Pricing Discrepancy

[TheBlackCat]

Hi, first of all thanks for this great mod; it's absolutely brilliant and has gotten me interested in antiquity and antiquity-period fantasy again.

I'm looking at playing a Saba campaign, and I've noticed what looks like to me as a severe pricing discrepancy.

Ethiopian Axemen (Zabatat) vs South Arabian Tribal Highlanders (Fayah Alatin).

The cost is 550/103 vs 850/160 but the Ethiopians seem to be far superior. They:

• Are faster
• Have higher attack (7+4 vs 5+3)
• Have far better shields (5 vs 2)
• Have no heat penalty (0 vs 2) and better terrain modifiers
• Come with an officer. (ok this is minor especially with Huge units, which I use).

The Tribal Highlanders' advantages, as far as I can see, are:

• Better availability, which is not really an issue since if I don't want them I can use a combination of Ethiopians, Citizen Militias, Skirmishers and the truckloads of melee-capable archers Saba has.
• Slightly larger unit mass (1.1 vs 1.05), I imagine this makes them better at shoving the enemy around in melee?
• Trained vs untrained, so they're better at holding formations - not really an issue - and the mountain tribesmen have a very loose formation anyway.

Everything else seems to be the same, except that the Ethiopians are classed as heavy infantry and the mountain tribesmen as light, don't rightly know what that does for combat power if anything, but if there is an effect I doubt it favours the mountain tribesmen. Also different charge distance, for what that's worth.

Do the Arabs have better axes? Are they overcosted at all, or am I underestimating the difference in unit mass and training (both units have no javelins)?

I've just tested them, head to head charging into each other with no upgrades or attempts at tactics on either my side or the AI's, on flat grass, and the Ethiopians flattened the Arabs: 114 remaining, with only 22 Arabs escaping.


So, should I just not use them, unless I want to roleplay that much, with having every unit in the roster in use? Not that even Sabaen finances can afford that, at least in the early game when I'm still counting cost?

[QuintusSertorius]

Equipment, status and unit size are the primary determinants of cost. Both units are slightly wrong; the Arabs are costed as a professional unit, when they're actually semi-professional. The Ethiopians as a semi-professional one, when they should be professional. The attack value itself isn't factored into costing; that's a function of the weapon and the skill of the user (the latter is part of "status").

Both Tribal units come down in cost slightly, and the Ethiopians go up - ultimately the better equipment of the Arabs skews things (more armour) slighty in their favour cost-wise. They'll be updated in the patch.

[TheBlackCat]

Roger, and thanks for clearing that up.

If I reprice the units myself, will I have to restart the campaign?

[ramsesii]

Roger, and thanks for clearing that up.

If I reprice the units myself, will I have to restart the campaign?

No its savegame compatible, I do recoment you backup your EDU.

[QuintusSertorius]

New costs are:

Zabatat:

stat_cost               1, 650, 122, 33, 65, 650, 4, 122

Highlanders:

stat_cost               1, 765, 144, 39, 77, 765, 8, 144

Lowlanders:

stat_cost               1, 945, 177, 48, 95, 945, 8, 177

[TheBlackCat]

Ramsesii: My game disagrees, it crashed when I tried to load old saves with new unit stats.

QuintusSertorius: That sounds a good deal better, and it does make some sense even though the highlanders are still more expensive than a unit in the same role, with the same weapon, that will clean their clock in the direct matchup.

Having played some more Saba, I can see that highlanders ought to be a lot easier to get in numbers than Zabatat (by installing Abd and allied governments instead of Aqib everywhere), even though for some reason, even with all of Arabia and Ethiopia under control, Maryab and a minimal smattering of mercenaries provide more than enough recruiting to keep my finances in check.