Results 1 to 30 of 33

Thread: Chivalric men at arms and feudal men at arms.

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    The hair proves it... Senior Member EatYerGreens's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Above the greengrocer's
    Posts
    851

    Default Re: Chivalric men at arms and feudal men at arms.

    Note the difference in morale, too.

    It strikes me that the CMAA would really come into their own in defending a gateway against a siege assault, where they will accept higher losses before breaking and likely inflict more casualties in the process. Assuming, that is, that the AI doesn't simply try and starve them out.
    (Note: I haven't had the chance to try Halbardiers yet, I'm sure some would recommend these even higher, for the castle defence role, where movement speed hardly enters into the equation).

    In the field, where some losses to missiles are to be expected, I'd probably favour FMAA, since they're cheaper and less prone to fatigue. As a.s.m. said, once valoured up, they'll be as good as the CMAAs anyway. Valour boosts attack, defence AND morale, the latter by two points per step.

    EYG

    ________________________
             

  2. #2
    Villiage Idiot Member antisocialmunky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    ゞ( ゚Д゚)ゞ
    Posts
    5,974

    Default Re: Chivalric men at arms and feudal men at arms.

    Well... after alot of fighting. I was wondering what's the most cost effective sword infantry-type in melee and came up with a formula:

    a= armour - 3 if armour > 3

    (Atk + Def + 1/2 Morale - a) * men at default / cost

    It adds up all the pros, subtracts the cons, and multiplies by the amount of men and divided by cost.

    It only factors in attack armour, and defense because charge doesn't matter after impact. The reason that I subtract armour is that it causes fatigue and increases the attack of AP units.

    I'll list them with armour factored in and out so you can match up for AP and non AP.



    Byzantine infantry
    Charge 3 Attack 2 Defence 2 Armour 3 Speed 6, 10, 11 Morale 0 Cost 200

    (2 + 2 + 0 - 0) * 100 / 200 = 2
    (2 + 2 + 0) * 100 / 200 = 2


    Feudal men at arms.
    Charge 3 Attack 3 Defence 2 Armour 3 Speed 6, 10, 11 Morale 2 Cost 175

    (3 + 2 + 1 - 0) * 60 / 175 = 2.057
    (3 + 2 + 1) * 60 / 175 = 2.057


    Chivalric men at arms.
    Charge 3 Attack 4 Defence 3 Armour 4 Speed 6, 10, 11 Morale 4 Cost 250

    (4 + 3 + 2 - 1) * 60 / 250 = 1.92
    (4 + 3 + 2) * 60 / 250 = 2.16


    Feudal foot knights.
    Charge 3 Attack 5 Defence 2 Armour 3 Speed 6, 10, 11 Morale 8 Cost 275

    (5 + 2 + 4 - 0) * 40 / 275 = 1.6
    (5 + 2 + 4) * 40 / 275 = 1.6


    Gothic foot knights*
    Charge 4 Attack 5 Defence 6 Armour 6 Speed 4, 8, 9 Morale 8 Cost 475

    (5 + 6 + 4 - 3) * 40 / 475 = 1.011
    (5 + 6 + 4) * 40 / 475 = 1.263


    Hospitaller foot knights.
    Charge 3 Attack 5 Defence 5 Armour 6 Speed 4, 8, 9 Morale 8 Cost 400

    (5 + 5 + 4 - 3) * 40 / 400 = 1.1
    (5 + 5 + 4) * 40 / 400 = 1.4


    *Does not factor in AP effect


    I think it's pretty fair, using my formula, it seems that FMAA, CMAA, and BI are roughly equal. Dismounted knights are about as equal to each other as well.

    I prefer FMAA to them in alot of situations, but CMAA are better when not fighting AP or in the desert as long as all factors are equal.
    Fighting isn't about winning, it's about depriving your enemy of all options except to lose.



    "Hi, Billy Mays Here!" 1958-2009

  3. #3
    The hair proves it... Senior Member EatYerGreens's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Above the greengrocer's
    Posts
    851

    Default Re: Chivalric men at arms and feudal men at arms.

    I take it the Units are "Factor.men per florin", to coin an expression? (or, even better, "man.factors per florin").

    More is better, too?

    The foot knights initially seem inferior but I gather you don't actually train them as units of 'foot knights' per se, they come out as horsemen and it's down to the player to dismount them before battle, when that's best for the circumstances (eg castle assault/siege defence where the horses are just too easy to shoot).

    EYG

    ________________________
             

  4. #4
    Villiage Idiot Member antisocialmunky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    ゞ( ゚Д゚)ゞ
    Posts
    5,974

    Default Re: Chivalric men at arms and feudal men at arms.

    Well, dismounted knights, as I mentioned, are compared to each other since they're really a different class of troops. And it is also based on cost efficiency in battle as in quality of man per florin. Routing isn't really factored in majorly so the dismounts and the regulars shouldn't be compared to anything outside their class.
    Fighting isn't about winning, it's about depriving your enemy of all options except to lose.



    "Hi, Billy Mays Here!" 1958-2009

  5. #5
    Clan Takiyama Senior Member CBR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    4,408

    Default Re: Chivalric men at arms and feudal men at arms.

    Units with AP bonus will get a +1 attack against FMAA and CMAA as armour 3-4 is the same for AP.


    CBR

  6. #6
    Senior Member Senior Member econ21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    9,651

    Default Re: Chivalric men at arms and feudal men at arms.

    Quote Originally Posted by CBR
    Units with AP bonus will get a +1 attack against FMAA and CMAA as armour 3-4 is the same for AP.
    Yes, I don't think you should subtract armour-3 from the combat effectiveness equation.

    IIRC the AP bonus is (armour-1)/2 rounding down. And of course you need an AP weapon for it to come in. So what you subtract from your combat effectiveness measure should be some (armour-1)/2 weighted by the probability of an attacker having an AP weapon. In most SP games, I suspect that probability would be rather small.

  7. #7
    Villiage Idiot Member antisocialmunky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    ゞ( ゚Д゚)ゞ
    Posts
    5,974

    Default Re: Chivalric men at arms and feudal men at arms.

    I thought AP only applied to AP values 4 and over.
    Fighting isn't about winning, it's about depriving your enemy of all options except to lose.



    "Hi, Billy Mays Here!" 1958-2009

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO