RS2.5 feedback and unit stats for 2.7/2.8

**tone** · May 21, 2012, 08:49 AM

Hi everyone,

It would be helpful to get some feedback on the lighting changes for 2.5, whether these are working well and if there are any lighting appearances that look "off".

Secondly, I've become aware recently that with the adjusted stats that came with 2.5 and generally less money available, it seems (in my experience with AI campaigns anyway) that the Romans in non-Roman campaigns don't have enough money to buy the necessary buildings to get to the Marian / Imperial reforms. Could people say whether this is their experience or not please?

**GRANTO** · May 21, 2012, 08:55 AM

yes i noticed the roman thing going on with the ai and dramaticaly boosted there starting funds , for me the lighting is superb and i have used it in a few different mods no complaints about that.the sunsets are very pleasing and the winter lighting , also night lighting is very good i find , but i guess its peoples preference as well

**Spike** · May 21, 2012, 09:32 AM

maybe cheapening the Roman unit cost in Non roman campaigns could be the keys, or giving to Roman specific units (legionary) additional secondary hp to help them boosting autoresolve will do...

about the unit stats, everything seems fine now

**tone** · May 21, 2012, 09:43 AM

Are people experiencing too few armies to battle against or just right on the whole? Maybe should make this a vote question?

Also, is anyone interested in trying out some alternative sets of unit stats?

....and lastly, are people finding seeing the new formations being used? Infantry wedges etc.

**Primo** · May 21, 2012, 10:21 AM

Originally Posted by tone

Are people experiencing too few armies to battle against or just right on the whole? Maybe should make this a vote question?

Also, is anyone interested in trying out some alternative sets of unit stats?

....and lastly, are people finding seeing the new formations being used? Infantry wedges etc.

What? There are infantry wedges? I thought they were hardcoded to Cavalry only???

I certainly never saw them.

**tone** · May 21, 2012, 10:22 AM

Yes they - check the formations preview bit for 2.5

**Primo** · May 21, 2012, 10:38 AM

Originally Posted by tone

Yes they - check the formations preview bit for 2.5

I must have missed that part.

But since I never saw it ingame, the AI apparently doesn't use it - come to think about it, I never saw a cavalry wedge, either ...

**ur-Lord Tedric** · May 21, 2012, 10:59 AM

My whole experience of battles from 2.1a to 2.7(?) this year has been great - the battles are something of a joy now - all seem much more real.

Given that many have referenced it - I would certainly review elephant stats.

I have seen AI cavalry wedges, but not often and only really with the Macedonians. I've not seen infantry do the same thing, but have enjoyed many things the AI does seem to do, including phased attacks, flanking manoeuvres and tactical withdrawls - often sacrificing some units.

In 1 turn I think there are plenty of battles - a total of 3 hours for a single turn is not uncommon.

The different levels of lighting are rather nice for effect. Funnily enough, although older than 2.1a, is that I do find battles in leafy woods more of a pain due to the restricted visibility - but that has a charm all of it's own. There is then much more chance of the AI getting one-up on the player and having more of his forces escape before they can be run-down.

Reviewing stats to lead to re-balancing costs based upon those stats....

**Paedric** · May 21, 2012, 01:43 PM

....and lastly, are people finding seeing the new formations being used? Infantry wedges etc.

There are not the default formations, they need to be chosen in the launcher first.

**Braeburn** · May 22, 2012, 04:56 AM

Originally Posted by Paedric

There are not the default formations, they need to be chosen in the launcher first.

Uhm how do we chose that in the launcher. I've looked around the launcher preference editor and found nothing about these formations

**iKossu** · May 21, 2012, 01:52 PM

I think there are slightly too many battles even with 1-turn recruitment.

**kanzy** · May 22, 2012, 04:22 AM

I like the lighting in the game.

I have an issue with Elephant stats, specifically Cataphract Ele., the seem a bit off when they can decimated a whole army by them self’s and then decide to go from Eager to Broken in an instant and even when routed you cant kill them.

As for Romans in a non roman campaign they got their reforms and are doing very well making life hard for me.

The armies and fights in 1-turn are perfect, an AI can stack all his forces to invade or defend and you might get a few long consecutive battles but if Victorious you will be rewarded with the prize of 2 or 3 AI cities that will be easy to take before the AI can muster-up more forces.

**Dean Martin** · May 22, 2012, 05:18 AM

In the preferences menus is a tab called other RSII parameters, there you can choose formations.

And those Elephants are heavily overpowered.

**Primo** · May 22, 2012, 06:17 AM

Originally Posted by Dean Martin

And those Elephants are heavily overpowered.

They are adressed in the next patch - read the stickied thread about what will be in 2.6.

**Braeburn** · May 22, 2012, 06:33 AM

Originally Posted by Dean Martin

In the preferences menus is a tab called other RSII parameters, there you can choose formations.

I think you mean this one.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read:

But the question is which formation for either AI or Human and what Inf Have Inf wedge

**Dean Martin** · May 22, 2012, 09:18 AM

Well, i have no idea i used only the default option. This question is for the dev team, I'm corious myself to be honest.

**Paedric** · May 22, 2012, 10:58 AM

Oh, sorry, that would be Athenogoras, from the name of the guy who made them.
I'm not entirely sure they work at each unit size, I believe there might be some problem with small unit size.