I've been doing a lot of testing of various faction troops lately, and figured I'd post my thoughts. Let me start off by saying that it's not realistically possible to be perfectly scientific with the testing of units in Warband/VC, so I don't claim that my results are completely indisputable, and I'd like to hear feedback based on others players' experiences.
The settings I used:
Royal Sandbox mode.
Easy Recruitment (still took a LOT of Ctrl + X cheating to level up the units that I was looking to test
).
Hardcore Campaign and Battle AI.
Everything else set to Normal.
When testing non-spear infantry, I'd cheat up 55 men of the same type, and engage AI lords in open field battles. I did essentially the same thing with spear infantry, but increased their numbers up to 77 soldiers since they're typically weaker against enemy infantry. While I did my best to ensure that enemy armies were equal, that was only possible when I was testing player-troops of the same faction (ie, when testing Irish troops, I could always just reload and fight the exact same enemy army, but had to settle for something "close" when playing as the Britons).
So far I've experimented with the Picts, Irish, Britons, Angles, and Norse, and my opinions based on that are as follows:
The settings I used:
Royal Sandbox mode.
Easy Recruitment (still took a LOT of Ctrl + X cheating to level up the units that I was looking to test
).Hardcore Campaign and Battle AI.
Everything else set to Normal.
When testing non-spear infantry, I'd cheat up 55 men of the same type, and engage AI lords in open field battles. I did essentially the same thing with spear infantry, but increased their numbers up to 77 soldiers since they're typically weaker against enemy infantry. While I did my best to ensure that enemy armies were equal, that was only possible when I was testing player-troops of the same faction (ie, when testing Irish troops, I could always just reload and fight the exact same enemy army, but had to settle for something "close" when playing as the Britons).
So far I've experimented with the Picts, Irish, Britons, Angles, and Norse, and my opinions based on that are as follows:
Pictish and Irish T3 spearmen were the worst units that I've tested, with their Briton and Angle counterparts seeming a bit better, and the Norse as top dog. I figure that the reasons for this are that the Briton/Angle/Norse spearmen have a little bit better body armor on the top end, a chance at metal helmets, and somewhat shorter spears (especially for the Norse). The spear length may actually not be a factor, but I think that the longer ones tend to cause more glancing blows for the AI, for whom facehugging is an art form.
The most spectacular failure in my testing was when I took 77 third tier Irish Spearmen up against an enemy lord from Northvegr, who had roughly 180 troops. My army killed a grand total of 5 men before being absolutely annihilated; and to be honest, I think that most of my kills were from throwing weapons hitting his skirmishers before he pulled them back and advanced the infantry. Subsequent testing against other lords, along with some Footpad/Robber parties of +/- 85 men, resulted in consistently decisive losses with the Picts or Irish, but usually not as bad as the first lord that I tried. When going up against the smallest/weakest faction-armies that I could find on a day-1 game, I was able to get something like 30-50 kills with most of these T3-spearmen-only armies, before losing. Pictish/Irish spearmen were typically towards the bottom end of that spectrum, with Britons and Angles performing better, and the Norse often getting upwards of 60-70 kills.
When it comes to T3 infantry that doesn't carry spears, the Picts are pretty amazing (though according to their level, I'm told that they should be considered T4). They are guaranteed a Gambeson, a metal helmet, very good selection of weapons, and significantly higher 1h weapon proficiency than everyone other than the Irish (who have to deal with some 1h/2h weapons - a bad thing for any AI soldier that also carries a shield). Pictish Axemen were clearly the best here, with everyone else tending to perform similarly to the non-Pictish/Irish T3 spearmen (though with 55 men in my army instead of 77; adding in another 22 soldiers of some type would have made a significant difference, and put them ahead of the spears).
The most spectacular failure in my testing was when I took 77 third tier Irish Spearmen up against an enemy lord from Northvegr, who had roughly 180 troops. My army killed a grand total of 5 men before being absolutely annihilated; and to be honest, I think that most of my kills were from throwing weapons hitting his skirmishers before he pulled them back and advanced the infantry. Subsequent testing against other lords, along with some Footpad/Robber parties of +/- 85 men, resulted in consistently decisive losses with the Picts or Irish, but usually not as bad as the first lord that I tried. When going up against the smallest/weakest faction-armies that I could find on a day-1 game, I was able to get something like 30-50 kills with most of these T3-spearmen-only armies, before losing. Pictish/Irish spearmen were typically towards the bottom end of that spectrum, with Britons and Angles performing better, and the Norse often getting upwards of 60-70 kills.
When it comes to T3 infantry that doesn't carry spears, the Picts are pretty amazing (though according to their level, I'm told that they should be considered T4). They are guaranteed a Gambeson, a metal helmet, very good selection of weapons, and significantly higher 1h weapon proficiency than everyone other than the Irish (who have to deal with some 1h/2h weapons - a bad thing for any AI soldier that also carries a shield). Pictish Axemen were clearly the best here, with everyone else tending to perform similarly to the non-Pictish/Irish T3 spearmen (though with 55 men in my army instead of 77; adding in another 22 soldiers of some type would have made a significant difference, and put them ahead of the spears).
Given the level of performance that I was seeing at Tier 3, I think that there needs to be some kind of upkeep-price difference between spear and non-spear infantry at this rank, if possible (there's a slight difference when it comes to the Picts and Irish, due to NPC-level not being the same, but I don't think that it's enough). It may also help if the Pictish and Irish spearmen had a chance at metal helmets in this tier, since as it stands right now, they just don't seem to be worth using.
I think that the Irish Warriors either need to have the 1h/2h Long Axes removed from their equipment list, or switched out for another weapon (and the same can be said for the higher tiered Irish Champions and Saxon and Norse Veterans). That type of weapon just doesn't work well with a shield - there will be a lot of slow moving, low damage glancing blows. I'll freely admit that the effect wasn't as bad as I expected it to be before I started testing the Irish Warriors in larger numbers, but I think that this deficiency is largely covered for by their very high 1h proficiency (which makes their other weapons extremely deadly for their tier).
I think that the Irish Warriors either need to have the 1h/2h Long Axes removed from their equipment list, or switched out for another weapon (and the same can be said for the higher tiered Irish Champions and Saxon and Norse Veterans). That type of weapon just doesn't work well with a shield - there will be a lot of slow moving, low damage glancing blows. I'll freely admit that the effect wasn't as bad as I expected it to be before I started testing the Irish Warriors in larger numbers, but I think that this deficiency is largely covered for by their very high 1h proficiency (which makes their other weapons extremely deadly for their tier).
At Tier 4, it seemed like the differences in the various non-Norse spearmen became fairly small, with the Norsemen becoming incredibly good. I was just now able to defeat a ~185 man Saxon army with 77 Norse Elite Spearmen, and only took 30 casualties doing it [5 of which were the un-geared companions that I started with as king]). I'm assuming that this performance difference is largely due to the Norse being better armored than other T4 spearmen, though I also still have the sneaking suspicion that the ~200 length spears of the other factions cause a lot more glancing blows than the ~150 length ones used by the Norse. It's also worth mentioning that at least some of the Norse soldiers will have a langseax as a backup weapon, which is significantly better than everyone else's hunting knife or seax. (Side note: It's possible that the longer spears would be better in a mixed spear/non-spear shield wall, but I haven't tried testing that.)
When it comes to non-spear infantry, the Picts win at this tier as well...as long as you're cheating
. While the Pictish Veterans are fantastic units, they're also also fantastically expensive. In fact, given the price that it takes to promote them, I'd probably advise sticking with the previous Axemen unless you're quite rich - it cost me over 70,000 peningas to promote 55 Axemen to Veterans. While the other factions' T4 infantry wasn't as good in a fight, it's much more economically feasible to field in larger numbers (except for the Irish, whose T4 unit also didn't even really outperform T3 Pictish Axemen).
When it comes to non-spear infantry, the Picts win at this tier as well...as long as you're cheating
. While the Pictish Veterans are fantastic units, they're also also fantastically expensive. In fact, given the price that it takes to promote them, I'd probably advise sticking with the previous Axemen unless you're quite rich - it cost me over 70,000 peningas to promote 55 Axemen to Veterans. While the other factions' T4 infantry wasn't as good in a fight, it's much more economically feasible to field in larger numbers (except for the Irish, whose T4 unit also didn't even really outperform T3 Pictish Axemen).I would suggest that the Pictish Veterans and Irish Champions have their promotion cost lowered to be in line with everyone else, even if this means some nerfs for the Picts (not having so much of a proficiency advantage, and maybe some chance to be equipped with Gambesons, like everyone else). Also, the Angle, Saxon, and Briton T4 infantry probably need to be given a chance at mail armor, like the Norse have. Since I don't think that very many of us have T5 soldiers in large numbers, these factions don't field much-if-any mail armor, and don't really have any other advantages that I can see. The Norse already have the best spearmen, possibly (probably?) the best archers, and arguably have the best non-spear infantry at this tier as well. While I'd give the edge to the Picts, man-for-man (their mail is guaranteed and their 1h proficiency is great), they're just too expensive for what you get. To use my example of 55 man testing armies; who would pick having 55 Pictish Veterans over 55 Norse Veterans and having over 50,000 peningas in their pocket? That's worth a lot more mercenaries, faction troop hirings and promotions, etc...
And while I appreciate not having totally homogeneous armies, I'd like to see the non-Norse T4 spearmen get some improvements, to be more in line with the Elite Norse Spearmen. I'm not 100% sure on how to achieve that, though. Would having a chance at mail armor do it? Or am I correct about spear length playing a big role in killing power?
And while I appreciate not having totally homogeneous armies, I'd like to see the non-Norse T4 spearmen get some improvements, to be more in line with the Elite Norse Spearmen. I'm not 100% sure on how to achieve that, though. Would having a chance at mail armor do it? Or am I correct about spear length playing a big role in killing power?
