[EB MP]3.0 Thread - Testing and Updates

[vartan]

Please go discuss your maths elsewhere. The numbers have me confused

Well we do have a (history) research department if you'd like to stay away from maths.

[antisocialmunky]

That's what I've been wondering, too. I want to say that the visuals don't make any difference, and that the two models have only to collide at one spot in their collision detection overlays (very simple, probably elongated spheres) in order for combat calculations to start running. So it's not that the combat is pure numbers, or entirely based on animations, but rather depends on both. The animation itself doesn't contribute, it's the position of the model relative to the enemy model. I wish CA made it so that it was more physical, that the animation represented something real. That it would hit the neck, or the torso, or the legs, with varying chances let's say. But that's more work (I should know!)

WHICH IS WHY I WANT TO REDUCE UNIT RADIUS BECAUSE RIGHT NOW UNITS SPEND TOO MUCH TIME SPREADING OUT AND THEN SLOWLY WALKING AT EACH OTHER WASTING STAMINA.

*Ahem*

But seriously lateral spacing divided by 3.

[Lazy O]

LISTEN TO ASM AND LET HIM DO IT

ahha this is fun

[gamegeek2]

Yes, sounds good.

[-Stormrage-]

I support that. And make a script to remove guard mode.

I Agree, Dont ignore this issue it has been brought up several times.

[Ludens]

It's possible to coerce unit stances in SP historical battles, but these are a special case. AFAIK it's not possible to do this for custom or campaign battles, let alone MP ones. There would also be no way to check if your MP opponent has the script running.

[antisocialmunky]

Yes, sounds good.

Its not so much straight guard mode but it is an issue of density since units spread out so much when attacking, you have one guy effectively engaging multiple guys. The stamina issue is also fairly big but its not so bad now that stamina has been largely given to all heavy infantry. You just have to engage better against people with better formation using heavy infantry or knock them out of formation.

If there was one thing I would change to formation infantry it would be to make them more vulnerable from the sides and rear but there's no real way of doing that except to make them missile invulnerable from the front....

[Kival]

We could just rule it out (I'M still not sure, If I am happy with getting rid of guard mode). If it's really relevant as in tourney vartan e.g. can tell you by seeing if a unit it in guard mode.

[-Stormrage-]

This is video proof of the power of Panda phalanx. You decide should Pandas "levy" cost 1300 phalanx handle that much ?

Watch This

Best Way to Prove your point give a video, oh and i have 2 other replays with the same scenario.

[TheShakAttack]

Storm I dont think you have chosen the best example. In that specific instance, there were allied eagle troops around which AFAIK helps boost morale for everyone in the team (if they are around). There might have been druids chanting as well iirc (can't see in the video).

However, I have seen other examples where a seriously flanked panda unit does not rout quickly, and takes some time to do so. Even when there is no eagle/druid support present.

As I've told you, I do not think this is a big issue- yes they do not rout quickly, but they do rout. The question everyone has to answer is: is the amount of time it takes for them to rout acceptable? IMO, yes it is.

[-Stormrage-]

allied eagles or generals do not give an effect . If my ally has an eagle or druid chanting next to my men , my men dont get a boost :D

What do u mean amount of time it takes for them to rout ? they didnt even rout. I dont mind time but that was too much time all i want to see is white flags, That is too much time for a 1300 phalanx totally flanked and charged by neitos and cohorts, Watch it again it was even Jav charge from behind. What more do u want

[Kival]

allied eagles or generals do not give an effect . If my ally has an eagle or druid chanting next to my men , my men dont get a boost :D

I'm inclined to disagree. At least generals work for allies too.

[Kival]

If there was one thing I would change to formation infantry it would be to make them more vulnerable from the sides and rear but there's no real way of doing that except to make them missile invulnerable from the front....

That's not entirely impossible but I would not choose the way you'd need to go for that: Increase shield values but decrease armour values drastically.

[Galvanized Iron]

That's not entirely impossible but I would not choose the way you'd need to go for that: Increase shield values but decrease armour values drastically.

Yes don't do that unless you enjoy vanilla style skirmish armies to dominate the field...

[-Stormrage-]

how about taking Ap secondaries from Phalanx.

[The Celtic Viking]

No, if they used axes then they used axes and should use axes.

Do nerf the Evocata though.

[Kival]

They have only 4 (!) attack. Their melee power really in now way is OP. If anything the difference to other phalangitai is perhaps too big.

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

With panda phalanx its more an issue of the unit being in guard mode (! again an issue) and the men not peeling off from the main formation. This means they don't actively seek their deaths at the hands of flanking infantry by walking towards them. This causes morale to decrease slower. However, rout one panda phalanx and they will all rout. This has proven time and time again.

[antisocialmunky]

@Adjusting shield value

Shield values are doubled from the front when standing still. This is why experience players only throw javelins at moving targets if they have to throw from the front. And while this is the easiest way, it makes high missile defense basically impenetrable missile defense

[Kival]

I thought thrown weapons ignore the double value of shield? Where did you get shield is only giving double value when standing still?

[Arjos]

That video about the pantodapoi is hilarious, the legionaries in the front getting killed are keeping the phalanx on high morale enough to sustain the rear attack, which btw not leaving a gap makes them prone to fight 'til the end...

[gamegeek2]

@Adjusting shield value

Shield values are doubled from the front when standing still. This is why experience players only throw javelins at moving targets if they have to throw from the front. And while this is the easiest way, it makes high missile defense basically impenetrable missile defense

I think they are always doubled, are we sure about this?

[antisocialmunky]

Test it.

I'm pretty sure shield is only doubled when idle which is why using Bosphorans to initiate a missile dual and then holding fire with them basically makes them imbalanced due to shield. I dunno about thrown but in my experience a moving unit takes more casualties than an idle unit.

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

Laterally moving units will definitely take more casualties but I've never noticed any difference between an idle unit and a charging unit in terms of missile damage received. I also have read, and believe that thrown missiles ignore the double shield bonus though I am far from 100% on this.

[antisocialmunky]

Battle Mechanics
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=377804

Unit Guide
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=111344

I can pretty much swear that there is some sort of frontal missile bonus. I guess it is likely that 'bracing' could account for it as the first volley of missiles from archers tends to get a few kills but subsequent ones do not because units put up their shields. I dunno but my extensive experience with heavy infantry and archers has always confirmed that its a bad idea to shoot missiles at a unit from the front unless they are moving (at which point they'll take more casualties). You can test this using javelins. Charge a unit using pila and then have the pila unit attack the same unit.

Or look at the whole issue with point blank archer shots. Clearly, missile resistance is lower when units are engaged from the front. You can shoot at heavy infantry point blank in the face and it won't do much but if oyu engage them in melee and shoot, suddenly you cna actually cause casualties.

[Kival]

As far as the other tests goes: shield value is at maximum from the front and right (!) of the unit, less on the left and in the back (-50 %). For missiles the front is the strongest shield side and (here) the left is as good as the right side here. Defense is only 100 % from the front,-33% LEFT, -20% RIGHT and -50% penaty to BACK. Armour has a very slight decrease for missile attacks not originating from the front. For details I'd need to check again but I'm not allowed to write in this thread about it. @Robin :P

[Lazy O]

So is ASM doing his radius thing he kept ranting about since June or not?

And im not sure what you guys are talking about, panda phalanx rout pretty much instantly when flanked.

The reason they are not routing in the video is because they are killing stuff faster than they are losing stuff. That means...yes people, when engaging a phalanx remember the value of guard mode ;) Also, the legions I saw were not attacking the phalanx directly, they were engaged with another unit and only a handful were facing the Phalanx, so they get better morale because they 'think' they are 'winning'.

Suppose :( is flanker and :) is phalanx and :(( is the unit in front of phalanx.

the video has it like this:

:( :) :(( and another unit engaged with :(( so theoretically :) is only engaged with :(

[TheShakAttack]

Haha. In fairness, I have seen what storm is saying- it takes a while to rout pandas even if they are heavily flanked by infantry (cav is a diff matter). I think he raises a vaild issue- do pandas take too long to rout? His choice of video was appalling though. A certain despicable panda-hater (who has contributed greatly to their endangered status today) who shall remain nameless (lets call him "TCV" for code) agrees with Storm that they take too long to rout and that its more fun to shoot baby pandas when they are running away from you. I get the feeling that everyone else is more or less satisfied with the current morale/gameplay of pandas though.

Regarding Arjos' post I have two questions:
That video about the pantodapoi is hilarious, the legionaries in the front getting killed are keeping the phalanx on high morale enough to sustain the rear attack, which btw not leaving a gap makes them prone to fight 'til the end...

Is this true? Does killing a lot of enemies raise morale? and Secondly, certainly in real like being totally surrounded makes people sometimes fight harder, but is this true in game as well? (apart from "fighting to the death" mechanism)

[-Stormrage-]

there is absolutely no such thing as morale increase for the unit "thinking" it is "winning" . Absolutely False, back in the summer I used an army of chevroned elite macedonian phalanx. in the end there was one left and it was sourounded on everyside. It Said the Unit thinks it is winning then the next second the flag turned white. So you can see The unit htinking its winning doesnt make a difference, this elite phalanx thought it was winning and routed the next second.

and ill get another replay for people who dont like this one

EDIT: Is there anyway guard mode can be removed or maybe kept for specific units only ? The sooner we can get this done the sooner we can have some real battles. Not like that battle i had with whats his name where he left his line of galatian spearmen in guard mode while i encircled him with neitos and cohorts and charged him from the rear while my front line troops were fighting him in the front. Middle of battle i checked the situation, his main line troops were Fresh mine were winded. Common

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

There is most certainly a morale bonus for a unit believing that they are winning a localized battle. In your case Storm, there is also a morale penalty for a unit which recognizes that the wider battle is being lost. Units that kill fast aka Bastarnae and Drapanai are difficult to rout even when you kill a whole bunch at once because once in melee, their kill rate keeps morale up.