Common misconceptions in M2TW?

[Maklodes]

What do you think are some of the more common misconceptions among M2TW players?

A few ideas I think are misconceptions, although perhaps I'm displaying misconceptions of my own in writing them? If I'm the one with the misconceptions, tell me!

1. Light spearmen are better against infantry than standard spearmen: e.g., town militia is better against infantry than spear militia, Italian militia are better vs. infantry than sergeant spearmen, etc, because of the light_spear property. My take: I think they all do equally well/badly against infantry. There's allegedly a penalty spear units suffer against infantry that light_spear units don't, but I'm skeptical that it has any effect.

2. Guns are just for morale shock. They aren't as good in actual killing as archers, crossbowmen, etc. My take: guns' morale-effects are secondary to the sheer carnage they can inflict when they're operational. Admittedly, keeping them operational with a clear line-of-sight, out of melee, etc, can be tricky, but in a pure shooting match with clear line of sight, I'd easily say a humble unit of non-Portuguese arquebusiers can beat dismounted dvor, Scots guard, Genoese crossbowmen or anything -- and not by routing them when they're still 80% alive or something, but by killing lots and lots of them. (The exception is if a hybrid unit like dismounted dvor just charges the arquebusiers and beats them hand-to-hand.)

3. Pressing "continue" rather than "end battle" after routing all enemies gives the general dread traits like "winning first." My take: winning sufficiently crushing victories after fighting with already favorable odds, or having your general personally kill lots of people, or some other triggers, can lead to battle dread, but whether the results that lead to battle dread (such as killing or capturing 50% of the enemy army) occur before or after pressing "continue battle" is irrelevant. (Although, of course, if you don't continue the battle to chase routers, then you will kill fewer enemies overall, so you have less of a chance of crossing the 50% kills threshold, or having your general kill 9+ enemies.)

Now let's see how long we can keep an ordered list, with the next poster starting with misconception #4, the third poster starting one after the second poster's last, etc, before it all turns into a tangled mess with three "#14" misconceptions and such!

[Hazzard]

4. Cavalry charges are easy and quick like in Rome
They aren't, I find that the best way to perform a cavalry charge is line then up stationary with the target and then have them run the whole way. The default run distance is too short.

[Sitalkes]

4. Cavalry charges are easy and quick like in Rome
They aren't, I find that the best way to perform a cavalry charge is line then up stationary with the target and then have them run the whole way. The default run distance is too short.

That's because there are two types of cavalry charge, the slow (one-click, walking) and the quick (double-click). The slow one is better but more difficult to achieve.
The following is from this:

• http://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showth...-Strategy-Tips (scroll down a couple of screens)

A: Jason from CA has explained how charging works:


Regarding the new charge mechanic, there are two charges available to a cavalry unit: a formed charge which allows for most of the unit to charge into a target; and an unformed charge which stops the charge after 10% of the soldiers within that unit have made contact with the target. In RTW this wasn’t as much of an issue because cavalry did not have long lances and as such did not require two significantly different charge abilities. The M2TW charge system allows you to have a very powerful charge if you do everything right and a light charge if you don’t.

The triggers for a formed (powerful) charge include:

Line up the cavalry parallel to the target
Utilize a long straight run up toward the target
Prioritize stationary targets as moving targets may result in a last second turn and reform

The triggers for an unformed (weak) charge include:

The unit is spread out just before charging
The charge is issued while too close to the target
The charge is issued when the unit isn’t facing the target
The player changes direction just before the charge• The target moves and turns just before being hit


http://totalwarcommunity.blogspot.com/


Originally Posted by Daveybaby
In order to get a good charge going:
(1) you need to have a decent sized gap between your cav and your target
(2) Stop your cav to let them form up if need be (i.e. if youve had them running around).
(3) Target your enemy, but WALK DONT RUN. If you run your charge will lose cohesion
(4) Leave em to it. At the correct distance your cav will break into a charge.
If youre defending against elite heavy cav or bodyguards with normal (i.e. non-spear etc) infantry then expect to get slaughtered. This is as it should be.
Use spearmen and ensure theyre in guard mode, in formation, and NOT MOVING.



For further advice on how to get off a good cavalry charge, read Hashashiyyin's tips:

http://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpo...41&postcount=1

And yet more discussion here:
http://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=73535

[Sitalkes]

4. Cavalry charges are easy and quick like in Rome
They aren't, I find that the best way to perform a cavalry charge is line then up stationary with the target and then have them run the whole way. The default run distance is too short.

That's because there are two types of cavalry charge, the slow (one-click, walking) and the quick (double-click). The slow one is better but more difficult to achieve.
The following is from this:

• http://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showth...-Strategy-Tips (scroll down a couple of screens)

A: Jason from CA has explained how charging works:


Regarding the new charge mechanic, there are two charges available to a cavalry unit: a formed charge which allows for most of the unit to charge into a target; and an unformed charge which stops the charge after 10% of the soldiers within that unit have made contact with the target. In RTW this wasn’t as much of an issue because cavalry did not have long lances and as such did not require two significantly different charge abilities. The M2TW charge system allows you to have a very powerful charge if you do everything right and a light charge if you don’t.

The triggers for a formed (powerful) charge include:

Line up the cavalry parallel to the target
Utilize a long straight run up toward the target
Prioritize stationary targets as moving targets may result in a last second turn and reform

The triggers for an unformed (weak) charge include:

The unit is spread out just before charging
The charge is issued while too close to the target
The charge is issued when the unit isn’t facing the target
The player changes direction just before the charge• The target moves and turns just before being hit


http://totalwarcommunity.blogspot.com/


Originally Posted by Daveybaby
In order to get a good charge going:
(1) you need to have a decent sized gap between your cav and your target
(2) Stop your cav to let them form up if need be (i.e. if youve had them running around).
(3) Target your enemy, but WALK DONT RUN. If you run your charge will lose cohesion
(4) Leave em to it. At the correct distance your cav will break into a charge.
If youre defending against elite heavy cav or bodyguards with normal (i.e. non-spear etc) infantry then expect to get slaughtered. This is as it should be.
Use spearmen and ensure theyre in guard mode, in formation, and NOT MOVING.



For further advice on how to get off a good cavalry charge, read Hashashiyyin's tips:

http://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpo...41&postcount=1

And yet more discussion here:
http://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=73535

[Highlander of Scotland]

5. That all ancillaries can be moved
Only certain non persoanly ones can.

[Aeratus]

What do you think are some of the more common misconceptions among M2TW players?A few ideas I think are misconceptions, although perhaps I'm displaying misconceptions of my own in writing them? If I'm the one with the misconceptions, tell me!1. Light spearmen are better against infantry than standard spearmen: e.g., town militia is better against infantry than spear militia, Italian militia are better vs. infantry than sergeant spearmen, etc, because of the light_spear property. My take: I think they all do equally well/badly against infantry. There's allegedly a penalty spear units suffer against infantry that light_spear units don't, but I'm skeptical that it has any effect.

Actually, this is not a misconception. Light spear units are actually better than spear units in melee due to the anti-infantry penalty of long spears. But this difference is so small that it is almost negligible.

[Maklodes]

Actually, this is not a misconception. Light spear units are actually better than spear units in melee due to the anti-infantry penalty of long spears. But this difference is so small that it is almost negligible.

For what it's worth, I tried town militia vs spear militia (I control England, AI controls Scotland (to save me the step of changing it to something other than the default):

English town militia vs. Scottish spear militia (3 trials):
SM victory: 10 TM remain, 34 SM remain
TM victory: 46 TM, 32 SM
TM victory: 27 TM, 10 SM

English spear militia vs. Scottish town militia (3 trials)
SM victory: 39 SM remain, 31 TM remain
SM victory: 48 SM, 27 TM
SM victory: 25 SM, 18 TM

So, on the whole, it seems that spear militias (spear) are at worst on even footing when facing against town militias (light spears).

What about against other infantry? I tried controlling Denmark and sending viking raiders against Venetian Italian militia and against French sergeant spearmen (comparable light spear/spear units):

Vikings vs. Italian militia (3 trials)
Viking victory: 57 vikings remain, 32 IM remain
Viking victory: 70 vikings, 28 IM
Viking victory: 62 vikings, 24 IM

Vikings vs. sergeant spearmen (3 trials)
Viking victory: 47 vikings remain, 3 SS remain
Viking victory: 51 vikings, 4 SS
Viking victory: 48 vikings, 6 SS

Here, there's an interesting pattern: Italian militia routs sooner, before either sustaining or inflicting as many casualties as the sergeant spearmen. I think this is because of formation ranks -- the Italians form up in 5 ranks and 15 files, while the sergeants and vikings form in 4 ranks and 19 files. The result is that the vikings wrap around the end of the Italians, leading to a quicker rout, while the sergeant spearmen and viking raiders meet head on and both take more casualties before the sergeants rout.

So, on the whole, I don't believe in the "light spears are better against infantry" thing. However, at this point, I don't know how much better regular spearmen are against cavalry than light spearmen without testing it.

UPDATE: Kill ratios:


Kills:
19 IM kills, 44 VR kills
6 IM kills, 48 VR kills
14 IM kills, 52 VR kills
39 IM kills total, 144 VR kills total
Ratio: 3.69:1 VR to IM kill ratio


29 SS kills, 73 VR kills
25 SS kills, 72 VR kills
28 SS kills, 70 VR kills


82 SS kills total, 215 VR kills total
Ratio: 2.62:1 VR to SS kill ratio

[Aymer de Valence]

6. That peasants are useless

This is why I love Medieval 2....EVERY unit has worth in battle. Thanks to the dynamic fighting, peasants can still manage to hurt and kill enemy units, and in fact have an advantage over billmen etc because they can attack quicker. Peasants can still cause a lot of damage to the enemy if they flank attack. In a recent siege, a unit of peasants held the main street of my town for a good couple of minutes, and managed to take down just over 50 enemy spearmen with them.....not bad for a unit which costs just 100 florins.

Unlike in Rome, where the peasants may well have been using feathers for weapons...

[UndrState]

No offence Maklodes, but is that really apples and apples? Aren't seargeants professionals, with the attendant morale bonuses? Why not compare Italian Militia versus Italian Spear Militia?

[Maklodes]

No offence Maklodes, but is that really apples and apples? Aren't seargeants professionals, with the attendant morale bonuses? Why not compare Italian Militia versus Italian Spear Militia?

AFAIK, they have the same morale: Italian militias are comparable to low-to-mid grade professionals from other factions. The differences, aside from cost and recruitment differences, are:

1. Italian militia uses light spear. Sergeant spearmen use standard spear.
2. The default rank difference (4 x 19 vs. 5 x 15).
3. Italian militia has "Mediterranean" climate adaptations, while sergeant spearmen have "Northern" climate adaptations. (Sergeants are a bit better on snow and forests. Italians are a bit better on sand and have lower heat fatigue.)

I didn't do Italian spear militia vs. Italian militia because Italian spear militias, unlike sergeant spearmen, wear light armor. Of course, I could have given the Italian militia the bronze armor upgrade, which would allegedly give them the same armor as the ISM (a gambeson-type vest), but that gets into other issues of exactly what armor upgrades do, which is a thorny issue in itself. (Some people think it just adds 1 point of armor, as with the unit cards. Others claim that it upgrades along the sequence of armor values for units that have that armor by default (i.e., 4 for leather tanner-based upgrade, 5 for blacksmith, 6 or 7 for armourer, 8 for heavy armourer, 9 for master armourer, and 10 or 11 armour factory). Still others claim that it adds around 2 or 2.5 points of armor regardless.

I don't really know.

I could do Nubian spearmen instead of Italian militia as the light spear unit to compare to sergeant spearmen.

[UndrState]

You know what, you are right. At least from what I can tell from Honga sergeant spearmen aren't any more "professional" than the italian militias. For the values of Morale/Discipline/Training they show "5, normal, trained" .

[Aeratus]

So, on the whole, I don't believe in the "light spears are better against infantry" thing. However, at this point, I don't know how much better regular spearmen are against cavalry than light spearmen without testing it.

If your test is charge vs. charge, it's about even. Spear militia has a penalty against infantry, but they do more damage in the charge due to having higher mass than town militia. So, I think the mass difference counteracts the melee disadvantage.

[Maklodes]

If your test is charge vs. charge, it's about even. Spear militia has a penalty against infantry, but they do more damage in the charge due to having higher mass than town militia. So, I think the mass difference counteracts the melee disadvantage.

Okay. You're correct that town militia have 0.8 mass, compared to 1 mass for spear militia. I checked EE spear militia, and it has 1 mass, but is otherwise identical to (Western European) town militia (or, correspondingly, is identical to (WE) spear militia except for having a short spear (and fewer armor upgrades). So I did three EE spear militia vs. standard spear militia trials, and three standard vs. EE trials.

I control Russian spear militia and attack Scottish spear militia
1. Russian victory: 54 Russian survivors, 37 Scottish survivors
2. Russian victory: 47 Russian 33 Scots
3. Scottish victory: 1 Russian, 23 Scots

I control English spear militia and attack Russian spear militia
1. Scottish victory: 25 English survivors, 25 Russian survivors
2. Scottish victory: 55 English, 32 Russians
3. Russian victory: 13 English, 25 Russians

Total number of Russian survivors from six trials: 184
Total number of British survivors from six trials: 186

I still don't see any superiority for the light spear in infantry-vs-infantry combat.

Of course, if you have any evidence from more thorough trials, then I'd be very interested in seeing it.

[Aeratus]

Due to the mass difference, I'd expect town militia to come out even with spear militia if the two units are charging each other.

However, if you edit the files so as to make the two units have the same mass, my guess is that town militia will be superior. I haven't tried adjusting the mass to be the same, so maybe it's worth a try.

[Maklodes]

Due to the mass difference, I'd expect town militia to come out even with spear militia if the two units are charging each other.

However, if you edit the files so as to make the two units have the same mass, my guess is that town militia will be superior. I haven't tried adjusting the mass to be the same, so maybe it's worth a try.

Is there any reason this approach is preferable to the simpler approach of using EE spear militia instead of standard town militia, since EE spear militia is like standard town militia with 1 mass instead of 0.8 (or, correspondingly, like standard spear militia with light_spear instead of spear and spear_bonus_4 instead of spear_bonus_8 and one less armor upgrade)?

Update: Some interesting stuff in this thread. It looks like the idea is that light_spear and spear perform the same against piercing and blunt damage, but maybe there's a special penalty for spear against slashing that light_spear doesn't have?

[Aeratus]

Is there any reason this approach is preferable to the simpler approach of using EE spear militia instead of standard town militia, since EE spear militia is like standard town militia with 1 mass instead of 0.8 (or, correspondingly, like standard spear militia with light_spear instead of spear and spear_bonus_4 instead of spear_bonus_8 and one less armor upgrade)?

No, there's no difference. Sorry, I misread part of your post. However, one thing that bothers me is that the EE spear militia has the long spear graphic rather than the short spear graphic.

I did use your method of using EE spear militia (light spear) vs. Spear militia (spear), and I got the following results.

The test condition is that I start the battle by simply right-clicking on the enemy unit. So my unit walks only, and doesn't run.

The numbers are counted in the number of kills. I thought that the number of kills is better than the number of survivors, because kills represents actual kills during combat, whereas the number of survivors is distorted by the after-battle healing. Men captured are not counted as kills because capture occurs after combat, not during combat.

Number of kills (higher is better)

Test 1: controlling light spear
    L. Spear    Spear
1    62        50
2    72        59
3    66        40
4    73        85
5    104        73
6    99        110
7    66        60
8    90        73
9    81        73
10    87        89
    800        712
            
Test 2: controlling spear
    L. Spear    Spear
1    69        66
2    96        97
3    79        66
4    100        93
5    93        97
6    85        88
7    72        90
8    84        69
9    71        95
10    71        58
    820        819

I think the testing methodology gives a slight advantage to the unit I control, because the unit under my control enters charge/run mode later. This allows their formation to be more intact when the lines hit, whereas the AI unit activates run mode before charging, which disrupts formation integrity.

In both test 1 and test 2, light spear got more kills than spear, but it's hard to say if the results are statistically significant.

In the second set of tests, I control sudanese tribesmen vs. EE spear militia or spear militia (+1 attack, +4 exp, +2 armor)

Test 3: Controlling sword vs L. Spear
    Sword         L.Spear    
1    93        67
2    94        64
3    96        102
4    111        99
5    89        65
6    113        94
7    75        52
8    105        101
9    92        63
10    95        78
    963        785
            
Test 4: Controlling sword vs Spear
    Sword         Spear    
1    97        90
2    92        92
3    94        50
4    93        88
5    93        81
6    92        82
7    90        66
8    107        67
9    96        65
10    85        68
    939        749

In the above test, the light spear had a slightly higher kill ratio (785/963 = .815) than that of the spear (749/939 = .80), but doesn't appear to be significant. However, this test is more volatile than the spear vs. light spear test.

[pacifism]

7. Diplomacy is broken.

It's not. If you can keep your current state of affairs with all nations on the default difficulty, diplomacy is okay. If giving an alliance is considered generous (unlike in Rome) then diplomacy is not broken. I think there is a lot of depth in it and most people actually never bother with the basics and instead opt the Total War aspect of the game.

[UndrState]

7. Diplomacy is broken.

It's not. If you can keep your current state of affairs with all nations on the default difficulty, diplomacy is okay. If giving an alliance is considered generous (unlike in Rome) then diplomacy is not broken. I think there is a lot of depth in it and most people actually never bother with the basics and instead opt the Total War aspect of the game.

Thank you so much for saying so Aquila. I agree whole-heartedly, and have always enjoyed the added depth diplomacy in M2TW has added to the overall game.

[Maklodes]

Thanks. I did a few one-off tests of statistically similar spear and non-spear units (didn't bother recording much).

Lamtuna spearmen vs. Viking raiders -- Lamtunas have better training and morale, hardiness, and one extra point of defense. Vikings get AP, but neither unit had armor. The lamtunas were totally crushed. (I controlled both sides sequentially.)

Lamtunas vs. Kurdish javelinmen (Skirmish and fire at will off, engaging in melee for Kurds.) -- Kurds have 1 more defense point, but much worse morale/training properties and 20% fewer soldiers. They won pretty decisively. (I controlled Kurds ony, since otherwise I couldn't really test "no javelins no skirmish" Kurdish javelinmen.)

Almughavars (skirmish + fire at will off, melee) vs. Sudanese tribesmen -- Sudanese have one extra point of attack, but Almughavars have significantly better training/morale/discipline. The almughavars were crushed. (I controlled almughavars only.)

And just for fun, I tried pavise crossbow militia (skirmish + fire at will off) vs. dismounted Polish nobles (DPNs get one extra attack point, and light spears.) Pavise crossbow militia won, but no overwhelmingly. Sorry, Polish nobles, your horrible spear penalties mean that a militia of crossbowmen can beat you even if they never get out their crossbows. I bet you wish you'd stayed on your horses, don't you?

It sort of aggravates me how much spears got screwed in this game. They get much lower basic stats for their pricing and they they get penalties (or maybe slow animations or something) so that even if they do match other units in base stats, they still get killed. All this might be worth it if spears really were strong against cavalry, but while they are a bit better than sword/axe/whatever type unit in taking a charge, I see cavalry crushing spearmen way too much to think of them as an anti-cavalry counter. (And I mean stuff like "mounted sergeants beat armored sergeants," not "Qapukulu beat Slav lavies.")

I know, I know, complaining about balance in Vanilla is silly. Just use a mod.

Is it okay for me to derail this thread and take it off topic if I'm the OP?

[Aeratus]

I did some more tests with EE spear militia vs. spear militia. This time, I gave the unit I controlled a +1 weapon upgrade (equivalent to +6 attack), and did 10 new trials each.

the light spear unit got 63.30% of total kills (when light spear had +1 weapon, and under my control)
the spear unit got 63.68% of total kills (when spear had +1 weapon, and under my control)

So far, no discernible difference between spear and light spear.

Also, regarding spear vs. sword, in my test with sudanese tribesmen vs spear militia, the units stats were as such:

Sudanese tribesmen: 13 attack, 8 defense

Spear militia (base): 5 attack, 7 defense
Spear militia (with +1 weapon, +4 exp, +2 armor): 13 attack, 11 defense

So even though the spear militia had 3 more defense, it still lost to the sword unit. Here, I'm counting +1 armor upgrade as equivalent to 2 defense, even though it is believed that +1 armor upgrade is slightly more than +2 defense.