View Full Version : [EB MP]3.0 Thread - Testing and Updates
antisocialmunky
09-01-2011, 17:25
1 They are not mean to reach the enemy lines but to be in the back as archers and help in melee as needed.
2 Your right but I said catas as I would say anything else. It was fun for the first times to get heavy cavalry butchered by archers but I dont think that's their purpose. If it was me I would give them high attack, nice lettality but low discipline, morale and defense so they can be effective in some short fights but defeated when encountering disciplined enemies. Its completely exasperating, when playing as sweboz to defeat enemy phalanx only to get butchered by archers in melee, belive me ;)
Well they were absolutely ridiculous and like pandas, they were melee infantry first before their actual function of being archers or phalanx in the panda case.
-Stormrage-
09-01-2011, 20:29
luso u were saying indian longbowmen are OP, i am saying no they arent becuase they die to arrows before they can even touch any of your units. By saying this i am proving they werent OP , OP is when a unit is so good that nothing can counter it.
They have like 3 armour, if u dont bring archers to kill them thats your problem. as i said.
Indian archers in vanilla were OP in vanilla because they could kick the ass out even of catas!
1)They die like flies before they reach the enemy lines. I said this to refute your claims , that indian longbowmen were OP.
2)Catas are not meant to fight in melee, they are hit and break hammer. i said this to show you that a smart person wouldnt leave his cataphracts fighting in melee he would pull them back thus , if u leave your catas fighting in melee against AP units ofocurse they will "kick the ass" out of them.
Now moving on, i think They should get AP back with the lethality and the attack and everyhting they had. Becuase they were not unbalanced or OP to begin with, they did not need balance between historical accuracy and gameplay becuase they were balanced from the start.
There things are 3 armour no sheild- i dare anyone to tell me they are OP or Unbalanced. 3 armour with no sheild is now OP too you, but a 10 armour archer is not OP, heck you even want to give them +1 sheild. now we got 10 armour 3 sheild archers we got 10 armour 1 sheild, 7 armour 1 sheild. but when u here there is a 3 armour no sheild archer with an AP attack u go crazy. When i was saka i had a hard time just keeping these guys alive. i rememeber they were so fragile i used to keep them by the red border line so vega's 10 armour imperial archers wouldnt make them shish kebab. that is what has now become OP ?
Brave Brave Sir Robin
09-01-2011, 20:40
Yeah in no way were Indian Archers OP. By taking them, you are virtually ceding the missile duel to your enemy who can then content himself with using cheaper archers to pick them off rather easily. Their rather low morale also meant that they would break if charged by cavalry or after losing a decent percentage of their unit. I'm not sure what they will be priced at for 3.0 but earlier edus had their price around 1100 which is pricy for unarmored archers. Even if their sole purpose was to act as a falxman type unit, they are disadvantaged in that you cannot recruit more missile units to stop your foe from shooting up your unarmored flankers, and they have significantly lower morale.
-Stormrage-
09-01-2011, 20:42
Indian longbowmen:
stat_pri_armour 3, 11, 0, flesh (armour,defense skill,sheild)
This is the OP unbalanced unit your all afraid of.
, on the matter of falxmen give them AP back and lower attack or lethality.
stat_pri_armour 12, 12, 1, metal , wow look at that high armour low sheild , hmmm maybe we should use some AP slingers. hmm i think your right.
What happened to your common sense you forgot simple Rock paper scissors.
Indian longbow men light armour no sheild -- shish kebab them with archers.
Rompharoi high armour low sheild (1) -- Swiss sheese them with slingers.
Stormy's Archer/slinger rants are starting to make sense now huh .
Well GG said archers and slingers are fine as is . So you have no problem giving AP back to indians and Rhomphs .
-Stormrage-
09-01-2011, 20:48
Well they were absolutely ridiculous and like pandas, they were melee infantry first before their actual function of being archers or phalanx in the panda case.
They are only ridiculous if u were ridiculous enough to let them live past the missile phase.
The real problem is there is no way to change weapon damage since they are all 1 lethality 1 HP of damage. So the only metric you can change is accuracy.
Increase range and missile attack ?
"The Hindus tribes west of the Indus are famed for their use of massive longbows made from cane and strung with tough silken bowstrings. These bows allow them to launch arrows at a tremendous range" - www.europabarbarorum.com. 170 is not a tremendous range i hope its fixed in 3.0.
LusitanianWolf
09-01-2011, 21:06
luso u were saying indian longbowmen are OP, i am saying no they arent becuase they die to arrows before they can even touch any of your units. By saying this i am proving they werent OP , OP is when a unit is so good that nothing can counter it.
They have like 3 armour, if u dont bring archers to kill them thats your problem. as i said.
Well, I play most with Lusos who only get slingers and Sweboz who (before v3) only had crappy archers and lack of armoured manpower so you had to spare them since you need the slots for infantry and zerg rush If you wanted to have any chance agaisnt civ factions. But I agree that units like Cretans or Roman are even worst to fight agaisnt. Is just that, at least on my oppinion indian archers should be good archers with decent melee skill, not shock infantry that happens to have bows. But I gess this is just my oppinion and I respect yours.
2)Catas are not meant to fight in melee, they are hit and break hammer. i said this to show you that a smart person wouldnt leave his cataphracts fighting in melee he would pull them back thus , if u leave your catas fighting in melee against AP units ofocurse they will "kick the ass" out of them.
Again, I was meaning heavy cavalry at general, not only catas. They should be able to kill engaged heavy cavalry but not to survive a charge and after defeat it singlehanded at melee. I may be remembering wrong but I think they did this in old EDUs.
Brave Brave Sir Robin
09-01-2011, 21:14
Slingers are great against archers. They cost less and make them waste all their arrows.:2thumbsup: This was the important fact I learned playing mainly Lusos over the past month.
gamegeek2
09-01-2011, 21:26
Yeah in no way were Indian Archers OP. By taking them, you are virtually ceding the missile duel to your enemy who can then content himself with using cheaper archers to pick them off rather easily. Their rather low morale also meant that they would break if charged by cavalry or after losing a decent percentage of their unit. I'm not sure what they will be priced at for 3.0 but earlier edus had their price around 1100 which is pricy for unarmored archers. Even if their sole purpose was to act as a falxman type unit, they are disadvantaged in that you cannot recruit more missile units to stop your foe from shooting up your unarmored flankers, and they have significantly lower morale.
With no restrictions on missiles, the inability to bring more missiles is not a problem anymore.
-Stormrage-
09-01-2011, 21:27
Again, I was meaning heavy cavalry at general, not only catas. They should be able to kill engaged heavy cavalry but not to survive a charge and after defeat it singlehanded at melee. I may be remembering wrong but I think they did this in old EDUs.
they have 9 morale, 3 armour no sheild, u expect them to surivive a cata charge? remeber cata charge is AP so that will cuthte 3 armour into 1.5 armour.
-Stormrage-
09-01-2011, 22:16
With no restrictions on missiles, the inability to bring more missiles is not a problem anymore.
factions that have ap have the crappiest archers in the game, excuse the language, i feel it best describes things nowadays. Those factions are Baktria and Saka. Further more If a player brings say 10 archers 5 indiands and 5 others to protect them. Do you think he will win?
1) he will have significantly lower infantry then his enemy . If he uses the 10 slots for infantry he will have no cavalry.
2)if he brings cavalry he will have even fewer slots for infantry.
So i think no sane mind would do this.
I must admit it was a very clever argument, that never crossed my mind.
antisocialmunky
09-02-2011, 04:26
They were pretty different with +1 chevron. If you could avoid having them completely shot up, they kicked some major butt. But yeah, you basically ceded missile superiority though 5 Cata, 5 Light Cav, 10 Indian archer steppe army was always pretty amusing.
2)Catas are not meant to fight in melee, they are hit and break hammer.
Who told you this lie?
-Stormrage-
09-02-2011, 06:19
Its basic knowledge.
Its basic knowledge.
No. It's not "basic knowledge". I don't work with "basic knowledge" here, sorry.
antisocialmunky
09-02-2011, 16:02
About everytime cataphracts have gotten into prolonged melee with infantry, its gone not very well. Aurelian, during the last major battle against the Alamanni charged a mix formation of horse and infantry with his Cataphracts and heavy horse which was repulsed with relatively high casualties as the horses were killed from beneath the cataphracts. They then routed and crashed into his right flank which only managed to be reformed due to the discipline of his troops.
Additionally the Sassanids never really managed to successfully invade against Romans because the Romans were reliably able to defeat heavy horse (unless you are a fat rich guy) and the Romans were only usually defeated on campaign by the inability to hold Armenia and Mesopotamia because they had to spread themselves so thin in the cases of Anthony and Trajan.
Funny enough Aurelian made the members of the cataphract units that did not rally back to him dress up as women after he won the battle.
gamegeek2
09-02-2011, 16:13
About everytime cataphracts have gotten into prolonged melee with infantry, its gone not very well. Aurelian, during the last major battle against the Alamanni charged a mix formation of horse and infantry with his Cataphracts and heavy horse which was repulsed with relatively high casualties as the horses were killed from beneath the cataphracts. They then routed and crashed into his right flank which only managed to be reformed due to the discipline of his troops.
Funny enough Aurelian made the members of the cataphract units that did not rally back to him dress up as women after he won the battle.
This is correct. Cataphracts seem to have been resisted by prepared infantry very well, as they are now. Infantry being flanked or hit in the rear are not prepared.
They do however seem to have crushed other cavalry most of the time assuming the other cavalry were unsupported, such as at Panion and at Magnesia, where the Seleucid cataphract charge broke the Roman left, but then pursued the Romans back to their camp.
Additionally the Sassanids never really managed to successfully invade against Romans because the Romans were reliably able to defeat heavy horse (unless you are a fat rich guy) and the Romans were only usually defeated on campaign by the inability to hold Armenia and Mesopotamia because they had to spread themselves so thin in the cases of Anthony and Trajan.
Correction: the Parthians did not succeed at invading against romans. The Sasssanids, on the other hand, conquered large swaths of territory, at one point overrunning the entire Levant, Egypt, and much of Anatolia.
antisocialmunky
09-02-2011, 16:21
That's because Khosrau I reformed the cavalry into lighter heavy lancer/horse archer hybrids and deemphasized the cataphracts.
Also I want one of what the Sassanid Knight is shooting: http://www.kavehfarrokh.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Turkish-Hun-wars-7-century-AD.jpg
http://www.kavehfarrokh.com/news/nabil-rastani-the-ancient-world-war/
gamegeek2
09-02-2011, 16:30
That's because Khosrau I reformed the cavalry into light heavy lancer/horse archer hybrids and deemphasized the cataphracts.
Correct; later Sassanid armies were optimized for campaigning. He probably drew more of the Dhiqans into service to do so. Regardless, EBO armies seem to not greatly emphasize cataphracts as the main shock too, either, with plenty of hybrids employed where possible, and supporting lighter cavalry in wide use; at least that's the direction things seem to be heading in, especially with Hayasdan and Parthia, and I have little doubt that once I wrap up the Seleucids they will be greatly using the Medians as well.
re: indian longbows: they're definitely NOT on par with good quality reflex composites. for example, a good (not exceptional) quality turkish or mongol composite bow (of course, those 2 are probably the pinnacle of composite bows) had greater range and power than your average english longbow (which is clearly superior to a cane longbow). i really don't see how or why would a cane longbow be better in any way (other than cheapness and ease of use) than a reflex composite bow from the steppe. and i don't see how the fact that the bow was a well respected weapon in indian society factors in. the japanese also revered the bow and used longbows, yet their bows pale in comparison to pretty much every composite bow out there. it's also worth noting that a steel self bow is worse than an equivalent wood self bow because of the properties of the material (less of the "spring" force is transferred via steel) and were probably a social symbol or whatever more than anything else (the main (only?) advantage is that the steel bow requires waaaaay less maintenance and were more "resistant" to weather changes. although it's waaaaaay more dangerous when it breaks). another thing worth noting in the longbow vs composite is the arrows. in EB's timeframe the vast majority of steppe arrowheads were of bone (bronze became dominant only very late in the EB period, if not even later) and while i have no sources on what the indian used for arrowheads, i wouldn't have trouble believing that most of their arrows would have iron/steel tips due to the advanced metallurgy that was a prominent feature of the area for quite a long time. and it's reasonable to assume that the longbow arrows were heavier (although considerably slower), just like their english "counterparts". btw i completely agree that the indian longbowmen should be significantly cheaper (besides the sword, i don't see anything that would justify such a hight price)
re: falxes: from a purely realism/historical standpoint it makes no sense to have them be AP since the forward-curving tip was the only thing capable of doing that (and very likely the main reason why the romans reinforced the helmets). unfortunately, the very simplistic nature of the TW engines doesn't lend itself well to recreate the dynamics of combat (especially the overly simplistic AP thing. let's face it, the falx would be next-to completely ineffective against something like the Dosidataskeli or the Grivpanvar... and giving it the AP would make them overly effective against such units. which is very unrealistic but perhaps a necessary "sacrifice"?) so i wouldn't have much objections against the falx getting the AP because, let's face it, there's only a handful of units in the EB roster that have adequate limb protection against the weapon (although those same units would suffer the most vs the falx due to the bollocks RTW implementation of AP).
another thing to consider: if the falx really was such a fearsome weapon, why did it "die" with the dacians (assuming that later polearms weren't inspired by the falxe)? why didn't the romans use it (considering they were wont to adapt and use tech that was "better")?
btw, the AP attribute does not take 1/2 of the armour in consideration. it actually adds (armour-1)/2 to the attack. just sayin...
This is correct. Cataphracts seem to have been resisted by prepared infantry very well, as they are now. Infantry being flanked or hit in the rear are not prepared.
They do however seem to have crushed other cavalry most of the time assuming the other cavalry were unsupported, such as at Panion and at Magnesia, where the Seleucid cataphract charge broke the Roman left, but then pursued the Romans back to their camp.
I was informed that there is at least one cavalry unit from the "West" that defeats cataphracts: Sacred Band of Carthage.
EBO armies seem to not greatly emphasize cataphracts as the main shock too, either, with plenty of hybrids employed where possible, and supporting lighter cavalry in wide use; at least that's the direction things seem to be heading in, especially with Hayasdan and Parthia, and I have little doubt that once I wrap up the Seleucids they will be greatly using the Medians as well.
RTW unfortunately takes the "shock" out of "shock cavalry" when it comes to medium and light cavalry. They are instead, at the moment, best used to add bulk in the melee in cav vs cav.
antisocialmunky
09-02-2011, 17:48
While it wasn't a cavalry tactic, there was an infantry tactic that was basically creating an infantry wedge with the heavily armored elite troops on the outside and less armored infantry on the inside to increase mass.
Lanceari and ambakaro epones are the other "western" cavalry which beat cataphracts.
And vartan, why does the site say SAC archer limit is 8?
The Celtic Viking
09-02-2011, 19:20
Not quite the right place to ask that.
There is no other place to ask that. Since he is offline and I will be going to sleep soon.
The Celtic Viking
09-02-2011, 21:00
There is no other place to ask that. Since he is offline and I will be going to sleep soon.
This forum does have private as well as profile messages, you know. ~;)
Lanceari and ambakaro epones are the other "western" cavalry which beat cataphracts.
There you go, more odd cases that continue to baffle.
And vartan, why does the site say SAC archer limit is 8?
Why not? It's the (now legacy) ruleset. Do you have a problem with it?
There is no other place to ask that. Since he is offline and I will be going to sleep soon.
You would do well to contain your...whatever the word is to describe your behavior...inside our Hamachi chatrooms. It's more than plenty there. Don't bring it here if you can prevent it (and you certainly can).
This forum does have private as well as profile messages, you know. ~;)
Thank you!
It was bumped to 10 in june, why has it been reverted?
It was bumped to 10 in june, why has it been reverted?
June was the first tournament this year. It was also the debut of EBO MP EDU Series 2. This is why certain rules were altered. July saw the use of 2.1, and enter 2.1.1 in August. Rules were changed more than a few times in order to complement the EDU changes. Regardless, it is all irrelevant now as Series 2, like Series 1, is now obsolete. Thanks for asking though.
Why. Sauro still get 10, why not the others?
antisocialmunky
09-03-2011, 13:47
Random question, how is the density stuff working out? I have some ideas that could make infantry infantry charges actually work.
The Celtic Viking
09-03-2011, 14:10
Why. Sauro still get 10, why not the others?
The reason why the Sauros got 10 was because at the time they didn't have any non-archer cav, and that put them at max 8 cav (which would also have meant no foot archers). As this has changed and they have Scythian Nobles now, they should no longer receive this special rule.
Why. Sauro still get 10, why not the others?
Sauros do not get ten. They get anything they want now. Stop asking questions that are completely irrelevant. Thank you.
Random question, how is the density stuff working out? I have some ideas that could make infantry infantry charges actually work.
GG2 hasn't informed me about any work on density. What are you offering? And do we really want infantry charges to work? I know I wouldn't, because as it is, cavalry charges are messed up half the time with lances not lowered. Would you want that with infantry?
The reason why the Sauros got 10 was because at the time they didn't have any non-archer cav, and that put them at max 8 cav (which would also have meant no foot archers). As this has changed and they have Scythian Nobles now, they should no longer receive this special rule.
Thank you.
Brave Brave Sir Robin
09-03-2011, 16:54
Sauros do not get ten. They get anything they want now. Stop asking questions that are completely irrelevant. Thank you.
GG2 hasn't informed me about any work on density. What are you offering? And do we really want infantry charges to work? I know I wouldn't, because as it is, cavalry charges are messed up half the time with lances not lowered. Would you want that with infantry?
Thank you.
Cavalry only don't lower their lances if you don't position them properly before the charge. Its all about understanding the quirks of the engine.
Cavalry only don't lower their lances if you don't position them properly before the charge. Its all about understanding the quirks of the engine.
Clearly. But I'd like to fight for players who can't exploit the engine as much as some other players can. What I mean is something like this. If one of my cavalry if fighting one of yours, and you have one on standby nearby, one thing you can do to take advantage is to withdraw your fighting cavalry and charge with your standby. What this does is it makes my cavalry automatically pursue your fleeing cavalry and get charged like a car accident in which one car hits the side of another. What's more, even if I told my cavalry to attack the incoming cavalry, it would be highly unlikely for my cavalry to couch their lances due to the proximity of your charging cavalry. A similar case would arise with infantry if they work anything like cavalry do. By this I mean if they have to be executed at a certain distance, in a certain way, then there could be opened a whole can of worms, Pandora's Box, if you will, since there would be a whole chunk of online gaming technique which would be solely devoted to exploiting these (highly unfortunate) nuances of the engine in order to win.
EDIT: I really hope that makes sense. Let me know if I am mistaken in my reasoning. It's just what comes to mind when I think about this, and I've thought about this plenty and have been slightly disappointed that it's never been at the forefront of our decision making, with the EDU taking the lead role in that regard.
antisocialmunky
09-03-2011, 18:50
Weird engine bugs make professional starcraft the best game ever.
Brave Brave Sir Robin
09-03-2011, 23:27
Weird engine bugs make professional starcraft the best game ever.
That's not really an engine bug. Cavalry can't suddenly change direction and absorb an incoming prepared charge. It's really just simple preparation. It is unfortunate that newer players have to learn these things by getting burned, but it happened (will happen) to us all. That's why we play so many practice matches.
Also, you can put your cavalry on guard mode if you don't want them to chase. Similarly, the cavalry battle is generally what most players micro and so if you see your opponent pull his cavalry back or see another unit charging in, pull your cavalry back as well.
gamegeek2
09-04-2011, 01:15
Actually I'd really like infantry charges to work. Please, offer your proposal!
I will not be available to chat except on Facebook until Monday, or even Tuesday, due to a hard drive failure.
Lazy is slightly misrepresenting: we found that the Pahlavan Zrehbaran and their identical armenian counterparts crush lanceari if they get one charge, and that the same is almost certainly true in the case of the Epones, which we did not test. The Sacred Band were about 50-50 with the cataphracts, but doubtless the cataphracts are more devastating to infantry.
antisocialmunky
09-04-2011, 01:45
Can you catch me online?
Also, can you increase drapnai to 120? They aren't very effective yet except making your cav hard to engage.
Also, did you apply factional price discounts?
gamegeek2
09-04-2011, 02:00
Can you catch me online?
Also, can you increase drapnai to 120? They aren't very effective yet except making your cav hard to engage.
Also, did you apply factional price discounts?
Yeah. Post-Marian romans don't have any though.
Regarding the rules; I dont get it, did the SAC rules get outdated or what?.
And cavalry charge distances, does not matter if you set it to half the map, you still need to know the quirks of the engine for it to work, you cannot avoid that.
@GG2; Yes but, the cataphracts also have 6 other cav for company so I guess our tests are irrelevant :D
-Stormrage-
09-04-2011, 08:26
1)Bosphoran archers have the same Defense skill as pontic heavy infantry. Since when did an archer get any sort of melee defense practice. Maybe he had karate lessons on the side. Archers should have beween 2-5 defense skill
2)infantry such as Drapanai have more charge Distance then Cavalry, Drapanai have 40 Cavalry are at 30. The increase of Cavalry Charge Distance would cause lances to lower earlier thus impale any men beween the cavalry and its target . thus the charge wont get messed up by fleeing archers or a tiny group of men who the cata happened to touch before lowering lance, thus messes up the formation.
3) I see Cataphracts have recieved +1 Sheild and Slingers as well as archers have recieved significant accuracy Decreases. That Is nerfing the use of slingers on cataphracts 2 fold one by lowering accuracy another by adding shield. I'm not a history fan boy but did Cataphracts historically have shields ? hmmm nice to know its not pick and choose which histroical fact to apply and which to disregard.
2.) No, that has no effect on combat whatsoever, the only thing important for charges is the way they are facing, if you about turn and then charge chances are they will never lower their lances.
-Stormrage-
09-04-2011, 09:27
yes or no question:
lazyo when u target a unit to chagre with your cavalry and your cavalry are positioned perfectly u charge, in beween u and the target there is a unit of archers in loose formation, before your cav lowers lances they hit the loose archers what will happen. If the lanes werent raised they will break formation and engage the archers, If the charge distance is big enough that they lower lanes before touching the archers they will stampede the archers and charge the target.
-Stormrage-
09-04-2011, 09:43
I urge you to edit the charge distance of the Griv in the EDu to 50, then go to custom battle and test the distance for your self, then test 30 charge distance. I tested it and distance at 30 is too close and may result in them lowering lances too late.
I dont know, my cavalry respect and fear me enough to know that they will most probably die like flies if they engage the archers... ;D
PRESS GUARD MODE IF THERE IS SOMETHING IN BETWEEN
-Stormrage-
09-04-2011, 11:09
Or the better option would be to scale Cavalry Charge distances to 40-50. I tested it and its Epic.
Edit: GG can you give the Saba Faction All rome units. It would be fun to have some Rome vs. Rome battles.
Regarding the rules; I dont get it, did the SAC rules get outdated or what?.
Don't look at the God-forsaken rules page. It's none of your business anymore. It does not concern you. It's there for reasons that pertain to me mainly regarding how I'm going to archive that and a bunch of stuff which is now obsolete. Stop bringing this up because "SAC rules" no longer exist. Get it. Got it? Good.
1)Bosphoran archers have the same Defense skill as pontic heavy infantry. Since when did an archer get any sort of melee defense practice. Maybe he had karate lessons on the side. Archers should have beween 2-5 defense skill
Haven't you seen the cost on the Bosphorans? It's no wonder they're so powerful.
2)infantry such as Drapanai have more charge Distance then Cavalry, Drapanai have 40 Cavalry are at 30. The increase of Cavalry Charge Distance would cause lances to lower earlier thus impale any men beween the cavalry and its target . thus the charge wont get messed up by fleeing archers or a tiny group of men who the cata happened to touch before lowering lance, thus messes up the formation.
That's no excuse. The person is playing smart by counter-charging. Besides, you can completely avoid this by walking instead of running your cavalry, if you really insist (even though the problem isn't really as you describe it since yours is an exaggeration).
3) I see Cataphracts have recieved +1 Sheild and Slingers as well as archers have recieved significant accuracy Decreases. That Is nerfing the use of slingers on cataphracts 2 fold one by lowering accuracy another by adding shield. I'm not a history fan boy but did Cataphracts historically have shields ? hmmm nice to know its not pick and choose which histroical fact to apply and which to disregard.
It's pretty clear you don't know precisely why missile accuracy was modified and cataphracts given an artificial shield point. That's fine. If it's in the documentation, you'll read all about it. If gamegeek2 has mentioned it (which he has), you'll read about it. If you're lucky, somebody will tell you about it. I'll let you figure it out since I'd like to tease you. It's a puzzle but an easy one. Just think about why someone would make those changes ;-)
yes or no question:
lazyo when u target a unit to chagre with your cavalry and your cavalry are positioned perfectly u charge, in beween u and the target there is a unit of archers in loose formation, before your cav lowers lances they hit the loose archers what will happen. If the lanes werent raised they will break formation and engage the archers, If the charge distance is big enough that they lower lanes before touching the archers they will stampede the archers and charge the target.
You don't charge a unit in front of which are a bunch of loose archers. That is retarded (literally), at least in our game, precisely because of the engagement mechanics. Your charge will become discoordinated and a real mess. Instead find a better charge to commit to, gg.
Or the better option would be to scale Cavalry Charge distances to 40-50. I tested it and its Epic.
Edit: GG can you give the Saba Faction All rome units. It would be fun to have some Rome vs. Rome battles.
It's not epic. It's stupid. Most lances don't even couch as it is. 50 would just ruin it for everybody. And giving Saba factional SPQR should only allow the opponent to pick factional SPQR (no mercs), but that's probably the smartest thing you've said for a long, long time. Well done.
gamegeek2
09-04-2011, 17:31
The only problem with stormrage's suggestion is that it would require a massive amount of editing to desr_model_battle so that Saba would have the necessary skins.
If we are to have any rules, Lazy, they would be these:
-Merc unit limit dependent on faction; some would get more than others (Rome, for example).
-Fair play rules
-Unit limitation based on costs, which you have proposed and I want you to outline in a post, because I think it is an excellent idea. It would prevent spamming of units like Lanceari, Cataphracts, and Scythian Nobles, and impose some fair historical limits, while allowing people plenty of options in army composition in terms of the numbers of missile troops, etc. they can bring.
I think it went something like this, though I forgot exact limits.
No limit for under (price)1000
Max 8 same of 1000-1500
Max 6 Same of 1000-2000
Max 4 same of 2000-2500
Max 2 same of 2500+
Brave Brave Sir Robin
09-04-2011, 17:55
I think it went something like this, though I forgot exact limits.
No limit for under (price)1000
Max 8 same of 1000-1500
Max 6 Same of 1000-2000
Max 4 same of 2000-2500
Max 2 same of 2500+
This rule hurts the Arverni too much. The only advantage they have over Aedui is having a solid line composed of Arjos (which are phenomenal line troops) which cost 2000+. If we limit them to 4, that is not enough to compose a line of.
-Stormrage-
09-04-2011, 18:55
Your going about this the wrong way. You have to get the pricing of units just right so that the spammage of elite units would make the player lose money for other parts of his army. The Stats should also be just right that even if he spammed elites he would have the Rock but, the other army might have the Paper and cut the elites to bits. Get what i mean.
The EDu should be rightly Statted and perfectly priced, If that happens then the smart player will know it is not in his faovr to spam just cavalry or just infantry for example, becuase he will then have only 1 of 3. While the army which is baalnced in other words has all 3 rock paper and scissory will beat his rock spam or scissors spam.
You can just ignore all my advice and continue doing whatever your doing ofcourse .
Vartan, when lances are "couched" at 30 charge distance, this distance is so close that it will lead to cav sometimes not couching in time, this is your problem. Just listen to strormage again like u did with the 60 man elites, and give cav 50 charge distance.
Why are you people so stubborn.
The Celtic Viking
09-04-2011, 19:41
Your going about this the wrong way. You have to get the pricing of units just right so that the spammage of elite units would make the player lose money for other parts of his army. The Stats should also be just right that even if he spammed elites he would have the Rock but, the other army might have the Paper and cut the elites to bits. Get what i mean.
Yes, you want to play rock, paper, scissors. We get it, but you won't. My advice to you is to get a friend: as long as neither of you is a thief, then you should already have all that you need, and you can stop buggering us about it.
Vartan, when lances are "couched" at 30 charge distance, this distance is so close that it will lead to cav sometimes not couching in time, this is your problem. Just listen to strormage again like u did with the 60 man elites, and give cav 50 charge distance.
It favors fast, light lancers too much. Heavy cavalry have it hard as is.
And I don't see why I can't bring 6 Grivpanvar if I want to in a tournament. It's my loss.
-Stormrage-
09-04-2011, 20:49
Why are you people so stubborn.
---
To be very clear charge distance effects when cav lower their lances, i am asking that instead of having cav lower lances at the last minute they should lower lances earlier.
Instead of 30 charge distance , we increase it to 40-50. (according to cav type).
i hope im being clear.
---
To be very clear charge distance effects when cav lower their lances, i am asking that instead of having cav lower lances at the last minute they should lower lances earlier.
Instead of 30 charge distance , we increase it to 40-50. (according to cav type).
i hope im being clear.
Don't you understand that it means I'm going to have to move my exhausted heavy cavalry even farther away from the enemy before I can charge properly again? Major ruin for the already difficult maneuvering with the heavy cavalry.
gamegeek2
09-05-2011, 01:06
This rule hurts the Arverni too much. The only advantage they have over Aedui is having a solid line composed of Arjos (which are phenomenal line troops) which cost 2000+. If we limit them to 4, that is not enough to compose a line of.
Chevroned Bataroas are excellent; 1800 for 100 11-attack long-swordsmen with a big shield, 21 defense, 13 morale. Also would you expect historical Arverni to compose their entire line of nobility? And do recall you have Neitos as well.
Frankly I see too many mailed troops in Celtic armies, with cheap Iaosatae making up for expensive infantry.
There is no "all three" stormrage. There are at least six different basic troop types in EB: Infantry Skirmishers, Missile Inf, Melee/Heavy Inf, Horse Archers, JavCav, and Lancers/Heavy Cav. Try playing rock-paper-scissors with that.
Hi guys. Many have asked why Bosphorans are the best archers. gamegeek2 is who I went to and this is the response he gave, which I believe perfectly answers the question:
Of course they cost more than cretans, they have better armor and better weapons, but equal bow skill (bosporans use lighter arrows though) and tier. They defeat all other archers easily.
EDIT: Storm check this out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rock-paper-scissors-lizard-Spock
Brave Brave Sir Robin
09-05-2011, 03:32
Chevroned Bataroas are excellent; 1800 for 100 11-attack long-swordsmen with a big shield, 21 defense, 13 morale. Also would you expect historical Arverni to compose their entire line of nobility? And do recall you have Neitos as well.
Frankly I see too many mailed troops in Celtic armies, with cheap Iaosatae making up for expensive infantry.
I'm not arguing for both Aedui and Arverni, I'm arguing solely for Arverni. The only difference between the two is Arjos/Carnutes with Carnutes obviously being the more useful unit. If we are limited in the use of Arjos, it makes little sense to pick them as the Aedui will simply be superior with the druidic chants.
gamegeek2
09-05-2011, 05:28
I'm not arguing for both Aedui and Arverni, I'm arguing solely for Arverni. The only difference between the two is Arjos/Carnutes with Carnutes obviously being the more useful unit. If we are limited in the use of Arjos, it makes little sense to pick them as the Aedui will simply be superior with the druidic chants.
I would counter with the following: As Arverni you get 4 more mailed line infantry. Carnutes are more expensive and less effective as general-purpose troopers, thus only one or two are usually brought. Thus out of their unique advantage, the Arverni received 4 troops, while the Aedui received one or two.
antisocialmunky
09-05-2011, 05:59
Well, pedites have no become just another generic AP infantry and now Hoplites are so ridiculous in charging, that it is hilarious.
Brave Brave Sir Robin
09-05-2011, 14:35
I would counter with the following: As Arverni you get 4 more mailed line infantry. Carnutes are more expensive and less effective as general-purpose troopers, thus only one or two are usually brought. Thus out of their unique advantage, the Arverni received 4 troops, while the Aedui received one or two.
Good point, I didn't think about the limit being applied to Neitos as well. Duh.
antisocialmunky
09-05-2011, 14:41
Camillian Triari are now officially the best unit Rome has.
Brave Brave Sir Robin
09-05-2011, 15:11
Yeah but I mentioned the good stamina for them and not Polybian Triarii and he said that was a mistake. He may have meant for the Polybians to have good stamina and not the Camillans who are more heavily armored.
gamegeek2
09-05-2011, 17:39
Yeah but I mentioned the good stamina for them and not Polybian Triarii and he said that was a mistake. He may have meant for the Polybians to have good stamina and not the Camillans who are more heavily armored.
Both should have good stamina. And those Camillan triarii need to have their cost reduction remove, fo sho, while the Polybians may well keep it.
Wait, they are ridiculous at charging? Hmm that giant, heavy shield they have might make some sense out of that, but please describe this "ridiculous charge" you speak of.
antisocialmunky
09-05-2011, 18:20
If you find a corner or an unguarded 'seam' between units, you can order your Hoplites to attack it and then it'll expand and wedge it open. If you stack hoplites on top of each other then they can basically punch a hole through a weakly guarded section of enemy line. You could always do that but since you made the pedites have a not stupid formation, the best unit to pull off the trick with are Massilians and camillian Triari... For Rome anyway.
gamegeek2
09-05-2011, 19:48
If you find a corner or an unguarded 'seam' between units, you can order your Hoplites to attack it and then it'll expand and wedge it open. If you stack hoplites on top of each other then they can basically punch a hole through a weakly guarded section of enemy line. You could always do that but since you made the pedites have a not stupid formation, the best unit to pull off the trick with are Massilians and camillian Triari... For Rome anyway.
How many times do I have to say this, the Massilians' stats aren't done yet!
Anyways it's about time someone put hoplites to good use. Then again, it's you ASM...what can I expect!
GG2/Vartan Please put the rules we are supposed to be using on the first post .
GG2/Vartan Please put the rules we are supposed to be using on the first post .
Just came back from exam. This is gg2's thread so he'll take care of that. I'll fix the site you can clearly tell what we're doing at the moment, where we're at with 3.0.
Just came back from exam. This is gg2's thread so he'll take care of that. I'll fix the site you can clearly tell what we're doing at the moment, where we're at with 3.0. hey vartan i could like that you guys keep old rules and only change to be 10 merc for marian era nad 10 for carthage, all other rules looks very balanced, also please if you fixing site update and factional list, just to make clear are capadocian cav heavy or light and are accensi and samitici milities for both polybian and camilian era maybe i missed somthing but well :) :book:
The site has been updated. Please read the news post on the homepage for more information.
hey vartan i could like that you guys keep old rules and only change to be 10 merc for marian era nad 10 for carthage, all other rules looks very balanced, also please if you fixing site update and factional list, just to make clear are capadocian cav heavy or light and are accensi and samitici milities for both polybian and camilian era maybe i missed somthing but well :) :book:
Check the new rules. Mercs are limited to 6. Marian onward get 8. Carthage down to 14 (this rule is a formality, Carthage is by definition merc-based, whether or not we call them factional units). Sauromatae get a hybrid (compromise) of 10 mercs, between the old SAC and CAC merc limits that were exclusive to the Sarmatians, while still maintaining their 4 Greek and 4 Germanic limits. How are Samnites even recruitable for Polybians? That's the wrong era. Bringing them would violate the rule: "SPQR (Rome) must pick one era from which to choose its factional units." Accensi are indeed Republican, so I presume they should be factional for Polybian. Someone correct me if this is a mistake. Cappadocians are non-heavy cavalry in our old system. Our new system does not differentiate between heavy and non-heavy cavalry as there are no rules yet that pertain to the "heaviness" of cavalry. If such a rule or rules arise, I will make sure to update the DHCS (Determining Heavy Cavalry Status) document in order to accommodate for that.
TheShakAttack
09-06-2011, 19:57
The site has been updated. Please read the news post on the homepage for more information.
Check the new rules. Mercs are limited to 6. Marian onward get 8. Carthage down to 14 (this rule is a formality, Carthage is by definition merc-based, whether or not we call them factional units). Sauromatae get a hybrid (compromise) of 10 mercs, between the old SAC and CAC merc limits that were exclusive to the Sarmatians, while still maintaining their 4 Greek and 4 Germanic limits. How are Samnites even recruitable for Polybians? That's the wrong era. Bringing them would violate the rule: "SPQR (Rome) must pick one era from which to choose its factional units." Accensi are indeed Republican, so I presume they should be factional for Polybian. Someone correct me if this is a mistake. Cappadocians are non-heavy cavalry in our old system. Our new system does not differentiate between heavy and non-heavy cavalry as there are no rules yet that pertain to the "heaviness" of cavalry. If such a rule or rules arise, I will make sure to update the DHCS (Determining Heavy Cavalry Status) document in order to accommodate for that.
Why shouldn't Polybian have access to Samnites?
Why shouldn't Polybian have access to Samnites?
Hmm. Not sure. I should ask a Romanist. EB has them placed in the Camillans. So I'm guessing Samnites actually show up in Polybians, but guess what: they're showing up as Principes, Hastati, and so on! Get it? This was after they were integrated hmm?
Brave Brave Sir Robin
09-06-2011, 20:38
Hmm. Not sure. I should ask a Romanist. EB has them placed in the Camillans. So I'm guessing Samnites actually show up in Polybians, but guess what: they're showing up as Principes, Hastati, and so on! Get it? This was after they were integrated hmm?
Samnites weren't integrated into Roman society all too well. Hence their role in the Social War 200 years into our timeframe.
In campaign at least, the Samnite heavy infantry are only recruitable during the Camillan era. However, the Samnite spearmen are considered allies(its in the unit name), like the Pedites and Equites Extraordinarii, and I consider them factional for both eras as they are recruitable in campaign as such. I use them in my Polybian armies so someone correct me if I am wrong.
TheShakAttack
09-06-2011, 20:47
Samnites weren't integrated into Roman society all too well. Hence their role in the Social War 200 years into our timeframe.
In campaign at least, the Samnite heavy infantry are only recruitable during the Camillan era. However, the Samnite spearmen are considered allies(its in the unit name), like the Pedites and Equites Extraordinarii, and I consider them factional for both eras as they are recruitable in campaign as such. I use them in my Polybian armies so someone correct me if I am wrong.
Yeah, exactly. It was AFTER last social war that they were given roman citizenship EDIT: (and therefore integrated into hastatii, principes etc).
If Samnite Spearmen appear, surely milites should as well. Having said that, their power was considerably eroded by the "Polybian" era, this may have been the reason why the EB team chose to implement in this manner, though the inconsistency is still troubling. Or it might just be an oversight on their part?
Yeah, exactly. It was AFTER last social war that they were given roman citizenship EDIT: (and therefore integrated into hastatii, principes etc).
If Samnite Spearmen appear, surely milites should as well. Having said that, their power was considerably eroded by the "Polybian" era, this may have been the reason why the EB team chose to implement in this manner, though the inconsistency is still troubling. Or it might just be an oversight on their part?
LOL not really. We would need to create a new unit representing the Polybian era Samnite soldier. But we can't if there's no unit space left. It's pragmatism, not inconsistency. In fact, there is no reasonable way of representing the waxing and waning of a unit's power throughout history. Stats remain constant unfortunately.
antisocialmunky
09-06-2011, 22:28
Model sharing issues would be annoying. You may be able to add milites to the Rome Roster if you wanted as a merc unit.
TheShakAttack
09-07-2011, 01:07
I meant the samnite's power eroded as a group, not as a unit/fighters. They still fought ferociously against the romans in the last social war (which was post marian). I dont think they should be made weaker as a unit if you were considering making them factional.
If pedites extraordinarii are the "best" of the allied infantry, it stands to reason that the "others" who didn't qualify for extraordinarii service still served in the legions, and presumably, a not insignificant chunk would be samnite.
I do however note that they could be added as a merc unit- though I am still not sure why they would need to be incorporated like this. BUT the point ASM made is a fair one. 8 merc limit is more than flexible enough to incorporate them should anyone want to (I will try to contact the EB team to ask why they did not include Samnites in Polybian).
antisocialmunky
09-07-2011, 01:49
Just edit the edu to give Romans the milites, take them both in a custom game and see if the game explodes.
Brave Brave Sir Robin
09-07-2011, 05:37
Why would it? Both are recruitable in campaign and I've used both in battle numerous times. Thats why the Samnite Heavies are mercs and are skinned as such. You can use the Samnite Allied spears and the mercenary equivalent in the same battle as well if you want to.
antisocialmunky
09-09-2011, 05:59
So I made better hoplites.
On the soldier line, change the last number to 10 (mass), then add ', .15' to the end of the line to override default collision box radius from .4
I tested against hastati and the hoplites pushed so hard that they ended up in the middle of the hastati unit surrounded by hastati.
PS. spear seems to make phalanx slightly more pushy.
PPS. phalanx mass would need to be adjusted to be something like 15 so hoplites can be poked away.
-Stormrage-
09-09-2011, 07:22
We got problems,
Replay 1 : 3 britons late champions , 4 casse champions , 3 ebherni armoured shock infantry , 1 chariot , 1 druid , 4 slingers
WTF. You can elite spam and still get 17 units. Replay (http://www.mediafire.com/?zxpswbgfv51o1ty)
Replay 2 : Settle for the above replay, I was going to give you a replay of Imperial archers shooting point blank range at gallic light cav , but i will look for it later.
GG you claim archers are fine, please come to hamachi so we can test stuff out.
I can tell u for a fact komatai toxatai vs gallic light cav results in 2 kills on first volley, 0 kills 2nd volley, 0 kills 3rd volley. POINT BLANK RANGE.
yah nothing wrong with archers.
-Stormrage-
09-09-2011, 07:27
PPS. phalanx mass would need to be adjusted to be something like 15 so hoplites can be poked away.
I agree phalanx mass needs to be high.
Secondly, do u realize that phalanxes dont have bonus vs cavalry.
I Charged my Grivpanvar straight into a phalanx once the phalanx lost 20 men i lost 2 or 3, i puled back charged again that phalanx was decimated, i cant remeber the guy i was playing with but i hope he remembers.
GG TEST YOUR **** OUT!
http://www.mediafire.com/?5i9tfan5ibat2l2
guys who have time watch this short replay, also try ti fix arhers again you gave sagitari more shield but who knows what you decrease... bcz thanvare parsig which are cheaper than my sagitary beat my archers without problems i dont know what another smart thing i can say, also i hate new rules i hate them very hard bcz they suck and they are not balanced and not historical.... crap in any case :D one funny thing i also one so funny thing i found equites romani cost same as daha uezdaetae (dahae noble cavarly) lol, still cant reconcile with fact that cohorts have less defensive skill than archers, just pathetic move to make cohorts weaker in guard mode, why then they cost more if they are weaker than last edu......xD
-Stormrage-
09-09-2011, 10:15
I think no one will deny, our Missile system sucks.
I can't complain thus far, Storm. :) By the way why 2 last repalys are from games against me. :D
The Celtic Viking
09-09-2011, 12:59
http://www.mediafire.com/?5i9tfan5ibat2l2
guys who have time watch this short replay, also try ti fix arhers again you gave sagitari more shield but who knows what you decrease... bcz thanvare parsig which are cheaper than my sagitary beat my archers without problems i dont know what another smart thing i can say, also i hate new rules i hate them very hard bcz they suck and they are not balanced and not historical.... crap in any case :D
Before I begin, I must make an appeal to you: please make an effort to use some basic grammar at least. You know, proper punctuations, spelling and paragraphs. I shouldn't have to send your messages through expert code cracking teams just to figure out what you're trying to say. :sweatdrop:
Now, I've watched that replay, and I don't know what to say other than... you're wrong. The Heavy Persians were not defeating the Sagitarri; on the contrary, the Sagitarii were defeating the Heavy Persians. Granted, it wasn't going fast, but you will see that soon after your opponent runs forward the rest of his foot archers, his Heavy Persians who started the 1-on-1 shootout are equal in numbers to the Sagitarius they fought against. As they start out with 8 guys more, this means they had lost 8 guys more than you had. When they were both out of ammo, the Heavy Persians numbered 32 and your Sagitarius 37. That's not Heavy Persians beating Sagitarius, much less "without problems", my friend.
As for the rest of your Sagitarii who fought the rest of his Heavy Persians, watch that replay again and you'll see that you allowed him to fire at your guys without firing back. Not until after you had lost 11 guys in one unit and 13 guys in the other did you start shooting back. (This was because yours were out of range (due to slight hill advantage - in EDU numbers they have the same range.) When you admitted defeat, the Persians were out of ammo and I assume yours were too (if not, that would only work against you). This advantage thus meant that they ended up with 59(PH) vs 40(SA) as well as 64(HP) vs 42 (SA).
Since the cost differential is only 53 mnai, I don't know what you're whining for.
one funny thing i also one so funny thing i found equites romani cost same as daha uezdaetae (dahae noble cavarly) lol
This is because Premarian Roman cav gets a +7.5% cav cost for historical reasons (except Italici who get only +5%, just like postmarian cav). You get -10% cost for postmarian infantry though.
still cant reconcile with fact that cohorts have less defensive skill than archers, just pathetic move to make cohorts weaker in guard mode, why then they cost more if they are weaker than last edu......xD
Cohorts are now more expensive because they had their artificial cost reduction lowered. They still cost 10% less than they would for any other faction.
I think no one will deny, our Missile system sucks.
Actually, I think that the new missile system is a good improvement over the last one.
Brave Brave Sir Robin
09-09-2011, 13:10
I'll agree with Storm on this one point. GG2, it is my opinion that the shield values need to be reduced back to v2.1 levels. The extra shield values on units like light cavalry make them incredibly resilient to missiles from the front and sides, while only susceptible from the back. Maybe infantry can keep the extra point where applicable (i.e. shieldwall units), but for cav, it would be difficult to move the shield around on horseback to protect against missiles. I fought that test battle with the Komatai Toxotai against Storm who was using the various Roman Auxilia cavalry, who in all fairness, are more of medium cavalry than lights because of the extra armor. However, in about 6 volleys from the side on the Gallic cavalry, I killed about 4-5. When I swung around the back, it was more about 2-3 per volley. The difference here would be the shield which I think is too drastic for a small cavalry shield which would be more useful in melee than against missiles imo.
Also, slingers are now far too cost effective against all but the heaviest archers. Unless you are taking Bosphorans or the Dacian Elites(which are both incredibly expensive), it makes almost no sense to take archers. You are better off taking a cheap slinger unit that may actually win against the archers while costing nearly half their price.
antisocialmunky
09-09-2011, 14:47
I agree phalanx mass needs to be high.
Secondly, do u realize that phalanxes dont have bonus vs cavalry.
I Charged my Grivpanvar straight into a phalanx once the phalanx lost 20 men i lost 2 or 3, i puled back charged again that phalanx was decimated, i cant remeber the guy i was playing with but i hope he remembers.
GG TEST YOUR **** OUT!
We need a new mass system as .1 differences in mass do nothing.
I think that the 2 problems with the current missile system are that (1) missiles do jack to heavy infantry who aren't moving (well except for barbs and phalanx) and (2) you can kill enemy missiles. Shield values should probably be reduced by 1.
gamegeek2
09-09-2011, 16:09
We need a new mass system as .1 differences in mass do nothing.
I think that the 2 problems with the current missile system are that (1) missiles do jack to heavy infantry who aren't moving (well except for barbs and phalanx) and (2) you can kill enemy missiles. Shield values should probably be reduced by 1.
Missiles aren't supposed to kill heavy infantry. There was a good reason that archers were not popular in the West, and weren't until the invention of the crossbow, which could effectively pierce armour (arrows won't pierce through chainmail and cause damage unless you get hit straight-on).
Slingers will have their attack reduced by 1.
Shields I am not sure about; I would have to lower javelin attack as well, which I am not in favor of doing, but if it's called for then sure.
TCV, I love your post. It points out exactly why I do not take Vega and Stormrage's complaints very seriously unless I actually see what they're going on about with my own eyes, in-game.
One thing you said is not correct, though:
You get -10% cost for postmarian infantry though.
Postmarian infantry have no cost reduction, and neither do the auxiliary cavalry (Hispanic, Germanic, Thracian, Gallic). Only Premarians receive an infantry discount, and I may remove the discount for Principes to encourage people to actually bring Hastati.
-Stormrage-
09-09-2011, 16:20
GG, i ran into a light cavalry unit in the roman roster do you know how much armour it had, it had 5 armour . then i look down a bit then i see the sheild value 5 SHEILD!!!
what have u been drinking ?
Here is my proposition.
anything light,
medium armour 5-7
high defense skill
low sheild, 1 or 2 maximum.
and for the archers,
Decrease all archer morale by 4.
What will happen? Light cavalry will be vulnerable to missile fire yet att the same time preform well in melee, due to defense skill.
The Decreased morale will lead to light cavalry routing archers and slingers.
gamegeek2
09-09-2011, 16:32
Maybe low morale will let bad archers rout if they lose too many men from missile fire? Problem is I think routing is difficult to pull off if you're not nearby the unit.
You can at least name the unit you're talking about. That one would be Equites Germanorum.
-Stormrage-
09-09-2011, 16:46
Let me give a scenario of the ideal battle system.
Note: the heavy cvaalry in this case are Cataphracts.
I attack my enemy our front line forces engage. I have heavy cavalry and light cavalry he has archers and slingers. If i bring in my heavy slow cavalry, they will get Devastated by slingers before i even touch his line. what to do ? My light cavalry are fast , i bring in 2 light cavalry and charge his archers and slingers, the archers only have time for 1 volley if he responded in time. my light cavalry quickly rout his archers/slingers making way for heavier and slower troops to flank ,in this case its heavy cavalry.
You see ? This is how a player should think. atleast the EDU should make players think like this.
Now lets see what would happen if someone was in the same situation but he is using the current EDU.
Same thing, infantry lines clash, i have light cavalry and heavy cavalry, my opponenet has slingers and archers. I bring up my light cavalry charge his archers my cavalry are now fighting half of that archer unit in melee the other half is firing arrows. light cavalry engaged and the archers are ignoring them firing arrows. im Serious ive tested all this out, they are shaken but thats it. His archers dont do much damage since i got 5 armour 5 sheild, or in some cases 8 armour 3 sheild. so niether unit is doing their job, i bring up my heavy cavalry his slingers take out 2 of my cav i continue. they are in position my heavy cvaalry charge at his infatnry, his slingers fire off another volley this time 3 die, his line breaks i win the day.
in the end Light cavalry didnt do their job , archers didnt do their job, and slingers didnt do their job.
One smart guy might argue that well if it takes 30 seconds to fire a volley and every volley gets 2 kills then in 5 minutes or whatever minutes u would have destroyed his whole unit, well this isnt Single player where the AI will leave his cavalry for u to shoot at for 5 minutes, in 10 seconds his cavalry would be mowing down your left flank.
-Stormrage-
09-09-2011, 16:51
Maybe low morale will let bad archers rout if they lose too many men from missile fire? Problem is I think routing is difficult to pull off if you're not nearby the unit.
You can at least name the unit you're talking about. That one would be Equites Germanorum.
im dont know all these fancy names.
and most people bring a general that will give archers +2 morale, plus some might give them a chevron, thats another +2 morale.
the morale thing needs to be sorted out as well. im talking all units, the general/fear morale effects need to be taken into the equation.
antisocialmunky
09-09-2011, 16:56
Missiles aren't supposed to kill heavy infantry. There was a good reason that archers were not popular in the West, and weren't until the invention of the crossbow, which could effectively pierce armour (arrows won't pierce through chainmail and cause damage unless you get hit straight-on).
Slingers will have their attack reduced by 1.
Shields I am not sure about; I would have to lower javelin attack as well, which I am not in favor of doing, but if it's called for then sure.
TCV, I love your post. It points out exactly why I do not take Vega and Stormrage's complaints very seriously unless I actually see what they're going on about with my own eyes, in-game.
One thing you said is not correct, though:
Postmarian infantry have no cost reduction, and neither do the auxiliary cavalry (Hispanic, Germanic, Thracian, Gallic). Only Premarians receive an infantry discount, and I may remove the discount for Principes to encourage people to actually bring Hastati.
I meant can't hit missiles. Actually it is somewhat accurate because no one could really figure out how exactly to deal with skirmishers. However, you should consider lowering morale for skirmishers. Right now they will actually hold against cavalry especially if you chevron them for an additional +2.
gg2 you need to reduce the shield value for cavalry, and I mean light/medium cavalry. Slingers aren't effective as deterrents for them right now. This is primarily due to the higher shield value of the light/medium cavalry. There are claims I see that slingers are too powerful. Reducing their attack might cancel out this lowering of the light/medium cavalry shield value. You will need to figure out how to make the slingers less powerful if these people are correct in what they say, but still make them stronger against light/medium cavalry. You might need to look at accuracy since lowering attack won't do anything but worsen the problem.
And Storm stop being a griefer. Phalangites aren't supposed to have bonus against cavalry because that bonus is not applied solely from the front and with the sarissa alone.
The Celtic Viking
09-09-2011, 17:44
Postmarian infantry have no cost reduction, and neither do the auxiliary cavalry (Hispanic, Germanic, Thracian, Gallic). Only Premarians receive an infantry discount, and I may remove the discount for Principes to encourage people to actually bring Hastati.
Oh, I see. I got that straight out of the 3.0 documentation though, so was that something you forgot to change in an update, or have you simply neglected it to focus on the actual EDU? I just want to know how up-to-date it is, so I can more accurately regulate my salt supply when reading it.
-Stormrage-
09-09-2011, 18:11
gg2 you need to reduce the shield value for cavalry, and I mean light/medium cavalry. Slingers aren't effective as deterrents for them right now. This is primarily due to the higher shield value of the light/medium cavalry. There are claims I see that slingers are too powerful.
These "claims" need to be supported by proof and tests, before we can even consider the situation. Its not enough that a person comes up and sais heavy infantry die too quickly, what is your defintion of die too quickly. maybe he thinks die too quickly is 1 kill every 10 minutes.
Now, people claim slingers are too powerful let see their facts, what is the slinger kill per volley? people are thinking 1 kill/volley is OP .
This claim is a bag of dung . Becuase...
1)Sheild Values have increased
2)Slinger accuracy has been significantly reduced, according to GG2.
Side note: Catas given +1 sheild, Imperial archers given +1 sheild.
So we see that slingers werent just nerfed they were nerfed 2 fold, lesser accuracy and high sheilds what more can u want , whats this rubbish about slingers still being too powerful.
And Storm stop being a griefer. Phalangites aren't supposed to have bonus against cavalry because that bonus is not applied solely from the front and with the sarissa alone.
well then u need more greifers to remind you of the basics of warfare.
Slingers are anti armour not anti light cavalry Mr.Vartan , killing light cav is the archers job.
P.S
Phalangites aren't supposed to have bonus against cavalry because that bonus is not applied solely from the front and with the sarissa alone.
:laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4: i would edit that if i were you :laugh4:
For the second part i give u this :
stat_pri -, -, no, 0, 0, melee, simple, piercing, spear, -, -
stat_pri_attr long_pike, spear, spear_bonus_8
stat_sec -, -, -, -, -, melee, blade, slashing, sword, -, -
stat_sec_attr no,
This will give bonus attack vs cav only for the sarissa.
Done worry Vartan, I know what im talking about. :grin3:
TCV dont worry about my english worry about what edu we gonna play next tourney, if you guys just ignore me dont know why i am even here i dont need to lose my nerves on this game, but ok gg2 will do it how he think it should be, just hope that rules will be changed at least :D Anyway robin your signature is awasome man! :DD
Brave Brave Sir Robin
09-09-2011, 19:35
Storm, I thank my lucky stars to know someone as gifted at unintentional comedy as you.
I think the slinger v archer problem may have something to do with the trajectories of the missiles? The slingers have more of an advantage because their missiles fly in a straighter line and therefore hit anything in the way. Archers put more arc on their shots and therefore not only have to worry about getting their x coordinates right, but also their y's if you get what I'm saying. I'm not sure how this relates to the accuracy values but it definitely needs some fiddling with.
And Vartan, personally I don't consider slingers too powerful against anything other than most archer units. I must ask however, what prompted this reboot of the missile system in the first place? Was there something terribly wrong with it in earlier versions? I'm just curious.
Anyway robin your signature is awasome man! :DD
Thank you Vega! I made it myself. If you'd like one for Rome I would be happy to make you one. Just pm me or ask me next time you see me on hamachi.
-Stormrage-
09-09-2011, 19:58
Archers need a accuracy boost. and not a .1 accuracy boost mr.gg . Big accuracy boost. So that they accualy kill what they are supposed to kill, and the things they arent supposed to kill wont get killed becuase they have armour. if u follow.
antisocialmunky
09-09-2011, 20:10
I dunno, hastati have more pilum and they function pretty well as of now. You should leave it alone.
Also, I found out that .2 radius makes Romans units stand shoulder to shoulder while attacking (more realistic). So I think we should make hoplites and shield wall infantry have .15 radius and most line infantry .2. It just looks much better and they function more realistically.
EDU: http://www.mediafire.com/?8o1ofhtfmkk9bk4
gamegeek2
09-09-2011, 20:11
gg2 you need to reduce the shield value for cavalry, and I mean light/medium cavalry. Slingers aren't effective as deterrents for them right now. This is primarily due to the higher shield value of the light/medium cavalry. There are claims I see that slingers are too powerful. Reducing their attack might cancel out this lowering of the light/medium cavalry shield value. You will need to figure out how to make the slingers less powerful if these people are correct in what they say, but still make them stronger against light/medium cavalry. You might need to look at accuracy since lowering attack won't do anything but worsen the problem.
And Storm stop being a griefer. Phalangites aren't supposed to have bonus against cavalry because that bonus is not applied solely from the front and with the sarissa alone.
Slingers aren't supposed to deter medium cavalry. Medium cavalry should run over slingers and then turn to do something else.
Lowering shield values would run counter to my entire objective of strengthening lighter infantry and cavalry, which has been very successful. How would you propose to balance the two? Reduce the shield boost for only heavier troops?
-Stormrage-
09-09-2011, 20:55
Slingers aren't supposed to deter medium cavalry. Medium cavalry should run over slingers and then turn to do something else.
Lowering shield values would run counter to my entire objective of strengthening lighter infantry and cavalry, which has been very successful. How would you propose to balance the two? Reduce the shield boost for only heavier troops?
Do you READ my posts?
Hold on a second, u just said u are strengthening light infantry and light cav, strengthening agaisnt what ? Archers ?
So your plan is to make the one thing archers are supposed to kill, invulnerable?
So i geuss the 5 sheild cav wasnt a mistake.
and the 0 kill per volley Komatai toxotai vs light cav, point blank range, 0 KILLS! that is your plan right ?
Thats cool.
I Vote we fire GG.
Brave Brave Sir Robin
09-09-2011, 21:22
I dunno, hastati have more pilum and they function pretty well as of now. You should leave it alone.
Also, I found out that .2 radius makes Romans units stand shoulder to shoulder while attacking (more realistic). So I think we should make hoplites and shield wall infantry have .15 radius and most line infantry .2. It just looks much better and they function more realistically.
Yeah hastati are fine as is imo. As ASM said, there are more of them to toss pila, but they also function well as flankers or flank guards because of their larger numbers when running into the nasty AP infantry that players often use to flank the main line.
I would say that light cavalry needs to be kept away from missiles in general. They weren't used pre 2.1 because their missile attacks sucked, not because they couldn't defend properly against missiles. Light cav are cheap glass cannons. A well positioned light cav can kill of an entire heavy infantry unit in about 15 seconds with 4-5 jav volleys to the back and then harrass enemy heavy cavalry if need be. Smart players would be wise to use up the majority of the enemy's arrows before bringing in lighter cavalry. The problem is more with the units like gallic light auxilia cav and median mediums, that is units with a decent amount of armor and shields. Slingers and archers wisely positioned behind the main line shouldn't be single handedly killing these units off, but should be causing enough casualties to at least make your opponent think twice about moving them into range which they currently do not. Of course, caught in the open, light and medium cavalry should be killing off the slingers and archers in turn, but I think low morale for missile units has that working quite fine atm.
antisocialmunky
09-09-2011, 21:28
It doesn't make sense that you need to spend 1800 more mnai to kill a slinger and how that unit will get shot apart if there are enough slingers. :p
I mean heavy cavalry costs more than heavy infantry but you can mass murder the heavy infantry for the fraction of the cost because they are re-useable. Cavalry just gets shredded against missiles. So it is kinda pointless right now to counter missile with cav because your cav will basically be out of the fight for the rest of the game.
I suppose you can make light infantry counter slingers or push them off the field but all that does is allow you to join lines faster and your missiles just do support fire for the rest of the battle to counter cav attacks.
And Vartan, personally I don't consider slingers too powerful against anything other than most archer units. I must ask however, what prompted this reboot of the missile system in the first place? Was there something terribly wrong with it in earlier versions? I'm just curious.
You should be asking the EDU editor. If I remember correctly (gg2 remind me if I'm forgetting), I had no hand in the decision to re-create the missile accuracy system.
Archers need a accuracy boost. and not a .1 accuracy boost mr.gg . Big accuracy boost. So that they accualy kill what they are supposed to kill, and the things they arent supposed to kill wont get killed becuase they have armour. if u follow.
Increasing accuracy does not make an archer kill "what it's supposed to kill", it makes the archer kill more and more, including both what it's supposed to kill (whatever this may mean) and what it isn't supposed to kill (see last parenthetical).
Slingers aren't supposed to deter medium cavalry. Medium cavalry should run over slingers and then turn to do something else.
Lowering shield values would run counter to my entire objective of strengthening lighter infantry and cavalry, which has been very successful. How would you propose to balance the two? Reduce the shield boost for only heavier troops?
How are you going to make slingers an effective deterrent to light cavalry then?
Do you READ my posts?
Only for comic relief.
I Vote we fire GG.
How do you fire someone who was never hired? :laugh4:
-Stormrage-
09-10-2011, 00:27
How do you fire someone who was never hired?
Easy,did i ever tell you about my cousin :laugh4:
antisocialmunky
09-11-2011, 05:05
Fix slinger spams
I think he fixed it by making Archers OP again :D
Decrease slinger numbers or increase thier cost thats the only solution, 5 numidians can match with 4 boshporans :D i dont like it ,4 boshporans cost 8000 mnai, 5 slingers(numidians for example 3000 mnai), :D tell me if im wrong..
Its extremely annoying. Thats the only problem I have. You are basically forced to do it or get all of your cavalry killed.
gamegeek2
09-11-2011, 16:36
Slingers will be max 80 once again and their spacing will decrease.
antisocialmunky
09-11-2011, 16:49
Pick one or the other but not both lol.
Who do you think you are? Blizzard fruit of the month WoW Arena balancer?
-Stormrage-
09-11-2011, 16:55
Decrease slinger numbers or increase thier cost thats the only solution, 5 numidians can match with 4 boshporans :D i dont like it ,4 boshporans cost 8000 mnai, 5 slingers(numidians for example 3000 mnai), :D tell me if im wrong..
HOW THE **** do u get a 10 armour 3 sheild archer to lose against a 1 armour 1 sheild slinger.
Are you really that bad ?
If your serious then you should provide your evidence ,your proof. Show us a replay we could use some lols. :D
Slingers will be max 80 once again and their spacing will decrease.
haha this is priceless, gg beleived you. :laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:
I think your smarter then that.
Whats pissing me off is when someone sais something as illogical as what vega said u listen to him and do what he sais.
but when i provide replays, Reasoning,Stat comparison, and everything no one does anything.
when vega sais ":D tell me if im wrong.." u do what he sais without question.
gamegeek2
09-11-2011, 17:05
Pick one or the other but not both lol.
Who do you think you are? Blizzard fruit of the month WoW Arena balancer?
Well, just the spacing then. Seriously, I'm trying to listen to you guys as much as I can on this issue!
-Stormrage-
09-11-2011, 17:17
did you know if u charge your griv directly into the front of a phalanx only 2 will die. did u know that ?
becuase phalanx doesnt have bonus vs cavalry, charge your catas into a phalanx u will laugh i swear.
I dont knoow why im telling you again, becuase it seems you dont listen.
you can put these attributes in the EDU to get realistic phalanxes which actually kill cavalry.
long_pike, spear, spear_bonus_8
this will give bonus only for the sarissa.
this will take us half a step further to getting a real EDU.
Im glad some of you have finally realized archers/slingers are worthless and your not bringing them anymore. Welcome on board your finally awake.
-Stormrage-
09-11-2011, 17:19
Seriously, I'm trying to listen to you guys as much as I can on this issue!
Listen to the right people.
and how come u gave cataphracts a sheild value ?
when i asked you to take away the armour value from nakeds u told me ...
Wait, stat them as if they didn't have something that they did have, and the game shows they have?
how come you are now statting cataphracts with something they dont have and is not represented in the game .
im curious how on how this statting system works. nakeds should have no armour more then cataphracts should have a sheild, from the historical and sense perspective.
GG2 how will spacing solve the problem of them being ridiculously OP now that limits have been removed and we can spam them as much as we want and the rest of the army can be ultra elites?
Brave Brave Sir Robin
09-11-2011, 18:03
Well closer spacing means that more arrows will likely find their targets. After all, slingers in default formation are basically equivalent to archers in loose formation. This still doesn't really address the problem adequately though. Archers cost too much compared to similarly armed slingers. Do Numidian archers cost more than their slinger brethren for that stylish hat? I know its a good look, but still.
gamegeek2
09-11-2011, 18:18
Well closer spacing means that more arrows will likely find their targets. After all, slingers in default formation are basically equivalent to archers in loose formation. This still doesn't really address the problem adequately though. Archers cost too much compared to similarly armed slingers. Do Numidian archers cost more than their slinger brethren for that stylish hat? I know its a good look, but still.
The Numidian archers are better trained, better accuracy.
gamegeek2
09-11-2011, 18:19
GG2 how will spacing solve the problem of them being ridiculously OP now that limits have been removed and we can spam them as much as we want and the rest of the army can be ultra elites?
Your rules that restrict 2500+ units? To 2 of the same unit?
I think you forget most factions have a range of elites to choose from.
antisocialmunky
09-11-2011, 19:00
I can bring 2 spartans and 2 of the gold shield hoplites:D
did you know if u charge your griv directly into the front of a phalanx only 2 will die. did u know that ?
becuase phalanx doesnt have bonus vs cavalry, charge your catas into a phalanx u will laugh i swear.
Did you know you can actually add addendums to your posts by pressing the EDIT button without having to do double posts?
What "tone" are you talking about?
Some of the comments are getting a bit too personal.
Erm, so? We are not insulting or anything. We have hamachi for that :D-
Some of the comments are getting a bit too personal.
Could you please explain because this time you have me confused. When you point out things such as in this as well as your previous post, I find a problem. That problem is the following: Is Ludens' remark directed toward the post(er) immediately preceding his remark, or is it directed toward some other post(er)? I'd certainly hope for the former since that's the clearer of the two. Now in this case, if it's the latter, it would be hard to gauge one's own comments as I wouldn't know, as a user, if I was the one who needed to mind his or her tone. Also in this case, if it is the former, then I am yet confused as to where your remark came from and why. The tone in my post was, if there was a list to choose from, informative or perhaps serious (I like the former). It was not sarcastic or demeaning or any of the other ones from this hypothetical list that would be a "red flag", so to speak, for moderators to watch out for. I hope you understand because I really didn't see that coming... (As a short addendum, I wouldn't have told my fellow user Stormrage about the possibility of editing instead of double-posting if this was the only case of his I had noticed, but since it wasn't, I decided it wouldn't hurt to just point it out...)
That problem is the following: Is Ludens' remark directed toward the post(er) immediately preceding his remark, or is it directed toward some other post(er)?
Actually, my post wasn't directed at a specific person. It was intended as a general reminder that comments like "You're smarter than that" and "Who do you think you are?" aren't helpful. Neither of them is a direct insult, but because I saw several in a row, I assumed the tone was turning hostile. What happens on Hamachi is your own business, but please keep it polite on the .Org forums.
My apologies if I wasn't clear.
-Stormrage-
09-13-2011, 13:50
Even i got it from the first time, he was talking about me. I am very Honored.
Brave Brave Sir Robin
09-14-2011, 17:30
Ok, so this doesn't belong in 3.0 errors but....
Legionary cohorts have been nerfed too much. ASM and Lazy were testing today and confirmed what I've believed since 3.0 has been released. The defense skill on the cohorts is too low. Take this example. Accensi have a 6 defense skill, Legions a 7, Sagitarii Auxilia an 8. What number seems out of place? Polybian Principes are also a 7. Recommendation would be to raise cohorts defense skill by 2 to 9, the same as Thorakitai which seems reasonable. Raise Polybian Principe skill to 8. Right now, Roman heavy infantry is inferior to that of other factions which seems somewhat silly as this should be their strong point.
-Stormrage-
09-14-2011, 18:22
adding 1 or 2 defense skill wont make a difference. so this infantry is 7 defense and that is 8, so what 1 defense skill wont do much.
antisocialmunky
09-14-2011, 19:21
Do the spacing change first and test.
gamegeek2
09-14-2011, 19:38
Ok, so this doesn't belong in 3.0 errors but....
Legionary cohorts have been nerfed too much. ASM and Lazy were testing today and confirmed what I've believed since 3.0 has been released. The defense skill on the cohorts is too low. Take this example. Accensi have a 6 defense skill, Legions a 7, Sagitarii Auxilia an 8. What number seems out of place? Polybian Principes are also a 7. Recommendation would be to raise cohorts defense skill by 2 to 9, the same as Thorakitai which seems reasonable. Raise Polybian Principe skill to 8. Right now, Roman heavy infantry is inferior to that of other factions which seems somewhat silly as this should be their strong point.
You really think Thorakitai and Legionaries need a 21% increase in defensive effectiveness? I'd like to see some evidence forst-hand. I could lower shield to 4 and bump defense to 8 if you wish, that way they might die a bit more to missiles (21% more from the front).
+1 defense ~ +10% increase in defense effectivenses in melee. Or, to put in in different terms, if otherwise identical individual troops (same (attack, animation, armor, and shield) faced off in frontal melee, but one had 8 defense skill and the other had 7, the unit with 8 defense skill would win approximately 52.5% of the time (off the top of my head).
Ok, so this doesn't belong in 3.0 errors but....
Legionary cohorts have been nerfed too much. ASM and Lazy were testing today and confirmed what I've believed since 3.0 has been released. The defense skill on the cohorts is too low. Take this example. Accensi have a 6 defense skill, Legions a 7, Sagitarii Auxilia an 8. What number seems out of place? Polybian Principes are also a 7. Recommendation would be to raise cohorts defense skill by 2 to 9, the same as Thorakitai which seems reasonable. Raise Polybian Principe skill to 8. Right now, Roman heavy infantry is inferior to that of other factions which seems somewhat silly as this should be their strong point. Finnaly someone who understand me :D
gamegeek2
09-14-2011, 20:02
Now I have recently introduced a new weapon type in the documentation: "Long Short Sword", which however does bear an additional cost compared to the regular short sword but has .01 additional lethality. What I would propose is to treat all Gladii Hispanienses as "Long Short Swords" without any cost increases. This would apply to Romans, the Dunaminaca, and the Elite African infantry, which probably all deserve boosts anyways.
Brave Brave Sir Robin
09-15-2011, 04:08
Thorakitai don't need any boost, I was comparing legionaries to them. Thorakitai currently have a 9 defense skill while the legions have a 7. Right now people use legions in guard mode more than they did previously because they are not that great outside of it. I fought a battle against Shak where he placed probably 6 or 7 legions in guard and only used the others as flankers around my phalanx line.
By the way, phalangites are absolutely useless against heavy infantry in guard mode. This is a serious issue for phalanx factions as you can't simply avoid units with phalangites. Does anyone have any ideas on how this may be addressed?
antisocialmunky
09-15-2011, 04:28
I have made a script that automatically adjusts unit spacing so they don't spread out any more outside of guard mode.
Here is the edu it generated: http://www.mediafire.com/?hwza386356od4w7
gamegeek2
09-15-2011, 04:46
By the way, phalangites are absolutely useless against heavy infantry in guard mode. This is a serious issue for phalanx factions as you can't simply avoid units with phalangites. Does anyone have any ideas on how this may be addressed?
Yeah, even 0.3 lethality does not solve this problem. The thing I can think of is changing phalanxes to spear in primary attributes, which will actually decrease killing power but increase pushing power, if I understand correctly. Either that or we can restore their old mass which was very unrealistic in melee situations with the sword, and which may not do too much to increase push power (but I'm not sure about that either :/).
Brave Brave Sir Robin
09-15-2011, 05:38
Idk, but phalanx could use some serious tinkering with. Me and munkey just had a test battle with various phalangite types against legions who were both in and out of guard mode. Levy phalanx killed about 2-4 legionaries a minute when the Romans used guard mode. :/ Granted they are levies but the pez only did moderately better. Its hard to justify spending 1900 mnai on a unit that is so easily nullified.
antisocialmunky
09-15-2011, 14:23
You can get better results if you micro them to walk forward and then stop.
-Stormrage-
09-15-2011, 14:31
You can get better results if you micro them to walk forward and then stop.
Or we can fix them, just a suggestion.
antisocialmunky
09-15-2011, 18:51
While we are on the subject, are there any ways to bust through guard mode anymore short of getting something that costs 50% more of the guard mode unit?
Somehow it seemed much less of an issue in 2.0.
Edit: I tested high infantry charge values, and if you have really high values around 40-60, you can cause enough initial casualties ( about 5-10) to break through guard mode units. You probably would need it slightly lower through or its not worth defending. Maybe only make it so you have to do 2-3 charges to inflict enough casualties.
Edit 2: Mid 20's seem to be around the amount needed to damage hoplites (without AP of course)
Let's send a petition to CA asking for a patch that improves game mechanics for the phalanx-mode units.
antisocialmunky
09-15-2011, 20:56
is it possible to mod phalanx attack speed. If you made it so units could actually get into the pikes a little bit (make it so that better phalanxes make it harder to get into the pikes), then it would fix the problems of the phalanx unable to kill anything and the currently pointlessness of attacking a phalanx. I realize that they are supposed to be hard to kill from the front but currently there is no way to disorganize phalanxes or anything in this game. So instead, make them less invulnerable so people will be willing to invest in attacking them.
antisocialmunky
09-15-2011, 22:17
I fail to see how phalanx attack is weak against guard mode when you can do the walk forward/backspace to force your phalanx to engage aggressively...
http://www.mediafire.com/?dt7q5jmcczwxbhk
I fail to see how phalanx attack is weak against guard mode when you can do the walk forward/backspace to force your phalanx to engage aggressively...
http://www.mediafire.com/?dt7q5jmcczwxbhk
The majority of players I've seen don't do this because either it hasn't been suggested to them or they haven't seen it, or something similar, I'm betting.
Brave Brave Sir Robin
09-16-2011, 05:09
The majority of players I've seen don't do this because either it hasn't been suggested to them or they haven't seen it, or something similar, I'm betting.
I know this exists but how are you supposed to do this when there is a critical cavalry battle being waged on the flanks?
gamegeek2
09-16-2011, 05:13
I know this exists but how are you supposed to do this when there is a critical cavalry battle being waged on the flanks?
Practice your micro. All I can say.
I know this exists but how are you supposed to do this when there is a critical cavalry battle being waged on the flanks?
Just be a boss like the elites among us!
Practice your micro. All I can say.
Basically. I'll look into possible custom scenarios which players can use to practice their micro, although it's going to be hard against AI. Still better off practicing micro against real folk.
Brave Brave Sir Robin
09-16-2011, 05:58
Or, just don't pick phalanxes and not have to worry about microing them to death. I mean really, do any of you feel capable of microing a line of 6-7 phalangites against a capable opponent? Maybe if I don't take any cavalry I can, but Hellenistic factions sort of need their cavalry.
antisocialmunky
09-16-2011, 14:38
Or don't engage your cavalry until you've engaged the infantry.
You do not have the choice most of the time. If you dont move your cavalry and keep microing the infantry, expect lances up your backsides.
antisocialmunky
09-16-2011, 17:56
if you can't micro 2 places at once :|
Brave Brave Sir Robin
09-16-2011, 19:49
if you can't micro 2 places at once :|
...you suck at Starcraft?
I do, thank you very much :)
antisocialmunky
09-16-2011, 23:25
...you suck at Starcraft?
I do, thank you very much :)
Lazy O does apparently since he can't multitask apparently :p
antisocialmunky
09-17-2011, 00:47
So after playing with Cretans. Is it possible to reduce archer attack to 4.5 ish instead of 6? Roughly a reduction of 25%? 1/2 my shield cav were dead because the cretans could just shoot into the cavalry in melee. :\ It runs counter to your reasoning that arrows couldn't do that much damage back then.
I'd also like to propose differentiating military archers and skirmisher archers/irregulars. One of them should have more ammo and lower accuracy (area of effect fire) with no skirmish while the 2nd category should have lower ammo and higher accuracy and skirmish (skirmishers). This would of course apply more towards the cretan, bosphoran, syrian, persian archer, heavy archer, and the archer/spear units.
Basically not all archers are meant to fire from big giant squares.
-Stormrage-
09-17-2011, 02:09
ASM, archers have suffered lower accuracy and cav have recieved higher sheild values, The archers arent OP maybe you just need to learn how to use cavalry.
Thank you for that well reasoned and supported aurgument "oh my cav died too fast can you nerf archers for me , yah thanks."
The Average sheild cav has 7-8 armour and 3 sheild. It more likely tha cav died of old age rather then archers.
gamegeek2
09-17-2011, 03:56
ASM, archers have suffered lower accuracy and cav have recieved higher sheild values, The archers arent OP maybe you just need to learn how to use cavalry.
Thank you for that well reasoned and supported aurgument "oh my cav died too fast can you nerf archers for me , yah thanks."
The Average sheild cav has 7-8 armour and 3 sheild. It more likely tha cav died of old age rather then archers.
I agree. Even in the ancient world, it would be more likely to die of old age than die to an arrow.
Personally I think melee-shooting or throwing should be a fairplay infraction. It's hard to prevent, but some other things can be as well, such as accidentally cavcharging through your own men. The ETW engine does a great job of this (almost too good of a job), the RTW engine doesn't.
Should the "skirmisher" units be small in general, and the military archers be the big ones? This seems to be the original goal of EB, but without an accuracy limiter they couldn't have archers be too big without overpowering them. Could you propose some hard numbers?
Personally I think melee-shooting or throwing should be a fairplay infraction. It's hard to prevent, but some other things can be as well, such as accidentally cavcharging through your own men. The ETW engine does a great job of this (almost too good of a job), the RTW engine doesn't.
I can't believe I didn't put that in the fair play rules list. We've been basically using this unwritten rule since I can remember my first multiplayer battle.
EDIT: How would you phrase this fair play rule gg2, or anyone else?
Cute Wolf
09-18-2011, 12:16
Let's send a petition to CA asking for a patch that improves game mechanics for the phalanx-mode units.
I don't wish to point out, but it's obvious:
USE ALEX :2thumbsup:
The Celtic Viking
09-18-2011, 14:30
I suspect not everyone has alex either anyway.
-Stormrage-
09-18-2011, 14:58
Personally I think melee-shooting or throwing should be a fairplay infraction. It's hard to prevent, but some other things can be as well, such as accidentally cavcharging through your own men. The ETW engine does a great job of this (almost too good of a job), the RTW engine doesn't.
I have mentioned this before, I told you about my experience where i had cav fighting a portion of the archer unit andd the rest is shooting like nothing happened, and they're just shaken. This is whats pissing me off, these basic warfare laws that are being broken , I charge light cavalry on completely undefended alone group of archers what happens ? they get shaken . Cavalry riding down archers the archers are shaken . I just want to let you know, because when you ask me Storm why do you hate EB. This is why archers stall cavalry, Very realistic. The Most Basic laws of warfare are upside down here, Ahmed-"but wait he might get cavalry, maybe i should get spearmen ? ", Ali-"oh no man get some archers " , Ahmed-"WHAT!", Ali-" oh yes this EB man, in EB archers fight like infantry, Its the most historical mod out there. "
How to Fix:
I say again, Decrease Archer morale. Decrease Archer morale. Decrease Archer morale.
Now i know gg did take my advice and he did give archers a decrease, thats why they became shaken when i charged them with cav, If they had the old morale they would still be eager. But it wasnt enough, You need to decrease archer morale even more, finish the job you started you got them to shaken get them to rout.
It shouldnt take a cataphract charge to rout archers.
The problems i complain about, are not taken seriously until the problem happens to you then you say hey thats a problem.
EDIT: How would you phrase this fair play rule gg2, or anyone else?
We wouldnt need rules if the archers were just stated correctly. Why make a rule on it when you can stop it from happenning.
Get the Pricing right Get the Budget Balanced, so people cant elite spam and still get a balanced army. Did you know, in this EDU i can get 4 grivs , 5 Pantadapoi (hellenic Phalanx) , 4 persian Archers, 5 Babylonian heavy infantry.
Thats 4 Best cataphracts + 5 phalanx + 5 heavy infantry +4 archers. The problem with the budget is you adjust it to make the players get all 20 units. It was 35000 but it was increased to 36000 , why? so we can get the one extra unit. Thats wrong way to think about it, it should be if you want 20 units then cancel those 8 semi elites or those 6 cataphracts, not "no problem we will raise budget so you can get 8 semi elites and still have money for all 20 units. " It should be "if i want 2 elites i must sacrafice my archer quality, ill get levy archers so i have money for elites.
Right now its a given you have enough money for elites and best archers and good 4 cavalry no problem.
Ill tell you something. You cannot have 100% history alongside with 100% balance. If you aim for 100% historical accuracy it will come at the cost of balance some units wont be balanced .
Historical accuracy and balance conflict with each other, and if you have 50% history and 50% balance then you get a crappy game becuase it only half done , only hald balanced half historical. it as they say sitting on 2 chairs. He who sits on 2 chairs gets his bum sore.
I say get EB as historical as possible . If you want to play Insanely Historical battles then launch EB, IF you want Gameplay balance then launch RSII.
Dont ruin EB by making it balanced leave it do what it does best, History lessons.
Brave Brave Sir Robin
09-18-2011, 19:58
He who sits on 2 chairs gets his bum sore.
A regular Confucius you are, Stormrage.
I don't wish to point out, but it's obvious:
USE ALEX :2thumbsup:
The following is even more obvious: You can't use something you don't own/have. Have a good day. :2thumbsup:
Why have Numidian cavalry been nerfed for apparently no reason?
Why has cavalry penalty for archers been decreased?
Ethiopan Cav secondary attack got a nerf. No price decrease. Why? Same for the Saba Cavalry?
African Elite Infantry GLADIUS was decreased to 0.13 lethality WHY?!?! Are they not shit enough for you?
Many longsword cavalry got secondary attack decrease, they are already crap compared to ap secondary. Why?
Persian Archers got 200 denarii Increase....No stat changes... Whats the problem?
5 less men for Germanic Cavalry yet no price change.
Pheraspidai got a significant nerf. Still cost 2.8k.
Iberian Cavalry falcata is .11 lethality. I MEAN WTF?!?!
Why do so many sword troops got lethality decreased?
Next time save me the trouble of comparing everything, Make a damn list.
-Stormrage-
09-19-2011, 15:29
Im going to try a different aproach. Logical thinking, replays, Stats. Reasoning , it doesnt work i tried all of it.
I dont have a problem when someone doesnt take my suggestions, or doesnt implement my suggestions. i have no rproblem with that aslong as he gives me a reason to explain why i am wrong.
I get annoyed why i write an essay explaining my point, providing a replay, stat comparison, and logical thinking. then someone tells me "ok ok i saw you wrote alot so here is what ill do. ill give them +1 defense skill , will that shut you up ? "
and without any reason why my suggestion wont happen, nothing at all. He just gives me a sort of bribe or like when you give a baby a lolipop to get him to stop crying.
Thats why i get annoyed or "pissed off" as some say.
so please im not a baby you dont have to give me a lolipop to make me shut up, just give me a logical reason for why this or that is not happening. and just so you know "it isnt OP" is not a logical reason. especially when i give evidence in my talk about how this thing IS OP, then you reply simply "it isnt OP" like your words are enough to out weigh my whole essay.
Why have Numidian cavalry been nerfed for apparently no reason?
Why has cavalry penalty for archers been decreased?
Ethiopan Cav secondary attack got a nerf. No price decrease. Why? Same for the Saba Cavalry?
African Elite Infantry GLADIUS was decreased to 0.13 lethality WHY?!?! Are they not shit enough for you?
Many longsword cavalry got secondary attack decrease, they are already crap compared to ap secondary. Why?
Persian Archers got 200 denarii Increase....No stat changes... Whats the problem?
5 less men for Germanic Cavalry yet no price change.
Pheraspidai got a significant nerf. Still cost 2.8k.
Iberian Cavalry falcata is .11 lethality. I MEAN WTF?!?!
Why do so many sword troops got lethality decreased?
Next time save me the trouble of comparing everything, Make a damn list.
i think i will copy lazyo he has a good method. i will make my aurgument by putting "why?" at the end. i wont waste my time giving you proof or logic ill just complain .
Archers got accuracy decrease, cavalry got shield increase why ?
Persian heavy archers are lighter then imperial archers but cost the same why ? maybe typo.
some cavalry got 5 sheild, why ? i didnt know roman cohorts rode horses.
saba general 2619 why ? mounted generals are at 1500. Maybe cuz theyre arab their generals are ten times the generals of any other faction :2thumbsup:
triballi infantry cost 1805, why ? , Triballi infantry must be cheaper or like cohorts.
thessalians why only good stamina ? typo ?
iberian assualt and samnites only 2300/2000 . really ? i can get 15 of those.
im noticing some of these elites are around 2000 minai. How come orca still 2700 ? orca arent that much better then iberian assualt infantry, infact iberians are better they got AP.
romph's still dont have AP, whats up man ?
all units are losing AP, is vega paying you on the side or something ?
cohort price decrease, Ap disappearing.
Indian longbows lost AP , Why ? if you say they are OP i will laugh and get their armour stats, so you laugh with me. 3 armour is OP now ?
im done for now.
EDIT:Romphs 11 attack not AP. No javelin, 25 armour price 2500, Iberian assualts 10 attack AP sword, Ap Javelin, 28 armour price 2300. ???
Lazyo too ? if thats the system around here then who do i talk to make saba stronger ? or should i just give the money to you ? :smile:
The Celtic Viking
09-19-2011, 17:09
I think you forgot to lower the cost of the Golberi Curoas. They were nerfed the same way as the Bataroas, but unlike the latter still cost 1503 mnai.
Brave Brave Sir Robin
09-19-2011, 17:22
African Elite Infantry needs some sort of boost. They are hardly elites as of the moment and barely suitable as line infantry for their cost.
romph's still dont have AP, whats up man ?
all units are losing AP, is vega paying you on the side or something ?
cohort price decrease, Ap disappearing. Storm i wil accept it like a joke, well to join this company, i want to say that im not please with new imperials, they are even worse than last imperials, im using polybians to save spqr honour :D lol
gamegeek2
09-19-2011, 18:44
I'll respond to all of this when I get home, but from what I see there are several plain untruths right in front of me.
How precisely are the Imperials worse? However I do intend to give their javelins a slight range and accuracy boost. Imperials now are a more elite but smaller version of Marians.
I think I may have intentionally made the mercenary version of the Bataroas cost more, to make it more expensive to bring more of these troops.
But here's a few gems:
im noticing some of these elites are around 2000 minai. How come orca still 2700 ? orca arent that much better then iberian assualt infantry, infact iberians are better they got AP.
Orcas have been described as perhaps the best line-holding elite in the new EDU. They may warrant a nerf fo' crying out loud.
Persian heavy archers are lighter then imperial archers but cost the same why ? maybe typo.
How about that they have 90 men as opposed to 80?
saba general 2619 why ? mounted generals are at 1500. Maybe cuz theyre arab their generals are ten times the generals of any other faction
Because they have 80 men while the mounted generals have 20 men?
all units are losing AP, is vega paying you on the side or something ?
Which units besides some of the two-handers exactly?
iberian assualt and samnites only 2300/2000 . really ? i can get 15 of those.
The current official EBO rules say you can't take more than 4 of either.
Archers got accuracy decrease, cavalry got shield increase why ?
Because slingers archers rendered most light horsemen worthless previously. Sadly, they often still do, but they impose a greater cost on your army to bring generally (at least the former, slingers on the other hand...)
some cavalry got 5 sheild, why ? i didnt know roman cohorts rode horses.
Same shield, same value. The cavalry are easier to hit with the missiles, so they might as well get the same shield value as the infantry. At least, that's how I see it.
For LazyO's point, I may have accidentaly decreased longsword attack instead of increasing it for cav, which is what I intended to do. And I belive I fixed all the 0.11 lethality falcatae. If the Elite African infantry still have 0.13 lethality, my bad; I'll do something about them.
But this:
Pheraspidai got a significant nerf. Still cost 2.8k.
How, precisely, does having the highest javelin accuracy level in this EDU possible, 5 javelins, 63.3 range, and 8 javelin attack, as well as very good stamina + 14 atk/27 defense, count as being nerfed from their previously-unplayable state?
I do think 0.16 lethality is warranted for them, though.
Idc about what storm says. What ive said is results of the awesome "compare" feature Notepad++ has
------------------------
Antesigani lost a javelin, no price change.
antisocialmunky
09-19-2011, 19:47
Eastern Axes are way to strong against things like legions.
gamegeek2
09-19-2011, 20:40
Antesigani lost a javelin, no price change.
I can only really say that this is simply not true. Have a look at the current EDU version:
;240
type roman infantry marian antesignani
dictionary roman_infantry_marian_antesignani ; Antesignani
category infantry
class light
voice_type General_1
soldier roman_infantry_antesignani, 40, 0, 1.1
officer ebofficer_roman_centurion
attributes sea_faring, hide_improved_forest, can_sap, very_hardy
formation 1.2, 1.4, 2, 2.4, 4, square
stat_health 1, 1
stat_pri 8, 4, javelin_uh, 51.8, 4, thrown, simple, piercing, spear, 10 ,1
stat_pri_attr prec, thrown
stat_sec 17, 4, no, 0, 0, melee, simple, piercing, spear, 0 ,0.15
stat_sec_attr light_spear
stat_pri_armour 12, 10, 4, metal
stat_sec_armour 0, 0, flesh
stat_heat 3
stat_ground 0, 0, 0, -2
stat_mental 16, disciplined, trained
stat_charge_dist 30
stat_fire_delay 0
stat_food 60, 300
stat_cost 1, 2551, 790, 50, 70, 2551
ownership seleucid, slave
Let's try another one:
Many longsword cavalry got secondary attack decrease, they are already crap compared to ap secondary. Why?
Current secondary stats of several longsword-armed cavalry units.
Aithiopikoi Hippeis (Tier 2) - stat_sec 12, 15, no, 0, 0, melee, blade, slashing, sword, 0 ,0.225
Brihentin (Tier 3) - stat_sec 13, 24, no, 0, 0, melee, blade, slashing, sword, 0 ,0.225
Remi Mairepos (Tier 4) -stat_sec 15, 24, no, 0, 0, melee, blade, slashing, sword, 0 ,0.225
Compare with units equipped with the falcata, a weapon that gets no change when mounted other than the standard +2 attack bonus for cavalry.
Cantabrae Eponereidam (Tier 2) - stat_sec 11, 15, no, 0, 0, melee, simple, slashing, sword, 0 ,0.14
Iberi Curisi (Tier 3) - stat_sec 12, 15, no, 0, 0, melee, simple, slashing, sword, 0 ,0.14
Ambakaro Epones (Tier 4) - stat_sec 14, 24, no, 0, 0, melee, simple, slashing, sword, 0 ,0.14
Before the recent updates, the longsword and the falcata were identical except the falcata was 0.14 lethality and AP, and cheaper, while the longsword was 0.225 lethality, non-AP. Now the longsword receives a +1 bonus when used by cavalry.
Incidentally this also proves you wrong about this:
Iberian Cavalry falcata is .11 lethality. I MEAN WTF?!?!
And what's that I heard about elite africans?
African Elite Infantry GLADIUS was decreased to 0.13 lethality WHY?!?! Are they not shit enough for you?
How about you swear about this?
type carthaginian infantry dorkim afrikanim aloophim
dictionary carthaginian_infantry_dorkim_afrikanim_aloophim ; Dorkim Aloopim
category infantry
class heavy
voice_type General_1
soldier carthaginian_infantry_elite_african_infantry_dunaminaca, 40, 0, 1.2
officer ebofficer_lusitanian_carthaginian_officer
attributes sea_faring, hide_improved_forest, can_sap, hardy
formation 1, 2, 2, 3, 4, square
stat_health 1, 1
stat_pri 6, 16, pilum, 36.8, 3, thrown, siege, piercing, spear, 15 ,1
stat_pri_attr prec, thrown, ap
stat_sec 13, 16, no, 0, 0, melee, simple, slashing, sword, 0 ,0.16
stat_sec_attr no
stat_pri_armour 12, 9, 2, metal
stat_sec_armour 0, 0, flesh
stat_heat 4
stat_ground 0, 0, -2, -2
stat_mental 15, disciplined, highly_trained
stat_charge_dist 30
stat_fire_delay 0
stat_food 60, 300
stat_cost 1, 2042, 511, 90, 130, 2042
ownership egypt
That said about the elite africans, they should have 5 shield and not 2. My mistake on that. I'll upload that fix right away.
Brave Brave Sir Robin
09-19-2011, 20:40
Eastern Axes are way to strong against things like legions.
:dizzy2::dizzy2::dizzy2::dizzy2:
Umm, these units were previously absolutely useless. Isn't the point of light AP units with high defense skill to be useful against some of the more heavily armored non-elites? Because they are useless still against just about anything else, especially if it has one or more longer range javs.
gamegeek2
09-19-2011, 20:44
[H]ere's the link to the EDU with the fixes to the Elite African Infantry. (It is also on the OP) http://www.mediafire.com/?vopwwjpedixcovz
Eastern Axes are way to strong against things like legions.
I don't see this complaint about Western European barbarians, but when it comes to Eastern "barbarians" like hillmen, oh no they can't be allowed to do well. Those Eastern axemen are every bit as fierce and "barbaric" and have a much of a warrior culture as the western european barbarians, and this persisted well into the Sassanid era and beyond with the Deylamites.
antisocialmunky
09-19-2011, 22:47
The reason I raise it as an issue is that if you take mass axemen, better archers, scary, better cavalry then Rome just isn't going to win.
gamegeek2
09-19-2011, 23:14
And fit that into one army? Hmm. Plus I don't think such generalizations are accurate or appropriate at describing how battles play out in EBO.
antisocialmunky
09-19-2011, 23:22
The thing is, you can. We had this issue with the 1.0 edu and marian/imperial. While it is actually much better, the 3.0 revision returns things than that 2.0 addressed.
I mean, post-Marian Rome is much better than 1.0 where it died to anyone with cavalry but it still has issues vs AP.
I mean, I can draw a roman army of the same size with +1 chevron eastern axes + levy phalanx. I can use the money I save (as 1.3/1.5 K units average less than 1.65k per unit) to afford better missiles and cavalry so I can just massacre your cavalry. Then you army gets killed by cavalry in the back super fast due to nakeds.
antisocialmunky
09-20-2011, 00:02
I'd also like to report that armor upgrades are acting funny. It costs 400 mnai to upgrade a hoplite by +1 armor and less than 100 mnai for my Thorakitai...
Someone mentioned to me that they are allowed now but like I said, it seems to be acting funny.
:dizzy2::dizzy2::dizzy2::dizzy2:
Umm, these units were previously absolutely useless. Isn't the point of light AP units with high defense skill to be useful against some of the more heavily armored non-elites? Because they are useless still against just about anything else, especially if it has one or more longer range javs.Robin its not about that axemen its about cohorts, hoplites can easy deal with that axemen, this is sad Rip spqr 20 semptember :((
Robin its not about that axemen its about cohorts, hoplites can easy deal with that axemen, this is sad Rip spqr 20 semptember :((
How? Swordsmen deal with infantry better than spearmen. Hoplites are spearmen, and Roman cohorts are swordsmen. Therefore, Roman cohorts deal with axemen better than hoplites.
How many times do you update the damn thing? My statements were based on the EDU you linked to us on hamachi. When I compared that one with the ones you posted yesterday, there were only a few changes. -_-
-Stormrage-
09-20-2011, 13:24
Eastern Axes are way to strong against things like legions.
He just doesnt want his legions to get beat up to badly.
:dizzy2::dizzy2::dizzy2::dizzy2:
Umm, these units were previously absolutely useless. Isn't the point of light AP units with high defense skill to be useful against some of the more heavily armored non-elites? Because they are useless still against just about anything else, especially if it has one or more longer range javs.
You have to notice that this is ASM who is complaining about this, He is a Dedicated Roman player Ofcourse he doesnt want AP units to kill Legions he's Roman.
He isnt arguing about a balance issue, he is fighting for his faction. Please tell me im wrong.
If this was from a non roman it would have more weight.
Brave Brave Sir Robin
09-20-2011, 13:34
He just doesnt want his legions to get beat up to badly.
You have to notice that this is ASM who is complaining about this, He is a Dedicated Roman player Ofcourse he doesnt want AP units to kill Legions he's Roman.
He isnt arguing about a balance issue, he is fighting for his faction. Please tell me im wrong.
If this was from a non roman it would have more weight.
Storm, ASM plays KH almost all the time. As per your request, you are wrong.:clown:
TheShakAttack
09-20-2011, 13:46
How many times do you update the damn thing? My statements were based on the EDU you linked to us on hamachi. When I compared that one with the ones you posted yesterday, there were only a few changes. -_-
Haha, that's hardly GG2's fault is it? As a beta, it is supposed to be updated regularly, and given GG2 is doing this in his spare time, its bound to be sporadic and piecemeal.
I think the thing you did was very useful (comparing changes and discussing them). You should keep on doing it. Maybe in the future, it'd be helpful for all of us if you indicated which two EDUs you were comparing?
antisocialmunky
09-20-2011, 14:54
Guys, guys guys, mind the tone.
Seriously though.
Hoplites die just as badly as legions, a little worse in fact as the axemen definitively win rather than a weird draw slightly in favor of the legion. Not sure where you are getting your statistics from.
So suppose I take 15, 1500 units against Rome and save 250 per unit which ends up being about 2750 mnai. I can spend this towards better missiles (bosphorans) and cavalry so I can beat the Roman cavalry. I just don't think its really playable as Imperial Rome. Though to be fair, the Romans had a crappy time conquering the Pontik and Armenian areas.
However, Peltastai pretty much SPANK every single eastern axeman. I think its more of an issue of Roman legions still not having enough support since KH can deal with AP BS by killing it with javelins (and fire) but Rome can't really afford good support troops as they lack the 'excellent morale' requirement to not break from scary without a chevron.
I'm thinking you need to give them mercenary versions of pretty much all the mercenary light infantry from Western Europe to the Levant. Ironically this includes eastern axes...
TheShakAttack
09-20-2011, 16:02
Guys, guys guys, mind the tone.
Seriously though.
Hoplites die just as badly as legions, a little worse in fact as the axemen definitively win rather than a weird draw slightly in favor of the legion. Not sure where you are getting your statistics from.
So suppose I take 15, 1500 units against Rome and save 250 per unit which ends up being about 2750 mnai. I can spend this towards better missiles (bosphorans) and cavalry so I can beat the Roman cavalry. I just don't think its really playable as Imperial Rome. Though to be fair, the Romans had a crappy time conquering the Pontik and Armenian areas.
However, Peltastai pretty much SPANK every single eastern axeman. I think its more of an issue of Roman legions still not having enough support since KH can deal with AP BS by killing it with javelins (and fire) but Rome can't really afford good support troops as they lack the 'excellent morale' requirement to not break from scary without a chevron.
I'm thinking you need to give them mercenary versions of pretty much all the mercenary light infantry from Western Europe to the Levant. Ironically this includes eastern axes...
Correct, axemen are incredibly easily countered. Not just peltastai, but with any kind of missile unit (apart from slingers). There was a game yday where 2 units of axemen were whittled down significantly by a horse archer unit for a pretty large distance (which is surprising since their accuracy is so crap). You don't even really need peltastai. A unit of lowly archers, or akontistai (with a few good throws) can reduce their numbers significantly.
I agree with you about Imperial support troops. The 3 non cav supports are pretty high quality but also high cost troops. The mercs (who are acting as "auxilia" ) tend to be either high quality/cost or low quality/cost. There aren't as many "medium-ish" quality units iirc.
Problem is I have absolutely no way of knowing when the EDU is updated. From what gg2 is saying, it appears he updated it some 3-4 times in 1.5 days....... How would I know that im comparing the wrong stuff?
@ASM; Yup, I also petition for them to recieve Alans, Cataphracts, and a special unit wearing Lorica Segmentata that shoots lasers.
Correct, axemen are incredibly easily countered. Not just peltastai, but with any kind of missile unit (apart from slingers). There was a game yday where 2 units of axemen were whittled down significantly by a horse archer unit for a pretty large distance (which is surprising since their accuracy is so crap). You don't even really need peltastai. A unit of lowly archers, or akontistai (with a few good throws) can reduce their numbers significantly.
I agree with you about Imperial support troops. The 3 non cav supports are pretty high quality but also high cost troops. The mercs (who are acting as "auxilia" ) tend to be either high quality/cost or low quality/cost. There aren't as many "medium-ish" quality units iirc.
This is very good gameplay wise because it reminds me of other factions' key units that play important roles and must be used wisely as well as eyed carefully by your enemy lest he wish to lose. What comes to mind immediately is the falxmen, which would be the Getai counterpart...
But they suck as anything besides cavalry support :D
The Celtic Viking
09-20-2011, 17:51
Problem is I have absolutely no way of knowing when the EDU is updated. From what gg2 is saying, it appears he updated it some 3-4 times in 1.5 days....... How would I know that im comparing the wrong stuff?
Yes, I agree with this. A new post saying "new version, see OP" or something like that would help.
@ASM; Yup, I also petition for them to recieve Alans, Cataphracts, and a special unit wearing Lorica Segmentata that shoots lasers.
While we're at it we should do similar things to the other weaker factions as well, shouldn't we?
antisocialmunky
09-20-2011, 18:42
Yes, I agree with this. A new post saying "new version, see OP" or something like that would help.
While we're at it we should do similar things to the other weaker factions as well, shouldn't we?
It would be nice to bump with update EDU rather than only edit OP.
Well I petitioned to get the whole Roman unit roster added to Saba.
It seems like I can't keep up fast enough with gg2. You'll see installer for 3.0 b0919 on site pretty soon...
gamegeek2
09-20-2011, 19:44
Rome can't really afford good support troops as they lack the 'excellent morale' requirement to not break from scary without a chevron.
13 morale = 'excellent morale' and they have 'disciplined' as well.
I think I made an error with the merc Peltastai that I ought to fix.
Also I will include a post with each update. But do note that the OP also contains a date + time of the latest update.
antisocialmunky
09-20-2011, 19:54
14 is the threshold for 'will not mass rout with scaries' and 12 is pretty good because you can stick 1 chevron on it but it is a little more touch and go. Merc Thracians on the KH roster are still missing their skeleton.
Also ban armor upgrades until you fix upgrade costs.
gamegeek2
09-20-2011, 22:41
14 is the threshold for 'will not mass rout with scaries' and 12 is pretty good because you can stick 1 chevron on it but it is a little more touch and go. Merc Thracians on the KH roster are still missing their skeleton.
Also ban armor upgrades until you fix upgrade costs.
Right, OK. And yeah no armor upgrades for now.
Right, OK. And yeah no armor upgrades for now.
Updated site to reflect this.
-Stormrage-
09-21-2011, 13:23
How come chevrons so expensive, Consider lowering chevron cost.
Brave Brave Sir Robin
09-21-2011, 13:48
That's impossible Storm. It's a percentage of the overall cost.
-Stormrage-
09-21-2011, 13:50
maybe lower the percentage? i dont think it cant be done
maybe lower the percentage? i dont think it cant be done
Actually I wish it could. I also wish morale-manipulating effects such as fear could be altered as well, scaled up or down. But RTW wasn't made in such an open fashion... =/
What happened to eb online network, when i want to join it, i first must to send request for membership ?! WTF! am i banned lol
I have the same problem. You are not banned tho. You just have to wait till admin accepts your request, it seems.
It's working now it seems.
gamegeek2
09-26-2011, 07:05
I have updated the OP with the Ptolemaic, Baktrian, and Seleukid units. I'm sorry I didn't finish the Saka, but it's 2AM here in the USA and I want to get this thing out so that our European players can have a crack at it before I get home later today.
I didn't check it thoroughly because it's so late, and (as always) if you find problems, please inform me as soon as possible. Thanks!
gamegeek2
09-26-2011, 20:13
Just updated with a few quick corrections to the Taxilan Agema, Peltastai Indohellenikoi, and AS/Ptolly bodyguards.
Just updated with a few quick corrections to the Taxilan Agema, Peltastai Indohellenikoi, and AS/Ptolly bodyguards.
._. for the first time we have build 0926 and then build 0926a...CORRECTED! hah...when do we expect Saka?
gamegeek2
09-27-2011, 00:29
Apparently I didn't upload the right EDU file last time...whoops! It's now up front.
There has been recently some concern over the fact that the Reidonez (Germanic Light Cavalry), according to their current cost, can only be fielded up to a max of 2 due to duplication limits. We will not be reducing their unit size or restatting them. Instead they are an exception to the duplication limit. If you visit the site now at the Rules page you will notice that 4 of them are allowed instead of 2, so they act as if they were within the 2-2.5k cost range.
Brave Brave Sir Robin
09-28-2011, 04:32
What is the concern with Reidonez? That the Sweboz would be too cavalry light?
gamegeek2
09-28-2011, 04:34
What is the concern with Reidonez? That the Sweboz would be too cavalry light?
All other factions have a light cavalry they could bring 4 of. Germanic light cavalry was of good quality and was an important asset to any Germanic army, but with a limit of 2 units of it this is not able to be represented in game. Now it is.
The Celtic Viking
09-28-2011, 14:03
Should Illyrian levies really cost as much as Germanic ones (well, very slightly more to be more precise) when they're in equal numbers but of clearly inferior skill? (2 less attack, 3 less defence, 3 less morale and less stamina.)
Brave Brave Sir Robin
09-28-2011, 17:28
Should Illyrian levies really cost as much as Germanic ones (well, very slightly more to be more precise) when they're in equal numbers but of clearly inferior skill? (2 less attack, 3 less defence, 3 less morale and less stamina.)
I think one of the advantages (there are not many) for the Sweboz is that you can bring levies to the battle for next to nothing and expect them to actually hold for some time.
gamegeek2
09-28-2011, 17:54
The problem with Sweboz is that they have many cheap troops but few expensive ones to fill out the roster...
-Stormrage-
09-28-2011, 18:14
The problem with Sweboz is that they have many cheap troops but few expensive ones to fill out the roster...
in that case, saba have many light troops but few armoured troops to fill the roster...
gamegeek2
09-28-2011, 18:24
That's true, also.
Saba armored troops are really nothing more than glorified javelin fodder.
-Stormrage-
09-28-2011, 19:13
they dont have armoured troops.
...so does anyone know why lower-stat Illyrians cost more than higher-stat Germans?
EDIT: Some people have been wondering what happens when, say, a 2000-2500 cost unit is given experience and goes into the >2500 cost range. Does this mean I may only bring 2 instead of 4 of this unit now? No. I have added the necessary line in the Rules (http://www.ebonline.tk/rules/) page on EBO website.
The Celtic Viking
09-28-2011, 21:53
Thanks for asking the question again for me, Vartan (and for answering the one about chevrons before I even got around to ask it :p).
While we're at it, I can also give a reminder that I have two questions in the other "errors in 3.0" thread awaiting answers. And here's another one: is it intentional that KH doesn't have access to regular toxotai? Neither I nor Kival could find them on the roster when we played as the KH earlier today.
Thanks for asking the question again for me, Vartan (and for answering the one about chevrons before I even got around to ask it :p).
While we're at it, I can also give a reminder that I have two questions in the other "errors in 3.0" thread awaiting answers. And here's another one: is it intentional that KH doesn't have access to regular toxotai? Neither I nor Kival could find them on the roster when we played as the KH earlier today.
When I commissioned gg2 to begin work on 3.0, I was firm in insisting that he use "vanilla" EB 1.2 MP EDU as a base. In other words, to start "from scratch." If you know your EB Online history well enough, you'll remember that our very first patch (I believe EBO MP EDU 1.1) was to add toxotai and various other Greek units that were oddly enough missing from the KH multiplayer roster. So to put it simply, this is a remnant from EB 1.2's MP EDU which contains this subtle lack of units on KH roster. I'll try to resurrect the short documentation for EBO MP EDU 1.1 and post it here so that gg2 and others may see the mistake. If the error is not what I've just describe, I'm truly sorry.
EDIT: Here it is. Please visit for more info:
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=explorer&chrome=true&srcid=0B8pgdrJqBnJBYTJjMGIzNWEtZmM3YS00MmNiLTlkYzQtMTUyYzgzMjUzZmEw&hl=en
antisocialmunky
09-29-2011, 02:16
You don't realize how overpowered you've made the KH.
Brave Brave Sir Robin
09-29-2011, 04:44
You don't realize how overpowered you've made the KH.
What is the basis of this statement? You are making a broad generalization without actually presenting us with any information to support claims.
antisocialmunky
09-29-2011, 05:02
Have you fought Toxotai? They can kill literally 1/2 a unit of slingers each if they are shooting point blank!
gamegeek2
09-29-2011, 06:22
Have you fought Toxotai? They can kill literally 1/2 a unit of slingers each if they are shooting point blank!
Key words highlighted.
What is the basis of this statement? You are making a broad generalization without actually presenting us with any information to support claims.
He's just playing you guys on the tip of his finger. Friggin' ASM. So what's up people? Where are the latest tidbits of feedback, thoughts? any major problems? minor stuff? Maybe we need more time to tell. Keep it up. :happy2: Sorry I'm not around as often as I'd like to be. :sad:
We need to have a look at the changed charge-values for infantry. I've not found anything about it in the documentation and cannot recognize any system. Some units stayed the same while others got 32 charge value. I understand most changes where they have been done but I don't understand why other units have not been changed and I don't understand the differences (Gemanic naked dudes got 32 while gasatae got only 20 charge). Perhaps gamegeek can give us any hint how he determined the charge values.
gamegeek2
09-29-2011, 13:37
I didn't use any systematic formulae; I probably should come up with one. I mainly determined them in a manner I figured was balanced for given factions.
antisocialmunky
09-29-2011, 15:11
Remove the radius values, they don't do anything and screw up my auto radius script.
I didn't use any systematic formulae; I probably should come up with one. I mainly determined them in a manner I figured was balanced for given factions.
2570
Make a system! Now!
2571
Can you please listen to waht asm has to say on thsoe radius things???
antisocialmunky
09-29-2011, 17:43
.02 radius difference does not do anything.
We can monkey with it after Saka is done but in the mean time, take off the radius values.
gamegeek2
09-29-2011, 19:02
I'll get to all your issues, I promise. But don't expect me to be some sort of work-monkey - I'm back in full school mode, and have college applications to boot. Since there's no set deadline for the EDU to be ready by, don't count on things being done by any specific time.
What's the problem with the radius? Is it anyhow gamebreaking? If not there is no need to pressure gamegeek.
@gamegeek
I just wanted to note/ask about the charge values. There is no need to rush.
antisocialmunky
09-29-2011, 20:14
It just makes units not expand when fighting starts so they stay in the same formation as when they are guardmoded. It increases kill rates so you would probably do a kill rate reduction of .05 - .1 or so to compensate.
The Celtic Viking
09-30-2011, 11:56
Since none of my questions have yet to get an answer (except for the Toxotai one - thanks, Vartan), I have a new question: why is that? Why am I being ignored?
Since none of my questions have yet to get an answer (except for the Toxotai one - thanks, Vartan), I have a new question: why is that? Why am I being ignored?
Propably it's becaue you wrote them in the other thread no one is reading anymore. So let me quote them here:
Was removing the Ordmalica intentional, and if so, why was it done?
Edit: also, Gaelaiche cost exactly the same as Gaeroas but have less charge and a shorter jav range (as well as a slightly lower mass), with everything else being the same.
The Celtic Viking
09-30-2011, 12:27
No, it's not just there, but I've said in this thread that there are questions there I've asked that haven't been answered. Why would people just ignore the thread when there's a new post there anyway?
Then we have this question asked in this thread as well:
Should Illyrian levies really cost as much as Germanic ones (well, very slightly more to be more precise) when they're in equal numbers but of clearly inferior skill? (2 less attack, 3 less defence, 3 less morale and less stamina.)
Lastly, I asked some weeks ago if the documentation was updated with the new 3.0 versions (in this thread, if it matters), which was ignored as well. I'm just guessing it's not. :shrug:
Don't feel ignored, I'm sure it's not intentional.
Very nice, but can I know why I have not been able to see you online on hamachi lately Kival and TCV? Anything for your defence?
PS awesome screenshot TCV!
-Stormrage-
09-30-2011, 13:09
Can Horse archers get lower morale, their only job is to shoot arrows not become stalling units. light skirmishers archers and slingers as well. We dont want to see any of these used as stalling units or cav charge distrupters.
Give them Poor morale.
The Celtic Viking
09-30-2011, 13:27
Very nice, but can I know why I have not been able to see you online on hamachi lately Kival and TCV? Anything for your defence?
For my defence I have been on Hamachi every day for the last I-don't-actually-know-how-many days, and Kival has been there as well. Maybe time zones? I don't know how much I will be on in the future, though; my hamachi is really screwing up now. Yesterday I had a red dot and a warning message for ASM, even though he and everyone else were green to me. Ugh.
PS awesome screenshot TCV!
Thank you, though I'm only responsible for half of it (the Celtic charge). ~;) The other side is Arthur, King of the Britons' picture, and MaxMazi's the one who cooked 'em both together. I got it because I was a joint winner of the August screenshot competition.
Brave Brave Sir Robin
09-30-2011, 14:21
For my defence I have been on Hamachi every day for the last I-don't-actually-know-how-many days, and Kival has been there as well. Maybe time zones? I don't know how much I will be on in the future, though; my hamachi is really screwing up now. Yesterday I had a red dot and a warning message for ASM, even though he and everyone else were green to me. Ugh.
Hopefully you can work that Hamachi issue out soon TCV. Its always good to see you around, especially if a battle or two gets played. You always seem to have my number. As far as the Germanic units, I believe they may receive some sort of discount for their infantry units. They are all rather cheap. And Illyrian units have all always been rather crappy for the price.
Galaiche/Gaeroas I have no idea. Same with Ordmalica.
I gave your questions a shot, but I think its GG2 who may be best suited to answer. Did you try sending him a PM? He always responds to mine within 24 hrs.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.