Noob questions.

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

No. Each hit is only a guaranteed kill if it comes over the defense of the enemy. Accuracy is a factor *before* the attack-defense calculation is made.

Yes. Accuracy is a whole separate entity here when discussing missile units. An arrow that "hits" its target with attack "x" still needs to overcome defense "y" before the 1 lethality value kicks in. However, the chance of the successful hit is randomized by the accuracy value of the missile itself.

[-Stormrage-]

Apart from certain units (elephants, chariots, catas and infantry who like it au naturel etc), being flanked and being hit with cav charges, what else brings down morale/causes units to rout?

Definetly getting shot at the back by slings or archers.

Once routed a whole mob of roman legions cuz i had 3 slingers at the back pelting them. definetly saw a morale decrease when the stones hit. Shaken to wavering. (did this in RSII, but eb using same engine)

[-Stormrage-]

Yes. Accuracy is a whole separate entity here when discussing missile units. An arrow that "hits" its target with attack "x" still needs to overcome defense "y" before the 1 lethality value kicks in. However, the chance of the successful hit is randomized by the accuracy value of the missile itself.

That reminds me, INCREASE ARCHER ACCURACY.

Thank you :D

[The Celtic Viking]

I had some time today apart from my usually busy schedule and so I decided to make a small test on the effect of experience when put on archers. I used the flat grasslands map, and by setting the AI as defender and bringing 4 Thorakitai (one as my general), which I always kept right behind the archers I was testing with, I kept the AI standing still in close formation. I first tested normal Kovkasi Lernain Netadzik (Caucasian Archers), then I tested them with 3 experience and then with 3 weapons upgrade (the two latter both showing up as giving 10 attack [7 being the normal], for the record). I fired from the default formation (5 ranks deep, close formation), always from the direct front (or as close to that as I could come). I fired from the maximum range possible. I did it 10 times per version. Here are the results:

Caucasian Achers (no upgrades, 7 attack) vs Hoplitai Haploi (no upgrades)

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

1: 22
2: 17
3: 25
4: 27
5: 25
6: 27
7: 30
8: 27
9: 38
10: 24

Average: 26,2 kills

Caucasian Archers (3 experience upgrades, allegedly 10 attack) vs Hoplitai Haploi (no upgrades)

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

1: 22
2: 26
3: 20
4: 30
5: 29
6: 25
7: 32
8: 35
9: 45
10: 28

Average: 29,2 kills

Caucasian Archers (3 weapon upgrades, 10 attack) vs Hoplitai Haploi (no upgrades)

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

1: 63
2: 85
3: 65
4: 65
5: 71
6: 69
7: 67
8: 66
9: 78
10: 69

Average: 69,8 kills

Because the difference was so stark, I went ahead and did the same test again, but this time with 9 experience points.

Caucasian Archers (9 experience upgrades, allegedly 16 attack) vs Hoplitai Haploi (no upgrades)

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

1: 33
2: 35
3: 34
4: 42
5: 26
6: 36
7: 36
8: 43
9: 30
10: 43

Average: 35,8

My conclusion from this is that experience points doesn't seem to increase missile attack at all; rather, the theory that experience for missiles only improve their accuracy seems much more likely to be true.

[antisocialmunky]

Pretty much that. Experience gives some sort of accuracy bonus. This is why I banned weapon bonus for long range missile units because missile/shield/kill rate bonuses are so finicky.

Well that and wall of legions with archers.

[Kival]

I'm wondering about that... before we changed it, accuracy was 100 % for all unis, so it does not really make sense to increase accutacy.

[The Celtic Viking]

Actually, that's not true, Kival. Though GG2 indeed did add accuracy modifiers that didn't exist before (for arrows, sling bullets and javelins, that is), missile accuracy cannot have been 100% prior to his fiddling as they still missed a lot. (Yes, I have checked it to be sure.)

[Kival]

Actually, that's not true, Kival. Though GG2 indeed did add accuracy modifiers that didn't exist before (for arrows, sling bullets and javelins, that is), missile accuracy cannot have been 100% prior to his fiddling as they still missed a lot. (Yes, I have checked it to be sure.)

Are you sure that's not only attack lower defense in the random calculation of attack?

[The Celtic Viking]

Are you sure that's not only attack lower defense in the random calculation of attack?

Yes - when I said they "missed" I meant that their arrows landed off target, i.e. in the ground.

[Lazy O]

But weapon upgrades are bugged, that is not a fair comparison at all.

[vartan]

But weapon upgrades are bugged, that is not a fair comparison at all.

They're only "bugged" in your opinion and that of many other misinformed. It just works differently than you'd like it to.

Yes. Accuracy is a whole separate entity here when discussing missile units. An arrow that "hits" its target with attack "x" still needs to overcome defense "y" before the 1 lethality value kicks in. However, the chance of the successful hit is randomized by the accuracy value of the missile itself.

This is quite disturbing. It means that the attack point you get from a chevron is different from the attack point you get from a weapon upgrade. That and gg2 misinformed me and/or I misunderstood him. Because if you remember, it isn't simply attack vs defense. If this was the case, you couldn't hurt an enemy unit if it had a certain defense or higher. Remember that even at the lowest attack values there is an apparent minimum chance to hurt the enemy.

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

They're only "bugged" in your opinion and that of many other misinformed. It just works differently than you'd like it to.

This is quite disturbing. It means that the attack point you get from a chevron is different from the attack point you get from a weapon upgrade. That and gg2 misinformed me and/or I misunderstood him. Because if you remember, it isn't simply attack vs defense. If this was the case, you couldn't hurt an enemy unit if it had a certain defense or higher. Remember that even at the lowest attack values there is an apparent minimum chance to hurt the enemy.

Well I remember us testing the defense bonuses vartan and it didn't seem to matter whether 1 bronze shield was added or the unit had an extra point of armor. However, the attack bonuses may operate differently. TCV got nearly 3 times as many extra kills by adding the weapons upgrades. If you just gave Caucasian Archers 10 attack in the edu and tested it, I feel the results would be much more similar to those he received testing with the 3 chevrons added rather than with the gold weapons upgrade though all three would be at 10 attack.

This may mean that attack bonuses are broken while the defense ones are not.

[gamegeek2]

All "attack" values are the same. "Lethality" is separate from attack, as is "accuracy" but weapon upgrades provide the same sort of attack boost as do chevrons, though chevrons provide other bonuses as well (morale, for example).

As far as I know, attack and lethality are interchangeable values. If somebody can come up with a concise study to disprove this statement (which is supported by phalanx man's study) please, I welcome it.

[Kival]

but weapon upgrades provide the same sort of attack boost as do chevrons

According to TCV tests that cannot be true.

[vartan]

According to TCV tests that cannot be true.

Our resident genius, that's right. I too am baffled. Where does the truth lie in all this rubble?

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

Our resident genius, that's right. I too am baffled. Where does the truth lie in all this rubble?

Well if we take the experience of vanilla MP players into account, everyone goes for gold weapons upgrades on archer units. There probably is a reason why.

[Lazy O]

The rule is that weapon and armor upgrades are better no matter what, the only cases where experience is used often is on head hunting maidens to give an extra bit of punch.

[vartan]

Well if we take the experience of vanilla MP players into account, everyone goes for gold weapons upgrades on archer units. There probably is a reason why.

Was the same when I used to participate in competitive play in 2007. Attack is much cheaper, too.

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

The rule is that weapon and armor upgrades are better no matter what, the only cases where experience is used often is on head hunting maidens to give an extra bit of punch.

Lazy, me and Vartan actually tested this and found it to be false. We modified the edu to give mercenary hoplites -1 armor and then gave them a bronze armor upgrade and matched them against regular hoplites. I think we tested 20 units and the split was 11-9 or something like that for the units without the upgrades. There was clearly no advantage for the armor upgrade. I'd be interested to do the same test for weapons upgrades however.

[Lazy O]

I meant better compared to experience.

[gamegeek2]

According to TCV tests that cannot be true.

I was speaking of melee units, sorry.