Factions balance

[Monarch]

Puzz3d if u are going to make claims about what "ca said" put a link to said claim, or otherwise it just looks like you making it up to give your own opinions more cred.

Realturka, 3 out of 5 muslim factions (including mong/tim) have swordsmen.

And then you've got Egypt who have axemen which after the patch will become very useful. But it doesnt really matter, Saracen Militia hold nicely.

[pike master]

for some odd reason the saracen spearmen can do better against cav than the papal guard but im not sure why.

[Fenix7]

who have axemen which after the patch will become very useful

To be honest those axmen units in MTW 2 have high stats and AP bonus. I hope that after the patch this units won't become as effective as axmen units in BI, otherwise we will have to face another spam.

[R'as al Ghul]

for some odd reason the saracen spearmen can do better against cav than the papal guard but im not sure why.

Statwise the Papal Guard looks superior, so it has to be the animations. I'd guess, since Militia can be considered lighter troops that they can attack faster.

[ElmarkOFear]

That is the main difference between the new engine from the old. The move to 3-D animations and trying to make the stats jibe with the individual units has created a major problem, not only in finding (which the MP community does very well), but also in the time it takes to make any corrections to help the problem.

Since CA has shown in the past a major unwillingness to spend much time making corrections, which benefit the MP community more than the SP campaign, do not expect to see these animation problems fixed. They might tweak the stats, but the underlying problem with the animation will remain.

As for things missing from the old in the new: Having played more online and having tried all the factions, I have come to believe that the things taht appear missing from the original engine, are actually still there, but their effects have been reduced.

Fatigue is still there, but it has changed from what it was previously. Fatigue only begins once a unit runs, walks uphill, or fights. Regular walking movement on flat terrain does not add any fatigue to units. Also, units can recover fully if rested. There is a different type of fatigue mgmt. necessary from STW. The one thing about fatigue that needs a slight change is cavalry fatigues too slowly, especially when the unit is running. I can see the light cav having this, but the heavily armored cav units need to have a differing rate of fatigue. This would help discourage the use of mostly cav knight armies and would slightly reduce the overall effectiveness of cav.

Morale is still there, but I believe it is set a bit too high, since most non-peasant units fight almost to the death. It appears the morale penalty from unit loss is the culprit. You see an awful lot of 2 thru 10 man/cav units running around at the end of a battle, which you rarely see in MTW/VI. Part of this is due to the in-battle experience upgrades, which have always been a problem for MP.

The in-battle upgrade system needs to be eliminated once again to help offset this morale problem and small units winning against a more numerical unit.

Terrain effects have been reduced slightly from the original game, with lesser bonuses/penalties for using units in the wrong type of terrain. Plus, most maps still do not have much forested areas, and the effects of sand/heat seem to have been reduced quite a bit as well for heavily armored units. Terrain factors should be increased slightly and more maps need be made containing larger areas of these different types of terrain. Height doesn't seem to make much difference in a unit's fighting ability, but this may be due to the bug where some units do better fighting uphill rather than downhill. The only noticeable effect from height I have seen is the ability of missile units to shoot further.

Well, I have to go now, but will continue this discussion later on.

[SoxSexSax]

Factions may be "balanced", but only because every faction has basically the same unit selection.

The french have longbows. Are you taking the piss CA?

The english have 2 units of spearmen with IDENTICAL stats, negating the 4 unit max rule entirely.

Not to mention 3 different types of footknight, with just 1 stat point between them.

Not to mention 4 different types of cavalry with just 1 stat point between them.

So balanced it may be. Interesting? Not really.

[Puzz3D]

Factions may be "balanced", but only because every faction has basically the same unit selection.

The french have longbows. Are you taking the piss CA?

The english have 2 units of spearmen with IDENTICAL stats, negating the 4 unit max rule entirely.

Not to mention 3 different types of footknight, with just 1 stat point between them.

Not to mention 4 different types of cavalry with just 1 stat point between them.

So balanced it may be. Interesting? Not really.

That's a good observation. The battle system is limited in the number of units it can differentiate in terms of combat capability. In the old engine, the dynamic range of the melee combat points is -20 to +20, but the usable range is more like -2 to +8 and you need a difference of at least 2 points to differentiate one unit from another in melee combat. That gives you 6 places on the scale to place melee units. The new engine increased the dynamic range to -64 to + 64 but reduced the size of the steps on the scale to half which helps when balancing the units, but only slightly increased the number of places on the scale for melee units. There is a new parameter in the new engine called lethality which could provide an additional way to differentiate melee units as long as it doesn't simply muddle the difference between the units. You have to have clearly differentiated units each serving a unique purpose for rich tactical gameplay to exist. If instead you put in lots of units with minimal differentiation between them, the differences are swamped out by the uncertainty of the combat calculation, and no one can make intelligent tactical decisions when the result is highly random. Numerous decisions were made by Creative Assembly in the design of the new battle engine which increased the randomness of the combat results, and this has detracted from the tactical gameplay.

[Monarch]

So balanced it may be. Interesting? Not really.

Erm, it was worse in Shogun

@ france having longbows, lol if you use them instead of normal xbows then...well, your not the best army maker in the world. Way too expensive.

[Puzz3D]

Erm, it was worse in Shogun

Only in STW/MI v1.12 not so in STW v1.02, although monks were slightly underpriced and guns a bit weak.

[pike master]

aside from the horrible suspicion that someone sabatoged the game with super peasants and cav with tank treads i would say the best balance could come by unit pricing.

[Puzz3D]

aside from the horrible suspicion that someone sabatoged the game with super peasants and cav with tank treads i would say the best balance could come by unit pricing.

Once the battle mechanics problems are fixed and the units adjusted so that they can actually perfom the task assigned to them, you would adjust the unit costs. This means assigning a basic cost to a unit based on its melee power, and then adding in the value assigned to things like anti-cav bonus, ranged effectiveness, mobility and morale etc. These added costs should accurately reflect the true value on the battlefield of the capability being added to the unit. One of the issues in MTW was that the anti-cav bonus and ranged units were overvalued while mobility was undervalued. Even in STW ranged units were overvalued, but the players were able to lower the cost of the ranged units by selling off their honor.

[SoxSexSax]

Erm, it was worse in Shogun

@ france having longbows, lol if you use them instead of normal xbows then...well, your not the best army maker in the world. Way too expensive.

I think that's besides the point really. The fact that I CAN select longbows as the french demonstrates how similar the factions are. The best possible army available at any florin level for France is practically identical to the best possible army at any florin level for England, or Austria, or Venice...etc.

Basically, balanced through total lack of variety.

P.S. Comparing Shogun to MTW2 in terms of diversity is silly. Japan is ONE country. M2TW takes place over dozens of countries, spanning about a quarter of the globe. There is no comparison to draw.

[Cheetah]

I think that's besides the point really. The fact that I CAN select longbows as the french

and there goes roughly 1/3 of your budget ... (at 10k) as 4 dismounted french archer costs more than 2800 florins.

demonstrates how similar the factions are.

Does the fact that you can pick peasant archers with almost all western faction makes them all similar? I dont think so.

The best possible army available at any florin level for France is practically identical to the best possible army at any florin level for England, or Austria, or Venice...etc.

With due respect to your oppinion but I have a very different experience. No way that you can play the same army lets say with Russia, Hungary, or Byzantines that you can play with France, or with France that you can play with Milan or Venice, etc. If there is a difference compared to MTW it is the fact that factions have a lot more varied unit rosters and lot more flexibility.