A Simple Guide for Complaing about Unit Stats

[tk-421]

What should I do if I think a unit is underpowered?

Before posting anything about a unit whose stats you think are wrong, please check to see if the unit is using the spear attribute. This can be done by opening the export_descr_unit.txt, found in the EB/Data folder and searching for the appropriate folder. If the unit in question has said attribute, than you have probably found the cause of your problems (or at least the ones associated with that unit). To fix the problem for yourself, change "spear" to "no" (unless there are other attributes present, in that case, just delete it). If you do not find that attribute, then go ahead and post something and I or someone else will see if we know what the problem is (if there even is a problem).

Why is the Spear Attribute so bad?

The spear attribute gives a rather large penalty to a unit engaged against enemy infantry. Our stat system was not designed with this in mind. In short, I HATE the spear attribute.

If you hate the spear attribute, why is it in the game?

The spear attribute was mistakingly given to some units by unit integration people (don't blame them, they didn't know) and others are left over from a very long, long time ago.

Will the spear attribute be removed in the next release?

It already has been.

What should I do if I think a unit is overpowered or has some other problem?

Go ahead and post something, someone will take a look. Keep in mind that your problem may have already been fixed in our internal build or we may not consider it a problem it all.

What if I think that the Gaesatae and/or Tindanotae (Celtic Fanatics) are overpowered and feel it necessary to post a thread about the subject?

We are comfortable with our stats for Celtic fanatics and will not change them, so don't post a thread about the subject. If you really don't like them, just reduce their hitpoints from 2 to 1 and maybe reduce morale a bit.

How does EB stat its units?

A complex system, a magic (if somwhat out of date) spreadsheet, and a lot of testing.

Will EB release its stat system to the public?

Maybe some day, but probably not anytime soon.

Will EB release its magic spreadsheets to the public?

No.

Why do some spear-armed cavalry have lethality of 0.15 and others of 0.33?

That's part of our system.

How does EB determine a unit's cost?

A system and a magic spreadsheet. Costs, though, are often left open to some tweaking if we feel there is a gameplay issue.

I notice that there are some costs which seem inconsistent, should I report them?

No. All costs have been reviewed and all problems have been fixed (I hope...).

If I do have something legitimate to complain about, where should I do my complaining?

This thread is probably as good as any, or maybe another one.

[mAIOR]

I have one omplain that is Tindonatae being 1000mnai cheaper than Gaestasae... Why is that??



Cheers...

[NeoSpartan]

exelent post...:yes:

I recommend you put the Celtic Fanatics part be typed in BIG BOLD LETTERS.

Now just to double check something with you.... that "spear attribute" needs to be corrected in non-spear infantry soldiers, OR does it need to be corrected in spear and non-spear infantry alike????? :help:

[Pharnakes]

Yeah, I'm sure I've seen people saying that units should have the spear attribute.

[Centurio Nixalsverdrus]

exelent post...:yes:

I recommend you put the Celtic Fanatics part be typed in BIG BOLD LETTERS.
Agreed.:2thumbsup:


Now just to double check something with you.... that "spear attribute" needs to be corrected in non-spear infantry soldiers, OR does it need to be corrected in spear and non-spear infantry alike????? :help:
I think in both spear and non-spear infantry. I think he is referring to the known Hypaspistai issue, IIRC.

[Tito Pullo]

Personally, I think the Eb unit stats system is very good for this game engine much better than vanilla and others mod I´ve tried.

[Watchman]

Far as I can tell the "spear" attribute is (outside phalanxes natch) virtually entirely restricted to the secondary weapon of "sword-and-spear" units like Hypaspistai and the assorted Celtic elites (a fair few others with the same combination don't have the attribute for their secondaries). Since the primary weapon in all cases is a sword, and one with the whopping 0.225 lethality and in most cases but one point less attack than the secondary spear (which has the usual infantry overhand lethality of 0.13), I must wonder - how is the secondary weapon having the "spear" attribute in any way particularly relevant to an unit "performing poorly" (especially as it sidesteps the issue AI has with secondaries), and were it removed (or lacking to begin with, as with eg. the Gastiz and their ilk), what reason would anyone have to ever use the units' secondary weapons ?

To me at least it would make sense to use the secondary overhand as a specialized "anti-cavalry" weapon to emphasize the versatility of these high-end units; certainly if it were stripped of any such factors, the only reason to ever use it would be for the sake of appereances...

[Centurio Nixalsverdrus]

I just changed the "stat_sec_attr" from "spear" to "no" for both Hypaspistai and Galatikoi Kuruathoroi. I hope they'll perform better.

Btw, I always wondered why Pheraspidai have defence ability of 12, while Hypaspistai have 8? I know Hypas and Pheras were both members of the same corps, equipped and trained to serve in a different role. So why should Pheraspidai be 50% better in defence than Hypaspistai, when they are virtually the same? Or is it just to equalize the 14 armour of the Hypas with the 10 armor of the Pheras? The same goes for the Kuruathoroi. They have exactly the same stats as Hypaspistai, but shouldn't they have an armour value of ca. 12 instead of 14, wearing mail armour while the Hypaspistai wear a bronze cuirass?

[mAIOR]

It could be a mobility issue being that the peraspidais armor allowed better mobility than their hypaspistai counterparts...


CHeers...

[Watchman]

The only real difference between the two in equipement I can see from the UI pics on the site is that the Hypas wear muscle-cuirasses for body armour and the Pheras something else, depending on faction - and given that none in any case restrict arm movement meaningfully, and one of the latter is a thigh-lenght mail hauberk (which weighs a ton and is AFAIK heavier than the muscle-cuirass), I don't really think the mobility argument holds.

In practice the difference between the two is that the Pheras have had 4 points of armour shifted over to defense skill. Personally I'm willing to shrug that off as a somewhat arbitrary but acceptable way to keep the two even (since they are after all effectively the same guys in different outfits) within the confines of the sometimes unwieldy RTW unit-stat mechanics.

Although frankly, it seems to me the Pheras' armour level is on par with the Thorakitai - wouldn't it really make more sense to use their armour value 12 instead, as the harnesses are pretty much comparable ? Just wondering.

[russia almighty]

could we get an SN of this elusive spear stat ? I need to know what the target looks like before I can kill it.

[mAIOR]

I talked about mobility beacuse mail allowed for more rotation of the Torso.
Also, I think that because of the EB stats system, Pheraspidai should have 12 armor instead of 10.


Cheers...

[Cybvep]

I have a suggestion: use "accuracy_vs_units" value (it's quite unique - the lower the better) in descr_projectile_new.txt for standard projectiles (arrows, javelins etc.). By that you can eg. make western archers less accurate than their eastern counterparts. I've tested it, and it works. Just another thing for stat-balancing and such (and without the "lethality" value for missile units it's quite useful, I think...).

Do you have any plans to limit the effects of unit's experience somehow? Those "gold chevron guys" are quite unbalancing... Maybe all units should start with 3-5 chevrons (with corresponding changes in stats, of course)?

[Watchman]

I talked about mobility beacuse mail allowed for more rotation of the Torso.Not really - the stiffer forms of cuirasses (which most of the Phera skins wear in any case) just rotate around the body like the outer shells they are. Mail does tend to allow more bending than most other types though, particularly that "long" form of infantry muscle-cuirass with the extension to shield the lower abdomen which AFAIK makes it next to impossible to properly bend at the waist.


I have a suggestion: use "accuracy_vs_units" value (it's quite unique - the lower the better) in descr_projectile_new.txt for standard projectiles (arrows, javelins etc.). By that you can eg. make western archers less accurate than their eastern counterparts. I've tested it, and it works. Just another thing for stat-balancing and such (and without the "lethality" value for missile units it's quite useful, I think...).There's such a detail ? Neat, that opens up all kinds of possibilities. I've seen it mentioned in more instances than I care to even try to count that thrown spears, while quite powerful as such, had a bit of a problem due to being highly visible in flight and not the fastest projectiles around, with the due result that a man with room to move had an easy time dodging them (and close-order troops duly just having to put up with it)...

[QwertyMIDX]

Do you have any plans to limit the effects of unit's experience somehow? Those "gold chevron guys" are quite unbalancing... Maybe all units should start with 3-5 chevrons (with corresponding changes in stats, of course)?


Yeah, we're working on rescaling the stat system to use larger numbers so experience is less unbalancing. Once we have the room to play around that the larger numbers will give us we my also do something about starting units with some experience.

[Cybvep]

Neat. Anyway, I have another suggestion: you can use the "arena" attribute in EDU for units with shortswords and big shields to represent the fact that such units would be able to deal with the effects of cohesion better and therefore be much more efficient in close order. Correspondingly, you can also give a speed penalty for the units with heavy two-handed weapons (like two-handed axes or swords). Currently almost all units have their speed set to "0" (which is not a bad thing, as the battles are more intense), so...

[NeoSpartan]

Far as I can tell the "spear" attribute is (outside phalanxes natch) virtually entirely restricted to the secondary weapon of "sword-and-spear" units like Hypaspistai and the assorted Celtic elites (a fair few others with the same combination don't have the attribute for their secondaries). Since the primary weapon in all cases is a sword, and one with the whopping 0.225 lethality and in most cases but one point less attack than the secondary spear (which has the usual infantry overhand lethality of 0.13), I must wonder - how is the secondary weapon having the "spear" attribute in any way particularly relevant to an unit "performing poorly" (especially as it sidesteps the issue AI has with secondaries), and were it removed (or lacking to begin with, as with eg. the Gastiz and their ilk), what reason would anyone have to ever use the units' secondary weapons ?

To me at least it would make sense to use the secondary overhand as a specialized "anti-cavalry" weapon to emphasize the versatility of these high-end units; certainly if it were stripped of any such factors, the only reason to ever use it would be for the sake of appereances...

hum.... I like to use the overhead spear when I put them in HOLD formation. Once I take HOLD off then I have them fight with swords.

BTW... is just me, or do spear units preform MUCH better when in HOLD??

[Ludens]

Just to make sure: the spear attribute should be removed from all units, phalanx and non-phalanx troops alike?

[Watchman]

The phalanx formation requires the spear, short_pike or long_pike attribute to be present AFAIK.

[Ludens]

The phalanx formation requires the spear, short_pike or long_pike attribute to be present AFAIK.
Sorry, do you mean that they need spear and short/long pike, or just one of the three?

[Watchman]

I've seen it mentioned "short_pike" is bugged in some fashion; in any case EB doesn't use it so that point is moot. Anyway, looking at the EDU (*cough*hinthint*cough*) all phalanxes have at least "spear"; pikes have "long_pike" on top of that.

[Pharnakes]

Eb does use the short pike, for the ipracrathous hoplotai, no?

[Watchman]

;155
type greek infantry iphikratous hoplitai
dictionary greek_infantry_iphikratous_hoplitai ; Iphikratous Hoplitai
category infantry
class spearmen
voice_type General_1
soldier hellenistic_infantry_iphikratoushoplitai_misthophoroihoplitai_indohellenikoihoplitai, 40, 0, 1.26
officer officer_hellenic_officer
officer officer_hellenic_standardbearer
mount_effect horse +2, camel +2, elephant -1
attributes sea_faring, hide_forest, can_sap
formation 1, 1.2, 2, 2.4, 4, square, phalanx
stat_health 1, 0
stat_pri 14, 0, no, 0, 0, melee, simple, piercing, spear, 0 ,0.15
stat_pri_attr spear
stat_sec 9, 2, no, 0, 0, melee, simple, piercing, sword, 0 ,0.13
stat_sec_attr no
stat_pri_armour 10, 5, 5, leather
stat_sec_armour 0, 0, flesh
stat_heat 3
stat_ground 0, 0, -3, -2
stat_mental 11, normal, highly_trained
stat_charge_dist 30
stat_fire_delay 0
stat_food 60, 300
stat_cost 1, 1374, 344, 50, 70, 1374
ownership greek_cities, slaveNo.

[Pharnakes]

Prehaps it used to then...:oops:

[Ludens]

Thanks Watchman, I'll remove it from all non-phalanx units then.

[JMRC]

Hi.

In EDU file there are written some rules about this:


; 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.
; prec = Missile weapon is only thrown/ fired 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
; spear & light_spear = The unit when braced has various protecting mechanisms versus cavalry charges from the front
; spear_bonus_x = attack bonus against cavalry. x = 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 or 12

So, unless there is an error in this description, the spear attribute only gets bonus against cavalry and even gets penalties against infantry.

I made some tests putting sword units against spear units with similar strengths and attributes and could not find such a clear advantage as is being said here.
Besides, it was very difficult to find similar units because they have so many variables that you can't say they won just because they had a bonus due to the spears.

However, against cavalry, as was expected, spears are deadly. I play EB with BI and use the spear_bonus_x attribute to give even more bonus against cavalry.

Can you show me an example of 2 opposing units where I can clearly see the spear bonus? Or is this an inside information that someone has from CA?

[NeoSpartan]

Thanks Watchman, I'll remove it from all non-phalanx units then.

Even from non-phalanx units that ONLY fight with spears like Hoplites, Theuperoi (sp), etc??????

[Watchman]

Those never had the attribute to begin with.

[tk-421]

Btw, I always wondered why Pheraspidai have defence ability of 12, while Hypaspistai have 8? I know Hypas and Pheras were both members of the same corps, equipped and trained to serve in a different role. So why should Pheraspidai be 50% better in defence than Hypaspistai, when they are virtually the same? Or is it just to equalize the 14 armour of the Hypas with the 10 armor of the Pheras? The same goes for the Kuruathoroi. They have exactly the same stats as Hypaspistai, but shouldn't they have an armour value of ca. 12 instead of 14, wearing mail armour while the Hypaspistai wear a bronze cuirass?

The Hypaspistai should actually have a slightly better defense. This was a mistake that has been fixed in our latest internal edu.


I made some tests putting sword units against spear units with similar strengths and attributes and could not find such a clear advantage as is being said here.
Besides, it was very difficult to find similar units because they have so many variables that you can't say they won just because they had a bonus due to the spears.

I run many tests with the spear attribute and I can tell you that it puts many units at a clear disadvantage.



; 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.
; prec = Missile weapon is only thrown/ fired 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
; spear & light_spear = The unit when braced has various protecting mechanisms versus cavalry charges from the front
; spear_bonus_x = attack bonus against cavalry. x = 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 or 12
So, unless there is an error in this description


This is not from the 1.5 edu. Is this BI? Regardless of what it's from, many of the descriptions that CA gave in the edu are pretty much worthless. They fail to mention lethality, they simplify the armor, ds, and shield work, and so forth. So yes, I'd say that there is a good chance that what they say is an error.

[Trax]

I like to use the light_spear attribute instead the spear, the melee penalty is much smaller or even non existent, but the spearmen still get some protection against frontal cavalry charges.

[Divinus Arma]

It seems that I'm getting an excessive number of NAKED GUYS from Gaul attacking me. Had a stack with 7 NAKED GUYS and another with 10. Ordinarily I see 2-4 per stack, which feels just about right.

Just an observation. It certainly contributes to the difficulty.

[Ludens]

Question: why do mercenary Iphikratean hoplites have the "good stamina"-attribute, while normal Iphikrateans don't?

[mcantu]

I too think that light_spear should be used for for most non-pike units. The EDU states that spear is for very long spears...

[tk-421]

Question: why do mercenary Iphikratean hoplites have the "good stamina"-attribute, while normal Iphikrateans don't?

Because attributes weren't finished yet at that point.


I too think that light_spear should be used for for most non-pike units. The EDU states that spear is for very long spears...

We may be using the light_spear for our spear units.

[Cybvep]

I have a question - why the armoured elephants are almost the same as the unarmoured ones? Just look at the stats of these two units:

;128
type african elephant armored bush
dictionary african_elephant_armored_bush ; Armoured African Bush Elephants
category cavalry
class heavy
voice_type General_1
soldier african_elephant_rider, 9, 3, 1
mount elephant african cataphract
mount_effect horse +3, chariot +3, camel +3
attributes sea_faring, can_run_amok, frighten_foot, frighten_mounted
formation 7, 11, 13, 16, 1, square
stat_health 1, 4
stat_pri 6, 3, arrow, 120, 60, missile, archery, piercing, none, 15 ,0.7
stat_pri_attr no
stat_sec 5, 60, no, 0, 0, melee, other, blunt, none, 0 ,0.1
stat_sec_attr area, launching, ap
stat_pri_armour 1, 5, 0, flesh
stat_sec_armour 15, 15, metal
stat_heat 5
stat_ground 0, 0, -5, -4
stat_mental 6, normal, untrained
stat_charge_dist 30
stat_fire_delay 0
stat_food 60, 300
stat_cost 2, 16250, 4063, 270, 400, 16250
ownership egypt, numidia, thrace, romans_julii, romans_brutii, slave, pontus

;127
type african elephant bush
dictionary african_elephant_bush ; African Bush Elephants
category cavalry
class heavy
voice_type General_1
soldier african_elephant_rider, 9, 3, 1
mount elephant african
mount_effect horse +3, chariot +4, camel +3
attributes sea_faring, can_run_amok, frighten_foot, frighten_mounted
formation 7, 11, 13, 16, 1, square
stat_health 1, 4
stat_pri 6, 3, arrow, 120, 60, missile, archery, piercing, none, 15 ,0.7
stat_pri_attr no
stat_sec 5, 53, no, 0, 0, melee, other, blunt, none, 0 ,0.1
stat_sec_attr area, launching, ap
stat_pri_armour 1, 5, 0, flesh
stat_sec_armour 13, 15, leather
stat_heat 3
stat_ground 0, 0, -5, -4
stat_mental 6, normal, untrained
stat_charge_dist 30
stat_fire_delay 0
stat_food 60, 300
stat_cost 2, 11250, 2813, 250, 370, 11250
ownership egypt, numidia, slave, thrace, romans_julii, romans_brutii, pontus, saba

So, the armoured elephants gain +7 to charge bonus (which doesn't really make a big difference with numbers above 50), +2 points to armour and +1 bonus versus chariots compared with the unarmoured elephants. Such small changes are insignificant. Oh, and they have worse "heat" stat (5 instead of 3, so they will tire themselves quicker) and cost 5000 mnai more. This plus higher upkeep (cost/4) make them, in fact, worse than their unarmoured version. This is quite strange.

;131
type indian elephant armored
dictionary indian_elephant_armored ; Armoured Indian Elephants
category cavalry
class heavy
voice_type General_1
soldier african_elephant_rider, 9, 3, 1
mount elephant indian
mount_effect horse +3, chariot +4, camel +3
attributes sea_faring, can_run_amok, frighten_foot, frighten_mounted
formation 7, 11, 13, 16, 1, square
stat_health 1, 4
stat_pri 6, 0, arrow, 120, 60, missile, archery, piercing, none, 15 ,1
stat_pri_attr no
stat_sec 5, 55, no, 0, 0, melee, other, blunt, none, 0 ,0.1
stat_sec_attr area, launching, ap
stat_pri_armour 1, 5, 0, metal
stat_sec_armour 15, 15, flesh
stat_heat 5
stat_ground 0, 0, -5, -4
stat_mental 7, normal, trained
stat_charge_dist 30
stat_fire_delay 0
stat_food 60, 300
stat_cost 2, 15450, 3863, 270, 400, 15450
ownership thrace, romans_julii, romans_brutii, slave, egypt, numidia, pontus, parthia, carthage

;130
type indian elephant standard
dictionary indian_elephant_standard ; Indian Elephants
category cavalry
class heavy
voice_type General_1
soldier african_elephant_rider, 9, 3, 1
mount elephant indian
mount_effect horse +4, chariot +4, camel +4
attributes sea_faring, can_run_amok, frighten_foot, frighten_mounted
formation 7, 11, 13, 16, 1, square
stat_health 1, 4
stat_pri 6, 0, arrow, 120, 60, missile, archery, piercing, none, 15 ,1
stat_pri_attr no
stat_sec 5, 52, no, 0, 0, melee, other, blunt, none, 0 ,0.1
stat_sec_attr area, launching, ap
stat_pri_armour 1, 5, 0, metal
stat_sec_armour 13, 15, flesh
stat_heat 3
stat_ground 0, 0, -5, -4
stat_mental 7, normal, trained
stat_charge_dist 30
stat_fire_delay 0
stat_food 60, 300
stat_cost 2, 10450, 2613, 270, 400, 10450
ownership thrace, romans_julii, romans_brutii, slave, egypt, numidia, pontus, macedon

Next pair. What do we have here... Um, almost nothing. +3 to charge bonus (practically, this means nothing), +2 to armour, 5 "heat" instead of 3, slightly worse (-1 O_o) bonuses versus cavalry and chariots. +5000 to cost and higher upkeep.

Ok, but maybe the armoured versions have much bigger mass. I checked this. The Armoured African Bush Elephants have bigger mass (20 instead of 15, this makes a difference in some situations, when the elephants have to charge through big mass of men), but the Indian ones don't even have a specific entry in descr_mount.txt and their mass is exactly the same in case of the unarmoured elephants and the armoured elephants.

It seems to me that the current stats are just placeholders, but I want to bring your attention to this elephant thing. The Armoured versions need better protection, I mean, their armour should somewhat reduce their vulnerability to missiles, right? So some bigger bonuses to armour or a point to hit points should give them some meaning.

[bovi]

Right you are, they're placeholders. They have a significant increase in armour in the internal build :2thumbsup:.

[Tellos Athenaios]

Not to mention those lovely new skins! :2thumbsup:

[Gaias]

Not to mention those lovely new skins! :2thumbsup:

Which we will get to see very soon right? :beam:

[Tellos Athenaios]

They've been previewed already.