Wrong flank?

**Ailfertes** · 08-30-2007, 23:18

Well, first of all I like to follow the tradition of congratulating the entire EB team with honestly the greatest mod I ever played. I must say I have learnt a very great deal about ancient history with the (I believe) flawless history that this mod strives for and in fact achieves. Since I will begin my first year History at the university I hope I can even use this knowledge I have now from EB. BUT,

I have a little question. It has come to my attention, and I'm sorry if there has already been a topic asking this, that in a lot of cases (not to say the most), the defence skill of units is higher than their shield value. I wonder why the EB team has chosen to do this, because that way attacking the left (shield) flank of a unit with flanking units is more profitable than attacking the right (weapon) flank. I really can't see the point of this, because I thought that it was actually common to reinforce the right flank to protect it (for exemple the first cohort that in a basic Roman formation was always on the right), and mostly have most flanking units on the left for the purpose of breaking the right flank of the enemy? This is actually not a big issue, but it goes against any sense of logic. Wouldn't it be less hard to find a gap in one's defence when he's defending with a sword, than that you have to poke your way past a massive shield? Anyway, I would love to hear some sensible responses that will prove me wrong, or else my vision of the all-knowing EB team will be somewhat... wrinkled.

Thanks in advance

**helenos aiakides** · 08-31-2007, 00:15

I thought it was because the shield is usually carried on the left

**NeoSpartan** · 08-31-2007, 00:39

You see here is the thing, shield valued vary very little. Only the quality of the shild and model dictates its value. HOWEVER, Defense Skill varies A LOT between units.

For example: Hoplitai Haploi carry the same shild as Spartans, but Spartans have a higher defence value because they are better trained fighters.

ex:
https://img182.imageshack.us/my.php?image=wg1fw6.jpg
https://img265.imageshack.us/my.php?image=wg5gf3.jpg

Look at the defence value and shield value of these 2 units.

**Ailfertes** · 08-31-2007, 09:53

Ah, so the EB team preferred the realism of having shields that were much alike having the same defence over the realism of correct flanking? That is... acceptable for me. Though because shield only defends right of and in front of the unit, and skill the left side and front side, I wonder why the team hasn't put some... skill in using the shield with the shield value instead of with the weapon, the actual skill value. Because however skilled a spartan hoplite might be, I still find it rather hard to believe he could fend off a slash from a sword with his long spear. But it must be a concious choice the team has made and maybe I'll just have to ram my cavalry into the left flank from now on, however odd it seems to me.

**The Internet** · 08-31-2007, 10:56

Your left flank or their left flank? Personally i attack both flanks at once and then hit them from behind with cavarly or a reserve/flanking unit, that seems to work.

**pezhetairoi** · 08-31-2007, 12:28

Me, the only time I care about what flank I'm attacking is when I'm using slingers during fire for effect. Otherwise I attack whatever flank offers a weakness or has the less steady soldiers, left or right notwithstanding. Morale is my major issue here.

**Ailfertes** · 08-31-2007, 13:52

I agree with this, and I too mainly attack the rear of the enemy. But nonetheless it is often a very usefull thing to know which flank is weakest purely in defence. Attacking the flank has certain benefits too over attacking the rear. I just wondered why the team is remaining such irrealistic values when it comes to flanking, but now I know that the EB defence system doesn't focus on which side of the unit is defended, but rather on which weapons and skills the unit has. Why the team hasn't chosen to integrate the defence skill with the shield in the "shield" value remains a mystery to me, but perhaps it's to depict the actual importance of certain types of shields.

**Foot** · 08-31-2007, 13:57

Originally Posted by Ailfertes

I agree with this, and I too mainly attack the rear of the enemy. But nonetheless it is often a very usefull thing to know which flank is weakest purely in defence. Attacking the flank has certain benefits too over attacking the rear. I just wondered why the team is remaining such irrealistic values when it comes to flanking, but now I know that the EB defence system doesn't focus on which side of the unit is defended, but rather on which weapons and skills the unit has. Why the team hasn't chosen to integrate the defence skill with the shield in the "shield" value remains a mystery to me, but perhaps it's to depict the actual importance of certain types of shields.

And also because increasing the shield value would make missile units even more worthless than they are now. Everything is connected in really annoying ways in the RTW stats system, and it is not conducive to a realistic engine if you look at the individual numbers. We have to take the whole finished image and tweak it until we can get it as close as possible.

Foot

**Ailfertes** · 08-31-2007, 14:07

Here is the much enlightening and sensible response that makes that my vision of the all-knowing EB team remains. Thanks Foot.

**GodEmperorLeto** · 09-02-2007, 21:15

I generally roleplay my strategies, so I usually go for the unshielded right flank and I never have my cav make frontal assaults on infantry (they don't have stirrups, so it's kinda dumb unless the unit is light infantry or another cav unit).