Recruitable Unit Rebalance Version 7.51 Released.

[Saber Cherry]

Huzurdaddi said:
SC: I think what you have done with Abysia's Salamanders is cool. The idea is right: make them useful. But the tripple buff of attack, length, and reduced cost seems a little much. They are *awesome* in combat.

They could use a little nerf. I like the attack and length mod. Perhaps an increase back to the old price or heck, even more than the old price.

OK, thanks, I'll look into that. With only ~5 attacks per battle (at 20 encumbrance) and low survivability (low protection and defense) I wanted to err on the side of cheapness, but my intention wasn't to give Abysia a new supreme unit...

[Huzurdaddi]

I don't think I would call them a supreme unit. And the trick with them is to arrange it so they do not get hit. But my quote to soapy was when fighting HC "Run *****es! RUN! BUUUURN!" Which is exactly what happens the 2nd round after contact with the enemy.

[Huzurdaddi]

Please don't take my word for it, I could be smoking crack. Whip up a game with indeps at 9 and let it rip! I was using rich world settings and that does seem to make the problem considerably worse since you can recruit more of them more quickly.

Oh and I have a question wrt. the Jotun Herse. Why did you reduce it's cost? Did you think it was overcosted at 60 gold? They are fine units. Compare them to woodsmen ( both are sacred ). Similar units except that the Herse is wearing actual armor.

[Saber Cherry]

Huzurdaddi said:
Please don't take my word for it, I could be smoking crack.

I'll keep that in mind

Oh and I have a question wrt. the Jotun Herse. Why did you reduce its cost? Did you think it was overcosted at 60 gold? They are fine units. Compare them to woodsmen ( both are sacred ). Similar units except that the Herse is wearing actual armor.

I think they are highly overcosted for any purpose, other than weak unequipped (or maybe a lucky coin) Thugs when heavily blessed. Jotunheim has access to much better thugs (like Banes / Banelords). Even at 50g it is usually preferable for Jotunheim to let 30g indy human leaders do the leading.

Their stats are way lower than Woodsmen and they lack the useful abilities of Forest Survival and Stealth. In other words... anything that Herses can do, indy leaders or Woodsmen can usually do better.

Jotun Scout @ 50g
HP 32
STR 22
ATT 12
DEF 12
PREC 11

Jotun Herse @ 50g
HP 33
STR 21
ATT 11
DEF 10
PREC 10

Note that the Jotun Scout should 33-34 HP; the 32 is a mistake (as non-leader Woodsmen already have 33).

[Huzurdaddi]

Good point about the scout.

Perhaps the Scout is undercosted. Let look at the other sacred non-holy leaders. IIRC the sacred non-holy leaders are: the Shaman, the Wind Lord, the Hunter Lord, the Lord Warden, Keeper of Tradition, the Communicant, and the Prince General. All of the ones with combat potential ( everything except for the Shaman and the communicant ) are seriously expensive. I personally think that it is the scout which is out of wack and undercosted and not the Jotun Herse. As a matter of fact, I consider the Herse one of the more exploitable units in the game.

[FrankTrollman]

Question: in order to do this, it looks like you went through and figured out what al the weapon numbers corresponded to. Any chance that list is stored somewhere?

And another question: If you give a unit a weapon like "fire flies", does it actually shoot out a pile of those dinky little fires, or does it try to wield them as a melee weapon somehow? And if the former, how much ammo does it have?

-Frank

[Saber Cherry]

FrankTrollman said:
Question: in order to do this, it looks like you went through and figured out what al the weapon numbers corresponded to. Any chance that list is stored somewhere?

And another question: If you give a unit a weapon like "fire flies", does it actually shoot out a pile of those dinky little fires, or does it try to wield them as a melee weapon somehow? And if the former, how much ammo does it have?

-Frank

I wrote down (with much help from others) the equipment IDs when I started on the Combat Simulator. You can search the forums for that thread... or just download Edi's Weapon and Armor Database, available at Arryn's site among others. I used Edi's compilation when making the mod because it is much more complete and up-to-date than the list I had made previously (listing all the weapon effects and so forth).

Fire Flies (like all spells) cannot specifically be given as a weapon, although multi-shot ranged weapons can be created, and it may be possible to replicate Fire Flies with a cleverly-designed weapon. Ammo can be modded, and ranged weapons are only used ranged, never in melee. A unit without a melee weapon will have "fist" or "claw" by default. Download Illwinter's mod manual for more info. BTW, also remember that ranged weapons do not cause fatigue.

Ironhawk said:
PDF, how can you suggest to anyone that Arbalests be used? Ever? Thier rate of fire is so terrible as to make them usless. Unless thier accuracy or ROF has changed in the latest version of the mod?

ROF and accuracy unchanged. However, they are now shield-negating (and 12 damage). I'm not entirely certain how projectiles and shields work - for example, if a person has no shield, is there a 100% chance of a projectile hitting, or a 45.7% chance (0 attack versus 0 defense)? I *assume* it is the latter but I'm not sure.


Stats:

Xbow: 10ap damage, rate 0.5, range 32.
Arbalest: 12ap damage, rate 0.333, range 45.


Hitrate versus a 2-defense shield (like a round shield):
Xbow: 30.2%.
Arbalest: 45.7% or maybe 100%.


Hitrate versus a 3-defense shield (like a kite shield):
Xbow: 24.7%.
Arbalest: 45.7% or maybe 100%.


Hitrate versus a 4-defense shield (like a tower shield):
Xbow: 18.4%.
Arbalest: 45.7% or maybe 100%.

Source: http://www.shrapnelcommunity.com/thr...=&sb=5&o=&vc=1

So against shielded enemies, modded arbalests are always far better than crossbows by virtue of the greater damage and range; their high hitrate always more than makes up for the lower firing rate. The only weakness of modded arbalestiers is the high rcost.

[PDF]

Thinking about missile weapons "bypassing shields" : I'm not sure it would have any effects if the bypassing apply to the shield defense bonus. AFAIK missile weapons ignore defense altogether, they are aimed at squares and happen (or not) to hit stg in the square.
And I'm not sure the bypassing apply to the shield protection.
Lastly I don't find shield-bypassing missiles much rationalizable, unless they are rationalized as guided precision ammo !