Research: Effect of Defence

**A.Saturnus** · 05-22-2005, 14:14

On request of QwertyMIDX, this thread is to put forward research results concerning the effect armor, defence skill and shield have in battle.

**QwertyMIDX** · 05-27-2005, 03:20

I've been doing a new stat system for EB and I've been working pretty extensivly with the various types of defense (DS, Armor, Shield). While doing so I realized something rather interesting and unexpected; the "ap" attribute does not seem to work on armor gained from shields.

Here are some numbers:

1st case, armor:12 shield:4
44-75
33-75
(Casualties in Unit - Casualties in Unit with AP)

2nd case, armor:0 shield:16
13-64
19-87
(Casualties in Unit - Casualties in Unit with AP)

Note: This test was not conducted using vanilla units, and should doubtless be repeated many times using more conventional units.

**Marcus Maxentius** · 05-28-2005, 00:16

I noticed that shields seem to be too protective against AP. when fighting with chosen axemen vs. pre-marian legionarres. I kept hearing clunk-clunk as the big axes were deflected by the shields. I would think after a while the shields should break from abuse. It ended up the chosens were slaughtered and thankfully my night-raiders came and slaughtered the romans. They weren't even AP.

It looks like the bigger the shield, the lower the causalties regardless of how armored the unit is. But, like you said, it needs more testing.

**Simetrical** · 05-29-2005, 08:24

Originally Posted by QwertyMIDX

While doing so I realized something rather interesting and unexpected; the "ap" attribute does not seem to work on armor gained from shields. . . .

2nd case, armor:0 shield:16
13-64
19-87
(Casualties in Unit - Casualties in Unit with AP)

Wait, that looks like it does work on armor gained from shields. Far higher casualties from the AP, no?

-Simetrical

**NihilisticCow** · 05-29-2005, 11:07

I always thought that armour piercing only effected armour (and the effect being that it reduces the targets armour by half), not shield or defensive skill, which is why Chosen Axemen are so effective flanking where neither of these two factors come into play.

**Deus ret.** · 05-31-2005, 22:13

Nihilist,
you're right. Since the skill is named "Armour Piercing", it should be quite obvious that it doesn't affect shield bonuses. That's also why Eastern infantry (whose virtually only protection is their shield) fares far better against Desert Cav than Cataphracts or the like.

**QwertyMIDX** · 05-31-2005, 23:34

Originally Posted by Simetrical

Wait, that looks like it does work on armor gained from shields. Far higher casualties from the AP, no?

-Simetrical

No you're reading it backwards, the unit with AP took far higher casualties (about 50% more) against units will all shield and not armor.

When a unit is fighting an enemy it is facing it's defense has 2 parts DS and Armor+Shield, which the game rolls against seperatly. The odd thing is that it add the Armor+Shield like this when dealing with 1/2(Armor)+Shield rather than 1/2(Armor+Shield). I'm not saying CA didn't mean for it to work like that, but it is not very realistic. A shield is very susceptible to heavy "AP" weapons, a large axe, weilded with 2 hands, would shatter and shield and the arm behind it with realtive ease if it made contact.

**Simetrical** · 06-01-2005, 03:23

Originally Posted by QwertMIDX

No you're reading it backwards, the unit with AP took far higher casualties (about 50% more) against units will all shield and not armor.

Oh, the casualty figures are for the number of casualties in the unit with AP, not the number it causes. Now it all makes sense!

-Simetrical

**QwertyMIDX** · 06-01-2005, 07:02

Yeah, sorry I was kind of unclear.

**Narayanese** · 06-15-2005, 16:27

There was a suggestion by Turin that there is an axe attribute.
I tested having "axe" as stat_pri_attr

Axe attribute vs Iberian inf (rotulari dead-iberians dead)
19-152
58-69
17-154
No attribute vs Iberian inf (rotulari dead-iberians dead)
7-55
34-99
17-154
Spear attribute vs Iberian inf (rotulari dead-iberians dead)
36-81
140-28
58-164
Axe attribute vs Sacred band cavalry (rotulari dead-sacred dead)
156-50
151-42
No attribute vs Sacred band cavalry (rotulari dead-sacred dead)
134-24
159-40
Spear attribute vs Sacred band cavalry (rotulari dead-sacred dead)
54-102
40-81

Conclusion:
There is no axe attribute (other then for sound). I am also surprised at how much difference the spear attribute does.

**Slaists** · 06-15-2005, 19:12

Has anyone researched what are the battlefield tactical effects? For example, how much does a unit lose in terms of defense rating if it s flanked or attacked in the rear? Is there such a loss at all in RTW? Similarly for attack/defense bonuses/penalties given height difference...

**Simetrical** · 06-16-2005, 00:12

Originally Posted by Narayanese

I am also surprised at how much difference the spear attribute does.

It should be +4 attack vs. cav, -4 vs. inf, according to JeromeGrasdyke. Someone could test that too if they wanted.

-Simetrical

**econ21** · 06-16-2005, 00:40

Originally Posted by QwertyMIDX

When a unit is fighting an enemy it is facing it's defense has 2 parts DS and Armor+Shield, which the game rolls against seperatly. The odd thing is that it add the Armor+Shield like this when dealing with 1/2(Armor)+Shield rather than 1/2(Armor+Shield). I'm not saying CA didn't mean for it to work like that, but it is not very realistic. A shield is very susceptible to heavy "AP" weapons, a large axe, weilded with 2 hands, would shatter and shield and the arm behind it with realtive ease if it made contact.

Funny, I'd always implicitly assumed that it worked the way it does. I guess I was thinking of AP weapons like medieval ones - either blunt ones or ones designed to pierce gaps in plate. Realistically, I would have thought a shield would be effective fairly against them. Even a hand-axe does not seem very useful against a legionnaire's shield. (The whole "axes shatter shields" mechanic in Mount and Blade does seem plausible to me.)

If you are talking about a great axe, great sword or falx, then I can see your point. But even then, I guess it depends on the force of the blow and where it hits the shield. I can see the shield bearer's arm getting damaged by the force (even if the sheild does not shatter) but I can also see the great weapon getting stuck in the shield - giving the legionnaire a chance to fight his enemy disarmed. Personally, in such a contest, I'd rather have the shield than a legionnaire's armour but this is all arm chair stuff from my part.

**QwertyMIDX** · 05-26-2007, 03:55

2 years later, here's a couple pictures on that topic

**Dol Guldur** · 05-29-2007, 23:43

Ah, good, proof at last that the Romans did have cameras... :)

**guineawolf** · 05-31-2007, 12:42

and those legions know how to use it.....

**Ludens** · 05-31-2007, 13:19

**guineawolf** · 05-31-2007, 16:05

just kidding!

back to topic:

Originally Posted by Simetrical

It should be +4 attack vs. cav, -4 vs. inf, according to JeromeGrasdyke. Someone could test that too if they wanted.

-Simetrical

the eastern infantry got 3 attack only how it counts if it's spear -4 vs infantry?
except you are talking about phalanxe unit?

**Aradan** · 05-31-2007, 18:04

The penalty (which is 8 if you're talking about spear and light_spear units) is not applied directly to the attack of a unit. You can think of it as a bonus to the other unit, rather than a penalty to the spearmen.