Re: Sieges: Are some units better than others?
 

Thank you. This is actually interesting:
So, a generic human soldier has str 10. 10^2/10 + 10 = 20.
For a mindless unit like longdead 1+10=11.

Does it mean that undead chaff are not 10 times worse then normal units, but only 2 times, so 20 longdead = 10 human infantry in castle defence?

Re: Sieges: Are some units better than others?
 

Huh? A human has 10^2/10 = 10 in defence
A str 10 soulless gets 1 in defence.

Guard skill is a specific castle defence bonus applied to certain units (the castle icon). Most units don't get it.

Re: Sieges: Are some units better than others?
 

The "guard skill" in the formula is the special castle defense bonus (most units don't have it, so the value for them is zero.) So, effectively your run of the mill longdead/soulless would have a defense strength of 1 (not 11). Your average str 10 infantry would have ((10 * 10) / 10) + (10 * 0) = 10 (again, no bonus.) So yes, on average mindless undead are 10 times less effective than live units in defending sieges.

On the balancing side, you're a lot more likely to have 100's or 1000's of undead chaff sitting around.

**>> Of course, ninjas like Gregstrom don't concern themselves with petty castle defense...

Re: Sieges: Are some units better than others?
 

I think these values are a factor of 10 too large aren't they? By which I mean it would take 150 human troops to tear down a defence-150 castle in a turn, not 15 troops.

Re: Sieges: Are some units better than others?
 

Oh I see yes, that's what lch says in the paragraph following the quoted equations.