[Experimental Battle Pack] - New stat and combat system (09.03.2018)

[♔Greek Strategos♔]

If your light troops are roman units, then I am afraid you will always loose "roman lives" But rather loosing skirmishers than expensive infantry. If you do not insist on historical accuracy, you might think of using 4 peltast-like units (2 on each flank) and 3-4 archers/slingers. The specificity of Rome is that you win battles with your infantry and in infantry fight, there will always be casualties on both sides as you can not hope for some quick decisive blow with shock cav while your pikemen keep enemy on the other side of their sharp sticks, nor for winning the battle with an army of horse archers killing enemy on distance.

Good points.

[KAM 2150]

You know, I am getting a lot of casualties in my legionnaire units. How can I use light troops to limit the loss of Roman lives? I've usually used Rome's medium auxillary skirmisher units on the flanks to javellin and rear charge to fold up the line, should I increase the number of skirmishers? I'm using the slower battles version.

Light troops are to be used against enemy light troops so that enemy ranged infantry can't just pepper your troops without any real danger.

Of course if I would go for super realism, legionary shields and armour would be enough to frontally stop most of missiles BUT gameplay wise it would mean that you just park your infantry in long line and wait until enemy goes out of ammo and charges forward. Also, historically, enemy light troops would try to circle around and find gaps instead of wasting ammo frontally and once they would be out of ammo, they would just disengage from battle rather than charging.

Of course you can always have more legio and less light troops and just put your infantry in testudo, hoping AI cav will not smash them apart

[CadetNewb]

I note that with the release DeI campaign, battle mechanics seemed to have kills be low at first and slowly pick up as the fight drags on. As a result, we could get away with taking a town with very little casualties if we maneuvered and ended it quickly with an envelopment or something. With this experimental battle pack however, it looks like kills are happening earlier in the fight, and more consistently throughout. As a result, I'm finding that I have to manage unit replenishment more. The battles and their logistics feels more natural this time around, and the added challenge of having to manage replenishment more is a welcome one. I also note that elephants are actually something I worry about now, even if I'm sending spears against them, as the damage they cause is more substantial feeling. The removal of formation attack is also a change that I find welcome, as it makes the units move more naturally. Speaking of, the differences between heavy and light units are more substantial feeling, and something I appreciate.

Overall, the changes are very welcome. I haven't noted any bugs or the like yet, though I am contending with Syracusan ballista, which may need some work from what I understand. They haven't made an impact in battle yet, but I'll be sure to let you know if I notice something.

[iporto9393]

Does "Formed Attack deleted once again" means no phalanx animations, shield wall and whatnot?

[KAM 2150]

No, just not formed attack ability on some units like Thorakitai. It has nothing to do with pikes, hoplites and barb shield walls.

[Sixela]

In fairness to the AI, they rarely charge formed spear infantry units unless they are cornered in a city or the player times it perfectly for the unit form up and lower their pikes just as the cavalry commit to their charge. It was what made those moments especially rare and satisfying in battles.

What bothers me is that I remember back about a year ago that pikes seemed to be working alright after constant tweaking for months and they retained that bonus against moving units to be devastating against a cavalry charge. Maybe they were OP against infantry though, because I don't remember using them a lot against proper sword units.

Where is that bonus?? Is it weapon related ( pikes) or a hidden kv_rules stat??

[KAM 2150]

In kv rules.

[Sixela]

In kv rules.

Could you specify which one ?? There are dozens of stats there

[Don_Diego]

I am thinking the formed attack removal is a good thing now as it also fixes animation bugs. Gonna use this mod when I play game again. New system sounds very interesting so far.

[CadetNewb]

Have ranged units received changes, or are they still in need of work? I was having some Sicilian or Italian slingers fire onto the right side of some hoplites in a fort, but they seemed less effective than I expected. I'm well aware that they are bottom of the barrel levies and were shooting over a wall, but the projectiles were definitely landing in the masses of men. I'm either spoiled by good archers, or range units haven't had a proper look over. I've no clue which though.

[Olmsted]

Have ranged units received changes, or are they still in need of work? I was having some Sicilian or Italian slingers fire onto the right side of some hoplites in a fort, but they seemed less effective than I expected. I'm well aware that they are bottom of the barrel levies and were shooting over a wall, but the projectiles were definitely landing in the masses of men. I'm either spoiled by good archers, or range units haven't had a proper look over. I've no clue which though.

I was having issues shooting at some sort of Sicilian hoplite levies (rebels), where I murdered them from the front, but inflicted zero casualties from the right or rear. Not sure if that was a fluke, but it happened in about four different battles.

[CadetNewb]

Well, I isolated a Massalian Veteran Hoplite general unit that was just sitting there, and placed four of those Sicilian slingers on its left flank. It took almost all of their ammunition to whittle them down to around 80 men in the unit. If the projectile block chance wasn't altered in any way, they likely just need their damage values re-evaluated.

[leonardusius]

They are just provide bonuses or penalties to unit stats like attack, damage.

Names CA picked for formations DO NOT MATTER, they don't do anything. You can give them whatever bonuses or penalties you want but they don't make units walk back or push.

You're right. Battle mechanics, no ! But the bonuses are there. I don't have Britannia, maybe someone can tell if anything is there in this direction from CA....

[CadetNewb]

You're right. Battle mechanics, no ! But the bonuses are there. I don't have Britannia, maybe someone can tell if anything is there in this direction from CA....

I don't have it either, but given that the gameplay is more arcadey like Atilla was, I seriously doubt it.

[Tiny]

Hey Kam, I was just in a fight involving Naked Spearmen from Celts. I was playing as Polybian Rome.

Those spearmen are honestly quite ridiculous. In a front fight, they beat Principes and Hastati handily. Both units were somewhat depleted (~70%), but the raw stats of that unit just don't make any sense man. 7 attack and 12 defense? They could spam those guys all day and destroy my heavily armored and much more expensive legions.

I've been enjoying this experimental pack immensely, but I'm getting the feeling that high armor doesn't actually give a decisive advantage in melee fights. I'm losing too many Romans in too many battles, and I don't get my men into bad situations. I think the Romans are missing that quality that makes them worthy of fear and respect.

Also, cavalry are substantially weaker compared to the base mod. They can get wiped out in seconds, whereas in 1.2.3 I can withdraw them and chasing enemies just wouldn't mow them down...but then again, I find the cavalry of 1.2.3 to be really OP.

Either way, I would love to see you update this further! I'm loving the combat despite its expected quirks as something experimental.

[Agathor Krex]

Does this mean units will rout less quickly? Because that's the only thing that bugs me. Units routing while having a lot of troops.

[KAM 2150]

Hi Tiny, have you tried slower pack? Armour plays larger role there so maybe it uses better values

Agathor, no, units should not fight until they are down to 40-50%, only best troops can pull that off.

[popovic]

Hey Kam, I was just in a fight involving Naked Spearmen from Celts. I was playing as Polybian Rome.

Those spearmen are honestly quite ridiculous. In a front fight, they beat Principes and Hastati handily. Both units were somewhat depleted (~70%), but the raw stats of that unit just don't make any sense man. 7 attack and 12 defense? They could spam those guys all day and destroy my heavily armored and much more expensive legions.

I've been enjoying this experimental pack immensely, but I'm getting the feeling that high armor doesn't actually give a decisive advantage in melee fights. I'm losing too many Romans in too many battles, and I don't get my men into bad situations. I think the Romans are missing that quality that makes them worthy of fear and respect.

Naked Spearmen are teh shizznick. My favourite unit when playing Arverni (their version is named differently I believe, but it`s the same .)

But I don`t remember beating Principes with them.

P.S. I was just playing Ardiaei, and wondering why they don`t get a unit like that (as the way that unit works seems just like how Illyrians were described fighting...)

[ivanpera]

Hi Tiny, have you tried slower pack? Armour plays larger role there so maybe it uses better values

Just ran a couple of quick tests with naked spears and principes with both versions of the battle pack and i wish there was a middle ground. I like the pacing of the faster version, but with that one the spears (which with Alternative Economy cost less than a half of the pricipes) where definetly packing too much of a punch: they still lost due to routing, but both units where down to about 90 men.
With the slower versione the principes lost just about 30 men (granted, the charges where messed up).
Also, pretorian guards sent head on against the shieldwalled general of the Arverni (the spear unit, can't remeber the name now) with no envelopment voing on struggled a lot with the faster version (to the point of losing the fight) while with the slower version they traded blows equally

[Maetharin]

Does this mean units will rout less quickly? Because that's the only thing that bugs me. Units routing while having a lot of troops.

Well, historically units routed at about 5 - 10% losses, after which the slaughter of the fleeing went on, bringing losses to about 15 - 20% if there were no other factors like surroundings etc..

If you just think about it, at 5% losses that means 1 in 20 men is dead.
But concentrate this onto the front rank and everything changes.
If we have a 5 men depth that means in the front rank, 1 in 4 men is dead.
Morale is a finicky thing. If you see two or three men in front of you dying in quick succession, you would be less then eager to take their place.

So IMO combat ought to have even less losses than now, with it being slower as a whole, but routing happening faster.
But KAM has told me time and again that this isn´t possible, so I´ll shut up about it^^