Page 38 of 39 FirstFirst ... 13282930313233343536373839 LastLast
Results 741 to 760 of 763

Thread: [Overhaul Submod] "Data Venia" (for DeI 1.2.5 - Updated 2019-08-21)

  1. #741
    Elianus's Avatar Ordinarius
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Athens,Greece
    Posts
    759

    Default Re: [Overhaul Submod] "Data Venia" (for DeI 1.2.5 - Updated 2019-08-21)

    You have certainly put in some serious work in this. I see lots of changes that I enjoy. One question though and I may have asked this already in some older post. Why is it that that the regular phalangitai have better stats, including armour, than the thorakitai version? I have noticed this in all successor armies. The only exception I found where the silver shields. In that particular case the regulars have the same armour as the thorakitai.
    ''Πας μη Έλλην, βάρβαρος.''

  2. #742

    Default Re: [Overhaul Submod] "Data Venia" (for DeI 1.2.5 - Updated 2019-08-21)

    Quote Originally Posted by Ygraine View Post
    Great! Yes, it's "Rusted Pack File Manager", a new and different version of PFM with a lot of new features! It also doesn't crash randomly and corrupt your pack like PFM could do.
    Go to "reforms.lua" (in lua_scripts) and browse down to second reform "ladder" (first one is for the AI called "Global"), there you can easily edit what turn reforms should trigger at for the various factions.

    Here's how Rome looks: roman = {3, 100, 5, 260, 7, 480},

    The first number is the required imperium level needed, the second the amount of turns.
    Speaking of which, 480 is quite much.. I think I'll lower all reform-times slightly next time I update the pack, for all factions.

    Thanks for the feedback!

    -Diplomacy is like I explained to The Despondent Mind above, sometimes you can get a snowball effect which usually happens if you neglect the diplomacy side (or if you back the "wrong" kingdom in another war, and other kingdoms back the opponent and thus get angry at you). Otherwise I also found it in a pretty good spot. Yes, making NA impossible to get and for the AI to suggest it removed a big amount of the diplomacy spam on AI turns.

    -Glad you like the cav changes!

    -In regards of artillery I increased the spread of ballistas since some other players were complaining that they were racking up 1000-2000 kills with them using fire balls against armies. I designed fire balls to be effective vs infantry with large aoe and shockwave once they hit, in comparison the stone ammo version has less spread is excels better against walls/towers/ships. Perhaps I overnerfed fire ball spread though.. I will test it in a custom game, thanks for letting me know.

    -Since DV has 12 base TPY, I increased the amount of exp needed to progress per chevron level. I also removed most sources that give you +1 to rank when recruiting new units, but it's possible I missed some sources. Which ones did you notice? Right now the only one that I can think of is max tier barracks and some specific temples that add for example +1 rank to all spear recruits. There shouldn't be any other source giving +rank on recruitment. If there is then I've missed it! And in regards of max rank barracks, I think I will increase recruitment rank to +2, because that tier pretty much never unlocks any new units and is kind of pointless to build if you don't get proper boni for your trouble (it's also late tech).
    You can edit the exp needed per level in db-> "unit_experience_thresholds_tables". I recommend making your own pack, import the tables in DV you want to edit and load it before DV. That way you won't lose your edits every time I update the overhaul.

    Rusted PFM, right on, I have 3 different builds of PFM installed and sometimes none of them can open certain db tables, hopefully this will do the trick. How do I go about making my own *.pack? Extract the tables i want to edit, creat new *.pack, then do I just import the file or do I have to recreate the folder structure?

    The entry roman = {3, 100, 5, 260, 7, 480} has 3 sets of values, I'm assuming 3,100 upgrades your spear mainples to with swords; 5,260 is mariam reforms; and 7,480 is imperial reforms?

    I can appreciate the challenge of balancing artillery. While I was waiting for 1.2.5 I got into Napoleon TW and did quite a bit of rebalancing to my liking, and artillery was the fussiest bit, having to factor in ammo, rate of fire, spread, splash damage, structural damage to fit with the size of armies you intend to play with, the duration of battles, the movement speed of units, etc, while factoring in historical realism and gameplay considerations. Just some personal thoughts on artillery balance for Rome 2, playing with 40 unit armies, large unit size, and 60 minute time limit, using the Roman Ballista as a baseline:
    -in a siege, the potential structural damage of an artillery piece has to be limited so as to not render other siege equipment completely redundant. Imo the ballista should have enough ammo/damage to take out 1 wall section and 1-2 towers, or 3 towers. If positioned at a safe distance, and you're unlucky with accuracy, maybe only 1 wall + 1 tower, or 2 towers. It shouldn't take more than 15 minutes to complete its mission and fire all its ammunition, so we can all get on with our lives.
    -in field battles, I could class the role ballistas play as follows:
    -low micro, afterthought: ballistas attached to the army for sieges, they sit behind the line and I let them take some potshots at an advancing army before ceasing fire so they dont hit friendlie. In this role, you shouldn't expect more than a couple hundred kills, depending on luck.
    -medium micro, opportunity: terrain provides some advantage for artillery that gives you highground or a way to set up for enfilade fire. Takes some planning of unit deployments and micro of the ballista. Should expect the ballista to out preform a successfully flanking skirmisher unit, 400+ kills.
    -high micro, desparation, cheese mode: zero chance of winning a convention battle, all your troops are 100% expendable at this point, they're just bait to get the AI to blob up so you can fire some hail marry shots. Ideally, you shouldn't be able to get 2k kills doing this...
    So, in the previous patch, under the low micro conditions, ballistas were really over preforming, getting 600-800 kills routinely, if memory serves me. With a scatter of 10, I'm getting 150-300, before I have to cease fire. The scatter is pretty severe at 10, and I have to cease fire pretty early, leaving maybe 1/4 of the ballistas range as buffer. Accuracy is quite bad, good enough to hit walls, pretty useless against a single unit target, but the splash damage compensates for the low probability of hitting a line of enemy units. With these settings, medium micro tactics aren't worth while due to the likelyhood and severity of friendly fire. In desparation/cheese mode, the high scatter doesn't matter because of the close range, and the large splash damage lets you mow down mobs and win fights that you're outnumbered 4:1 with a single ballista.

    With these things in mind, may I suggest testing a scatter lower than 10, and reducing the splash damage, so that ballistas are more viable under opportune conditions, less overpowered in desparate situations, and balanced for low micro situtations.

    Scorpions and polybolos are another matter, but I can't comment on that presently.

    Regarding recruitment experience, within the first 10 years, with a temple of mercury, academy, and rank 1 veteran legionary army tradition, I was recruiting silver cheveron troops. Didn't even have the barracks tech for that veterancy buff, I expect I'll be able to recruit gold cheveron troops within another decade. My battle hardened troops can't keep up. There definitely needs to be a reason to make upgraded barracks and such though, which is why I was thinking of just buffing the experience from combat.

  3. #743

    Default Re: [Overhaul Submod] "Data Venia" (for DeI 1.2.5 - Updated 2019-08-21)

    Is tweaking the melee infantry damage a simple matter? I'd like to increase the lethality a bit, it seems a bit slow compared to ranged weapons and cavalry, which feel like they're in a good spot for what you see on screen (ie a cavalry charge or volley of javelins inflicts the casualties you'd expect based on the graphics). It feels like light skirmishers make for more devestating shock troops on the flanks than heavy infantry, and if you were to envelop an enemy with melee and ranged troops, you may as well not even charge the rear of the enemy with your melee troops, cause they'll just end up being a meatshield for your more lethal missile attacks .

  4. #744
    Senator
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Tulifurdum
    Posts
    1,297

    Default Re: [Overhaul Submod] "Data Venia" (for DeI 1.2.5 - Updated 2019-08-21)

    I think I will start a new game with the mod, never tried it before.

    I read with interest the post of Cool_Ranch about artillery. One of the points which kept me from using Data Venia was the flaming explosive ball artillery. It's sad enough that you can use huge ballistae in vanilla DeI with ease in field battles. I'm guilty of doing it myself as it is a very convenient op weapon, forcing the enemy to attack while comfortably sitting behind the lines in safety. It can also, if necessary, move around as if a big combustion engine were build into the device.

    But it's hard to find actual battles where such huge machines were used. The Phocians allegedly used stone throwers against Philip II. in one instance (says Polyaenus) but it's more probable that they simply threw stones from the height of hills. Alexander III. used artillery once to secure a river crossing, presumably not a huge stone thrower however. As far as I remember artillery was mentioned in one battle of Macedon or the leagues against Sparta. The Romans used small bolt throwers in field battles, especially in the late republic and the imperial period.

    So why make the big arcade artillery even stronger? I will try to restrict it's use on the contrary, if possible (remove explosive projectile, make them immobile on the battlefield, lower campaign range, for example).


    The second point which makes me hesitant is the feature of an AI with more armies at hand than vanilla DeI. I don't like multi stack battles that much. Can someone with experience give a hint how often you have huge AI armies with a lot of massed stacks invading and how often multi stack battles occur compared to normal DeI? Are there always a multitude of AI stacks bundled together?

  5. #745

    Default Re: [Overhaul Submod] "Data Venia" (for DeI 1.2.5 - Updated 2019-08-21)

    https://www.twcenter.net/forums/show...41-unit-armies
    https://ibb.co/9Z5x9Y4

    https://www.twcenter.net/forums/show...41-unit-armies
    https://ibb.co/9Z5x9Y4

    https://www.twcenter.net/forums/show...41-unit-armies
    https://ibb.co/9Z5x9Y4

    the link at the top of the mod for 40 units fertility.we have 30 and we need 1.25. help people good. don't know how to make 1 . 25 under 30 units.

  6. #746

    Default Re: [Overhaul Submod] "Data Venia" (for DeI 1.2.5 - Updated 2019-08-21)

    Quote Originally Posted by Cool_Ranch View Post
    Is tweaking the melee infantry damage a simple matter? I'd like to increase the lethality a bit, it seems a bit slow compared to ranged weapons and cavalry, which feel like they're in a good spot for what you see on screen (ie a cavalry charge or volley of javelins inflicts the casualties you'd expect based on the graphics). It feels like light skirmishers make for more devestating shock troops on the flanks than heavy infantry, and if you were to envelop an enemy with melee and ranged troops, you may as well not even charge the rear of the enemy with your melee troops, cause they'll just end up being a meatshield for your more lethal missile attacks .
    Yeah, melee need some tweaks i think. Older versions seems to be a lot more faster in general.

    Enviado de meu SM-A520F usando o Tapatalk

  7. #747

    Default Re: [Overhaul Submod] "Data Venia" (for DeI 1.2.5 - Updated 2019-08-21)

    How does the reforms work for the german tribes? Was it modified? Because I cant recruit my berserker infantry (those big axe guys) with Kimbroz. Do i miss something?
    Historia est magistra vitae. - Cicero

  8. #748

    Default Re: [Overhaul Submod] "Data Venia" (for DeI 1.2.5 - Updated 2019-08-21)

    Did you change the unit sizes for this mod as well? If so how do you go about increasing them? I'd like bigger unit sizes but when i open up PFM and go into my Rome2 data folder, I don't see DeI or DV mod in there, so im not sure which file im supposed to edit to increase unit sizes.

  9. #749

    Default Re: [Overhaul Submod] "Data Venia" (for DeI 1.2.5 - Updated 2019-08-21)

    Geala, I'm not suggesting artillery be made stronger compared to the last patch, quite the contrary, its just that some projectiles seem like they have a typo in the scatter now. Historically, how were stone throwers transported? I assume they only hauled the irons, and ropes, and parts that needed to be carefully crafted, and built them out of a fresh timbers when they needed to be set up, and they wouldn't even be employed when the army was on maneuvers or deploying for a field battle. There could be an argument for nerfing ballistas to the point that they can't play a meaningful role outside of a siege, but if they're only purpose is to knock a hole in a wall and save a turn or two on a siege, they'd have to be a lot cheaper to be attractive, and they'd still trigger the enemy AI to bum rush you in battles, which is a big put off, and it wouldn't account for non-siege battles where the equipment could have been set up and put to good use, like river defenses or fort battles. For my tastes, I'd tone down the splash radius/bounce distance, so it's not as exploitable against clumped up enemies, and make them accurate enough so that you have some tactical options, and putting effort into using them isnt just a waste of time.

    As for your second point, I can only speak playing as mighty Rome (weaker factions may be a different experience), but I think buffing the AI so they have more troops is super necessary to make things challenging. It might make the campaign unbalanced if you're strictly an auto-resolver, but I don't know why you wouldn't be playing EU4 or CK2 instead you're not playing battles. I'd also recommend increasing the army size to 40 once you get through the early game, I find the AI is just more effective when it can concentrate its armies on the campaign map, and deploy a full strength force as a single army on the battle map, instead of half coming as reinforcements. It also makes rebelions a lot more threatening.

    Let me give you a snap shot of my current Rome campaign. It's about 250 turns in (12tpy), all of Italy, Sicily, Corsica & Sardinia, and Masillia are firmly Roman. Greece, Narbo, and the Alpine passes have recently been conquered. I initially marched on Greece with my main 30 unit army, backed up by a 10 unit reserve legion. Through the course of this campaign, my forces east of the Adriatic has ballooned to 1x30 unit Roman legion, 2x20 unit auxillary legions, and 1x10 garrison force, in order to deal the Panonian and Dacian raiders, the 40 stacks coming in from Thrake, and naval invasions from Rhodes and Pergamon. I sent the navy to counter attack Rhodes, but Carthage took advantage and sacked Sicily, and I had still had to divert a whole auxillary army to destroy the 40 stack of rebels in Rhodes. Meanwhile my other frontiers are stretched precariously thin, I have 40 units split into two armies defending the Pyrenese mountains, one army is on ambush guarding the pass to Aquatine against 70-80 north Iberians split into 3 armies. My army to the south managed to push along the Mediterranean, defeat a Carthaginian army, then force the walls of Tarraco, but having suffered heavy casualties and with no reinforcements, had to abandon the city in the face of a reinforcement force of 60 Carthaginian units. The legions guarding the alpine passes are so battered there are hardly any romans left in them, and have become specialized ambushing forces, relying on military intelligence and logistics to ensure the success of their mission and year round deployment.

    I think it's a lot funner when you necessarily have to win every battle by heroic victory. Btw I'm playing with large unit size (0.75x), and I edited ships so they'd have the full 1.0x crew size you get on Ultra.

    GeneralDeath, I dunno if this works on Rome 2, but in Napoleon (same engine?) you can add "campaign_unit_multiplier X;" to your user.script.txt. Ultra is x=1 and gives the unit sizes defined in the .pack files. You can also edit it in the save files, under Campaing_env>campaign_setup>campaign_setup_options, the second variable.
    Last edited by Cool_Ranch; September 12, 2019 at 04:49 PM.

  10. #750

    Default Re: [Overhaul Submod] "Data Venia" (for DeI 1.2.5 - Updated 2019-08-21)

    @Ygraine, having now actually played the 12 tpy campaign up to the Marian reforms (5, 260), I don't think the pacing is bad at all for 12tpy. Instead of lowering it, maybe faster paced campaigns should be left to the 4 tpy submod. Just a thought.

  11. #751

    Default Re: [Overhaul Submod] "Data Venia" (for DeI 1.2.5 - Updated 2019-08-21)

    Quote Originally Posted by Cool_Ranch View Post
    @Ygraine, having now actually played the 12 tpy campaign up to the Marian reforms (5, 260), I don't think the pacing is bad at all for 12tpy. Instead of lowering it, maybe faster paced campaigns should be left to the 4 tpy submod. Just a thought.
    So i just started a new campaign with DeI and this submod, do you know when the reforms hit since this has a 12tpy campaign?

  12. #752

    Default Re: [Overhaul Submod] "Data Venia" (for DeI 1.2.5 - Updated 2019-08-21)

    Quote Originally Posted by GeneralDeath99 View Post
    So i just started a new campaign with DeI and this submod, do you know when the reforms hit since this has a 12tpy campaign?
    Yeah, Roman reforms occur at roman = {3, 100, 5, 260, 7, 480}
    hastati/principes upgrade to swords at imperium 3, turn 100, Marian reforms at imperium 5, turn 260, etc.

    Ygraine explained a few posts up where to find these values in the database if you want to modify them.

  13. #753

    Default Re: [Overhaul Submod] "Data Venia" (for DeI 1.2.5 - Updated 2019-08-21)

    Regarding recruit experience bonuses, it's possible to recruit 3 gold cheveron Roman infantry by the Marian reforms, without even having the highest tier of barracks or military academy. The tier 3 (out of 4) Military Academy, Barracks, and Temple of Mars, give 3, 1, and 1, unit experience, respectively. The Veteran Legionary army tradition gives up to +3 exp, and you can get a household member that gives +1 exp, giving a total of +9 experience for Roman heavy infantry recruits. For comparison, my most experienced combat units at the time Marian reforms kicked in were at 1-2 silver chevrons.

    I do like some of the bonuses, like the Veteran Legionaries, which is one of the few you can get for auxillery recruits, and on its own doesn't seem overpowered, considering it takes a long time to acquire these bonuses, your fighting legions aren't necessarily going to be near your ideal recruiting provinces, and it seems appropriate that highly decorated and prestigious legions would be able to attract better quality men. The building bonuses, when stacked, are excessive though, and pretty much breaks the whole unit experience system. Some of these buildings serve little to no other purpose though, and without the perks wouldn't even be worth a building slot, let alone the penalties you incur (eg -400 wealth and +6% corruption from a tier 4 military academy). Could the flat recruitment experience bonus be replaced with a +exp/turn effect so troops gradually gain experience by being stationed in the province? It would add an interesting dynamic, where you must choose between rushing fresh recruits to the front, or incurring the opportunity and upkeep cost of drilling them first.

    While I was looking to increase the speed of melee combat, I saw the official DEI combat related submods scale the weapon damage, I was wondering if it wouldn't be cleaner to just modify the melee hit chance variables in the kv_rules table, seeing as applying a % bonus to weapon damage would benefit high damage weapons more than low damage ones, and can really unbalance things (ie a slight buff that raises damage over some critical threshold and lets a weapon kill with 1 hit instead of 2). Also, I noticed your mod changes the melee_hit_chance_normalization_coefficient from 1 to 0.5. What does that do? I'm also curious about your approach to weapon balance if you have time to elaborate. I notice "AP Damage" is set very low and the "Armor Piercing" and "Armor Penetrating" flags are used (unlike DEI). From what I understand, AP Damage is guaranteed damage that is applied on a successful attack, whereas the Armor Piercing and Armor Penetrating result in the armor value being divided by 2 or 4 (set in kv_rules), effectively halving or quartering the effectiveness of armor when it comes to reducing the base damage a weapon inflicts on a successful attack. How do these diffrent approaches play out in the game?

    Certain units, like First Cohorts and Eagle Cohorts, need their cost rebalanced. Their recruitment/upkeep costs don't reflect the fact that they're a double strength unit, and they're only slightly more expensive than regular legionary cohorts with half as many men.
    Last edited by Cool_Ranch; September 18, 2019 at 06:15 PM.

  14. #754
    Senator
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Tulifurdum
    Posts
    1,297

    Default Re: [Overhaul Submod] "Data Venia" (for DeI 1.2.5 - Updated 2019-08-21)

    @ Cool_Ranch

    I would indeed like it if big throwers would be restricted to siege battles. Since the time I watched fast deadly trebuchets racing over the M2TW battlefields (making me stop playing the game till modding took it's toll) I have a certain aversion against big siege engines out of sieges. For sieges I would give them higher accuracy (they were quite accurate) and ammo perhaps. Stone throwing machines were actually not that effective against walls, up to the times black powder came into play, but it is a game. So they need a role. I would make wall towers even stronger as they are and throwers the best way to battle them and keep casualties low.

    To multiple stacks, I just don't like battles with more than one stack per side. It is annoying because of the way they appear on the battlefield, and because anything is so cramped and chaotic and unrelated at the same time. I prefer battles without pausing and frantically doing things here and there because I want to "enjoy" them. If we had a working "order" system and a decent AI, I could agree with larger battles.
    Last edited by geala; September 19, 2019 at 08:44 AM.

  15. #755

    Default Re: [Overhaul Submod] "Data Venia" (for DeI 1.2.5 - Updated 2019-08-21)

    I think its best if they're balanced to fit a variety of play styles, just taking out towers is pretty niche, and to some extent its up to the player to apply some house rules and restrictions to maximize their own enjoyment. For my game, I nerf towers (range and shots per volly), as they're easy for me to neutralize, but the AI just eats the shots, sometimes their entire flank would just get decimated standing in formation in tower range waiting for the gate to be breached. Lately I just haven't been using ballistas and made dedicated siege legions with the engineering traditions for heavier siege equipment and do things manually.

    I know what you're saying about reinforcments, I don't like having half being deployed and half showing up immediately as reinforcements and it being a disorganized mess or two completely separate battles. DV tweaks the deployment zones and I think increases the battle field size (I know in Napoleon you can double the battle field dimensions), and reinforcing battles with 40 stack armies are actually very enjoyable, if you're not in a hurry. The battle field is huge, even for 40 unit deployments, when I'm on the attack it usually takes 10 minutes to scout the enemy and get my line arranged and ready to charge. If I have reinforcements (either a dedicated cavalry wing or a garrison force) there are lots of options as to whether I deploy close to where the reinforcements come from, and form up as one army, or deploy far to take advantage of some terrain feature and have my infantry reinforcements arrive late or exhausted. When you're attacking a group of smaller armies, they have time to get on the battle field and form up before you can engage them. On the defense, fighting against multiple 40 stack armies is awesome, as their first full strength army will hit you fully formed up and organized, then waves of fresh reinforcements will arive for the enemy before you're even able to break their first line, really makes for some gritty fights. I don't find it to be cramped or particularly chaotic, seeing as the battlefield is enormous and you have a chance to get organized before the clashes begin.
    Last edited by Cool_Ranch; September 19, 2019 at 11:58 AM.

  16. #756
    Ygraine's Avatar Campidoctor
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    The Frozen North
    Posts
    1,606

    Default Re: [Overhaul Submod] "Data Venia" (for DeI 1.2.5 - Updated 2019-08-21)

    Sorry I've been absent for the last week or so, will read through the feedback properly tomorrow and reply. I also have a new patch coming in the weekend that will fix some of the stuff mentioned here.
    (2nd position - Gameplay Mods-category - 2016 Modding Awards.)

  17. #757
    Senator
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Tulifurdum
    Posts
    1,297

    Default Re: [Overhaul Submod] "Data Venia" (for DeI 1.2.5 - Updated 2019-08-21)

    @ Cool_Ranch

    1. I would make big throwers at least immobile, as they were very difficult to be moved in reality. I did not achieve this in my last artillery mod, setting it in the according db files seems not to be enough, and I was too lazy to look further. So I decreased movement speed for artillery very much. A snail would be considered a racer compared to the bigger machines. If you have a time limit and have to position super-slow ballistae to knock out towers and breach the wall, it's quite a pressure (in this mod version ballistae had low accuracy and relatively few ammo, because they were still mobile).

    2. Your description of such bigger battles a bit whets my appetite to play them again. I had them a lot in Europa Barbarorum and in earlier campaigns in DeI when I used the easy-peasy Hellenic factions, but the last times I always played as Medewi, and they are not the best for prolonged battles against superior armored troops.

  18. #758
    Broomish0's Avatar Civis
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Winnipeg, CA
    Posts
    123

    Default Re: [Overhaul Submod] "Data Venia" (for DeI 1.2.5 - Updated 2019-08-21)

    How come discipled formation was made into a passive?
    Vive La Lancaster!

  19. #759

    Default Re: [Overhaul Submod] "Data Venia" (for DeI 1.2.5 - Updated 2019-08-21)

    hi, have you added walls to cities without walls? Crete, Rhodes, Epirus, etc.?

  20. #760

    Default Re: [Overhaul Submod] "Data Venia" (for DeI 1.2.5 - Updated 2019-08-21)

    -medium and heavy siege equipment (unlocked by army traditions) needs their ignition threshold raised significantly. Currently heavy siege equipment is only slightly more fire resistant than light and no more likely to get to the walls before burning down, even though it's iron plated. Hardly justifies spending army tradition points on Engineering Experts.
    -siege galleries seem to be less effective than testudo formation.
    -is it possible to mod the quantity or type of siege equipment that is deployed? For instance, could the starting 2x ladders be changed to 4 ladders or siege towers or a combination of equipment? If so, I think the siege battle experience could be greatly improved, as it is the AI never builds adequate siege equipment, and even as a player laying siege, the AI will suicidally sally forth to be slaughtered outside of the city before you can build more than a couple turns worth of equipment.
    -Roman scorpion balance is really good. Been using them a lot lately (2 scorpions with each big consular army), and they do their job nicely without being overpowered. I like that they can knock guys back and disrupt their formation without impaling the entire file. Even when the ai gets clumped up, they don't end up spoiling the battle by killing way more guys than they ought to. Kill wise they end up being comparable to an elite archer unit, and even in the most exploitable situations (ie clumped up enemy inside a fort) they don't stealing the show.

    For those who have an interest in faster melee combat, I've been playing with a few very simple tweaks that make the pacing and balance more suitable to my taste. In kv_rules I changed the melee_hit_chance_base, _max, and _min from 15,100,1 to 20,95,5. Everyone has a higher base chance to hit, and the discrepency between top tier and bottom tier units is lessened somewhat, so while an elite unit will still slaughter mobs of levies, they wont come out completely unscathed. I also gave spears a tiny buff by increasing AP_damage from 0 to 1. The effect is that melee combat is a lot less stalled, front lines don't feel like they're locked into a stalemate that can only be resolved within the time limit by a decisive flanking maneuver, and even heavy infantry center lines will be suffering enough casualties from sustained melee combat by the time you can win control of a flank and begin enveloping that you'll want to save some reserves for reinforcing the center.
    Last edited by Cool_Ranch; September 27, 2019 at 06:28 PM.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •