unit mass

**Dooz** · 09-20-2005, 04:19

Has there been or will there be any significant work done on unit mass? From different things I've read here and there, it seems to play a big part in the battles, and doing the right things with them can weild great results.

**jerby** · 09-24-2005, 20:32

well i think unit mass of hoplites should be upped, a lot.
it would
a: reflect their heavy equipment
b: reflect how teh density of their formation repelled intruders (horses and other)

for teh rest i can't come up with more uses..

**Moros** · 09-24-2005, 20:36

Well it also has some role with charges. tought the charge bonus and unti defence play a major role in that too.

**Ludens** · 09-24-2005, 23:51

Originally Posted by Gertgregoor

Well it also has some role with charges. tought the charge bonus and unti defence play a major role in that too.

Actually, the charge bonus has a quite minor effect on the killing-power of a charge. That is what the whole charge-bug is about. Basically, it seems that the charge bonus is actually determined by the armour bonus (for the most part), while mass determines how far and how fast a charging soldier will drive into an enemy formation (provided he doesn't get killed).

**jerby** · 09-25-2005, 14:46

Originally Posted by Ludens

Actually, the charge bonus has a quite minor effect on the killing-power of a charge. That is what the whole charge-bug is about. Basically, it seems that the charge bonus is actually determined by the armour bonus (for the most part), while mass determines how far and how fast a charging soldier will drive into an enemy formation (provided he doesn't get killed).

that's weird.
i tested it liek this:
i ahd a levy-pikemen and a companion. they a levy pikemen.
phalanx head on to phalanx. and i charged from side and back. at the side i killed aprox 20 people with teh cav. at the back 35 at most.

same scenario, this time is made the charge bonus 30 (export_descr_unit)
and now i killed 30 form teh side, and 50 at teh back..

my guess is that charge-bonus is a bonus to attack-power when charging.
i guess penetration-power of a charge is then measured by mass(or defense..)

**Moros** · 09-25-2005, 16:47

Originally Posted by jerby

that's weird.
i tested it liek this:
i ahd a levy-pikemen and a companion. they a levy pikemen.
phalanx head on to phalanx. and i charged from side and back. at the side i killed aprox 20 people with teh cav. at the back 35 at most.

same scenario, this time is made the charge bonus 30 (export_descr_unit)
and now i killed 30 form teh side, and 50 at teh back..

my guess is that charge-bonus is a bonus to attack-power when charging.
i guess penetration-power of a charge is then measured by mass(or defense..)

no the charge bonus is the chance you hit the target. but if you hit your target it doesn't mean it's killed.

didn't I say charge bonus AND units defence AND unit mass?

**Ludens** · 09-26-2005, 17:54

Originally Posted by jerby

my guess is that charge-bonus is a bonus to attack-power when charging. i guess penetration-power of a charge is then measured by mass(or defense..)

That is essentially how it was intended, but charge bonus is not added properly to the attack value. At extreme values, like in your test, you do see a difference, but in the game the effect of charge is almost negligable. Charging power is determined by the armour value. They discovered it in this thread: I bet you don't believe this: cavalry charge is broken.

**SwordsMaster** · 09-25-2005, 16:59

Originally Posted by jerby

well i think unit mass of hoplites should be upped, a lot.
it would
a: reflect their heavy equipment
b: reflect how teh density of their formation repelled intruders (horses and other)

for teh rest i can't come up with more uses..

I reckon all roman heavy infantry should get their masses buffed too...

**jerby** · 09-25-2005, 17:02

why Roman? there weren't that heavy..

romans counted on flexibilty, and mobility. i think they were rather light...for heavy infantry.

Greeks made it their deal to be the heaviest..

**SwordsMaster** · 09-25-2005, 18:14

Originally Posted by jerby

why Roman? there weren't that heavy..

romans counted on flexibilty, and mobility. i think they were rather light...for heavy infantry.

Greeks made it their deal to be the heaviest..

But the romans charged with their shields which is something the greeks didnt do.

**jerby** · 09-25-2005, 19:13

Originally Posted by SwordsMaster

But the romans charged with their shields which is something the greeks didnt do.

well.. actually they did..
greek hoplites (at leats the ancient ones, from the persian wars) could run in formation. and used their momentum (speed+weight) to bowl over their opponents.

charging,and hsieldbashing wasn't copyrighted by teh romans..
ranika might give soem good examples..or any other..