Too many wounded men

[mikeboix]

This is happening to me since 1.03, I think.

Now, in battles, around 70% or 80% of fallen men in battles (in my side or in the enemy side, doesn't matter) are wounded, not dead.

This is really cool to make great amounts of money with the prisoners, but... seems strange for me and maybe it's a bug. When a spear go across the stomach of my enemy or (silly) when I CUT MY ENEMY'S HEAD (dismemberment), he just gets wounded.

What's happening here?

 

[rustyshakleford]

I had this since 1.02. I suspected its the Surgery skill somehow apply to both sides instead of just yours, I have 2 characters with 10+ surgery and I don't see nearly as many actual deaths as I should. I don't really mind since its the only reliable way for me to earn enough to upkeep my army and refuge (400+ troops total).

I remember in Native, the only way I could consistently get prisoners was to have masses of mace wielding troops or heavy cavalry.

 

[DerGreif]

This is working as intended. Realistic causalties like in Brytenwalda.

 

[mikeboix]

This is working as intended. Realistic causalties like in Brytenwalda.

Realistic? If I decapitate my enemy and he just gets wounded that's called realistic? 

 

[kalarhan]

the heavier the armour the less likely a soldier will die. They are working on the surgery skill but that is one of the factors (so elites die less often).

About the rate itself it is quite normal. Real battles had low number of deaths and lots of wounded (the difference is that many wounded would die a few days later or be useless as soldiers).

Look at Hastings (1066) as a example. English troops were routed after a entire day of fighting and they had less than 50% deaths. And that was not a normal one as it had huge armies (for the time) and are a case of extreme casualities (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Hastings). Battles were more about routing/morale than killing.

http://www.quora.com/How-has-mortality-rate-per-battle-changed-throughout-history

casualities = death + wounded

Most fights on WB and VC are small skirmishs (one lord against other), not 10,000 v 7,000 troops. And the lack of cavalry in the game makes it harder to kill routed enemies.

 

[mikeboix]

That sounds legit, but anyway they should fix the wounded-decapitated men 

 

[kalarhan]

That sounds legit, but anyway they should fix the wounded-decapitated men 

if that happens on 1.03 you could open a new bug report.

A screenshot of a death + head flying + text msg saying you just wounded someone would be nice 


(beware the headless northmen! 

隐藏

)

 

[kraggrim]

storyline end

隐藏

Whrn Sven Bull Neck slashed my mother in the penultimate scene she was "knocked unconscious" rather than killed. I then preceded to bury/burn her (can't remember), presumably alive!

1.03

 

[kalarhan]

storyline end

隐藏

Whrn Sven Bull Neck slashed my mother in the penultimate scene she was "knocked unconscious" rather than killed. I then preceded to bury/burn her (can't remember), presumably alive!

1.03

simple, she died later cause the wounds. She got a fever, she was mad for a few days and then she died. The end 

 

[DeltaGun]

Like you said, any warrior wounded in the 9th century is likely to die from their wounds later, die of infection, or be permanently crippled.

 

[Zanthius]

Like you said, any warrior wounded in the 9th century is likely to die from their wounds later, die of infection, or be permanently crippled.

Wouldn't those casualties fall under the "seriously wounded" part of the "killed or seriously wounded" statistic the game removes units by? Sure, they may not die that day in battle, but I assumed it was implied that they were no longer fit to fight and retire, or die from complications later; The historical low casualty rate, from my understanding, was mostly from surrenders and routs, not incapacitated enemy soldiers surviving their wounds after having fought to the last.

It does seem strange that so many survive having their skulls caved in with axes or having thrown spears embedded in their chests.

 

[kalarhan]

It does seem strange that so many survive having their skulls caved in with axes or having thrown spears embedded in their chests.

the alternative would be to make troops route after losing 10-20% of troops, which would not be fun. Its harder to gather a army, painful to see troops dying, not fun to see enemy run after 1 minute of battle, and we still need to keep deaths at a low %.

Form a good 200 strong army. You will lose 40 at first battle (plus some injured). Rest a week. Fight another battle. Now you have less than 100 soldiers. How long would it take to recruit and train 100 replacements? Thats based on the graphic (15-20% casualties for the winner, 40% for the loser). And we still have the surgery skill to keep in mind that on native gives a 25+4*skill chance of wounded instead of killed.

Max skill = 10
Bonus if you have max skill = 4
Chance of wounded: 25+14*4=81%
Chance of death: 19%

 

[JuJu70]

We're looking into this. The ratio of prisoners seems to be higher than we would like to (closer to 70%).

 

[sirgzu]

We're looking into this. The ratio of prisoners seems to be higher than we would like to (closer to 70%).

What ratio are you aiming for?

Thats based on the graphic (15-20% casualties for the winner, 40% for the loser)

The problem with your math is that the 60% survivors of the defeated side all end up as prisoners.
Should there also be a percentage of wounded that convert to routed after the battle?
Historically speaking, I imagine wounded soldiers could not carry on fighting, but they could still run.

Also could we see an oriflamme option (or whatever the equivalent at the time was)?
No quarters (so no wounded), giving a moral malus to the enemy (with perhaps a reputation loss).

 

[kalarhan]

The problem with your math is that the 60% survivors of the defeated side all end up as prisoners.
Should there also be a percentage of wounded that convert to routed after the battle?

OP is about the wounded/dead ratio after a battle. This is important to keep the player army alive.

Unless you are playing with a elite army of vinkigr that kills any AI army with less than 3-5% losses (you just destroy them) it can hurt alot. If you have a normal army and you go against the AI with similar numbers you could lose over half your troops on a single battle.


Now the prisoner/wounded ratio is a separate thingy. We do have a routed statistics but that is about the ones that run in the combat scene. We have another thread about it created by you. Lets add a url/link for that: http://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php/topic,326421.msg7713477.html#msg7713477