Want to understand stats a little better

[Violent Whimsy]

I continually find my units lose 1v1 to roman units which take forever to rout and will often go back and forth from shaken to wavering several times before routing. Where typically mine once wavering will rout 90% of the time. With no general effects going off and no other noticeable change how do they do this?

Also, are the stats displayed for each unit during a battle anywhere close to correct? took forever to rout a sword unit which was surrounded and being attacked on all 4 sides with two sword units having superior stats by far except of course the 1 in weapon deadliness. The other two units had good stats but were spears.

In the same battle another of my sword units was head on 1v1 with another roman unit and it lost and yet it had melee attack and defense 10-15 more than the roman unit, 10 more armor, 2 or 3 more in the weapon damage, same health of 40 and 30+ more base morale. Is weapon deadliness so significant that superior numbers in all other stats are meaningless? I had dropped the roman unit to 40/100 and it had been "shaken" forever and mine got to 53/100 and ran away??

I know there are a lot of factors (in this specific case both generals were already long dead) I guess im just getting tired of surrounding Roman troops and not getting any where even when my stats are equal or better.

it gets frustrating and I just want to understand the mechanics/stats to understand why this happens so I can plan or change strategy or army composition to negate what ever super power the Romans have.

Very Hard Campaign/Normal Battle difficulty.

Any help and/or suggestions on army composition like go spear heavy or sword heavy etc (as I play all factions I am not looking to get into faction specifics), or stats to try and boost more than others, or anything really. If this is the kind of thing which CA put into the engine when playing harder difficulties instead of better AI then let me know that too.

[mrhappyx666x]

It gets said a lot but 1v1's aren't a very good way to assertain the value of units. They are balanced for battles not 1v1's. I'm sure Kam could explain better but I doubt he wants too again lol

[KAM 2150]

Well, I'll just put it this way before going into details:

NEVER
DO
GRINDFEST
WITH
ROMANS



Also like mrhappy said, 1v1 is not balanced scenario as your units fights as an ARMY not as single entity.
Romans on the other hand have very high morale and 1 point od deadliness, which is not much at first, but it simply makes them better as the combat progresses, due to how Romans fought. Worst thing you can do is to try to beat Romans head on in prolonged 1v1 melee. Besides high morale, they are also disciplined, hence harder to rout.

So what is the trick against Romans? Their generals stats are lower then those of most units, like melee attack and charge values. Romans also tend to have inferior ranged and cavalry units. So most of other nations have units that will be beating Romans at the beggining of combat, like Spartans, but will later on get more and more casualties due to deadliness, so even if Roman units will be defeated, it will still be able to inflict large casualties if melee will take long enough. But once units are tired or exhausted, their stats are getting lower. Your strategy should be not to engage Romans in full on melee, but commit some of your troops and leave ELITES AND HEAVY units in reserve. You will use them later on for flanking or reinforing your main line. Obviously flanking is better etc, etc, but why you should reserve your best units for this?

Let's do some math:

a) Roman legionary has base stat of 23 melee attack
Seleucid Royal Swordsmen has 25 of melee attack.
b) Legionary unit is attacking some other Seleucid unit and is getting into tired state, while Seleucid Royal Swordsmen is in reserve, in fresh state.

c) Legionary unit is becoming exhausted, their stats are lowered to 50% and 60% of base values, depending on stat. In case of melee attack it is 60% of base value.

d) Seleucid Royal Swordsmen unit is attacking exhausted Legionares. Seleucid unit still has its base 25 point of melee attack, while Legionary units has only 60% of 23 melee attack, whic is now around 14 points of melee attack.

e) Royal Sword units also has bonus from charge, which furhter boosts their initial attack, which will deal a lot of casulaties for Romans, who won't have enough time to grind with those Royal Swordsmen.


Still, the easiest soluton against Romans is cavalry Rear charges will maul Legionares and if you have heavy enough cavalry like Agema or Saka Cataphracts, even frontal charges will do the trick if Legionares won't use their pila. Also other nations have mostly superior ranged units, that will be very helpful against any Roman army. Just move your Peltats to the rear of Legionares and enjoy the show of javelins followed by a rear charge

As for your question, yes, stats 100% close to correct, but it depends on many factors and some unit are just better for other things. Also in campaign, units benefit from technology, experience, general skills and other that further make everything a bit out of control in the long run and it is almost impossible to balance it for all scenarios.

Also make sure that you know which mods you use as some change stuff a lot.

[Violent Whimsy]

Thanks MrHappy for letting me know Kam is the stats guy. I will focus my searches on Kam's posts to try and learn more about it. I had read a thread he had posted in regarding AP vs Wep. Deadliness but it had not gone into how it relates to the other stats.

Kam, sadly the grindfest was where this battle was at. all units exhausted (mine and theirs), no more ammo for my elite javs (I really liked the reduction in ammo which DeI introduced vs Vanilla. Vanilla missile after all the bonuses always had what seemed an unending supply which just was never case. Except maybe slingers who to some degree could pick up ammo easily), I had more units left (army was all elite Nervii) and from the stats I had the upper hand especially morale which I build for with building bonuses and general upgrades. Given my 80+ morale to their 50+ morale which showed in the stats I figured I woudlnt be the first to rout which is why I was so frustrated.

I will add some cavalry which I like to use but stopped doing because they are so unfairly hit by the autoresolve combat option versus other troops. I really dislike the way the engine does this but I know its CA and not DeI. Thanks for replying and after I search your previous posts some more, if I still have questions regarding stats or how they work I will make a new post.

[ThatWhichThinks]

I remember the first time I fought Romans as the Arverni after the battle overhaul. The Romans just wouldn't route with the wear-down that would mostly work before 1.1. I had to go way more cavalry and javelin heavy when fighting Romans than when fighting other Celts of any type or Germanics. It is nice to have to build different kinds of armies to face different foes. It's a good thing Roman AI tends to recruit little in the way of cavalry and that Celtic cavalry can generally thrash any cavalry early Romans can field or I would have been hosed!

Just wait until you have to fight a city assault against Romans. You will either get very creative or your soldiers will get very dead!

[KAM 2150]

Yeah, you need to pick cavalry with your forces or you will suffer. Before 1.1 release, almost every battle was played out in the same way, no matter which nation fought which nation, now there is a true difference. If you go infantry heavy against Romans you will suffer as we wanted to make a Rome a real threat to the player, which you can see for yourself In other words, going into exhausting grindfest with Romans is like trying to beat Romans with what they are best at. It is possible, but there are dozens easier ways to do it. That is when cavalry, ranged units and reserves come in hand Remember that your units will survive a bit even when facing 2 Roman units so you can give your troops time to rest. Also take a closer look at which of your infantry units have highest charge values and then use them for flanking and rear charges. As barbarian state you can also get access to some Naked Fanatic units which have "fear" attribute that will reduce morale of every troops nearby them.

Or you can just bring solid cavalry ;P For example, in my Parthian campaign I only recruited heavy shock cavalry when there was a huge battle to happen and during time of smaller battles or peace I would disband them. You can do the same, in time of peace disband your cav to save some cash and during war recruit them if you know there will be big battle before you and disband them after it.

[Violent Whimsy]

So far I have found going 4 missile (pref archers over peltasts/javelin, slingers almost never), 7 spear and 8 sword pretty much kills anything it comes against. Not as good with most greeks factions as their sword units only get good later in the game if they have any good ones at all. I go more missile heavy when I know Im going to be facing the nomads and a bazillion horse units. I also try to make sure all units are the best I can build at the given moment. Basically two armies and I take over whatever I want. I try and replace two swords with shock cavalry whenever I have access to a good one but since AI craps on horses when doing autoresolve it can really slow down forward advancement if I am not near my recruiting province. Sidenote- Cappadocian Lancers are insane! That charge bonus is crazy and I love them. I also usually pick a horse general unit unless I know its going to be a far off or long war campaign.

This general army build has been working against Rome usually as well but it seems not when I play western barbarians (celts/germanic). With Getae/Odrysian and Galation celts I didnt seem to get into the grind all too much with Rome like I did with Nervii or Leugoz and the pikes and elite hoplites available to most greeks allow you to poke Rome to death pretty easy. This could be due to the fact that Rome typically seems to focus northwest and south most campaigns which is understandable so it isnt able to switch fronts in time before their economy is in the toilet after I advance on them.

Playing Cimmeria right now but will take your suggestions and what I learn to heart next game when I think I will be Iceni or Averni and give it another shot with the western barbarians.

[KAM 2150]

Iceni will be a fun for you as they have overal very good infantry with insane charge bonus (they have highest charge values for infantry on average) so they will be great for some shock tactics

Getae and Odryssians will be better against Rome as they use very high damage weapons that are great against heavy armours of Romans so they simply kills Romans faster then Romans kill them On the other hand, very heavy Greek units will be better vs Getate and Odryssians then Romans, since they will have even higher melee attack and melee defence then Romans. Roman units with AP damage are just better overal vs very heavy units, but Getae/Odryssian units have mostly lower armour so their advantage with AP is reduced while their inferior melee attack is more noticeable.

Also forgot to mention that for quick rout morale shocks are more important that prolonged maluses for morale. So if unit if encircled for long time and it is still able to fight back, it won't rout as they have no reason to (if you are encircled, you have no way to flee so you have to fight anyway), but if you shower them with missiles and then follow it up with cavalry charge, they will rout. Sadly, AI is unable to prevent player for flanking etc. so I had to reduce penalty for flanking and rear attack as it only made battles easier for the player, while AI was unable to take advantage of it. BTW, penalty for being attacked in the rear is one of the biggest there are (-31 or -35 morale from what I remember and flanking is mostly applied at the same time, so fully encircled unit has like -50 to morale).

[mec287]

Do different weapons have different bonuses? I remember from another thread that Axes and Flax reduce armor. Do spears, pikes, or swords do anything? Are spears actually better against cavalry or do swords work just as well? Does length matter?

[KAM 2150]

Do different weapons have different bonuses? I remember from another thread that Axes and Flax reduce armor. Do spears, pikes, or swords do anything? Are spears actually better against cavalry or do swords work just as well? Does length matter?

Weapon damage is the most important value. Units using gladius also get single point of weapon deadliness, but their top damage is slightly lower. Axes and maces have higher damage then swords. Spears have lower overal damage but have big bonus against cavalry, depending on quality of weapon (so levy spear will have lower bonus vs cavalry then some elite hoplites). Falx weapons have high damage and are effective against shields plus they have small bonus vs cavalry and elephants. Sickles have good damage and bonus vs elephants.

Length of weapon does not matter at all, except for pikes since game engine only recognizes the length of it when in formation as they do not need to triger combat animation.

[Violent Whimsy]

Thanks Kam. You guys have done wonders within the constraints of the CA engine and AI and also thanks for taking the time to respond and explain. I like the Iceni and most celts because I like sword units which Eastern and some Greek factions are not as well equipped with always. (hoplites can be beasts but they kill slowly) I like units that go in and rip the enemy to pieces I will keep in mind to try and burst down enemy morale versus grinding it down.

I also tend to find the western barbarians more difficult because of the lack of archers. I have played a Lusontani campaign fully relying on their units plentiful spear throwing as my missiles rather than use slingers. So the Iceni will be interesting and a challenge. I will make sure to maximize that charge bonus! Thanks Again!