[EB MP]3.0 Thread - Testing and Updates

[-Stormrage-]

As far as archer attack, I think gamegeek is using the draw strength of various bow types in attack ratings, possibly factoring in arrow types as well. It is the accuracy that really matters though. If you hand a bow to a professional archer and someone off the streets who is relatively strong, there is little difference in the amount of damage the arrow would do if both hit their target. However, the professional will hit his target far more often so in this sense the accuracy changes make a lot of sense.

Yes your right a proffesional archer wil hit his target more often then a levy archer, but my point is most eb units have armour around 10 even "light units" have armour, so even if the archer hits his target the armour of the "light" unit will stop it. not to mention all light units have sheilds 3 to 5. an increase in arrow attack will insure that when a light unit is hit he will die and his armour wont stop the bullet.

Another note: I think sword attack is too low. Lets take a common sowrd, for example we have a sword thats 11 attack. consider the enemy unit most unit have 8- 10 armour, + sheild + the defense skill. So add all those defense aspects then look at the attack value of a sword. It shows that the units are dying way way way too slowly.

Message to GG: If u want to have a light unit, here is what u can do u can give the light unit something like 4-5 armour, then give him 20-25 defense skill. that way you get a light unit archers can kill, but at the same time a light unit which doesnt die too fast in melee, thats my advice.

GG i found a problem, its either a stat error or a category error. Unit (Taxilan Agema )
category cavalry
class light
stat_pri_armour 12, 13, 2, leather (armour/defense skill/sheild)

[LusitanianWolf]

Yes your right a proffesional archer wil hit his target more often then a levy archer, but my point is most eb units have armour around 10 even "light units" have armour, so even if the archer hits his target the armour of the "light" unit will stop it. not to mention all light units have sheilds 3 to 5. an increase in arrow attack will insure that when a light unit is hit he will die and his armour wont stop the bullet.

Another note: I think sword attack is too low. Lets take a common sowrd, for example we have a sword thats 11 attack. consider the enemy unit most unit have 8- 10 armour, + sheild + the defense skill. So add all those defense aspects then look at the attack value of a sword. It shows that the units are dying way way way too slowly.

Message to GG: If u want to have a light unit, here is what u can do u can give the light unit something like 4-5 armour, then give him 20-25 defense skill. that way you get a light unit archers can kill, but at the same time a light unit which doesnt die too fast in melee, thats my advice.

GG i found a problem, its either a stat error or a category error. Unit (Taxilan Agema )
category cavalry
class light
stat_pri_armour 12, 13, 2, leather (armour/defense skill/sheild)

EB units killing rate is already too high, historically speaking in the majority of battles there would be much less casualities and the majority of them during pursuit.


Bah, I'm eager to finish this work and get back to EB MP, the new EDU looks promissing!!!!

[-Stormrage-]

[QUOTE=LusitanianWolf;2053367961]EB units killing rate is already too high, historically speaking in the majority of battles there would be much less casualities and the majority of them during pursuit./QUOTE]

Historical battles lasted for hours, We cant spend hours on a single battle. This is wwhat historical accuracy has driven you too , oh people. You are now willing to make kill rates so slow to match the kill rates of real life. well you have to remmeber something, its a game not real life.

[LusitanianWolf]

[QUOTE=-Stormrage-;2053367967]

EB units killing rate is already too high, historically speaking in the majority of battles there would be much less casualities and the majority of them during pursuit. /QUOTE]

Historical battles lasted for hours, We cant spend hours on a single battle. This is wwhat historical accuracy has driven you too , oh people. You are now willing to make kill rates so slow to match the kill rates of real life. well you have to remmeber something, its a game not real life.

I'm not talking about the speed of killing but the number of people that would be killed... Alexander the Great in Guadamela was fighting a huge number of archers and peltasts and his infantry casualities are said to be 100-500 (acourding to wiki at least).

[-Stormrage-]

@Shak, I love yah man.

Till now ALL of your 11 posts have been posts of good reasoning, historical facts , and supported by resourses and jquotes. Best of all your supporting some ideas i agree with, and are putting them forth in a good case.

[TheShakAttack]

[QUOTE=LusitanianWolf;2053367970]

I'm not talking about the speed of killing but the number of people that would be killed... Alexander the Great in Guadamela was fighting a huge number of archers and peltasts and his infantry casualities are said to be 100-500 (acourding to wiki at least).

That is correct. Historically, archers were not terribly effective against armies that were well prepared for to receive fire from arrows. It's very easy to hide under shield or some sort of cover. Most archers were skirmishers and meant more to annoy, harass, distract, lower morale etc than deliver serious casualties. The psychological threat of being hit/maimed by a constant volley of arrows, seeing a few guys being hit around you, and the annoyance at not being able to retaliate was the desired effect. The only exception would be when the archers were well positioned and the units couldn't really turn around to face fire and duck under shields. Even in the battle of Carrhae, the HAs most useful purpose was to sap morale and continously harass the legions. They did not inflict tremendous casualties (in comparison to how long they were shooting/harassing for and the great shooting position they would have i.e. raised, and from flanks).

The logical exception of course would be units that were not prepared (didn't bring a sheild, or have decent armor)- this would have been more mobs than real armies. In EBO we play pitched battles, and in situations like this, it is hard to imagine that a unit would not even bring a shield or some sort of cover.

The exception of course are elite archers who functioned more as snipers than mass volley archers (think Legolas from LotR v an orc archer). Unfortunately EB does not seem to have represented them very well. These elites had the ability to shoot incredibly accurately from long ranges. Of course, they would have to be very, very expensive and small in numbers...

[-Stormrage-]

(think Legolas from LotR v an orc archer)

HAHA lol

Unless it hits the "naked's" two spherical objects contained in a sac close to the pelvic region. In which case it should disintegrate and explode. Instantly killing the indian longbowmen and half the army.

xD

[-Stormrage-]

HE REMOVED AP FROM ORCA
stat_pri 13, 8, no, 0, 0, melee, blade, slashing, sword, 0 ,0.225
stat_pri_attr no

What the hell you thinking!!!!
Orca??? orca!?!?!!?!? those are ELITES.

NOTE: Cav charge distances are now 30. Archer charge distances are 30. infantry charge distance is 30.
Ok,cavalry should have a longer charge distance then infantry, especailly long lance weilding cavalry becuase: the cav charge especially the heavy cataphract charge should not stop for anything when u increase charge distance the cataphract will lower lance a longer way back thus any unit in between the cataphract and the target does not distrupt the charge. this is what will happen. the cataphracts will lower lanes charge to their target any levy unit any loose formation unit will get impaled and the cata will continue forward to the target. another situation, consider there is a blob of infantry . if targeta unit and it happens to be fighting on the opposite side of the blob, the cata will not lower lances it will run into the blob lances raised, if charge distance is increased they were lower lances way before and impale any poor unlucky guy between the cata and its target.

Cav charge should be between 40 and 50.

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

Storm, why don't you play as Getai and take 5 Elite Archers. Those guys tear stuff to shreds. I can't see any basis in your complaints otherwise. If you want strong archers you should not be playing a mod from this time period when infantry was the predominant force on the battlefield.

Oh and orca never had AP Storm. He's made them stronger by giving them a 0.225 longsword. These are now, imo, one of the best infantry units in game. Do not complain about them.

[LusitanianWolf]

[QUOTE=TheShakAttack;2053367981]

That is correct. Historically, archers were not terribly effective against armies that were well prepared for to receive fire from arrows. It's very easy to hide under shield or some sort of cover. Most archers were skirmishers and meant more to annoy, harass, distract, lower morale etc than deliver serious casualties. The psychological threat of being hit/maimed by a constant volley of arrows, seeing a few guys being hit around you, and the annoyance at not being able to retaliate was the desired effect. The only exception would be when the archers were well positioned and the units couldn't really turn around to face fire and duck under shields. Even in the battle of Carrhae, the HAs most useful purpose was to sap morale and continously harass the legions. They did not inflict tremendous casualties (in comparison to how long they were shooting/harassing for and the great shooting position they would have i.e. raised, and from flanks).

The logical exception of course would be units that were not prepared (didn't bring a sheild, or have decent armor)- this would have been more mobs than real armies. In EBO we play pitched battles, and in situations like this, it is hard to imagine that a unit would not even bring a shield or some sort of cover.

The exception of course are elite archers who functioned more as snipers than mass volley archers (think Legolas from LotR v an orc archer). Unfortunately EB does not seem to have represented them very well. These elites had the ability to shoot incredibly accurately from long ranges. Of course, they would have to be very, very expensive and small in numbers...

Exactly. But these elites would probably not be gathered in a single unit but acting as officers/champions spread around the army to inspire other archers or as general's personal retinue and they impact on battle would be too low to represent in RTW (unless some managed to kill the enemy general or hunt some Mumakills )

[-Stormrage-]

Another problem we have is, the light units which are accually stated as having light armour are given a huge sheild to block arrows.

example : Ridanz
stat_pri_armour 2, 12, 5, flesh . Cool theyve got light armour i finally found a unit i can kill with archers, thank you. oh wait, 5 sheild WTF!!!

I think GG is a big archer hater. Even the light units which should die to archer fire are given a big sheild to hide behind. GG its like your mocking us .