Change needed in EDU

[Mirionis9]

I've been playing with the Seleucids a rather memorable campaign, for the first time in 2.6. Conquering Egypt was my first concern. Now I'm fighting the Parthians and it came to my surprise that the cataphracts are really unbeatable even by the phalanx. The tend to break into the phalanx and slaughter my men. So I came with a solution. I gave the phalanx in EDU "horse+1" and the problem is solved. Now if the cataphracts attempt a frontal assault they with face extinction, as it should be. Any comments?

[ur-Lord Tedric]

Sounds pretty good to me as a result; unless the same happens when the phalanx is attacked from the rear and cannot turn to face?

Others who know my views on 'charging cavalry' (charging in the ancient world did not hold quite the same connotation as now), will not be surprised.

[Spartan999]

why was the +1 against horse removed from a lot of spear man?

There is also the matter of Cata having 60 charge bonus.

[Black_Baron]

i wanted to ask that just installed reasently this mod playing as Macedon right now.It goes smooth so far but i found out the cavalry is a bit resistant from spears.So can anyone tell me how to add this +1 to horses(guess it is against cavalry like the vanilla had).So far haven't meet any cataphracts but still a heavy units of cavalry that i face now i need a long time to kill them and hoplite spearmen or any that dont have phalanx don't do well against cavalry any way to give them boost too?

[Spartan999]

mount_effect horse +4, camel +4, elephant +4, chariot +4

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

type cohors i batavorumdictionary cohors_i_batavorum
category infantry
class heavy
voice_type Heavy_1
soldier batavian_infantry, 50, 0, 1.202, 0.35
officer roman_centurion
officer roman_standard
officer roman_signifier
attributes sea_faring, hide_forest, can_sap, very_hardy, can_swim, mercenary_unit
formation 1, 1, 2, 2, 5, square, shield_wall
stat_health 1, 5
stat_pri 8, 12, auxilia_javelin, 50, 2, thrown, simple, piercing, spear, 25, 1
stat_pri_attr prec
stat_sec 10, 12, no, 0, 0, melee, blade, piercing, spear, 25, 0.246
stat_sec_attr light_spear, spear_bonus_6
stat_pri_armour 7, 17, 5, metal
stat_sec_armour 0, 1, flesh
stat_heat 2
stat_ground 0, 0, -2, -1
stat_mental 21, disciplined, highly_trained
stat_charge_dist 50
stat_fire_delay -55000
stat_food 60, 300
stat_cost 0, 1635, 531, 247, 330, 204
ownership romans_brutii, thrace

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

type cohors i batavorumdictionary cohors_i_batavorum
category infantry
class spearmen
voice_type Heavy_1
soldier batavian_infantry, 50, 0, 1.202, 0.35
officer roman_centurion
officer roman_standard
officer roman_signifier
mount_effect horse +2
attributes sea_faring, hide_forest, can_sap, very_hardy, can_swim, mercenary_unit
formation 1, 1, 2, 2, 5, square, shield_wall
stat_health 1, 5
stat_pri 12, 12, auxilia_javelin, 50, 2, thrown, simple, piercing, spear, 25, 1
stat_pri_attr prec
stat_sec 14, 12, no, 0, 0, melee, blade, piercing, spear, 25, 0.246
stat_sec_attr light_spear, spear_bonus_6
stat_pri_armour 12, 17, 5, metal
stat_sec_armour 0, 1, flesh
stat_heat 2
stat_ground 0, 0, -2, -1
stat_mental 21, disciplined, highly_trained
stat_charge_dist 50
stat_fire_delay -55000
stat_food 60, 300
stat_cost 0, 1635, 231, 247, 330, 204
ownership romans_brutii, thrace

that is how you can have a bonus against cav or camel, or elephants, or chariots.

Don't know the limits of how high you can make it but I am sure it is somewhere around 9

or something.

Any more question regarding RS 2 on EDU or EDB?

[Black_Baron]

Ty for the reply i might try that if i have problems with the factions that don't have anticav units (rome i guess)

[Spartan999]

Ty for the reply i might try that if i have problems with the factions that don't have anticav units (rome i guess)

You can change the Auxiliary with spear from heavy infantry to spear men. Let them be recruit able everywhere

so you can recruit spears.

[SD_Man]

This sounds like a good addition, better than my idea of giving all spear units AP damage so I could finely own them Catapony A's. Though I must know, why was this bonus even removed? Everyone knows that spears vs horses is the best way to go.

[Spartan999]

somehow this has slipped my mind during that conversation

EDIT: found out why, cavs died like flies when you add them numbers (against pikes at least).

[ur-Lord Tedric]

tone can better explain 'why', but all 'Mount effects' were removed for a purpose a long time ago. The Antesignanii '+' vs Elephants was one of the last to go as it had slipped through.

[Mirionis9]

1. I guess that horse+2 is enough for any phalanx with the exception of the elites; they should have horse+3 due to their supreme cohesion. Also the hoplites and in general any spear unit should have horse+1.
2. The legion cannot fight back cavalry. It is simple; swordsman vs spear cavalry. So the legions should remain as they are (just my thoughts though).

[SD_Man]

1. I guess that horse+2 is enough for any phalanx with the exception of the elites; they should have horse+3 due to their supreme cohesion. Also the hoplites and in general any spear unit should have horse+1.
2. The legion cannot fight back cavalry. It is simple; swordsman vs spear cavalry. So the legions should remain as they are (just my thoughts though).

I agree on cohorts though i'd like to add some proper stat examples based on spear types:
Light Spears / +3
Heavy Spears / +2
Pikes / +1

This comes from the simple logic that heavier weapons should have less of an effect/maneuver when dealing with cav, they are infantry after-all. Meanwhile "light spearmen" are the more devastating, like the naked falx vs heavy legionary.

P.S. Some feedback would be heavily appreciated

[dvk901]

As I've said in other places, configuring the stats of units is an extremely difficult process to arrive at balance in both how the game is played by the player, as well as how auto-resolved battles are resolved (all AI vs AI battles are auto-resolved). I know that Tone worked with and was advised by Aradan, who has made a name for himself in a few other mods where formations and units stats are involved (Fourth Age, for one, which involves a lot of cavalry), and personally, I think the balance of our units is about as good as you can get.

That said, in any TW game involving cavalry and infantry you have to make sure that cavalry is 'good', but not too good. Because then people complain that cavalry is useless, or OTT. The object of our stats, then, was to balance infantry against cavalry without using the 'gamey' RTW\CA bonus feature to sort of 'level the playing field' between factions that have a LOT of spear infantry, and others that have very little.....or, on the other hand, factions that have a lot of cavalry, but little infantry.

As soon as you start throwing in these bonuses, you upset this balance because now, an otherwise 'mediocre' infantry unit has more value than a unit that costs more but doesn't have that bonus. Then people say, 'heck, my generic spearman are worth more than a more elite and expensive unit.' Why did you do that?

The fact is that cavalry in RS2, for the most part, is only useful when attacking from the non-shield side and the back. Any other attack is either of minimal value or suicidal. Cataphracts are an exception, but I've explained already why that is. And cavalry against a phalanx unit in a frontal assault? I've seen no indication that that is a good idea from the cavalry man's viewpoint.

So yes, the bonuses were removed for good reasons. Also, there is no need for a 'camel' bonus. There are no camels in RS2.

[ur-Lord Tedric]

.............. Cataphracts are an exception, but I've explained already why that is. .............

Agree with everything apart from this. I know that people want their 'tanks' (silly), or perhaps just their 'charging knights', but there is no evidence that I am aware of that suggests that cataphracts horses are any more stupid, or even 'especially trained', to charge home on to any formed and ready infantry.

Goodness, it takes a very experienced show-jumper to prove to a horse that they can jump over things; you go watch jousting even today and there is a good reason there's a rail down the centre separating the riders; let alone that we do have evidence that the very occasional attempted use of scythed chariots required the horses to be blind-folded, and even then that didn't work very much.

'Charge' means to approach rapidly and unleash an attack, whether it's using javelins, bows or long sarissa/kontos spears; it doesn't necessarily mean to charge home and break up the formation. Back to even the Battle of Carrhae, you have the cataphracts trying to prise apart the Roman's shields with their pikes/spears.

But, I do recognise it's like flogging a dead horse......the cavalry myth is alive and well. All cavalry should indeed die horribly if they try to take on infantry that doesn't break.

[dvk901]

Agree with everything apart from this. I know that people want their 'tanks' (silly), or perhaps just their 'charging knights', but there is no evidence that I am aware of that suggests that cataphracts horses are any more stupid, or even 'especially trained', to charge home on to any formed and ready infantry.

Goodness, it takes a very experienced show-jumper to prove to a horse that they can jump over things; you go watch jousting even today and there is a good reason there's a rail down the centre separating the riders; let alone that we do have evidence that the very occasional attempted use of scythed chariots required the horses to be blind-folded, and even then that didn't work very much.

'Charge' means to approach rapidly and unleash an attack, whether it's using javelins, bows or long sarissa/kontos spears; it doesn't necessarily mean to charge home and break up the formation. Back to even the Battle of Carrhae, you have the cataphracts trying to prise apart the Roman's shields with their pikes/spears.

But, I do recognise it's like flogging a dead horse......the cavalry myth is alive and well. All cavalry should indeed die horribly if they try to take on infantry that doesn't break.

I hope that you aren't saying that 'I' want my tanks. Because that really isn't the case, as I explained before. Still, don't think that I am completely resistant to change. When we come to testing future campaigns (2.8, 2.9, etc.) it will be much easier to deal with individual EDU's than 25 of them.

[ur-Lord Tedric]

Let's think simple for a moment. Imagine hundreds of armored horses and riders that come at you with good speed. That sight alone and the sound of the trampling hooves are terrifying like hell for soldiers who have never seen such a thing. I don't know why that gets always heavily discussed, but you have to admit that the mass of the horse and the armor could easily run you over, plus the weapons of the rider. I agree that this can only work in the right moment, when the enemy army is falling apart. I would say Cataphracts had more effect on the psyche of the enemy, than crushing them with one charge.

This is the correct view IMHO - and applies just as much if the cavalry are the, otherwise, equally superb and 'shiny' Carabiniers and Curassiers of Napoleon's army at the other end of history. If the horse and rider can get in amongst the infantry; if he infantry turn their backs and flee; if the infantry are fully engaged frontally and the cavalry appear behind the flank; or, just as with the Parthians, when the infantry are worn down by heat, lack of water and are tired from continuous harrassing bowfire and simply lose all cohesion then the cataphracts approach.

I hope that you aren't saying that 'I' want my tanks......

Dear dvk' - no, not at all. But you only have to read up to see the 'I like my tanks' comment. Indeed I do understand it - gamers are impatient chaps these days, how many still don't like battles that last more than 10mins! Battles are normally (RL) long and tedious affairs until a breakthrough is made. This is why, and when cavalry come into their own, that nearly all casualties are caused after the battle and why the loss rates are normally highly disproportionate.

Overall, and only if we could almost re-write the engine, cavalry should indeed have a mostly morale effect from their positioning and, by all means, cataphracts and the like should be even more intimidating; but when the player orders a cavalry charge then one of two things should happen: either the infantry pass their 'morale check' and the cavalry don't even charge home, but pull up, or veer away and reform; or they don't and the formation comes apart and the cavalry kill. The former, in most cases with good troops, should be dominant. But, at the right moment, when the infantry are tired and perhaps wavering - then that is the time to charge.

For that's what the Parthian nobles watched for - after hours, perhaps even days, of their retainers shooting arrows, then they would exploit the opportunity. The downside to cataphracts, bearing in mind that their horses, whilst larger than average, were nothing like the bloodlines developed later to carry knights, also became tired very quickly. With restricted views cataphracts are also vulnerable and the classic tactics against them involved light cavalry and light infantry, who could harass and get in close and kill, often concentrating on the horses.

[Mirionis9]

It is impossible to break a phalanx pike wall in a smooth terrain with a frontal attack. That is for sure. So I still think that the cataphracts and the cavalry in general is overpowered from that point of view. So
"1. I guess that horse+2 is enough for any phalanx with the exception of the elites; they should have horse+3 due to their supreme cohesion. Also the hoplites and in general any spear unit should have horse+1.
2. The legion cannot fight back cavalry. It is simple; swordsman vs spear cavalry. So the legions should remain as they are (just my thoughts though)"
as I mentioned above. Anyway we are talking about something that is already extraordinary; RS II.

[Darth Bane1]

Let's think simple for a moment. Imagine hundreds of armored horses and riders that come at you with good speed. That sight alone and the sound of the trampling hooves are terrifying like hell for soldiers who have never seen such a thing. I don't know why that gets always heavily discussed, but you have to admit that the mass of the horse and the armor could easily run you over, plus the weapons of the rider. I agree that this can only work in the right moment, when the enemy army is falling apart. I would say Cataphracts had more effect on the psyche of the enemy, than crushing them with one charge.

[SD_Man]

After spending quite some time with the EDU (and some soul searching), I came to realize the distinction between "mount_effects," "spear_bonus," and some general logic. No mount effects should be added as it just makes no sense and is realistic, but spear_bonus should be given a second look. All heavy and pike spears have a value of "spear_bonus 6" which adds bonuses to a spear weapons when fighting cav (Light spearmen have value of 4). Since pikes already destroy "tank cav", and light spears can handle themselves pretty well, there needs be no changes except for heavy spearmen who deserve that extra "8." Im going to try to test this week and will hope that my spears can at least do some considerable damage before they die.

Also @Tedric on the topic of cavalry behavior: Don't you know that the Parthians have been Avatar bonding with their horses since birth? It only makes sense that these beasts are overly disciplined yet impetuous enough to both break a formation and stand their ground.

[Mirionis9]

An addition to what ur-Lord Tedric has mentioned. In the battle of Magnesia (190 bc) The Seleucid cataphracts of the right (offensive) wing not only drove away the roman cavalry but also managed to defeat the roman right. It was the first time the Romans had to face the cataphracts and probably had a "blurry" idea of the new weapon. Yet we hear that the Romans were able to defeat the Seleucids and their casualties were extremely low, despite the fact that their left wing had collapsed. That tells us that the cataphracts were used only for their charge and not for long distances, like chasing fleeing enemies, like the Hetairoi cavalry used to. It was due to the horses low stamina (they could not stand the heat for a long period of time). So extra heavy cavalry should tire easily, really easily, not the "good stamina" they have in the game.