Battle speed??

**dogukan** · July 11, 2018, 11:48 AM

I know this topic comes up from time to time, but haven't seen one since the last release. I ve been playing with various factions.
I think currently battles are too fast. All those beautiful units, and we cannot get to experience them

I try to take SSs but action happens so fast that I can't keep up with things. Not to mention the lack of tactical maneuvering due to pace of the battles.

Then again, I am a DEI fan so I might be biased, but are there plans to slow battles down?

**You_Guess_Who** · July 11, 2018, 05:35 PM

Thank you for the input. Battle balancing is particularly tricky to get just right. If I may, what feels too fast? Battle speed is comprised from many factors.

1. The melee kill ratio for units fighting at each others head-on?
2. The time till the unit become too fatigued and demoralized to fight in the frontline?
3. The effectiveness of morale shock due to flanking maneovres?
4. The effectiveness of charges and its shock effects?
5. The effectiveness of formations (e.g. Pike Wall, Shield Wall) on the melee kill ratio?
6. Walking Speed?
7. Missile weapon effectiveness against target head-on?
8. Missile weapon kill per time in an skirmisher duel?

Or combination of several of these factors?

**cloud700** · July 12, 2018, 05:31 AM

Same here i find it too fast also i remember playing Broken Crescent i liked that speed it was more of a tactical battle.

**KAM 2150** · July 12, 2018, 02:45 PM

I can't prosmie it, but rescently I developed some neat excel formulas that allow me to recalculate unit stats very fast so I might work on a small combat submod.

**dogukan** · July 12, 2018, 04:22 PM

Originally Posted by You_Guess_Who

Thank you for the input. Battle balancing is particularly tricky to get just right. If I may, what feels too fast? Battle speed is comprised from many factors.

1. The melee kill ratio for units fighting at each others head-on?
2. The time till the unit become too fatigued and demoralized to fight in the frontline?
3. The effectiveness of morale shock due to flanking maneovres?
4. The effectiveness of charges and its shock effects?
5. The effectiveness of formations (e.g. Pike Wall, Shield Wall) on the melee kill ratio?
6. Walking Speed?
7. Missile weapon effectiveness against target head-on?
8. Missile weapon kill per time in an skirmisher duel?

Or combination of several of these factors?

Oh I can imagine how difficult it is to create a sweet spot.
I haven't really focused on exactly what causes it.

I'll play a bit more and give better input later on. But as for my opinion right now, I'd probably the emphasize the routs happening too fast. I don't know if that happens due to a fast kill ratio.
So kills and routs/morale would be my first suspicion. As for shocks/flanks, since they were so powerful in this period, I don't mind them having drastic effects. I don't know how good the AI is with utilizing that of course. So I would not want that to be a huge advantage to the player over AI.

When battle lines meet(and I play with large armies) one flank breaks while I am dealing with another flank. The battles end in about 20 minutes. Which I guess is good for an average player

But I like 30 to 40 minute grinds with tactical maneuvering and stuff. So this is just my opinion. Maybe a submod later can adress this better.

**cloud700** · July 12, 2018, 08:22 PM

Originally Posted by dogukan

Oh I can imagine how difficult it is to create a sweet spot.
I haven't really focused on exactly what causes it.

I'll play a bit more and give better input later on. But as for my opinion right now, I'd probably the emphasize the routs happening too fast. I don't know if that happens due to a fast kill ratio.
So kills and routs/morale would be my first suspicion. As for shocks/flanks, since they were so powerful in this period, I don't mind them having drastic effects. I don't know how good the AI is with utilizing that of course. So I would not want that to be a huge advantage to the player over AI.

When battle lines meet(and I play with large armies) one flank breaks while I am dealing with another flank. The battles end in about 20 minutes. Which I guess is good for an average player

But I like 30 to 40 minute grinds with tactical maneuvering and stuff. So this is just my opinion. Maybe a submod later can adress this better.

I hope so.

**Rebond** · July 13, 2018, 05:46 AM

Hello, I would also be very interested in longer battles.
I'm also a fan of DEI of Rome 2. I think longer battles (with a lowered death rate) is more realistic, since battles in the medieval times took time. A battle line with the infantry used to be set, then the flanks did all the work. But in order to do that we need more time.

So I would shout for anyone willing to make a submod

**You_Guess_Who** · July 13, 2018, 04:00 PM

Originally Posted by KAM 2150

I can't prosmie it, but rescently I developed some neat excel formulas that allow me to recalculate unit stats very fast

Nice, if you managed to finish it, please do share

Originally Posted by Rebond

Hello, I would also be very interested in longer battles.
I'm also a fan of DEI of Rome 2. I think longer battles (with a lowered death rate) is more realistic, since battles in the medieval times took time. A battle line with the infantry used to be set, then the flanks did all the work. But in order to do that we need more time.

So I would shout for anyone willing to make a submod

Guys, I'm right here. If you can give precise feedback, submod might not be necessary.
Now, as you all established melee combat as too fast, how about the state of missile combat as of now? Both should be balanced - if I stiffen the melee but the missile kill rates unchanged, it might make players feel either one is not worthwhile or overpowered.

**Teutonic** · July 14, 2018, 06:39 AM

I personally find the extreme vulnerability to missiles of the tier 3 two handed units very frustrating. Historically, the reason these guys were armed with two handed weapons (the men-at-arms, knights, halberds, etc) was because advancements in armour making tech meant that they didn't need shields to protect them from missile fire anymore.

I'd like the tier 3 units armoured in plate to be made almost invulnerable to missile fire. They die really fast in melee too. I'd like that reduced too. To balance this you could reduce the unit sizes- they are, especially on foot, too large now, and further increase costs. Stamina can be reduced too, especially for non-elite units or ones where most soldiers wear closed helmets. Or whatever else you deem appropriate.

This type of modding work can make a huge difference in the enjoyment of a mod, but is also more tedious and subjective in terms of goals and results. Therefore I'd like to say a big Thank you! to the guys doing it

**dogukan** · July 14, 2018, 09:38 AM

You_Guess_Who

is right about emphasizing the archery issue. Because visually, the rates look better under how archery works. But such dropping like flies situation impacts the overall battle a lot. In DEI, the ineffectiveness of archery was quiet frustrating for me. (havent played in a while). When the archers are weakened in parallel to melee to get longer combat, they become quiet useless. I guess a good way to deal with this could be to emphasize missile protected vs non-protected difference. But again, we get to the problem of AI's ability utilize it.

**You_Guess_Who** · July 27, 2018, 07:14 PM

After looking again, even though I've increased the morale base, kill rates and breakage speed still not changing much. I suspect it has something to do with the newer fatigue effects - where the morale and actual fighting effectiveness of the unit severely decreases alongside fatigue. So the morale bonus might be higher, but due to fatigue the fighting time returns not far to the previous versions. This is a realistic mechanic, but again a sweet spot need to be found.

Stamina: How punishing should they to the player, but not rendering the AI useless? Do you all prefer slower fatigue with slower recovery, or fast yo-yo of very fatiguing combat but quick rest to get the men back up again? The interval for each state of fatigue is changeable, and I should adjust just that - so active to winded are close, but tired to exhausted are far so much longer rest are needed to restore their fatigue levels. Due to AI (and most player) tendency to run their units all over the place, I am thinking perhaps lowering down running speed together with its fatigue penalty, but keeping charging run speed and fatigue penalty high.

This worsened by the AI (and sometimes, human players) keep grinding the units till they drop, not understanding the feature so they don't keep reserves and cycling the frontline.

On walking speed, do any of you have data on realistic marching speed per minute? I'm not sure if Napoleonic rates are applicable on Medieval marching rate however, and what is realistic might not feels right in-game. (In-game tooltip speed is in decimeter/second)

One other thing after watching a battle record in Youtube: Are the Crossbows overpowered as of now? Because I see Pavise Crossbowmen killing 500+ in a siege defense (from very advantageous positions raining down from walls on attackers on chokepoints and ascending ramps)

**Heisenburrg** · July 30, 2018, 01:35 AM

Mhm... In terms of stamina I would prefer a compromise between these two opportunities; On the one side the yo-yo effect (so fast fatigue -in relation to battle length- and fast recovery) is the more realistic way of portraing the battles. On the over side the units shouldnt be exhausted after 5 minutes already, so they would have to rest or rally 3-4 times in a battle (which should last for approximately 20-25 minutes). The overall stamina should be so high that the units could take a decent fight before they really have to rest, let´s say after 10-12 minutes. This would prevent the battle from beeing over after 7 minutes because the AI/the Player does not know how to save reserves, throwing everything in at once and fighting with exhausted/ineffective units, but it would still contain the need to think about reserves, if the battle lasts longer.
Of course the kill rate would have to be adjusted to that too, so there would be 60-70% of a unit left after the first breaking point 10 minutes into the battle and 30-40% at the battle´s end, when the units really start to break irreversible.

The crossbows seem fine to me though. No changes needed.