Jump to content


Add raised shields ability to every shielded melee infantry.

raised shield ability every melee infantry

  • Please log in to reply
32 replies to this topic

Ardez #21 Posted 21 November 2017 - 05:38 PM

    Zhayedan

  • Praetorian
  • 2,232
  • Member since:
    03-06-2012

View PostElysion, on 21 November 2017 - 10:51 AM, said:

I dont understand why there is not passive arrow resistance for having a shield active at all times. This is a normal total war mechanic.

To compensate ranged friendly fire into the backs/flanks of enemy infantry should be toned down.

 

There is, it is called the Missile Block stat. It just doesn't apply to the rear of units.


Elysion #22 Posted 21 November 2017 - 06:06 PM

    Private

  • Closed Alpha Gladiators
  • 7
  • Member since:
    04-12-2011

View PostArdez, on 21 November 2017 - 05:38 PM, said:

 

There is, it is called the Missile Block stat. It just doesn't apply to the rear of units.

 

Does it actually block all damage a % of the time? Playing archers i always got the sense that things just took less damage from front, though i suppose in practice it would result in the same thing.

 

The problem with making things too missile resistant in the game is that melee tends to get more mixed and blobed up than seems typical for TW. You can have a low damage ranged unit work out if its allowed to sit on a flank slowly adding damage to a melee, but not if it is expected to function in cramped enviornments and unable to flank shoot. Increasing armored and shielded unit resistance to ranged but also lowering friendly fire by a lot, and adding an ammo system, is something id like to try.


Edited by Elysion, 21 November 2017 - 06:06 PM.


Ardez #23 Posted 21 November 2017 - 06:54 PM

    Zhayedan

  • Praetorian
  • 2,232
  • Member since:
    03-06-2012

View PostElysion, on 21 November 2017 - 01:06 PM, said:

 

Does it actually block all damage a % of the time? Playing archers i always got the sense that things just took less damage from front, though i suppose in practice it would result in the same thing.

 

The problem with making things too missile resistant in the game is that melee tends to get more mixed and blobed up than seems typical for TW. You can have a low damage ranged unit work out if its allowed to sit on a flank slowly adding damage to a melee, but not if it is expected to function in cramped enviornments and unable to flank shoot. Increasing armored and shielded unit resistance to ranged but also lowering friendly fire by a lot, and adding an ammo system, is something id like to try.

 

The missile block stat operates as a percent of missiles blocked. A unit with a base missile block(provided by shields, unshielded units have 1 missile block, so 1%) of 35 will blocked 35% of all incoming missiles from the front arc.


DalRiada #24 Posted 28 December 2017 - 08:27 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Closed Alpha Gladiators
  • 52
  • Member since:
    11-10-2017
Until CA/WG publish actual battle performance results for unit types, as WG does for WOT and WOWs, these unit nerf / buff discussions are anecdotally meaningless.

Ardez #25 Posted 28 December 2017 - 10:00 PM

    Zhayedan

  • Praetorian
  • 2,232
  • Member since:
    03-06-2012
You may want to consider how old certain threads are before bumping them in a non-constructive way. I think there is some good value as far as education goes for these theorycrafting discussions, whether I agree with them or not. I would love to get access to that data you mention, but I doubt it will happen anytime soon, if ever. If we don't have these kinds of discussions before we get that data, we may never be able to have them.

Edited by Ardez, 28 December 2017 - 10:00 PM.


DalRiada #26 Posted 28 December 2017 - 10:24 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Closed Alpha Gladiators
  • 52
  • Member since:
    11-10-2017

View PostArdez, on 28 December 2017 - 10:00 PM, said:

You may want to consider how old certain threads are before bumping them in a non-constructive way. I think there is some good value as far as education goes for these theorycrafting discussions, whether I agree with them or not. I would love to get access to that data you mention, but I doubt it will happen anytime soon, if ever. If we don't have these kinds of discussions before we get that data, we may never be able to have them.

 

I see your point that it is better to get the discussion going.  Obviously it would be nice to have hard data to back up everyone's anecdotes.  The words that make me concerned in your reply are "if ever".   WG publishes performance stats for WOT and WOWs, why not for Arena in the future?  Although I understand it may not be a high priority, I still hope they will publish results sometime.  Is there a reason you think they may never do so?

Ardez #27 Posted 28 December 2017 - 11:33 PM

    Zhayedan

  • Praetorian
  • 2,232
  • Member since:
    03-06-2012

View PostDalRiada, on 28 December 2017 - 05:24 PM, said:

 

Although I understand it may not be a high priority.

 

My concern is the piece of your quote above. I know for certain that CA has a history of preferring to keep stats hidden. We had to claw for what we have now (They used to round acceleration, deceleration, speed and so on.) We still have no online database of units to look at, and those numbers are static in the game!

 

I've nagged them about an API on and off... since June?

 

Anyways. It's more that I haven't seen enough evidence that they want to make something like that public than that it won't exist. 



DalRiada #28 Posted 29 December 2017 - 01:07 AM

    Lance-corporal

  • Closed Alpha Gladiators
  • 52
  • Member since:
    11-10-2017

View PostArdez, on 28 December 2017 - 11:33 PM, said:

 

My concern is the piece of your quote above. I know for certain that CA has a history of preferring to keep stats hidden. We had to claw for what we have now (They used to round acceleration, deceleration, speed and so on.) We still have no online database of units to look at, and those numbers are static in the game!

 

I've nagged them about an API on and off... since June?

 

Anyways. It's more that I haven't seen enough evidence that they want to make something like that public than that it won't exist.

 

Now I think you are probably correct as I don't think CA has ever released stats on units for multi-player regular Total War (warhammmer, rome, etc...).  That is unfortunate.

Vampire_Jesus #29 Posted 29 December 2017 - 06:13 AM

    Lance-corporal

  • Closed Alpha Gladiators
  • 13
  • Member since:
    05-11-2014
This game has a problem in that it doesn't really feel like an epic battle. There is no main line, back line, and flanks. Basically everyone goes to the sides of the maps or forests and fights there. It's a cluster. I think most of that is to be blamed on archers and arty. No one wants to take 3 slow [edited] units down the open middle of the map only to be pelted into oblivioun by ranged attackers they can't even catch. It's annoying and very frustrating. In my opinion that's why I don't seem to see much sword infantry. It's really quite disheartening to get into battle and it's all cav, pikes and arrows. This just doesn't feel like being a part of a larger army. Make front line infantry more arrow resistant and I think we will start seeing more infantry.

Arkkinite #30 Posted 02 January 2018 - 03:42 AM

    Junior Sergeant

  • Closed Alpha Gladiators
  • 179
  • Member since:
    11-27-2016

Ranged fire ( and artillery too) are indeed some of the reason why this does not feel like a pitched/set-piece battle as you said, Vamp_J. Melee infantry units felt forced to engage in melee asap to avoid range fire (enemies generally dont ff into their blob) so the battleline usually devolve into a mess.

 

But i suppose maps might be a problem (few have large open spaces like Rubicon), and melee units (mostly swords and flx tho) have very few penalties from blob 3 units on top of each other, so there is no battle line.

 

Ok that was a bit of a tangent. Does anyone know what is the base missile block chance for e.g. Silver shield hoplites, t9 roman swords and heavy swords, and t9 barb swords?

Raise shield is indeed much inferior to FitS or Testudo, but if the base block is like 50%, the 50% bonus from Raise Shield might really push the balancing out of wack.



traumadisaster #31 Posted 02 January 2018 - 01:23 PM

    Sergeant

  • Closed Alpha Gladiators
  • 319
  • Member since:
    07-20-2012
Why can't we spawn anywhere on our side of the map, was there a time it was tested and it was not fun?

Ardez #32 Posted 03 January 2018 - 03:19 AM

    Zhayedan

  • Praetorian
  • 2,232
  • Member since:
    03-06-2012

View Posttraumadisaster, on 02 January 2018 - 08:23 AM, said:

Why can't we spawn anywhere on our side of the map, was there a time it was tested and it was not fun?

 

Too easy for a more coordinated team to overwhelm one flank or the center before the opposing team can react to it.


Flying_Bacon_Monster #33 Posted 03 February 2018 - 07:35 AM

    Lance-corporal

  • Closed Alpha Gladiators
  • 34
  • Member since:
    10-25-2014

I totally support this idea. It is baffling when I get a barrage from some archer cluster far away and my roman infantry (I use sulla, so no testudo) will literally lose half of its health in one go. In almost every total war game, when a unit has a shield it will automatically bring it up once under archer fire, why should arena be any different? 

Also I'm not asking for that level even, just a toggle that will make them raise their shields and increase the missile block chance and decrease the melee defence and the charge defence, much like how the Greeks and their ability act.







Also tagged with raised, shield, ability, every, melee, infantry

2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users