Action Points? Encumbrance? What?
 

Well, I can't find a thread discussing the discrepancies in Action Points anywhere on this forum - I find that odd.

This has bugged me for quite some time. I realize, there MAY be some correlation to Encumbrance, but this fact is not listed in the manual (where it discusses Encumbrance, or Action Points), nor in the FAQ anywhere.

First, Mictlan Warrior (Yellow):
Base AP: 12, Enc 4, AP: 11 (This is what makes me thing Enc has something to do with it.)

Second, Mictlan Warrior (Yellow):
Base AP: 12, Enc 4, Limp (-4), AP: 5 (11 - 4 = 5?)

Next, Mictlan Warrior (Green):
Base AP: 12, Enc 6, AP: 9

And, Mictlan Warrior (Green):
Base AP: 12, Enc 6, Limp (-4), AP: 4

Now, the sacreds-

Jaguar Warrior:
Base AP: 12, Enc 4, AP: 11 (Same as above, Limp puts it at 5)

Jaguar Warrior with W9 Bless:
Base AP: 12, Enc 4, AP: 16 (With Limp AP = 7)



Now one of the strangest parts of this to me, is that in just about every instance in the game, even .2 gets rounded up. Yet here we see a unit with 11 current AP getting +50% from a bless = 5.5, but only gaining 5 rather than 6. Now, if the units are still using their base AP for attacks, so attacked take 12 AP, the bless is in fact only giving +33% more attacks, which is significantly less of a gain than +50%.

If the mechanic does have something to do with Encumbrance, I would have to suggest that it be removed altogether. Regular units already are given AP that is intended to be balanced, but then high armor infantry with low AP get further penalized? Quickness is already used infrequently in spell form, perhaps this would make it more competitive with Body Ethereal as a combat buff. And lastly, I believe the reason that Water bless is not valued more, is because this mechanic greatly reduces the effect. It seems 4/5 people would rather take a Fire bless, and now that I am looking more deeply at the numbers, I can see why. This isn't just a simple limiting of overall choice, either, some nations simply get much more attractive/efficient pretender choices in Water, and some nations don't get a pretender that starts with Fire at all.


Oh and I just closed the battle I was getting my numbers from..... My prophet, from strategic view, shows Base AP: 12, Current AP: 13.... Enc 6 and Battle Fright. O.o

Re: Action Points? Encumbrance? What?
 

Jim, I have always found the calculation of ap, hp,etc to have a little juju in it. It rarely matches what I *think* its supposed to be.

I figure some of its bugs - and just pray the bugs average out for all players.

Re: Action Points? Encumbrance? What?
 

Well, there is a philosophical standpoint to it, sure. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Where it bothers me is when W9 blessed units only get a few, or even 1 bonus AP, rather than their full 50%. The base can be whatever it wants to be, right? But in some cases the bless is of very little effect - and unless there is something I am totally unaware of - far from WAD.

Re: Action Points? Encumbrance? What?
 

Jim,

As nearly as I can tell, your post relies implicitly on the assumption that attacking always costs 12 AP. I don't think this is correct. As near as I can tell, attacking costs your full movement allowance, after accounting for armor but before counting Quickness. Units with a Limp still attack once per round. I keep fairly careful track of these things because I'm into zero-net-encumbrance units that stay at the same fatigue levels for 20-30 rounds at a time. If they were attacking less frequently because of armor weight their fatigue would drop, and it doesn't.

-Max

P.S. And yes, AP is definitely affected by encumbrance. You can watch it change as you put armor on a commander. I think this is mentioned in the mod manual.

Re: Action Points? Encumbrance? What?
 

Encumberance effect is very visible with nations such as MA Ulm. Normal infantry has 9 AP, black plate infantry 8, infantry with Tower Shields less than units with similar armor and no shields.

Re: Action Points? Encumbrance? What?
 

Well looking at Ulm now, I see you get 3 Enc for free, and each point after reduces AP by 1.

However, this does not explain why Limp removes 6 AP, or why the Quickness effect religiously rounds down, while nearly every other observable mechanic in the game rounds up.

It very much seemed that my Jaguar Warriors in particular were not attacking as frequently as I am accustomed to, from W9 blessed units. I mean, if it really looks at the "current" AP for how much an attack costs, rather than the base, then how does it differentiate between normal current, and Quick current? I mean with full spell Quickness, you are theoretically at +100% AP, so if a human with 12 base has 18 AP with spell Quickness, does each attack actually take 9 AP? And if it doesn't, then why are we so horribly lied to about the way that Quickness (not Haste, which is only supposed to affect movement, and not attacking) actually works?

Some units all seems fine, and it's seeming to me that the more AP they start with, the better the math works out, to really show the proper frequency of attack. When the starting AP dwindles, it appears to be less reliable - partly because movement takes the normal amount of AP, whether you get what you would expect, or not. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...ies/tongue.gif

Re: Action Points? Encumbrance? What?
 

It's not that "you get 3 Enc for free", it's that every unit has a base Enc value, which is the cost in fatigue of attacking. Base Enc does not reduce AP's, and Enc from equipment or age or whatever is added to that to get the total fatigue costs for actions. Most but not all humans have base Enc 3. Non humans may have more or less or zero base Enc. And if you have zero base Enc, you don't incur fatigue by attacking but you do from spellcasting (and equipment encumbrance is added for spellcasting - hence the thread someone created warning about putting marble armor on spellcasters).

Oh, and another thing to factor in is that some use of AP's carry over to the next turn. The typical way this shows up is while someone can always attack once per turn, they can't move as far on a turn after they have attacked.

Re: Action Points? Encumbrance? What?
 

Also blindness lowers AP by smth. about 6 in average. And this isn't stated anywhere.

Re: Action Points? Encumbrance? What?
 

Also, elephants go from 16 > 8 with a Limp.

I understand how spellcasting encumbrance is greater than melee, that much is shown in a presumably accurate fashion.

I'm just saying that while the inconsistencies may be fine in a general sense, since everyone's units are subject to the same penalties, whether they're the ones we see or not - but I am wondering if perhaps the way that AP costs for attacks are calculated, if perhaps Quickness is not providing the benefit that it claims that it should, and possibly more so for W9/10 Quickness bless, than for spell/item Quickness.


Also, I get it, of course, I didn't think it would be the base Enc that is free, that makes total sense. But the rest of the mechanic seems to be misrepresented at best, and possibly broken in ways that hurt some people more than others.

And good catch Ano. I had noticed that a couple of times, but wasn't concerned with the AP of Blinded units, since they're, well, Blind. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/laugh.gif

I'm trying to think of a way to make this seem like a fun thing to fix. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...ies/tongue.gif I know W9 would be really awesome if it worked right. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif I don't have much material here. >.>

Re: Action Points? Encumbrance? What?
 

Encumbrance from armor reduces AP unless the unit is mounted, in which case it does not. Base encumbrance has no effect on AP. Limp IIRC cuts AP in half. Crippled cuts AP to 2, no matter the base value.

Attacking uses up all remaining AP for that round, but I'm not certain if it cuts into the AP allowance for movement of the next round (e.g. a unit with 12 base AP moves 6, then attacks, does it cost just the 6, or does it cost 12 and leave only 6 points of AP for movement the next round?).

Re: Action Points? Encumbrance? What?
 

Edi, I think that second variant is right. At least that is what I noticed and, probably, read somewhere.
It may be easily noticed that very often units who didn't perform attack in the combat round leave those, who did, behind the next round.

Re: Action Points? Encumbrance? What?
 

That's my suspicion as well, but I have not paid quite enough attention to make a definitive call on it. It would explain a lot, though.

Re: Action Points? Encumbrance? What?
 

According to the manual, attacking costs all of your total action points and if you've already used some the debt carries over to next round. Not sure how accurate this is.

Re: Action Points? Encumbrance? What?
 

It certainly seems to be true. It's most obvious when you're watching your troops run down fleeing enemies. You'll see someone make a long move and attack then not move at all the next turn.

I'm still not quite sure how those AP numbers with Limp add up. Is it possible that Limp is actually half, but the displayed penalty is wrong?

Re: Action Points? Encumbrance? What?
 

Well and my problem here is rooted in that.

Attacking is supposed to use a full turn of AP, not just what is remaining, but the entire sum, and will subtract from the next turn. This seems to work fine, especially as everyone operates in the same fashion.

What I am trying to figure out, is with 50%(ish http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...ies/tongue.gif) Quickness, how is that determined? Because Quickness is clearly differentiated from "Haste" in game mechanics. Quickness, in all instances, states that it increases ability to move faster AND attack, while Haste only gives the ability to run farther.


So, here is my dilemma - A human unit with Base AP of 12, Armor Enc leaves him at 9 AP, Quickness puts him at 13 AP - how many AP does it actually end up costing him to attack?

This is really driving me mad, because the behavior I am seeing in SP settings with W9 blessed sacreds - the higher the Base (or Current, after armor etc) AP of a Quickened unit, the more reliably it seems to produce extra attacks - and the lower the AP of the Quickened unit, it starts to produce behavior that more resembles simple Haste.

Re: Action Points? Encumbrance? What?
 

Well, attacks must cost the 100% AP limit after armour, otherwise heavy infantry (say from base 12 down to 6APs) without quickness would attack every second turn, and they attack every turn. At least as far as I've seen anyway.

I'd imagine 50% quickness could work either as:
1) leaving the armour-adjusted AP cost, just modifying APs.
2) altering the attack AP cost equal to the new quickness-modified AP total
...a) then giving alternate 2 attacks - 1 attack each round.
...b) discounting the attack AP cost (67% in this case) depending on quickness type.

If you're seeing fewer attacks with low AP units, I'd expect you are seeing either (1) or (2a), both being different routes to the same result. This would be because a fast unit could move and afford to attack twice (18APs mean 5APs move and two attacks at 12 each), whereas a slow unit would be more impaired by movement (6APs, only 1 AP free to move for two 4AP attacks.)

Re: Action Points? Encumbrance? What?
 

I believe - but I could be hallucinating that 50% quickness is intended to give an attack every other round.

Attacking is supposed to consume your full AP; it is supposed to put you into negatives. The negatives are then supposed to carryover when your AP gets refreshed the next turn.

Rather than being a bonus of 50% to your ap each turn, is there any chance they are giving a full bonus every other turn? I think this might better explain the behavior you observed.

Additionally, haste doesn't give a ap increase Idont think - I think it decreases the cost per square to move - for example, from 4 to 3.

Re: Action Points? Encumbrance? What?
 

Yeah, haste does something similar to that. It's the "running" ability also given by Boots of the Messenger. Less AP taken to move the same area.

Re: Action Points? Encumbrance? What?
 

Odd, I've only used them a couple of times, thought before that they added AP.

That's interesting, because it means that Boots of Long Strides (Messenger are just reinvig) could combine well with Jade Armor or W9 bless - something to look into for sure.


And of course you'll see more attacks with more AP, that stands whether they're hasted or not. My point is just that the lower the baseline is for AP, the less overt benefit you actually realize in combat, from Quickness.

Not sure how much you've used it, but personally when I am making a bless strat, 9/10 times I will go W9 before I go F9, and when working on builds, I always watch the fights very closely so that I see exactly what my results are, and how they compare to other builds. In this case - for LA Mictlan, a W9 bless is anomalously poor relative to most bless nations where I feel it compares quite favorably to a F9 bless, as far as damage output is concerned. So, this odd disparity, coupled with a couple examinations of Limpy soldiers, really got me thinking about the AP mechanics themselves.