I am, among many other things, one of the EB stats balancers. I would like some input on what you think needs changing for a more balanced game.
Printable View
I am, among many other things, one of the EB stats balancers. I would like some input on what you think needs changing for a more balanced game.
One thing I noticed right off the bat is unit speeds. Aren't they still a little too fast? It's not distractingly fast, but just seems a bit much. I'm going to try the unit speed modifier which takes down all speeds evenly by way of terrain and see if that helps.
Hmm don't really know about that. Feels like it has a pretty good balance. Effecting the speed could change that (at least according to the RTR forums unit speed affects charge and thus their balance). I don't think things move too fast. Elephants seem to die a LITTLE too easily one or two barrages from peltasts will leave about half the indian elephants dead. Although they appear to do plenty of damage.
Playing as Parthia I have major problems facing Seleucid and Bactrian General's Bodyguards. They are basically immune to arrows (one time I had 8 units of horse archers discharge all of their arrows on a unit of 120 Seleucid bodyguards and managed to kill only half of them) and also they cannot really be countered by any other unit the Parthians have. Cataphracts and the javelin armed persian cavalry units are all killed in no time and parthian infantry (including the pikemen) don't do the job either. Right now the only way to beat them is by surrounding them and hoping they rout.
Mad guitar Murphy
Here are a few quick observations:
1. Theurophorai/Peltasti- these two are all fairly close in stats. The only major difference I can see between the first two is that the Peltasti are better (!) charging, and theTheus are better against cavalry. Are the theus supposed to have identical armor and defense? Also, a charge of 1 and using spears makes them more or less worthless when flanking other infantry, which is both what I understand their role was and the description states.
2. Not really stats, but Macedon seems to be completely without the ability to recruit cavalry, except via mercenaries. There is a thread with a fix for the Companions, but it would seem that there is nothing else- no hippokontasai, hippeis, Thessalians, anything. Admittedly, I have only built the highest level barracks in Pella, and no sign of Hypaspistai or Agema or any other elite units at all, but I assume I am missing some other required building for them.
3. Akontisai and other skirmisher units (slingers, archers, etc.) seem to last an awful long time if they actually face a cavalry charge or turn on the cav after it hits. I've had peltastai decimate a Thessalian heavy cavalry after it charged them from behind. Cavalry as a whole seems vastly weaker against some units. The computer also seems to know this, as they regularly charge any non-phalanx unit with whatever skirmisher they have laying around.
4. Related to 3, somewhat- phalanx units are now just silly. I had a group of Pezhataroi fighting my hoplitai. My Companions hit him from the rear, killed 3 (large unit size) then lost a quick dozen men when the Pez swung their sarrisa around before they finished disengaging. The Pezhataroi then swung BACK around to punish the hoplitai a little more before a wave of Galatian swordsman hit them from behind- they turned, saw them off with NO losses, then went back to chewing up the hoplitai, who didn't get any kills this whole time the while pezhataroi kept turning to ignore them and fight off the more dangerous threat. While I assume this is probably a CA "feature", the lower kill rates make this a problem I never saw in vanilla or RTR. Basically, is there a way to stop a phalanx from changing facing while engaged? Otherwise, I think their armor or defense needs to be cut down somewhat to make them actually take losses when hit away from the pikes before they can respond.
5. Pirate ships- the stats for the "Great Pirate Fleet" ships are more than 2x the best ship I was able to build with the 2nd level naval yard- while I certainly would agree that pirates were a major threat during the era, I haven't ever read of them destroying a major power's navy in pitched battle before either- also, one huge unsinkable pirate fleet doesn't seem to simulate the way pirates actually operate- profit is the only motive usually, and sinking warships is a lot less lucrative than raiding merchants and villages.
6. Speaking of ships- how about a virtually unprotected transport- something a little less pricey and faster to build than the warships. The computer seems to be pretty aggresive when fighting at sea, so using one anywhere but the safest spots or for an emergency wouldn't be very useful. Of course, as long as one ship carries as many as a fleet this isn't a major concern (certainly not worth cutting a real unit anyway).
More next time I get a chance to play
Iskandr
I know this is a very sensitive subject but I think that cavalry charges are weak should the Akontisai mentioned above even stand and fight after being hit in the rear by a companion cavalry charge for example.
Yeah, the problem with cavalry charges is that 1.2 has a bugged charge bonus so other methods have to be used. Hopefully I sort it out a bit more, although don't expect to see heavy cav trampling over much of anything with a frontal charge (except skirmishers whose melee skills I will try and nerf).
I 2nd that a small, cheap transport ship should be buldable- epsecialy for Casse as getting your diplomat onto main land Europe just to ask for trade or sell maps is far too expensive.
I've had two "jedi general" encounters with the Bactrian guards. Each time I had them completely outnumbered and surrounded with powerful units. The general must have absorbed 100+ hits.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Guitar Murphy
I've been considering cutting general units down from a battle sized force to a token bodyguard force for most factions. Any thoughts?
Sounds wonderful to me :gring:Quote:
Originally Posted by QwertyMIDX
Problem with this is suicidal generals.Quote:
Originally Posted by QwertyMIDX
I think the balance is about right, thoguh maybe increase all defensive values for slightly longer battles?
1.5/6 corrects the charge values I think (And makes for challegning battles!).
Yeah the charge bonus bug is fixed in 1.5 and 1.6 (I keep begging for a port). Also, I haven't seen too many suicide generals in either EB or in 1.5, so I think I will do some testing once I'm back at home with my computer.
Just curious, but why are you thinking of doing this? Is it to more faithfully reflect historical orders of battle? If so, it may be a counter-productive to producing a good historical simulation. I suspect it would be too easy for the player to decapitate the AI and thus produce unhistorical results (my early Shogun battles tended to degenerate into this). Yes, perhaps the player should exercise self-restraint but personally I find gaming systems that require such behaviour to be a little frustrating. What you are doing with a historical game is simulating history - you don't have to literally represent every feature to do this and sometimes literalism in one area reduces the overally validity of the simulation. One way to think about ahistorically large bodyguard units is that it is just other elements of the army rallying around and fiercely defending its leader (or joining him in leading a crucial assault etc). From what I've read, trying to kill the enemy's general is a historical tactic but it should not be easy. It's for this reason I used to be happy with 2HP generals, despite it being ahistorical when looked at in isolation.Quote:
Originally Posted by QwertyMIDX
If you want to reduce bodyguard size for gameplay reasons, I'd be curious as to the reasoning. I find strong AI bodyguards rather a fun challenge. I would not worry about players abusing them in SP (prudence is a restraint anyway).
I haven't yet tested any units in battle except the Romani's, but I've taken a look at some of the other stats. I noticed that the Aursi Baexdzhyntae (That how you spell it?) have a charge bonus of 55. That seems...excessive? Especiall considering they are only first-tier riders.
Charge bonuses have very little effect, if any. You can ignore them.
Elephants vs Skirmishers
I'm able to kill an entire unit of african elphants with one or two volleys of javellins. I can route them on one volley and kill them on the second.
I'm not sure if that's what you wanted. It will force eastern players to really out flank and out manueuver the skirmishers. Or, you could try tempt the AI or opposition player to spend their javelins on lesser units.
I think it's cool, but the AI is too stupid to protect the elephants. I can nerf them before the main battle commences.
Strength melee Archers
They seem to be a bit difficult at times to route when using calvary. I smash in to their flanks to begin with, then they loosen up in formation, and pull out spears. They are able to kill a handful of my calvary, which does not seem like much, but for a player like me, calvary and how I use it is always the key to my victories. So losing 5 or 6 riders to archers will hurt me since those very Horsemen will probably hit 3 different groups of infantry in 3 different waves. Not mention chasing down routers. (I love calvary). I never worried about archers before, till now. Unless I use a general's calvary, regular seems to take a bit of a beating. Not much, but a bit. I thought archers had poor melee skills to start with. I don't see how low armoured units like them would stick around for a cavalry charge.
Spear armed archers should be able to stand up to some cavalry attacks, especially some of the 'barbarian' ones who aren't the sad sorry militia of their civilized western counterparts. Still, missle troops do seem to be too tough in melee at the moment.
I totally agree with units like Doryphorai (sp?) and such beating up on light cavalry, but I do hope we get the 1.5/1.6 version with fixed charge bonus. It's really annoying seeing 2 full strength units of companions inflict 3-4 casualties on archers when they hit them from behind. Does anyone know if there is a malus when the charge target is running away? It seems that a lot, the light troops will run away until the cavalry finally catches up and kills 1 or 2 (thus slowing down from the charge) then instantly rally back into melee with the now stationary cavalry. In the real world, unless the light troops reached broken terrain (sadly absent from CA's dream world) or supporting troops, the chance of them halting and reforming in this circumstance is essentially 0, regardless of morale or experience.
Finally, as an aside, does anyone know what the requirements are to build Macedonian infantry beyond Pezhataroi? I mean Hypaspists and the like.
thanks,
Iskandr
I don't find the generals unit to be a problem. The general himself can be. Waiting 15-20 seconds for him to die on x3 TC, while completely surrounded by my own generals is a bit jarring. But for the sake of the AI there doesen't seem to be much that can be done.Quote:
Originally Posted by QwertyMIDX
happy new year
The speed of a charging unit relative to the unit it is attacking seems to have a pretty serious effect yes.
Yesterday I took my Roman consular army against the large Epeirote army that always appears in Calabria after the first year. I found it somewhat remarkable that two units of Epeirote peltastai were able to stand up against the charge of my Romani faction leader and member and a unit of equites combined, and fight them to a standstill and hold them there for half the battle instead of being run over. It took a rear attack by my other cavalry wing, who easily ran over the other Epeirote wing's akontistai, then ran across the enemy rear, to rout them. Isn't peltastai morale a tad too high? I mean, considering the akontistai routed the instant the first line of horsemen reached them, the fact that the peltastai got into a close-in scrap seems almost too much to believe.
As mentioned earlier, Peltastai have virtually the same stats as Theurophorai- 20 total defense, the same as Pezhetairoi. That's more than twice the defense of Akontistai (8) and better than levy hoplites (14). Seems a little over the top, or maybe the cav just needs better offense?
Iskandr
I observed that my Equites Consulares have 2 hit points, but the Molossian bodyguards of the Epeirotes only have 1. Isn't that a bit unfair? One unit of my consulares can rip through the Molossians like butter.
It would do everyone well to remeber that Peltastai as estentially rearmed Hops or Pezhets. They are well trained men.
I have noted that the Hellenistic generals are incredibly though. It takes a really long time to get them down in close combat. Especially the Ptolemic bodyguard, who appear to have double hitpoints. I think decreasing their armour/defence a tad, and making sure all bodyguard units have only 1 hitpoint will improve the balance, especially when the step to 1.5 is made. I haven't tried out the other generals yet. Also, the lightest skirmishers can stand up to cavalry-charges right now, but I think this problem will be solved by 1.5 as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by QwertyMIDX
(I know the decision to upgrade has not been taken yet, but several members have suggested that EB will upgrade.)
Shouldn't training equate to the defense SKILL, not armor though? I know this would make a big difference to missile fire, not sure about cavalry charges.Quote:
Originally Posted by QwertyMIDX
Iskandr
As they are men from Pedzetairoi or Hoplitai they have the same armour and even better shield.Quote:
Originally Posted by Iskandr
akontistai are poor levy called in RTW peltlasts while EB peltlastai are well trained medium level skirmish/meele inf
Macedon bodyguards are nasty, they are seriously over the top. As Greeks I sent my army to deal the killing blow to the faction. I reached the town and saw it had 4 generals in it. I looked at my 14 stack army, shook my head and went home. It wasn't worth the cost of half my army.
Also cities should all have some kind of levies troops. In my Pontus campaign one of the Macedon islands kept building a 15 stack army of slingers (nothing else) and attacking a city only to get destroyed. After years of this the city had an army with silver chevrons.
Ok, another quick note: elephants are currently very, very easy to kill- 1 unit of akontistai just wiped out 2 units of elephants with 3 volleys of javelins- indian elephants mind you. Pehaps (a lot) more than 4 HP would help? Also, it makes no sense whatsoever to have all their defense be in skill (33 skill, 3 armor?). I don't recall elephants were ever trained to dodge javelins and block spears with their tusks- please let me know if I am mistaken. In any case, since skill has no effect on missile fire, their defense drops to...3 against missiles...even arrows drop them in short order. I haven't seen any live long enough to run amok. Anyway, my suggestion: change all their defense to armor (maybe some shield to represent the headguard and houda and other non-body armor that covers the front only). As it is- elephants are nearly useless, and for their price and historical reputation, that's a real shame.
Also, across the board I see a fairly large variation in armor values for units with similar or identical descriptions- for example, Thanvabara and Eranshar Arshtbara- their descriptions make them sound more or less the same, and no armor is mentioned or noticeable on the cards. But Eranshar have 2 armor, Thanvabara 1. Also, the "long dagger" of the Thanvabara gives them melee 9, the 8' spear of the Eranshar is only an 8 (though of course with the anti-cav bonus)
Iskandr
accidental double post, sorry
well for one thing, ive noticed that gestatae(the naked gaul unit) have an armor stat of 4...there overall defense is like 14 i think? i dunno, i can understand their high defence skill from benig skilled and their shield defence, but why do they get an armor bonus? seems like being naked wouldnt allow that...
Because of the use of leathality in EB attack factor is only half of a unit's attack power. The 8 foot spear has a lot more leathality than the knife.
The Gestatae have a helmet, that is where the armor comes from.
I would take up the Thureophoroi issue too. They have the same stats as Principes, plus bonus fighting cavalry! Please forgive me for not remembering the many glorius battles won by Peltasts and Thureophoroi. I am sure they defeated Carthaginians, Iberians, Gauls, Macedonians, Seleukids.... I just fail to remember their glorious deeds.
Honestly those guys are really pumped up. That is if we are concerned with historical accuracy alone. From a gameplay point of view they give the phalanx based nations a refreshing new alternative. I like that.
Thureophoroi were actually very effective troops, they were just seriously underunsed by most of the Greek states. Only the Seleukids really took to them. 9000 Thureophori held off 4 legions at Cornith. Also, the romans weren't some incredible, unstoppable force. Most of their skill was not in fighting, it was in getting others to fight for them. Expecting their (pre-marian no less) forces to steam roll everything else is not particularly reasonable. Additionaly the short sword animation is slightly more effective than the overhand spear animation. Just looking at stats doesn't say much of anything, you have to actually use the troops in battle.
Anyway, what Princeps are you talking about, early or late? IIRC the late princpes has an extra point of armor with relation to the Thureos (I'm away from my home computer an the EDU).
Just a quick post to say that after a weekend of playing EB (as Romans), I think the stats are very well balanced. The balance of arms - cav vs inf vs missiles - feels "right" to me and nothing shrieks out as unbalanced. I think you have succeeded in your ambition to create a more realistic and challenging combat system. There's always a temptation to keep tweaking things, but I would not want to see any radical reworking of the combat system unless/until you have to adapt it to the post-BI patches.
Perhaps the only thing I would suggest needs looking at are the elephants' vulnerability to missiles. I've faced a fair number now (mainly Epirote Indian elephants and armoured Indian with no description and unarmoured graphics). And they regularly die very quickly to single units of Roman levees (one or two volleys kills 4 elephants). It does not seem right. I prefer the vanilla RTW model, where elephants cause you fits. I don't know much about the realism, but from a gameplay point of view, elephants seem questionable player picks and anticlimatic opponents.
I think generals are way too powerful... I liked your idea of making their bodyguards tiny like 13 men or so (large unit size).
Archer power needs to be toned down, they are far too devastating at the current setup, I play multiplayer battles against my friend online and we don't evne play with archers anymore, or we both only have one, otherwise if you get 3 decent archer units, and since everybody can, you can kill 500-600 guys easily, even if they have armor upgrades and stuff. Its overpowering.
Multiplayer I think reveals alot of inbalances, of course its difficult to say, but regardless my friend is worlds better than the AI and he stills gets the floor wiped with him when it comes to my Baktrian Hippies in tow. He's never been able to defeat my Baktrian Army of this setup
- 1 Unit of Baktrian Cataphracts (3V 2ATTK 1DEF)
- 3 Units of Baktrian Hippies (2V 2ATTK 1 DEF)
- 3 Units of Pantadopoi Phalangites (2V 1DEF)
- 2 Units of Thorakratai (3V 2ATTK 1 DEF)
- 3 Units of Indo-Greek Hoplites (3V 1 DEF)
- 1 Unit of Baktrian Agema (3V 1ATTK 2 DEF)
- Optional Slot, maybe some Indian longbowmen, or some Pheraphasidai or two units of some of those Pontic Spearmen for some "weight"
That setup is unstoppable and all for only 48000 cash, which sounds like alot, but with EB units are all 1k + each and that's without any upgrades and that's the shit troops, 1 unit of Cataphracts is 10k alone, so you can see its not spam-fest of 1000000 cash games, I hate those.
He bitches about my cavalry all the damn time, cause it wipes the floor with his "bonus against cavalry" infantry he buys like thereuphoroi and such. I think I use my cavalry extremely well (its all about 2, 3 or 4 way attacks!), but he insists that if you get 4 cavalry units together, it doesn't matter what you do, you will win. I'm increasingly thinking that in Eb more cavalry = better, cause not even roman foot can stand up to dual units of cataphracts slamming into them, maybe some Praetorians, but even rank and file Roman foot will melt away like snow. I can't imagine how much ownage it'd be as Parthians with all those archers AND heavy cavalry, of course campaigns is a hella alot different than multiplayer. Generally me and my friend don't even touch those factions with a 10 foot pole, because it'd be a slaughterfest for whoever doesn't have the army of cavalry and archers.
Just my input, btw, EB is hella fun online, without stupid ass AI its better than RTR online and makes RTW vanilla online look like a child's game. Kudos, and god I love my Baktrians! Don't nerf them, you'll make me cry. :embarassed:
I agree with your friend... 4 Units of cavalry all together will win the day, even if you charge them head on into powerful pikemen...
Doesn't matter what mod you play, people online will ALWAYS try to win in the cheapest, gayest way possible... Which is usually with 10+ units of archers and the rest expensive cavalry... Which might actually be realistic for some eastern factions...
I stopped playing MP after about three games... I know what i was going to see in every battle i played... And you know what? I was right... First online game i ever played, my opponent was Parthia and he used more horse archers than there are minutes in a day...
Second game was against 'Egypt'... My opponent used several units of those elite Egyptian pharaoh pikemen, several pharaoh archers and a ton of those cavalry units with more men in them than other factions' cavalry...
Third game my opponent was Rome and used lots of urban cohorts and lots of praetorian cavalry... Sack this for a game of soldiers i thought, since i knew every opponent i faced was going to use these unrealistic armies all of the time so i just stopped playing...
Anyway, archers too powerful? I'm playing as Rome at the moment and i've seen some archers, but they barely inflict any casualties on me or on the enemy... Mostly only barbarian archers i've seen though, haven't encountered any of the heavy eastern stuff.
Yes, I can't stand playing with other people, especially 1000000 denarii games, man those are ridiculous, everybody was Seleucids with endless cataphracts, silver shields and onagers. It was idiotic.
I always try and set up armies reasonably realistic, and although my Army is cavalry-heavy, its not overwhelming, he usually gets 3 to 4 Cavalry units as well, just doesn't use them as well. But the eastern archers are ridiculous, I loathe those cheap persian levies, simple loathe them, they are everywhere, everywhere and they will cut anything you got to pieces in campaign. In my Baktrian campaign half my army is archers, they will eat formations alive unless they were the best you got. However, even Cataphracts take heavy losses from archers. I remember once my Hetarioi lost like 30 men to my friend's Thanavabara, there wasn't anything I could do since they have such long range and there wasn't and opprotunity I could use my cavalry in, say break apart his flank or something. So they got shot to pieces. Considering its 10,000 cash unit and its being eaten up by some 2,000 cash archers, man it pissed me off.
I also wonder why roman Generals are in groups of 100 with 2 hp, and good stats while nobody else is. Roman generals are terrible to beat unless you overwhelm them, 100 2 hp cavalry with upgrades AND the general with them to get morale is just killer, worse than my Baktrian Cataphracts.
They chew up my Sacred Band cavalry, spit them out and ask for seconds.
Perhaps we can make the spear bonus against cav higher.
Some experiances in the SP campaign: I don't find the Yeuzhi foot archers terribly powerful. They chew up lightly armored targets easy enough but anything with armor no chance. Hoplite-types can't even be touched, which is good. I just started training the noble cavalry but am yet to use them.
Baktria's Pezhetairoi made me pay dearly for an attack on them with 4 units of heavy cav, but they still lost to the cav eventually. It's much more effective for me to use my own spearmen but their upkeep is so high I rarely have more than 3 units. 5 spearmen units being the idea force. So it's actually easier and cheaper to use 4-5 faction members to kill basically everything. 2 archers to pick off unarmored units and 1-2 spearmen for fodder.
Indeed, hopefully we'll be able to cut down the usefulness of general units in the next build.
I did a little exploration of the EDU stats using Caligula - one curious thing I observed was that some (Companion, cataphract) heavy cavalry secondary weapons (swords) had the AP property whereas others (e.g. Roman, Greek) did not. I am not sure if this was an intentional way to represent "superior" cavalry but it seemed odd.
Also the Praetorian cavalry looked odd - their primary weapon seemed to be a lance, but lacked the AP property and higher hit strength of comparable units.
Some other queries - why do Roman general's cav primary weapons have a swing speed of 160 and those of equites have a swing speed of 0?
Why do levees have a secondary weapon hit strength of 0.125 and velites only 0.04? I am not sure exactly what hit strength does, but are velites supposed to be much less effective in hand-to-hand combat? I had assumed the secondary weapon was a short sword in both cases.
Most Greek heavy cav is armed with a Kopis, which cuts through armor like butter, it's very like the Iberian Falcata. That is where the AP comes from, if you look at them in battle you'll see the difference.
I think the Praetorians are going to be cut and as such I didnt stat them...not sure though.
The overhand cav spear has a quicker swing rate, but I think is less lethal...I'll check when I get back to my own EDU.
The leeves have a spear, the velites have a knife.
The Thanavabara archers are insanely overpowered especially if you have bunch of them. They can cut through anything like butter. I charged my armenian general at them and by the time they got there almost half of them were dead and then they didn't even run away.
Btw in battle when you hold the mouse over the armenian general's unit it says pontus cavalry. Why aren't my general's bodyguards catharphacts?:inquisitive: They can't take on anything:shrug: while my roman general's unit single handedly wiped out the naked dudes just after 2 volleys of javaleins.:gah2:
A very good idea IMO, as it is more realistic as well. There are plenty of elite units in the game, and a large general's bodyguard is not really neccesary...Quote:
Originally Posted by QwertyMIDX
I also think that elephants die too easily, especially with their price tag. Perhaps you might tweak up their defense/hitpoints and make it more of a morale penalty to fight an elephant unit?
Also, I think you have done a great job with archers. The eastern ones are very good, and the western ones do exactly what their description says, provoke an attack. I can't stand it when I face these psioli archer units that targer my general. After they've picked off 1 or 2 men, I rush in...
some generals units still have 2 hp. you mgiht wanna check it. my seleucids ones, as an example.
archers aren't always that "overpowered" but you cant expect to let your light-infantry just walk straight threw....
General Units = Invincible to Spears and Phalanx. I'm having trouble fighting the Carthagian General unit. Lot's of trouble.