I dont like SS HIP v0.8,it is not very balance like SS 6.4

[BuTAJIuK]

Lifthrasir. I thought you there team . And someone already working on the EDU . And it turns out - no.

[Dekhatres]

Correct. Once I'm done with the animations, I'll start working on the stats in the EDU (but for later release, not the next one or you will have to wait longer ).
Anyway, as suggested by somebody (sorry I forgot who), I might adjust the armor protection in accordance with the shield protection in order to make things more realistic without unbalancing the gameplay (hopefully).

well it's not like EDU is a big file, even if it wont be in the upcoming release you can easily upload it whenever you finish it and we just overwrite the old one

[Lifthrasir]

Yes but its size it's not my main concern at present. My main concern is "free time" to do my stuff faster

@ BuTAJluK, I don't think so. I said that we will work on the EDU later but I didn't say now

[Dekhatres]

i just did some tests with 4 heavy archers vs 1 Athanatoi (with 20 armor and 5 shield) on grassy plain and after shooting about 40% of their arrows not single one has died, i think it's safe to say that with those stats a cav unit is pretty much immune to missile, however things to keep in mind, there was no hill advantage for archers and they shot only frontally

now some other changes i made were to cav melee attack, i reduced heavy cav melee damage to 1-4 down from 6-14 (more or less on the level of most infantry) i did leave lighter cav melee intact, my reasoning is that being slow and encumbered in armor heavy cav units should do less melee damage than foot units, i also think defense skill should be very low or inexistent on cav, i hardly see a guy on horse actively dodging parrying or moving his big shield around to block attacks (it's ok in the case of a buckler or other small shield) i think heavy cav should rely almost entirely on it's armor in melee

i would like to hear your thoughts on this

[j.a.luna]

Yes but its size it's not my main concern at present. My main concern is "free time" to do my stuff faster

@ BuTAJluK, I don't think so. I said that we will work on the EDU later but I didn't say now

and for the EDU,lifthrasir don't you need help?i remember that someone of us offered you help...if you need it,tell us

[BuTAJIuK]

I think that our help . This report bugs and provide innovation and substitution. A correction EDU - a delicate matter . It needs experience and analytical mind .

[La Tene]

i just did some tests with 4 heavy archers vs 1 Athanatoi (with 20 armor and 5 shield) on grassy plain and after shooting about 40% of their arrows not single one has died, i think it's safe to say that with those stats a cav unit is pretty much immune to missile, however things to keep in mind, there was no hill advantage for archers and they shot only frontally

now some other changes i made were to cav melee attack, i reduced heavy cav melee damage to 1-4 down from 6-14 (more or less on the level of most infantry) i did leave lighter cav melee intact, my reasoning is that being slow and encumbered in armor heavy cav units should do less melee damage than foot units, i also think defense skill should be very low or inexistent on cav, i hardly see a guy on horse actively dodging parrying or moving his big shield around to block attacks (it's ok in the case of a buckler or other small shield) i think heavy cav should rely almost entirely on it's armor in melee

i would like to hear your thoughts on this

Well reasoned and seems in-line with what I consider to be the best of the battle mods (I'm thinking mostly of R2) One thing to consider: knights trained on a much higher level compared to typical infantry. I'm sure you're aware of this - I'm just wondering if their melee stats might be good a slightly bit higher to reflect this. I've seen some pretty maneuverable modern day performances so I've been wondering lately just how cumbersome those plate armors really were. Although, I also think the plate armor you see on modern day actors is probably less cumbersome since it's manufactured using modern day metal working techniques.

My Serbian foot knights seem a lot less protected from missiles from what you describe, but then they've only got 10 armor, I think? I can say I've felt disappointed with well armored units in this mod tending to be cut down by missile fire considering how high their upkeep has become. But please don't think of lowering upkeep, the difficult economy aspect improves SSHIP over SS very much.

[Dekhatres]

it's not really only the encumbrance from armor, the low attack is meant to reflect a number of disadvantages cavalry has in melee, also heavy cavalry attack speed is tremendously high if you noticed, that is because of their animation i think, from what i've seen even with that little attack rating 1 cav guy still wont go down till he takes a few guys with him

sorry i dont know what serbian foot knights are you talking about, did you mean foot banderium knights ? if yes then i did a test right now with them (they have 11 armor without upgrade) vs 1 unit of heavy archers (again on grassy plain) and when they reached the archers they were down to only 51 men, so yes you were indeed right about that, realistically i think they shouldnt have taken casualties even close to that, i have tested again now with 15 armor and it was definetly better, the've lost only 6 men but then when they got very close to archers they starting losing a lot more, in the end when they hit the archers they were down to 101 still a bit too much but with upgrades wich should boost their armor to 18 i think they should be fine

[nvm]

In this mod I have faced a faction who just spammed feudal knights and had several stacks full of them and it was one of the most irritating experiences ever. Aside from the part where they were reinforcements in siege and turned out before my army and half of them were killed with little loss to me while trying to get to the city. Their neglect of infantry made it really easy to take their cities as well.

[Boogie Knight]

A quick point about the mention of Hastings on the previous page - not that I want to reignite the argument at all, I'd just like to add something to it in the context of the effectiveness of cavalry vs. infantry, particularly as regards this mod. That battle was something of a wake-up call for the Normans. It wasn't so much the Saxon shield wall that caused them problems - it did make things difficult for their cavalry, obviously, but I'm sure they'd have expected that - but the Saxons proved remarkably adept at dropping Norman horses. This is usually attributed to the Danish longaxe they used, though it may also have had something to do with the tactics of the shield wall itself. In fact so effective did the Saxons prove to be when facing cavalry, the Normans organised many Anglo-Saxon warriors into anti-cavalry 'units' (I suppose that's the best term for them) post-conquest to be used in their own wars.

As an aside, if any devs of SSHIP are reading, it'd be great to see units based on these horse-slaying warriors in-game. I know vanilla SS had a fyrd unit but that was the only Saxon unit England had. Would SSHIP consider something similar? I haven't played SSHIP yet myself due to a lack of free time right now, but the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle attests to the creation of these cadres so we know they existed. I know nothing about their effectiveness or when they were used, however, but my guess is that they probably played a part in some of the many Norman civil wars and succession disputes that arose in the decades following the conquest as well as the first crusade. So how about it?

[Lifthrasir]

Well, that costs nothing to have a look at it. If you have sources, that would be very helpful and will save time for us

[Boogie Knight]

After a morning of searching, I'm afraid the best I've been able to turn up is an unsourced Wikipedia entry. Damn.

I could've sworn I'd seen it mentioned elsewhere leading back to an entry in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, but I don't know where I saw that. It's a huge shame as I'd love to see them represented somehow, but obviously you can't just include them based on my word alone. I'm still looking though, so fingers crossed.

[Used2BRoz]

Best text on anglo-norman warfare (or collection of texts is this book :

Anglo-Norman Warfare


Studies in Late Anglo-Saxon and Anglo-Norman Military Organization and Warfare


Edited by M.J. Strickland


blurb about book:
The influence of war on late Anglo-Saxon and Anglo-Norman society was dominant and all-pervasive. Here in this book, gathered together for the first time, are fundamental articles on warfare in England and Normandy in the 11th and 12th centuries, combining the work of some of the foremost scholars in the field.
Redressing the tendency to study military institutions and obligations in isolation from the practice of war, equal emphasis is given both to organisation and composition of forces, and to strategy, tactics and conduct of war. The result is not only an in-depth analysis of the nature of war itself, but a study of warfare in a broader social, political and cultural context. The Themes dealt with largely span the period of the Conquest, offering an assessment of the extent to which the Norman invasion marked radical change or a degree of continuity in the composition of armies and in methods of fighting.
This important collection, with an introduction and select bibliography, will be is essential not simply for the student of medieval warfare, but for all studying Anglo-Norman society and its ruling warrior aristocracy whose raison d'être was war.
-------------------------------------------------------------------


my comment:


Generally the way society changed between the anglo-saxon and norman periods (after a period of transition) was that the A-S society was mainly based around the king ; a few nobles (often from the same family) and then a widespread freemen element. The king and the nobles had their own elite troops - huscarls; below them came the fyrd - a general coming together of the freemen of a region. The Normans, as we know introduce a hierarchy of nobles and knights, each with their own troops loyal to them, all ultimately owing loyalty to the king. The old fyrd seems to have died out by the early years of the 12th century, replaced by county and town militias, but the backbone of the army was the landed gentry and the king with their own forces plus, of course, whatever mercenaries they could gather, and allied troops from Wales, Scotland Ireland etc. The other factor that changed in the warfare was who the army was intended to fight. Armies adapt their tactics to those used by their enemies. As most of the enemies the Normans were fighting (when they weren't engaged in civil wars) were Welsh, Scots, Irish, and those armies tended to have few cavalry, then they wouldn't employ many anti-cavalry forces. Instead they favoured heavy cavalry, infantry - mainly poorly equipped and armoured but no worse than their opponents, who provided cover for the cavalry when they needed a break, and archers - initially at least poorly trained but still capable of causing casualties to their lightly armoured opponents. Properly handled and disciplined such armies should succeed but were often poorly lead and ill-disciplined, leading to some notable military failures.

[k/t]

What was the attack value of the archers used in the test?

[Dekhatres]

the unit is ME_Heavy_Archers

stat_pri 6, 2, quality_mass_composite_arrow, 210, 32, missile, missile_mechanical, piercing, none, 0, 1

and here's some other stats

projectile quality_mass_composite_arrow


effect arrows_new_set
end_effect arrow_impact_ground_set
end_man_effect man_impact_tiny_set
end_package_effect arrow_impact_wall_set
end_shatter_effect arrow_impact_ground_set
end_shatter_man_effect man_impact_tiny_set
end_shatter_package_effect arrow_broken_impact_wall_set


effect_offset -1.5
damage 0
radius 0.1
mass 0.07
accuracy_vs_units 0.08
affected_by_rain
min_angle -80
max_angle 70
velocity 25 50
display aimed
effect_only

[Boogie Knight]

Thank you for that, Used2BRoz. I'll be sure to give it a look, it sounds fascinating!

[k/t]

Missile troops are overpowered in RC at the moment. Rather than randomly increasing the armour of units, it would be better to cut 2 from the attack of every missile unit.

With the new javelin animation, probably even javelin attack could be reduced by 2.

[jurcek1987]

Toxotae only have 2 missile attack and they bring down bodyguards like they're made of paper.

[Dekhatres]

Toxotae only have 2 missile attack and they bring down bodyguards like they're made of paper.

archers will bring down eventually anything that isnt very heavily armored, early bodyguards included, bodyguards are only 20 so even when only a few get killed it seems a lot, besides, a unit of toxotae wont be able to 1v1 a bodyguard unit, try shooting down a unit of Scholarii with toxotae

@k/t reducing the damage will cause some trouble in balance because archers that previously had 3 attack now will have 1 like levy archers, if you do that then you would also have to adjust the accuracy so that there's a diference between these units

imo this change wont make big diference, sadly cant test it right now since i messed up something and mod wont work anymore...again

EDIT: i meant try a unit of archers with 2 damage again Scholarii, you cant test toxotae against Scholarii since they are in same faction, that's a fail on my part xD

[k/t]

Yes, other adjustments might be necessary. Like range and arrow mass.