Armour upgrades etc.

**Ketchup** · May 23, 2008, 02:14 PM

Seeing as though, in RS1.5, you have increased the defense and attack values to roughly 3x (I think) what they were in vanilla my conclusion is that the armour and weapon upgrades are now completely worthless. For example what is +1 armour going to affect when a unit already has 60 defense un-upgraded. At the moment the system is useless and I'm proposing to make each level of armoury increase the attack/armour by +3. Is this possible and, if so, why has it not already been done?

Cheers

**Snake_Plisskin** · May 23, 2008, 02:18 PM

That a good idea buddy, i haven't seen this raised in any of the other threads. the upgrades do seem pretty pointless now, unless being shot by missiles as i think thir attack values are still roughly the same ??

if thats the case the whole thing will have to be recalibrated until it plays out realisticly. but good point

see what they say ....

**Ketchup** · May 23, 2008, 02:21 PM

Cheers,

If I remember correctly the missile attack changed as well: Pilum are now 25 attack (?) and they used to be around 10.

**Squid** · May 23, 2008, 02:51 PM

The point is the upgrades are not supposed to be very powerful. As has been discussed before (though I'm not sure if it was outside the dev forums or not), the quality of metal and hence the armour/weapons made from it, was more or less uniform across all of Europe and Asia minor, therefore having an effect that does not reflect this wouldn't make much sense. In addition to that there are three levels of of weapon/armour upgrades only so that limits what we can do.

**traxx91** · May 23, 2008, 03:11 PM

I think the upgrades are quiet usefull. 60 + 1 defense is just better then 60 + 0. I learned to use the upgrades pretty well in my Gaul campaign, when I faced Rebel stacks using nearly the same units! Especially now, in the late-game I have units with 3-5 experience and +3 upgrades directly when you train them, which means a total of 6-8 to defence and attack.

**Ketchup** · May 23, 2008, 03:24 PM

Originally Posted by traxx91

I think the upgrades are quiet usefull. 60 + 1 defense is just better then 60 + 0. I learned to use the upgrades pretty well in my Gaul campaign, when I faced Rebel stacks using nearly the same units! Especially now, in the late-game I have units with 3-5 experience and +3 upgrades directly when you train them, which means a total of 6-8 to defence and attack.

Sure 60+1 is better than 60+0 but it is only an increase of 1.7% whereas in vanilla and most other mods it is an increase of 10% which I find is better for gameplay. Just my opinion I guess...

**Coldcall** · May 23, 2008, 04:06 PM

I like the way it is now. The few bonus points they give come in very useful and realistically they should not be uber upgrades. The better weapons in ancient times were probably through better mixtures of metals making weapons degrade more slowly, edges staying sharper longer; basically not falling apart as much as they invariably did.

**Rovdyr** · May 24, 2008, 09:28 AM

Originally Posted by Coldcall

I like the way it is now. The few bonus points they give come in very useful and realistically they should not be uber upgrades. The better weapons in ancient times were probably through better mixtures of metals making weapons degrade more slowly, edges staying sharper longer; basically not falling apart as much as they invariably did.

Swords and such was not sharp in the ancient and medieval times. If you take a sword and bang it at a shield a few times, it won't be that sharp anymore, so it was simply not worth it to keep sharpening your weapons.

Anyways, I personally feel that upgrades should be better, but not much. So instead of the 1.7% it should be around 3% or something. But definetly not 10 or something. Even though it might not be entirely historical, if I were looking for historical accuracy I woulnd't be here but at EB's forum!

**The Sloth** · May 24, 2008, 06:31 PM

Originally Posted by Rovdyr

Even though it might not be entirely historical, if I were looking for historical accuracy I woulnd't be here but at EB's forum!

I can almost hear the RS team cry after reading this one.

But the OP got a point there. And silly me always gets all excited when I build some big temples of forge and have silver-chevroned soldiers...

**Columcille** · May 25, 2008, 12:11 AM

Originally Posted by The Sloth

I can almost hear the RS team cry after reading this one.

But the OP got a point there. And silly me always gets all excited when I build some big temples of forge and have silver-chevroned soldiers...

Heh, i know how you feel.

But a general rule of thumb for me is that every upgrade counts when you are on long campaigns.!

**rory o'kane** · May 25, 2008, 06:14 AM

He's right. That extra 60+1 defence should mean that if 60 men die, one extra man should survive - think about how many thousands of doods you lose in an average campaign. Of course, if you've got barbarian light infantry facing off against Roman Imperial Legions, then you're still a bit screwed either way!