View Full Version : Creative Assembly Significance of armor?
Ok, what is the significance of armor? As I understand it, the armor factor is already included as a part of the defense factor, so why have it as a separate stat? Yes, you can add to it, but why not just say armor upgrades add directly to defense - why bother with a separate armor stat? Or is there something I am missing? Does this mean when looking at stats, I can just ignore the armor and look at the defense stat?
Grifman
anymapkoku
10-06-2002, 08:07
Think of it this way. If you get shot in the back of the head with an arrow, do you want just 5 defense or 5 defense and 5 armor?
Quote Originally posted by anymapkoku:
Think of it this way. If you get shot in the back of the head with an arrow, do you want just 5 defense or 5 defense and 5 armor?[/QUOTE]
But the point is the developers have said that armor is already included in the defense factor - it is not additive. So your 5 defense is just 5 defense, not 10.
Grifman
I'd like to know as well. I read the armor thread in the table of contents, and I'm still confused as hell.
If armor and defense are the same, then why do so many units have differing armor and defense values??
anymapkoku
10-06-2002, 08:59
If you're blocking a punch with you hand, that's defense. If you're getting shot at point blank range with a gun, and the bullet ricochets off your bullet proof vest, that's armor. Who said they were the same thing?
anymapkoku
10-06-2002, 09:02
I never said that it was additive or that 5 defense becomes 10. Do you want to be able to defend yourself only(5 defense) or be able to defend yourself and have armor at the same time(5 defense 5 armor)?
anymapkoku
10-06-2002, 09:04
Armor contributes to defense, just as hold formation does. Doesn't mean hold formation and defense are the same thing.
FacelessClock
10-06-2002, 09:05
Just from my own observations, I think defense might not have full effect when a unit is hit from the back, and armour does.
I don't have any stats though, so take that with a grain of salt.
anymapkoku
10-06-2002, 09:09
Defense has full effect when hit in the back, the attacker just gets a attack bonus. Shields only add defense to the front though.
Quote Originally posted by anymapkoku:
I never said that it was additive or that 5 defense becomes 10. Do you want to be able to defend yourself only(5 defense) or be able to defend yourself and have armor at the same time(5 defense 5 armor)?[/QUOTE]
So then, tell me exactly how it works then? If it isn't additive to your defense, then what does it do for you? So far you haven't explained a thing - you haven't told me anything other than 5 defense and 5 armor means 5 defense and 5 armor. And that ain't saying much.
Grifman
Quote Originally posted by anymapkoku:
Armor contributes to defense, just as hold formation does. Doesn't mean hold formation and defense are the same thing.[/QUOTE]
Again, you're writing words, but not explaining anything. What does the nebulous term "contributes to defense" mean? How does it figure into the combat calculations? What exactly is its "contribution". A little more specificity would be appreciated.
Grifman
Quote Originally posted by anymapkoku:
If you're blocking a punch with you hand, that's defense. If you're getting shot at point blank range with a gun, and the bullet ricochets off your bullet proof vest, that's armor. Who said they were the same thing? [/QUOTE]
Call it what you want, but effectively they are the same thing - in both examples, you are unharmed because of either the defense or the armor.
Grifman
Armor is defense versus missiles, defense is defense versus everything else.
Sometimes the figures are different.
I used the F1 key in a custom battle and alan merc had a def bonus of 1 and armour of 3 at 0 valour.Are these the stats that is being disscused.As fas as I know armour is how well you defend against missiles and def value is how well defend against mellee.
[This message has been edited by Saki (edited 10-06-2002).]
Quote Originally posted by Kalt:
Armor is defense versus missiles, defense is defense versus everything else.
Sometimes the figures are different. [/QUOTE]
That may be, but Arkatriedes in a prior post in another thread wrote:
******************************************
These are the stats how they should be (when you press F1):
defense = base + valour + armour bonus + shield
attack = base + valour + weapon bonus
So, for example a valour 3 Chivalric Knight unit, with level 2 weapon and level 4 armour upgrades should be:
defense = 5(base)+3(valour)+4(armour)+0(shield) = 12
attack = 5(base)+3(valour)+2(weapon) = 10
This is USUALLY correct. However, I found that there somethimes is an EXTRA +1 or -1 modifier to either attack or defense (or both) and I haven't been able to figure out when it applies. If it applies, it applies for all units in the army (in the same way, so for example all have a +1 bonus to attack, or all have a -1 bonus to defense), so that made me think that it had something to do with the general, but it seems to wary from battle to battle.
********************************************
He seems to have tested this using the F1 key in battle, so according to him, armor is additive to defense - but I do think one of the CA people said it wasn't - I'll have to find his comments.
Grifman
anymapkoku
10-06-2002, 13:04
Armor upgrades are different than normal armor. Armor upgrades give you +1 armor and +1 defense.
If a unit has 5 defense and 5 armor this is assuming it has no armor upgrades, otherwise we would say "+3 armor" etc.
So
5 = whatever equation you use to calculate defense including armor
Because "armor is already factored into defense" as has been said, you cannot add it into defense a second time, that would be redundant. The "5 defense" in a 5 def 5 armor unit already takes into account the 5 armor. The "5 defense" in the 5 def 0 armor unit, however, has benefitted from no armor. Take away the 5 armor from the "5 def 5 armor" unit and it has less def as a result. Do the same thing to the 5 def 0 armor unit and it has 5 def still, as the armor was never a factor to begin with.
I hoped my posts above would help people to figure this out for themselves: Armor affects ranged attacks, defense is for melee.
[This message has been edited by anymapkoku (edited 10-06-2002).]
Quote Originally posted by anymapkoku:
Armor upgrades are different than normal armor. Armor upgrades give you +1 armor and +1 defense.
If a unit has 5 defense and 5 armor this is assuming it has no armor upgrades, otherwise we would say "+3 armor" etc.
So
5 = whatever equation you use to calculate defense including armor
Because "armor is already factored into defense" as has been said, you cannot add it into defense a second time, that would be redundant. The "5 defense" in a 5 def 5 armor unit already takes into account the 5 armor. The "5 defense" in the 5 def 0 armor unit, however, has benefitted from no armor. Take away the 5 armor from the "5 def 5 armor" unit and it has less def as a result. Do the same thing to the 5 def 0 armor unit and it has 5 def still, as the armor was never a factor to begin with.
I hoped my posts above would help people to figure this out for themselves: Armor affects ranged attacks, defense is for melee.
[This message has been edited by anymapkoku (edited 10-06-2002).][/QUOTE]
Ok, thanks for being more specific.
But I am still puzzled by a number of things:
1) The F1 key seemingly adds armor to defense when calculating the defense of units.
2) You (and others) have said that armor only counts in missile attacks, not in melee - yet it does factor into melee because of the impact of armor piercing weapons
3) It seems odd that units with armor are worse off defensively if attacked by units with armor piercing capability than if they had no armor.
4) It seems strange that if defense already includes armor, that some units have no inherent defense without their armor - it seems every unit would have an inherent defense.
Not saying you're wrong in any way, just still puzzled by unreconciled statements made in the various armor/defense threads.
I really wish the CA guys would give us a definitive explanation here once and for all - pretty please, guys - you've been so great in explaining other things . . .
Grifman
5 base defense + 0 armor bonus in a melee against non-armor piercing opponents is exactly the same as 3 base defense + 2 armor bonus. However, against missiles, the 2 armor would be better protected.
Armor piercing works like this: bonus = (armor level - 2) / 2. This bonus gets added to whatever the current melee value of the attacker is. That means the bonus only applies to units with AT LEAST 4 armor value, which is supposed to give a +1 melee to the attacker. However, it is kinda bugged at the moment and is supposed to be fixed in the patch so that armor-piercing is more effective.
My take on things (which doesn't neccesarily mean that I won't repeat some of the things already said in this thread):
1. Unit armour is added to the defense, but, units can have different values of the two. I find it easier to think about armour as a missile defense, instead of "armour" as such. Look at Ghazi. They have a very low defense, but fare somewhat better against missiles (I know, they have a shiled as well).
2. I think that AP modifier is calculated by using the armour value, but is, however, added to the attack in relation to unit's defense.
3. Units with high armour tend to have high defense. If what I said under 1. is true, the AP is more of a "leveling tool", it negates the defense portion that is due to armour, but not the inherent defense rating. Attacker will get less of a bonus against units with low armour, but they tend to have lower defense as well, so it will break even.
4. It's not that they are "defenseless", it's just a number used to set the unit's defense relative to that of other units. Again, Ghazi have -4 on defense, which means that they are very bad in that field when compared to other units, but still it's not an absolute zero. Afaik, it can go down to -20, so -4 is still something.
[This message has been edited by hrvojej (edited 10-06-2002).]
longjohn2
10-06-2002, 21:07
It's been discussed quite a bit already, and is explained in the strat guide.
Armour = defense against missiles
Defense factor = defense in melee.
The defense factor already includes the effect of armour, troop training, weapon type, and mode of fighting.
When you get an armour upgrade, this would obviously contribute to both defense in melee and against shooting, so it increases both stats.
To answer you questions.
1) When you press F1 the effects of any armour upgrades are included in both the defense and armour stats.
2) Yes. In this case the armour factor serves as a handy indicator of how much of a unit's defense factor is due to armour, and thus how much bonus the armour piercing weapon would get.
3)This is not so. If a unit had less armour, it would have less defense. Units always benefit from having more armour, even against armour piercing weapons. It's just that against ap weapons extra armour gives less benefit.
4)A defense factor of 0 or less does not mean a unit has no inherent defense. The absolute value of the numbers are of no importance, only the difference between the attacker's attack, and the defender's defence.
So here's how I'm interpreting it: (correct me if I'm wrong http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif)
The DEF and ARM values in the unit stat files are completely unrelated. The first has to do with melee defense, and the second has to do with missile defense. This explains why units can have higher intrinsic armor values than intrinsic defense values.
(As an additional note, valor increases -- +1 atk, +1 def, +2 morale, for anyone who doesn't know -- do NOT signify an increase in a unit's missile defense.)
On the other hand, when you get armor BONUSES through buildings, this goes to both defense AND armor.
What's most confusing is the difference between inherent armor and armor bonuses. Armor bonuses increase both armor and defense, but the intrinsic armor of a unit applies only to missile defense.
Sound right, everyone?
PS I highly suggest that people ignore this anymap guy. He's shown that he doesn't have the maturity to post respectfully, and the best way to deal with such people, in my opinion, is /ignore.
[This message has been edited by Dorkus (edited 10-06-2002).]
Thank you, Longjohn, appreciate the responses . . . you guys have been great.
Grifman
(Grifman goes off to ruminate on all this info to see if he can yet make sense of it all . . . must be effect of withdrawal symptoms while not playing waiting for patch http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif)
Quote Originally posted by Dorkus:
So here's how I'm interpreting it: (correct me if I'm wrong http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif)
The DEF and ARM values in the unit stat files are completely unrelated. The first has to do with melee defense, and the second has to do with missile defense. This explains why units can have higher intrinsic armor values than intrinsic defense values.
(As an additional note, valor increases -- +1 atk, +1 def, +2 morale, for anyone who doesn't know -- do NOT signify an increase in a unit's missile defense.)
On the other hand, when you get armor BONUSES through buildings, this goes to both defense AND armor.
What's most confusing is the difference between inherent armor and armor bonuses. Armor bonuses increase both armor and defense, but the intrinsic armor of a unit applies only to missile defense.
Sound right, everyone?
PS I highly suggest that people ignore this anymap guy. He's shown that he doesn't have the maturity to post respectfully, and the best way to deal with such people, in my opinion, is /ignore.
[This message has been edited by Dorkus (edited 10-06-2002).][/QUOTE]
Yeah, I think you are on to it Dorkus. At least that is what is rolling around in my head right now.
Grifman
Dorkus, they *are* related. The intrinsic values are not related, but the final defense is equal to intrinsic + armour (or is that what you meant in the first place? http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif ).
That's why you get an increase in both armour and defense, or better to say both melee and missile defense with the upgrades. I think the only confusing part is semantic, that armour, as it is in the f1 screen, is actually a misnomer. If it was called missile defense, and you were said that armour upgrades will improve both of the defense ratings, I guess it would be clearer (and no, I don't want to go into what would we call the AP then http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif ).
[This message has been edited by hrvojej (edited 10-06-2002).]
To hro:
I'm actually referring to the unit stat files circulating around in excel format, not f1. In these files, there is a column for armor that is often different from the column for defense (sometimes larger, sometimes smaller). The column for defense in the excel file is consistent with the unupgraded, unvaloured defense of units according to F1.
For exmaple, hashinin have a def of 3 and a arm of 2. Janisssary archers, on the other hand, have a defense of 0 and an arm of 2. Now how could this be? Particularly the latter case?
I guess there are two ways to interpret the armor in these files:
1. They're giving defense bonuses, but the REAL base defense of units with lower defense than armor is less than 0.
2. THere's a differnce between these INTRINSIC armor values and BONUSES to armor achieved through buildings. Basically, INTRINSIC or BASE defense (which, according to this interpretation, is what we see in the excel file) is melee defense. BASE armor is missile defense. 'Armor' upgrades increase BOTH melee and missile defense -- so really aren't armor upgrades at all. They're armor AND defense upgrades.
I'm saying that I think 2 is the answer. Correct me if I'm wrong... http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif
[This message has been edited by Dorkus (edited 10-06-2002).]
I with you Dorkus, but given my past lack of understanding on this issue, that probably doesn't count for much, and may count against you http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif
Grifman
Dorkus,
Actually, I think that both 1 and 2 are correct http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif .
There are obviously some units that have a negative defense to start with (ghazi, nizaris), so the intrinsic defense can be
Well, they both can't be correct since in one of the two scenarios base armor is for missile defense only - so it couldn't be in your basic defense factor then.
However, either of the two scenarios above will get you to the same answer in calculating overall defense.
Grifman
Grifman,
Well, I guess that's a bit less convoluted way of looking at it. http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif
(and I finally got what Dorkus and you meant; again, the problem is in the misnomed missle defense)
anymapkoku
10-07-2002, 03:22
Dorkus everyone else but you has already figured it out.
Maturity? Your name is "Dorkus."
The defense factor is used in melee while armor factor is used only in missile combat that is the difference.
TakaRatta Yamamoto
10-08-2002, 22:34
Hey Cheetah, you keep posting "Listed in the TC"
What the hell does that mean?? Pordon my ignorance, but i can not for the life of me figure this out...is there a forum you are refering to??
again, sorry if someone else has asked this before
Taka/Snorri
Quote Originally posted by TakaRatta Yamamoto:
Hey Cheetah, you keep posting "Listed in the TC"
What the hell does that mean?? Pordon my ignorance, but i can not for the life of me figure this out...is there a forum you are refering to??
again, sorry if someone else has asked this before
Taka/Snorri[/QUOTE]
check out the following thread http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif
http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/Forum7/HTML/001388.html
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.