The Shield Problem(s)

[General Zhukov]

With the working shield, a lot of units will have much increased performance, their defence will actually go up of 12 points in some cases. And so a lot of late era units without shields, which performed admirably against them, will be totally outclassed halberdiers, zweihanders, Lancers, Gendarmes etc.. There will be no point in fielding newer units.

Indeed, it seems that unit balancing takes factors into account we were not aware of.

The testing results indicate that a shield is a detriment in melee combat, which is an idea I can wrap my head around. The bulkier the shield, the more of a penalty in melee, but with a boost in missle resistance. Many units, like sword infantry, won't feel the burn of the penalty much since they have high normal armor, good defense skill, and high melee attack anyway.

What the penalty means is that shieldless melee units (two handers of all stripes, plus peasants) will have it easier by 3-6 points against shielded troops. Again, it smacks of troop balancing.

I see no reason to assume things are not working as intended.

[Ulstan]

Good testing, Musashi. I disagree with you that it's ok if shields do nothing in melee, but the question is rather academic at this point.

I'm also glad to see that you tested adding an artificially high shield value and seeing what happened - that is a key test that makes it pretty clear the shield is being 'subtracted' rather than 'added'.

Is it possible to put in a negative number for the shield value? Regardless, if shields work fine for missiles right now, but are messed up for melee, it is going to be nearly impossible to mod in a fix that doesn't screw one combat method over.

The testing results indicate that a shield is a detriment in melee combat, which is an idea I can wrap my head around. The bulkier the shield, the more of a penalty in melee

My god. No, no No no NO.

Hey lets get rid of armor too. The bulkier the armor, the more of a penalty in melee!

Discard all the ridiculous nonsense you have gotten from the movies. I don't care if the hero with no armor and no shield routinely hacks down heavily armored, shield wearing guards. That's not the way it worked in real life. Name ONE army that had its soldiers take off their armor and shields before a melee fight because they were 'too bulky'.

I just cannot fathom the large group that adheres to the belief that heavy armor and a shield hurt you in melee, despite all historical evidence to the contrary. I blame Hollywood :(

[Revenant]

My god. No, no No no NO.

Hey lets get rid of armor too. The bulkier the armor, the more of a penalty in melee!

Discard all the ridiculous nonsense you have gotten from the movies. I don't care if the hero with no armor and no shield routinely hacks down heavily armored, shield wearing guards. That's not the way it worked in real life. Name ONE army that had its soldiers take off their armor and shields before a melee fight because they were 'too bulky'.

I just cannot fathom the large group that adheres to the belief that heavy armor and a shield hurt you in melee, despite all historical evidence to the contrary. I blame Hollywood :(

Nobody wrote such things here.

[Foz]

I disagree, Rev, Zhukov is clearly suggesting that it makes sense for shields to detract from a unit in melee combat, as the post wraps up by saying we should not assume shields are not behaving as intended. I'm forced to disagree vehemently. There's no way you can suggest that giving me a nice shield to deflect blows with should make me less able to defend myself in melee combat. A shield confers a huge amount of cover in melee, and allows its user to deflect blows with something other than his sword or other weapon, affording additional defense and openings for attack in combat as well. If you gain good shield position on an attacker, you can literally prevent him from bringing his weapon back to position to defend himself and easily kill him. As for the tremendous weight of a shield, this is also Hollywood BS. Even the largest steel shields depicted on heavily armoured units in the game typically weigh about 15 lbs, the weight of a bowling ball. This in no way makes you a lumbering oaf as people always seem to think, and is clearly a benefit rather than a hindrance in close combat.

The other clear factor that indicates shields are not intended to detract in combat is that the game adds the unit's shield stat to its total defense calculation that it displays when you mouse over the unit. As it would make absolutely no sense if they added its value into the displayed stat but then subtracted it in combat in actuality, not to mention that this would be horribly inaccurate historically, we should assume shields are not acting as intended. I thought this was totally obvious, but apparently not.

[Carl]

Let me also add that if you fix Pikemen and the shield issue and give the bugged 2-handers Halberd/Voulgier animations, (depending on the 2-hander), the units really ARE balanced. Shield units WILL be beaten by later era, (non-sword), 2-Handers. Indeed, earlier era units are beaten by later era units, EXCEPT in the case of 2-handed swordsmen, who, (IMHO), have had issues all along. Most forms of Sword & Shield infantry gave them issues without the fix and some even beat them, as did cav without a formed charge, even if they didn't have the shield fix applied. All fixed units also beat them totally.

Also, look at most of the 2-handed swordsmen stats and compare them to the unfixed base stats of units that beat them badly. Do that and you'd realise that honestly, according to the stats, Heavy Billmen, (to name an often complained about example), SHOULD be beating DGK, and quite handily. (Remember that DGK only have 9 armour after AP effects). The Heavy Billmen have 2 better attack and 1 better defence overall. Even unmodified Noble Highland Archers beat them senseless.

The problem isn't that it makes the early units too good, it's that the late units are often 2-handed swordsmen and that the 2-handed sword animation is, (in it's own unique way), as badly bugged as all the other unmodified non-halberd animations. Give them an animation fix, (don't know what to use yet), and appropriately better stats and they will be fine.


In other words, it's more a case that every non-halberd unit in the game has a bug, (:O GENUINE SHOCK), of some kind and until you fix them all, the bugged units look bad in relation to the debugged ones.

[General Zhukov]

As it would make absolutely no sense if they added its value into the displayed stat but then subtracted it in combat in actuality, not to mention that this would be horribly inaccurate historically, we should assume shields are not acting as intended. I thought this was totally obvious, but apparently not.

Indeed, I don't think that is obvious at all. The historical usefullness or uselessness of a shield in melee is largely a side issue. The real question is: have the mechanics and settings in place now yielded the unit balance the developers intended? Or, has there been a coding error, which would mean that all the battles involving shielded units we have fought heretofore were a sham. I will withhold judging this a bug until someone in the know says it is.

The other clear factor that indicates shields are not intended to detract in combat is that the game adds the unit's shield stat to its total defense calculation that it displays when you mouse over the unit.

You have a batch of statistics, but you do not know exactly how all of them operate and interact during play. The statistics block, in my opinion, is best viewed as a general gauge of the unit's effectiveness in the areas it abstractly mentions. The final defense calculation is holistic, lumping all the defensive attritbutes together as a convenient rule of thumb. For a unit with a shield, its actual defense against any particular form of attack will vary, since the calculations take into account different modes of defense, and, as we have seen, restrictions the unit has.

[Carl]

@Zhukov:

Take a look at my post will you. if you fix the bugged 2-handers with appropriate animation fixes and deal with the Pikemen wanting to be swordsmen issues, the all Pikemen and non-sword 2-handers are suddenly vastly IMBA compared to Sword based 2-handers and Sheild equiped units.

Fix the sheild bug and suddenly the Sheild equipped units can compete again, (spearmen aside who have penalties vs. other infantry), this just leaves Sword based 2-handers as UP. IMHO this makes it clear to me that the Sheild bug, IS a bug as it explains why fixed 2-handers are so OTT, it's because everything else they face that isn't a fixed 2-Hander/Halberd unit is also bugged.

Fix these other bugs and only the 2-handed sword units feel out of kilter, and considering their stats i'd expect them to be UP in any case, plus as noted hey have a terribbly slow attack animation.

[Revenant]

Carl: That is my conclusion too.

[General Zhukov]

Take a look at my post will you.

I did read it Carl. I have read many of your posts. They all move to this beat: bug, fix, bug bug fix, fix, fix, fix fix bug. Which plays into a larger phenomenon I've noticed about the boards: somebody finds something they question in the game, and make a "fix" for it! Meanwhile, it's by no means clear that the vanilla version of what they're changing was bugged in any way. Alot of this is stylistic; it's modding. But you can't find a percieved problem, mod it, and then claim to have achieved balance. Okay, so many people around here like to do just that. But for people who care about the vanilla experience, and are more comfortable leaving the balance aspect to the original creators, all this rush to modify is a bit too hasty.

[Slaists]

Well, this does seem like a major bug similar in scope to missile units using their missile stat for melee attacks in RTW, but, in my opinion, more game breaking. For me MTW 2 is shelved until CA comes out with fixes for 2H weapons and shields. Fixing armor upgrades to what CA originally hoped for would be nice too.

[Carl]

@Zuhkov: My point is that until you apply the sheild fix, fixing the issues that ARE known bugs, (Pikes and non-sword/Halberd 2-handers), creates IMBA. Fixing the sheild bug gets rid of it. It dosen't really leave any room for doubt unless your suggesting late era sheild and 2-handed swords should be uncompetetive with late era 2-handers of other kinds and late era Pikes.

And yes the Pike bug is clearly a Bug IMHO as otherwise they wouldn't have Pikes. Whats the point of pikeme if they allways fight as swordsmen except when charged, (it also begs the question of what makes Papal Guard and Voulgiers Unique compared to Normal Pikemen)?

[TopHatJones]

For me MTW 2 is shelved until CA comes out with fixes for 2H weapons and shields. Fixing armor upgrades to what CA originally hoped for would be nice too.

I agree.

Mods have done a great deal to help, but its just one thing after another with this game.

[Carl]

Forgot somthing.

IMPORTNAT POINT TO ANYONE WHO BELIVES SHEILDS ARE BUGGED AND MAKES A FIX FOR THEM:

Vargarian guard and one of the Danish 2-handed Axe units, (and maybe a few others), have sheilds as well as their 2-handed axe. They probably suffer from the sheild bug too, remeber that.

[JCoyote]

@Carl: No, they don't, or likely don't. Because they use 2h weapons, their shields aren't considered for melee, only for missiles.

[Carl]

We don't know that for sure, it's best if it's tested of course, but i'd bet, (considering what else is going on thats weird), that it IS considered in reality.

I may lose that bet of course.

[Revenant]

I did read it Carl. I have read many of your posts. They all move to this beat: bug, fix, bug bug fix, fix, fix, fix fix bug. Which plays into a larger phenomenon I've noticed about the boards: somebody finds something they question in the game, and make a "fix" for it! Meanwhile, it's by no means clear that the vanilla version of what they're changing was bugged in any way. Alot of this is stylistic; it's modding. But you can't find a percieved problem, mod it, and then claim to have achieved balance. Okay, so many people around here like to do just that. But for people who care about the vanilla experience, and are more comfortable leaving the balance aspect to the original creators, all this rush to modify is a bit too hasty.

OK, but the 2H axes/polearms units are bugged (without any of fixes), at least this is true.

But the other issues can be in reality intentional game mechanics. Shields hamper combat, but because late units (as zweihanders and DGK) do not have big stats, everything will equals itself. Or maybe developers discovered some bugs before release, and then tried to "repair" it with some artificial rules, we cannot be sure.

[Carl]

Vargarian Guard ARE effected. Just ran some tests, one with the Vargarian Guard set to have 60 sheild, the other with them set to the defualt 3 sheild. Both with fixed attack animations, (Voulgiers Animation). They fought Dismounted Conquistodors with my sheild fix (add the sheild value plus 2 to their defence skill).

With the standard sheild the Vangarian guard slaughtered the Conquistodors with less than 10 dead. With the 60 sheild they where down to just 10 left when the Conquistodors routed. Go figure.

@Reverant: I'd also say the pikes are a definte bug, they simply refuse to use pikes when not reciving a charge 90% of the time and are hopless without them. I don't think that issue is in any doubt eithier.

[Revenant]

@Reverant: I'd also say the pikes are a definte bug, they simply refuse to use pikes when not reciving a charge 90% of the time and are hopless without them. I don't think that issue is in any doubt eithier.

But some people claim pikes are working for them. I used them in some custom battles - long line of pikes + some heavy hitting units, cavalry and arquebusiers and they were victorious over armies composed of heavy armoured assaualt infantry such as dismounted feudals, chivalrics + cavalry and shooting support. Maybe their use is just cheap line infantry to hold enemy, maybe it is feature, not bug.

[Carl]

Considering pikes are a Late era, expensive, elite infantry in most armies I don't think they are cheap line holders, plus Swordsmen (even with the sheild bug), are much better at that anyway due to their better attack and defence stats. if they arn't using their Pikes, Pikemen are infiriour to EVRYTHING, including most types of spearmen.

Also, whilst people HAVE got them working in vanillia, they have to mess about and work really hard to make them work, and they STILL don't beat the units they should without massive losses. Considering their vulnrability to flank and rear charges they have to be able to beat supiriour stat units head on convincingly to justify their price.

[Foz]

Here's the Shield Fix version 1.2, which puts half the shield points rounded down into armour, and half rounded up into skill (and thus zeroes the shield stat for all units). It's available in 2 flavors:

1. A patched vanilla export_descr_unit.txt file...

OR

2. The patcher program, which will generate a new file from your existing EDU. Put it in your data folder where the export_descr_unit.txt file you use is, and run it. It generates a new file called "new unit file.txt" that you'll have to rename to export_descr_unit.txt after you backup your old one.

[Carl]

Have you done the Vargarian Guard and Norse Axemen too?

A Note to everyone else, whilst the armour fix DOSEN'T mess up auto-calc. it WILL mess up actual battles as AP missile units are significantly more effective against sheild units now. This is going to really hurt against crossbows and Longbows and the like. You might want to bear that in mind. Especially with say, Pavise Crossbowmen.

[Revenant]

Considering pikes are a Late era, expensive, elite infantry in most armies I don't think they are cheap line holders, plus Swordsmen (even with the sheild bug), are much better at that anyway due to their better attack and defence stats. if they arn't using their Pikes, Pikemen are infiriour to EVRYTHING, including most types of spearmen.

Also, whilst people HAVE got them working in vanillia, they have to mess about and work really hard to make them work, and they STILL don't beat the units they should without massive losses. Considering their vulnrability to flank and rear charges they have to be able to beat supiriour stat units head on convincingly to justify their price.

I am not expert on pike units, but did some tests. In the hands of player and with hold mode offTercio pikemen always defeated Sword and buckler men. In one to one combat. I was using vanilla stats. Take also the fact they are impenetrable to frontal attack from cavalry and they do not have very high upkeep. And are also relatively cheap (cheaper than armored sergeants, for example).

With computer using pikes, well that entirelly different matter, computer just cannot handle them I think it is because comp has always hold mode on and pikes just not attack in this mode.

But it probably belong somewhere else.

[Slaists]

Since, MTW II inherits RTW engine, it would be interesting to test whether the shield problem exists in RTW too.

[Revenant]

Since, MTW II inherits RTW engine, it would be interesting to test whether the shield problem exists in RTW too.

I just did some tests but probably not.

[Foz]

Have you done the Vargarian Guard and Norse Axemen too?

A Note to everyone else, whilst the armour fix DOSEN'T mess up auto-calc. it WILL mess up actual battles as AP missile units are significantly more effective against sheild units now. This is going to really hurt against crossbows and Longbows and the like. You might want to bear that in mind. Especially with say, Pavise Crossbowmen.

Yes, those units too. Every single unit that lists a value for shield has it added to armour and set to 0.

After seeing the comment about AP missiles beating down more on the fixed units, I set out to prove it correct. Alas, I could not...

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Armoured swordsmen receiving 7 volleys of yeoman fire on grassy plain. I gave France the swordsmen to accomplish this. I had to restart the test twice to avoid bad weather. As per my standard, I sat them there in default formation to receive the fire at the archers' leisure.

arm 8/skl 8/shd 6. These are the default unit stats.
Swordsmen Killed:

13
13
14
12
8
--
60

arm 14/skl 8/shd 0. These are the fixed stats, shield pts moved to armour.
Swordsmen Killed:

10
8
12
11
9
--
50

The number of dead swordsmen is actually less with the fixed stats, though I'm certain the difference isn't statistically significant, meaning we should consider the results equal. To speculate as to the reason for this result... I would surmise that the AP stat is being applied to the defense total that would normally oppose any given attack, instead of just the armour field. This could arise from ambiguity in the word armour... where it could mean the armour stat of the unit is being pierced, or it could mean physical items that are "armour" are being pierced. Regardless of why, in this case I'm saying the shield's ranged bonus was probably already being cut in half by the AP as well as the unit's armour value, meaning there is in fact no difference between having shield points and having armour points for the purposes of AP.

This is by no way an exhaustive test, however, and will require considerably more data and confirmation from others in order to be considered remotely conclusive. So for now consider it a hunch with some data seemingly pointing in its direction

[Carl]

Thats intresting data Foz. I'm too tierd to do more conclusive tests tonight, but i'll have a go in the morning. If this works then i'll go with the Armour fix myself as it dosen't mess things up in auto-calc.

[Revenant]

I'm posting my shield fix, which puts the shield points directly into armour instead (and thus zeroes the shield stat for all units). It's available in 2 flavors:

1. A patched vanilla export_descr_unit.txt file...

OR

2. The patcher program, which will generate a new file from your existing EDU, adding all shield values to armour and replacing them with zeroes. Put it in your data folder where the export_descr_unit.txt file you use is, and run it. It generates a new file called "new unit file.txt" that you'll have to rename to export_descr_unit.txt after you backup your old one.

Thanks, good work

But as I said, late non shield units are now totally crap.

[Carl]

Couldn't sleep so I did the tests. The following are cashulty figures. In the first set the target unit had 40 sheild. In the Second they had 40 Armour. the firing unit was Longbowmen with a missile attack of 20. Same weather for all and 7 volleys each.

40 Sheild

33
23
35
27
27

40 Armour

21
15
17
23
14

Do you know what I thinks happening? The sheild value is only being applied to attacks from the left.

But as I said, late non shield units are now totally crap.

First, does this file include fixed 2-Hander animations and Fixed Pikes? if it dosen't then it will seem that way.

Second, are you using spear or 2-handed sword units to determine this, if you are DON'T both are seriously underpowered vs. infantry and Pikemen. Fixed non-sword 2-handers and unfixed Sheild units will ALL beat them, (or decimate them before losing). A test with eithier type of unit proves NOTHING IMHO.

[Revenant]

First, does this file include fixed 2-Hander animations and Fixed Pikes? if it dosen't then it will seem that way.

Second, are you using spear or 2-handed sword units to determine this, if you are DON'T both are seriously underpowered vs. infantry and Pikemen. Fixed non-sword 2-handers and unfixed Sheild units will ALL beat them, (or decimate them before losing). A test with eithier type of unit proves NOTHING IMHO.

I am using units with Great Sword against shield infantry and late era heavy cavalry against mounted knights (no surprise here, they really have better stats now). 2H polearm infantry with fix are killers even now. Pikes I do not use, I have never used the pike fix.

[dopp]

@Carl: You can just use the Foz's modded file and make your own changes to it. The pikemen and polearm fixes are minor when set against tweaking the shield stats of every unit.

To 'fix' the pikes, just run a search for long_pike and replace all the secondary weapon entries with the following line:

stat_sec 0, 0, no, 0, 0, no, melee_simple, blunt, none, 25, 1

That's it. There are only 8-12 pike units in the game (and half of them are Scotland's), so it's an easy job.

Might I suggest that since shields normally only apply to attacks from the left, adding them directly to armor will make shielded units a lot stronger than they 'should be' in combat. Why not halve the bonus or subtract 2 or something to even things out a bit?