NTW unit layout

[The Stranger]

i already said it would be alot of work. we shouldnt do it though, its not worth it.

[QuickDagger]

HY,

I´m working on a stats system for my own game too.

Extra Class Colision Old New
Non Combatant 0,7 0.7
Infantry Very Weak 0.7
Siege Fast 0,8 0.8
Skirmish Weak 0.8
Siege Slow 0,9 0.9
Cavalry Very Weak 1 1
Cavalry Weak 1
Cavalry Average 1
Cavalry Strong 1
Cavalry Very Strong 1
Chariot Average 1
Chariot Strong 1
Chariot Missile Average 1
Chariot Missile Strong 1
Camel Weak 1
Camel Average 1
Camel Strong 1
Elephant Weak 1
Elephant Average 1
Elephant Strong 1
Elephant Very Strong 1
Ship 1
Dog Weak 1
Skirmish Average 1
Infantry Weak 1
Spearman Weak 1
Dog Strong 1,2 1.2
Skirmish Strong 1.2
Infantry Average 1.2
Spearman Average 1.2
Infantry Strong 1,3 1.4
Spearman Strong 1.4
Infantry Very Strong 1,5 1.6
Spearman Very Strong 1.6
*As you might have noticed I have created some extra classes, so that it has became easier to assign new values to colision mass. The creation of the new classes has considered many other factors such as morale, training, mount type, etc.

Extra Class Morale
Old New
Morale Poor 0 2
2
Morale Average 4 6
6
Morale Good 8 10
Morale Excellent 12 14
14
Morale Heroic 16 18
*when talking about morale it is important to notice that the game alrealy translates the meaning of the number. Ie: a unit with morale 2 will appear in game as low morale and a unit with morale 12 will appear as excellent

Personal Skills
Class Attack Bonus Defence Bonus
Untrained 1 1
Familiar 3 3
Average 4 4
Professional 5 5
Specialist 6 6
Elite 7 7
Legend 8 8
*It is important to remember that (despite terrain, colision mass and high grounds) attack values (plain personal effects) are a mix of Skill + weapon, as well as defence are a mix of skill + armor + shield + weapon. Skill is based on amount of training and on some special mental effects such as berserker fury.

Weapon Types
Class Attack Bonus
Arrow Heavy 8
Arrow Light 6
Axe 1 Handed 8
Axe 2 Handed 12
Axe Trhow 6
Bullet 4
Dagger 4
Dog Bite 4
Falx 10
Hatchet 4
Head 4
Javelin Heavy 8
Javelin Light 6
Mace 6
Quarterstaff 4
Spear Horse Heavy 8
Spear Horse Light 6
Spear Long Heavy 12
Spear Long Light 10
Spear Short Light 8
Spear Short Heavy 10
Sword Broad Long 8
Sword Broad Short 6
Sword Kopesh 8
Sword Rhomphaia 8
Sword Scimitar 8
Sword Sickle 4
Trident 6
Warhammer 6


Shield Size
Class Defence Bonus
None 0
Small 2
Medium 4
Large 6

Body Armour Class
Armour Type AC Breast AC AC
Pate Arms Legs
Clothes 0 0 0
None 0 0 0
Leather Armor 1 1 0
Padded Armor 1 1 0
Ring Mail 2 1 1
Studded Leather 2 1 1
Brigandine 3 1 1
Scale Mail 3 1 1
Hide 3 1 1
Chain Mail 3 2 1
Splint Mail 4 2 1
Banded Mail 4 2 1
Bronze Plate 4 2 1
Iron Plate 4 2 2
Steel Plate 5 2 2
*Hey, armours have always been piecemental. So it would produce a far richer effect to consider it. I mean there will be much more different armour values for units. It would be very boring to have 240 units with only 10 armour values

Head Armour Class
Armour Type Total Defence Bonus
None 0
Cap 0
Coif Fabric 0
Hat 0
Coif Leather 0
Coif Chain Mail 1
Open Faced Helmet Leather 1
Open Faced Helmet Bronze Plate 2
Open Faced Helmet Iron Plate 3
Open Faced Helmet Steel Plate 3
Close Faced Helmet Leather 2
Close Faced Helmet Chain Mail 2
Close Faced Helmet Bronze Plate 3
Close Faced Helmet Iron Plate 4
Close Faced Helmet Steel Plate 4
*To reach the final armour value just sum the head + piecemental values and ... voila !

I have listed some weapon and armour. There could be more to add.

I have checked the final values and they go a long way. Example:

A Berserker should have a morale of 18 (heroic), with attack 19 (7 elite skill + 12 axe damage) (hey ! 19 is exactly the valilla value !), with defence 7 (piecementalk armour = 0 + 7 defence skill). A little better than vanilla, but, this little difference make it possible to reduce this unit´s overpowered hit points from 3 to 2, wich is more reasonable.

In addition, it is very easy to correct over/underpowered values just by adjusting the skill effects. No need to alter the armour and weapon values because they are already balanced and are already piecemental. Piece of cake !

By the way, all values are on a Excell sheet that should be able to export to txt an automatic working version of export_descr_unit.txt making it easy to edit unit stats. But ... it´s not finished yet.

I´ll be here in case you want to discuss it !

[The Stranger]

despite some differences our layouts are pretty much the same. though i havent done the attack layout, i am working on it. i think we should combine it.

[QuickDagger]

Hail Emperor,

Nice to meet you.

Sure ! Just let me know if you want to duscuss something.

At this moment I´m working on some skins, but I am also working on the Excell sheet about the RTW V12 vanila stats. I havent finished it yet. I´m still deciding wich types of armour should be considered, and wether how armour material should modify the values.

I undertake those 2 projects because I believe both stats and skins should (must) be all the same thing. I mean, a units armour class AC value should be allways the same for all the units skined, lets say, all units wearing chain mail should have exactly the same AC (hey! I said AC, expertise and experience should affect the FINAL DEFENCE value too). It makes the AC obvious: just take a look at that strange new enemy at the battlefield and wander what his AC should be. Its obvious: just look. But, RTW Vanilla is not that much obvious !

Please, PM me if you want to exchange any thoughts or any XLS files.

Cheers

[Rodion Romanovich]

Remember that armor values also determine how much the unit will push back the unit it engages. The armor rating is combined with charge bonus there, so it's not as logical as it might seem. Also, different chain mail had different quality - larger rings were cheaper, but less sturdy, whereas smaller rings were expensive but very effective against penetration. However, such historical details don't need to be included in the basic stats layout, they can be taken into account when the basic stats have been decided according to the layout. I think the current level of complexity for the layout is good, and we can take those details into account afterwards when we do the beta testing. In order to make those additions in a way that makes sense, we should compare units of the same type to see that we aren't overcompensating for those details.

I agree that skins should hint stats. Nothing more annoying than R:TW desert axemen with invisible armor... There's never any problem, I think, about having units with zero armor - they can have any charge strength, but units with much armor can't have a too weak charge effect, which can be problematic. Has anyone done research on which of the armor ratings it is that determine this charge push-through effect, or if all armor ratings have that effect? An alternative solution to this problem could be to add to defense skill ability for armored units that should have low charge strength, in order to give them the properties the armor gives them without increasing their charge too much... On the other hand, that could mean kataphraktoi would get lower armor rating than others, so perhaps that might force usage of lower armor ratings for most units, then put much of the armor value in the defense skill factor instead. What do you think? Is it necessary, or are the highest armor ratings low enough to allow a weak charge for the slow, heavily armored units?

[The Stranger]

Nice to meet you too

yeah i did a bit, horses with heavy armour is a nightmare, they push the line back for 10 meters (ingame). thats not really realistic. i'll do some research.
i'm talking about pushing phalanx back.
are we still using my layout. if so we might add his attack/charge layout i dont have one

[Rodion Romanovich]

Well, I think we're using yours. If QuickDagger's charge stats can be combined with your other stats then I suggest you just combine them right away, if needed with some changes so that it all works together.