Samurai Wars: unit changes for next version

As a new updated version of the mod is being worked on, Yuuki and I have taken the opportunity to look at possible changes to a few units.

We have spotted 3 units that are not used as much as they should be. As our goal has always been to ensure as varied armies and gameplay as possible, we have decided on some minor changes that should improve overall gameplay.

Yari Ashigaru: +2 morale
Cavalry Archers: +2 morale and same bow as Samurai archers (improved accuracy)
Samurai Archers: remove the negative cav modifiers (so they are not as weak against cavalry)

None of these changes should result in any drastic changes for the players but should make these units more worth their cost.

There is one effect of increased usage of such units though, and that is that the 10k florin level we use might end up being a bit too high.

It has always been my opinion that this mod allowed for games played at different florin levels. The current 10k level is IMO Samurai Wars deluxe as we see lots of high quality units like Warrior Monks and Heavy cavalry. Games at 9k and even 8k should be fine too and it actually allows players to have more varied armies, as they wont be "forced" to buy a standard line of heavy units to spend all the money.

With these changes we are pretty sure that 9k will be a better standard and personally I encourage trying out 8k too, not for making that a standard but simply because I dont need loads of Warrior Monks or Heavy cavalry to have fun ~D

Questions/comments are welcome.


CBR

I agree with the above changes. :bow:

Some ideas and thoughts to get the discussion going:
About Warrior Monks. Iirc, they differ from No-Dachi only in a 4 point defense value. Monks have 2, No Dachi -2 Defense.
I honestly don't see how that is worth 500 Koku. Especially since the "afraid of"
option is hard to balance and therefore absent. My point is that, yes we do see a lot of Monks but I don't think they are really worth 1000 Koku. I think it's more a matter of people thinking that, like in original Shogun, they scare other troops.

Also Heavy Cav aren't really overpowered or overused. The opposite is true when you take semantics into account. Heavy Cav should be the strongest.
Yari Cav for that matter seem a tad strong. barocca feels they are overpowered, iirc, but I'm not speaking for him here. I've used them a lot, not always succesfull, but when used right they own all other cav. One could argue that the spear is a stronger weapon in general because of its reach but then Yari Sams should be stronger in melee than No-Dachi. Btw, I've recently read that the Naginata was a particular succesfull weapon against Cav, slicing through Horses and riders legs. I'm saying that because I feel the Naginata units could be used more often. As it is now I avoid buying them because I think they are too slow.

Oh, and perhaps we should have a limit on gunpowder units. I didn't appreciate being shot to pieces by you last night. :wink:

You bring up a lot of points Ra's, but none of them have to do with the proposed changes. ~:)
To answer your points:

The starting point for Samurai Wars pricing was 2x STW pricing.
STW pricing for melee units was YA = 100, YS = 200, ND = 300, NI = 425, WM = 500, YC = 475 and HC = 600.

The 4 point difference between WM and ND translates into a 200% difference in probability to kill. It's 1.2^4 = 2.07. The WM is twice as good as the ND in melee. The ND does have higher charge, and the ND was priced at 600 at one time. However, the cost was lowered during the run up to the 10b unit stats because ND were not getting used at the 600 cost. At 500, they are still more expensive than the YS at 400 which they beat. This lowering of the price of ND also allowed the cost of CA to be lowered.

We can't really conclude that WM are too expensive at 1000 since we see a lot of them used. It's possible that WM could go to 900 especially if we switch to 9k as the standard money level, but NI would also have to be lowered to 700 in that case since WM are 1 combat point stronger and that alone is worth 20%. There is room to do this because ND went down to 500. It's possible that NI are overpriced at 800. NI are 3 combat points stronger than ND which makes it 1.73x better in melee, but they are slower and have lower morale. 500 x 1.73 = 865. Lowering the cost of NI and WM would make all other units relatively more expensive to these units. NC could possibly get a price reduction to 800 and the other cav left where it is which would open up more of a difference between NC and YC. The YC are 3 combat points better vs NC. This could be reduced to 2 points (1.44x better) by making the YC anti-cav bonus 4 points rather than 5 which would make it equal vs HC in melee points, but in STW the YC was 1 point better vs HC.

We could try these price changes in test battles along with the previous changes mentioned to YA, SA and CA, and see how they work at 8k and 9k. Something to keep in mind is that YC is a counterunit to CA and HC is a counterunit to WM. If these units get priced out of the game, the gameplay will be adversely affected.

Concerning weapon types. The gameplay isn't based on the historical weapon type. For instance, NI are simply a defensive unit and the weapon is inappropriate, but we didn't choose it. YC beat other cav which is not historical, but it's in there to provide an RPS system within the cav units. This was part of the original STW gameplay.

I was observer in a battle yesterday where you, Ra's, charged two of CBR's teppo frontally with two YC. The YC were repulsed with very close to half the men of each unit lost while the teppo lost only 15 men total. This means you lost 1000 koku while CBR lost only 50 koku. The YC are not designed to make frontal charges like that since they don't have high enough morale. The NC are better suited to that since they have higher morale and higher melee. You would have to guard your NC with YC to counter enemy YC. Even so, you will loose more money than you gain in a charge like that, and then have to make it up with your own teppo or archers later in the battle.

Double post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Puzz3D

You bring up a lot of points Ra's, but none of them have to do with the proposed changes. ~:)

---

:grin: Well didn't I say I agree? Sorry for Highjacking, I kind of understood it as an invitation for discussion. That is not to say that I question yours and CBR's authority on this topic, of course. I'm satisfied with the stats as they are but also still unaware of some things.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Puzz3D

To answer your points:
[..]
The 4 point difference between WM and ND translates into a 200% difference in probability to kill. It's 1.2^4 = 2.07. The WM is twice as good as the ND in melee.

---

Okay, I wasn't aware that it's that high. Seems alright then.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Puzz3D

We can't really conclude that WM are too expensive at 1000 since we see a lot of them used. It's possible that WM could go to 900 especially if we switch to 9k as the standard money [..]

---

I do not understand what you win by the change to 9k. Of course, when 9k becomes the new standard then every price has to change.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Puzz3D

Concerning weapon types. The gameplay isn't based on the historical weapon type. For instance, NI are simply a defensive unit and the weapon is inappropriate, but we didn't choose it. YC beat other cav which is not historical, but it's in there to provide an RPS system within the cav units. This was part of the original STW gameplay.

---

Right. Let's have a good gameplay. I'm not hysterical about not being historical.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Puzz3D

I was observer in a battle yesterday where you, Ra's, charged two of CBR's teppo frontally with two YC. The YC were repulsed with very close to half the men of each unit lost while the teppo lost only 15 men total. This means you lost 1000 koku while CBR lost only 50 koku. The YC are not designed to make frontal charges like that since they don't have high enough morale. The NC are better suited to that since they have higher morale and higher melee. You would have to guard your NC with YC to counter enemy YC. Even so, you will loose more money than you gain in a charge like that, and then have to make it up with your own teppo or archers later in the battle.

---

:wall: Thanks for bringing that up.
It was a desperate move. I simply panicked because all my troops were hit by backfire and I couldn't figure out why. From my perspective it looked as if my troops where behind a hill and far enough in the back. It was clear relatively early that i'd loose that shootout. 1000 to 50. Good god, it's not nice to hear it like that. I have been succesfull with similar charges but more from the flank and better timed.
Anyway, I agree neither YC nor NC should be used in frontal assault. It was a desperate move. I still have to watch the replay.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by R'as al Ghul

I do not understand what you win by the change to 9k. Of course, when 9k becomes the new standard then every price has to change.

---

10k was chosen because it's 2 x 5000. 5000 was the standard money of STW, and units in Samurai Wars are priced 2 x STW prices. However, STW was played with upgrades and downgrades while Samurai Wars is not. In STW, ranged units were usually downgraded by one honor level, and often two honor levels by expert players. In Samurai Wars, the ranged units are modeled on their one level downgraded STW unit with the price adjusted accordingly. This means more high level units can be purchased in Samurai Wars because non-ranged units are not upgraded as they were in STW. We tried playing Samurai Wars with the ranged units modeled on their non-downgraded costs and stats, and they were too expensive for what they could accomplish in battle. So, the prices on ranged units was lowered and later ND was also lowered without any change in the standard money used to purchace an army.

What CBR is saying is that 10k is too high for the present price structure, and could be part of the reason we don't see many lower cost units. Units like HC, YC and WM which are at the top of the price range should be limited by the money and not simply by the tax on more than 4 of the same unit. Of course, if we lower some of the unit costs such as NI = 700, NC = 800 and WM = 900, then 9k might still be too high.

The average cost of all the units not counting the BN, which is a special purpose unit and probably overpriced right now, is (100 + 200 + 300 + 400 + 400 + 400 + 500 + 600 + 800 + 900 + 1000 + 1000 + 1200) / 13 = 600. If the NI, NC and WM are each lowered by 100 the average becomes 577.


10000 / 16 = 625
9000 / 16 = 562
8000 / 16 = 500

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by R'as al Ghul

Thanks for bringing that up. It was a desperate move. I simply panicked because all my troops were hit by backfire and I couldn't figure out why. From my perspective it looked as if my troops where behind a hill and far enough in the back. It was clear relatively early that i'd loose that shootout.

---

We left the back kills as they were in STW. I've seen the result of limiting the back kill distance in STW/MI v1.02. It leads to an even worse situation where the player who is winning the shootout can put melee infantry right behind his guns which means there is no chance for the loosing player to charge those guns.

The reverse slope is usually a bad position for troops when you have units on the crest which can be fired on by guns. The reason for this is that the projectile travels in an arc, so if the enemy gunners are shooting upwards, the projectiles that miss are going to travel further. You're better off using YA inline with your guns or using cav somewhat back on the flanks ready to advance if the enemy sends cav at your guns.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by R'as al Ghul

:grin: Well didn't I say I agree? Sorry for Highjacking, I kind of understood it as an invitation for discussion. That is not to say that I question yours and CBR's authority on this topic, of course. I'm satisfied with the stats as they are but also still unaware of some things.

---

Oh I dont consider it highjacking. If you have questions about gameplay issues then just come with them even if they dont have anything to do with the current changes we are planning. We might do more if its needed and heck we might not think about everything. Either something needs to be changed or just better explained so players know why it is the way it is.

Backfire can sometimes be a bitch but as Yuuki already explained its in for a reason. It takes a bit of experience to learn how to place your guns and melee units. With hilly terrain it can be difficult to predict where the shot will fall and you have to move some units.

In your case your units were behind the hill and I think it would have been better to have placed them closer to your guns on the reverse slope.


CBR

Rather than the cost changes I mentioned, CBR and I think taking 1 point off the anti-cav bonus of YC and giving NI the same run speed as YS and SA would be safer. YA, ND and WM would still run faster than NI.

Well changes are in the eye of the beholder.
Problems are mostly perceived (except from the really glaring ones), because there can't be a perfect balance, objectively that is. There will be always some trade-offs.
People don't always base their armies on rational thought, and many times their selection depends on imaginary "bonuses", because it can be difficult when you 're not playing on a very frequent basis to determine the exact relationships between the various units.
Having said that, people may construe relative power through the at/def/mrl/arm stats, but the less measurable and comparable parameters, like speed and unit behaviour in different types of games, take the back seat. Therefore units that don't handle well frequently occuring situations in a 2v2 doesn’t mean that it ‘ll be the same in a 4v4, in terms of mobility at least.

I used to think that having distinct unit types and a small unit number makes it easier to balance. It certainly isn’t so when units start having radical differences that span from a few points in running and charge speed to having a penalty vs cav. Trying to be true to the original game also is a contributing factor. Maybe “extreme” stat units, aka units with a very clear role in the r/p/s, don’t take it well to small unbalances, and this can be magnified in a setting that pits a limited group of people against each other in a limited number of game types.

You’ll also have to consider that doubling the costs isn’t necessarily a logical way to handle the stw transition. A 1200 fl.-koku unit carries with it different expectations than a 500 one, and if you have units in the same price spectrum like 1000 and 1200, then the ability gap should be less pronounced than 200 and 400, because at high power levels stats and other abilities stack in a more significant way.

As for the 9k question, if there any changes are planned, it’s better being consistent and modifying them to 10k. I also don’t like too many elite units in a game, and we had thought of this a bit in the development of DUX , as we could see some armies with a decent number of elite units, most being around the 800-1000 mark, yet there were some costless ways to react (like showering a 800fl. spear unit with javs) and no single unit could win or lose a game (unless you went for all swords and the enemy had a good number of fks and cks hanging around:p).
Now with the low unit number, an elite unit can make a difference even if there’s only a slight balance issue. But as I mentioned in the beginning, past battles form the way one understands any problems, and I don’t know if at this moment changes across the board can be justified in a coherent way. If it was a couple of units at a time it’d be easier to track any repercussions that may appear in the existing game.

I wouldn't have a problem with cutting the unit costs in half and then playing at 5k. Doubling the costs does give you more resolution in the cost scale, but we don't make use of that because we keep costs on intervals of 100.

I thought the NC could be fit into the unit lineup without any problems, but it's not turning out that way. The NC at 900 is between NI at 800 which it beats and WM at 1000 which it doesn't beat. These units are a bit squashed together costwise, and the higher mobility of the NC isn't being accounted for in these relative costs. The HC at 1200 beats all of these units, and its cost does reflect it's combat advantage over NC, and at least to some degree it's combat + mobility advantage over the NI and WM.

Into that mix the YC is placed at 1000. It's slightly more expensive than its cost in STW. It looses to both NI and WM, but beats NC and HC. The +5 anti-cav bonus is probably too high. It was increased from +4 when the YS anti-cav bonus was increased to be consistent with that change. It's faster than other cav so that it can be effective in its anti-cav role. Its mobility is coming at a high price if you consider that YS at 400 is even stronger when fighting cav. The cost of this unit has to be determined empirically. If the anti-cav bonus is put back to 4, the YC vs HC matchup becomes even. The unit which makes the better charge will win.

The proposed changes to YA, SA, CA, NI and YC aren't drastic, but could have significant impact on the gameplay. Even if tested one at a time, eventually all have to be tried in combination to see how they work together. I feel confident that we can sort out the cause of any problems. We are getting more players now and seeing a wider variety of playing styles recently which will help uncover any problems. We don't currently have any highly exploitive players currently playing, but I think those issues were sorted out by increaseing the RPS last year.

I just hope this stat change will make Mizu more competitive against Shingen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Krypta

I just hope this stat change will make Mizu more competitive against Shingen.

---

You mean 2 to 1 kill rate Mizu vs Shingen isn't good enough?
Just tell me your favorite unit so I can be sure to ruin the stats on it for the next update. ~:)

did they fix the unit cost/ upgrade bug for missile troops?
otherwise you need to be carefull how far you reduce the cost
B.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by barocca

did they fix the unit cost/ upgrade bug for missile troops?
otherwise you need to be carefull how far you reduce the cost
B.

---

That problem comes from a value in the projectile file, and that can be set at 0 to remove the problem completely. As we had to make a custom projectile file anyway, to make proper guns, we changed it to 0 for all weapons.


CBR

I think I understand now what playing at 9k or 5k could do to unit choice.
So far, I've only seen Yari Ashis once, for example.
Cav Archers aren't bought as often as in STW either.
Since we're playing without upgrades it also happened quite often that I had some koku left.
And I agree that 4 Monks or 4 HCav is a bit much.
Samurai deluxe as CBR said.
One should be forced to buy weaker units when having 4 elite units.

I'd really like to test a 5k game.

Yuuki and I had a couple of 9k battles with the new stats and it certainly felt ok. Just having that 1k less seemed to work as expected and it gives the player more options. We will try it out a bit more I think before releasing it for more testing and eventually replacing the current stat.


CBR

Talking about employing weaker units brings “the route question” closer into view.

For some time now I have been aggravated by a nagging thought in the back of my mind (scary place).

The whole idea of routing troops adds an interesting aspect to game play. But it’s application to 16th century feudal Japan, where you could loose your head for not paying attention much less running away, may need a closer look.

Samurai are committed to-the-death, this is Bushido. If they have orders, they will complete their task or die in the process.

Even as far as Ashigaru are concerned, they would be lead by Samurai who would not hesitate to correct any wavering conscripts.

I believe that neither would rout as easily as has been depicted in the Total War series so far.

Do we have any historical information on this aspect?

:book:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tomi

Talking about employing weaker units brings “the route question” closer into view.

---

The proposed changes improve several lower end units so that playing at 9k will not mean more routing. YA and CA get +2 morale and SA looses the negative anti-cav bonus which it didn't have in original STW anyway.

The two other changes are CA getting the same bow as SA which just gives it a very slight improvement in accuracy from 0.55 to 0.60, and YC having 1 point taken off it's anti-cav bonus. This actually returns YC to the same anti-cav bonus of 4 it had in STW.

Playing at 9k means there will be fewer of the more powerful units in a battle which is another factor that allows low end units to survive longer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Puzz3D

This actually returns YC to the same anti-cav bonus of 4 it had in STW.

---

Does this mean that, if they don't charge properly they'll loose to other cav?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by R'as al Ghul

Does this mean that, if they don't charge properly they'll loose to other cav?

---

YC vs HC will be an equal matchup, so the YC will have to get a good charge to ensure a win especially since it has lower morale than the HC. YC vs NC will still be advantage to the YC by 2 combat points and should win, but will take heavy losses if the NC make the better charge. The lower morale of the YC in this matchup shouldn't be a problem since it will be designated as "winning". In both cases, the YC will inflict casualties at a lower rate.