Slow cavalry is dead cavalry, applies with much greater consequences to light cavalry.
Printable View
Slow cavalry is dead cavalry, applies with much greater consequences to light cavalry.
Is there a limit?Quote:
Originally Posted by gamegeek2
Currently it is 3 heavy cav max, dont ask me how you classify heavy cav thats a whole other complicated process in itself.
Sounds interesting while complicated. At least the issue with steppe + phalanx would be solved this way...Quote:
Originally Posted by gamegeek2
Is it your intent to make it so people are spamming elite phalanxes as pontus?
What are you talking about?Quote:
Originally Posted by antisocialmunky
They are too cheap. That is what he's talking about.
How would you like all elite phalanxes to be like that, but 100 men and less cost?
I don't know though the other elite phalangites should still be better than the pontos ones. The pontos elite phalanx should still be somewhere between pez and elite phalangites.Quote:
Originally Posted by gamegeek2
Agree with Kival. Chalkaspides are mere imitations of the true successor elites. That said, they are an elite in and of themselves if you get what I'm saying.
Current stats almost doom them to be superior, if that can be counted as doom. Therefore I think making ¨^elite phalaxes Tier 3 units is the wisest course of action. There would be statting to make the African Pikemen and the Chalkaspides inferior to the successor elites.
That'd be good.Quote:
Originally Posted by gamegeek2
I'm wondering, kopis armed sword cavalry seems strictly inferior to asian axe armed cavalry. Lonchophoroi/Successor Skirmisher cav for instance die to them quite hard. Most of the cavalry form the range of 2k-3k will die to these guys when you use their axes including hippies type cav. Yet, they cost only 1.8/1.9k. I think you should consider stating axe attack down a little bit to atleast reign in the ridiculousness. :)
Ive been considering plus 1 attack for kopis armed for some time now. Youve convinced me.
Other proposals I have in mind:
-Stat Peltastai Makedonikoi and Hypaspistai as a high-quality veteran units, rather than an elite ones.
You should stat the Peltastai as vet and Hypaspistai as Royal Guard so pretty much like the Agema that everyone else gets.
Javelin cav seems woefully ineffective also :\ I dunno if you can make them 'effective against cavalry' or whatever. I know the idea is that they harass cav but it seems like they can never hit anything...
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&p...iNmNl&hl=en_USQuote:
Originally Posted by -Stormrage-
I'm sure a couple of levels into ESL is enough for anyone to understand how heavy cavalry is determined. I would skip the first page because it contains the most English.
----------------------------
What a mess.
Post it on the website in the rules section
Where are your manners?:laugh4: Please post it on the website in the rules section.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lazy O
The vartan does not require manners.
Seconded.Quote:
The vartan does not require manners.
Perhaps not, but he certainly deserves it.
To return to the topic, I believe you missed to up the Numidian archers' ammo, as they still only have 20. Small thing, but it's just something I noticed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lazy O
Speak for yourselves please. Thank you.Quote:
Originally Posted by -Stormrage-
Thanks, and gg2 just mentioned it to me. We'll be fixing that certainly.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Celtic Viking
Right, heres a list of suggested changes and ones I have thought of that Ive compiled.
1. Increase Teceitos, Indian Longbowmen, and Drapanai to 100 men unit size (Large)
2. +1 sword attack for kopis and falcata armed cavalry. Kopides are statted so they are approximately identical in effect to axes and maces, but cost slightly more. The kopis was a superb cavalry weapon, therefore it seems reasonable for it to receive a slight bonus for cavalrymen who wield it.
3. Stat elite phalanxes as Tier 3 veterans, not Tier 4 elites, so they are a reasonable cost.
4. Increase light HA and skirmish cavalry numbers to 60 men (large) and some medium cav units (medians, armenians, hippeis, and equites mainly)
6. Increase the skirmisher javelin bonus from +1 to +2, and apply it to Peltastai Makedonikoi and skirmisher cavalry
7. Increase slinger size to 80 men
8. Increase the shield value of some light barbarian units and increase costs correspondingly. Gaeroas are almost unuseable simply because they die SO easily to missiles. A big shield should block missiles at least somewhat effectively.
9. Increase Georgian infantry morale to 13, Peltastai morale to 11
10. Make Dacian elite skirmishers capable of skirmishing, and make them better at it (same with Thracians on the second bit)
11. Make Cretan archers better in some manner, perhaps by giving them their massive range back.
12. Make Indian elephants either cheaper or increase their numbers.
13. Make Indohellenic noble hoplites Tier 3, not Tier 4, to differentiate them
--- MAJOR HA PROPOSAL ---
1. Remove cantabrian circle from horse archers
2. Increase numbers of Rider units to 60 men
3. Increase numbers of common HA units to 70 men (the ones with shortswords)
The point of this is to make it so there need not be any restrictions on steppe cavalry and missile limits, moving towards the no-rules highly-balanced zone that I think we want to be in. As of right now an HA in cantabrian circle defeats a Persian or similar archer, but foot archers should easily outshoot horse archers. We may even be able to remove the HA attack reduction if this is done.
For archers screwing up cav, my suggestions are:
1. Stat heavy archers with more archer skill so they cost more to bring but are better as archers.
2. Lower morale of light archer units (6 for persians sounds good).
-Wait... you can make 70 man units?
-I'd HIGHLY discourage stating down elite phalanx. There's no reason to, they are fine. Who the heck ever assembled an army that was all silvershield/bronzeshield?!? You can already and it should be discouraged.
-Can you make the lightly armored barb units just have more men instead?
-I like the idea of removing cantabrian but I rather keep it. :p
-I'd say limit cav size to 60 max.
You don't need to balance everything at once, just make some small tweaks and see if it works first.
Btw- I noticed that some skirm cav have jav range less than skirm range so they never actually lob their missiles.
I Like the suggested changes.
Can someone please explain to me the TIER system?
I too dont think elite phalanx should be cheeaper, i would love it if you did,but i think elites are fine as is.
INCREASING ARCHER SKILL,can you do that!?!? cool.
i suggest +1 for archers,whatt do you think GG. its a BIG change.
Agree with many changes except statting down elite phalanx and also giving 70 men to light HA units. 60 is a big enough change and should suffice. Also don't feel as changing the shield of light barbarian units is the answer. They are already pretty cheap. The extra men solution would work, but I still don't feel like you would see many on the field for the corresponding price increase that would come. Barbarians generally just have better infantry options and so do the successors that can also use them.
Right, the other option is to keep elite phalnxes at 100 men and current prices. If thats fine, then we are OK.
I say light HA to 70 men (not including the riders) because of a few reasons:
1. If we are to remove cantabrian, they would get shredded by foot archers too easily for their cost. They will still lose costwise, I just want the steppe factions to have a fighting chance with steppe armies vs foot archers, if we are to ever reach the no army comp rules point.
2. They can
Also the current system for archers/slingers and javelins (respectively) works as this and I say we discuss it:
Bow determines base attack, range, and ammo
Levy/Crap: -1 attack, -10% range, +0 base cost
Normal: 0 attack, 0 range, +.15 base cost
Good: 0 attack, +10% range, +.35 base cost
Very Good: +1 attrack, +12% range, +.6 base cost
Javelin determines base attack range and ammo
Normal: 0 attack, 0 range, +0 cost
Good: +1 attack, +5% range, +.2 base cost
Very Good: +2 attack, +10% range, +.45 base cost
I wont get into base cost details on how it works because thats very confusing, all I will say is that +.2 base cost is between 100 and 200 more usually, depending on unit size. Cavalry are costed as if they have twice as many men as infantry, so they would go up a bunch too (this is what drives up javcav costs).
I feel this system needs changing.
Come on Hamachi.
NAO
YES, THANK you. Our missile system IS crap, we need some changes.Quote:
I feel this system needs changing.
What would you suggest?
Guys just to know are you planed to test roman faction, will be there major changes to them ?? I can help if you want.. Cheers
This plan is my current, modest proposal. A more radical plan would involve altering the descr_projectile_new file, to change missile accuracy.Quote:
Originally Posted by -Stormrage-
Bow/sling and ammo determine base range and cost of weapon
Levy/Crap: -1 attack, -5% range, +0 base cost
Normal: 0 attack, 0 range, +.15 base cost
Good: +1 attack, +5% range, +.3 base cost
Very Good: +2 attack, +10% range, +.45 base cost
Javelin determines base attack range and ammo + cost of weapon (technically it does vary, i forgot to mention that)
Normal: 0 attack, 0 range, +0 cost
Good: +1 attack, +10% range, +.15 base cost
Very Good: +2 attack, +20% range, +.3 base cost
Foot Skirmishers: +2 additional attack, +10% additional range
Cavalry Skirmishers: +4 additional attack
Id also want to increase cohors cost so its just above 1800, only so cohort only armies are not possible. Im thinking to reduce marian and imperial cost reduction to -17.5% to do this (currently it is -20%).