Armor / shields

[antred]

I've noticed that many units that have relatively small shields have nearly identical shield armor ratings as units with MUCH larger shields. For instance, I have 1 "Carnute Cingetos" (levied from a client state) and a bunch of "Cohors Legionaria" in the same legion, so they both get the same armor modifiers from the general's / legion's traits / skills / traditions. In this legion, the armor ratings are as follows:

                        Base value    Shield value

Cohors Legionaria:       44                  27
Carnute Cingetos         41                  24

Yet if you look at the unit models, the Carnutes have a tiny round shield that seems barely 2 feet in diameter.

There are dozens of other units that also have armor ratings (both shield and base) that seem very odd when you look at what shields and armor they actually wear.

[antred]

I'm just fighting a battle against Tylus. They have a unit of slingers called "Klappagnetoi". Most men in this unit are fighting with a bare upper body. The rest are wearing some sort of shirts. Their base armor rating is 3.

In that same army there are a bunch of swordsmen units called "Karotovas". They have almost exactly the same clothing (or lack of it) as the Klappagnetoi, but for some reason they get a base armor rating of 26, or almost NINE times that of another unit that appears to wear pretty much identical armor (i.e. none whatsoever).

[JObadiah]

DeI's armor and shield systems are very.... abstract. While this has its virtues, the actual allocation/balancing needs some serious attention.

[meerkatology]

DeI's armor and shield systems are very.... abstract. While this has its virtues, the actual allocation/balancing needs some serious attention.

ya, most naked units with small shields ave like 30+ combined armor

there is also a hidden HP system that plays far more into the durability of units than armor value, i.e. cataphracts
but as far as melee infantry goes they are all around 50-65 hp i think

[Butan]

Problem would be : how do we simulate the superiority of poorly armoured meleeists, compared to poorly armoured skirmishers?

If we give, say, 3 armour to shirt-wielding swordmen, I let you imagine what happens when they get in melee contact

[Harnis]

armor and shield ratings are used to balance. Like Butan said, it wouldn't work to have melee infantry with 3 armor.

Besides, for melee units, just pretend that their melee skills combined with a sword give them a boost to their armor rating as compared to a skirmisher.

[antred]

armor and shield ratings are used to balance. Like Butan said, it wouldn't work to have melee infantry with 3 armor.

Besides, for melee units, just pretend that their melee skills combined with a sword give them a boost to their armor rating as compared to a skirmisher.

If that is really true then the armor rating shouldn't even be visible to the player, since the way it's used in the game it is merely an implementation detail that the player cannot derive any useful conclusions from.

[Butan]

If that is really true then the armor rating shouldn't even be visible to the player, since the way it's used in the game it is merely an implementation detail that the player cannot derive any useful conclusions from.

HP arent visible so maybe armour could too...

I'm more of the crowd who wants HP to be visible as every stats though ^^

[Argouges]

well i think , too many units are implemented too fast , team should just stop new units , at least in major updated factions and take the time to reconsider the balance of all units . Maybe suppress some useless parts like deadliness and .. ^^ i don t remenber ; like suggested in another post . these stats just complicate for nothing , and many issues come from them.

[m_1512]

I'll take this up with the team. Thanks for reporting.

You can continue the discussions though.