Armour Values

[Randal]

Hey all,

I've been playing this mod for months now, trying out all kinds of factions though I've only finished one campaign so far. Great work. It's even replaced Broken Crescent as my favourite Total War mod.

However, I'm a bit confused about some of the armour values in the mod. Some seem odd. I've read that the team decided them based on historical evidence, but searching hasn't revealed any topics on this.

To take some examples: Camillan hastati seem to wear only a single bronze greave and a bronze helmet for protection. This nets them 7 armour, compared to an unarmoured Gallic Swordsman who has only 1. It seems a rather huge increase in armour for a unit which looks only marginally better protected.

A Cohors Reformata wearing a full coat of iron mail however only has 10 armour. This seems a comparatively small increase for wearing advanced armour instead of virtually none.

And then it seems Polybian Principes who have virtually the same armour have a value of 12 here. Is this because later Roman legions no longer wore greaves? It seems a pretty big difference. I can sort-of see how the greave'd help a lot in melee, but against archery in particular I'd expect the mail to make a much bigger difference.

Anyway, I imagine there has been tons of internal discussion on stuff like this on the team, but I don't know which. I'd be very interested to hear the reasoning behind all this.

[Ludens]

The armour stat of any EB units is calculated via the same formula, based on the unit's equipment. The only exception I know is that barbarian units get an additional armour point for reasons of balance (and possibly to simulate that they would more often have supplemented their armour with captured equipment).

Although I don't know the exact formula, the basic idea is that a large shield will already cover most of the body, so armour on those bits that are not covered (the head and the leading leg) is going to make the biggest difference.

[gamegeek2]

AFAIK, the hastati got calculated as if they have a chest plate.

I find that the EB armour system has some serious flaws, but it does balance out the game pretty well. One of the biggies to me is the apparent OP of helmets - a cheeked helmet gives +4 armour (compare bataroas with botroas).

AtB (Asia ton Barbaron, a mod for EB) will get a revamped stat system, though the fundamentals of EB stats (slow combat, lethality-based) will still dominate - values will definitely be tweaked.

I also don't get the Principes - Cohors difference.

[Qvintvs]

How to explain that Bataroas take a lot more casualties when you bombard them with javelins than Hastati, who take basically no?

Why Goldberi Curoas have 1 more point of armor than Bataroas?

[Randal]

Because the Hastati have a bigger shield (great against missiles) and better armour to boot.

But no, it does not seem as if they are calculated as if they have a breastplate, because Polybian Hastati with a breastplate showing on the model have 9 armour instead of 7.

Which again seems weird, as this puts them just 1 point below a Cohors Reformata (Or other troops with medium-mail armour, I expect.)

And since the Cohors for some reason has a lower defence skill than the Hastati the Cohors has the same defence stat as Polybian Hastati even though the former is armed in chainmail and the second has just a bronze pectoral that would mostly be covered by the shield anyway, which as per Ludens' explanation above shouldn't really have given much of a boost.

I assume that the lower defence skill is because mail armour would encumber the soldiers more? Not quite sure I'd agree with that then since in a formation there wouldn't be much room for dodging and using mobility as a defence. I'd sooner expect the armour to affect stamina, which would in the long run also reduce defence skill as the troops get tired more quickly.

Yeah, it does seem a bit peculiar. Still, most troops do seem to perform roughly how I'd expect them to. And the slow combat makes battles better than almost any total-war game I've played.

(But if I were to tweak EB, I'd definitely switch a few of those armour values around a bit. I'd also make the weapons a bit more similar to eachother. Reduce lethality of longswords, remove AP from most weapons...In antiquity, or most pre-modern warfare, the deciding factor in combat was the coherence, discipline, morale and courage of the troops involved, not whether they had a straight sword or a slightly curved/weighed one that suddenly made them twice as effective against armoured foes, and combat usually saw relatively few casualties until one side broke and ran and was cut down in the pursuit. Making weapons less of a deciding factor might simulate this a bit better, I feel. Well, except the spectacular and unusual weapons we know did have a big impact on battles, like the Sarissa or the Falx.)

Oh, and thanks for the explanation, Ludens. I hadn't considered the redundancy reasoning. It makes quite a lot of sense, though it would have the effect of making the troops more vulnerable to missiles from the rear in-engine. Still, because they couldn't dodge then this does make some sense.

[seienchin]

Off course its completly ahistorical. Even Geasatae have an armour rating^^
But I guess the EB Team had the problem with missile units, which always have Lethality 1 and atacks from the back making armour your only defense, so giving everybody reasonable armour ratings would have made EB more or less like Vanilla. And I am happy they didnt.

[athanaric]

I find that the EB armour system has some serious flaws, but it does balance out the game pretty well. One of the biggies to me is the apparent OP of helmets - a cheeked helmet gives +4 armour (compare bataroas with botroas).

OTOH, I've always interpreted it as if those Barbarian swordsmen (Bataroas, Xerunoudozez, Milnaht) occasionally had some irregular armour besides their helmet, upping their armour to 5 (helmet+basic clothing+factor x).

I also don't get the Principes - Cohors difference.

Maybe the Cohors Reformata's value should be upped to 11? That way, they would almost be on par with Solduros (12). I say almost because I assume that Solduros, being genuine elite troops, would be more likely to get top notch equipment than legionaries.

How to explain that Bataroas take a lot more casualties when you bombard them with javelins than Hastati, who take basically no?

Shield ratings count twice against missiles. This means that any unit with a shield value of 4 has a pretty decent anti-missile defence from the front.

Why Goldberi Curoas have 1 more point of armor than Bataroas?

That makes them more interesting to hire (they are also slightly more expensive, accordingly). Likewise the Cretan Archers.