At the net their was a hot topic on 'The quest for a new Florin standard' 2 days ago I posted some questions on the situational factors, and thier impact at 10k and under, the thread died in its tracks and ive not heard from any of the 10k and under guys; How come? (im not gonna let the issue die).....
Well, I think the thread died down because of it's nature, trying to find an ultimate florin level that everybody who isnt a noob MUST PLAY until RTW comes out. That never happened because it is going to be impossible to change people's minds without actually playing for some time. I dont think anybody "won" or anything.
If you want my opinion, I think that the situational factors will make more of an effect at lower settings because of the lower strength and morale of the troops. Since it is harder to survive a charge, hills would seem a bit more important for their charge-slowing ability. I do not know about rain, however. I dont know a lot about the stats and how things are calculated, because the game relies on a lot of voodoo math to calculate everything. If I had more than just a suspicion of something, I would have been more active in the thread.
How strong should situational factors be, in your opinion?
Also, I think that many of the people at the NET read only the "recent topics" list, and cannot be bothered to navigate to the forums when the link disappears beneath the bottom. Try bumping the thread.
"Never in physical action had I discovered the chilling satisfaction of words. Never in words had I experienced the hot darkness of action. Somewhere there must be a higher principle which reconciles art and action. That principle, it occurred to me, was death." -Yukio Mishima
The simple answer is that situational factors have the same impact no matter what florin level...but of course nothing is simple
The only thing that might mean more is the morale bonus for being uphill (+2 I think) A low morale unit that would rout while standing on level ground might only waver with that +2 bonus...but it still depends on how big the morale impact was for it to rout (maybe so big anyway that +2 is not enough)
The combat stats themselves are not really important. Its the difference that matters. 2 units each with 0 attack/defense will kill each other just as quick/slow as if they each had 20 in attack/defense.
The morale loss from lots of fatigue means more for low morale units as they are closer to the rout point of course. The first lost bar doesnt mean anything though..the second bar means -2 atk, third bar is -3 atk, -1 def plus -3 morale.
For those people who thinks 15k now has too much morale(with the +2 we got in VI) then 10k is the answer as that more or less means a general reduction in valour of 1 on most units..of course depending on what army you are using but from what I have seen and what Im using myself I see the same units being used just with one less valour.
Before the patch 10k was paradise for cavalry and gameplay was very different compared to 15k. But with swipe gone I feel the gameplay/army selection is the same as 15k, just with that -2 morale in general.
Think that was it?
CBR
Yes if we look at hills then they are important for swords if playing a low florins (all or most units being equal valour) The hill means cavalry has its charge reduced (dont know how much really...only my experience) and non-spear units will not lose that many troops and therefore not rout.
A spear unit wont feel that charge anyway so standing on a hill to survive against cavalry is not very important.
CBR
Well, doesnt less valour upgrades mean less defense, and a greater impact from strong charges? There is more than just a morale reduction, I think.
"Never in physical action had I discovered the chilling satisfaction of words. Never in words had I experienced the hot darkness of action. Somewhere there must be a higher principle which reconciles art and action. That principle, it occurred to me, was death." -Yukio Mishima
Well yes and no..
If playing at high florins then it will be a v1 cav charging a v3-4 foot. while a low florin game it could mean v0 cav versus v0 foot. If the valour is equal then the foot will have higher losses. The stats themselves are not important...its the difference that matters.
CBR
Ill repeat the post (I begin to become suspicions of the 10k under supporters motives in 5k7k10k, and I get no response).... the fact is the situastional factors will have an EXTREEM impact on games below 10k, the loss of one fatigue bar from marching the length of the map (or up-hill) results in (quite tired) -2 attack to the unit... that ladies and gents is 50% of a v0 CMAA's attack Plus the camping defender who remains quite fresh gets +1 to his attack.... add the combat penality for the attacker attacking up-hill, and the combat bonus to the defender for counter-attacking down hill; and the attackers are totally out classed....., anyone (imho) hosting a map with even moderate hills and defending (and camping) is basicly hosting a sucker game (1v1s) Are the supporters of 10k under going 1v1 attacking hills? When you begain to compile the other situtational factors the advantages enjoyed by hill campers are staggering....(Anyone willing to attack me best of 7 on Acre at say 7k)?
[I]
Hm Ill repeat my answer then.
The combat modifiers for fatigue and terrain have same effect for combat results. It doesnt matter what the actual numbers are (v0 or v4)
If a unit loses 2 in attack it will kill less enemies per combat cycle. Its calculated with the formula 1.9% x 1.2^(attack value - defense value) As the chance to kill per combat cycle.
So on average the unit will kill only 69.4% of what it did without that -2 modifier. As all valour gives both defense and attack there is no difference in kills over time. A v4 CMAA will on average make same number of kills against another v4 CMAA as if they both were v0 and any modifiers (positive or negative) will give same effect no matter what they valour upgrade is.
CBR
perhaps i'm odd, or perhaps i'm just stubborn, but i do now, and have allways enjoyed higher cash games...afterall...i prefer to be able to afford to upgrade my elite troops....instead of just my peasants. *wondering how a v3 cmaa would do do against a v4 ms*
Looking out on the field of battle, seeing the twisted corpses of mine and my enemy's men, i wonder how we ever convinced anyone that war equals glory.
V4 MS winsOriginally Posted by [b
Abandon all hope.
Kokami,
I think you'll find v3 cmaa and v4 mil sgt to be closely matched. Those two units would have identical 7/7 att/def stats with the cmaa having higher morale and slightly less charge.
Lahll,
Some things I noticed in low morale games is death of the general is more likely to rout your army, units are more likely to rout at the 49%/50% casualty transition, casualties from ranged units are more likely to rout a weakened unit, outnumbered units don't hold as long and "positional" routs from enemy units standing on your flank or behind you are more likely. I don't think these things necessarily make taking hills more difficult at low moral in 1v1, but they can cause the conflict to be over sooner. If you have a flanking force on the way when your main battleline routs because it was outnumbered, that could make you want higher morale. The outnumbered penalty can help attackers take hills in team games.
As far as hills are concerned, it's just a handicap you grant the opponent or take for yourself. I think hills are quite difficult to take in both low and high morale 1v1 games, and it's more a case of being challenged than suckered. After all, if you loose attacking a hill, all the defender can claim is that he won with the help of a handicap. We know that given opponents of about equal skill and armies of about equal combat strength, the hill will make the difference.
_________Designed to match Original STW gameplay.
Beta 8 + Beta 8.1 patch + New Maps + Sound add-on + Castles 2
not sure what this thread is meant to address. but my feeling about terrain is, although LJ had said the bonus associated with them are unchanged since stw/mi.. seriously most games i played in mtw or vi, the feel is that terrain is not as important as in stw/mi.. because i hardly see the manifestation of its bonus in battle outcome.. i.e. in theory one on higher ground should have the advantage in melee due to charging and fighting downhill.. and it also help boost morale fighting downhill. the only advantage i see is that missile shoot longer, thats all. i feel stw/mi give me a more realistic feel of the terrain impact on battle.
i dont understand about the 'sucker game' issue when one host hilly map, and camp uphill. there is no official competitve ladder in mtw like in stw. if one is game for the challenge.. join the game then. if one doesnt like this type of battle.. well.. no one is forcing him to. even if he doesnt know till in the battle, just excuse politely that he doesnt like attacking uphill vs camper and leave the game.
Excellent thread. Thanks for answering some of my questions concerning morale and florins. After fighting lots of uphill battles (as well as snow and desert) my gut feeling was that at low florins it was much harder.
ichiRW
Stay Calm, Be Alert, Think Clearly, Act Decisively
CoH
my point was, as you go lower in koku, the difference in combat modifiers percentage becomes more pronounced,(for CBR); your correct the -2 for fatigue stays the same but, at v0 for CMAA thats 50% of their attack, if it were a v4 CMAA it would be 25% of their attack..follow?
The chance to kill (CTK) on a strike depends on the difference between attack and defend, and not the percentage by which one value has been reduced.
v0 cmaa (4/4) vs v0 cmaa (4/4) is 4 - 4 = 0 is 1.9% CTK
v4 cmaa (8/8) vs v4 cmaa (8/8) is 8 - 8 = 0 is 1.9% CTK
Give the first unit -2 atk for being quite tired:
v0 cmaa (2/4) vs v0 cmaa (4/4) is 2 - 4 = -2 is 1.3% CTK
v4 cmaa (6/8) vs v4 cmaa (8/8) is 6 - 8 = -2 is 1.3% CTK
_________Designed to match Original STW gameplay.
Beta 8 + Beta 8.1 patch + New Maps + Sound add-on + Castles 2
i think the discussion over at net was going good, but it did fizal out .. your question about hills is someth9ing i will look into and try to pay some attention to
Konnichiwa,
Isn't there also a fixed morale penalty for fatigue?
Ja mata
TosaInu
Fatigue combat modifiers:
4 bars (fresh) no penalties
3 bars (quite fresh) no penalties
2 bars (quite tired) -2 atk
1 bars (very tired) -3 atk, -1 def, -3 morale
0 bars (exhausted) -4 atk, -2 def, -6 morale
0 bars (totally exhausted) -6 atk, -3 def, -8 morale
Map sizes are:
Large map = 31 x 31 tiles (25 x 25 minus red zone)
Medium map = 26 x 26 tiles (20 x 20 minus red zone)
Small map = 20 x 20 tiles (14 x 14 minus red zone)
Fatigue rate due to walking tested on large, flat, arid map:
1st bar is lost at about 4:40 min
2nd bar is lost at about 11:15 min
3rd bar is lost at about 30:45 min
Fatigue rate due to standing:
1st bar is lost at 20 min
2nd bar is lost at 40 min
Time required to walk edge to edge on a large map:
Speed 4 unit takes 14:30 min
Speed 6 unit takes 9:40 min
Speed 9 unit takes 6:30 min
Time required to walk edge to edge on a small map (56% of large map):
Speed 4 unit takes 8:07 min
Speed 6 unit takes 5:25 min
Speed 9 unit takes 3:38 min
The walking fatigue is recoverable up to whatever ceiling the standing fatigue imposes. So, the player who has been moving his units can equalize fatigue with a player who has never moved, but it takes time.
_________Designed to match Original STW gameplay.
Beta 8 + Beta 8.1 patch + New Maps + Sound add-on + Castles 2
Thanks Yuuki,
A unit at 1 bar suffers a morale penalty of 3. This is the same for a v0 and a v3 unit. Since the routing point is equal for both and v3 has 6 more morale than v0, the penalty will (relatively) hurt the vo unit more than v3. In other words: more likely that -3 causes morale to drop below the routpoint.
The same is of course true for other penalties like enemy units nearby, no flank support.
Morale is present in high florin games, but units will endure more before breaking. So other elements will kick in to decide a victory.
Your feeling seems right ichi san.
Ja mata
TosaInu
Ah yes, but as Yuuki just stated you can always return to the point of the camper's tiredness by waiting a while. So in essence fatigue due to the size of the map should be a point. Unless the camper takes his chances and rushes down to fight you. But then he isn't really a camper anymore is he?
But I see the point that he will win if you wait too long (getting the bonus to morale of being on a hill while you get the penalty). But honestly I haven't felt it that much. Flanking and other factors are still vastly more important.
You may not care about war, but war cares about you!
Yuuki,
thanks for the fatigue stats.
CBR is correct about the fact that only the difference in combat ability matters, due to the voodoo math of the combat equation-- but that is essentially splitting hairs. The fact remains that a -2 attack modifier for going uphill added to fatigue is a significant disadvantage.
"theoretically" you can equalize fatigue by standing around for 40 minutes. Is that acceptable in most games? Hardly. So I think, realistically, fatigue plays a very important role in low florin games unless you want to play a 2 hour game.
If you lose your 3rd bar while you are fighting uphill (which is likely if you dont wait the 40 minutes to achieve equalized fatigue), that is -3 morale, -5 attack, -1 defense all at once. How long do you think it will take to reach the 50%unit-strength morale penalty at -6 combat? Not very long, certainly you will reach that before the camper loses his 3rd bar--at which point you will rout, esp. at 5k.
Even where the matchup is exactly even, the -6 combat and -3 morale is going to have a SERIOUS effect on what would otherwise be evenly matched units. The disadvantage to the attacker is roughly equal to a a v0 chivman (attacker) fighting a v2 +1W Chivman (defender) on flat ground.
Do any of us doubt the v0 is going to lose?
Now magnify that effect across the entire army (because you are attacking uphill with everything) and I don't see how the attacker can win against an equally skilled defender. This does not take into account the increased range and accuracy of the defenders ranged units due to height.
So I think lahll makes good points. My conclusion: If you play at 5k and you are asking people to attack your hill, that sounds like a scam to me. If you want to fight on hills at such low florins then at least have the decency to be the attacker.
Hunter_Bachus
You do not have to wait 40 minutes at all... Try it out. Take a unit of infantry (as they are often those that suffers the most) and run it until it has lost 3 bars (takes a good time I would say). Then wait. The wait isn't much longer than the time, if at all, you run around.
So if it takes you 5 minutes to walk to the foot of the hill, then wait for another 5. 5 minutes is not much.
You may not care about war, but war cares about you!
No I dont think its splitting hairs..
There are basically only 2 ways you gonna win a 1v1 uphill battle:
a) The opponent is a newbie who has such a bad army that you gonna win by simple frontal assault.
b) You are either more skilled or opponent has bad day (watching sudden nudity on TV etc etc) and somehow outmaneuver him so you can get flank or even rear attacks or some very good unit matchups (depends on how steep the hill is of course)
And that doesnt really change with florins. What does change is the consequences of making mistakes: morale 10 units can take a lot of abuse before routing.
Playing at valour 0 does not suddenly mean there is magic in the air and your units start running on contact. That will require some insane fatigue and/or losses for that. There is time enough for some units to hold while you outflank somewhere else.
The lower morale game can mean that a unit will rout because its charged in the flank..that actually means maneuver is more of a battle winner compared to the high morale units that keep on fighting. And its the same thing with hills: a good attack can mean a quick victory with less fighting. Which is actually my experience so far when dealing with hills in low florin games.
Of course I havent been online much lately but I dont remember seeing many 1v1 5k hosts using sucker maps, nor 10k or 15k so whats the problem? If one is allergic to maps with knolls on (hint: anything not called Steppe or Plains)...well then dont join them..
CBR
Krax,
I can never fully restore my tired units fatigue bars. I can only wait until my enemy's fatigue drops down to my level and stabilizes. I cant ever get back to fresh. Also, you will notice that if I restore a bar and then start marching immediately, the bar will go away again. So just because you get a bar back doesnt mean you are equal with your enemy. To actually reach equality you must allow the fatigue to stabilize. That takes a minimum of 20 minutes, right?
CBR,
It seems we agree that you have to outclass your opponent to win an uphill battle. I'm not talking about only 1v1's, but 4v4's too. If you are counting on locally outnumbering the defenders to win, then you are also trying to outclass them with manuever.
It is splitting hairs because in the final analysis the fatigued uphill attacker is stil -6 combat and -3 morale. At -6 combat the attacker will die very fast and that adds morale pressure to the already low -3 morale, so there is certainly a "feedback loop" between combat and morale penalties.
In a higher florin battle this feedback loop wont rout your entire army, or even the unit under the pressure...but at low florins a hiccup will rout everything. -3 morale is a significant disadvantage at 5k-- an additional -2 to combat decreases the staying power of the unit even further due to "kills per frame" penalty and reaching the 50% rout point faster.
Anyway, I agree that you should avoid games you wont enjoy-- but there seems to be a drive by many in the community to promote a single florin level. I dont know why, but everyone seems to want a "standard" florin level. To the extent that I don't enjoy uphill fights at 5k (but I do at 10k), I oppose a 5k "across the board standard", with argumentation if necessary.
I think it is cheesy to expect people to attack uphill at 5k--thats all I'm saying-- and I think I have a good reason for it. It seems you agree? At least you agree that the defender has a significant advantage, which is magnified at 5k? The morale effect of the variance in combat stats between attacker and defender is magnified at 5k. That is all I'm trying to say, and that was lahll's main point.
The fact that lahll was talking about -2 to "attack stat" and we are talking about -2 to "variance in combat stat [att+def]" is splitting hairs.
Hunter_Bachus
I have two uphill fight replays. One is 10k one is 5. Judge for yourself and then discuss.
5k hill attack
10k hill attack
Take off your pants, baby. -Ernest Hemingway, A Farewell to Arms
gah-- homework.
blech.
Ill take a look, but only if my grade depends on it heheh
Hunter_Bachus
Puzz@CBR....the precent of numbers does matter, if my v0 CMAA is quite tired....he is 50% weaker in attack than yours (v0 CMAA that is fresh.....if my v4 CMAA is quite tired he is 25% weaker than your v4 CMAA....
Lahll:
No offense but why dont you actually read what we are saying or even just try and do your own calculations as the formula is right there?
A v0 CMAA will kill another v0 CMAA just as quick as a v100 CMAA versus another v100 CMAA. If any modifiers are involved they will have precisely same impact, meaning a -2 to attack will give same number of kills both in the v0 CMAA and the v100 CMAA example.
As you can see from the formula its 1.9% x 1.2^(attack-defense) the main thing is the (attack-defense), no matter what the actual values are its always the difference between attack and defense values that are important.
If we use the -2 attack example again. Find a calculator and check what 1.2^(-2 -0) and 1.2^(98-100) will give..the result is 0.694 for both. That 0.694 is multiplied with 1.9 to give the percentage chance for a soldier to kill another soldier.
As a valour upgrade gives 1 attack AND 1 defense to a unit you can see that a valour upgrade only increases a units's killpower if the unit its fighting against has less valour upgrades. If they have the same upgrades then there is absolutely no difference in kill rate compared to v0 and as you can see from the calculation examples any modifiers have same impact no matter what upgrading or actual attack/defense values a unit has.
CBR
however, another way to interpret Lahll's point is that a very tired unit compared to one that is quite or not tired has lower morale, and is more readily to rout (translating to weaker attacking power).. is most obvious for low base morale units because the drop bring them nearer to the rout threshold than those at higher base morale.
EDIT: oops, didnt know this point was brought up on previous page.
attacking uphill should always be a tough job.
is there a campaign to drive for a standard florin level? imo people will play at levels they are most comfortable with.. if 5k is no fun, no one will play it. if 99k is no fun, no one will play it.
15k is what most are comfortable with now. i'm seeing more getting comfy with 10k.
for whatever reason, naturally over time the one with better appeal to most will dominate.. i think its quite meaningless to argue whats fun and whats not fun 'cos its entirely personal.. but the general perference of the mass will prevail.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks