[UPD - 21 MAY] Closed Alpha - Feedback

[Drag0]

I agree with you, fountain guards is a pike unit. But pikes are too long, could you make shorter pikes?
The unit should have a pike long as the vineland guard's one. And a sword for close combat.

[Maestro1]

My only fear with having the Fountain Guard with pikes instead of longspears is that they're not going to be worth their salt. This is an extremely expensive unit and the most elite soldier Gondor has to offer. I can already envisage an easy counter to them. Engage with a mediocre unit, which has enough health to last a little while (since the pikes do minimal damage), and then shower them both with arrows. Friendly fire won't matter since it's a cheap unit and you're eliminating an expensive asset.

Even without doing this, they still don't seem worth it save for siege battles. But we'll see. It's a long road ahead.

I'll probably end up maining Dale so I suppose by all means keep it where it's at

Historically, pikes are strong because they can hold enemies at bay without loosing many men. Other troops such as missiles would do the actual killing. However, your statement has given me an idea:
it is known from Alexander's pikes that missiles were practically useless because the long pikes would block almost all arrows, and those that did make it through mostly were either a miss or would get stuck in a shield. Though our pikes are not as long as Alexander's, we perhaps could still implement this feature so that pikes are very hard to kill with missiles. Maybe even add an animation to it.
This adds to the very defensive roll we gave them and makes very much sense.

Share your thoughts on this idea. I believe it would fill the gaps in the current role they are given. The role is good, but still incomplete. Would this help you think?

[Commissar Caligula_]

I agree with you, fountain guards is a pike unit. But pikes are too long, could you make shorter pikes?
The unit should have a pike long as the vineland guard's one. And a sword for close combat.

There'd be no point in giving them a sword for close combat if they've got a spear as long as the Vineland Watchmen, because they're nearly always in close combat.
Also, the current pike is weapon length 5 (same as vanilla Attila). The Vineland Watchmen have weapon length 3. This means they're a lot worse at defense, and can't actually hold the enemy at bay all that well.

I reckon its good for Gondor to have a full-size pike unit, maybe not the Fountain Guard if that goes against the lore or whatever, but the Guards of the Star City at least (the Osgiliath pike unit that was planned, but cut from the current release).

[Drag0]

There'd be no point in giving them a sword for close combat if they've got a spear as long as the Vineland Watchmen, because they're nearly always in close combat.
Also, the current pike is weapon length 5 (same as vanilla Attila). The Vineland Watchmen have weapon length 3. This means they're a lot worse at defense, and can't actually hold the enemy at bay all that well.

I reckon its good for Gondor to have a full-size pike unit, maybe not the Fountain Guard if that goes against the lore or whatever, but the Guards of the Star City at least (the Osgiliath pike unit that was planned, but cut from the current release).

what's the minimum pike length to use also a sword?

[Alkar]

My only fear with having the Fountain Guard with pikes instead of longspears is that they're not going to be worth their salt. This is an extremely expensive unit and the most elite soldier Gondor has to offer. I can already envisage an easy counter to them. Engage with a mediocre unit, which has enough health to last a little while (since the pikes do minimal damage), and then shower them both with arrows. Friendly fire won't matter since it's a cheap unit and you're eliminating an expensive asset.

Even without doing this, they still don't seem worth it save for siege battles. But we'll see. It's a long road ahead.

I'll probably end up maining Dale so I suppose by all means keep it where it's at

Lol that shameless plug xD.

[alphasquad]

Historically, pikes are strong because they can hold enemies at bay without loosing many men. Other troops such as missiles would do the actual killing. However, your statement has given me an idea:
it is known from Alexander's pikes that missiles were practically useless because the long pikes would block almost all arrows, and those that did make it through mostly were either a miss or would get stuck in a shield. Though our pikes are not as long as Alexander's, we perhaps could still implement this feature so that pikes are very hard to kill with missiles. Maybe even add an animation to it.
This adds to the very defensive roll we gave them and makes very much sense.

Share your thoughts on this idea. I believe it would fill the gaps in the current role they are given. The role is good, but still incomplete. Would this help you think?

I agree with your point. However, during his campain against the persians, Alexander always was victorious not only because of his strategy, but also because of his military reform. Acording to Historical writings, the macedonian "sarissa" was a very long pike (between 5 to 7,5 meters long) very useful against missiles as you said, but also deadly against charging enemies like cavalry and chariots. Now, the early persians actually fields light cav, chariots and light infantry. This kind of force was completely useless against the well organized pikemen. The horses were afraid by the long pikes and chariots and cav could not be used properly. The disorganized persian infantry crushed into the macedonian pikes, causing chaos upon their ranks. When finally someone started to pass through the point, he had to fight against multiple enemies that pick up their sword.


Later on, when the Romans fight against the last greek alliance, the greeks were crushed because the legionaries were equiped with great shields that could be used like a wall against pikes, and also because of the two pilum they could throw before the engagement in melee.

I hope you understand that what i was meaning was that the damage (at least the standard damage) of pikemen must be improve to be a little bit more efficient against light infantry.

[Maetharin]

The romans actually were pushed back frontally by Pikemen,
there´s even a few historians mentioning the Sarissai penetrating Scuta.

But, even though they were pushed back,
their flexible formation enabled them to partly absorb the push by giving ground and their excellent discipline prevented them from breaking.

Never is there an instance of a Roman Legion being broken by a Macedonian Phalanx.
In all battles Pyrrhus fought against them, Hellenic victory was caused by other factors but the great push of the Macedonian Phalanx.

I wouldn't´t know how to translate these factors into the game,
since you guys are already in contact with pretty much everyone who knows how to balance these guys,
I trust you to make them as awesome as they did.

[AlexiosThe1st]

Historically, pikes are strong because they can hold enemies at bay without loosing many men. Other troops such as missiles would do the actual killing. However, your statement has given me an idea:
it is known from Alexander's pikes that missiles were practically useless because the long pikes would block almost all arrows, and those that did make it through mostly were either a miss or would get stuck in a shield. Though our pikes are not as long as Alexander's, we perhaps could still implement this feature so that pikes are very hard to kill with missiles. Maybe even add an animation to it.
This adds to the very defensive roll we gave them and makes very much sense.

Share your thoughts on this idea. I believe it would fill the gaps in the current role they are given. The role is good, but still incomplete. Would this help you think?

I disagree with your sentiments on what made pikes useful. Swiss pike blocks were rather dynamic and could be used very effectively in offense. They were very good at steam rolling other infantry, though they were with weaknesses. But to give them such capabilities would not fit the "meta" you might want to create for pikes. And I agree with that. Keep them defensive.

As for your thoughts on missiles v pikes. I've always been of the opinion that pikes, when positioned well, should combat other infantry effectively. To defeat a pike unit with other infantry, crafty maneuvering and flanking should be the go-to. And so it becomes a little micro battle of positioning. I've also been of the opinion that to effectively counter pikes without intense micro you simply focus fire them into oblivion.

BUT in this mod there are going to be a large number of good archers. If my normal opinion were to become the law of the land, Uruk pikes and all other pikes would be useless when fighting the elves and Dale. They'd get minced without shields.

So perhaps your idea, whether buffing armor or giving them an additional resistance to arrows in some form, might be the way to go lest we never see pikes in multiplayer.

Make Pikes Great Again

[Maetharin]

So perhaps your idea, whether buffing armor or giving them an additional resistance to arrows in some form, might be the way to go lest we never see pikes in multiplayer.

Make Pikes Great Again

Hahaha, made my day buddy

IMO the best way to balance pikes is making them vulnerable in their flanks and rear.
DeI´s KAM did it by transferring much of their defense to shield defense IIRC.
He also increased flanking mali but reducing rear mali accordingly,
as units get both rear and flank mali when attacked from behind, making rear charges slaughter without this modification

[Alkar]

I suggest that you guys read up on pikemen. xD

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pike_(weapon)

https://www.quora.com/Why-were-pikem...ssance-warfare

You will find that they aren't quite what you envision.

They explain it better than I could probably.

[♔atthias♔]

ran a few tests
I find rhohanvivon ranger a little bit OP they destroy ilethen rangers 1vs1 while the latler should be better IMHO since they are part dunedain
skirmshers arre ussless IMHO note that I am a bit biased in this since I am more of a dwarf style player so if anybody could teach me how to use them I will be very thankfull

[alphasquad]

Btw why missile damage is the same for every skirmisher? (30 standard and 8 AP)


Inviato dal mio iPad utilizzando Tapatalk

[AlexiosThe1st]

I suggest that you guys read up on pikemen. xD

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pike_(weapon)

https://www.quora.com/Why-were-pikem...ssance-warfare

You will find that they aren't quite what you envision.

They explain it better than I could probably.

What in those articles is at odds with what people are saying?

Regardless, I disagree with much of what the quora article is saying. Especially his conclusion that the halberd is the natural/final/ultimate iteration of the pike. It is most certainly not. They are different weapons. It's not part of a continuum of progress to better weapons. They were very often used in the same formation. The Swiss famously used mixed formations with the front several ranks of pikes and then halberds and other weapons behind to stem any breaks in the pike line. A tactic which was evidently very effective.

And I think we can all agree that pikes were not discarded when the threat of cavalry passed, as the article contends.

A line like "most advanced spear an individual soldier could use" is something of a red flag to me. Simply because something came later in time does not mean it's inherently better. The 1906 British cavalry saber is not the ultimate form of saber. It's only different and suited to its time of use.

[Alkar]

BLO


What in those articles is at odds with what people are saying?

Regardless, I disagree with much of what the quora article is saying. Especially his conclusion that the halberd is the natural/final/ultimate iteration of the pike. It is most certainly not. They are different weapons. It's not part of a continuum of progress to better weapons. They were very often used in the same formation. The Swiss famously used mixed formations with the front several ranks of pikes and then halberds and other weapons behind to stem any breaks in the pike line. A tactic which was evidently very effective.

And I think we can all agree that pikes were not discarded when the threat of cavalry passed, as the article contends.

A line like "most advanced spear an individual soldier could use" is something of a red flag to me. Simply because something came later in time does not mean it's inherently better. The 1906 British cavalry saber is not the ultimate form of saber. It's only different and suited to its time of use.

I wouldn't care much about those opinion-type things. There is some valuable information there about performance in battle. Such as the fact that pikemen were vulnerable to archers, even if they had shields, and the fact that some would carry shields to use if fighting got close. Things like that.

1. Crossbows and archers - Even with shields,pikemen were still subject to being decimated by arrows. Heavy clouds of arrows could disrupt phalanxes and make it difficult for the formations to recover.

This line sounds particularly interesting. It seems that the main vulnerability of pike formations to archers was the fact that the formation could be disrupted, not necessarily simply destroyed. I don't know how that could be incorporated though.

[Maestro1]

Well we must take into account that pikes are weapons that are hard to wield. You cannot move forward with a block of 80 men against a packed line of 100 because they would simply run through like water. Thus you cluster your pikes to a more dense block. But that makes them very much unmaneuverable. Also the nature of the pike is that is a weapon of thrusting which is, like the spear, by definition a move that pushes the enemy back when he comes at you, but moving to him with a long pole is generally a bad idea since he is much quicker and much more agile to maneuver and strike you, a pikeman, in the vitals. And so the pike naturally becomes a defensive weapon, not an offensive. Again a pike phalanx is not a clenched fist that minces everything it faces from the front. It is a rather static formation formed for the purpose to not be beaten from the front, but not to move in and plow through enemy lines. For that you would need swords and axes, that can push an enemy's shield away to the side and make in vulnerable and to hack at him. But since hacking cannot be done with pikes, such offensive opportunities are not abundant for them. Combining this with a shield, a pikeman could simply not fight properly whilst moving forward because a very long pole and a heavy shield would just make him loose is balance with a slight move.

And so we come back to the fountain guards. The nature of the unit is very defensive. None of them would have been used on a campaign, they were the guardians of the tree and not a pack of raiders. They would not even fight outside Minas Tirith. They would lower their pikes to bar anyone's way that would seek to destroy the courtyard of Minas Tirth. They could not form into a phalanx that is able to move through like a tank. That is simply a bad interpretation from Total War and many mods. After all, in what TW game have pikes not been OP from the front? Perhaps we are one of the few actually trying to balance that out properly

[Maetharin]

Sorry if I have to disagree, but IMO pikes aren´t a defensive weapon.
Their purpose is to wound an enemy, is it not? That it happens at a longer distance is of no matter IMO.
Also, according to interpretation of course, there are historical examples of pikes being used offensively.

F.e. how the romans were pushed back during Pydna.
We could discount one source telling of Sarissai punching through Scuta,
but all sources agree of the dread frontal combat against pikes invoked.

I purposefully took Pydna as an example, since it is the only case when the legions actually defeated a Macedonian Phalanx from the front.
And even then this was only possible due to their flexibility and superb training and discipline.
Without these attributes they´d have broken before the Phalanx had lost cohesion in uneven terrain.

In all other Roman - Macedonian confrontation the issue was settled through different means, elephants, skirmishers, cavalry, getting into the flanks, aso.

You mention pike formation being unwieldy. Again I disagree.
All it takes is for them to lift their pikes and they can reform their formation.
It just takes a lot of training, which most armies did not have.

But since all big formations of men are unwieldy and need training to be flexible,
I wouldn´t single pikes out.
Pike formations simply need to attack in a single line and as long as they do not loose cohesion, their only weakness is their flank.
But again, all armies need flank protection during their attack, with lowered pikes just simply moreso, which is a disadvantage.

I do agree on the fountain guard being no field unit though.
How many of them do we even see in the movie?
6? And are any of them ever seen outside of the courtyard?
IMO if Gondor should have a Pike unit, it ought to be a fiefdom unit.

This doesn´t mean you should completely get rid of them,
just that I´d prefer it if they were designated as an exclusive General unit once (or if) you´ve introduced another pike unit.

[Maestro1]

We have one or two more units up the sleeve for Gondor

[Drag0]

Fountain guard is a controverse unit.

In Wikipedia we can read: "Fountain guards are elite guards of the kingdom of Gondor in J. R. R. Tolkien's legendarium. They are the best soldiers in all the kingdom and guard in permanence the White Tree of Gondor. They were mainly a spear-carrying unit; each soldier carried a spear as their primary weapon, as well as a thick wooden shield painted black with the tree and star of Gondor, and a short ceremonial sword for close combat."

In the movie we can see fountains guards with pike and sword.

Why not 2 fountain guard units? One more defensive with pike and sword, like in the movie (the actual unit but with shorter pikes). And the other one, more aggressive, with spear and shield? You could use last alliance shields or citadel guard shields or both. I think would be a good compromise. Sure fountains guard should be the best unit for Gondor.

[AlexiosThe1st]

Well we must take into account that pikes are weapons that are hard to wield. You cannot move forward with a block of 80 men against a packed line of 100 because they would simply run through like water. Thus you cluster your pikes to a more dense block. But that makes them very much unmaneuverable. Also the nature of the pike is that is a weapon of thrusting which is, like the spear, by definition a move that pushes the enemy back when he comes at you, but moving to him with a long pole is generally a bad idea since he is much quicker and much more agile to maneuver and strike you, a pikeman, in the vitals. And so the pike naturally becomes a defensive weapon, not an offensive. Again a pike phalanx is not a clenched fist that minces everything it faces from the front. It is a rather static formation formed for the purpose to not be beaten from the front, but not to move in and plow through enemy lines. For that you would need swords and axes, that can push an enemy's shield away to the side and make in vulnerable and to hack at him. But since hacking cannot be done with pikes, such offensive opportunities are not abundant for them. Combining this with a shield, a pikeman could simply not fight properly whilst moving forward because a very long pole and a heavy shield would just make him loose is balance with a slight move.

And so we come back to the fountain guards. The nature of the unit is very defensive. None of them would have been used on a campaign, they were the guardians of the tree and not a pack of raiders. They would not even fight outside Minas Tirith. They would lower their pikes to bar anyone's way that would seek to destroy the courtyard of Minas Tirth. They could not form into a phalanx that is able to move through like a tank. That is simply a bad interpretation from Total War and many mods. After all, in what TW game have pikes not been OP from the front? Perhaps we are one of the few actually trying to balance that out properly

I'm with Maetharin. There are a great number of examples of pikes being used offensively. My field of interest runs a little later than does Maetharin's and the example that comes to mind is the Swiss pikemen. They were not a strictly defensive force. In fact they were extremely effective at steamrolling other infantry formations. They were famous for advancing and breaking their opponent with the impetus of their blocks of pikemen.

You mention "moving to him with a long pole is generally a bad idea since he is much quicker and much more agile to maneuver and strike you, a pikeman, in the vitals". Well this may or may not be true if I've got a pike and you've a sword and shield and we're alone in a field. But when I'm part of a line of pikes, with the rank behind me bearing pikes forward, and the rank behind them bearing their pikes, being more agile is a moot point. A pike block works because the ranks behind the front rank can poke too, and progressively closer to the actually dudes in front.

As far as I've read, pike blocks were notoriously difficult to combat. Their greatest weakness, it seems, is that they're generally hard to maneuver and wheel in formation. They possess vulnerable flanks.

In my opinion, pikes should be OP when fighting other units head on. However, they should possess obscene flanking penalties. They require proper positioning to be used effectively. This encourages skill. If placed effectively, they do well. If not, they're practically useless.

And this is part of the reason why I'm against having the Fountain Guard as a pike unit. These are super elite dudes; having them as this strictly defensive meh unit isn't going to incentivize me to ever bring them. And it will certainly make me smile when I see an enemy has wasted their florins.

[Commissar Caligula_]

ran a few tests
I find rhohanvivon ranger a little bit OP they destroy ilethen rangers 1vs1 while the latler should be better IMHO since they are part dunedain
skirmshers arre ussless IMHO note that I am a bit biased in this since I am more of a dwarf style player so if anybody could teach me how to use them I will be very thankfull

Thats surprising, I would've thought the Ithilien Rangers would've won because they have the Stalk ability which means they're always hidden. The reason Rhovanion Rangers don't have it is because it makes their cloaks really bugged out and we didn't have time to fix it.

In terms of how skirmishers work, they've got 3 shots and they're powerful anti-infantry but have short range. You could use them against units attacking a barricade if you're defending in a siege, or against pikes. They require a bit of micro-management due to their short range.

Btw why missile damage is the same for every skirmisher? (30 standard and 8 AP)

Because all the skirmishers use the same javelin weapon. The difference between them comes in their accuracy (a hidden stat unfortunately, as there wasn't enough room on the UI), their Tier level, armour and their other combat stats.

And this is part of the reason why I'm against having the Fountain Guard as a pike unit. These are super elite dudes; having them as this strictly defensive meh unit isn't going to incentivize me to ever bring them. And it will certainly make me smile when I see an enemy has wasted their florins.

Pikes are quite useful, I'd certainly always bring one. They basically deny the enemy access to a certain area, eg you could put them in the middle of your formation so the enemy avoids them since they can't really be beaten from the front, and then you flood some reserves in through the pikes and attack the flanks of the enemy because they're avoiding your centre.
They are very costly as you pointed out however, and cheap archers can target them and take them out due to their lack of shields and tight formation.