Upgraded weapons and armour

[Oaty]

Well in MTW once you had that level 4 weaponsmith and armourer you could pump out those guys with all those upgrades at no extra cost

Wasn't it quite common for the new troops to be equipped with inferior equipment than there predecessors if there were heavy financial burdens on the country at that time.

I'm just wondering if you have a high level armourer shouldnt you be able select the quality of the armour that you want on these new troops to either put out elite troops at a high cost or save some bucks on lowere quality men

Also if you ar planning a desert campaign it would be really nice to give them light armour instead of letting them have that elite armour that will exhaust them before they even get to the enemy

[Myrddraal]

Great idea.

Make it more realistic. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/bigthumb.gif

[econ21]

Personally, I think the weapon and armour upgrades should go, at least in SP. I don't think they are very historical - differences in arms and armour are better represented by different unit types. I don't see a +4/+4 upgraded legionnaire unit compared to a 0/0 one corresponding to much in history. Differences in valour I can buy, but not kit.

[The Wizard]

Well, in screenshots, movies and TC we can see examples of what I *think* could be RTW's armor upgrades and whatnot.

For instance, in Marathon, we see hoplites of different forms, some with only spear, shield and helmet, some with bronze breastplates, and some with the 'Alexandrian' armor with the metal strips and such.

Wouldn't that be a nice way to make armor upgrades and differences noticeable in a graphical way?



~Wiz

[CBR]

Quote[/b] (Simon Appleton @ May 06 2004,11:47)]Personally, I think the weapon and armour upgrades should go, at least in SP.
And personally I think they should go in MP too http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif


CBR

[shingenmitch2]

"Personally, I think the weapon and armour upgrades should go, at least in SP."
"And personally I think they should go in MP too "

AGREED http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/eek.gif

Different units should be the upgrade -- There should be some way to "refit" units into a "new/better type" in SP.

Valor upgrades should take care of experience & drill. (and Valor should do no more than make a unit 1.5 - 2x better than its "base 0")

[Myrddraal]

Nonono http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-furious3.gif

Armour upgrades should NOT go

They give u something to do when uv already got all the amazing troops.

But it would be good if they were represented graphically.

[shingenmitch2]

GAH

Gives you something to do? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/eek.gif

Myrd, I'm not trying to sound condescending, but you need to fully understand the game mechanics/ combat calculations to appreciate why armor/ weap ugrades are so bad. Ever wonder why tactics are totally useless in SP when either you or the AI has an "all gold" experienced army?


Anyway, to get those "higher" quality troops I speak of (or to re-fit vetran lesser units), you should have to build mines and build all the bowerys and smith-works as usual, plus training grounds etc.

[SirGrotius]

Perhaps a compromise can be reached. Would raising the initial cost of building/upgrading an armory be meaningful (assuming that additional costs per unit is dropped in favor of simplicity)? I personally enjoy seeing advanced units on the map, if only for their enhanced gameplay value (more differentiation). I would imagine that medieval governments (whether petty or dynastic) contracted out specialist smiths to construct especial weapons, but I wonder if something akin to that was enacted in the classical error? How were arms and armor meted out?

[Saki]

I'm not all that keen on the armour and weapons upgrade for reasons already mentioned.I mean, what would we do with the naked barbarion ,give him a knitted willy warmer or somthing ?

[shingenmitch2]

"How were arms and armor meted out?"

Well here's the thing. A coat of chainmail is pretty much a coat of chain mail (okay some were better A1 vs A0), a lino-thorax curiass is a lino-thorax curiass.

A galadius was a gladius; a spear was a spear; a sarissa was a sarrissa... Quality of weapons when we talk about units of hundreds of men, evens out. The difference was TYPE: spear vs. gladius.

So how was arms and armor meted out? Except for some professional armies (Rome). Those who could afford it, bought the best, while the bulk of the troops made due with what they had.

Thus, most Greeks only had a shield, spear and helmet. The bare minimum for hoplite warfare... and these were men with some $.

The wealthiest would have a curaiss, or muscled curaiss and those with more $ could add greaves. Many times this armor was passed down in families.

The poorest in the community became peltasts and other "light troops."

Even in Rome there was some stratification in armor for those who could afford it.

In game terms this means the better armored/equipped unit should cost more and perhaps require more "industry/facilities" to build.

********
But the main point is that the better units were equipped DIFFERENTLY than the weaker units. You wouldn't find, for example, two Roman units both wearing lorica segmentata's and scuttums with 2 different armor ratings because one had "upgraded armor." The units would be rated EXACTLY the same for their equipment, and the only difference would be leadership and experience.

Now this lorica segmentata unit would be considered an elite unit compared to say, early Triarii who only had a small breast plate, or compared to peltasts. But because the Lorica Segmentat unit requires more armor to be that unit, it should also cost more to build and perhaps require more "industry" type buildings before you could create that unit type.

Then, If you want an upgraded unit... don't give some peltast V4, A3 W3... that's crap Retrain the peltast (at less cost than building a fresh unit, and have it retain some of its "experience') and turn it into the better Lorica Segmentata unit.

[Myrddraal]

I see u feel strongly on this poin shingenmitch2, maybe ur right...

But the problem is that they'd have to make a hell of a lot of new, very similar units to make up for the armour upgrades.

[Trax]

What if an armour upgrade wouldn´t give +1 defense, but only enhance the the defence stat by some 5- 10% symbolizing little bit better metalworking skills developed over the years or simply better quality iron in certain provinces?

[Vanya]

GAH

Armor irrelevant.

Thin metal plate not enough to stop Vanya's might axe from chopping off head.

Vanya sez... armor good for cooking. Make good pots and forks.

Vanya sez... Weepons irrelevant too. Only good for humans to kill themselves. They have no effect on Vanya... other than to tickle His humor.

GAH

[katank]

why not unit evolution as others suggested? in some historical battles, I see gold gold vanilla spearmen and I just crack up since not even my best troops get that often.

I must also say the OP element.

once I get a specialist army up that is made of professional soldiers and trained up on rebels, mongols, whatever to V4-5 and refit them with gold gold or the best I can get for them, the AI has no ability to counter whatsoever.

also, they are sometimes scared stiff by even high valour javs etc. and just get shot up.

so it's kinda stupid to have those upgrades and not just unit evolution with a certain valour threshold triggering an auto upgrade or retrain for the upgrade.

this would also take care of the annoying 30 valour RKs that are absolutely jedi though you may not realize at first.

[squippy]

Quote[/b] (katank @ May 10 2004,19:07)]why not unit evolution as others suggested? in some historical battles, I see gold gold vanilla spearmen and I just crack up since not even my best troops get that often.
You may laugh, but I'm presentouly using v1 gold armour regular spears against the Horde. Because I am the byzantines and that is all I can build.