Regarding Spears and Cavalry

[Jambo]

Hi,

There seems to be some inconsistencies with regards to what bonuses and attributes some spearmen have throughout the units file. It would seem that some spear units have the "spear" attribute, some have "spear" and "long_pike", some have a "mount-effect" bonus and on one occasion, a unit actually has both "spear" and the "mount_effect"....

Triarii and Roman Auxilla have the mount_effect bonus.
German Spear Warband have the spear attribute.
Carthaginian medium infantry have the mount_effect.
Carthaginian heavy infantry (Poeni) have the spear
Sacred Band infantry have the spear.
East heavy infantry have both the mount-effect and the spear attributes.
East Hoplite and all the Greek Pikemen have spear and long_pike attributes.
Spartan Hoplites and other Greek Hoplite varieties only have the spear attribute.
And some spearmen don't have any bonuses or attributes, e.g. Town Watch and East Infantry.

So, in short there doesn't seem to be much consistency as to whether a unit gets a mount_effect bonus, the spear and/or the long_spear attributes, or any combination of the above. Maybe this might go some way in helping to explain the relative power of cavalry versus spear units?

Regards

[Bob the Insane]

Well the one with the "spear" or "long_pike" attributes are the ones with the phalanx ability...

I can't imagine why any unit would have the phalanx ability and not have the mount effect... :dizzy2:

There is alos a listing for Primary weapon whcih can also be a Spear... But this is not the same as the "Spear" attribute...

You are right about things appearing to be a little confused in the unit stat files...

[Jambo]

Hi Bob,

Doesn't the Phalanx ability require the Phalanx formation in addition to the "spear" and/or "long_pike" attribute?

In other words, is it possible to have the spear or long_pike and not be able form the phalanx?

[Louis de la Ferte Ste Colombe]

Yes, it is possible to have spears and not being able to form a phalax (Triarii)

And Yes, form phalanx is what makes a unit able to form phalanx. Again see Triarii

You are right, I find all this very confusing.

At some point, I fought they put some mount effect for units with spears without phalanx ability, and that phalanx was giving specific bonus against cavalry.

Alas, some units got both mount effect AND can form phalanx. Do they get dual bonus? Or the assumption that phalanx was giving a special bonus wrong?

Overall, the unit file is very messy. It really looks like as they have changed their mind a couple of times on how they would code the units. Eventually the overall feeling and fear is that all that is not really consistent.

I'd be interested by CA feedback on that topic.

Louis,

[Bob the Insane]

Thanks for the corrections... Guess I would be modding for a while yet... ~D

Pray for the holy grail that is the RTW SDK....

[Jambo]

Actually, although Triarii do have spears they don't have the "spear" attribute. All they have is the mount_effect bonus.

[Louis de la Ferte Ste Colombe]

By spear attribute, you mean phalanx formation?

Louis,

[Jambo]

Nope, spear attribute is different from the phalanx formation. I've include examples of what i mean below:

A section from the Triarii:
mount_effect horse +4, chariot +4, camel +4
attributes sea_faring, hide_forest, can_sap
formation 1, 1, 2, 2, 3, square
stat_health 1, 0
stat_pri 7, 7, no, 0, 0, melee, simple, piercing, spear, 25 ,0.73
stat_pri_attr no

-No spear attribute and no phalanx formation, but does have the mount_effect.

A section from East heavy infantry:
mount_effect horse +4, chariot +4, camel +4
attributes sea_faring, hide_forest, can_sap
formation 1, 1, 2, 2, 5, square, phalanx
stat_health 1, 0
stat_pri 7, 6, no, 0, 0, melee, simple, piercing, spear, 25 ,1
stat_pri_attr spear

-Has mount_effect, phalanx formation and the spear attribute.

And lastly a section from Poeni Infantry:
officer carthaginian_standard
attributes sea_faring, hide_forest, can_sap, hardy
formation 1, 1, 2, 2, 5, square, phalanx
stat_health 1, 0
stat_pri 9, 7, no, 0, 0, melee, simple, piercing, spear, 25 ,1
stat_pri_attr spear

-Has spear and phalanx, but no mount_effect.

That should should help clarify the confusing spear arrangements ~;)

[Bob the Insane]

Nice examples..

[Louis de la Ferte Ste Colombe]

Ok, now I see what you mean...

I don't have the unit file readily available, but from the top of my head;

We got spears (stat_pri) with no spear attribute (stat_pri_attr)
We got spears with no spear attribute and mounted effect
We got spears with spear attribute
We got spears with spear attribute and mounted effect
We got spears with spear attribute and phalanx formation
We got spears with spear attribute and phalanx formation, and mounted effect
We got spears with long pikes attributes and phalanx formation

I hope I have not missed anything...

What does that all mean?

I think one of the spear mention might be related to graphic or sound management, but has no impact on gameplay per se. Not sure though. A modder might know.

Louis,

[andrewt]

From the file:

; stat_pri_attr
; primary weapon attributes any or all of
; ap = armour piercing. Only counts half of target's armour
; bp = body piercing. Missile can pass through men and hit those behind
; spear = Used for long spears. Gives bonuses fighting cavalry, and penalties against infantry
; long_pike = Use very long pikes. Phalanx capable units only
; short_pike = Use shorter than normal spears. Phalanx capable units only
; prec = Missile weapon is only thrown just before charging into combat
; thrown = The missile type if thrown rather than fired
; launching = attack may throw target men into the air
; area = attack affects an area, not just one man

I'm not sure what is the difference in capabilities between spear and long_pike and short_pike. It might have something to do with rank bonuses or other stuff.

[Louis de la Ferte Ste Colombe]

As far as I know, there is no short pike unit, only long pike and spears. In phalanx formation long pike seems to have more men fighting from a longer distance (which makes them really worthy against simple spears unit)

I think the problem Jambo is pointing to is that, as you mention it andrew, stat_pri_attr field mention spears giving bonus against cavalry... But we also have a mounted effect giving boni/ mali against different kind of units.

Are those cumulatives? Is one used and not the other? Does that have anything to do with Phalanx formation?

So many questions... And the only way I can see of answering them is some modding to see if there is any difference in behaviour...

Louis,

[R'as al Ghul]

Just to add to the confusion:
From andrewt's post it can be derived that the length is as follows:
:book:
short_pike < spear < lang_pike

:dizzy2: correct?

R'as

[dcd111]

I can't imagine why any unit would have the phalanx ability and not have the mount effect... :dizzy2:

I was reading a thread over at twcenter.net that was discussing this issue. One possible reason there might be phalanx-capable units without the mount effects is that the mount effects are applied regardless of whether the units are using primary or secondary weapons, whereas the "spear" attribute is weapon-specific and can be applied to one and not the other. In some cases with phalanx-forming units, the secondary weapon is a normal sword or something similar, which should not have a bonus against mounted units, so giving them the mount effects wouldn't make sense in cases where they attack with their secondary weapon.

Nonetheless, there doesn't seem to be any real consistency, hopefully some of this will be better implemented in the patch, or a modder will clean this up once the true effects of the spear attribute are better understood.

- dcd111

[Red Harvest]

There are a lot of consistency issues with units at the moment. Spears, pikes, phalanx, and mount effects are one part of that. Check out shields to see some glaring inconsistencies. For mounted units, some small shields are +4 (same as large shields) while others are +2. Sometimes a unit gets a +5 shield rating while not having any shield (pharaoh's guards.)

Long pikes are very effective against cav (at least while in phalanx formation) so they have some built in bonuses. Short pikes are not used by any units so far.

I think CA was a bit rushed and did not finish up balancing of the units.

[Louis de la Ferte Ste Colombe]

I am going to bump this one....

Louis,

[Jace11]

Do Triarii get the mount bonus so they do not get a penalty for fighting against infantry.

If the intro to the unit desc file is correct


; stat_pri_attr
; primary weapon attributes any or all of
; ap = armour piercing. Only counts half of target's armour
; bp = body piercing. Missile can pass through men and hit those behind
; spear = Used for long spears. Gives bonuses fighting cavalry, and penalties against infantry
; long_pike = Use very long pikes. Phalanx capable units only
; short_pike = Use shorter than normal spears. Phalanx capable units only
; prec = Missile weapon is only thrown just before charging into combat
; thrown = The missile type if thrown rather than fired
; launching = attack may throw target men into the air
; area = attack affects an area, not just one man

then phalanx units don't get mount effect cause they get hidden bouses and penalties from having "phalanx", Triarii do not form phalanx so shouldn't get a penalty when fighting infantry but cause they have spears they need a bonus against cavalry.

Armenian infantry if they can for phalanx and get mount bonuses are way out there, I have no idea about that

[Sinner]

Perhaps it was intended as a game balance. There are lots of horse-heavy factions in the east and maybe CA felt that Armenia needed some infantry that could cope with that, giving them the benefits vs cavalry of both phalanx and mount effects.

[hoof]

It could be even simpler than that, do Armenian Heavy Infantry have a sword as a secondary weapon? If their spear is used both for phalanx and non-phalanx use, then they should get mount_bonus when not in phalanx mode (unlike hoplites that don't use their spears except for in phalanx).

That would make everything consistent:

-mount_bonus is used for non-Phalanx hand-to-hand combat only, and applies anytime that unit uses a spear for non-Phalanx fight
-spear would apply to any unit that can form a phalanx, and would enable the "phalanx" button
-long_pike would be a modifier to the spear attribute, making the unit use long_pike tactics (more rows involved in combat, longer engagement distance, etc)

I would suspect that "short-pike" would have 1 fewer rows in the phalanx than normal hoplites, and engage closer in.

[Spino]

The TWC thread on spear units also covered the reasons why Eastern Infantry, Libyan Spearmen, Triarii, Auxilia Infantry, etc. possess a +4 'mount_effect' but not the 'spear' or 'short/long_pike' classification. It seems that units with the spear classification (regular or long or short pike variety) generally perform poorly versus non-spear infantry in melee. The biggest strength of true spear units is their ability to resist and kill cavalry. The one caveat is that units with the long_pike classification generally get the best of all enemy units (spear, non-spear or mounted) because of the length of their pikes, their greater numbers and the additional ranks that lend their pikes to the fight.

Since hoplites are pure 'spear' units they seem to rely solely on their numbers and extra fighting ranks to beat non-spear units. Armenia's Heavy Spearmen have both spears and the +4 mount_effect probably because it is that faction's only decent anti-cavalry spear unit and it helps to offset their smaller, 80 man size.

Actually in light of how well 'long_pike' equipped units perform I think the 'short_pike' classification might make those units perform too well so CA opted to stay with the vanilla 'spear' classification. I would be interested to see the results of testing with the three spear types. You would think that long pikes would have one more row fighting than short pikes who have one more row fighting than hoplites.

One thing I am certain of is that for non-spear 'spear' units the +4 mount_effect is woefully inadequate against most cavalry.

Wait, did this post answer anyone's questions? ~:confused: I'm not thinking straight because I'm starved! NEED FOOD!

[nameless]

Just a question, I was trying out the capabilities of the Auxilla to combat Calvary compared to Legionary Cohort fighting Calvary. This was set on medium. In both tests the romans won. The Auxilla suffered 38% casualities but Legionary Cohort suffered only 8% casualties.

Also looking at the numbers and bonuses, the Auxilla's fighting strength is 5 and a bonus of 4 which gives it an attack of 9, equal to that of a Cohort except the Cohort has 22 armor while the Auxilla has 17. So....are these spearmen even worth it? ~:confused: or is it better to jack up their bonuses?

[bubbanator]

Well, Auxilia are lightly armored which gives them a big dissadvantage when cavalry charges them. Plus, the cohorts attack is quite a bit stronger than auxilias, even with the bonus.

What you should do, is set auxilias stats to be exactly the same as the cohorts. Have the attack and deffense the same and then run some tests. This should give you some more accurate results to see if the mount_effect actually does anything.


On a side note, I think that it would be hillarious to make archer auxilia 'super-units' with insane attack and deffense, give them the mount_effect bonus, along with armor piercing and body piercing arrows, area effect (like onagers, i assume) and give them the launching property so that men go flying everywhere when they get hit ~D

[nameless]

I gave the Auxillia 9,22; the same as a cohort and the Auxillia suffered only 5% casualities this time while the cohort again suffered 8%.

I'm thinking of just leaving the stats at 5,17 and then jacking the bonus from +4 to +10 or something. Calvary is just too powerful in this game.