View Full Version : Suggestions for online gun costs
Before this beta patch goes final, can we get some opinions on how much guns should cost in the online game so that they do not dominate the gameplay?
I'm offline at the moment, but I have made some subjective comparisons in custom battle of musk vs SA in STW v1.12 and WE/MI v1.01. A number of experienced players are saying that guns are more effective in WE/MI than they were in STW. My own observations in custom battle seem to support this. At max range, H2 musk in 3 ranks and in fine weather typically kill 3 to 4 SA/volley. In STW this, the rate seems to be typically 2 to 3 SA/volley. You have the volleys that kill none or one intespersed in both game. In addition, if you move in a little closer than max range, you can easily get 5 or more kills/volley in WE/MI. At that rate the target unit will get decimated very quickly, and, at the new STW morale level, it won't stick around for long. My results, while preliminary, indicate that the accuracy of the musk has been increased. The range seems to be the same as in STW.
CA/DT did tinker with the parameters of YS, SA and ND which were existing units. They may have done the same with musk and arqs. They have made cost adjustments in the beta patch to rebalance the online game. I think this is the only thing we can expect right now.
Arqs have 20% lower range than musk, and lower accuracy IIRC. They should cost less than musk, but, if guns are dominating the online game, we should ask for an increase in the cost of musk and arqs.
I would initially suggest 500 koku for musk and 300 koku for arqs. It could be tested online by mentally keeping track of the cost. I may be back online within a week, but others could test this, and report their results. If guns are unbalanced and we don't make some suggestion to CA/DT before the patch goes final, we will have missed an opportunity to improve the online game in an important way. If guns are dominating the online gameplay, then we will all be forced to use them all the time.
MizuYuuki ~~~
Clan Takiyama ~~~
400 to 500 koku would seem about right for musks imo...it might stop the amount of long gun duels and make archers more attractive.
RageFury
10-06-2001, 05:43
Yup i agree...the large kills adds to realism imo..
But they r way too cheap
500 koku sounds about right http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif
Might stop this 10 guns or 8 gun duals that r broing people to death
400 and 475 koku.
More roundup and keep ratio the same.
Tera
------------------
Honour to Clan Torîi Aku.
Visit my resource centre here! (http://terazawa.totalwar.org)
Evil is within us... http://terazawa.totalwar.org/emo.gif
Well, there may be a different solution rather than tinkering with the cost..
I am forced here to give a sneak preview of my special project I have been working on, to address through modding most of the realism and game balance issues in STW/WE/MI.
Obviously I have no way of altering unit costs, but what I have done so far is this-- I have made archers better in melee, so that they might triumph over YS if they can work some small advantage.. and I may also increase their range by, say, 20%, mebbe just 10%..
As for musketeers, I have reduced their ammo from 40 to 20, and am mulling several possibilities to reduce their previously off-the-wall capability for collateral damage.
Anyway, any feedback on that you guys have is welcome, though it may be hard cuz I'm only giving a very limited picture of the overall changes I'm working on, which are necessary perspective for a full analysis. At any rate, I really think you guys are going to like this mod I'm working on, it should address most/all of the issues people have been raising, and it is at this point looking pretty damn good.. and would at least be a good starting point..
Matt
Anyway, I hardly make use of even 20% of the musk ammo.. you get what I mean. SA is very balanced now w.r.t other unit types vs cost. So no reason to change it.. making it any stronger may lead to another type of SA dual. . although they do not demoralise like those musk. Making we can adopt what has been suggested for MHC, which is to lower the size of units by, say, 25%.. i.e. 60 --> 45..
My five cents.
------------------
tootee the toothless warrior (aka goldfish shimazu)
------------------
Given the unchanged stats,
I would suggest 375 for guns, 400 for naginata. http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/biggrin.gif hey, 25 koku makes a difference, lol. :P:P:P
Swoosh So
10-06-2001, 13:49
Id say fix the stats not the koku or we will be tinkering with koku forever............
I'm with you Matrix2 we gotta remember to get those Nags involved in MP also! An awesome unit that has been in the dark far too long; Nags at 375 sez I.
I also vote Arq at 200 and Muskets at 300.
My vote: musket 425 koku, arqu 275 koku.
Reason: Musket should be priced between NoDachi and monk. If guns are too expensive, it will make monk rush unbeatable again. when you have arround 300 koku, you can either add a H1 gun to your shooting army or a H2 ND to your h2h army. H2 gun at 425 close to a calvary, and H3 at 588 close to a monk. The player can make a choice depend on his/her tactic. We are not making guns over priced so that its no longer a viable unit. http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif
With similar reasons, I suggest argu at 275 koku, so H1 arqu is close to a H2 YS.
[This message has been edited by Polar (edited 10-06-2001).]
Konnichiwa Swoosh san,
Very wise words.
------------------
Ja mata
Toda MizuTosaInu
Daimyo Takiyama Shi
http://www.takiyama.cjb.net
yes please fix the stats. Shooting in a little rain is ok (maybe reduced rate of fire?)but my God something is different about these guns. Sitting through the never ending gunfights is tedious. Not a whole lot in the way of strategy if the person with the most guns wins.
Well, certainly shortening the gunfights might work? Would a reduction of ammo from 40 to 20 be enough? Perhaps as low as 15?
Also, it would seem as if giving the *Samurai* Archers a tad bit more power in melee would make them a more desirable unit. And perhaps add some range..
Also work on the collateral-damage capability of the guns.. like lower power or something (people who are familiar with Projectiles.txt will know what I'm talking about).
Archers already of course have a bit of an edge in that they can fire up and down hills and into the woods..
Anyway, going the way of stats modification would undeniably be a surer way to ameliorate the problem, as currently there is no public capability to modify cost, and CA is very unlikely to do anything along these lines. But the stats we can take care of ourselves.
Matt
P.S.: Also do note that, yes, guns now *can* fire in the rain, but not really. In my experience they are pretty pathetic in this situation, and you're probably better off just using them as melee troops.
Polar,
Musk/Arq at 424/275 sounds interesting for the reasons you stated, but even 300/200 would be a move in the right direction. I don't want to price them so high that they are not a viable unit to use. In that vein, reducing naginata to 400 would be a move in the right direction for that unit also. I agree that adjusting the stats would be preferable to cost adjustment, but I don't think we will see that in v1.01.
MizuYuuki ~~~
Clan Takiyama ~~~
In reality, the party with most guns usually win. Think about the demise of Takeda Shingen.
That's right guns really had a great impact to samurai culture and warfare. But historically, are they really expensive???
kagemushashingen
10-10-2001, 10:52
Let's have a realism check. I understand that musketeers are getting a wee bit powerful on the battlefield (especially when it doesnt rain and if they are perched on the hills), but shouldn't that be the case?
Sensei Il naomasa may correct me..
But the invincible takeda shingen was killed by a stray bullet. And hence kagemusha = shadow warrior, in which the clan had to put a dummy lookalike to win the army over and to keep fighting. Naturally they lost and the takeda clan continue to disintegrate in strength.
When Takeda Katsuyori took over the helm, he continued to use cavalry as what he thought to be the most effective tools of war. Yet in his final battle (with ODA?) he got decimated simply because the musketeers decimated his horde of horses. He commmitted seppuku after that
The bottom line is this. First there were samurais, with emphasis on skill and honour. It was man to man combat, it was not about numbers.
Then came the Ashigarus. Honour was still talked about. But when a couple of honourable samurais face a horde of uncouth villagers wearing straw hats and sticks, THEY RUN.
Then came the cavalry. And that's why Takeda Shingen was so effective in the begining. A samurai on a mounted horse can outmaneuver, outrun a samurai anytime, anywhere (except in the woods). and then came....the muskets.
Let's face it. Muskets changed the face of warfare, not just in Japan but also in medieval europe. Bullets don't speak honour. And it's cheap to employ. Which warlord is gonna spend 2 years training a bunch of samurais when one can buy guns (GUNS ARE CHEAP), train a farmer to reload, aim and fire all within 2 weeks?
Let's keep realism within oru sights when we talk about rebalancing the costs of musketeers versus others. I think the current game format is fair, measured on what I know historically to be true.
Good post kagemusha-san. Think you read my mind.
Kagemushashingen's post is historically relevant, however, as far as the Multiplayer game is concerned is not so relevant.
Ultimately for MP to work for any game it has to be well balanced and above all really good fun...
If imbalances exist as in the case of some of the units in STW then not only does this chase potential players away for the online game, it also reduces the replayability and fun factor http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif
So, while i am in agreement that guns altered the face of Japanese warfare...we do not want this to hamper our online gaming experience in such a way as to create imbalances. The idea for online play was that each unit would have its own advantages and disadvantages and hence balanced armies lead by a good player would win the day. At present we have some players using armies that consist of maybe only 2 or 3 unit types and pulling off easy victories.
This is neither realistic nor skilfull but just people using current imbalances in some of the units to maximum effect. For example muskets and mOnks.
Regards,
DocJ
------------------
Online name: DrJambo Ouchi
[This message has been edited by DoCToR (edited 10-10-2001).]
Erado San
10-10-2001, 16:39
If historical accuracy is a valid point, then show me one battle in history where a Jap Daimyo used a full army of Ashigari, half of them with Yari and half of them with guns. And make his Taisho an Ashigaru as well.
Historically Guns may have changed Japanese Warfare, but they were pretty rare compared to what we see online.
Thus, I think the focus should be on playability. Which means the guns must be addressed. I wanna have fun. I don't want to be forced to go into battle with a minimum of 4 Musks simply because otherwise I lose by default. In a decently balanced game ANY wisely picked selection of units, used with decent and appropriate tactics should at least stand a chance nine times out of ten. The guns ruin this.
But, it's good to know that CA are still addressing the balance in the game. Even though nobody will make statements about it, they still read the forum and are looking into possible solutions. You just have to be a bit patient. Heck, Patch 1.01beta is a major step forward, but expect the final version to be even better.
Konnichiwa Kagemushashingen san,
To say that katsuyori lost the battle at Nagashino due to the use of 3,000 (?) ARQUEBUSSIERS is not completely true.
Muskets were never used on such a large scale. When Commander Perry landed in Japan in the 19th century, the arquebus was still in use.
The battle in the film Kagemusha by Akira Kurosawa makes one believe that the guns decided the battle within some 20 minutes.
This is not true.
Takeda Shingen was a great general. His son Katsuyori wanted to be as great as his father, but he wasn't. So he did stupid things just to prove himself. He did not listen to the advice of the great old generals who served under Shingen.
First of all, the battle was the climax of a 29 days Takeda Campaign in Mikawa. The initial idea was to capture Tokugawa's headquarter in Okazaki. He relied on traitor to open the catle gates. But before the Takeda army reached Okazaki the traitor was discovered. They buried him with his head just above the ground, placed a bamboo saw beside him and invited passers by to try the saw on the traitors neck. It took him 7 days to die.
Katsuyori changed plans, but somehow Ieyasu managed to predict his moves. Finally Katsuyori was forced to return home. On his way home he decided to size Nagashino castle. The garizon had some 500 men. Takeda had an army of 15,000 including 655 arquebusses. The commander of the garizon was an enemy of Katsuyori and thus very decided to fight.
The Oda and Tokugawa allied and sent relieving forces: 38,000 men.
So the Takeda were slightly outnumbered.
Oda choosed the terrain very well: woods and a small river to slow down the mighty takeda cavalry. Katsuyori refused to listen to his generals and attacked here.
Oda made the protective fence which prevented the arqs to be slain by the Takeda cavalry.
Oda placed samurai (also important ones) near the arqs to assure their safety.
The arqs did made some victims and due to the new technique of 3 rows, they could fire rapidly and created quite some confusion.
The battle lasted some 6 hours, and fierce hand to hand fighting was waged. So it was not a battle won by guns alone.
Oda had more things to do (Mori), Kenshin died, so the Takeda clan and Katsuyori survived another 7 years.
Arquebusses had an effective range of 30-50 m. In STW the arquebusses seems to have a range of some 80 m. At the range of 30 m a trained gunner could hit a mansize target 5 times out of 5. At 50 m only 1 out of 5.
Muskets have a range of 80 m, that's the range an arquebus has now.
Realism is that the horses are trained to bear the noise made by a firearm and that any unprotected gununit would be completely destroyed if charged by cavalry. It takes a horse some 5 seconds to travel from in range to the shooter himself. It takes a skilled gunner at least 20 seconds to reload.
The maximum range of an arquebus was 500 m. The maximum 'effective' range was 200 m. So a 'lost' bullet could kill a man at long range. This is what you can see in the battles: casualties far away from the guns.
Didn't european armies have pikeman inside the musket units to protect them against cavalry?
You can read more about this in: Osprey Militairy Campaign, Nagashino 1575, Slaughter at the Barricades, Stephen Turnbull, ISBN 1-85532-619-1, http://www.osprey-publishing.co.uk
------------------
Ja mata
Toda MizuTosaInu
Daimyo Takiyama Shi
http://www.takiyama.cjb.net
Kraellin
10-10-2001, 21:40
i've read a lot of the posts about morale and balancing and fairness and so on in these forums and i've seen some good arguements for this and that and i applaud all those who've participated in attempting to make a very interesting game.
i also applaud the game makers for making something that can stir so much interest. it's a rare game that can capture this much attention for this long.
but my main reason for posting today is this issue of 'balance'. there is a direct analogy one can make with a real balancing scale to the units in the game. we've all prolly seen a real world balance, that device with a vertical pole that then has a horizontal arm attached at its middle on the vertical pole. at each end of the horizontal arm there is a little tray hung by chains from the horizontal arm. one puts things on one tray on one end and then other stuff on the tray at the other end and if they weigh the same amount the horizontal arm will remain horizontal and wont tip in either direction.
now, the same can be done with units in game play. if you have just 2 units you can say that it's like putting one unit on one end of each arm of the horizontal bar. to 'balance' those units you add a penny for each increment of each stat onto the tray for that unit. the stats themselves dont have to match up, but the pennys do or the arm will tilt.
now, imagine that you have a balance with 11 separate arms all arranged at regular intervals outward from the central arm and all arranged so that if you put a penny on the tray of ANY of the 11 arms you also tilt the whole array. thus, if you change one stat of one unit by one point, you throw the whole array out of balance.
now, add in, what is it, 6 or 7 more arms to your balance for the mongol units, and you begin to see what happened with the exp pack. you now have 11 arms plus 7 more on your scale.
now, add to this that for single play there is an entirely different scale used...at least for the campaign games. custom seems more like multi, but for campaign games they seem to have brought in a completely different scale.
and when i say a penny for every stat, that also includes how many men in a unit, because now, with the ninja and kensai, we have units that have differing amounts of men in them.
if any of you played Magic: The Gathering, those fantasy playing cards, and read anything about how they devised all this, you might remember that the fellow who came up with those cards actually used a mathematical system. i forget what it's called, but it seemed to work pretty well. maybe someone knows this system of math and could apply it somewhat to this game.
but a math model applied to balancing samurai and ashigaru and mongols units, would most likely drive the historical folks nuts. it just wouldnt sit right, i'm sure :)
so, for those of you who just skim articles like this, here's the jist of it: you cant change one single stat by one digit without affecting the entire balance. that means number of men, all the stat values or range and defense and armor and offense and so on. 'quick fixes' to one or two units wont cut it; it just throws something else out of whack.
so, you have to consider the whole, not just one unit or two, or just the japanese units of sengoku. you have to include EVERYTHING when balancing a game. STW was pretty well balanced. and i think some are beginning to see just how delicate a balance that was.
K.
------------------
I'm sorry, but i never apologize.
konnichiwa,
Of the 30,000 Oda 'soldiers', only 3,000 had arquebusses. Thus if you would want a historic accurate army you should pick 1-2 arquebus units in a total of 16 units.
Some other numbers:
In 1592 Shimazu sent some forces to Korea (they were part of a bigger army, thus there might already be enough yari units from other clans): the Shimazu army included 1,500 archers, 1,500 arquebussiers, 300 spearmen.
Date Matsume supplied 50 archers, 100 arquebussiers, 100 spearmen.
What's mentioned above are the ashigaru units in the army. Thus ashigaru teppo, ashigaru yari units and ashigaru bow units!
In 16000 Date supplied the Tokugawa an army of 3,000: 420 mounted samurai, 200 archers, 1,200 arqs, 850 spearmen and 330 support (not combat).
Another composition: 120 mounted samurai, 450 foot samurai, 370 arqs, 110 archers, 150 spearmen (the later 3 are all ashigaru units!).
Here are some numbers derived from the kakemono which shows the Matsuura army:
118 samurai, 20 mounted samurai, 104 arq ashi, 32 archer ashi, 48 yariashi.
Arqs are some 33% of the combat units here. Would be 5-6 out of 16. I'm sure they won't stand a cav charge. And this army isn't a war army. The scroll shows an army in the peace period years after the big battle at Sekigahara.
An Uesugi army in 1575 (heated Sengoku Jidai period): 3,609 spear ashi, 321 arq, 566 mounted samurai, 1,018 other including archers. Uesugi fought many battles against the Cavalry army of Shingen, so his choice for spears is explainable. Note: he didn't use 3,609 guns to scare the horses!
The Takeda army in the Nagashino campaign had 4,250 horsemen and 650 arqs in a army of 15,000.
Another unit which changed the battlefield was the yariashigaru. Not because they were so cheap that a daimyo could affort 9 honor, 3 weapon and 3 armor upgrades on them, but because he could recruit many of those and train them to an acceptable level.
------------------
Ja mata
Toda MizuTosaInu
Daimyo Takiyama Shi
http://www.takiyama.cjb.net
Many people have called for unit limits, and I have to agree that this would be an excellent way to handle the tendency in online play to identify the 'best' unit, and load up on them. It would have no effect on the single player campaign. If the musk were not rebalanced you would still have the mandatory x number of musk (x = unit limit), but at least you wouldn't have the disproportionate number of musk that you have now.
I went up against 6 musk and 2 CA with 4 musk, and 1 CA online last night in WE/MI v1.01. My opponent, who I know, skillfully protected his ranged units with yari, and my 2 NC could not successfully attack his ranged units. Needless to say I could not win the ranged battle, and had to rush. Since he had occupied the little plateau on Totomi, my rush failed. If I sit back, I would die a slow death from his musk. I suppose I could have withdrawn to a corner with trees, and just sat there. Possibly, I could have executed the rush more skillfully and won. The final casualties were quite close. However, as much as I hate to do it, it looks like I'll have to increase the number of musk I take on open terrain.
The original Magic: the Gathering was nicely balanced, but the introduction of new cards threw it way off. Many of these new cards had to be banned from tournament play. You could apply a mathematical system to balance Shogun, but an empirical approach using player's experiences can also work. It might take several passes, as you move things in the right direction. The nice balance of STW is now apparent. There were a few online balance issues that could have been refined, like monks, but now we have several Sengoku units that were ok before that have altered parameters, and other things may have been changed like game speed and fatigue. It does complicate things, and invalidates a lot of the experience built up over the past year with STW. You can see that the online morale in WE/MI v1.01, which has been set back to exactly the same as STW, doesn't play exactly the same as STW anymore.
MizuYuuki ~~~
Clan Takiyama ~~~
All this talk of guns and violence...!
GAH!
So here is my 39 koku...
Do you see folks running around throwing stones at tanks or fighting airplanes with sticks and shanks?
Guns are revolutionary, and to not use them is to commit your force to the 'mass grave of discarded lies' for those that do not embrace the changes of the time. Thus, to complain that somebody used too many guns is absurd.
Last I recall, a guy trying to stop a tank by standing in front of it got flattenned when it rolled over him...
So, guns are good. I have yet to see an opponent come at me with an all-gun army... (DOH! Its usually ME going at THEM with the wet-gunny wedgie army of doom! HE HE).
So, in case you might ask, here is the answer to the question I am sure is burning a hole in y'alls heads...
Q: But, Vanya, who leads the Wet-Gunny Wedgie Army of Doom?
A: A Gunnery Sargeant, of course! His official title then is the 'Wet-Gunny Wedgie Gunny'.
Corrollary: The ashigaru usually refer to their Wet-Gunny Wedgie Gunny as 'Honey Bunny' when off duty... There is an investigation pending on the origins of this bizarre practice...
[This message has been edited by Vanya (edited 10-10-2001).]
Err Vanya, me thinks you've been on the sauce mate.. http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/wink.gif
Anyway, i can accept that guns revolutionised warfare, but you cannot compare the SP campaign with MP online gaming...
In SP, the guns arrive at a set later stage in the campaign thus essentially replacing the archers except possibly on hilly maps where archers still have their uses.
In MP this is not appropriate nor relevant. MP is there to be fun, tactical and isn't supposed to be historically correct. It just allows you to select units from the Sengoku Jidai period in general or from when the Mongols invaded.
The aim of the MP game is to provide a balanced, tactical and strategic game....
Currently the fact that muskets are available cheaply and are very deadly means that everyone buys them a plenty. If you don't have as many muskets as your enemy on a flat map then 90% of the time you'll lose...
You have to ask yourselves if this is what you really want out of your MP experience??
Do you want a single unit type to become a dominant feature in army selection making up at least half of every players' army?
Do you want it to become a stagnant affair watching muskets fire at each others army until someone runs out of ammo and is forced to rush or camp, or has just simply routed due to sustained losses without even having any melee action?
I very much doubt it...!! I bet the majority want to be able to use a balanced variety of units, both missile and melee, where well executed manoeuvres and tactics can bring you victory...
Much the way the old Shogun was...
------------------
Online name: DrJambo Ouchi
Konnichiwa Vanya san,
I don't say guns are wrong, should be banned from the game or that a limit should be placed on how many units you can pick. I just say guns can do things they couldn't do.
If they did, then every Sengoku Daimyo would have armies of only guns.
------------------
Ja mata
Toda MizuTosaInu
Daimyo Takiyama Shi
http://www.takiyama.cjb.net
ElmarkOFear
10-11-2001, 03:31
I think a solution would be to turn the rate of fire down on muskets by about 1/2. This would allow an enemy unit to charge your muskets and not take such severe losses during the approach that you do not need to protect your guns with foottroops. The slowing down of rate of fire would also make archers more viable, because you could use them as musket killers. That is if their rate of fire is greater than the muskets as it should be. No further adjustment to koku or morale would be necessary.
I also would like the ability to change the icons of my units to little red Elmo's and other Sesame Street characters! Talk about your intimidating armies!! "Oh no! Big bird is getting our flank! Quick send your Kensai Snufflumpigus to stop him!"
Nit picking here.
All generals want the best soldiers possible, all generals don't end up with the best soldiers possible.
ElmarkOFear
10-11-2001, 06:09
and all soldiers want the best general, but unfortunately for my men they got me!! http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif
I'm sorry, but I have to say that I have no reason not to believe that the current reload rates for guns and such are just about spot-on. I've never had a problem with them.
I very much appreciate the point that Kraellin made so well, that really if you are going to revamp you must deal with the whole bungle. This is what I've been spending 6 or so hours a day on for a week or so now. [hint-- still looking for more testers and advisors]
If I might submit the opinion that relying on the people down at CA to do all this work for us is essentially trying to ride a broken donkey from California to New York. They simply don't have the time, even if they had a strong inclination, to do a proper job of it. Look at the changes they made with the patch-- up a price here, up a price there.. just sort of throwing meat to the ravenous dogs so they won't turn on you. If it's to be done well, it must be done by community members with time on their hands (which I believe many of the members who have spoken here may be engaged in..).
Anyway, perhaps if the conversation is to continue productively it should turn to how the whole of Shogun can be revamped. Kraellin totally converted me with his little speech, we should all take some heed of his point.
Matt
MagyarKhans Cham
10-11-2001, 07:48
i like the cumulative costs, like 1 is 250 2 =2*300 3 =3*350 4=4*400
that will learn people to balance http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif
for me teh 250 is ok but reduce the damage by 50% and range with 10%
Yup, nice idea Magy http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif
However maybe more along the lines of a 20% reduction in damage..
However, more importantly i think it's the huge demoralising effect, especially on cavalry, that is the major cause for concern.. !
------------------
Online name: DrJambo Ouchi
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.