Printable View
This is more a basic RTW engine question as much as anything else, but I was mainly wondering whether there were hidden effects.
The obvious things you can see are an increase in attack stats, defensive skill and morale. One point per chevron.
Are there any others? Does the range of skirmishers increase, for example?
I beleive the accuracy of ranged attacks increase. but thats only what i have picked up from random forum posts.
That's "attack stats" really. Both melee and missile attack ratings go up one for one with chevrons.Quote:
Originally Posted by Blxz
Yes but for missile units, apparently attack stat increases are equated to accuracy increases. So a freshly recruited unit of Cretans will be somewhat accurate while a gold chevroned unit will almost all hit with their arrows. Not sure what weapons upgrades would equate to though.Quote:
Originally Posted by QuintusSertorius
I see. That's the sort of "hidden" thing I was getting at, you can't tell that from the unit stats.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brave Brave Sir Robin
I think weapon upgrades again add to the attack stat (which unlike defense isn't broken down into constituent properties).
A tangential question, what effect do command stars have? I think it was something like +1 morale and +1 defensive skill to every unit for each star.
Well, from my experiences with RTW and some of it´s mods i´ve noticed, though it is really very personal experience, that units tend to follow orders more accurate and quicker if under the command of multiple star general. It actually makes sense, and the common lack of stars for your generals in EB sometimes makes me feel like a complete noob :) But, as i said, it´s just a kind of feeling, i can´t prove this...
Besides: Command stars seem really to affect the whole battlefield, not only the nearby troops - you can see this often, how AI soldiers suddenly loose their high morale, not only because their general was killed, but also because they then seem to loose all those bonuses.
Another random question, what's the difference between levels of discipline? As in between a unit with "normal" discipline and "disciplined" discipline? What's the game impact?
Indisicplined soldiers routs easily while disciplined ones nearly fight to death.Quote:
Originally Posted by QuintusSertorius
I think that has to do with how close they stay in formation, being able to then project more weight onto a smaller number of enemies or some such noise.
As for experience chevrons, I'm pretty sure they increase the Attack rating of all weapons and the Skill defense rating. I do not think they increase morale, that would be very imbalanced.
Weapon upgrades increase the attack rating for melee weapons only, and armor upgrades increase the armor defense rating.
AFAIK: disciplined units regain their morale faster.
edit: the tight of formation depends on two things - training level ( highly_trained = the best ) and spacing in the edu ( the smaller the number, like 0.7 with some elite units, the tighter ).
Surely that's morale, not discipline?Quote:
Originally Posted by Atraphoenix
I've noticed that levy hoplites take longer to change formation than professional hoplites. I click-and-drag unit layouts a lot, so individual soldiers have to rearrange themselves within the formation. I always thought that this was an effect of discipline - how quickly and effectively a unit can obey new orders. Levy hoplites will mill around forever, whereas professionals nearly always get into formation before the enemy charge hits :smiley2:
Training relates to how a unit lines up. For example, hoplites would be trained, falxman untrained. In Vanilla, peasant was also a level for, aptly enough, peasants and units like wardogs and gladiators.
Discipline is how well a unit reacts to morale shocks such as, scary units, fire attacks, compromised flanks, and units emerging from hiding as well as general attrition through melee.
Edit: There may also be a highly trained level which would probably be applicable to hoplites, phalangites, and other units that rely on keeping formation who are professionals. I haven't checked the edu lately.
When I win a battle against phalanx argies are always the last men on the battlefield.Quote:
Originally Posted by FriendlyFire
do not forget disciplines soldiers are not affected as levies when general falls.
There is, you can see it on the Unit List. Untrained, trained, highly_trained are the three levels.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brave Brave Sir Robin
The Ludus Magna contains most of the old threads for research into the R:TW engine. I don't think we ever worked out exactly what the unit attributes (such as "disciplined") did, though.
from EDU guide made by Aradan:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ludens
"disciplined" units morale won't be affected by nearby routing units, while "normal" and "impertuous" units will lose a point when nearby allies rout. "low" discipline unit lost in bigger parts. (or disciplined units affected in smaller margin, a bit forgot since I've seen disciplined units got chain routs)
And "Disciplined" units regain morale faster, while another got at longer time.
Unit training affect the "tidyness" of the formation, and maybe responsiveness to movement location
:bow:
Lots of confusion about experience in this thread. Experience does:
* Add to melee attack stat.
* Add to melee defence rating from all directions (defence skill).
* Add to morale.
Experience does NOT:
* Add to missile attack stat. The stat page for the unit shows an increase, but it doesn't actually make any difference.
Try a battle between a slinger unit with triple weapon upgrade and no experience against a phalanx unit, and tally the amount of dead by the time the slingers start to skirmish. Then try the same battle but give the slinger 9 chevrons but no weapon upgrade, and finally the same battle with no upgrade at all on the slinger. You'll see that the weapon upgrade makes them massacre the enemy while the chevrons make little or no difference from the base unit.
Since when does defence skill help in all directions? I thought it was clear that it only helps from the front and the right side.
I never run a test, but I don't believe that experience doesn't add to range attack. I had silver and gold chevroned slingers and they annilated everything and I never heard anything different.
The reason the test you recommend doesn't prove that is because EB phalanxes are invulnerable to any range attack from the front, so you are right more attack doesn't help there.
But slingers are a good unit to use because they have such a low base missile attack so the chevrons theoretically give them a huge bonus. Rahl, maybe you want to try the test against somehting other than a p[halanx unit then?
A phalangitai unit has shield value of 5 and this alone requires an attack value of 11 to just pass through that defence bonus. Now take into account the aditonal armor of at least 4 ( 8 :2 for sling ) and try to kill any of those guys with an unexperienced slinger from the front with a value of, say, 2 or 3 :) A slinger unit must then have an attack value of 15 to cause any significant damage on a phalanx unit from the front, which is not possible in EB without tweaking the EDU.
I also do remember reading, that defence skill only applies to the front and the right side, but shield and armor are there for instead. But while attacking a unit from the rear, some soldiers always would turn around and fight back.
phalanx_man has the exhaustive study on RTW Battle mechanics listed here : http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=377804
I seem to have seen an increase in rate of fire in experienced archers. I had two units of Toxotai Kretikoi loosing their arrows at incomming enemy, one fresh unit, the other with 3 chevrons. The experienced unit was out of ammo long before the other. Coinsidence, something I've missed?
Sorry about that, you are right, only those two sides are helped.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rahl
I chose a phalanx unit because any unit except those will either be significantly decimated regardless of upgrades, or they will reach the slingers before they have spent a significant amount of bullets. The test is valid precisely because they are so resistant to missile fire; with only +3 attack from weapon upgrades, they are decimated. Yet, even with 9 chevrons experience, which means +9 attack, triple the amount of the weapon upgrade, they are not.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rahl
Go ahead and test it.
I run some tests and it seems neither I nor you are fully right. I used Machimoi (modified by me, only 3 shield defence) as the enemy unit and attacked them with ethiopian archers, kretans and belearic slingers (also modified, 4 attack and 25 ammo). I tested 1 vs 1 unit first time with no upgrades, second time with 9 exp and third with 3 weapon upgrade.
In all runs the 9 exp units did about 20-50% more damage then the unexperienced ones while the units with 3 weapon upgrades got 60-100% more kills.
It seems experience does add to the range attack but only slightly while weapon upgrades give an enormous boost (they fully add to attack).
Maybe I will do further tests later.
I cannot find the results I got when I tried it a long time ago anymore unfortunately, but I recall seeing only a miniscule change with the unit experience, in the general vicinity of 8-14 kills without any upgrades, and 9-14 kills with 9 chevrons. The weapon-upgraded ones killed in the order of 20-35 each time, which is a very visible increase. As I only did the test 3 times with each instance, I considered the increase of chevron upgrades statistically insignificant, but perhaps the purported accuracy boost mentioned here by Blxz is true then. I suppose accuracy boost would make more of a difference in your test when each missile that actually hits has a greater chance of killing its target than in my test.
Still, the added penetration of the weapon upgrade obviously makes more of a difference than the accuracy. At any rate, the stat increase shown in the unit card for chevrons is clearly not correct.