Unit Balancing Suggestions to CA

[Longasc]

Well, I cannot come up with more elaborate advice right now, but I will at the end of next week.

Many of us know where and how to mod the unit stats.

Some units are or were overpowered

1.) Chariot Archers and many Egyptian units

2.) Elephants - their HP have been reduced, not sure about that, did not fight much with them after the 1.1 patch


Underpowered:

1.) Spears vs Cavalry

2.) Hoplites have some more issues, e.g. the "right-shift" phenomenon.



I suggest we collect some "better" stat set for these units. I still assume that spear boni are fine as they are, but BROKEN and not working at all right now.

[Basileus]

Some of the late roman units are abit overpowered if you ask me, Urban Cohort frontal attack on the best phalanx units and it kills 100 and only loses 10, even the spartan hoplite with hp of 2 gets a good beating heh..

[Akka]

My suggestions :

- Decrease the range, the ranged attack, the melee and the speed of chariots. Chariots were replaced by cavalry for a reason, and it was that they were unstable, and slower and less maneuverable than cavalry. The stats should reflect this.
- Remove the armour of desert axemen, and partially compensate by raising their defense skill. Desert axemen are overpowered, and on top of that, the picture is one of a shirtless guy, so all this armour feel just wrong.
- Slightly raise the power of the greek cavalry.

[Quietus]

My suggestions :

- Decrease the range, the ranged attack, the melee and the speed of chariots. Chariots were replaced by cavalry for a reason, and it was that they were unstable, and slower and less maneuverable than cavalry. The stats should reflect this.

They have to change the charge speed of all units before they nerf the range of arrows. If not, this game will sadly denerate into an all melee rushing.

Remove the armour of desert axemen, and partially compensate by raising their defense skill. Desert axemen are overpowered, and on top of that, the picture is one of a shirtless guy, so all this armour feel just wrong.

I've never encountered the Desert Axemen before, but that observation is flat out hilarious!!

The phalanx units are also waving their pikes like conductors ~:shock And it kills units!! Like a touch-of-death effect. Imagine what's gonna be on Total War 4.....

[Akka]

They have to change the charge speed of all units before they nerf the range of arrows. If not, this game will sadly denerate into an all melee rushing.

I'm not talking about reducing the range of ALL the ranged weapons.
Only the chariot-based archers.

[andrewt]

1. Many Egyptian units are way overpowered. The worst are the chariots and desert axemen. Very cheap and powerful and historically and realistically way more powerful than they should be. Camels have a bonus against chariots but chariot archers are killing my Bedouin warriors in a melee. Desert axemen are cheaper than early legionaire cohorts but have better stats. Sure, they don't have javelins but the javelins aren't that powerful to command that big of an extra cost. Pharaoh's bowmen are also overpowered. Compare their costs and stats to Cretan archers and they beat them easily even though, AFAIK, Cretans should be the best during this time period.

2. Phalanx units are way underpowered. Yes, they're vulnerable from the flanks and rear but in this game they are also vulnerable from the front. A frontal charge, by cavalry and some strong infantry, destroys their formation and makes them vulnerable to another charge from the front. Their formation should be able to hold against frontal charges much, much better.

3. Cavalry charges are overpowered. That and they can too easily withdraw, even after getting bogged down in the middle of an infantry formation, to charge again.

4. The upkeep cost of many later cavalry are too small compared to later infantry. Some infantry upkeep costs are ridiculous, considering how weak they are.

[Praylak]

I'm not talking about reducing the range of ALL the ranged weapons.
Only the chariot-based archers.

If you closely observe the archers in the chariots you'll find they are in fact Pharaohs Guard archers. These guys are elite, top gear archers both with long range and armour.

If you want to do something with chariot archers I would suggest 2/turn build time for all chariots as the others have and a higher building requisite to perhaps equal to building a Pharaohs Guard Archer. But lets not nerf them people. They are suppose to be good, they are suppose to be feared and rightly so. You can take these guys down with skirmishers and support missle fire. They may do well in the field, but they get creamed in sieges.

I can't understand for the life of me why it seems so many people want to degrade the best units in the game? They "can be" hard to take down sometimes, but thats the whole point. I mean, isn't that why you chose to play on veryhard difficulty? To make it harder? Because on medium level, after playing 100+ years of 7 factions, I've yet to run into something I couldn't counter.

CA went and "tweaked back" elephants and I believe it was do so in large to people complaining that they are to uber. Beta testers didn't seem to find anything wrong with them, but after only a week of release, they make the change based on virgin gameplay feedback. Now that may have introduced a retraining bug. It's happened three times for me now.

Oopps, I ranted. I just thank the Gods that this game is easy for even me to mod. Cause after the nerfing is over, I can go back in and change the stats to their original settings.

[Akka]

I don't dispute they are top-notch elite, I'm just annoyed about how the chariots have the advantages of chariots (able to reap infantry, able to shoot arrows, able to cause fear, and so on), without any of the shortcoming (unstability and slower than mounted horses).

I advocate a reduction of range and ranged attack to simulate the difficulty to shoot while moving and being on a unstable ground. I advocate the reduction of speed because a chariot simply can't be faster than cavalry.

[King Azzole]

When 5 groups of chariot archers in a CITY can decimate 12 units of ARMORED hoplites, something is seriously wrong.. Also I would think shooting from a moving platform would be less accurate and unable to shoot farther than foot archers. Not to mention they turn sharper than a Viper GTS. I think the only balance they need is less melee attack, longer turning radii and shorter ranges. Then they would be realistic.

[Red Harvest]

Praylak and others,

My main concern is having the units make sense. Their stats should bear a resemblence to their training, gear, and historical use, plus they should resemble the 3d images... Egypt seems to be a bit powerful vs. other regions, and their stats don't make sense in some areas. Inconsistencies suggest Egypt wasn't really "finished" and polished before release.

Egyptian Unit Observations. Summary, there are severe inconsistencies in the way these units are shown in the game and their stats. Here are some examples:

1. Desert Axemen: Attack 10, Charge Bonus 5; Armour 11, Def. Skill 5, Shield 2. The 3D Units are shirtless with nothing more than a metal collar/throat protection and armbands, the unit description card shows shirtless, and it says lightly armoured. Therefore the armour rating makes no sense. Other Egyptian units like this have armour values no higher than 3 (most are zero.) The defensive skill could be increased a bit. These men should be very vulnerable to archers, but won't be so with an armour rating of 11.

2. Desert Cavalry: Attack 7, Charge Bonus 3; Armour 3, Def. Skill 4, Shield 4. The rider is the same unit as the axemen, and graphic looks like an axe, but the units stats file says "mace" and blunt. The stats look reasonable, except for the shield rating of 4, and the weapon rating of "light." That shield rating is used for the long shields, not these little square things. It should be a 2. This is inconsistent in many cav units! The rider graphic should be updated for appropriate weapon or the light rating should be heavy, I'm not sure.

3. Pharaoh's Guards: Attack 12, Charge Bonus 8; Armour 7; Def. Skill 7, Shield 5. This one is screwed up in one regard, the unit graphic has NO shield yet it gets a 5 for the shield? They are wearing some nice looking armour in the 3D images. So the armour could even be boosted a few notches to compensate for the lack of shield.

I've compared these three to Nubian Spearmen, Nile Spearmen, Nubian Cav, Nile cav and other units in other factions to reach the conclusions above.

Chariots are special cases, and I'm not sure how to evaluate all of their stats. The missile stat is VERY high: 13. Such high numbers have ridiculous kill rates in the game. The range looks fine for this one, but the missile value is high. All the very common but "elite" archery units need toned down. Missile units did not do well vs. heavy infantry in this period. The defensive stats showing in the game unit card are for the mounts/chariots rather than the men. My main problem with them is their mobility vs. cavalry (since they have three riders), and lack of severe terrain speed modifiers, rather than their base stats. They should be godawful slow turning. The archers get 2 hit points (since the 3rd man/driver can't fire), while the regular chariots get 3. This probably has some impact since the individual chariots won't die until their hit points are exhausted.

Pharaoh's Bowmen get very high range (170), plus a 14 missile stat compared to the standard Egyptian Bowmen's range of 120 and missile stat of 7. I can accept the range, but the missile stat is overdone (as are so many.) Elites should be a substantial bump up from basic, but these guys are over the top. On top of that they have good attack and defense. They are well armoured, and their no shield stats are consistent (zero.)

The standard archers have reasonable stats for shirtless guys without shields.

[Red Harvest]

Shield stats are all over the map...and don't match the graphics in the game. When I look at shield stats, I never know what I'm going to find. Look at Numidian cavalry, and the small shielded variants of Roman cav, plus Egyptian Desert Cav. They get 4's for shield values??? They have small shields! Others like the round shield Carthagian and Iberian Cav. get values of 2 (makes sense!) The longshield guys get 4's. Should large wicker or leather shields get the same rating as heavier large shields? Perhaps they should lose a point?

The really fun ones are units like pharoah's guard. They have no shield, yet they get a 5 shield stat.

I think CA needs to either update unit graphics or get the stats consistent, then start working on balancing. Afterall, if they give high shield values to unshielded units, it is going to be tough to figure out what the heck the game engine is/should be doing. Meaning of course, that it will be tough for the player to figure out what they are supposed to be doing...

[andrewt]

If you closely observe the archers in the chariots you'll find they are in fact Pharaohs Guard archers. These guys are elite, top gear archers both with long range and armour.

If you want to do something with chariot archers I would suggest 2/turn build time for all chariots as the others have and a higher building requisite to perhaps equal to building a Pharaohs Guard Archer. But lets not nerf them people. They are suppose to be good, they are suppose to be feared and rightly so. You can take these guys down with skirmishers and support missle fire. They may do well in the field, but they get creamed in sieges.

Good? Feared? They are completely obsolete by the time depicted in the game. That's like creating a Napoleon: Total War game and making knights the most powerful unit in the game. They do very well in sieges, especially defending. They can turn corners very easily, something they shouldn't be able to do. They have the speed of medium cavalry and insane melee and they can easily run down skirmishers and support missile fire.

Cavalry were a hard counter to them and rendered them obsolete. In this game, they kill cavalry.

Egypt's units shouldn't be the most powerful in the game. Their units should be like that in MTW, the cheap, numerous ones. The elite units during this time period all belonged to other factions. The best units in the game shouldn't be obsolete units. Not to mention Egypt's elite units are ridiculously cheap for their power.

[hoom]

Egyptian chariots get a combat bonus for fighting in desert.
Wierdly, having lost large numbers of men in the campaign to chariots, I did some custom battles last night & had a single legion take down 2 units of chariot archers on medium difficulty, though I did start out with 2 & the first got mashed early in the battle.
Likewise, a roman cavalry unit easily beat chariots on medium but got slaughtered on very hard.

[andrewt]

Well, your legions wouldn't be able to catch them if they skirmished properly, which is another problem. I used mostly Arab cavalry and Bedouin Warriors against them. Both have a bonus in deserts as well and the Bedouins actually have bonus against chariots, being camel riders. The chariots either beat them horribly or I barely win with lots of casualties.

This is from the stat files:
type east chariot archer
dictionary east_chariot_archer ; Chariot Archers
category cavalry
class missile
voice_type Medium_1
soldier east_chariot_archer, 27, 9, 1
mount heavy chariot
mount_effect elephant -8, camel -4
attributes sea_faring, hide_forest, frighten_foot, cantabrian_circle
formation 8.5, 9, 15, 15, 2, square
stat_health 2, 2
stat_pri 13, 4, arrow, 120, 60, missile, archery, piercing, none, 25 ,1
stat_pri_attr no
stat_sec 9, 6, no, 0, 0, melee, blade, slashing, none, 25 ,1
stat_sec_attr launching, ap
stat_pri_armour 6, 5, 0, metal
stat_sec_armour 0, 1, flesh
stat_heat -1
stat_ground 0, 1, -6, -1
stat_mental 10, normal, untrained
stat_charge_dist 40
stat_fire_delay 0
stat_food 60, 300
stat_cost 2, 1060, 330, 110, 160, 1060
ownership pontus

type egyptian chariot archer
dictionary egyptian_chariot_archer ; Egyptian Chariot Archers
category cavalry
class missile
voice_type Medium_1
soldier egyptian_chariot_archer, 27, 9, 1
mount egyptian chariot
mount_effect elephant -8, camel -4
attributes sea_faring, hide_forest, frighten_foot, cantabrian_circle
formation 8.5, 9, 15, 15, 2, square
stat_health 1, 2
stat_pri 13, 4, arrow, 120, 60, missile, archery, piercing, none, 25 ,1
stat_pri_attr no
stat_sec 9, 6, no, 0, 0, melee, blade, slashing, none, 25 ,1
stat_sec_attr launching, ap
stat_pri_armour 6, 1, 0, metal
stat_sec_armour 0, 1, flesh
stat_heat -2
stat_ground 0, 2,-6,-2
stat_mental 10, disciplined, trained
stat_charge_dist 40
stat_fire_delay 0
stat_food 60, 300
stat_cost 1, 570, 330, 60, 90, 570
ownership egypt

They're similar in almost all respects. Pontus' is stronger than Egypt's, though I'm not sure by how much. Look at the price however. 1060 vs. 570. Somebody must really love the Egyptians. Many of their units follow a similar pattern. Pick a similar unit from a different faction and compare. Egypt's is horribly underpriced.

[Grifman]

Chariots are powerful, but you have to know how to counter them. I have no problem defeating the Egyptians, even numbers, even outnumbered, battle after battle in the game (unless you are talking MP, that's not my issue). You just have to come to battle with the right stuff. Of course chariots are going to tear up armored hoplites - the hoplites can't get close enough to even smell them, much less touch them with those long pointy spears. Don't come crying that your hoplites are dying any more than Crassus cried at Carrhae at what Parthian horsearchers did to him :) The game calls them missile cavalry and for all practical purposes that's what they are. So you have to fight them as that. For the Romans against the Egyptians, that means having artillery and archers. My Roman armies fighting the Egyptians who bring alot of ranged units to battle always have two onagers, and at least 4, maybe 6 archers.

I've found that chariots die easily under archer fire. Put two auxila archers units firing on a chariot unit and it dies quickly - they just don't last long. There aren't alot of men in a chariot unit and they die like flies under archer fire. I concentrate fire on them first and take them out. Meanwhile my artillery is pounding the desert axemen who have to advance slowly on foot. And when the chariots are dead, my archers turn their attentions on them.

On medium, I routinely inflict losses on the Egyptian in a ration of between 5 to 1 and 10 to 1 in my favor. Best was 1260 Egyptians dead vs my 60.

Grifman

[andrewt]

I did say that chariots die under archer fire. However, they could charge the archers and they have the speed to do it. Also, Egyptians have the best archers in the game and you'll lose the archer vs. archer duel if the enemy simply sits his chariot behind the archers. The AI does have some moments when it looks like it actually knows what it's doing.

A problem is besieging the Egyptians. The chariots are way too manueverable on the city streets and archers aren't very effective in sieges.

Missile cavalry die quickly when caught by light cavalry. Chariots, however, kill tons of light cavalry in the process. Even camels die in droves in a melee to them. Their melee ability is too high. They're just way too cost effective and way too powerful compared to what they were historically.

[Mr. Juice]

Missile cavalry die quickly when caught by light cavalry. Chariots, however, kill tons of light cavalry in the process. Even camels die in droves in a melee to them. Their melee ability is too high. They're just way too cost effective and way too powerful compared to what they were historically.

I'll second that.

[GFX707]

Barbarian units need to be cheaper, and Roman/civilised need to be more expensive....

[andrewt]

Some factions in the game have a really small selection of troops. Parthia, for example, has some really good horse units but they have too few troops in general. It seems CA focused on a few factions and many are really underdeveloped. Some, like the Gauls, only have generic troops with no real specialty.

[GFX707]

Yes, Parthia's infantry is completely worthless....if you are going to make the skirmish AI "run to map edge and get stuck" then you could at least have given parthia better troops....

[Praylak]

Good? Feared? They are completely obsolete by the time depicted in the game. That's like creating a Napoleon: Total War game and making knights the most powerful unit in the game. They do very well in sieges, especially defending. They can turn corners very easily, something they shouldn't be able to do. They have the speed of medium cavalry and insane melee and they can easily run down skirmishers and support missile fire.

Obsolete suggests its no longer effective in modern warfare. With the chariot archer we have a light platform being pulled by "two" well trained horses with a dedicated driver for it. Then you have two elite archers riding on it. Specifically speaking how is this no longer effective? I can understand how gunpowder eventually brought about making cavalry obsolete, but I fail to see how chariot archers are made into a thing of the past when a Phalanx crawls up to it.

Another thing I dont get is how it seems slingers with their comparatively low missile attack seem to murder chariots quite well.

I always thought the problem with Egypt was its cash cow regions, and the threat range of it's neighbours. It really doesn't have anyone but the Seleucids to challenge them and as if they don't have enough to contend with already. They don't border with anyone else for some time. You can't count the Numidians. This allows Egg to concentrate its forces and eventually get even more rich.

When I was playing the Seleucids I admit Egg was raping my butt. When I was able to field war elephants and hire camel warriors I smoked Egg with ease. War elephants arrow fire killed the chariots, and the Bedouins counter charged the Desert cavalry. Unfortunately the Seleucid AI doesn't seem to employ this and gets creamed.

I do completely agree and support with any who suggests unit prices needs adjusting. Thats what I think we need to be discussing here. Some unit prices are just off the wagon. They were kinda screwy in MTW too. I mean a unit of Horse archers upkeep being 110 (large size) is silly. A man and a horse should have a minimum upkeep cost of at least that of a skirmisher of 170? As chariots, should have a higher upkeep.

[Dorkus]

i agree with most of this stuff, but ph. bowmen are not overpowered (in the campaign) for the simple reason that they take two rounds to produce, and high tech.

chosen archer warband take 1 round and lower tech, and are about as good.

[Praylak]

It seems CA focused on a few factions and many are really underdeveloped. Some, like the Gauls, only have generic troops with no real specialty.

Not trying to be a dick or anything Andrew, but whats up with that statement? Ever use Forester warband Archers?

[Dorkus]

Not trying to be a dick or anything Andrew, but whats up with that statement? Ever use Forester warband Archers?

His basic point is right. I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing, though. rather they devote more time to, e.g. the battle ui, then develping x more factions. I think there's plenty of diversity as things stand.

[Turbo]

I certainly don't agree about the overpowering units. Use of the right tactics is needed.

However, the spears vs cavalry is valid, and the hoplites are definately problematic.

[andrewt]

I looked at all the faction unit lineups. Some, like the Scythians, have around 4 types of horse archers. Pontus has light javelin cavalry, heavy javelin cavalry, a few other unique units. Some, like Gaul, have only 1 or 2 units that are truly unique to them while some have tons of unique units. I was disappointed with Parthia's selection of cavalry. Sure, they are powerful but there's too few of them.

As for chariots, it wasn't the phalanx that made them obsolete. It is cavalry. Cavalry are faster and more manueverable. Historically, chariots are easily chased down and destroyed by light cavalry. They could easily separate the horses from the chariot, which would render the unit as just a regular archer unit, not to mention the momentum would hurt the guys riding the chariots. In this game, the melee ability of the scythes attached to the wheels of the chariots kill light cavalry really fast. Also, chariots have the speed of medium cavalry and the same manueverability, which is not true.

[Grifman]

Yes, Parthia's infantry is completely worthless....if you are going to make the skirmish AI "run to map edge and get stuck" then you could at least have given parthia better troops....

Just like in history. Parthia had great horsearchers and great cataphracts, but Parthian infantry was largely peasatn levies - crappy and totally unable to stand up to Roman legionnaires. Parthia shouldn't get great infantry because they didn't have it. But they do have great cavalry - why don't you complain about Roman cavalry being crappy because it is compared to Parthia? :)

Grifman

[Grifman]

I did say that chariots die under archer fire. However, they could charge the archers and they have the speed to do it.

And then your archers run behind your legion/phalanx and bye bye goes the chariot :) Again it's not that it's overpowered, it's simple tactics which people are not handing correctly.

Also, Egyptians have the best archers in the game and you'll lose the archer vs. archer duel if the enemy simply sits his chariot behind the archers.

Which is why you bring artillery along as the Romans - I can pound their slower moving archer infantry again and again before they even get into ranch. The Egyptian can't - and in a credit to the AI - won't just sit there when I start hitting it with artillery - it is smarter than that. It has to come out "to play" :) In addition I'll concentrate fire from two archer units on any one chariot/archer unit until it routes while the AI spread it's arrow barrages. Again, specific units, specific tactics for specific enemies. That's all it comes down to. Chariots are NOT overpowered because I can beat them EVERY time.

The AI does have some moments when it looks like it actually knows what it's doing.

It tries really hard :) The suicidal chariot charges under hails of arrows from my archer auxila usually does it in though :)

A problem is besieging the Egyptians. The chariots are way too manueverable on the city streets and archers aren't very effective in sieges.

Just line up your legion in a street with archers behind them and they'll take out chariots everytime.

Missile cavalry die quickly when caught by light cavalry. Chariots, however, kill tons of light cavalry in the process. Even camels die in droves in a melee to them. Their melee ability is too high. They're just way too cost effective and way too powerful compared to what they were historically.

Are we talking history or gameplay wise. Yes, chariots were obsolete by the time of the game so their being powerful is unhistorical. But we were discussing gamplay right? :) And in that respect, though they are powerful, they are not uber-units - they can be beaten because I do it all the time, every time, with the right units and right tactics.

Grifman

[Red Harvest]

Actually, I've read some stuff that indicates that improved infantry in "barbarian" (meaning not chariot ruled) areas finally learned how to counter chariots. Around 1200 BC most ot the great chariot dynasties were conquered.

Grifman, I can counter chariots too, but that doesn't mean they make sense. Speed and mobility wise they don't play right. With the battle speed we have, they can be unreasonably hard to fight. One of my toughest fights was a few chariot archers, two pharaoh's bowmen, some axemen and some spearmen. I had a big hardened powerful force, but those chariots caused mayhem. I won a Phyric victory.

One chariot unit can usually be countered fairly well. But two combined with super bowmen was just a mess, with chariots flying in and out of the line routing weakened units, and not being chased down despite concerted efforts on my part. I had faced them before so I knew how to counter them. Of course I had no real archers in my faction...so your suggested tactics were absolutely non-starters. Most Western factions do not get archers early on. Even if I had a unit or two of elite merc archers, they would have been completely outgunned by the best archers in the game.

[andrewt]

I'm discussing both. I'd like all the units in the game to function close to how they did historically. Whatever historically countered them should counter them in this game as well.

Sure, you can counter every unit in the game. The question is, is what the unit brings to the table proportionate to what it costs? Can you honestly tell me why a desert axeman who has better stats than the early legionary cohort costs less? The pila aren't that powerful to make them more expensive. Can you also tell me why the barely more powerful Pontic chariot archers cost 1060 vs. 570 for the Egyptian chariot archers?

I've used onagers. They don't do that much damage before the enemy closes in, though sometimes the stupid AI allows me to use all my boulders with impunity.

I've played Starcraft and Warcraft3. My definition of overpowered isn't something which beats everything else. If something is simply way more effective vs. what it costs, it is overpowered even if it has a counter. The time in the game when it is available is also a factor. You're beating the Egyptians' chariots/archers combo with more expensive, higher tech units because the Romans start so far away from them. You're also taking advantage of AI stupidity to counter them. Even if I'm just playing the AI, I'd like to play a game where I could counter a unit effectively if it was played by a human.

I could counter chariots as well but they are harder to counter than most units in the game. They also are a harder counter to units they do well against compared to other in game counters. To echo Red Harvest, they don't play right. What rendered them obsolete should be able to counter them the most effectively.