MA Ulm in CBM 1.9x

[danm]

Originally Posted by shatner

Think about it, Ulm loves bladewind because it shoots a whole bunch of grape shot over the battlefield. Their troops remain largely unaffected while the monkeys and militia and maenads get cut to ribbons. They would really benefit from the option of having the archer-equivalent of bladewind, not Gift from the Heavens. And a repeating crossbow happens to mesh with their theme in addition to the arbalest's sprite. Win-win!

Sure, that would be more efficient, but it doesn't seem at all thematic to me. Ulm wants big. Ulm wants heavy. Who wants to carry around a big heavy crossbow all day that is completely useless against "real" (read: armored) Troops? Troops without good armor clearly are too primitive to mount a threat to the mighty metal fist of ULM! Let the melee boys sort them out. What you need a bow for is them huge trampling elephants, and big ol' monsters, thugs, and supercombattants.

Let the uncivilized indie troops keep their pathetic shortbows. Warriors of ULM deserve a REAL bow! The fact that they might be strategically better served by blowguns doesn't mean an ulmish soldier is going to devote his life to training to use such "weak" projectiles.

For better and worse, Ulm thinks armor is important, and their crafters are obsessed with both perfecting their own armor, and overcoming that of their foes. It just doesn't make sense for them to put all their effort into fielding the best armor possible, and then build their bows around killing "obviously inferior" unarmored troops. Leave that sort of thing for poncy mages, and expendable independant mercinaries.

[shatner]

If that is the "theme" of Ulm that we are agreeing to (and I'm not saying I agree) then we need to tweak things so that the mechanics support a functional and sensible set of tactical options that is on par with what other, rival MA nations have to offer. In other words, a balanced set of options that fit within the nation's theme.

The fact that Bandar Log can't be bothered to field anything with a shield larger than a buckler annoys me to no end but that nation works despite the weakness. That weakness is even part of what makes Bandar Log feel like Bandar Log (as well as being truer to it's Hindu mythological roots). If you insist that Ulm have some pathological fixation of self-defeating ranged weaponry, so be it. The onus is then on you to submit a way to make the crunch work within, and despite, the fluff.

I have submitted my interpretation which is functional and internally consistent. Squirrelloid created an excellent mod which is also functional and fluff-friendly despite going about it in a very different way. Now it's your turn, danm.

EDIT:
And besides, having an elaborate work of artifice seen no where else in the age (repeating crossbow) which mows down those too foolish or uncivilized to wear proper armor seems pretty Ulmy, even under your interpretation. Ulm isn't just about "Hit it HARDER!" otherwise they wouldn't have towershield troops with hammers; instead it'd be nothing but mauls, greatswords and battleaxes.

[Knai]

Originally Posted by shatner

The fact that Bandar Log can't be bothered to field anything with a shield larger than a buckler annoys me to no end but that nation works despite the weakness. That weakness is even part of what makes Bandar Log feel like Bandar Log (as well as being truer to it's Hindu mythological roots). If you insist that Ulm have some pathological fixation of self-defeating ranged weaponry, so be it. The onus is then on you to submit a way to make the crunch work within, and despite, the fluff.

1) Small Reinvig on all troops, with more on Black Plate troops. Say 2 and 3, and maybe even 4 on all sacred units.
2) Increase Arbalest range to 50. Increase precision of all Arbalest units. This gives it another niche, as it is able to pepper troops from a distance that exceeds even long bows.
3) Increased mage power, as discussed earlier.
4) New national spells. Blade wind is glorious, but only kicks in at high levels, and Iron Darts doesn't really supplement that much. I'm not sure about the specifics here, but an enchantment spell that gives a whirling blade equivalent to poison cloud could work, particularly if the damage was kept low. 6 non AP damage will barely harm Ulmish troops at all, but those who get close to them while unarmored will get cut down.
5) Everyone wielding a black halberd gets actual awe, not a cheap imitation.

[llamabeast]

So do you guys actually think that MA Ulm is still weak in CB 1.92? I'm not sure that it is.

[Amorphous]

While I am not the most avid player of CBM and disagree with a number of changes I have the utmost respect for the work put in and the intention to balance things while keeping as much as possible of original theme and feel for each nation. The changes suggested in this thread have very little in common with that.

You essentially propose a nation with wide access to recruitable, powerful, low-encumbrance troops with magic weapons, reliable access to at least 2 levels of every magical path except water and blood and on top of that some extra national spells.

Can you truly not see a balance problem here?
Not to mention the idiosyncrasy of giving a supposedly magic-hating nation one of the broadest magic-bases in the MA.


I am sure that those with more experience of CBM can provide better advice, but I will offer some of my own.

Adding N and D to the MA Ulm magic base is not advisable. If you feel the need for more magic - which should not be necessary with the latest CBM changes - you should limit it to the paths already present. For reference, human nations having access to "only" four paths is not uncommon in the MA - look at Ermor, Machaka, Man, Marignon or Pythium.

Adding magic weapons to ordinary troops is something of which you should be wary. Ulm already has very well armoured troops with good attack and damage as well as good morale and low encumbrance. Ulm already has a magic weapon wielder in the guardian and it is a quite good one. Against ordinary troops, the other troops in the Ulm roster is better, but against sacred troops (of which there are a lot more than the two examples brought up), for popping mistform and for ignoring etherealness, it is a top-notch unit.



A few other things:
The calculation of troop costs are off. Upkeep is 1/15th of purchase price, so waiting 3 turns would add 2 to the price. Of course, this would only be true for 1/3 of the troops that wait. Average price increase for waiting troops would be 4/3gp. Also, you have to ask yourself why you are not building more castles. With production 3 and the Ulm production bonus, you should not have to wait 3 turns to have a decent number of your "lightly" armoured troops as long as you build an adequate number of castles.

Arbalests with their high damage, long range and decent precision are a good addition to MA Ulm. If you want ordinary arrows there are plenty of independent variants available in the MA, but arbalests are much better against heavily armoured troops than the also commonly available independent crossbows (or ulm's own sappers). While ulmish troops do decent damage, they do not do that much against some of the heavier infantry available to some nations. Especially since quite a few nations can easily add things like protection to the mix. Sure, in a vacuum ulmish heavy infantry will eventually win, but heavy infantry is often used merely as a delaying tactic. Ask yourself if you really want to try to whittle down arcoscephalian hoplite hp one at a time, while a communion of mystics sit in safety behind them. As Ulm you have tower shields and probably a lower encumbrance as well as better protection than the opposing heavy infantry. Arbalests will hurt them considerably more than you.

[llamabeast]

Lest people panic that I will implement the suggestions here verbatim, I'm not currently planning any additional changes to MA Ulm (except for a small improvement to the AOE of the Iron Fears Not... spells). For the moment it is not clear to me that they need any additional boosts.

[Corinthian]

I can tell you this llama. They are *WAY* strong in the early game now. And if they leverage that early game right they should have no problem in the mid and late game.

[Mightypeon]

Ulm is definitly no longer weak. The boost from CBM 1.92 is not as "big" as the one from "Order of the Black Rose", but it is enough to be competetive although not overpowering.
Although this depends on other factors, such as Diplo being allowed (Helps Ulm a lot).

[Mightypeon]

As an actual change for the next CBM, at the moment, Sappers are by far better choices than Arbalests for nearly everything:
reasons:

Arbalest fires every 3 turns, does 14 AP damage, range 45 precision 1.
Crossbow fires every 2 turns, does 10 AP damage, range 30 precision 2. It also has 2 more shots.

Already here, the Crossbow is imho a better weapon, after 6 turns, the "total damage" of the Crossbow is already better (since 3 Crossbow Bolts likely deal more tha 2 Arbalest Bolts), the crossbow is more precise which is usefull. The Arbalest has some uses when it comes to strong alpha strikes, and against masses of units who are resistant to 10 AP. Which is not a lot of units.

But the most important things in favor of the Sapper:
Map Move 2 and Siege Bonus of 5.
In Sieges, each Sapper is worth 5 Arbalest guys. A modest amount of 40 Sappers (something 2 normal forts can get in a single turn) is enough to instapop most 150 def forts, a main army with a contingent of 100 sappers will blow through any non Pan fortification in a shockingly quick way.

Imho, increasing the precision of the arbalest and or reducing the Siege Bonus of the Sapper would be nice for internal balance.

[Soyweiser]

Mightypeon, arbalests outrange most mages. With some careful placement you could outshoot a lot of enemy combat mages. (Mages that will never ever move forward, lazy gits).