Armor Upgrades Work Properly

[Foz]

This is post #181 that I later discovered was a poorly conducted test that caused much confusion. As such, I've removed it.

[Point_Blank]

'This program brought to you from the same people who coded the shield bug.'

We are trying to make sense of a system that could also very likely be bugged, so just won't provide logical results no matter what the tests.

I mean, to code a system like this is programming 101. How it could be this obscure is, well...

[Point_Blank]

Hmm, further testing.

Unit A: Dismounted Noble Knight, has upgrade path 4, 5. Has armor level 8 at upgrade 4: average losses vs archers: 22.
Unit B: Dismounted Noble Knight modded to have upgrade path 1, 2, 3, 4. Has armor level 4 at upgrade 1, theoretically armor level 8 at upgrade 4: average losses vs archers: 12.

Unit B with the gold upgrade more resistant than Unit A, though both should be identical in theory, with level 4 armor and armor value 8.

Have tried the same with other units.

[Point_Blank]

My opinion now is that you get 4 from the first upgrade, 1 from the second etc, no matter what your armor level at the start. eg if you have starting armor 4 with upgrade path 1, 2, 3, 4, your first upgrade will raise your armor to 8, then 9, then 11.

[Point_Blank]

Lets see what Patch 1.2 brings...

[Foz]

My opinion now is that you get 4 from the first upgrade, 1 from the second etc, no matter what your armor level at the start. eg if you have starting armor 4 with upgrade path 1, 2, 3, 4, your first upgrade will raise your armor to 8, then 9, then 11.

Nope. My tests above already disproved this idea. If each upgrade was always the same, then my Italian Militia with 3 base armor and gold armor upgrades would have been equal to Italian Militia with no upgrades but 10 base armor. The 10 base armor unit was more missile resistant, which is clear evidence that the upgrade slots are not simply locked in at given values. If they were locked, the third upgrade would've given 7 total armor bonus, which it clearly did not...

My results have my brain twisted up in a knot ATM

[Jambo]

Wouldn't it just be simpler and easier on the head if some kind soul pm'd or contacted a CA rep to get an official answer? Ideally someone already in regular contact with CA staff ... hint hint. Or are we all just masochists at heart?

That way we can finally put this debacle to rest...

[Foz]

Wouldn't it just be simpler and easier on the head if some kind soul pm'd or contacted a CA rep to get an official answer? Ideally someone already in regular contact with CA staff ... hint hint. Or are we all just masochists at heart?

That way we can finally put this debacle to rest...

Don't forget, that someone has to be given explicit permission to share any given thing that he may know as a result of contact with devs. It's not like even if he knows how things work he can actually come out and tell us. At least, not unless they let his leash out a little

[Lusted]

Don't forget, that someone has to be given explicit permission to share any given thing that he may know as a result of contact with devs. It's not like even if he knows how things work he can actually come out and tell us. At least, not unless they let his leash out a little

Tell me about it, at times i just end up screaming at my monitor because of some things i know about but cannot say.

[Foz]

Tell me about it, at times i just end up screaming at my monitor because of some things i know about but cannot say.

I don't doubt it, nor envy your position.

On that subject, is the topic at hand in this thread one that you're screaming about? I won't ask you what you do know, I just want to know IF you know.

If you do know, I might reasonably expect a bit of leading if I manage to throw an idea out here that is actually correct

[Lusted]

No i don't know anything in regards to this topic, haven't really chatted to Jason since this thread was started. It can be difficult communicating with him as he's in Oz and im in the UK. I do intend to discuss this with him.

[HoreTore]

Been reading this thread from the start, and I've got to tell you, it's getting VERY confusing to find out what the latest research point to. Can't even imagine how hard it must be for new people to read this thread.

So, it would REALLY be nice of those of you who actually have a good understanding of this thread, to post a summary every once in a while. Or, maybe even better, start a new thread where you only post definitve updates(no comments)...

The summary as I understand it(probably wrong), is this:

Armour upgrades work like they should, they add the value for the new armour, not just one point. The implications this has for modding, is not clear.

Is that correct?

[Re Berengario I]

Been reading this thread from the start, and I've got to tell you, it's getting VERY confusing to find out what the latest research point to. Can't even imagine how hard it must be for new people to read this thread.

So, it would REALLY be nice of those of you who actually have a good understanding of this thread, to post a summary every once in a while. Or, maybe even better, start a new thread where you only post definitve updates(no comments)...

The summary as I understand it(probably wrong), is this:

Armour upgrades work like they should, they add the value for the new armour, not just one point. The implications this has for modding, is not clear.

Is that correct?

Armour upgrades seems to work in some way that can resemble what it was intended and none is sure how armour and armour upgrades could be modded.

This pretty sums up the findings to this point.

[Foz]

Yeah that's about the state of things. I too am honestly a little confused at the system and its apparent aversion to divulging its secrets. That E result I last posted is particularly disturbing...

So from here I intend to noodle around with it some and maybe I'll determine what is really going on. I don't intend to work too hard though, as it's probably both simpler and easier to let Lusted talk about it with people who know, and hopefully be able to relay the information shortly.

[Point_Blank]

Armour upgrades seems to work in some way that can resemble what it was intended and none is sure how armour and armour upgrades could be modded.

This pretty sums up the findings to this point.

You nailed it exactly!

[Foz]

Well, everyone can breathe a small sigh of relief: my results in post #181 are to be ignored.

I discovered that the archers I was testing against had not been expending their full complement of arrows, but rather were marching forward to get a better shot, at the urging of the AI. I interpreted this to mean they were closing to initiate melee, and thus stopped the test at that point. This makes all those results worthless, as you cannot have a fair test if the amount of ammo fired is not identical.

I'm actually sorta happy it turns out to be the case, as it was horrible trying to wrap my mind around such sick results. So it could still be that the simplest explanation prevails. Finding this out doesn't really put me in a mood to test that though.....

[Carl]

@Foz: The best way to run the test would be to use the various froms of Pikes for the tests as they have a fixed movemnt speed. That way you can control the archers and ensure you get the same number of volleys each time. You can even limit the ammow of the archers to help ensure this if you want.

[SMZ]

^wordems - I realized I would have to control the archers, when on my first test, I intended to have my pikemen sit still and allow the archers to expend their full complement of arrows...

However, it appears said archers were led by a frenchman, who after firing two volleys commanded them to charge forward and impale themselves upon my pikes... I suppose in the hopes that the weight of their bodies would hinder the use of the pikes and allow their invisible reinforcements to chase me off.

[Foz]

Edit: I'm told that some people found the previous content of this post offensive. I assure you that was not my intent, and apologize to any who may have been unintentionally offended. As a result, I've removed the material.

[JCoyote]

You forget yourself Foz...

That only applies to Frenchmen.

[pat the magnificent]

well, regardless of how EXACTLY the armor upgrade system works, i think its reasonable to draw this one conclusion.

the current sheild fix system (ie, the foz's) has a good chance of interfering with the armor upgrade system.

[HoreTore]

well, regardless of how EXACTLY the armor upgrade system works, i think its reasonable to draw this one conclusion.

the current sheild fix system (ie, the foz's) has a good chance of interfering with the armor upgrade system.

Luckily, that's no longer a problem, as it will be fix in the new patch!

me = happy, happy, happy!

[pat the magnificent]

yeah but... when will THAT be? seems like i've been waiting for months already... oh wait... i have been.

[Lusted]

Well it's gone into final testing so it will likely be out next week. They said late feb back after the first one was released, and we are getting it in late feb.

[Lusted]

As promised i've been chatting to Palamedes about this(finally remembered). I only caught him briefly today but we'll be chatting more this week.

He gave me this useful info:

none no valid armour 0
Unarmoured Unarmoured 0
Padded Padded or leather 4
Light Mail Chainmail shirt 5
Heavy Mail Heavy Maiil 7
Partial Plate Fully armoured. Mostly Plate 8
Plate Full set of plate armour 9
Gothic Advanced Plate 10
Late Plate Renaisance suit of plate 11
Light Brigandine 6
Heavy Brigandine 8
Half Plate Breastpllate and helmet 7
3Q Plate Three quarters plate 8
Cav Unarmoured 0
Cav

And according to him armour upgrades should work by giving units the armour value of the next level, so billmen going from unarmoured to padded should get plus 4 to their armour. But as they aren't, it indicates it isn't working as planned.

But this does mean that CA did plan for armour upgrades to give the corresponding armour value to the look of the armour.

[Foz]

As promised i've been chatting to Palamedes about this(finally remembered). I only caught him briefly today but we'll be chatting more this week.

He gave me this useful info:



And according to him armour upgrades should work by giving units the armour value of the next level, so billmen going from unarmoured to padded should get plus 4 to their armour. But as they aren't, it indicates it isn't working as planned.

But this does mean that CA did plan for armour upgrades to give the corresponding armour value to the look of the armour.

Test results(number is men remaining):


Billmen:
Flesh(0) 3 8 4 6 4 Average 5
Leather/Padded(4) 22 14 15 18 26 Average 19
Light Mail(5) 34 28 41 38 36 Average 35.4

Berdiche Axemen:
Light Mail(5) 40 37 33 30 34 Average 34.8
Heavy Mail(7) 62 60 55 58 59 Average 58.8
Partial Plate(9) 74 81 85 76 79 Average 79

Heavy Billmen
Heavy Mail(7) 59 64 63 56 54 Average 59.2
Partial Plate(9) 82 78 82 85 79 Average 81.2

I thought these results were illustrative that the system was working entirely as intended. Now you don't think so? Why?

[Carl]

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showp...&postcount=181

Thats one of your own posts where you show that level 3 armour upgrades come out at less than 7.


https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showp...5&postcount=67

Yet this post by myself clearly shows that Heavy Mail is better than 5.

It's a damm weird situation.

My geuss is that the "Stat_Sec_Armour" line that is commented out was meant to be a text file way of editing an allready implimented peice of hardcode. Might explain the diffrances...

[Lusted]

I thought these results were illustrative that the system was working entirely as intended. Now you don't think so? Why?

Other tests by other people. The system is working mostly as expected, but not completely.

My geuss is that the "Stat_Sec_Armour" line that is commented out was meant to be a text file way of editing an allready implimented peice of hardcode. Might explain the diffrances...

You mean stat_armour_ex line. It does seem to indicate what armour the unit has for each armour level even though its commented out. I wonder if any of this stuff is contained in the battle_model.modeldb file.

[Carl]

You mean stat_armour_ex line. It does seem to indicate what armour the unit has for each armour level even though its commented out. I wonder if any of this stuff is contained in the battle_model.modeldb file.

Yeah, sorry, i couldn't be bothered to check an EDU, (i have several ), and tried to do it from memory.

[Foz]

LOL Carl. One of my other posts somewhere on this page explains that post #181 was bad, and why. As such I've removed it, since it is not accurate test data at all. IIRC (I'm not about to go back to read) It was something to do with archers closing to start shooting again, when I thought they had expended full ammo and thus stopped the test - which ends up having destroyed the results, as I have no way to know how many shots were fired in any given test before they decided to run forward.