Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 39 of 39

Thread: Low attack melee units

  1. #21

    Default Re: Low attack melee units

    Quote Originally Posted by QuintusSertorius View Post
    Levies are always free upkeep units, so the apparent upkeep is much lower when they're stationed in a settlement. Which is the best place for them.
    That's true, but it's also the cost as well. Since upkeep and cost are tied together, the initial price for them is also high. I think the good old Uassoi cost 720 and have an upkeep of 135, while the Kingetoi Uisusparanon cost 900 and have an upkeep of 168. The Uassoi might be slightly cheaper, but in comparison with other stats are a much worse deal.

  2. #22
    QuintusSertorius's Avatar EBII Hod Carrier
    Artifex

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    11,376

    Default Re: Low attack melee units

    Quote Originally Posted by Hirtius View Post
    That's true, but it's also the cost as well. Since upkeep and cost are tied together, the initial price for them is also high. I think the good old Uassoi cost 720 and have an upkeep of 135, while the Kingetoi Uisusparanon cost 900 and have an upkeep of 168. The Uassoi might be slightly cheaper, but in comparison with other stats are a much worse deal.
    Upkeep matters a lot more than initial cost, unless you are regularly disbanding your armies and re-recruiting them again. If you keep a unit for 5 turns, you've paid again what it cost to recruit them. Kingetoi are not a free upkeep unit, which means that difference in both recruitment cost and upkeep escalates. If you're only keeping them as your garrison, they're a much better deal since they're an idle unit which cost you nothing after their initial recruitment.

  3. #23
    Jurand of Cracow's Avatar History and gameplay!
    Artifex

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Cracovia
    Posts
    2,279

    Default Re: Low attack melee units

    Quote Originally Posted by QuintusSertorius View Post
    Upkeep matters a lot more than initial cost, unless you are regularly disbanding your armies and re-recruiting them again
    This is absolutely true. Additionaly, the low battle losses make the units more long-lived what makes the upkeep even more relevant.

    BTW, I really appreciate that the EBII makes use of both free_upkeep and the is_peasant attribute (this one makes units less efficient for garrisoning purposes). Sometimes they're combined, sometimes not - it might be seen in the table below in the "per capita" column: brown is free_upkeep, italic is is_peasant (there're errors in the table: Bodina, Katuos and Koxasalatoi have is_peasant). The SSHIP unfortunatelly doesn't make a full use of the M2TW engine (some alternative ideas were discussed here).

    Last edited by Jurand of Cracow; May 25, 2019 at 11:49 PM.

  4. #24

    Default Re: Low attack melee units

    Quote Originally Posted by QuintusSertorius View Post
    Upkeep matters a lot more than initial cost, unless you are regularly disbanding your armies and re-recruiting them again. If you keep a unit for 5 turns, you've paid again what it cost to recruit them. Kingetoi are not a free upkeep unit, which means that difference in both recruitment cost and upkeep escalates. If you're only keeping them as your garrison, they're a much better deal since they're an idle unit which cost you nothing after their initial recruitment.
    You’re right, upkeep is more important. I get that there is free upkeep, which is great, but the upkeep never should have been that high in the first place. Since we are on the topic, there are a lot of Celtic and Iberian units which have costs that don’t justify the effectiveness. An example is the Ambaktoi, who seem to be more expensive than they should be. Similar to the Kingetoi Usuisparanon, they have less men. They might have a slight edge in a few stats, but overall they aren’t as good.

  5. #25
    QuintusSertorius's Avatar EBII Hod Carrier
    Artifex

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    11,376

    Default Re: Low attack melee units

    Quote Originally Posted by Hirtius View Post
    You’re right, upkeep is more important. I get that there is free upkeep, which is great, but the upkeep never should have been that high in the first place. Since we are on the topic, there are a lot of Celtic and Iberian units which have costs that don’t justify the effectiveness. An example is the Ambaktoi, who seem to be more expensive than they should be. Similar to the Kingetoi Usuisparanon, they have less men. They might have a slight edge in a few stats, but overall they aren’t as good.
    Effectiveness at what? Sorry, "effectiveness" isn't a factor of the cost calculation. You can see the formula above and what it constitutes. You're over-focusing on a few particular stats.

  6. #26

    Default Re: Low attack melee units

    Quote Originally Posted by QuintusSertorius View Post
    Effectiveness at what? Sorry, "effectiveness" isn't a factor of the cost calculation. You can see the formula above and what it constitutes. You're over-focusing on a few particular stats.
    Effectiveness in battle. How are stats like attack and defense created, and how do they fit into cost? And I’m focusing on all the stats the player faces. In the case of the ambaktoi, the defense is only 12, the same as the Kingetoi Uisuparanon which have a larger unit. I think the mercenary Kingetoi have the same size unit as the Ambaktoi but have 15 total defense while being cheaper in upkeep. I think they all have the same morale.

  7. #27
    QuintusSertorius's Avatar EBII Hod Carrier
    Artifex

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    11,376

    Default Re: Low attack melee units

    Quote Originally Posted by Hirtius View Post
    Effectiveness in battle. How are stats like attack and defense created, and how do they fit into cost? And I’m focusing on all the stats the player faces. In the case of the ambaktoi, the defense is only 12, the same as the Kingetoi Uisuparanon which have a larger unit. I think the mercenary Kingetoi have the same size unit as the Ambaktoi but have 15 total defense while being cheaper in upkeep. I think they all have the same morale.
    The stats are based on the weapons and armour used by the unit, with an element of their status factored in. Both are factors of the cost formula.

    Look, you can do whatever you like to the costs in your own installation, the formula is not changing.

  8. #28

    Default Re: Low attack melee units

    Quote Originally Posted by QuintusSertorius View Post
    The stats are based on the weapons and armour used by the unit, with an element of their status factored in. Both are factors of the cost formula.

    Look, you can do whatever you like to the costs in your own installation, the formula is not changing.
    Both the Uassoi and Kingetoi Uisuparanon both use spears and have 1 armor, so what is the formula that creates the Uassoi attack of 2 vs. the Kingetoi attack of 7?

    I also have slightly tweaked a number of units (not even changing attack) on my own. But I started this thread because I want to see the mod (since it is my favorite) be as good and balanced as possible.

  9. #29
    QuintusSertorius's Avatar EBII Hod Carrier
    Artifex

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    11,376

    Default Re: Low attack melee units

    Quote Originally Posted by Hirtius View Post
    Both the Uassoi and Kingetoi Uisuparanon both use spears and have 1 armor, so what is the formula that creates the Uassoi attack of 2 vs. the Kingetoi attack of 7?

    I also have slightly tweaked a number of units (not even changing attack) on my own. But I started this thread because I want to see the mod (since it is my favorite) be as good and balanced as possible.
    Uassoi are levies, Kingetoi are semi-professionals. That's why they have a higher defensive skill and morale as well.

  10. #30

    Default Re: Low attack melee units

    Quote Originally Posted by QuintusSertorius View Post
    Uassoi are levies, Kingetoi are semi-professionals. That's why they have a higher defensive skill and morale as well.
    You didn’t seem to like upkeep and cost changes because they were arbitrary, but this also seems a bit arbitrary. Toutanakoi have 3 attack, and the updated machimoi which I think you said were semi professionals had 4. In fact, most of the unit stats in the game follow general trends but are still somewhat arbitrary. It’s not a bad thing. A bit of arbitrariness is necessary to get things balanced.
    Last edited by Hirtius; May 26, 2019 at 12:55 PM.

  11. #31
    QuintusSertorius's Avatar EBII Hod Carrier
    Artifex

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    11,376

    Default Re: Low attack melee units

    Quote Originally Posted by Hirtius View Post
    You didn’t seem to like upkeep and cost changes because they were arbitrary, but this also seems a bit arbitrary. Toutanakoi have 3 attack, and the updated machimoi which I think you said were semi professionals had 4. In fact, most of the unit stats in the game follow general trends but are still somewhat arbitrary. It’s not a bad thing. A bit of arbitrariness is necessary to get things balanced.
    It's not arbitrary, you're talking about two units in completely different classes. Comparing Uassoi and Kingetoi is utterly pointless.

    We have four classes of unit in EBII: levies, semi-professionals, professionals and elites. Machimoi have a 4 as semi-professionals because they use underhand spears. Kingetoi have overhand spears.

  12. #32

    Default Re: Low attack melee units

    Quote Originally Posted by QuintusSertorius View Post
    It's not arbitrary, you're talking about two units in completely different classes. Comparing Uassoi and Kingetoi is utterly pointless.

    We have four classes of unit in EBII: levies, semi-professionals, professionals and elites. Machimoi have a 4 as semi-professionals because they use underhand spears. Kingetoi have overhand spears.
    1. Is fighting in underhand really that bad for attack? If so, why do those units do it? Even if they are levies, why would they not know how to use overhand?

    2. Why do the machimoi have an attack of 4 and Voini have an attack of 5 if both are underhanded? I would think the machimoi would have at least 5 since they are semi professional.

    3. If you are really having things like overhand vs underhand make such a large difference in attack, then why does the Uassoi with a spear have the same attack as a skirmisher with a small knife? Both might not have much training, but the Uassoi use a better weapon.

    4. And going off of the previous questions, why do Toutanakoi and Uassoi have different stats if they are mostly the same in armament and position?

  13. #33
    QuintusSertorius's Avatar EBII Hod Carrier
    Artifex

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    11,376

    Default Re: Low attack melee units

    Quote Originally Posted by Hirtius View Post
    1. Is fighting in underhand really that bad for attack? If so, why do those units do it? Even if they are levies, why would they not know how to use overhand?
    At the risk of opening a perennial can of worms, yes underhand is worse. However, it's much more natural a way to hold a spear, and indeed has parallels with the way you handle a lot of agricultural implements, like spades, hoes and hooks. You fight the way you know, thus untrained levies fight in the natural way.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hirtius View Post
    2. Why do the machimoi have an attack of 4 and Voini have an attack of 5 if both are underhanded? I would think the machimoi would have at least 5 since they are semi professional.
    Voini are raiders, which is another semi-professional type. Machimoi should probably be 5, since most of the other semi-professional under-handers are.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hirtius View Post
    3. If you are really having things like overhand vs underhand make such a large difference in attack, then why does the Uassoi with a spear have the same attack as a skirmisher with a small knife? Both might not have much training, but the Uassoi use a better weapon.
    Now you're conflating two different things. Different weapons aren't analogous on stats alone. A spear has a longer reach and is handled differently by the engine.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hirtius View Post
    4. And going off of the previous questions, why do Toutanakoi and Uassoi have different stats if they are mostly the same in armament and position?
    The Britons have smaller shields, which allows them to fight with a more aggressive style. They're otherwise the same.

  14. #34

    Default Re: Low attack melee units

    I know I already asked about this, but why aren’t the machimoi getting an increased unit size? If I recall, the getai have a similar semi professional unit that I think uses underarm. You said attack increase to 4 (might need to be 5, especially if unit size isn’t changing) and defense is increasing by 3, giving it similar stats. The difference is that the getai unit has a larger size. Based on changing machimoi to semi professional, it sounds like they should be pretty similar.

  15. #35
    Jurand of Cracow's Avatar History and gameplay!
    Artifex

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Cracovia
    Posts
    2,279

    Default Re: Low attack melee units

    Quote Originally Posted by QuintusSertorius View Post
    At the risk of opening a perennial can of worms, yes underhand is worse. However, it's much more natural a way to hold a spear, and indeed has parallels with the way you handle a lot of agricultural implements, like spades, hoes and hooks. You fight the way you know, thus untrained levies fight in the natural way.

    Voini are raiders, which is another semi-professional type. Machimoi should probably be 5, since most of the other semi-professional under-handers are.

    Now you're conflating two different things. Different weapons aren't analogous on stats alone. A spear has a longer reach and is handled differently by the engine.

    The Britons have smaller shields, which allows them to fight with a more aggressive style. They're otherwise the same.
    I actually like discussions like this - I can learn a lot and understand those times better. Thanks!
    (I can't help refraining from another comment: I think the historicity of the EBII (units, buildings, maps, factions, scripts, traits, ancillaries) is stunningly well-thought-out, while many mechanics, the campaign balance (esp. the economic one) and the overall gameplay I find rather under-thought)
    JoC
    Last edited by Jurand of Cracow; May 27, 2019 at 06:32 AM.

  16. #36
    QuintusSertorius's Avatar EBII Hod Carrier
    Artifex

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    11,376

    Default Re: Low attack melee units

    Quote Originally Posted by Hirtius View Post
    I know I already asked about this, but why aren’t the machimoi getting an increased unit size? If I recall, the getai have a similar semi professional unit that I think uses underarm. You said attack increase to 4 (might need to be 5, especially if unit size isn’t changing) and defense is increasing by 3, giving it similar stats. The difference is that the getai unit has a larger size. Based on changing machimoi to semi professional, it sounds like they should be pretty similar.
    The Machimoi were always organised along more military lines, even when they were erroneously statted as a levy unit. They formed marine contingents and the bulk of local policing units, so were better regimented than the sort of troops the Getikoi represent.

  17. #37

    Default Re: Low attack melee units

    That probably wraps it up for the questions I was going to ask. Thanks for sticking with me for 2 pages and answering my questions!

  18. #38
    QuintusSertorius's Avatar EBII Hod Carrier
    Artifex

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    11,376

    Default Re: Low attack melee units

    Quote Originally Posted by Hirtius View Post
    That probably wraps it up for the questions I was going to ask. Thanks for sticking with me for 2 pages and answering my questions!
    It may not always be immediately apparent, but there is method to our madness.

    Talking of the Machimoi, they may get much more use by the Ptolemaioi player in the patch. Not only because you'll find your Hellenistic units being depleted for garrison duty, but also because the revolts script will put a new premium on internal security.

  19. #39

    Default Re: Low attack melee units

    Quote Originally Posted by QuintusSertorius View Post
    It may not always be immediately apparent, but there is method to our madness.

    Talking of the Machimoi, they may get much more use by the Ptolemaioi player in the patch. Not only because you'll find your Hellenistic units being depleted for garrison duty, but also because the revolts script will put a new premium on internal security.
    I could probably go through 30 pages of questions and recommendations, but I’ll just wrap up what I asked in this thread.

    1. I think you mentioned that the machimoi may need 5 attack since other underarm semi professionals like the voini have it. Will you plan to give them that? A 5 attack 15 defense unit wouldn’t be too shabby and might encourage them to be used more.

    2. As you’ve explained with other units, there is a beautiful method to the madness that I might not always agree with, but I can always make sense of. But earlier I think I briefly mentioned the Ambaktoi in comparison to the Kingetoi Uisuparanon. Besides for +1 attack, they seem to be similar in every way. The difference is that they have a smaller unit size and slightly higher upkeep. I edited them to have 15 defense and similar upkeep to the mercenary kingetoi. Why are the Ambaktoi like that? And does the team have any plans to buff them up in some way?

    Thanks for the help!

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

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