Recruitable Unit Rebalance Version 7.51 Released.

[Saber Cherry]

Sandman said:
Nice mod. I don't agree with everything (I've always liked Jotun Woodsmen), but it's a really impressive effort all the same.

Thanks for the suggestions! I've never played Conquerers of the Seas

With regards to Woodsmen, when and how do you use them? Even with Nature-9 / Earth-4 I prefer other Jotun infantry... and for stealth armies, Vaettir are at least as good as unblessed Woodsmen, IMO. I'm really starting to think giving Woodsman commanders 10 leadership and Holy-2 would be ideal, because even having dropped Woodsman units to 45 gold, I still can't think of a use for them...

Code:

---

200 gold, 54 res, 4 holy of Woodsmen versus 200 gold, 150 res of Vaettir:



'4*JO Woodsman' versus '25*JO Vaetti'  in 40000 bouts.



 ~ Attacker's Deathmatch Statistics ~



Score: ----------------------   82

Wins: -----------------------     .00%

Losses: ---------------------  100.00%

Kills per battle: -----------    4.13

Kills per round: ------------    1.46

Deaths per battle: ----------    4.00

Life expectancy (rounds): ---    2.35

Life expectancy (battles): --     .83

Avg. Rounds Elapsed: --------    2.85

Avg. Rounds to Win: ---------     .00

Avg. Rounds to Lose: --------    2.85

Hit Rate: -------------------   56.41%

Evade Rate: -----------------   32.94%

Damage done per swing: ------   12.41

Damage done per hit: --------   22.00

Damage taken per hit: -------    4.00

Total damage taken per life:    35.79

---

[Saber Cherry]

Big Daddy: Thanks for the additional information about projectiles! Although, some of the stuff about slings is pretty hard to believe. Where did you find the information; do you remember? And by the way, I know very little about slings, though in RPGs they tend to differentiate between "staff slings" and "normal slings." Do you know which were being described, or if the difference is an artificial one invented in the 20th century?

[Sandman]

With regards to Woodsmen, when and how do you use them?

With a water-9 bless and sloth scales. This turns their light equipment into a bonus, since they can be produced for few resources, and they get less fatigue. Quickened, they'll always strike first with enormous force, obliterating most indies. They can be used for flanking as well.

Despite it being the percieved wisdom, I've never really been tempted by a nature bless for them. Possibly because the Son of Niefel is so cool.

They're less useful as the game goes on, but the water bless stays handy forever, pumping up the Jotun Herses and with battle shrouds, boosting the Gygjas as well.

[Saber Cherry]

Arralen: Thanks for the research and the picture! The link is really well done, too.

Sandman: I'll have to try that sometime. As far as Gygjas go, don't you think it's odd that the Vaettir descriptions refer to them as sacred, and yet they are not sacred?

And also - I'm playing Jotunheim right now, and can't find a good use for Gygjas or Skrattis (though I have many vaetti hags, and uses for all of them). Both of them are very expensive to build and hope for good randoms (like 2 death). What do you do with Gygjas? Cast Crossbreeding?

[Boron]

Jotunheim is a big mystery for me also .
The scratti can at least be used for blood hunting + they can summon IDs with the +1 water ring and a random blood sorcery .
With random blood sorcery the scrattis can then forge blood boosters also and do the blood only spells like horde from hell and fiends .
So the scrattis are useful but expensive .
For gygias i have found no use at all . So if i play Jotunheim i normally chose utgaard instead of base Jotunheim .
Seithkonas and Nornas are more useful then vaetti hags and gygias .

[BigDaddy]

The second site is the one sighted. I could have sited the third, but I think its velocity figure is suspect.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sling_%28weapon%29
http://christiananswers.net/dictionary/sling.html
http://www.slinging.org/

And yes, longbows fired 400ms, as did x-bows, and surprisingly slings. The accuracy of the sling and longbow is rather more suspect at this range though. I think the sling was inferior, because it didn't penetrate metal armor well. My instinct (as someone who understands physics) is that the sling was likely as effective as described. A roman text describes excising a sling bullet. You'll see it sited on one of the websites.

Slinging was cultural. So, those cultures that used slings often practiced with them, and the male population at large was skilled and accurate. Longbows, hard to use, were trained from childhood to very young conscripts. By the time they reached adulthood, they were excellent troops all around (better than most any other non-elite troop), but expensive. X-bows were the great equalizer, because they where very easy to use.

[BigDaddy]

I couldn't find anything about historic ranges for heavy crossbows. They where never widely employed, and because of targeting issues (they had no scopes after all) the range of the other weapons was really already adequate.

I assume they fire somewhat farther, but likely not alot. The short draw lenght would still really limit any medieval x-bow.

[Endoperez]

One thing that would really help would be adjusting long/short distance accuracy. At the moment, crossbows can only be accurate or not accurate, while being accurate in short range but fastly becoming less accurate when the range increases would seem to work well for them. Longbows might be less accurate, but wouldn't suffer as badly from increased distance, because they are fired in an arc(ballistically?) anyway.

[wombatsSAR]

BigDaddy said:
I couldn't find anything about historic ranges for heavy crossbows. They where never widely employed, and because of targeting issues (they had no scopes after all) the range of the other weapons was really already adequate.

I don't understand why a crossbow suddenly needs a scope to fire at distant targets. The quarrel arcs out into the air, just an arrow, just as bullet. As for ranges, Payne-Gallway has fired one to 400 m. This matches up with the known draw weight and aerodynamic efficiency of the quarrel. If you would like, I can repost the literature references so you can peer at them yourself.

I assume they fire somewhat farther, but likely not alot. The short draw lenght would still really limit any medieval x-bow.

The short draw length is only relavent in considering quarrel design and the rate of fire. Once the bolt is accellerated to its 60+ m/s, it doesn't matter. The fact that the old designs did this in such a short span meant that the quarrel had to be particularly stout. The rate of fire issue is related because an efficient bow means that it can have a lower draw weight for a given effective power and can therefore be recocked faster. A man can only put out so much work in a given period of time.