CZII的最近内容

Koshkasa 说:

-

点击展开...

I don't think that Sturgia has a real cav disatvantage as of the latest version of the game. It's Khuzaits vs everyone else now really. Sturgia and Aserai were at a disatvantage due to cav bonuses when lords respawned with more units and the composition of those troops was different for different factions. Sturgia would get almost no cav at all while Vlandia they start the game at war with would get loads of cav. With a significant amount of troops often being those initial parties lords spawned with, Sturgian were set up for failure in the long run.

They have problems with noble units since they have some isolated villages rarely visited by lords and of course those end up being the ones with noble recruits, but that's irrelevant in the big picture and it's a part of a bigger problem where it's easier to get from the Western part of Sturgia to the Aserai than to the Eastern part of Sturgia.

Koshkasa 说:

Remember, the survival of a defending unit is decided by luck - a random roll between his HP and 1 must be greated than calculated damage value. So if we were to take keehuu's example literally, a 0.6 PL looter attacking 2.75PL cavalry does 12 damage, where a soldier of the same tier would have roughly about 2.115 PL and therefore take 15.6 damage.

What's the chance of a random value from 1 to 100 to land in the range of 12 to 15.6? It's 3.6%, right. That's a rough estimate of how much a singular cav unit (that must be first picked as a defender for it to have ANY effect, and the probability of that is Ncav/N again) directly benefits defensively from the flat cav bonus. A 10% chance to get a 3.6% advantage sounds huge, I know.

点击展开...

It's still 30% advantage applied to the dying chance (which is kind of backwards since you would expect survival but whatever). Infantry is 30% more likely to die than cav. How large that is depends on how high the damage is in the first place.


What we can already notice is that a cavalry unit is slightly better than an infantry unit a tier higher in autoresolve. But that's only as far as the battles go. It has even bigger implications for faction balance on the world map. Let's say we have two factions. One turns half of its recruits into tier 2 cavalry. The other only gets cavalry at tier 3 and only in one of the four branches. Let's dumb it down and say they get 1,000 recruits who get attacked by looters and upgraded if they survive once per iteration until they get to tier 5.


It's pretty obvious who would win in a battle and the advantage that the cav heavy faction gets would be that much higher if instead of looters we had higher tier bandits. If it was forest bandits or sea raider chiefs infantry would just die out by tier 3. Obviously the situation is not that exaggerated since units don't necessarily need to be attacked to upgrade but they also need to kill more than a single unit. Chances are they will be attacked at some point before they get their turn to attack someone in autoresolve. In every single battle they win over the years of a single player campaign the cav faction will have less units dying and more units getting promoted than the rest. It adds up and it shows. There could also be disproportionate effects from marginal advantages because winning by a few men is significantly better than losing by a few men but I won't go into that.

hruza 说:

It does nothing other then changing visuals. I posted links to the data, you have it there black on white. Armor values are hard coded.

点击展开...

You know you can check the files in the game folder without third party links, right? These values aren't in the game NPC files. Units have appearance, upgrade paths, skills and equipment sets. They don't have armor values. I guess the guy running the site pulls the values for armor from spitems.xml and adds them to the json file for your convinience. They could be hardcoded somewhere outside the xml files but then you wouldn't be able to add new units to the game just by editing the files, which you can do.
The upper screenshot is legionaries fighting butt naked veteran warriors. The lower screenshot is the same matchup but veteran warriors have their default equipment sets.

hruza 说:

I am telling you that it's the hard coded stats that matter. They might or might not correspond to the visual representation of the unit that you see in the the game.

点击展开...

If that was the case then changing armor in the equipment sets would do nothing. It very much does.

MinhTien 说:

Sturgian Shock Troops are absolute killing machines with their 2h Warrazors, but they tend to die a lot when using those, so eh.

点击展开...

I did some tests in custom battles and as far as shock infantry fighting other shock infantry goes it's Menavliatons > Shock Troops = Voulgiers.

Here's the caveat, I deleted 1h and 2h swords from their equipment sets to run the tests. Units seem to prefer to use the weapon with higher value unless specific behavior kicks in (e.g. use polearms against cav) and the value of a weapon is based on damage per second. Menavlions and voulges have 1h mode with very low damage and handling and that is the mode used to calculate their value which ends up being on par with some peasant weapons. Warrazor doesn't have a 1h mode so its value is calculated for 2h mode and it's one of the most expensive weapons in the game. As a result, Shock Troops use their polearms in most situations while Menavliatons and Voulgiers whip out their murder scythes only when they fight horses.

If devs fixed weapon preference, value of menavliatons and voulges or introduced weapon type commands for the player then Menavliatons would be more viable as they have a lot more armor than Shock Troops and Voulgiers.

MinhTien 说:

I personally don't find Legionaries to be particularly strong. They seem tankier, true, but killing-power-wise, they are pretty unimpressive.

点击展开...

Forming a bulwark against the enemy is their main function. Infantry simply can not do as much damage as ranged units, at least the way the game currently is. Staying power allows them to kill more enemies in bigger battles if you really care about that.

MinhTien 说:

Vlandian Sergeants seem pretty weak to me, like an inferior version of the Legionaries, nothing impressive all around. But maybe that's part of the faction balance?

点击展开...

Sergeants have a chance to spawn with a 2h billhook, some of them are closer to shock infantry than to heavy infantry. That gives them an advantage in melee. They win both against Legionaries and Veteran Warriors if the latter don't have a particularly good javelin volley. In a shield wall they are not great though. If units in formations hid units without shields behind the ones with shields they would work a lot better but then you would be able to mix heavy inf and shock inf in a single formation and they still would be the odd unit with blurred specialization.

Owen Wulfson 说:

I dread fighting Legionaries in Tournaments taking place in Imperial Cities as they have more armor than any other high tier units and even many lords by my reckoning.

点击展开...

If you have them in your party you can fight them in spear and shield duel rounds in Khuzait and Sturgian towns. Joy.

HalfMetalJacket 说:

Now I know you guys are saying that's not a good idea but hear me out. Sturgians may be barbarian, but they've got plenty of armour, all things considered. They shouldn't match armour from the Imperials, but rather that of Vlandia. They both share coat of plates and chain mail, and yet Vlandians are tougher. So I think it wouldn't be too far fetched.

点击展开...

Sturgian and Vlandian armors are already mostly the same.
The problem is half of the top tier Sturgian units use northern lamellar which is worse than nordic hauberk used by lower tier units. Tier 2 militia spearman is one of the most well armored units of Sturgia because of it. The current northern lamellar seems to be a legacy armor, there are new Sturgian lamellar armors in the game assets but they are not fully implemented yet.
There are also t4 Sturgian spearmen that get northern leather tabard instead of northern leather tabard over mail, which I assume is a mistake since the latter is a lot closer to armors used by other tier 4 infantry units.

panxo_dakilla 说:

Well wikipedia (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_Russian_army) says Druzhina would be the historically accurate noble troop. Also apparently they DID dismount for battle.

点击展开...

It's not that they dismounted for battle. Much like other historic heavy cavalry, they were expected to fulfill whatever role was required from them as the men with the best training and equipment available. E.g. Rus' princes often lead river and sea expeditions that did not present a lot of opportunities for cavalry charges. That didn't mean their retinue got to stay home because they couldn't bring horses. They were also (and at times mostly) expected to be proficient in horse archery as Rus' had conflicts with steppe tribes ever since its foundation.
I'm guessing devs toyed with the idea of making them heavy horse archers but decided against it at some point seeing how druzhinniks do have bows in the mp and had higher bow skill than polearm skill until the latest beta patch in sp. Many of the Sturgian lords also use bows. I am personally not a fan of the idea since we already have Khan's guard and Sturgia has no other shock cavalry to fill the void, but it would be better than them being reskinned Vlandian knights.

hruza 说:

In every instance you brought up, higher tier bow is better then the lower ones. And what I said still apply: low tier archers use crappy bows with 40+ damage. And those are actually bows AI uses most, since their armies consist from t1-t2 units.

点击展开...

You are technically right, the main word being technically. +2 to missile speed isn't going to change things in a noticable way. I was addressing you saying that you need high tier archers to use bows with fairly impressive stats. Only fians and mamelukes use those, other archers use mid tier bows even at the highest tiers. Imperials get the same bow at the tier 3 they and Sturgians will have until tier 5 and the bow used by high tier Khuzaits is 5% better at best. Imperial trained archer is a fairly low tier unit, you see tons of those in campaign.

Maximum997 说:

And dont forget that there is no damage multiplier like power draw. 100 bow skill give them what? 10% ?

点击展开...

11%. It's +0.11% damage and 0.09% accuracy per skill level. Skill should also improve AI according to developers.

hruza 说:

That's the case only with imperial archers and their low tier archers still use crappy bows.

点击展开...

No, that's the case with all of them except fians and mamelukes. Evolution from first tier to the next is great but from mid tier to high tier it's mostly cosmetic for anyone but fians.

Consider:
Mountain Hunting Bow (Sturgian Hunter): speed rating 86, missile speed 67, accuracy 82, damage 46;
Nordic Shortbow (Sturgian Archer): speed rating 89 (+3), missile speed 71 (+4), accuracy 95 (+13), damage 52 (+6);
Simple Short Bow (Sturgian Veteran Bowman): speed rating 88 (-1), missile speed 73 (+2), accuracy 93 (-2), damage 56 (+4).

Or:
Steppe Bow (Khuzait Hunter, Khuzait Noble's Son, Khuzait Qanqli): speed rating 86, missile speed 68, accuracy 80, damage 46;
Heavy Recurve Bow (Khuzait Archer, Khuzait Torguut): speed rating 87 (+1), missile speed 76 (+ 8, accuracy 91 (+11), damage 62 (+16);
Steppe Recurve Bow (Khuzait Marksman, Khuzait Kheshig, Khuzait Khan's Guard): speed rating 89 (+2), missile speed 78 (+2), accuracy 94 (+3), damage 62 (0).

Compare the best bow Khuzaits get to the shortbow used by mamelukes (the only unit using a tier 5 bow in the game):
Noble Bow (Aserai Mameluke Heavy Cavalry): speed rating 94 (+5), missile speed 90 (+12), accuracy 98 (+4), damage 80 (+18 ).

Here's fians:
Ranger Bow (Battanian Highborn Youth): speed rating 86, missile speed 65, accuracy 83, damage 42
Western Longbow (Battanian Highborn Warrior, Battanian Hero): speed rating 80 (-6), missile speed 74 (+9), accuracy 94 (+11), damage 60 (+18 )
Woodland Longbow (Battanian Fian, Battanian Fian Champion): speed rating 88 (+8 ), missile speed 82 (+8 ), accuracy 94 (0), damage 72 (+12)

hruza 说:

Armor certainly do exist for them and while there are bows with fairly impressive stats, you need high tier archers to have them. Low tier archers use pretty crappy bows.

点击展开...

High tier archers use the same bows as mid tier ones. Consider Imperials (tier 2 hunting bow => tier 3 composite bow => tier 3 composite bow => tier 3 composite bow), Khuzaits (tier 2 steppe bow => tier 3 steppe heavy bow => tier 3 composite steppe bow), Sturgians (tier 2 mountain hunting bow => tier 3 nordic shortbow => tier 3 composite bow) and Aserai (tier 3 composite bow => tier 3 composite steppe bow). Even Khuzait noble line doesn't seem to progress at all (tier 2 steppe bow => tier 2 steppe bow => tier 3 steppe heavy bow => tier 3 composite steppe bow => tier 3 composite steppe bow). Composite steppe bow is better than the rest but only slightly. Only fians, mameluke heavy cavalry, minor factions and forest bandits get tier 4 and 5 bows at the moment.

kweassa 说:

The Druzhinas aren't cavalry. Don't be fooled by the horse.

点击展开...

Druzhinniks used to have higher one handed skill but that was fixed in 1.3.0. Now they are just knights with worse equipment. I did some tests in custom battles and they are way worse on horses, most likely due to short lances and swords, and are about equal on foot. Elite cataphracts destroy both knights and druzhinniks dismounted. All dismounted T6 heavy cav is significantly worse than T5 heavy infantry (tested against legionaries, veteran warriors and sergeants).

mexxico 说:

I will continue examining situation. If it is obvious Sturgia suffer economically more we can give Sturgia culture 10-20% less wage bonus. So they can be weak at game start but if they can survive and develop their towns in terms of prosperity they can be more powerfull in late game (1100+s).

点击展开...

Could it be related to the reduced effects of goods on prosperity? Sturgia has a lot of fur villages that don't seem to be much of boon in 1.3.0. Almost every town in Sturgia also seem to have a brewery that turns local grain into beer which isn't counted as food for towns. If I understand correctly, those good are supposed to be traded and trade should have a positive effect on prosperity but that doesn't seem to be the case in the game.

I tried funding as much caravans as companion limit allowed in the center of Sturgia (Balgard, Sibir, Varnovapol) to see if there will be any improvements and it just doesn't seem to happen. It might have helped lords to maintain armies through tariffs because they stopped starving (might have also been a coincidence) but it didn't affect prosperity at all. I let it run on its own for a few years and Varnovapol actually started growing more consistently when my caravans were taken down because it started getting food surplus more often.

In fact, Revyl continues to be the town with the highest prosperity in Sturgia because it's mostly isolated and doesn't have a brewery. In 1092 it's more than 1,000 points ahead of Varnovapol in second place. The town almost always has >500 units of grain and fish that it can't sell due to lack of caravans and passing lords. That gives it a constant +2 daily prosperity food surplus bonus. The highest increase from market goods I've seen in 1.3.0 was +0.3 which is irrelevant compared even to the loyalty bonus. It seems to be better to have villages producing food than silver and to hoard that food for growing prosperity. I'm not sure if that's the intended effect.

Animal husbandry also seems to have next to no effect on the food situation which is now tied to prosperity even more than it was before. Sibir has two cow villages and it gets about +5 food score from meat on average. That's only slightly less than what they get from an occasional bunch of dates they get from caravans. Varnovapol has a hog village right next to it and they don't get any food benefits from it at all. For comparison, Revyl gets more than +60 food from its single grain village.

hruza 说:

You forgot 5 berserkers that killed 24 enemy with 1 loss. Yes, completely useless line. And don't forget to remove Legionaries as well as they are as useless as ulfhednar in your line of logic.

点击展开...

Last time I checked 25 + 5 still wasn't 12.
Berserkers have armor. They don't get naked for whatever reason. They can stay but they are completely redundant when you have shock troops who can also dispose of cavalry and use their damn shield at least when there are no enemies nearby.
Legionaries are not useless since they are better than ulfhednar. Turns out in almost every way too. They killed as much as ulfhednar and lost a lot less tier 5 units even in conditions that heavily favored ulfhednar (almost no enemy ranged). What's the point of fielding ulfhednar if regular tanky sword and board infantry can do as much damage and not be a walking dumb ways to die manual? As you saw in that battle infantry's main purpose is serving as meat shields for ranged and sustaining as little expensive casualties as possible in the meantime.
Another way to look at it is what % of enemies they killed since legionaries and ulfhednar combined killed less than a fourth of the enemy army.
Ulfhednar were 9% of the player army, inflicted 11% of enemy casualties and were 21% of casualties sustained. Legionaries were 9% of the player army, inflicted 11% of enemy casualties and were 11% of casualties sustained. Who killed the rest of the enemy army and sustained much less casualties? High tier archers and some cav. Just look at the kill feed. It's mostly palatines doing the killing.

He had 25 ulfhednar and 27 legionaries. Both killed exactly 100 enemies (mostly tier 1-2 units in both cases). Ulfhednar probably killed half of that with their throwing axes which they then ran out of. Ulfhednar lost 17 men, legionaries lost 9. Freaking useless exhibitionists. Just remove this stupid line from the game.
The 3 beautiful shock troop boys killed 18. Now that's a good glass cannon unit. The problems is they would fare much worse if it wasn't the kind of battle where you get 10 to 1 k/d ratio with mostly recruits charging into your shield wall chilling on a hill.

Baggedsoup 说:

Are the Sturgian veterans suppose to spawn with a large round shield or the tiny board shield like the Sturgian warriors get??? I am asking because the veterans have the tiny shield.

点击展开...

They have one in three chance to spawn with a tiny cavalry shield and mid tier Khuzait helmet on top of that. Changelogs mentioned that all Sturgian units should get round shields but I guess not.