Armor is useless, deadliness not what we think it is?

[meerkatology]

had some surprising findings today, it seems that even a few points of deadliness completely makes armor obsolete.

and armor is nearly useless to begin with.

apparently:
late hastati vs. imperial cataphract legion 1v1 = even
( 44 armor vs. 59 )
even though they have 10 regular damage and 5 deadliness, it seems that the regular damage doenst matter at all.
for and giggles, i modded to segmenta armor to give the imperial legion 400 armor , it still went exactly even vs the hastati

it did make a difference vs a unit with 0-1 deadliness, but it seems that any deadliness above 3-4 is completely negating armor.



i was under the impression that deadliness was just extra points of damage that bypassed armor. but now it looks like this isn't necesarily the case
highly armored units in general doesn't really survive much longer than lower armor units considering most things in the game has at last 1-2 points of deadliness.

would be interested if anyone knows what deadliness actually does.

[Butan]

Not long ago someone said initiative is too strong and deadliness is useless....

(not saying its not an interesting subject, just that you must ready yourself to some uncool posts )

[meerkatology]

Not long ago someone said initiative is too strong and deadliness is useless....

(not saying its not an interesting subject, just that you must ready yourself to some uncool posts )

Oh, initiative still trumps deadliness, thats not the question. but its more that armor in general is not very useful at all

[pyccos]

wow that's crazy even with 400 armor.... so what does it actual do? IMO design flaw.

[ma_251]

Could it be that the 'deadliness' is totally AP damage? That would explain it because even if you make the armour rating of 9001, you would still die in 10 hits if deadliness is 5 and enemy hp is 50. (50/5=10)

[Baleur]

As in deadliness being AP damage ON TOP OF the usual damage?
I see some possibilities. If either of which is true, who knows.


Damage (vs unarmored) 10 + Deadliness (vs armored) 5 = 15 damage (vs unarmored), 5 damage (vs armored)
Damage (vs unarmored) 10 + Deadliness (vs armored) 5 = 10 damage (vs unarmored), 5 damage (vs armored)

[JObadiah]

From what I understand, when a hit is scored, there's an RNG "roll" against armor to which the weapon's damage is applied, and if it's higher than the armor value, the difference is dealt in hp damage. And so yes, the upshot is that any armor value higher than max roll+weapon damage is as good as any other.

Deadliness is damage dealt on a hit regardless of armor, so yes, in a way, armor is 'useless' against it. Deadliness 5 will deal 5 damage against 10 armor or 100 armor, just the same. In DeI, a weapon's normal damage and a unit's exact armor rating can be pretty much safely ignored for purposes of melee on heavier units (most melee/spear units have enough armor through their shields to negate most normal damage), though the way missile weapon damage is balanced, armor is more relevant, and normal weapon damage is still relevant vs. a lot of missile units.

[pyccos]

thank you so much.

[rjacko10]

Does this mean deadliness is the same as armour penetration damage. So do you add the two scores together, and that's the guaranteed damage regardless of armour?

This is crazy. I'm sure this can be done in a much simpler way.

[JObadiah]

Does this mean deadliness is the same as armour penetration damage. So do you add the two scores together, and that's the guaranteed damage regardless of armour?

This is crazy. I'm sure this can be done in a much simpler way.

Deadliness just is AP damage, renamed and re-positioned in the tooltips.

[rjacko10]

Deadliness just is AP damage, renamed and re-positioned in the tooltips.

They should have just named it AP then.. and put it directly under damage. That would be common sense.

[meerkatology]

From what I understand, when a hit is scored, there's an RNG "roll" against armor to which the weapon's damage is applied, and if it's higher than the armor value, the difference is dealt in hp damage. And so yes, the upshot is that any armor value higher than max roll+weapon damage is as good as any other.

Deadliness is damage dealt on a hit regardless of armor, so yes, in a way, armor is 'useless' against it. Deadliness 5 will deal 5 damage against 10 armor or 100 armor, just the same. In DeI, a weapon's normal damage and a unit's exact armor rating can be pretty much safely ignored for purposes of melee on heavier units (most melee/spear units have enough armor through their shields to negate most normal damage), though the way missile weapon damage is balanced, armor is more relevant, and normal weapon damage is still relevant vs. a lot of missile units.

The non AP damage is not useless if the armor is higher than the damage. the RNG roll has a higher chance of doing 0 dmg if the armor is higher as there is a higher hcance of rolling armor above the dmg. ie. if you have 100 armor vs. 10 dmg, ur 0-100 roll on the armor means 90% of the time you take 0 damage. but other 10% you are rolling <10 and taking variable amounts. this is as far as i understand.

so by that logic higher armor should still mean something.

and also some units, i.e anti cav spearmen have 0 deadliness, if armor>dmg means you take no dmg then heavy units should be immune to them ya?

so my question is that somehow 40 armor vs. 400 armor is making no difference at all vs. a unit that does 12 normal dmg and 5 deadliness. armor above 40 seems to be completely negating the 12 normal damage - but we know this can't be true, because units with 0 deadliness are still capable of killing high armor opponents... this leaves me to think that the 5 deadliness was somehow making all of the unit's damage ignore armor?

[ma_251]

The non AP damage is not useless if the armor is higher than the damage. the RNG roll has a higher chance of doing 0 dmg if the armor is higher as there is a higher hcance of rolling armor above the dmg. ie. if you have 100 armor vs. 10 dmg, ur 0-100 roll on the armor means 90% of the time you take 0 damage. but other 10% you are rolling <10 and taking variable amounts. this is as far as i understand.

so by that logic higher armor should still mean something.

and also some units, i.e anti cav spearmen have 0 deadliness, if armor>dmg means you take no dmg then heavy units should be immune to them ya?

so my question is that somehow 40 armor vs. 400 armor is making no difference at all vs. a unit that does 12 normal dmg and 5 deadliness. armor above 40 seems to be completely negating the 12 normal damage - but we know this can't be true, because units with 0 deadliness are still capable of killing high armor opponents... this leaves me to think that the 5 deadliness was somehow making all of the unit's damage ignore armor?

Units with 0 deadliness kill because they might have AP weapon damage. EVEN if they dont, their normal damage will eventually kill armoured units.

[JObadiah]

this leaves me to think that the 5 deadliness was somehow making all of the unit's damage ignore armor?

I doubt that's the case; I'd think general kill rates would be much higher if so.

[ma_251]

If indeed Deadliness is totally AP, then isn't it overpowered?
If it is then perhaps:
-Make Deadliness add to Non-AP damage only so it can be countered by armour.
-Make Deadliness add to Melee Attack Stat.

(Dunno how Weapon Initiative affects Melee Attack or Damage)

[rjacko10]

If indeed Deadliness is totally AP, then isn't it overpowered?
If it is then perhaps:
-Make Deadliness add to Non-AP damage only so it can be countered by armour.
-Make Deadliness add to Melee Attack Stat.

(Dunno how Weapon Initiative affects Melee Attack or Damage)

If deadliness is not a unique variable then it should not exist as a separate variable.

I believe initiative is as it influences the chance that an attack is initiated. If successful initiation, then it goes to the attack/defence roll. If successful attack, then damage/armor roll (+AP damage).

[ma_251]

Anyways, only the modders can actually tell how deadliness works and if it actually gives any advantage over armour at all.

[zonks40]

I've never been a fan of the AP stat, I don't believe that any hit on an armored soldier should do damage 100% of the time, nothing could be further from realistic, if you want to represent armor piercing qualities of a weapon against armor, then a "normal" damage bonus should apply to give it a better chance of exceeding the armor stat and doing damage, even then the armor would have a chance to protect the wearer as it should.

[Archesel]

In older titles like RTW or MIITW, armor value was more a protection against missile weapons... Melee was rather affected by "combat skill" or "melee skill", something like that...

[KAM 2150]

In older titles like RTW or MIITW, armor value was more a protection against missile weapons... Melee was rather affected by "combat skill" or "melee skill", something like that...

Nope, still armor value was the most important. For example 20 armor was much better then 20 deffence.

There was just an AP attribute that reduced armor of attacked enemy by 1/2.