Kanuni,
Re-read the first 3-4 replies at the start of the entire discussion carefully and you will see the point of this entire thread. You missed it m8.
Kanuni,
Re-read the first 3-4 replies at the start of the entire discussion carefully and you will see the point of this entire thread. You missed it m8.
Retreat? Hell, we're just attacking in a different direction...
THE DEADLY SHINGEN
Thx for pointing that out dostum. That is what I thought too that v3a1 JI will lose against CMAA v3. Look forward to hearing your views when zou have time. Good Luck in your exams.
If you remember me from M:TW days add me on Steam, do mention your org name.
http://www.steamcommunity.com/id/__shak
OK, time for my 2 cents after reading all posts.
First of all I'd like to start with critisizing the calculation of combat rating. I don't know who found this calculation [att+def+(charge+armor+morale)/2] but it is completely wrong IMO to include "armor" for this calculation. Armor has no effect in h2h fight. It is only good for missile units to be less vulnerable to missile power. It may be discussed that it is also good for spear units to increase their defence, that will stand in hold formation to hold enemy infantry. But repeat: it has no effect in h2h clash of infantry. So it is wrong to consider this calculation for a JI/CMAA match, all that takes into account for this is charge, attack and defence, that's all. I'd like to also state that armor upgrades, unless used for missile units is not worth money because when you make armor upgrades you are also increasing the ap bonus of your opponent with ap units (you know it is very likely that you will face militia seargents). AP bonus is calculated as (opponent's armor-1)/2, so this means for every 1 armor you take you get +1 defence but give your opponent +0.5 ap attack bonus, so I NEVER take armor upgrades unless I'll use missile units to "shoot out only". It may be discussed that in reality armor may have a role in h2h, but in this game it simply DOES NOT
I don't think I missed it. h2h comparison of JI and cmaa was a part of this thread, and I pointed out that Sinan's choice of JI (v3a1) would lose vs CMAA v3. I'd like to also add one more thing. "Ignoring JI's bows", IMO the match for CMAA v3 for JI is v4. Their att+def. values are the same but JI with more morale and CMAA with better charge. So when they clash CMAA will kill more at the beginning due to better charge, and "normally" the fight will go on as evenly matched and CMAA having only slightly more men remaining. But because JI has +2 better morale they will reach routing point in about the same time. Now do not ignore JI's bows, assume that it will volley 2 shots (I think it can shoot 3 though) vs a skilled opponent. This way it is almost 100% that JI will win, and this way they will deserve the extra florins spent over CMAA v3.Originally Posted by [b
Sinan m8, shields do not give +1 def. bonus in h2h, shields are useful for defending vs arrows. It doesn't write anywhere that it does and I have done maybe more than 300 tests and saw that shields have no effect in a h2h fight of 2 infantry units. I'm thinking that maybe it does give +1 def. to units that stand in hold formation such as spears, but I am not sure, because I haven't tested it, I don't like using spears anyway.
Wrong. They WILL suffer from ap bonus. As I mentioned earlier ap bonus is calculated as (opponent's armor-1)/2. So militia seargents will have +1 att bonus vs JI and +2 att bonus vs CMAA.
I agree about v4 but not about v2w3. In MTW 1.1 it may be somewhat logical to take v2w3 because of the valor gained in battles, maybe they have a chance to gain 1 valor and become v3. But in VI it is a complete waste of money IMO. v3w1 compared to v2w3 will be cheaper, will have +2 morale and they will have the same att+def value. And also I didn't understand what you meant by "and now who get a charge bonus advantage?". Charge value is constant and it doesn't change with valor upgrades or weapon upgrades. JI will still have 1 charge value at v0 and v4.
M8, no offense but there is NO WAY that you will run out of ammo with 10 hybrids vs a good player. He just won't stand and watch his units getting wasted by raining arrows, he'll immediately rush you instead.
Yep, the Turks do have plain x-bows, but not pavs.
This discussion between you and louis went on for sometime, but I think quoting only this will be enough. Mate, no offense but before commenting on historical accuracy, you need to know history lol, no offense though. Ottoman military in the past was a lot more different than catholic ones. While catholics usually recruited soldiers proffessioned in their own area (for example: archers, cavalry, swords etc...) the Turks' approach was somewhat closer to modern approach and they wanted to recruit multi functional soldiers. Just as todays infantry (trained to handle different kinds of weapons, vehicles etc...), the Turkish infantry was multi functional. Most of the time their main heavy infantry was also armed with bows, handguns etc... There was no thing as "infantry first, archers second etc...", they had to use both. The Turkish understanding of military those days said that a good soldier has to be able to use different weapons, has to be multi functional etc..., just as modern approach. So I think CA's approach was true for JI but not enough, Turks had many more multi purpose units, that was unique and characteristic to the Turks. Sinan has quite good knowledge about this, too, lol probably even more than me. So refer to him as well
That is definitely a bug, it is the worst bug of this game and IMO it is ruining the enjoy. It is very unlogical. I can understand that horse walking through infantry may swipe up to some amount, but it should NEVER swipe more than regular charge, this is the unlogical part of it. Oh and I don't even want to mention the unrealistic "thin" lines of cav.
I completeley agree with you here. I hate them
Kardes, herkes anlasin diye sana yazacagim cevaplari Ingilizce olarak yazacagim.
No brother, futtuwwas are not cheaper to upgrade than JI. 1 example in order to make futuwwas equal to JI v4, you need to upgrade them to v4 w2 and it costs about 1600 where JI v4 costs about 1400.
BTW, 1 suggestion: Ignore the ghazis, they are just crap
Yep, honestly Sinan is a very skilled player. I'm not saying this because he's my buddy.
Balamir, I suggest that you play 15k too. It is like a standard agreed by all vets. And well I must disagree to your opinion about any type of florins being easier or harder. If an army is more expensive to upgrade (such as the Turks), the gap will be bigger and bigger if you increase the ammount of florins. And btw I don't think high florin games are fun nor realistic either. Units fight too long and some of them even stand when flanked so you may even lose by unluck even if you are skilled, flank better etc...
Sorry this has already been a long post, but I also like to shortly share my idea of playing Turks both for 1v1 and for team games, which I guess became the main idea of this topic (other than the OT discussions of course)
Most people know me or played with me know my general idea, but I'd like to share it with others, too. IMO, the most logical way of playing the Turks is using 7-8 strong hybrids that can take out enemy inf, JHI to take out enemy cav, and cav. just as extra units. You know a regular army has 12-13 combat units and 3-4 pavs. I have 12-13 combat units as well and my cav. is the remaining 3-4. This way I also have a strong missile army and also cav. in place of pavs, lol, and IMO it is damn efficient. In 1vs1 I just ignore the enemy's missile units and shoot at their main inf. instead. The enemy has 2 options, shoot at my hybrids (which is also my main inf) or rush. The worst thing he can do is shoot out, as you can guess 7-8 archers are much more effective and kill more than 3-4 pavs. And just when my ammo is about to finish I attacked to already halfed main inf
If my opponent rushes he will still lose quite a lot of inf b4 touching, and because my hybrids can match their maa or militia seargents I win as well (note that I use JI at v4 and ottoman inf. at v4w2 or even sometimes v4w3). Now if I be careful and protect my flanks well vs cav with JHI I'll have 3-4 weak cav. to flank my opponent's main army. My cav. is weak (v0 alans or armenians) but they are quite effective at flanking.
In team games my strat. is generally the same, but with 1 important difference. Whether attacking or defending, I just stay a little back from the main line of my allies. So the opponent I face needs to march forward to shoot out to me,and if he does, I march forwards as well and shoot out his main inf. and be "in line" with my allies. If he doesn't march forward and just stand, I stand as well, no gain, no losses. If he move towards one of his allies to double one of my teammates, I move as well and use the same strat. there too.
Well I guess this is all I can say now, hehe it has been more than 2 cents
Thanks for wishing good luck m8. I'll really need it because I hate tostudy at this age Damn I should have graduated from my uni earlier. Last year was a complete waste, maybe because of MTW. I hate you CA
I hope I'm still not too old to study this year and graduate from my GD uni I hate ir GRRRRRRRRRRR
Hi Kanuni,
Regarding combat point calculation summing up everything; completly agree; armor has nothing to do there. I would even say that charge has nothing to do there; it's secondary to attack and defense. Morale plays on another scale. I think we shall consider Att/Def on one hand (with a small look at charge) and morale as a separate factor.
AP; i think it's (Armor-3)/2, not (Armor-1)/2. Checking underway
1v1 10 shooter; if rushed with 10 hybrid on your side you win, unless your opponent had tailored an anti hybrid turk rush army.
Mitch comment on the 3/4 first post shall be regarded as; it's not stat only, it's versatility , a SBOW, etc...
Shield in h2h; variable effects some units use it in h2h not all of them an not all with the same effectiveness.
Charge bonus; new stuff to be checked; why do I seem to remeber that weapon upgrade gives a bonus to charge?
History; I think Sinan post an intersting link somewhere...
Louid the Simurgh,
I will take all your confessions at my topic "I hate CA" brother, we all feel the same way you doQuote[/b] ]I hate you CA
As for the futuwwa thing being cheaper, I meant:
Upgrading a futuwwa to val 4 is cheaper than upgrading JI to val 4, but of course, a val 4 JI is stronger than a val4 futuwwa. Of course, if you try to equalise a futuwwa's strenght with JI's, you will need more upgrades, which naturally costs more.
I tend to stay out of the values and all those numbers about CMAA since Im not so good about turning the game to a series of codes, I play with my instincts
Okay I will play 15k's from now on (hopefully from tomorrow, which is when I get my copy of VI) but I must ask you guys to accept my apologies about ruining a few team games, because Im pretty damn sure there are a lot of players that can beat me their eyes closed on 15k
Edit: spelling corrections
Nice post Kanuni. I agree with everything you say except one technical point. The base v0 cmaa are 4/3 (att/def) with a large shield. Normally a large shield would provide +2 to def. However, the cmaa has a 0.5 shield modifier, so it only gets +1 def which makes the v0 cmaa a 4/4. Yas' unit compare tool shows correctly 4/3 + $1 . When you upgrade to v3 the cmaa becomes 7/7 which is what you indicate. According to the Strategy Guide, the shield does not increase def from the rear. So, there is a slight disadvantage to this def shield bonus because at times a man may get struck from the rear while fighting if the enemy unit gets a double team on a man, and, of course, if charged in the rear the shield bonus doesn't apply either until the men turn around.
I agree to be careful comparing units with Yas's tool combat rating. The v4 JI (1489 florins) are 8/6 and the v3 cmaa (1228 florins) are 7/7 which is equal. The 2 point charge advantage of the cmaa is very small. It normally takes 4 or 5 points of charge to equal 1 point of melee. Not considering the JI bows, which the tool doesn't weigh into the combat rating, the +2 morale of the JI stands out as a big advantage over the cmaa in my estimation since melee combat is equal.
One other small point: apparently charge is added to att during the first few seconds of combat, so v3w2 JI (1542 florins) would have 10 att during the charge, but v4 JI (1489 florins) only 9 att. In this case, the v3w2 JI now equal the charge of the v3 cmaa. However, since v3w2 JI has -1 def compared to v4 JI nothing is changed in terms of the JI vs cmaa matchup except the kill rate for both units will be 20% higher since it's the (att - def) difference that counts, and the JI lost its +2 morale over the cmaa. So, I agree the w2 is not a cost effective upgrade. I guess a double weapon upgrade might be useful on a unit that will be used to flank because the men can get a some unreturned strikes before the enemy turns and fights back. Or as in the case of the JI + Ottoman combination, you're already at v4 on all units and still have florins left to spend. The idea here being to get as much combat power as possible into the hth inf which I think is a very effective strategy for the direct approach.
Balamir,
VI incorporates a +2 morale to all units so 15k in VI is like playing 25k in MTW v1.1. My own feeling is that you get a somewhat better VI game at 12k, but most are playing at 15k now which should feel similar to your 30k v1.1.
_________Designed to match Original STW gameplay.
Beta 8 + Beta 8.1 patch + New Maps + Sound add-on + Castles 2
Lol this is getting harder to adjust, 12k is the new fashion before I can even get used to 15k
I think it was (armor-2)/2 for MTW v1.0 and they changed it to (armor-1)/2 in v1.1, and in VI it is still the same.
I disagree to that. If you want to make those hybrids match up to maa and militia seargents the money won't be enough. So 7 (cmaa + mil searg) and 3 v1 chiv knights will easily beat those 10 hybrids. And the remaining 6? Well they will be weak anyway if you spend a lot to get 10 strong hybrids (probably 4 JI, 4 Ottoman, 2 futuwwas).
Hmmm, I have always considered, pressing f1 and seeing what displays as base stats, because I've seen many mistakes on programs/sheets that show unit stats. The f1 screen displays the base stats of CMAA as 4/4, so I guess that shield bonus is included. So it is unlike ap bonus because in order to understand what bonus u'll get from ap, you need to make another calculation and add to that. I think that in order to decrease confusion it's better to look at stats in F1 screen so therefore ignore any shield bonuses. Though it is right that shield bonus will have a disadvantage from rear attacks, but even that can be ignored too, because a JI flanked from rear will rout as well as CMAA
I understand your point here, but I still prefer to give 1v instead of 2w and think it is a more efficient way of spending money even in this situation. Instead of having a +2 att for a few seconds and a constant +1 att, I'd prefer a constant +1 def and +2 morale. It will hardly make any difference for the few seconds of flank anyway. A rear flank already kills too fast and I doubt a flanker will be that fast enough to kill more and use all of that +2 att in the few seconds. They kill what comes infront of them in the few seconds anyway, and charge bonus will probably be gone when the unit turns back, and the unit flanked will be close to routing anyway.
Hmmm, IMO what you said about 25k feeling applies to cath factions vs cath factions or muslim vs muslim. Because as the florin amount changes the balance of factions changes as well. I like 15k better and I think that +2 morale is given to balance the game more a bit and decrease the impact of that too strong cavalry. I like the new system better because it is more balanced this way, otherwise thin lines combined with the swipe would be too unrealistic and too strong again, therefore I like 15k for VI better. BTW saying VI's 15k equals MTW 1.1's 30k is a bit exaggeration IMO. If you could increase each unit of your standard 1.1's army's valor by 1, would the amount be 30k?
Anyway as VI is a different game with some changes to balance the game (ex the increased price of knights), the florin amount of one cannot be matched to another IMO. I think 15k is a good, balanced amount for VI.
Kanuni,
I don't advocate w2 upgrade over v1. As I said, it's not cost effective.
The 15k VI would be like 25k MTW because 15k * 1.7 = 25.5k. The 1.7 is the cost of valor upgrade. The point I was trying to make is that 15k VI would be more like 30k MTW than 15k MTW. However, I agree with you that they are different.
_________Designed to match Original STW gameplay.
Beta 8 + Beta 8.1 patch + New Maps + Sound add-on + Castles 2
I think the recently released Unit Comparison Tool would end the debate, according to my experiments, JI with v4 can beat a v3 CMAA easily because the JI already beats CMAA in h2h when we dont consider the charge of CMAA which is not so strong anyway, and the only advantage of CMAA (its charge) is rendered useless after taking casualties from a few volleys from the JI, since the JI will be already advantaged and its better on h2h, has better morale; the CMAA wont be able to beat them.
Correct?
Kanuni, that Turk army you described is a nice one, however I think its primary weakness is the weak cav. Sure, if you manage to flank or get into the rear of the enemy, it can still help you, but on attack, if your cavalry gets into the back of the enemy army, that army has a bad commander. If you are defending, the odds are better, but a good general will keep one or two anti cav or cav units of his own in reserve, and they will likely be enough vs v0 alans and AHC (assuming a Catholic enemy, of course!
When I play Turks, it is essential to have a good cavalry, and I don't discard Saracens altogether. I also did some tests together with Sinan on Ghazi, and he agreed they still are usefull under some circumstances. However the interesting thing about the Turkish faction is its many many army setup varations due to them having a lot of units available. That makes them very versatile and if nothing else, at least a very good support army in team games.
Ignoranti, quem portum petat, nullus suus ventus est. -Seneca, Epistulae Morales, VIII, 71, 3
Hi Brutal DLX,
I understand your point, but what I'm trying to mean here is usually the opponent should not find any units to face my cavalry because as a result I have 12 strong combat units if you exclude my cav. And if the enemy has 3 pavs + 1 weak gen, or 4 pavs + strong gen he will have 12 combat units too, so all combat units will be engaged and my cav. will be free. Think of the damage my 8 archers can do with bows, too. If the enemy has 16 combat units and therefore rushing me, my cav. will not be free and I'll probably lose them. But since 16 combat unit army units are weaker compared to mine, if I can be succesful in the remaining 12, then it means I still have the advantage. The damage of 8 archers while the opponent is rushing helps this a lot, too.
I know from experience *ouch* that Kanuni army is very effective...
Balamir, it's not really 1v1 comparison of units; I think we all agree that CMAA and JI are very close in h2h ability. Now as far as unit selection or faction selection is concerned, you got to look at the big picture; yes JI are good and have a bow, but Turks don't have pav. In 1.1 that was a major issue because arb were much more powerful than SBOW with a much longer range, and arb+ pav made it very difficult for turks to effectively engage in missile duel. Xbow + pav are manageable in VI...
Brutal DLX (I have never been able to drop speedball 1 for 2 by the way...), can you elaborate on Turks strong cav? They can have fun all medium cav, but I would not qualify them as really strong.
Louis the Simurgh,
One point Kanuni
I used JI V3 A1, but the A1 is not for the armor benefit..
The A1 increases BOTH defense by 1 and armor by 1.
So with the A1 the JI gets a benefit against missles (the armor increase) and a defensive bonus in H2H.
I understand about the "anti-armor" of some units... sometimes you talk only of the CMAA match-up w/ JI and then you speak of the units overall use (as against MilSgts.). Well that was my point... overall JI are more flexible a unit than CMAA. No they won't win straight up fight unless I can get some solid archer damage in on the CMAA.
If my opponent rushes he will still lose quite a lot of inf b4 touching, and because my hybrids can match their maa or militia seargents I win as well
So this agrees with my statement that they JI is a better overall unit because it does both H2H and fires arrows.
Just that you use the V4...
I agree that JI V4 are the winner of the battle, but for relative comparison, I used units that had almost idenitical costs, the V4 are significantly more expensive.
JI (V3 A1) 1246 florins
Charge: 1
Attack: 7
Defense: 6
CMAA (v3) 1228 florins
Charge: 3
Attack: 7
Defense: 6 (7 with shield)
The H2H stats are almost identical after the charge wears off.
Morale is identical, resistance to missle fire -- edge to CMAA cause of shield.
-------------------
btw it is a great feature.... :P IRONY
-----------------
I regret stating much of that historical stuff as Medeival Turkish & Islamic armies aren't my strong suit for military history and I'm posting without checking my books... but as I recall the middle eastern armies really never could handle the European heavies head-up and tried to skirmish, attrit and generally exhaust the Euro kinghts before actually giving full battle, which was more of what I was trying to get at. How specifically the JI matches versus the CMAA historically, I can only guess, but it would seem to me that the CMAA is supposed to represents almost the heaviest footman that the Euros came up with (aside from the CFK). So I'm not sure that the JI should stack up as well as they do against them in H2H.
2000 BC - 200 AD Archaic/Ancient/Classical and the Eurasian steppe of that period is far more my thing, along with WW2 and I can talk that with fluency
Retreat? Hell, we're just attacking in a different direction...
THE DEADLY SHINGEN
Thx, m8 for your opinion about my army
Well IMO, by being aggressive, marching towards main inf and shooting at them instead was an efficient way in 1.1 too, and IMO it was a good way to counter that arb power. Even if the arbs aim at your main inf too, because their reload time is much slower, you can kill more and faster then arbs do with more than 5 or 6 archers.
I mentioned it many times as well. I guess this time it is you that didn't read well
First of all I'd like to start with critisizing the calculation of combat rating. I don't know who found this calculation [att+def+(charge+armor+morale)/2] but it is completely wrong IMO to include "armor" for this calculation. Armor has no effect in h2h fight. It is only good for missile units to be less vulnerable to missile power. It may be discussed that it is also good for spear units to increase their defence, that will stand in hold formation to hold enemy infantry. But repeat: it has no effect in h2h clash of infantry. So it is wrong to consider this calculation for a JI/CMAA match, all that takes into account for this is charge, attack and defence, that's all.
You made such a fuss about the armor rating here I assumed it was aimed at my using the JI V3 A1 as the initial example. It seemed like you were discounting the affect of Armor Upgrade to the defense rating as I had never said that armor rating affects the H2H either (and battle formula, i'm not sure where you got it, cause I've never said it worked that way)
-------------
The JI doesn't GIVE that defense point away to the CMAA as the CMAA has no anti-armor capability.
and if the JI gives it away to the Militia Sgt., the CMAA gives up part if it's armor to the JHI then too.
---------------
BTW
Since I've started playing the Turks exclusively, I'm beginning to understand their limitations better... particularly in regards to their resisting a full CK cav charge in the open.
I've had difficulty switching my style from my Euro army approach (which was cav and missle duel oriented) over to that which the Turks require, but we all live and learn, and it's gotten better.
-----------
Retreat? Hell, we're just attacking in a different direction...
THE DEADLY SHINGEN
Sorry but everyone except you understood what I meant. And no I don't think even that phrase you quoted has anything to do with discounting the effect of armor to defence. Note that that calculation DOES consider defence, so I meant it is not logical to compare armor once more for h2h. And no I DID NOT make a fuss about it, I said my opinion that adding armor to that calculation is not right, and I guess all agreed about that as well as Louis did. And where did I get that formula? LOL. Sinan's combat rating calculation was based on that formula in the 1st page. Also Yas's unit stats comparison tool shows that.
LOL, and who said the opposite? You said earlier that JI doesn't suffer vs ap bonus didn't you? And I said it is wrong, and it does. I also showed you the calculation of ap bonus. LOL How else can I explain better?
Sorry but your last posts looked to me as if:
1. You either didn't read my post carefully or
2. You are mad because you were proven to be wrong about some points and just trying to make people percieve my posts wrong. But no, the points I made were clear enough
That's one of their limitations...
I think the army you field Mitch is quite close from a cath army, it shall not be such a big change. Is the heavy CK charge limitation linked to you trying to counter it with Turk cav (a cath player would do that...)? Cause that does not work often
Louis the Simurgh,
The only Turk cavalry that has the same charge value (8) as chivalrick knights etc... is Armenian Heavy Cavalry, but its morale is lower, so I guess it wouldn't be wrong to say that when you face knights with Armenians with "same stats" the fight will go evenly matched, but Armenians will rout due to lower morale. So if you want to face knights with cav. it will be better if your Armenians' stats are better, or take Ghulams that have lower charge but cheaper and make sure its att+def value will be at least +2 over to the knights, but in this case Ghulams will be too expensive too.
I think the combat rating formula comes from the Berserk unit tool... Or maybe not. Anyway, Mitch and Kanuni, you agree even if you are not aware of it
Louis the Simurgh,
Kanuni,
I don't want to face cath cav with turk cav, that's, most of the time, a loosing proposition...
But killing cav with cav is something a catholic general is used to do, and that's an habit to loose when shifting to turk.
Louis the Simurgh,
Louis I think it is mitch who isn't aware that he agrees with me
Yes I agree about facing Euro cav. with Turk cav, as I said in my earlier posts it will be too expensive to get a cavalry that will be sucessful
Louis,
For flanks i try to get the cav out ther to slow the CK down knowing i will lose, but i try to get a free JHI out there to back it up. The real trouble has been strait on 6-7 CK coming at the infantry line (with follow on infantry) and my 4 JHI and 4 JI not holding espeically well.
-------------------
Kanuni
I conceded ur point that the JI will suffer an armor penalty vs. armor piercing troops. I also had a big (AFAIK) next to that first post, because I wasn't certain how the armor penalty applies.
Excuse me if i thought that the rant about "armor not affecting H2H" was directed at my post as a good 2/3 of your first response was directed at me and I couldn't find where someone had discussed "armor rating" having H2H affects.
Beyond that, this statement still holds true:
"the JI suffers no armor penalty vs a CMAA as CMAA are not armor-piercing. The JI does not give up the A1 defensive point when they fight."
The reason I said "if the JI takes a penalty vs. MS, is like saying the CMAA takes a penalty vs JHI " is because I've been trying to establish the relative difference between JI and CMAA is very small with respect to overall, in-game combat (i.e. both troops will suffer to one degree or other to armor-pericing units.)
The topic of this thread should have been for 1250ish Florins, which unit gives more value... JI or CMAA? The only thing I've been arguing -- is esentially what u agreed to in your earlier post that discussed your tactics -- that the JI is a better overall unit because of its range capability.
Retreat? Hell, we're just attacking in a different direction...
THE DEADLY SHINGEN
Ok np m8. I mentioned this because the very first post of Sinan in this topic compares JI and CMAA in terms of this calculation.
Mate, I don't think there is any point in repeating that as noone said the opposite.
I must disagree here. It is not the same. While Militia Seargent v4 (costs about 1200) will have almost same chance of beating JI v4 "as CMAA v3", JHI needs about 3000 florin upgrades to do the same vs CMAA v3. So yes it is true that CMAA will also suffer vs JHI, but CMAA will win at the end if about 3000 florins isn't spent to JHI.
Mitch,
I have been caught a few times by CBR Mighty Click with 12 cavs on open ground and 4 JHI not ready to cope. All I can say is good luck. On the other hand JHI got the potential to turn the table.
Now, the initial contact between swarming cav in huge numbers and JHI is essential... JHI can rout on contact. But once the initial charge is done, then game over, no way the cav can make it. So it's all about slowing this cav down... Turk cav can sacrifice itself and do it. JI don't stand a chance.
Louis the Simurgh,
It's all about the Mighty Click
-----------
Kan
Quite right that JHI and MS are unequal units, fine compare apples to apples then...
MS vs JI
is essentially the same as:
MS vs CMAA
I was only attempting to illustrate that the penalties that JI & CMAA get for their armor are very similar and thus cancels out when comparing the units.
...but Mitch, Turks have no MS....
Retreat? Hell, we're just attacking in a different direction...
THE DEADLY SHINGEN
BTW Louis,
I think ur right, that comes from the compare tool.
I only look at the costs for upgrades vs. morale/ attack/ defense and a unit's charge.
Their unit "rating" system is highly flawed in that (as Kan pointed out) it doesn't figure the H2H correctly (although my guess is that they were trying to find some way to give the units a flat number that reflected all aspects of combat -- including missle survivability), also I don't think it handles the impact of morale and unit size well at all. (and I don't know if there is a way to acurately calculate that impact of morale differences through a simple formula).
That's why I think when comparing units, morale is the biggest key. You have to look at units when they have the same morale -- and then see what they cost to get there, and what their Attack & Def stats are in order to see which one is more cost effective. And then, if the units have different sizes, a judgement must be made about what impact that will have.
-------
Louis,
You're at 496 -- only 4 more to go Now if only I got credit for evey edit...
Retreat? Hell, we're just attacking in a different direction...
THE DEADLY SHINGEN
And even looking at units is not good enough, units effectiveness also relates to what other units are available within a faction. Looking at JI/JHI without noticing that Turk cav is not nearly as good as cath heavy cav or that Turks don't have pav is not really helpful. But how you figure that out and what value you give to that is difficult?...
No good way to sort that out. At least the Berserk number is limited in scope and easy to understand.
Louis the Simurgh,
Louis,
You are correct, no unit is an island when fielding an army and its effectiveness must be guaged against what else the faction has.
I see why u defended the JI so strongly. Although it is, by itself perhaps a bit unfairly strong, when placed in the context of the the rest of the army (esp. cav weakness) I have since seen why the Turks need a unit like that.
Retreat? Hell, we're just attacking in a different direction...
THE DEADLY SHINGEN
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks