Systematizing mounted unit attack bonuses

[Quinn Inuit]

This is just for my own reference, but feel free to comment. All values shown subject to tweaking if the unit is good or bad relative to the norm.

Kontos + Mace (mace can't be shown): 10 attack, 32 charge

Lance (usually xyston) + sword etc. (sometimes can't be shown): 11, 26

Lance by itself: 8, 26

Heavy cavalry spear + shield: 9, 20

Medium cavalry spear: 8, 21

Light cavalry spear: 6, 16

Roman or Greek_Cities cavalry: subtract 2,2 from the appropriate category

Heavy cavalry sword: 12, 10

Medium cavalry sword: 11, 8

[Quinn Inuit]

Ah hah! What about giving only heavy cavalry power_charge, but giving it the same charge _value_ as medium cavalry? That'll help avoid inconsistencies while at the same time replicating heavier shock value.

[Carados]

What is the difference between light, medium and heavy (superheavy??) cavalry anyway?

[Quinn Inuit]

Lights would be lancers and prodromoi types.
Medium would be ippiko, equites, and Persian types (Pontic armoured jav cav being the best example of that currently in the game, though I want to add some of aqd's later on)
Heavy would be hetairoi and cataphractoi types

Basically, it's sort of a question of shock charge value. What happens when a bunch of these guys slam into a bunch of soldiers (who aren't pointing spears at them at the time)? The more mass on the charge (and the more skillful the charging horseman is), the more the line is going to be disrupted. At least, that's my opinion based on what I've read. I'm open to other interpretations (hence the existence of this thread ).

[Carados]

Oh I can guess if something is light/medium/heavy, I was just asking if there was an actual distinction between them beyond weight (which is what is implied). Since wikipedia seems to be suggesting that all cavalry designed for close combat is heavy. I haven't tried it but do medium and heavy cavalry have different movement rates? It seems the cataphracts have a reduced movement speed but that might just be the trick of the eye what with them being so bulky and all that armour covering the legs thus masking the sense of movement.

Can you explain how the mechanics and stuff work at the moment? Is the weight of the rider and horse combined taken into account? Basically, what is the current reason for the stats being as they are. What does powerful charge actually do? etc.

Another thing that might be important is that horses don't run into solid objects. This is why the wedge formation was rather useful because the first rider would create space for the two riders behind, who then create space for the riders behind them and so on, pushing the infantry out the way as they go. If there is a solid block of infantry the horse is liable to just stop before it hits home. From that perspective I'd be tempted to think that the actual damage caused by the charge itself is a lot more limited to how it is portrayed at the moment. The actual mass and line disruption, as well as the shock, the fear factor of a cavalry charge, is what ultimately causes the damage. It must be quite unnerving for infantry, has anyone ever gone low and watched some cataphracts charge into the some infantry? The noise is absolutely horrendous! and most of the guys won't know what's going on!

[Quinn Inuit]

I'm pretty sure cataphracts have reduced movement, but I could be wrong.

The mechanics are a little haphazard ATM, which is why I want to systematize it.

Currently, I think the only thing that's reasonably systematic are charge bonuses, attack, and (maybe) distribution of power_charge. We should probably make sure attack and charge are better organized, and also look into the effects of mass on cavalry units. Currently, the attack and charge bonuses are distributed based on how heavy the cavalry is, but I'm not sure I was as thorough as I could have been.

Power_charge means that the unit stays in charge mode (with associated bonuses) for longer.

I like to go low and watch charges hit, too. Your comment about fear is a good point...we might want to give more heavies frighten_foot if they don't have it.

[Carados]

I suppose we could always just split the power of a charge into four categories based on rough weight i.e. light, medium, heavy, cataphract (I know I keep going on about cataphracts but I love them so much ).

So for example we could have light giving a bonus of say 16. Medium 21. Heavy 21. Cataphract 26. This is flat across the board although can be modifed based on what weapon the unit carries. Heavy and cataphract get powerful charge.

Actually... how do the cavalry weapons work? I've just remembered the cataphracts used the mace as a secondary weapon and I'm sure swords and stuff were used by other types. You've mentioned the mace and sword aren't shown in those profiles, which implies that they are actually accounted for in battles. Is this the case?

We could give a flat attack value to the primary weapon otherwise. The kontos/xyston could be 14, any other lance 12, spears and such 9 and swords 11 or something daft like that. I have an idea, why don't I go check myself?

Edit: Hmmm, think I'll let you get back before I go any further. I suspect you've combined the mace and bow together for the primary weapon, yeah?

[Quinn Inuit]

I suppose we could always just split the power of a charge into four categories based on rough weight i.e. light, medium, heavy, cataphract (I know I keep going on about cataphracts but I love them so much ).

Hey, nothing wrong with loving cataphracts. They sure made an impression on their enemies (Rome and Seleucia)!

So for example we could have light giving a bonus of say 16. Medium 21. Heavy 21. Cataphract 26. This is flat across the board although can be modifed based on what weapon the unit carries. Heavy and cataphract get powerful charge.

That sounds like an excellent place to start. Now we need to work out the weapon modifier, since sword, spear, xyston, and kontos are going to work very differently in a charge.

Actually... how do the cavalry weapons work? I've just remembered the cataphracts used the mace as a secondary weapon and I'm sure swords and stuff were used by other types. You've mentioned the mace and sword aren't shown in those profiles, which implies that they are actually accounted for in battles. Is this the case?

We could give a flat attack value to the primary weapon otherwise. The kontos/xyston could be 14, any other lance 12, spears and such 9 and swords 11 or something daft like that. I have an idea, why don't I go check myself?

Edit: Hmmm, think I'll let you get back before I go any further. I suspect you've combined the mace and bow together for the primary weapon, yeah?

Nope, bow is primary (it only operates on the missile weapon), and I've combined the mace and kontos. Cataphracts are the only ones where we have to do that, though. Everybody else can have a secondary weapon. (I used to think they couldn't, but apparently they just need to stop charging in order to use it.)

I recommend giving the spears attack values inversely proportional to their length, since a kontos wouldn't be much help fighting a guy right next to you. Swords should probably have the highest melee value, but the lowest charge value.

[Carados]

Ahhh, yes yes.

Ok how about this.
~Charge Value~
Light cav: 16
Med cav: 21
Heavy cav: 21 powerful charge
Cataphract: 26 powerful charge

~Charge Bonus~
Swords etc. +0
Spears +3
Lances +4
Kontos/xyston +6

~Attack~
Swords etc. 10-12
Spear 9
Lance 8
Kontos/xyston 6

For example. A cataphract with bow, kontos and mace would have an attack rating of 10 (mace), a base charge of 26 (cataphract) with a total charge of 32 (26 base plus kontos bonus of 6).

One of those armoured jav cavs of Pontus.
Attack of 10 (the sword doesn't look big).
Charge of 21.
No bonuses.

Equite.
Attack 9
Charge 21 + 3

Now, about Greek and Roman cavalry. Have you considered reducing their defence skill instead of attack/charge in order to represent how poor they are? Personally I think in a charge they would have roughly the same impact but if they get caught or bogged down they'll rapidly get destroyed (apparently at one of the battles between Caesar and Pompey, Caesar had ordered his spearman to jab at the faces of Pompey's equites, the reason being that they would concentrate more on protecting their beautiful young faces than their lifes!).

Doesn't matter if you don't agree with any of this, it's something to work on ^__^

Oh btw, does the secondary hp/defence stats have any benefit at all for cataphracts?? I'm thinking more the generals here because they really are like some kind of abrams tank or something when they get some experience behind them. In autocalc, I could have Rusa with around 5 experience and level 1 weapons and armour, and I could be fighting about 700 troops and I would win with about 10 loses......

[Quinn Inuit]

Ahhh, yes yes.

Ok how about this.
~Charge Value~
Light cav: 16
Med cav: 21
Heavy cav: 21 powerful charge
Cataphract: 26 powerful charge

~Charge Bonus~
Swords etc. +0
Spears +3
Lances +4
Kontos/xyston +6

~Attack~
Swords etc. 10-12
Spear 9
Lance 8
Kontos/xyston 6

For example. A cataphract with bow, kontos and mace would have an attack rating of 10 (mace), a base charge of 26 (cataphract) with a total charge of 32 (26 base plus kontos bonus of 6).

One of those armoured jav cavs of Pontus.
Attack of 10 (the sword doesn't look big).
Charge of 21.
No bonuses.

Equite.
Attack 9
Charge 21 + 3

That's pretty much what we need. I just have a few comments:

1. I wouldn't differentiate the xyston and lance--I'm pretty sure they're the same thing.
2. I like your charge value numbers, but I would zero it at the spear and give swords a negative bonus of maybe 8. I'd really like the use of sword cavalry to be very different than spear cavalry.
3. I'd also reduce the spear attack by one, so it would be spear-8 xyston-7 kontos-6.

Now, about Greek and Roman cavalry. Have you considered reducing their defence skill instead of attack/charge in order to represent how poor they are? Personally I think in a charge they would have roughly the same impact but if they get caught or bogged down they'll rapidly get destroyed (apparently at one of the battles between Caesar and Pompey, Caesar had ordered his spearman to jab at the faces of Pompey's equites, the reason being that they would concentrate more on protecting their beautiful young faces than their lifes!).

Doesn't matter if you don't agree with any of this, it's something to work on ^__^

Hmmm...hadn't thought of that, but you're right that it would work well. What about a tiny 1-2 charge reduction to show that they're not quite as skillful on the charge and then a two point reduction on def. skill?

Oh btw, does the secondary hp/defence stats have any benefit at all for cataphracts?? I'm thinking more the generals here because they really are like some kind of abrams tank or something when they get some experience behind them. In autocalc, I could have Rusa with around 5 experience and level 1 weapons and armour, and I could be fighting about 700 troops and I would win with about 10 loses......

The secondary hp stats definitely work for cataphracts--I've tested it myself.

You're right that cataphract generals are a problem. There's actually a story there.
When I first took away the second primary hitpoint for general units and replaced it with additional armour+defense, it worked really well--except for the cataphract generals. Those guys became unkillable. I largely rebalanced them, but it's still a challenge to try to balance the heavy defense a cataphract general needs with making the units realistic.

[Carados]

~Charge Value~
Light cav: 16
Medium cav: 21
Heavy cav: 21 powerful charge
Cataphract: 26 powerful charge

~Charge Modifiers~
Swords etc. -6
Spears +0
Kontos/xyston +6

~Attack~
Swords etc. 10-12
Spear 8
Xyston 7
Kontos 6

Greek and Roman cavalry have a further -2 charge modifier and -2 defence skill penalty.
----------------------------------------------------
I think -8 for swords would be just a little too far so I've put it at -6. Suppose anything works really. Perhaps -8 for large knives and stuff??

The secondary hp stats definitely work for cataphracts--I've tested it myself.

You're right that cataphract generals are a problem. There's actually a story there.
When I first took away the second primary hitpoint for general units and replaced it with additional armour+defense, it worked really well--except for the cataphract generals. Those guys became unkillable. I largely rebalanced them, but it's still a challenge to try to balance the heavy defense a cataphract general needs with making the units realistic.

Ah right. Have you tried giving them the same armour as ordinary cataphracts? In fact how is armour worked out for cavalry? Cataphracts have 22, the hetairoi have 12 (+5 defence skill). Pontus lancers are 11 (+5 defence skill). Equites are 7 (+4 defence, +4 shield). The armour doesn't always correspond to what they actually wear, nor with their infantry equivalent?

[Quinn Inuit]

Those charge and attack values sound good (good idea about the knives, too--I think a few cav units have those, like horse archers).

Armour for cavalry isn't particularly well systematized ATM, I admit. The values are mostly left over from RTRPE. We probably do need to re-evaluate it.

[Carados]

Alrighty.
Well the armour shouldn't be too much of a problem because it should be equal to the equivalent foot. The only contencious issues would be defence skill and how much extra armour the horse armour provides.

But let's take it one step at a time. We've got a good idea about the offensive side of cavalry.

[mcantu]

Quinn, a question....

are attack values based solely on the weapon used or does skill level of the unit come into play as well?

[Quinn Inuit]

Alrighty.
Well the armour shouldn't be too much of a problem because it should be equal to the equivalent foot. The only contencious issues would be defence skill and how much extra armour the horse armour provides.

But let's take it one step at a time. We've got a good idea about the offensive side of cavalry.

Ok, that makes sense.

Quinn, a question....

are attack values based solely on the weapon used or does skill level of the unit come into play as well?

Well, first we're going to regularize them, then we can start messing with the skill level. For instance, Numidians are probably going to get a boost relative to the norm, while Romans are going to get a reduction.

[Cheomesh]

These bonuses apply the entire time a unit is in melee, right? Or just charging?

M.

[Quinn Inuit]

Charge bonus only applies during the charge. Power_charge increases the time period during which a unit is considered "charging."

[Caesar Augustus]

Do I sense a 3.5.3 in the works to accout for this stuff? Or perhaps a while down the line so you can properly organise it and whatnot?

[Carados]

Not 3.5.3, that is mostly messing about with getting the Roman/Epirus balance right (read what I've put about Apollonia in the bug reports sticky and you should see what I mean ) and the occasional bugfix. It should be out around the weekend, hopefully.

The cavalry changes etc. should be in the next version, which is a long way off yet. I've already started playtesting some of these cavalry stats, and I must say... it looks promising. If you look around the forum a bit you can also gather some of the other ideas we have about it.

[Cheomesh]

So if a unit has, say, 10 attack, 12 charge and we're using this:

~Charge Modifiers~
Swords etc. -6
Spears +0
Kontos/xyston +6

~Attack~
Swords etc. 10-12
Spear 8
Xyston 7
Kontos 6

With swords it would have (10-6) 4 charge and (12 + 10) 22 attack?

I must say I don't know how the mechanics work; is it per individual man as he stabs at another individual man, or is everything done by the company of troops? Are these numbers "to hit" or "damage" numbers?

M.