unit speeds for STW, MTW and RTWdemo

[Puzz3D]

Unit speeds walk/run

STW v1.12: inf 6/10 and 7/12 (charge +0), cav 8/20 and 10/24 (charge +0)
WE/MI v1.02: inf 5/8 and 5/10 (charge +2), cav 8/20 and 8/24 (charge +4)
WE/MI *15%: inf 6/9 and 6/11 (charge +2.3), cav 9/23 and 9/27.6 (charge +4.6)
MTW v1.1: inf 6/10 and 6/12 (charge +1), cav 9/20 and 9/24 (charge +2)
RTWdemo: inf 6/15 and 6/18, cav 8/30 and 8/36

Keep in mind that STW v1.12 multiplayer had lag due to network coding errors, and because not many people had wideband internet connections. The result was that the units moved slower, but the camera scolling and mouse movement was not slowed down, so you had some extra time to issue orders. Those coding errors were fixed in WE/MI v1.02, so the game played faster than the numbers would suggest. As I recall, it played about 15% faster due to those fixes, and I calculated a line for WE/MI showing that. This included the fighting speed being faster, so the cav was left relatively fast so flanking was possible before the inf combat was resolved. The cavalry also had very high charge values in WE/MI v1.02, and this contributed to a faster killing rate. WE/MI v1.02 turned out to be too fast for most players to handle, and the number of online players declined by about 50% over several months.

[hotingzilla]

The speed difference is more obvious in multiplayer combat in RTW. Since you cannot use Pause to issue orders, you must click pretty fast!

[Shahed]

Good job Puzz.

[shingenmitch2]

I don't recall anyone ever having a problem with the running speeds and killing rate of STW. I understand there was never anything to compare to, but it just felt right from the get-go. MI did seem too fast, though we grudginly adjusted to it.

If STW was the ideal (and the gold standard that all the players I know refer back to), why would CA stray from that? Why wouldn't they try to get back to that? It's what got us to RTW in the first place.

I understand map sizes have increased, but if increasing map sizes has forced them to alter game play so significantly, then they've sacrificed the core of the game for the superficial benefit of a larger map. (I know, they can squeeze in more units to be able to claim on the box "3,000,000" units battle at once -- which is funny, because on-liners have never played at maxiumum unit sizes so they obviously don't help game-play).

-------
Yuuk, just read your other comment on speeds. I hope you are correct that it artificially pumped for the demo. I'm still not comfortable with kill-rates which goes to the speed of the battle cycle -- maybe I just need to play the demo more (but I've kind of thought the battle cycle was fast since MI). Too bad combat cycle is not a moddable "speed" (AFAIK) other than through artificial means (i.e. pumping up a defense stat./ turning morale off).

[A.Saturnus]

An observation: walk speed hasn´t increased at all, for horses it has decreased relative to MTW. Run speed has increased significantly, though it is worth to make a little comparison. A normal walk speed for infantry would be about 5 km/h, while trained men should be able to run with 20 km/h, so it wouldn´t be implausible if men run 4 times as fast as they walk, of course we have to consider that they carry armour and that would probably reduce the difference. But for normal inf units we have in RTWdemo a ratio run to walk of 2.5. That´s surely not an unrealistic fast run speed. For horses it´s rather unlikely that a canter and even more carriere are only 4 times as fast as walk, so they should rather be quicker.
Of course, the question is whether the walk speed is realistic, but if it isn´t, it has been so in MTW.

[CBR]

I gave some details on movement rates here, post 28 and 32:

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showt...5&page=1&pp=30


CBR

[SpencerH]

An observation: walk speed hasn´t increased at all, for horses it has decreased relative to MTW. Run speed has increased significantly, though it is worth to make a little comparison. A normal walk speed for infantry would be about 5 km/h, while trained men should be able to run with 20 km/h, so it wouldn´t be implausible if men run 4 times as fast as they walk, of course we have to consider that they carry armour and that would probably reduce the difference. But for normal inf units we have in RTWdemo a ratio run to walk of 2.5. That´s surely not an unrealistic fast run speed. For horses it´s rather unlikely that a canter and even more carriere are only 4 times as fast as walk, so they should rather be quicker.
Of course, the question is whether the walk speed is realistic, but if it isn´t, it has been so in MTW.

20km/h is too fast for a run speed for troops carrying their fighting order (weapons, ammo, helmet, etc, no rucksack). As I posted in the same thread as CBR, in my experience as a former grunt, experienced inf units can run about 10km/h down a road for 10 miles in fighting order and still have something left at the end (thats not wearing body armor BTW). Cross country, and staying in formation, the speed would be considerably less. I would guess that the charge speed cross country would not be much above 12-15 km/h especially for anything over 100m. Lightly armed irregulars would, of course, be much faster probably 2x.

[Puzz3D]

Good idea Mitch. Playing at maximum unit size will probably introduce enough lag to bring a feeling of control back to the player, and it will make the units fight longer at the same time.

I would say the increased number of units, the weapon and armor upgrades, units of varying size, the different factions and the discounts for ranged unit upgrades all make balancing the game a lot more difficult.

[shingenmitch2]

Hehe, we'll just call you Captain Sarasm

I'm not suggesting the lag of STW was good , but the pace of battle seemed about right. Obviously all the new variables make balancing difficult (impossible?) but that's kind of a different issue from combat-cycle rates (how fast each unit takes to make an attack) or how they adjust run speeds to cope with a larger map or finish battles faster (assuming that's why the run has increased so radically)

[Aelwyn]

I understand map sizes have increased, but if increasing map sizes has forced them to alter game play so significantly, then they've sacrificed the core of the game for the superficial benefit of a larger map.

To me, the better solution would be to slightly increase walk speed, so you can slow down the charge speed to a more acceptable rate. This doesn't make practical sense, but I don't care much about that. Of course you could ignore both and slow down kill rates, but that imo would just promote some types of camping, and dumb things down a bit. It'd be a lot like the tests people ran back a while ago where they never moved units, and they still did much better than they should have, if you know what I mean. So all 3 speeds may need some tweaking, but like Yuuki said, this ones gonna be tough to even semi-balance.

[econ21]

Puzz3D - are you more worried about unit speeds or killing speeds? As a SP-only person addicted to the pause button, I am not sure the differences in unit speeds you document are large enough to cause a problem. However, I find Trebia is still far too quickly resolved and hard to control. I wonder if it is the killing speed that causes this, rather than the unit speed?

In MTW, attack and defence factors were low - around plus or minus 5. Here, we seem to have a range of around 3 to 22. Remember, each difference of 1 in attack and defence changed the kill rate by around 20%. If the old formula for kills is used with the new numbers, it is no wonder we see units slicing through others like butter.

[Orda Khan]

Walking speeds seem ok....I think the huge map has a lot to do with that. Infantry run speeds and battle speed is a problem and I can't see how people can say it's not. As ShingenMitch is saying, if your front line creaks there is precious little time to send in reserve.

I have set up a battle on 1.12 Mod, Gauls v Julii, Hard setting. The march is nice and you have time to survey terrain etc. I have found archers and skirmishers to be very nasty. Then of course the battle proper begins. The Romans have one very serious army and nothing I have tried has broken them yet. I honestly feel this would be different if the whole charge/fight cycle was slowed down. Tough as they are, with units holding longer there is time to issue commands, as things are the whole experience is frantic. Use of pause is one way of countering this but what do we do in a 4v4 Multi?

Long battles is what I expected, even back in STW, I certainly don't want to see things resolved in minutes. This game has the potential to be the best yet and I still haven't given up hope that these speeds have been adjusted

.......Orda

[Armchair Athlete]

I really think we will have to wait for the full game to accurately say whether the new speeds are bad or not. First of all due to the new way the strategic map interacts with the battle map. If using MTW speeds ambushes would be much reduced in impact, as you would probably have time to sort out your troops being ambushed into a defensive line by the time your enemy has snailed across the map. Ambushes are supposed to be hectic and with not much time to react. Same with unexpectatly bringing up another army from the rear to attack the enemy (or the AI doing it to the player). If using the snail like speeds of MTW, you would fairly easily be able to form a new defensive line quickly. As with Multilayer, well that would be a bit of a tougher one, I agree it may be too fast, but the enemy will be under the same pressure as you so it sort of balances out.