Comprehensive Retinue Comparisons for Horse Lords 2.4.x

[Eslin]

I'm working on making two comparisons:

• 40% commander bonus (offensively and defensively)
• 15% tech across the board
• No bonuses from cultural buildings

And

• 40% commander bonus (offensively and defensively)
• 60% tech for one, 30% tech for the other two
• Max bonuses from cultural buildings

The first of these two should be fairly representative of the very early game or playing as a republic (with city capital), while the second of them should be fairly representative of the mid-to-late game. I can't really be bothered to make more than two comparisons (with values in-between or with other bonuses for the commander ... certainly not for terrain etc.) because it isn't going to change the relative rankings much, and the work is fairly tedious.

Don't include the commander bonuses at all. They're multiplied separately to all the others, so if you just remove commander bonuses you're just removing complication.

 

[Peter Kirby]

Don't include the commander bonuses at all. They're multiplied separately to all the others, so if you just remove commander bonuses you're just removing complication.

I could do that, but they're added together with the affinity multiplier.

http://www.ckiiwiki.com/Combat

It's not necessarily a big effect, but to remove the commander attack bonus entirely would tend to make affinity multipliers worth a little more (going from 1 -> 2 or 1 -> 4 is a larger effect than going from 1.4 -> 2.4 or 1.4 -> 4.4).

A commander attack bonus will always be present if there's a commander 16+, which is also assumed.

Defensively, it really makes no difference at all (as you point out), except that it would actually be a little more complication for me to remove the defensive bonus while keeping the attack bonus (because they're using the same function...).

 

[Eslin]

kk. In that case, I really wouldn't assume a bonus of 40%, patient commanders are really common. Maybe 10% offense and 30% defense? Even in a kingdom I often find myself lacking perfect commanders.

 

[NapoleonI]

How ofen would it be possible for a pure HA flank with an Altaic commander to change back to skirmish with the retreat and ambush tactic?

 

[majorlupa]

This much, but should be 100%. Bug has been reported.

 

[Peter Kirby]

kk. In that case, I really wouldn't assume a bonus of 40%, patient commanders are really common. Maybe 10% offense and 30% defense? Even in a kingdom I often find myself lacking perfect commanders.

Don't commanders get 2% damage bonus per level of martial?

http://www.ckiiwiki.com/Commander
"Every point in martial attribute increases the damage of a flank by 2%."

So basically it's based on a martial 20 commander.

 

[Korashy]

If I was unclear, I did not mean that any unit will "perpetually stay in skirmish."

Don't commanders get 2% damage bonus per level of martial?

http://www.ckiiwiki.com/Commander
"Every point in martial attribute increases the damage of a flank by 2%."

So basically it's based on a martial 20 commander.

As far as I know that's right. I'm assuming you are leaving out traits such as X leader, Flanker, etc.

On a sidenote, do you know how the calculations for narrow gap work?

Edit: Nevermind it's actually in the Wiki, didn't see it before

 

[Peter Kirby]

As far as I know that's right. I'm assuming you are leaving out traits such as X leader, Flanker, etc.

Right.

 

[Peter Kirby]

Two little notes here... based on testing in-game... http://www.ckiiwiki.com/Combat_tactics

[I'm assuming that is what "days = 10" means, but I'm not completely sure whether it means the 10th day or after the full elapse of 10 previous days...]

What "days = 10" means:

• 11th day of the battle or later
• 10 previous days of the battle have gone by

Also, the wiki "Tactics" page was very unclear about the difference between the "eligibility" criteria and the conditions for the modifiers.

• Most (but not all) of the modifiers are based on the proportion of troops within a kind of troop (i.e., skirmish or melee) -- the wiki was fairly clear about that.
• But, at this time, all of the "eligibility" criteria are based on the proportion of the total troop size dedicated to that unit.

This becomes relevant when you, say, just have one skirmish unit and one melee unit, but a lot more melee units. For example, say that you have a Generic Defence retinue with 1 out of 6 archers and 5 out of 6 pikemen. You're going to trigger the "Volley" tactic eligibility (and all the modifiers) because you have at least 1% of total army as archers (and 100% of skirmish as archers). But you're not even going to be eligible for the "Shieldwall" tactic because you have fewer than 20% of the total army as archers.

I changed the wording a little bit to reflect this.

Here's a screenshot to illustrate.

 

[Secret Master]

This becomes relevant when you, say, just have one skirmish unit and one melee unit, but a lot more melee units. For example, say that you have a Generic Defence retinue with 1 out of 6 archers and 5 out of 6 pikemen. You're going to trigger the "Volley" tactic eligibility (and all the modifiers) because you have at least 1% of total army as archers (and 100% of skirmish as archers). But you're not even going to be eligible for the "Shieldwall" tactic because you have fewer than 20% of the total army as archers.

This doesn't make sense. Why would the tactics be set up this way? Why penalize heavy infantry/pikes with no shieldwall if they don't have 20% archers?

Hell, even in medieval poems like the Battle of Maldon, the damn poet talks about them trying to form a shield wall. It doesn't exactly require a Brilliant Strategist.

 

[Peter Kirby]

I have no idea why tactics are set up the way that they are.

Some quick math shows that there are ways to 'work around' it, if someone wants to do so.

"Feint" -- 3 Defence : 1 Light Skirmish (generic)

"Shieldwall" and "Feint" -- 1 Defence : 1 Light Skirmish (generic)

"Shieldwall" and "Feint" -- 1 Defence : 1 Pictish Raiders

"Feint" -- 3 Defence : 1 Free Warrior

"Shieldwall" -- 16 Defence : 1 Longbow

"Shieldwall" -- 20 Defence : 1 Nubian Archers

"Shieldwall" and "Gray Wall" -- 12 Defence : 1 Steel Bow

(I actually find it a little neat because it gives an excuse to bring out some of the weaker cultural retinues, in a mix.)

I've not mentioned the ones that add heavy infantry (due to melee tactics, i.e., "Advance").

City levies might be able to fill the same role in a pinch (as they consist of pikemen, archers, and light infantry).

Here's an example of the 12 Defence : 1 Steel Bow flank (with a martial 14 commander...).

 

[Korashy]

Kind of makes sense for a pickmen not to be able to do a shieldwall

 

[Talq]

This doesn't make sense. Why would the tactics be set up this way? Why penalize heavy infantry/pikes with no shieldwall if they don't have 20% archers?

Hell, even in medieval poems like the Battle of Maldon, the damn poet talks about them trying to form a shield wall. It doesn't exactly require a Brilliant Strategist.

I have no idea why tactics are set up the way that they are.

Quoted for truth. My problem with the combat tactics system is that its both unintuitive and complex, which contributes to all the balance problems because half the time you need to whip out a spreadsheet to work out what is going on because how some things interact does not make sense.

 

[Korashy]

Quoted for truth. My problem with the combat tactics system is that its both unintuitive and complex, which contributes to all the balance problems because half the time you need to whip out a spreadsheet to work out what is going on because how some things interact does not make sense.

Honestly, if you are using pure retinues it's pretty easy to figure out what works how, and spending a couple minutes on the wiki (unless you really really need to min/max). If you are using levies, you have no control either way and may RNGesus be with you.

 

[Eslin]

No, it's incredibly complicated and unintuitive. There is no reason for the combat tactics system to be set out like this, and plenty of reasons for it not to be.

 

[Jorlem]

New beta patch is up, this was in the changelog:

- Can no longer trigger raid tactic if 50% of your army are horse archers.

 

[majorlupa]

Now that pure HA retinue seem to be fixed I calculated real quick. Possible tactics after retreat and ambush.

Swarm - 22%
Swarm Harass - 6,5%
Charge of Opportunity 6,5%
Charge 65%

Doesn’t seem so good. Am I missing something? Charges seem good because they use skirmish value from horse archers (which might be ~15 after some nomad upgrades).

I am not quite sure how battle simulation would go. What would enemy flank do after our HA change tactic after R&A ? Switch immediately to skirmish(which would be super good for HA) or finish up with their tactic and then start rolling for skirmish?

 

[Korashy]

Now that pure HA retinue seem to be fixed I calculated real quick. Possible tactics after retreat and ambush.

Swarm - 22%
Swarm Harass - 6,5%
Charge of Opportunity 6,5%
Charge 65%

Doesn’t seem so good. Am I missing something? Charges seem good because they use skirmish value from horse archers (which might be ~15 after some nomad upgrades).

I am not quite sure how battle simulation would go. What would enemy flank do after our HA change tactic after R&A ? Switch immediately to skirmish(which would be super good for HA) or finish up with their tactic and then start rolling for skirmish?

Should be the same as for charge undefended flank. I think they end their current tactic and then roll a new tactic. Thing is that charge tactics might have you end up in melee straight away again.

 

[majorlupa]

Should be the same as for charge undefended flank. I think they end their current tactic and then roll a new tactic. Thing is that charge tactics might have you end up in melee straight away again.

So its super beneficial for HA since tactic charge is classified as skirmish so if enemy flank would change tactic immediately(which would be high% for charge if we assume its AI levy), the damage HA would take would be really low since it would be charge vs. charge and both flanks would be using skirmish attack. I am not sure if it works that way. I should have result in about hour or two..

Going right into melee after charge is no problem for HA because they would end up in retreat and ambush again.

edit
Managed to find army that would stand long enough. Correction on my previous calculations. Tactics available after R&A
Generic : 5.9 %
Swarm 21.1 %
Swarm Harass 5.9 %
Charge on Undefended 1.9 %
Charge of Oportunity 5.9 %
Charge 59.8 %

After my Swarm -> R&A -> Charge, the enemy flank did not change theirs so I charged into force-back After 6 days of massacre I switched back to R&A which had 99% chance to fire.

Pure HA are trash. To elaborate; they are unreliable. Would destroy pure HI retinue but lose vs some elephants or pikes. Other nomad retinues are better. Pure HA shouldn't be considered when talking about min/max compositions.

 

[Prince Michael]

I wouldn't call HA "fixed". They can still roll Harass Swarm (which is a combined tactic designed for LC&HA) instead of Swarm (which is a mono tactic), because Harass Swarm has only HA trigger (and not both HA and LC).

But as Paradox has apparently lost their track in "balancing" the tactics (instead of tweaking the troop values which I would've preferred), Harass Swarm is actually more beneficial to HA than their pure tactic, Swarm.

Sigh.