Heat!

[Point Blank]

In new RC2.0, all mounts, weapons, shields and armor heat values have been re-worked. The overall heat effects dictated by descr_climate have also been tweaked to give heavy armor more of a penalty. Individual armor types have had their heat values re-evaluated in relation to eachother. Heavy armors also suffer an attack delay penalty.

In addition, unit movement speed has been altered to create more of a diversity between light and heavy units (both cav and inf).

Maximum mounted unit stamina is 'hardy' - by far the majority have no stamina bonus at all. Cavalry have far less ability to conduct repeated charges.

Also, will shortly be adding a unit cost function, calculated per man (as per before) considering unit category(eg cav, inf etc), quality, class (militia, average etc), type (Early Pro, Noble etc), region (eg Northern Italy has advanced armor production facilities), training time and finally equipment (eg large horses suitable for shock charges are less plentiful in some areas). Another example is armor worn by nobles has a +2 bonus, so it will cost double that of standard munitions-grade protection.

These values will be derived from a larger number of historical resources than previously.

The per-man cost will then be multiplied by the number of men in the unit and an 'administrative' and 'captain's cost' value added as well. This is not too different to the current system but being done on a spreadsheet makes if far simpler to calculate of course!

Mercenary depiction will be improved. There will also be an 'Italian Wars' mini-campaign 1494-1560 approx included.

[Andytheplatypus]

Very nice !

[k/t]

This will be in the new version of the Compilation that uses 6.4 as a base, right? That's what I've been waiting for, not SS 7.

I highly recommend tilting the quality bonuses towards defense. The effects are very good.


Speaking of heat, I'm sitting in my computer chair sweating massively right now.

[Point Blank]

This will be in the new version of the Compilation that uses 6.4 as a base, right?.

Yes

That's what I've been waiting for, not SS 7.

I highly recommend tilting the quality bonuses towards defense. The effects are very good.


Speaking of heat, I'm sitting in my computer chair sweating massively right now.

As one initial change, virtually all armors have underpadding represented by +1 armor. High-quality units get bonuses to armor value (up to +2) and also get access to the better quality armors 10-20 years before the average soldier. Basically, RC2.0 further differentiates between high and low quality units but costs will very much reflect that.

For example, a Noble wearing Full Plate (13) + underpadding (1) will also get a +2 armor quality bonus (this varies by unit type and class etc) and can get access to these armors and improved/advanced metallurgy, possibly 10+ years ahead of the lower-quality units.

Essentially RC2.0 continues and enhances the theme it was based on since day 1 - that medieval weapons were in most cases overmatched by the armors of the day.

Regarding bonuses in attack and defense values, they are in RC2.0:

UNIT QUALITY MODIFIERS TABLE
Foot, melee weapon non-spear/pike
Quality   Attack Charge Defense Attack Delay Heat Penalty
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peasant   -3  -1 -3 +45  +3
Peasant Militia  -2  -1 -2 +30  +2
Militia   -1  -1 -1 +15  +1
Average    0   0 0 0  0
Superior  +1  +1 +2 -15  -1
Elite   +3  +1 +3 -30  -2
Exceptional  +4  +1 +4 -45  -3

Note that going from Average to Superior gives +1 attack and +2 defense - these are the professional soldiers and mercenaries.

However, going from Superior to Elite gives +3 attack and +3 defense. This is based on combat psychology - that at the highest levels, individuals have developed or possess a level of aggression and taste for combat that goes beyond the purely professional.

I think you will find that the wider variety of bonuses derived from unit quality level definitely adds to defense to a greater extent than attack.

Guide attached.

[Point Blank]

double post

[k/t]

I know what the bonuses are now, and I'm saying that I tried tilting the bonuses towards defense and I got very good results.

And changing the quality bonuses would be good, too. We can keep the total amount of bonus points but skew the distribution towards defense:

Superior: +1/+2
Elite: +2/+4
Exceptional: +3/+5

Superior spear: +0/+2
Elite spear: +1/+3
Exceptional spear: +2/+4


This will prolong battles and increase the staying power of good units pitted against crappy ones. A lower attack isn't a problem anyway, since chevrons will raise it but not defense (because CA is stupid and decided to remove a logical feature in Kingdoms).

Surrounding an enemy and having an experienced army matter more than before like this.

You can try it and see how it goes. In the end it's not that important, since I can change it for myself.


Hmm...before, you said that the armour values include a leather jerkin underneath. Now there is an explicit +1 for it?

[Point Blank]

Hmm...before, you said that the armour values include a leather jerkin underneath. Now there is an explicit +1 for it?

Yes, in large part due to leather previously having armor 2, which implies an armor 1 leather jerkin (or some sort of padding) worn under the hardened leather armor, which therefore implies the hardened leather etc also only gives armor 1. This is inconsistent.

Its completely fine to not use the +1 for any particular unit, you've got me thinking I'll put the armor tables back to how they were and not automatically assume that a jerkin is worn underneath, so it can be worn by units on a case-by-case basis and can be figured into cost calculation.

It also allows armor 1 to represent heavy clothing, or very basic padded armor for peasants etc.

[Point Blank]

You will find that the armor quality bonuses will have a similar effect.

eg:
Superior Noble +1 attack +2 defense +1 armor quality
Elite Noble +3 attack +3 defense +2 armor quality, may have access to new armor technology that the Superior unit does not

Some high-quality units have +1 attack due to weapon quality etc.

Unit mass is now also modified by quality level.

[Andytheplatypus]

Speaking of heat, I'm sitting in my computer chair sweating massively right now.

Gross.

I am curious. Since crossbows will have faster reloads did you set their damage as lower?

[Point Blank]

No, because they still start the battle unloaded. I don't try to 'balance' things that way

[k/t]

"It also allows armor 1 to represent heavy clothing, or very basic padded armor for peasants etc."

That's what I've been doing.

I don't find it bad at all if leather gives 2. Hardened leather is very tough. Even if it should be more than 2, it's a matter of rounding and working within the confines of the engine.

I didn't think the current crossbow reloads were too slow. Only some types of crossbows will get faster animations, or all? The problem is that once they start the animation they can't move until they've gone through it, and that's the engine's fault.

[Judeman266]

I'm definitely looking forward to the new compilation and am even more interested now because of the "Italian Wars" mini-campaign.

[Point Blank]

there are multiple x-bow anims, from light x-bow up to steel arbalest.

[Andytheplatypus]

So no more 30 second cranking?

[k/t]

"No, because they still start the battle unloaded."

Is there a way to make them start loaded or is it hardcoded?

"So no more 30 second cranking?"

I think it's about 15 in total, which isn't that bad for the high-powered crossbows.

[k/t]

I don't think heavily-armoured horses (scale, mail, cataphract, armour) should get movement speed or heat bonuses if they're HA type. You wouldn't use lighter, quicker horses if they had to carry a lot of metal armour. And they wouldn't get tired less quickly than horses which went into melee. A skirmisher can't have a heavily-armoured horse. Probably not even barded horses should get those bonuses if they're used by horsearchers.


Edit: Does anyone yet know what the criteria for deciding whether a cavalry unit is a Lancer, a Charger or a Brawler are? I foolishly thought PB was back to stay and that he was almost done with his work so he would finally have time to answer some questions about RC, but he has disappeared again. I tried to get some ideas by observing which units were what in the preliminary EDU he released a year ago, because I want to finalize my changes of the BC EDU.

Lancer units seem to be ones trained to deliver charges as a unit.
Brawler units seem to be ones without a charge weapon (usually).
Charger units seem to be ones with a spear instead of a lance and who don't fit in the other two categories, for example Portuguese Knights, English Knights and Imperial Knights, so perhaps Charger is also the class for cavalry that wasn't that great, since England, HRE and Portugal don't have impressive cavalry in SS.

Does anyone else have any insights?

[Kolaris8472]

Edit: Does anyone yet know what the criteria for deciding whether a cavalry unit is a Lancer, a Charger or a Brawler are?

I was just about to ask the same thing...Brawlers are fairly obvious, but the distinction between Lancer and Charger is much less so. I've been making everything couched a Lancer and everything non-couched a Charger but I'm really unclear.

I think the Breastplate needs to be toned down. It has 1 more Armour than Heavy Mail, with less of a heat penalty, but it only covers the torso, unlike a hauberk.

I agree, I would think most of its advantages should come from "Fast" animations, "Light" terrain penalties, high agility bonuses, and no attack delay penalty. But it also has an outstanding armor rating to boot...

Speaking of which, it seems odd to me that Partial Plate, which I always took to be adding a Breastplate to Heavy Mail, goes from Medium animations/penalties to Slow/Heavy, while adding a Breastplate to Leather (so just Breastplate) keeps the Fast/Light penalties.

[k/t]

I remember some people discussing something interesting a few years ago. There was an idea of giving different cavalry units mount_effect modifiers based on their mounts. For example, ponies could get a mount_effect of horse -1, while light cavalry would get nothing, and heavy cavalry would get horse +1. This would simulate the trouble a guy riding a pony would have fighting a guy riding a horse, while two units from the same category's bonus or penalty would cancel each other out.

We could have:

pony -> horse -1
unarmoured horse -> 0
armoured horse -> horse +1

[k/t]

I think the Breastplate needs to be toned down. It has 1 more Armour than Heavy Mail, with less of a heat penalty, but it only covers the torso, unlike a hauberk.

[Judeman266]

I think the superior increase in armor on the torso is more important than the loss of armor on the arms and legs.