light spear balance (vs. swords) in 1.2

[Woreczko]

That`s a long story. As I said - I modified a lot of things, so 0.18 lethality of spears fits my version of EB well. Generally the outline is like this:
- spears have low to medium attack and 0.18 lethality. Overhand get a "density bonus", underhand are good vs. cavalry
- shortswords have medium attack values, low lethality (0.1-0.13) and are armour piercing (unless used by horsemen)
- longswords have high attack values and 0.2 lethality
- axes have low attack values and 0.25 lethality, no longer armour piercing.
- falcata, sica and other fancy sword-like weapons have very high attack values and medium lethality (0.16). No ap.
- 2-handed weapons got even higher lethality, than before, but lose the "ap" attribute.

The reasoning:
It was always strange to me, why best ap units (axemen, 2-handers) were found in areas, where heavy armour was pretty rare. Then I thought, why are heavy weapons ap? Sure, they are good vs. armour, but aren`t they even more deadly vs. unarmoured foes? It can be simulated IMHO better with high lethality or attack values, rather than ap attribute.

And that`s why, I gave "ap" attribute to weapons, who should be specifically efficient vs. armoured warriors. To soldiers, who are used to fighting opponents clad in linothrax or iron. Roman legionaries were an obvious choice, and so shortsword became an ap weapon in my version of EB.

I was also dissatisfied with unnaturaly high attack values of spearmen - so I lowered their attack and gave them higher lethality - spear is surely a deadly weapon. Then I thought - are hoplites indeed an anti-cavalry arm? Sure, they are not. They evolved in theatre dominated by infantry combat, and so are trained and equipped to fight infantry mainly. No reason for "light_spear" attribute. And thus came the division of spear-armed units into "general-purpose" short, overhand spears and anti-cavalry, longer spears, not-so-good vs. other foot soldiers.