[Battle Physics] There's some weird mass stuff going on

[WAD81]

My recent discovery: light_spear works great for keeping formation. I had an excellent battle yesterday with 8 hoplites units holding the line perfectly.

Also, RC is the way to go & a dream scenario.
As soon as I have some free time in October I would be ready to participate.
4/5 guys working on the units by region/faction and we're ready in a couple of weeks.

[athanaric]

My recent discovery: light_spear works great for keeping formation. I had an excellent battle yesterday with 8 hoplites units holding the line perfectly.

They actually had this in EB I.

As soon as I have some free time in October I would be ready to participate.

Same here (not earlier than October though), as long as it doesn't involve programming skills.

[Ferdiad]

I'd be willing to help out as well whenever they release the full EDU.

[Sint]

The stats here don't make any sense at all

Why?Certain troops wearing the same types of armor have the same rating ,same goes with skill.You not understanding it doens't means that it is senseless.
And yes it is not perfect....nor complete but hardly senseless.

[WAD81]

; COMMENTS Akontistai
type hellenistic infantry akontistai
dictionary hellenistic_infantry_akontistai
category infantry
class skirmish
voice_type Light
accent West_Greek
banner faction main_missile
banner holy crusade
soldier Euzonoi, 64, 0, 1.02
attributes sea_faring, hide_forest, hardy, is_peasant, can_withdraw
move_speed_mod 0.98
formation 1, 1.5, 2.79, 2.99, 4, square
stat_health 1, 6
stat_pri 8, 1, javelin, 80, 6, thrown, missile_mechanical, piercing, none, 0, 1
stat_pri_attr thrown
stat_sec 1, 1, no, 0, 0, melee, melee_simple, piercing, knife, 0, 1
stat_sec_attr no
stat_pri_armour 1, 3, 2, leather
stat_sec_armour 0, 0, flesh
stat_heat 2
stat_ground 1, -1, 0, -1
stat_mental 1, low, untrained
stat_charge_dist 7
stat_fire_delay 0
stat_food 60, 300
stat_cost 1, 440, 120, 55, 75, 480, 12, 145
stat_stl 10
armour_ug_levels 0
armour_ug_models Akontistai

Past this thing in properly and suddenly the unit is much better.

Sorry for double post.

[Gen.jamesWolfe]

Why?Certain troops wearing the same types of armor have the same rating ,same goes with skill.You not understanding it doens't means that it is senseless.
And yes it is not perfect....nor complete but hardly senseless.

^ what this guy said.



anyways: k/t, That you would merely judge it without even playing it, tells me more about you, than it does about the stat system--which is indeed seriously flawed at this time. But I'm not going to leave it at that:

I asked about the unit stats in EB2 a few years ago, with the intention of offering my services as a unit stat creator, as I have made RR/RC submods for two other mods already and I am probably the person most familiar with RC after Point Blank. I was told that the team was using EDU-matic, which was a highly customizable something something and it was ideal for their needs. I didn't want to be a RR/RaCist the way I usually am, because the EB2 team was very dedicated to its work, and I don't like to bother people, so I decided to wait and see the result, in case this EDU-matic turned out to be really good.

the EDU_matic is no longer used, as the method used to derive the stats is simply incompatible. besides, you should have seen what it was like before work was started on it--a mere 6 months ago...

and funny you would say this bolded part...let me explain why:

I haven't gotten EB2 yet, but the stats that I've caught a glimpse of from the posts in this thread are monstrous! Charge 28??? On infantry??? Mass 5??? Even for cavalry that's huge.

1-the reason the hoplites have this charge was to simulate the way they charged, and the weight of 8 ranks of them at that. and only hoplites (or hoplite style) soldiers have this. also, the cavalry have a higher total charge, and are ap (where applicable: not all cavalry are this way).
2-this is where I question your knowledge of the EDU: only the cavalry have ~5 mass in the EDU (at least that is supposed to be the case), but here's the thing: it is irrelevant: the mass is found in the descr_mount for the cavalry, not in the EDU. and if you open it, you'll see that the masses broadly fall between 2 and 3.5, with most around 3. as you can see, no where near where you claim it to be. And had you actually looked at the files, you would have known that.
3-bold: why are you judging a game you never played? I would suggest doing what the OP guy did, and actually do play it, and look at it--put up, or shut up. One thing I don't appreciate is people who talk out of their keisters--whether or not I like the current setup (and I don't).

"6 armour value for units with half naked guys, 8 armour for helmet, body armour and shins protection in e.g peltastai logades?"

I am looking at the stat list for armors right now (which are also applied in the EDU), I can positively say you are exaggerating--to say the least. only a handful of units have an armor of 6, and looking at them in the game, none are "half-naked". Fundamentally this shows a failure to understand that in M2TW, units can have both men with full armor, and men without, and that if the armor has a high value, that it will skew the results dramatically.

Yeah, that's really not so great. It reminds me of Broken Crescent's unit stats...they were absolutely terrible. Guys in a t-shirt had 5 armour, cataphracts had 10.

in this mod at this time--before the first fixes have been committed to the trunk: I show it here to show how much of an exaggeration/well unfounded your statement is:

"guy in t-shirt" (akontistai): 1
cataphract (minus the horse): 12 (the barding adds more).
man with pot on the head only: ~3-4

are you getting the picture yet? as you can see, it is nothing like Broken crescent, and it is in fact meant to make some level of sense. the fact that it is imperfect is natural for a BETA, and on top of that one that is being ported from RTW to this new engine (so it has teething problems) and God willing it will improve. everyone else here--including the OP, understands this.

having said that, please provide a link to the system you mention, explaining it in detail the philosophy behind it. the statter would like to see it very much, so as to fully understand your fascination with this system you mention. you don't know, he might implement it. unlike you, he isn't going to talk about a system he never saw first hand. Though if it is as some people are saying here, he feels that the "philosophy" behind it is good excellent, and in fact is similar to the one behind his, though he is unsure of the details germane to the system you and others describe that make it work so well. He is considering publishing his own system, since it is clear that it might help rectify the issues currently available. to summarize: it is in fact based on the armor's ability to protect a person (and a weapons ability to impart force onto the target), specifically the amount of force/energy required to defeat the armor (not to penetrate: defeat.). the main problem is to make sure the weapons and formations work as intended--and this has been difficult at this time.

aside from that, I have a message addressed to all others here: keep up the feedback. We need to make sure every problem in the system is ironed out. the javelin one I can now say is well taken care of for the infantry and skirmisher cavalry (whether to all's satisfaction only time will tell), but not the prec_cavalry--this is proving problematic. I must commend WAD and the OP poster for their excellent critiques, and the same goes for almost all else here.

[WAD81]

"I am looking at the stat list for armors right now (which are also applied in the EDU), I can positively say you are exaggerating--to say the least. only a handful of units have an armor of 6, and looking at them in the game, none are "half-naked". Fundamentally this shows a failure to understand that in M2TW, units can have both men with full armor, and men without, and that if the armor has a high value, that it will skew the results dramatically."


Thureophoroi swordsmen have the value 6.
And half of them have only helmet, naked torsos and leather boots perhaps.

In MT2 units can have different textures but afaik the game doesnt diffrentiate between them in terms of numerical value - they are all treated as 6 armour.

I'm perfectly happy with 6 btw. But why give hypaspistai only 8 in comparison? All of the men have helmets, body cuirass, and two shin grieves (which were very important imo).

In EB1, which used similar attack/defence values, it would be around 12.

PS. Thanks for kind words!

[Gen.jamesWolfe]

Thureophoroi swordsmen have the value 6.
And half of them have only helmet, naked torsos and leather boots perhaps.

that would give them an armor value of between 3 and 4 (which I mentioned in the post earlier)--the fully equipped ones would be about 7--all on their own; it averages out to 6. And I wouldn't call them "half naked" either way.

In MT2 units can have different textures but afaik the game doesnt diffrentiate between them in terms of numerical value - they are all treated as 6 armour.

which is precisely why it was averaged. it is an imperfect solution, but it works well on the unit level--which is necessary here at the end of the day. :shrug:

I'm perfectly happy with 6 btw. But why give hypaspistai only 8 in comparison? All of the men have helmets, body cuirass, and two shin grieves (which were very important imo).

this one may take some explaining, and I can understand the confusion. This fundamentally has to do with the way the armor was actually constructed back then: IIRC, the breatplates and greaves were made of bronze or iron/mild steel, backed with leather; the metal was ~1mm thick (rated 5.5), and leather has a protection rating of 3, for a total of 8.5. spread this out over the soldier, add a tunic, boots, and a cape, and you get ~8 for armor. the Hetairoi are similar in this regard. Greaves are indeed important, but the priority lay in protecting the head and thorax, and this is reflected in the system.

Of course, that was before it was discovered that in all likelyhood, there would also be a thoracomachus present under the armor: this may well bump out the armor rating to a 10 for Hypaspistai, Hetairoi, and IIRC the epilektoi and carthaginian sacred band, and add slightly to the Camillan Triarii. But this was only discovered today reading a book on the subject, so the change won't be in for some time. in fact the heat modifiers and changes to certain attributes (plus the javelin fix) were only officially added to the trunk yesterday. RL commitments prevent the statter often times from doing the changes in a timely manner--hence the at times incomplete statting (see below for a compounding factor).

In EB1, which used similar attack/defence values, it would be around 12.

ah, yes: any coincidence between the two is literally that--coincidence: this stat system was developed differently, and unlike EB I, does not use the EDU_matic, as mentioned before. (in fact, and this may sound crazy, it is input by hand). It was developed for a completely different mod (on the RTW engine--hence the teething problems), and for aims similar to that of RC (and similar, though not identical philosophies). I find the parallels and differences fascinating, now that I have found the readme for RC. the single biggest difference is that while the RC mod is focused on medieval combat, the stat system used by EB is more general purpose, and deliberately designed to cover more time-periods than antiquity, and it shows.

[/QUOTE]PS. Thanks for kind words![/QUOTE]

sure--you earned it

just keep the feedback going: we need it out there.

[WAD81]

"this one may take some explaining, and I can understand the confusion. This fundamentally has to do with the way the armor was actually constructed back then: IIRC, the breatplates and greaves were made of bronze or iron/mild steel, backed with leather; the metal was ~1mm thick (rated 5.5), and leather has a protection rating of 3, for a total of 8.5. spread this out over the soldier, add a tunic, boots, and a cape, and you get ~8 for armor. the Hetairoi are similar in this regard. Greaves are indeed important, but the priority lay in protecting the head and thorax, and this is reflected in the system."

using this method is it possible to obtain 6 for thur.swordsmen?

3 for leather cuirass... 1/3 of the unit has no cuirass, which makes it 2.... You can add 2 for helmet (but then, where's the +2 for helmet in hypaspists?), which makes it 4... where's 6?

Also: body armour > grieves? Fine. But in close combat, with shield in your face, wouldn't you often go for the legs area with your sword? Let's not underestimate shin protection, please.

[WAD81]

About javelin animation:
-those with 'javelin' tag have a BAD animation. They throw without a short run, from the place where they stand. And it takes AGES. They have skirmish mode 'on'.

-those with 'prec_javelin' have a GOOD animation. With the short run. It's FAST and looks nice. The units have their skirmish 'off'.

What I did: you need to change 'soldier' tag. For example, istead of Maldais unit (they have the bad animation), I pasted Euzonoi (they have the nice one).

It looks better & realistic, and is FASTER.

[torongill]

Perhaps it's a fast and dirty fix, but the behaviour is noticeably better.

[WAD81]

^Thanks! I also changed the formation slighlty, to give the unit more cohesion at the start.
If anyone wants their staple javelin unit to work better, just ask here and I'll paste in the changes for you.

About cavalry: soldier mass in EDU does't play an important role imo.
Remember, the soldier sits on a horseback. What IS important is the mass of the horse - which is in descr_mount.

[Doulkus Pontikus]

I have to agree. Skirmishers seem totally useless. It takes too long to throw their spears and usually when they throw the first one they stop!
Light units like archers fight against heavy infantry for ever and withstand cavalry charges without breaking formation.
Spear infantry seem unaffected by charges to their flanks or backs.
Some cavalry unit charges are ridiculous. e.g. Cappadocian and Armenian cavalry have a charge value of 4. How is that historically correct? I mean the impact of a horse in full speed against a foot soldier should be devastating.
I'm hoping for a patch to solve these.

[Sint]

The stats are not pulled from a medieval mod. They were first used in a medieval mod, but they are based on a system which can be adapted. They were stuck into Third Age and now they're standard in MOS.

They are based no medieval weapons and armor.You would need to use different and new values for what is used in EB2.
I think that was the point.

[Ferdiad]

They are based no medieval weapons and armor.You would need to use different and new values for what is used in EB2.
I think that was the point.

That's pretty obvious...RC is more of a philosophy of balancing than a set value...

[Alciphron]

Thanks Yerevan, that's very interesting!

[Smeel]

WAD81, I tried your fix, and in my opinion, skirmishers are behaving exactly like they should be now apart from the tight formation. Seriously, my akontistai managed to throw all their javelins during a short skirmish, I've NEVER seen that happen in m2tw before. What is the crucial line to edit? If I only change other skirmishers to "soldier euzenoi", would that be enough?

[torongill]

WAD81, I tried your fix, and in my opinion, skirmishers are behaving exactly like they should be now apart from the tight formation. Seriously, my akontistai managed to throw all their javelins during a short skirmish, I've NEVER seen that happen in m2tw before. What is the crucial line to edit? If I only change other skirmishers to "soldier euzenoi", would that be enough?

It seems it's necessary to associate the unit with a soldier model that has the short animation. The Euzonoi are one such unit, so until the patch comes and assigns the short animation for all javelin units, this is one way it can be fixed.

[Funeh]

I think javelin skirmishers need to have much faster reload time.. they just stand too long between the throws... like in reality it wouldnt take that much time to throw 2 javelins.

my opinion

[QuintusSertorius]

I'm using the Improved Javelin Skirmishing submod, which gives everyone longer range and the Akontistai formation, but Euzonoi still seem not to want to throw their missiles. In sieges they're not skirmishers at all, becuase they won't throw them. Even in field battles they tend to still have ammunition when everyone else has long expended theirs. I've taken to treating them as weak melee infantry, because they refuse to be missile troops.