Questions to CA about BI game mechanics
At the request of Kraxis, I am opening this thread to collection any questions people have about game mechanics raised by the expansion pack Barbarian Invasion. If we are lucky, some kind soul from CA may pass by and provide some answers.
Kraxis starts the ball rolling by the following observations:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kraxis
Several interesting and rather uncertain attributes have been added to the units.
is_peasant, what does it do? It doesn't seem to be connected to the hordes as several horde units haven't got this attribute as well as several non-hordeunits have got it.
power_charge, that is a strange one. It is applied to several of the heavier cavalries so it seems obvious what it is supposed to do, but a few good chargers haven't got it, such as Hunnic and Steppe Lancers or heavy cavalry like Scholae Palatinae. It doesn't seem to have enough consistency for us to make out ourselves.
The new attributes of 'spear' and 'light_spear' add some sort of effectiveness against cavalrycharges, but how much and how? I tested Saxon Keels (fair spearmen with the attribute spear) and they resisted Equites Cataphractii pretty well, if not perfectly. When I changed their attribute to light_spear they buckled totally under the charge and fled. It seems 'spear' is better than 'light_spear', but it is hard to balance stuff if we don't know what it actually does.
Re: Questions to CA about BI game mechanics
The less effective archers and cavalry, is that do to a stat change or some hard coded thing?
Re: Questions to CA about BI game mechanics
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steppe Merc
The less effective archers and cavalry, is that do to a stat change or some hard coded thing?
From an export_descr_unit.txt file that had only been modifyed slightly , and preportedly not at all for horse archers and archers in general {I downloaded it from TWC out of curiosity} I noted that all attack skill ratings for archer troops {foot and mounted} had been lowered a few points each .
Most Charge ratings are slightly lower , but I seriously doubt it would be enough to be noticed in play by anyone less observant than the Rain Man ~;) .
Edit : Grammatical error
Re: Questions to CA about BI game mechanics
Well the point about archery is rather interesting.
It is still very effective against the rear of enemies, they fall like flies. But any unit with large shields are pratically impervious to arows. That is interesting to me. For the large shields 'only' add a supposed 6 points of armour to the unit, but it really seems like it adds a whole lot more.
Limitanei have a large shield and 5 points of armour, 11 points in all to the front and left. Gallowglasses have 10 points of armour and no shield, yet they get ripped apart compared to the Limitanei. 1 point of armour can't do that.
Re: Questions to CA about BI game mechanics
Does hired Generals count towards the number of Famility Members allowed?
How does the Hounds of Culann and Lombard Berserkers work? The unitfile doesn't give them any special effects as far as I can see. How does one identify the special whirling attack they have?
Re: Questions to CA about BI game mechanics
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kraxis
Does hired Generals count towards the number of Famility Members allowed?
How does the Hounds of Culann and Lombard Berserkers work? The unitfile doesn't give them any special effects as far as I can see. How does one identify the special whirling attack they have?
stat_mental 15, berserker, untrained
Re: Questions to CA about BI game mechanics
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kraxis
Well the point about archery is rather interesting.
It is still very effective against the rear of enemies, they fall like flies. But any unit with large shields are pratically impervious to arows. That is interesting to me. For the large shields 'only' add a supposed 6 points of armour to the unit, but it really seems like it adds a whole lot more.
Limitanei have a large shield and 5 points of armour, 11 points in all to the front and left. Gallowglasses have 10 points of armour and no shield, yet they get ripped apart compared to the Limitanei. 1 point of armour can't do that.
Kraxis,
You probably know this by now, but RTW 1.3 (and therefore BI) effectively doubled the effect of shields vs. missile fire. This is a rather nice solution, as shields had not been as effective as they should have been. I don't remember the official source for this, but it certainly comes through in testing I've done. Units with shields hit by fire from the rear still suffer greatly (as they should.)
Re: Questions to CA about BI game mechanics
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Harvest
Kraxis,
You probably know this by now, but RTW 1.3 (and therefore BI) effectively doubled the effect of shields vs. missile fire. This is a rather nice solution, as shields had not been as effective as they should have been. I don't remember the official source for this, but it certainly comes through in testing I've done. Units with shields hit by fire from the rear still suffer greatly (as they should.)
This is strange. From what I read in the ask CA thread, Jerome mentioned that the difference between shields and armor is that shields are directional so only the front and left is protected.
So do shield confer extra protection above armor when it comes to missiles?
Re: Questions to CA about BI game mechanics
Quote:
Originally Posted by orangat
This is strange. From what I read in the ask CA thread, Jerome mentioned that the difference between shields and armor is that shields are directional so only the front and left is protected.
So do shield confer extra protection above armor when it comes to missiles?
Yes. There are three defensive stats: defense (basically ability to dodge or deflects blows), armour and shield. Defense works frontally, armour works allround, and shield only works front and left. However, when it comes to missiles, defense is useles and only armour and shield count. Since the BI and the 1.3 patch, shield ratings count double against missiles.
