Third post contains the new approach on unitstats.

Volunteers for calculating the Empire?

The current unitschema won't fit for all of the civs but I think we can still use it as base. Individual strengths of UUS we should discuss later or in the threads for the different civs.

We need to know what the strength values should be and what techs should be the prereqs(example vanilla Warrior)

Ancient

Worker
Ancient Warrior: Str 2, tech: none, modifiers: 25% city defense
Ancient Spearman
Ancient Archer
Ancient Axeman
Ancient Swordman
Shaman
Horse-Archer
Catapult
Chariot
Monster I
Scout
Galley

Age of Magic

Citizen
Militia Spearman
Militia Archer
Militia Swordsman
Light Knight
Hedge-Wizard
Bolt-Thrower
War Chariot
Monster II
Explorer
Caravel

Age of Discovery

Royal Guard: (should be strong, national unit restricted to 3 units in game)
Pikemen
Longbowmen
Crossbowmen
Heavy Knight
Wizard
Cannon
Galleon
Frigate

Mechanical Age

Cavalry
Musketman
Monster III: (national unit 1)
Ironclad
Special Unit: (national unit 3)

Here I want to collect Unitstatideas. Feel free to post everything you can think of related to this just follow this rules:

1)
only one unit per post please!
2)
only posts which include a whole unitstatsheet not just some values and questiobnsmarks.

Sorry but i don't really understand the question. Would you like warhammer stats? I can provide many of them from my army books. Or do you want specific stats for the mod? If the latter, do you want to point out which stats you need? (as in strength, defense, withdrawel chance etcetera?)

We agreed roughly about the following:

WS/BS(whichever is higher) should give firststrike chances
STR+Toughness+Attacks+Saving Rolls should be reflected in STR + Era-Mod
Ini should be reflected in firststrikes and or maybe withdrawal chances
Movement should be reflected in withdrawal chances and of course movement

Extraordinary powerful units could be firststrikeimmune in this system

Weapons we can reflect via promotionsettings later:

i.e Lances +20% strength attacking etc.
and of course also reflectng the paper-stone scissor system



Detail:

If we want to convert WH-Rules to civ we should be careful to not overexceed effects of WH-stats.

What's the effect of WS and STR/T in WH exactly?

A human attacking a Human has (WS 3 against WS 3) means he has a 50% chance to hit. If he hits he gets another 50% Chance to wound (Str 3 against Toughness 3). So what we have is a chance of 25% to kill his opponent(since he only has 1 wound). For the defender this means a 75% chance to survive the first blow and strike back. That means his chance to kill the attacker is about 19%.

The gladeguard has a chance of 66% to hit and the same chance to wound(fighting a human). Chance to killl is therefore 33%. The Empire Soldiers chance to survive the attack and kill the elf instead would be round about 16,5%.

The chances would stay the same if the elf had a WS of 4,5,6 - no matter!

here the tab for dice rolls to hit:

Spoiler:
Def WS

AT 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
2 3 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 5
3 3 3 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5
4 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 5 5
5 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4
6 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4
7 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4
8 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4
9 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4
10 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4


Sorry for the chaos: vertical line is Attackers value horizontal line defenders WS.
See what I mean? Weaponskill 10 sounds impressive but it doesn't matter much regarding hit chances if the attacker has WS 10 or just 4 against a def with WS 3. I counts just a little more if the defender got a WS value more than two times higher than the attacker, that's all.
So if we use WS I recommend small steps:

WS 1-3: no FS chance
WS 4-6: 1 FS chance
WS 7-9: 2 FS Chances
WS 10: 3 FS chances

In the example above (human against human) a higher ini would decide who gets the 25% and who the 19 %. The difference is just 6%. Of course striking first gets more powerful if also str and ws are higher.

I recommend something similar as above:
Ini:0-2: nada
Ini:3-5: 1 FS
Ini:6-8: 2 FS
Ini: 9-10: 3 FS


So in my version the gladeguard still would get 1 FS + 1 chance(since th Empire soldier got a FS too, he disables 1 firststrike of the gladeguard) and normaly win-so I guess he should be more expensive. In WH he costs roughly about 50% more than the Empire Soldier and since the Elf will likely get some boni in woodterrain too and maybe even move faster he should indeed cost at least 1,5 times the shields of the Empire Soldier. I think somewhere in this direction we can balance this.
Note: Ini of less than 3 normally are really slow units like undead and Dwarfs. Elves have normally Ini 6. Humans 3. Values in between or above apply mostly to monsters and heros(powerful individuals)

Weapons and Armor not yet taken to account(I recommend we put this after we decided about the basic stats-small steps!)


Basic Str: WH Str+Toughness

Attacks(A) will modify this:

A of 1 +0%
A of 2 +20%
A of 3 +30%
A of 4 +40%
A of 5 + 50%
A more than 5 get immunity to firststrikes

Wounds (W):

I suggest
wound 1 is +0%STR
wound 2 is +20% STR
above 2 every wound adds 10% to a total of 100% with ten wounds

Movement:
M = 1-4 --- 1 movement
M = 5-8 --- 2 movement
M = 9 or more --- 3 movement

Since we will have to decide soon what strengths and weaknesses the units should have I suggest we think about the unitstats for the general schema above in the first post. This would really help since I'm currently working on the unitinfo.
Forget about what I wrote earlier here about a complete design every single value counts and helps now.

Suggestions so far:

PL:
Ok, first of all we need a method for deciding what strength a unit will be.

I think it would be good if there was a base strength for all units in one tier. ie ancient units have a bae strength of 2, the next tier has base strength 5, next tier hasbase strength 10, next tier has base strength 15 (or something) and then each indevidual unit gets some extar strength added on or subtracted from that depending on thier abilities.
eg spell casters should get strength subtracted, because they are not strong but can cast spells.
movement should be easy: foot units have 1 move, skermish and horsy units have 2 move, flying and winged mosters have 3 and dragons and other uber things have 4.

Olleus:
Don't have any unit with movement greater than 3. It is simply to easy to blitz with those units and the AI will get very confused (just look at naval units).

I like your idea of base strength, maybe it should go something like this:
2, 5, 10, 18, 30, 50
So that you have an incentive for researching new techs. If you are afraid that this will cause big 'jump points' I have made a python mod where certain techs can make certain units a little stronger, making the rise in unit strengh progressive.

To make units stronger/weaker you could do:WS + S + T + 2A + 2W and compare that to a benchmark (about 13?). For every point above/below this the unit gets it strength changed by 10% (rounding up/down).

Also:
(I + BW) 5 = 0 - 1 first strike
(I + BW) 6 = 1 first strike
(I + BW) 7 = 1 - 2 first strikes
(I + BW) 8 = 2 first strikes
ect...

And for retreat chance:
(I + M) 9 = 10% chance
(I + M) 10 = 20% chance
(I + M) 11 = 30% chance
(I + M) 12 = 40% chance
ect...

That should be a good starting point.

Ploep:
I think this is to large steps. I don't think the normal tier concept really fits to Warhammer. I know you invented that for your mod to have tanks not beaten up by spearman i.e. but why shouldn't a crowd (a lreally arge one) of goblinspearmen beat up the phoenix guard?

If the steps are too small, then why bother researching techs? You might be better off turning science off and gold rushing every unit you can.

Well we can have some powerful units like Dragons, Bloodthirsters etc. which will be at the end of the tech tree. But I really prefer having smaller steps and working more with promotions and special abilities to have more tactical options instead of just brute force. The goal shouldn't be just conquering the world but doing this in as interesting way. The player should be forced to use the most effective unit against the enemy. Wich just overpowered units which are effective against anything there wouldn't be much fun in that, at least not for me.

fair enough.
How about reducing the basic age strength to:
5, 8, 12, 18, 27, 40

That way, every age provides a +50% bonus compared to the previous age. Thats a very large bonus, but one which is easily countered by city defences, clever uses of promotions and unit bonuses.

What about lessining that to 20% and reducing the production costs of higher tier units?

Edit: see below, just three steps I think 50% is okay. I was just trembling about the 40.;)

Btw we have only four eras and the last tier is really limited to just a couple of special units which makes it just three real steps after all.

Then it is not worth researching stuff. I hardly think that an orc armed with an iron sword is only slightly better than an orc armed with a stone club. The iron age orc would slaughter its ancient cousin every time.

Then it is not worth researching stuff. I hardly think that an orc armed with an iron sword is only slightly better than an orc armed with a stone club. The iron age orc would slaughter its ancient cousin every time.
I edited the post above. Yes you're right 50% is okay. That makes round about steps:
5, 8, 12
18-20 for specials like the Steamtank, Dragons etc.

Fine that way?

I'm fine with that. If I have time I might apply the system above to get Civ stats for different units to see if it looks OK.

That would be good. I could need this as soon as possible. Could you make this your toppriority right now? I think the unitschema and the techtree just have to be the base for the rest. We need to set up the generic unitschema and militaristic techs before we can really fit in the rest.

I edited the post above. Yes you're right 50% is okay. That makes round about steps:
5, 8, 12
18-20 for specials like the Steamtank, Dragons etc.

Fine that way?

Good ideas. those base powers would end up as the average powers for that age if i am correct.

woodelf unit example (not refined, just guessed)
(the first number is strength, second is movement.)


Ancient

Worker: Woodelf Worker
Ancient Warrior: Woodelf Warrior--2,1
Ancient Spearman: Woodelf Spearman--3,1
Ancient Archer: Woodelf Archer--4,1
Ancient Axeman: NONE!
Ancient Swordman: Woodelf Swordsman--5,1
Shaman: Woodelf Shamaness--3,1
Horse-Archer: Glade Rider Archer--5,3
Catapult: NONE
Chariot: NONE, get Beastmaster instead--6,1
Monster I: Great Eagle--6,3
Scout: Woodelf Scout--1,1
Galley: Living Raft?

Age of Magic

Citizen
Militia Spearman: Glade Guard Spearman--7,1
Militia Archer: Glade Guard Archer--8,1
Militia Swordsman: Wood Elf Swordsman--8,1
Light Knight: Glade Riders--8,3
Hedge-Wizard: Woodelf Prophetess--6,1
Bolt-Thrower: NONE, get Dryads--9,2
War Chariot: NONE, get Great Stag instead--9,3
Monster II: Unicorn--8,3
Explorer: Ranger--6,2
Caravel

Age of Discovery

Royal Guard: Eternal Guard--15,1
Pikemen: NONE, replaced by Wardancer--14,2
Longbow: Wood Elf Longbowman--12,1
Crossbow- NONE, replaced by Waywatcher--10,2
Heavy Knight- War Hawk Rider--12,3
Wizard: Spellsinger--10,1
Cannon:NONE, replaced by Tree Kin--13,1
Galleon
Frigate

Mechanical Age
Musketman: NONE, replaced by Treeman--20,1
Monster III: Forest Dragon Rider--24,3
Ironclad: NONE, replaced by Sea Monster--18,3
Special Unit: Spellweaver--16,1

What about armour save and wounds .. can wounds be put in just like in the civ3 mod (the green bar)? .. and armour save is rather important ..

Is it also possible to give units defensive en offensive bonusses in basic stats?

Are strength and movement the only variables we can use? Or is there a offensive and defensive strength. Strength against certain units etcetera?

we can make promotions that make units better against other types of units, ie elf slaying, orc slaying from FfH

we can make promotions that make units better against other types of units, ie elf slaying, orc slaying from FfH

Spearmen are a good example. They are defensive units that should be better against horse riders for example. We should give them lower strength, but a bonus (experience?) against horse riders. Swordsmen would be standard attacking units. Halberdiers are even better in defending than Spearmen, but also worse in offensive battles. Can we gives them a bonus if attacked? and let them use normal strength if attacking? Maybe it's a good idea to describe every possible weapon in Civ terms ..

I'm also afraid that every Empire city will be guarded by some Griffonriders for exaple. This is not the correct thread to start about this i think, but isn't it a good idea to give überunits a maximum? That you can build one per city for example? I don't know if this is possible?

well maybe we could give bonuses depending on what armement the unit has.

great weapon = 100% versus monsters

2 hand weapons = 50% versus melee

hand weapon + shield = +50% against characters (good in duel)

spear = +100% versus cavalry

lance = +50% when attacking

mounted sword = +50% against cavalry

bow/longbow = +25%/+50% defending cities, +25% defending hills

handgun= +1 strength


btw, are we keeping the same unit combats as in vanilla or are we changing them? I would be all in favour of having heavy_cavalry and light_cavalry as two different groups.

edit: Made a few changes.

I suggest handguns being effective against melee(especially against slow units) well in history they were the main reason for knights dissappering so also good against heavyknights I suggest. Or lets just say strong and effective against anything but cavalry, warmachines and large monsters(so to say everything of their own era) but limited to 10 units or less per civ to ensure diversity and the AI not only building musketmen anymore.

Shouldn't lances not being effective against infantry mainly? since most Knights will have lances in game this value would go to nothing. on the other hand I count heavy knights to the strongest of their era anyway so maybe they just would go well with withdrawal in addition to their str value.

I especially like the Greatweapon idea being effective against monsters.

We could always give handguns a bonus against nothing, and just make them stronger.

We could always give handguns a bonus against nothing, and just make them stronger.
That I was saying(in a way:mischief: ) in this case I agree with that.

Should we take into account unit size?

A unit of knights has far fewer men than a unit of gobblins. Should we take this into account when calculating unit strength, or should we just use this to work out the cost of a unit? The problem I am getting at the moment is that wizards are stronger than a standard unit. Maybe by giving -2 points to all characters when working out their strenght we can work around this problem.

the unitsize? isn't this just a graphical issue? What do you mean. the size in WH-tabletop or the size in civ?

I meant the unit size in WH tableop. 1 goblin doesn't stand a chance against 1 empire swordsman, but 1 unit of 30 goblins might take out 1 unit of 20 swordsman.

Ok em yes of course both.
For example a goblin should be weaker and cheaper. But I think this already works taking into account a single units values. So I still don't understand why we need to take unitsize into calculation. Would this really make a difference then?

if we don't take unit size into action, a wizard is stronger than a unit of spearman, because the wizard has better stats than any single man in that unit of spearman.

On another, unrelated, note. How will we decide what age each unit is in? Every unit that we play with in the table top game is 'modern era', so will we have to invent some new units?

Well look at the unitdesignthread and see what happened with the armylists;)
Most units are taken from WH-history. If that's not possible we make them up.

Oh and I think I understood your point fully. Yes we can reduce the strength of wizards but what about heros then? I think that's a problem really but maybe one we can push a bit since we only got three heros in total and no wizards who can cast yet. But already we have more than 150 units which need design right now.

I can't start working out unit strength untill we decide which unit is in what age.

Isn't that already clear from the list above and the unidesignthread armylists:confused:

I mean if not why did I put up all this spoilers?
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=174224

If anything is still unclear just ask. But right now the list above should be worked on. We can design the UUs around this then.

sorry, I must have spaced out while reading your post.

Am I the only one who feels that this is turning into a two man convo?

sorry, I must have spaced out while reading your post.

Am I the only one who feels that this is turning into a two man convo?
No you're not. Seems because we're the only ones present so far:D
Other opinions would be good yes.

I just had another idea. We can use the upgradetechs provided by JP to decide when units could be made available. For this we should make clear what should be the basic equipment for each unit. And then make that upgrade tech a prereq. I would prefer this to having promotions or even new models for all this units. They're already really many of them. We also could rename those techs to certain tactic techs then.

I like all of your ideas so far guys:)

Im a little confused by your last post though ploe. could you explain that in a different way?

I summarized the warhammer weapons list. So we can determine the bonusses once and for all! :p

Missile Weapons will follow shortly (and armour etcetera too :))

Close Combat Weapons list:
Hand Weapon
- No special rules
Great Weapon
- WH: +2strength, requires two hands, strikes last
- CIV: strength bonus (40%), no first strike chance
Flail
- WH: +2 strength bonus in first turn of combat, requires two hands
- CIV: strength bonus (20%)
Morning Star
- WH: +1 strength bonus in first turn of combat
- CIV: strength bonus (10%)
Halberd
- WH: +1 strength bonus, requires two hands
- CIV: strength bonus (20%)
Spear (infantry)
- WH: fight in two ranks
- CIV: ???
Spears (cavalry)
- WH: +1 strength bonus in first turn when charging
- CIV: strength bonus (10%) when attacking
Lance
- WH: +2 strength bonus in first turn when charging
- CIV: strength bonus (20%) when attacking
Pistol (in hand-to-hand combat)
- WH: +1 attack (strength 4 armour piercing in first turn of combat)
- CIV: ???


Missile Weapons list:
All units with shooting weapons have the ability to ‘stand and shoot’ when attacked and can shoot from a distance. This must be represented as a first strike when the square is attacked and when the unit is attacking.

Shortbow
- WH: 16 inch, strength 3
- CIV: no bombardment
Bow
- WH: 24 inch, strength 3
- CIV: 1 square bombardment
Longbow
- WH: 30 inch, strength 3
- CIV: 1 square bombardment and some bonus ??? over bow
Crossbow
- WH: 30 inch, strength 4
- CIV: 1 square bombardment
Repeater Crossbow
- WH: 24 inch, strength 3, 2x multiple shots
- CIV: 1 square bombardment, 2 times
Sling
- WH: 18 inch, strength 3, 2x multiple shots if enemy within 9 inch
- CIV: no bombardment, 2x first strike
Javelin:
- WH: 8 inch, strength as user
- CIV: ???
Throwing Star/Knife
- WH: 6 inch, strength as user
- CIV: ???
Throwing Axe
- WH: 6 inch, strength as user +1
- CIV: ???
Handgun
- WH: 24 inch, strength 4, move-or-fire, armour piercing
- CIV: 1 square bombardment, ???
Pistol
- WH: 8 inch, strength 4, armour piercing
- CIV:???

Pistols could ignore defence bonuses.

spear could get city defence bonuses, and bonuses vs cavalry

Javelin:
no bombardment, +5% strength

Throwing Star/Knife
no bombardment, +5% strength

Throwing Axe
no bombardment, +10% strength

I wouldn´t give bombardment ability to "normal" units, this should be only for siegeweapons IMO.

yeh true, give archers the normal city defence and hill defence bonuses accordingly. eg

Shortbow
- WH: 16 inch, strength 3
- CIV: +5% city defence bonus
Bow
- WH: 24 inch, strength 3
- CIV: +15% city defence bonus
Longbow
- WH: 30 inch, strength 3
- CIV:+25% city defence bonus
Crossbow
- WH: 30 inch, strength 4
- CIV: +25% city defence bonus
Repeater Crossbow
- WH: 24 inch, strength 3, 2x multiple shots
- CIV: +25% city defence bonus
Sling
- WH: 18 inch, strength 3, 2x multiple shots if enemy within 9 inch
- CIV: +5% city defence bonus
Javelin:
- WH: 8 inch, strength as user
- CIV: No city defence, +5% stength
Throwing Star/Knife
- WH: 6 inch, strength as user
- CIV: No city defence, +5% stength
Throwing Axe
- WH: 6 inch, strength as user +1
- CIV: No city defence, +10% stength
Handgun
- WH: 24 inch, strength 4, move-or-fire, armour piercing
- CIV: +30% city defence bonus, ignores defence bonuses, ???
Pistol
- WH: 8 inch, strength 4, armour piercing
- CIV: +20% city defence bonus, ignores defence bonuses

Ok, i am undecided about bombardment, because an alternative for that would be firststrikes relative to the inchesnumber

Furthermore, i think its a good idea to give the "units based on one type" but with a different weapon one base strenght (for example the empire militias) and everyone a bonus depending on the weapon and armor it has ( thats what the tabletop does in my opinion) perhaps using from build on given promotions (like the elven promotion or something) to add different boni to different units, making it possible to upgrade these by techs (better armor and weapons) not by exp.

and give cavalry a bonus against archers, perhaps ignoring firststrikes or better strenght bonus versus archers. and withdrawel for the light cavalrys.

which leads me to a point, where large steps in unit strenght arent that necessary if you give a big bonus versus different unitclasses or "promotions" (weaponclasses).

making units buildable shouldnt depend on the era but on the buildings (coming by techs) you have.

The cavalry advantage against Ranged weapons can easily be reflected by immunity to firststrikes and I think firststrikes is what archers should get besides citydefense.
I know no vannila unit which has any bonus less than 10% and I guess 5% is just like nothing but I'll wait for Olleus to give his 2 cents on this. Not much time now the game's starting soon:D

Psychic Llamas list is very comprehensive, but it doesn't make use of civs greatest strength, the paper-rock-scissor combat system. I would rather see weapons give bonuses versus certain combattypes, than just a general strength bonus.
I like the idea of similar units having 1 base strength and then certain bonuses based on weapons. We could even have a system where you can just train 1 type of militia, and you then use a free promotion to, in effect, pick what weapons they use. This would cut the number of units needed, thus saving a lot of time.

No promotions for this please we already have so many units with the adequate weaponry made! Swordsmen should fight with swords visible and nothing else. Or if you find a way to trigger the switch between early and late artdefines via promotion I'm fine with this idea. This way we can have a basic militia which can upgrade but only if we can have at least to more alternative artdefs so that militia can autoupgrade to either spears or bows. I think we can take the swordsmen from the militia anyway since they are sort of Elite they should better be a Standing army instead I suppose but spears and bows are a must have for Militia! ok gotta go now.

@Olleus
Sidenote: I will upload version three tomorrow. Can you check the worldbuilder error we get with the current mod Olleus?(mentioned it in the first post of the construction site) I think it's a pythonerror since it won't dissapear whatever the unitartdefines are and I think I got them almost correctly on my comp now(not yet uploaded) but still get the error. Could you also check the citizenstacker. I noticed weird graphics in the cityscreen.

If the models are already made, then my idea is void. I'll have a look at the python errors but have a feeling that they are caused by theLopez's code.

Does everyone agree on this method for working out unit stats?

Basic Age Strength = 5, 8, 12, 18
Use this value as the basic strength for units in a particular age.


Strength Modifier = ((WS + S + T + 2A + 2W + armour + ward save - 2 if it is a character -1 if it is a wizard -1 if it has a low unit size +1 if it has a large unit size) - Age constant ) *10

A unit if taken to have a lot unit size if it is usualy fielded in units of size 8 or less during a normal game of warhammer. A unit is taken to have a large unit size if it is usualy fielded in units of size 30 or more. Armour is basicaly the armour save that the unit gets, light armour gives + 1, heavy armour + 2, shield +1, mounted + 1, barding + 1, 2 hand weapons (infantry) + 1. Ward saves work in the same way, 6+ ward save = +1, 5+ ward save = +2, ect...
Age Constant = 12, 15, 18, 21


To work out the real unit strength do:
Basic Age Strength + Strength Modifier % of Basic Age Strength


To work out the unit movement:
If M = 4 or less movement = 1
if M = 4 - 8 movement = 2
if M = 8 or more movement = 3
if unit is flying, it ignores terrain costs.

To work out first strikes

if I + BW/WS = 8 first strikes = 0 - 1 (BS or WS, which ever one is higher)
if I + BW/WS = 9 first strikes = 1
if I + BW/WS = 10 first strikes = 1 - 2
if I + BW/WS = 11 first strikes = 2
ect...

To work out retreat chance
if I + M = 10 chance = 10%
if I + M = 11 chance = 20%
if I + M = 12 chance = 30%
if I + M = 13 chance = 40%
ect...


All of these are modified by the weapons that the unit carries.


great weapon = +100% versus monsters

2 hand weapons = +50% versus melee

hand weapon + shield = +50% against characters

spear (infantry) = +100% versus light cavalry

pike = +100% against all cavalry

Flail = causes collateral damage

Morning Star = +25% when attacking cities

Halberd = +50% against heavy and light cavalry, +20% defending cities

Pistol = +0-3 first strikes

spear (cavalry) = +25% when attacking against melee

lance = +50% when attacking against melee.

sword (cavalry)= +50% against all cavalry

bow = +25% defending cities, +25% defending hills, +1first strikes

longbow = +50% defending cities, +25% defending hills, +1-2 first strikes

handgun= +50% versus heavy cavalry, +25% defending cities, +1 first strike

crossbow = +25% defending cities, +25% against melee, +1 first strike

repeater crossbow = +25% defending cities, +25% against melee, +2-3 first strike

sling/Javelin/Throwing Star/Knife/Throwing Axe = +1 first strike (Are these still used? I can't remember the last time I saw a javelin armed unit)



I based this on there being 7 unit combats: Melee, ranged, light cavalry, heavy cavalry, artillery, monsters, characters/heroes.

To take an example:
Empire Spearmen, which belong to the Age of Magic (age 2)
m4 ws3 bs3 s3 t3 w1 i3 a1 ld7
Hand weapon, spear, light armour, shield

Basic Age strength = 8
Strength Modifier = ((3 + 3 + 3 + 2 + 2 + 2 + 0) - 15 ) * 10 = 0
Real strength = 8 + 0% of 8 = 8

moves = 1

first strikes = 0

retreat chance = 0%

special ability = +100% versus heavy cavalry

As you can see, this normal unit in the table top game has been given normal statst in CIV.


To take another example:
Brettonian Grail Knights, which belong to the age of discovery (age 3)
m8 ws5 bs3 s4 t4 w1 i5 a2 ld9
hand weapon, lance, shield, horse, barding, 6+ ward save, unbreakable

Basic age strength = 12
strength modifier = ((5 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 2 + 5 + 1 -1 for low unit size ) - 18 ) *10 = 60
Real strength = 12 + 60% of 12 = 19

moves = 2

first strikes = 1-2

retreat chance = 40%

special ability = +50% when attacking melee

This, on the other hand, is one of (if not the) most powerful unit in the real game, and this is reflected by awesome stats in civ.


The one thing that I have not yet done if unit cost. I will add this shortly.

Though normally I'm not fond of that high unitstats I would say lets give it a go and see how it works in the gameplay. If we use that much firststrikes we'll have to make sure to include the firststrike fix by LunarMoongoose(he stated that firststrike chances normally don't work correctly in civ cause of a typo by firaxis). If you don't know what I'm talking about check this thread:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=175766

I would just suggest a few cosmetical changes(and maybe logical too). I would prefer spears against lightknights since that is what they most likely will encounter and Halberds and pikes(don't forget them) should receive boni against all mounted units:

spears 100% against lightknights
pikes 100% against Lightknights, Heavyknights
Halberds +50% Lightknights, Heavyknights, +20% defending cities

We have actually some Javeliners(Norse Huntsmen, arab spearmen i.e.) but no throwingaxes, slings and knifes(no models easily makeable yet and I doubt there will be in Warlords)

Characters should be better of than wizards concerning strength, (if I understand this correctly they are weaker in your propousal)

Wow!:eek: that is sheer genius right there! its fool proof, and will really make the units represent where they came from. Great job:goodjob:

However, this formula will not work for all of the ancient age units, as most of them are made up.

Very impressive system you came up with Olleus - I really love it and second it.

I don´t think the stats for the Grailknights are to high (19 for one of the best Units compared to 28 for the vanilla tank. And We need some difference between the stats, otherwise you would build lots of cheap units instead of some better ones, because the difference in strength isn´t high enough.

@Ploe: I don´t see why Helberds should get a plus for city defence? But you´re right that they should be better than Pikes. maybe give them a normal +strength modifier of 10% or so.

Very impressive system you came up with Olleus - I really love it and second it.

I don´t think the stats for the Grailknights are to high (19 for one of the best Units compared to 28 for the vanilla tank. And We need some difference between the stats, otherwise you would build lots of cheap units instead of some better ones, because the difference in strength isn´t high enough.

@Ploe: I don´t see why Helberds should get a plus for city defence? But you´re right that they should be better than Pikes. maybe give them a normal +strength modifier of 10% or so.
The halberds second bonus was Olleus idea. I could imagine because it was indeed a weapon of cityguards mostly in history. I never fought with one myself to tell if it's really useful in that case though:D

Awesome list Lord Olleus .. really nice!

Halberds are the Empire's favorite weapons (most troops in the total Empire army are halberdiers). The form the backbone of every city defence.

I agree on Olleus' list. If some things are too strong, you can correct that (simply?) after playtesting .. right?

edit: only one thinh .. the 8/40 for small and large numbered units is kinda strange imo. A regular infantry unit has a minumum of 10 units and usually around 20 models in the unit. 40 is a LOT! almost none WH-player will fight with such a big unit, thus:
- small: 0-9 models (skirmishers, cavalry, loners)
- normal: 10-30 models (all infantry)
- large: 30-infinite models (mobs like goblins and skaven, swarms)

First:

Scouts in general need their 100% against animals back IMO. Get better results from the tribalvillages and only defend (all aspects like the vanilla ones)

We should have two versions of the Kraken - a weaker one, because strength 12 is too much IMO (model smaller) for the early ages and a stronger one (same size as now, but new skin) for the later ages.

What do you mean no WH player uses units of 40 modles DJ? ive got a wood elf army with 1 unit of 40 archers, and my Khemri army has 40 archers also.

i say
- small: 0-9 models (skirmishers, cavalry, loners)
- normal: 10-20 models (all infantry)
- large: 30-40 (standing army units, ie archers, slingers, etc.
- Huge: 40-infinite models (mobs like goblins and skaven, swarms)

@PL: could you discuss this in the Formations thread pls, this ones for Unitstats and it´s getting offtopic with such discussions - and since we already got a thread for the Formations, you could also use that one ;)

Oh, i thought we were discussing what benifist and penalties different sized untis would get... oh well, will move this to the formations thread;)

What do you mean no WH player uses units of 40 modles DJ? ive got a wood elf army with 1 unit of 40 archers, and my Khemri army has 40 archers also.

i say
- small: 0-9 models (skirmishers, cavalry, loners)
- normal: 10-20 models (all infantry)
- large: 30-40 (standing army units, ie archers, slingers, etc.
- Huge: 40-infinite models (mobs like goblins and skaven, swarms)

really? bleeegh .. I hate playing a wood elf ranged army :lol: .. they kill to much .. I rarely meet people with that big units .. but how many points are you playing then?

srry .. didn't read the off-topic warning when posting .. /me shuts up

Modified the post at the top of the page to take into account all of your ideas. I gave halberds a city defence bonus to make them more attractive to empire players.

All characters get -2, and wizards get an extra -1 (making a combined -3).

Do we really need 4 unit sizes? Isn't small(0-10), medium (10-30), large(30+) good enought?

I think it' complicated enough right now:D
I'll put a link in the first post to your post;)

Edit: We could use volunteers for calculating the Empire Units. The Empire units(of course not all of them) would be serving also as the standard or generic troops' values since they have not many special rules.

I had a go at doing some empire unit stats with your formula Olleus, but alot of them came out odd, like way too low for their age, or way too high. take a look at the ones i did:


S-(strength); M-Movement; FS-(First Strikes); RC-(Retreat Chance%)

(NOTE: some of the units came up with odd stats that don’t fit their era, units I am unsure about are marked with ‘???’)

Age of Magic

Citizen
Militia Spearman: Imperial Spearmen—S-8; M-1; FS-0; RC-0%
Militia Archer: Imperial Bowmen—S-7.2; M-1; FS-0; RC-0%
Militia Swordsman: Imperial Swordsmen—S-9.6; M-1; FS-0; RC-0%
Light Knight: Knightly Orders—S-12; M-2; FS-0; RC-20%
Hedge-Wizard—S-8; M-1; FS-0; RC-0%
Bolt-Thrower: NONE, get Mortar in AoD Instead—S-11.2; M-1; FS-0; RC-0%
War Chariot: NONE
Monster II: Griffon—S-20; M-2; FS-1-2; RC-20% ???
Explorer: Halfling Explorer
Caravel: Empire War Galley

Age of Discovery

Royal Guard: Greatswords—S-12; M-1; FS-0; RC-0%
Pikemen: Halberdiers—S-8.4; M-1; FS-0; RC-0% ???
Longbowmen: Imperial Hunters—S-6; M-1; FS-0; RC-0% ???
Crossbowmen: Imperial Marksmen—S-6; M-1; FS-0; RC-0% ???
Heavy Knight: Reiksguard Knights—S-14.4; M-2; FS-0; RC-20%
Wizard—S-13.2; M-1; FS-0; RC-0%
Cannon: Great Cannon—S-16.8; M-1; FS-0; RC-0%
Galleon: Imperial Greatship
Frigate: Imperial Wolfship

Mechanical Age:

Cavalry: Pistolier—S-9; M-2; FS-0; RC-20% ???
Musketman: Hand-Gunner—S-5.4; M-1; FS-0; RC-0% ???

I had a go at doing some empire unit stats with your formula Olleus, but alot of them came out odd, like way too low for their age, or way too high. take a look at the ones i did:


S-(strength); M-Movement; FS-(First Strikes); RC-(Retreat Chance%)

(NOTE: some of the units came up with odd stats that don’t fit their era, units I am unsure about are marked with ‘???’)

Age of Magic

Citizen
Militia Spearman: Imperial Spearmen—S-8; M-1; FS-0; RC-0%
Militia Archer: Imperial Bowmen—S-7.2; M-1; FS-0; RC-0%
Militia Swordsman: Imperial Swordsmen—S-9.6; M-1; FS-0; RC-0%
Light Knight: Knightly Orders—S-12; M-2; FS-0; RC-20%
Hedge-Wizard—S-8; M-1; FS-0; RC-0%
Bolt-Thrower: NONE, get Mortar in AoD Instead—S-11.2; M-1; FS-0; RC-0%
War Chariot: NONE
Monster II: Griffon—S-20; M-2; FS-1-2; RC-20% ???
Explorer: Halfling Explorer
Caravel: Empire War Galley

Age of Discovery

Royal Guard: Greatswords—S-12; M-1; FS-0; RC-0%
Pikemen: Halberdiers—S-8.4; M-1; FS-0; RC-0% ???
Longbowmen: Imperial Hunters—S-6; M-1; FS-0; RC-0% ???
Crossbowmen: Imperial Marksmen—S-6; M-1; FS-0; RC-0% ???
Heavy Knight: Reiksguard Knights—S-14.4; M-2; FS-0; RC-20%
Wizard—S-13.2; M-1; FS-0; RC-0%
Cannon: Great Cannon—S-16.8; M-1; FS-0; RC-0%
Galleon: Imperial Greatship
Frigate: Imperial Wolfship

Mechanical Age:

Cavalry: Pistolier—S-9; M-2; FS-0; RC-20% ???
Musketman: Hand-Gunner—S-5.4; M-1; FS-0; RC-0% ???


Can't be PL. You must have missed something. I.e. I get Str.19 for Greatswords without their equipment already! You probably took the WH str. Value as base strength and not the supposed basestrength by age which is already 12 for them without any modifier?

Edit: oh wait a moment maybe you're right. I check another time.

Ok the stats for Greatswords would be:

[[4(WS)+5(Str3+2)+3(T)+2(W2*1)+2(A2*1)+3(Armor4+)]-18]*10=10
12+10%=Str 13 right?

No, i'm pretty sure that i used the formula correctly. besides, 19 for a Greatsword is crazy tough, considering thats stronger than the base strength for the mechanial age, and they are only in the age of Discovery.

I just think that the formula is a bit inconsistent, because all of the Empire human units have very similar stats, and then subtracting such a large Age Constant (12, 15, 18, 21) actually makes the later units weaker than the middle age units. (look at the Griffon compared to the Hand-Gunner!!)

Grr do you allways have to respond so fast?:lol: I updated the post above. I think Greatswords start of with str 13 +100% against Monsters, M1, 0 firststrikes

Yes, i think i rounded down all of the results i got. so 13 is probably corect. but that dosnt answer how we are going to fix the formula for the other units, ie:
Cavalry: Pistolier—S-9; M-2; FS-0; RC-20% ???
Musketman: Hand-Gunner—S-5.4; M-1; FS-0; RC-0% ???
Pikemen: Halberdiers—S-8.4; M-1; FS-0; RC-0% ???
Longbowmen: Imperial Hunters—S-6; M-1; FS-0; RC-0% ???
Crossbowmen: Imperial Marksmen—S-6; M-1; FS-0; RC-0% ???
Monster II: Griffon—S-20; M-2; FS-1-2; RC-20% ???

Yes you're right with this. Seems to me we should give boni to some weapons or alter the ageconstant. We really get some weird results. Just checked the Halbardiers too and they are definitly too weak.
Also there seems to be the cavalry and artillery quite unbalanced in comparison to infantry if we just changed the ageconstant.
Hm maybe better we just make up the values. We still can use the weaponmodifications though even then 100& against Monsters for Greatweapons might be too much if Monsters aren't too be really really strong.

How about having a constant age constant of about 15. Every age would then have a constant of 15. Would that work (don't have time for working out the maths atm).

I think it would almost fit for infanty but I fear we get all to strong cavalry with this. If we use maths here we would need dif modifications for every single weapontype.

yes, i think a strict formula wount work very well here. perhaps have a loose rule saying that thing like elves should be weaker, but faster than humans, and things like orks should be stronger and slower than humans. just generalize it.

I would recommend doing everything with a strong rule, play a test game, and then do any modifications. Otherwise, we run the risk of some races being far stronger than others.

I would recommend doing everything with a strong rule, play a test game, and then do any modifications. Otherwise, we run the risk of some races being far stronger than others.

Yepp, I second that. Do the math give all stats after the same formula and then playtesting, discussions and afterwards changes - then again playtesting...

Sounds rather time cunsuming, but will definitely not be boring and seems to be the only way to get at this IMO.

my guess is that after 2 games the system will be pretty well balanced and after 4 it will be as good as it gets.

I have to say, i never played WHFB on tabletop and did not have time to play civ, so i cant really come up with a clever conversion of the rules..., but cant we convert the tabletop stats effect on a tabletop battle somehow to civ instead of making an average of 4 gameplay technical different attributes?!

So, if a Unit has high WeaponSkills (WS) it means that it will make more likely a hit and you need a hit to make use of your Strenght (S) stat, so a unit with a high S and a low WS will be morelikely not to do any damage but get hit from a Unit with higher WS, so we Should resemble this by using Firststrikes (i think in vanila it works like that 2 units both having firststrike attack at the same time like none having firststrike, is that right?):

WS of 1and2: no chance on a firststrike
WS of 3: 1 chance on a firststrike
WS of 4: 2 chances on a firststrike
WS of 5: 3 chances on a Firststrike
WS of 6: 4 chances of a Firststrike
...


Attacks(A) and Initiative(I) will modify this:
A of 1: standard
A of 2: 1 Firststrike
A of 3: 2 Firststrikes
...
I of 1: 0% Chance on a Firststrike
I of 2: 0% Chance on a Firststrike
I of 3: 5% Chance on a Firststrike
I of 4: 10% Chance on a Firststrike
I of 5: 20% Chance on a Firststrike
I of 6: 30% Chance on a Firststrike
...+10%

And for the Base Strenght we should take Strenght(S) plus Toughness(T)
and give a Bonus of % for every Wound, so Monsters will get tougher...

Morale and Leadership should go into a Psychology, and affect withdrawl or retreat...

Ranged Units should perhaps get Bombard one or even more firststrikes depending on the inches they can fire.
Cavalry should get withdrawl to show their flanking ability

Furthermore we got the Weapons listed somewhere, which give small bonus and should act after the Rock Paper Skissor system

For the Saferoll, perhaps make a Promotion with Armored, which cant be upgraded by exp, but is given to units which have a saferoll and let this give bonus on strenght, and let some weapons do a bonus against armored units (dont know if some weapons ignore or modify the saferoll)

Thats my contribute to the [b] Basic [b] Stats System, on which you can debate.

I think it is clear where i want to go.

I disagree with ws 3 already giving a firststrike chance since this is the standard. Also we should think about including some other values into the formula. I'm not sure if everything I understand correctly but what we can work with seems to be this:

<iFirstStrikes>0</iFirstStrikes>
number of firststrikes

<iChanceFirstStrikes>0</iChanceFirstStrikes>
number of firststrike chance(what's the chance exactly for each? I need to know)

<iWithdrawalProb>0</iWithdrawalProb>
percentage chance a unit can withdraw from combat, I believe if it attacks only

<iEvasionProbability>0</iEvasionProbability>
I believe the same as above just if defending not attacking

<iCollateralDamage>0</iCollateralDamage>
percentage of damage inflicted that is passed on to other units

<iCollateralDamageLimit>0</iCollateralDamageLimit>
percentage limit of damage inflicted on other units in a stack

<iCollateralDamageMaxUnits>0</iCollateralDamageMaxUnits>
I believe the max nr of units in a stack which can be affected by collateral damage

<bFirstStrikeImmune>0</bFirstStrikeImmune>
well immunity to firststrikes yes or no

I don't know where actually we can alter the percentage chance of a firststrike. If it's not in xml I 'd say better not work with that value.
The general direction I like of this idea so lets see how we can get into the details.

Additional attacks could as well give collateral damage imo instead of firststrikes and the ini could pass for firststrikes instead only maybe divided by 3(round normal but ini 10 gives 4!)

Ok, i thought again about it and first some questions:
-Is there a way to adjust damage ( strength goes into your and the other units damage) to make more damage without taking the enemy damage away (like a higher strength would do) and the other way round, reducing taken damage, this would be good for the save rolls (I think i saw something like this somewhere)
-Can we make use of the non deadly combat (i think a mod is out there enabling it)
?

And some alterations for the above mentioned Stat System as we cant adjust the %-Chance on Firststrikes i fear, we should perhaps grant firststrikes by Initiative and additional chances by WS... and do something else with Attacks, like a damage bonus. (it would not affect many units, only the bigger ones)

Bows could get a low percantage on collateral damage, depending on their BS and firststrikechances by their inches and WS
Crossbows and Muskets should instead of collateral damage (cause of slow firing) get a damage bonus and a firststrike malus.

well complicated using the same system for ranged and melee units...

all first strike chances have a 50% chance of becoming first strikes. This value is hard coded. The damage which is inflicted every round of combat is worked out using the strength of both units.

I would advise to not change the way basic combat works as it may confuse players who are used to normal civ rules.

I believe that <iEvasionProbability> is only used by stealth bombers. It is the probablity of it avoiding detection.

:lol: Ok in this case no evasion is withdrawal for both defenders and attacker then?

My opinion how we should use WH-Values roughly outlined:

WS/BS(whichever is higher) should give firststrike chances
STR+Toughness+Attacks+Saving Rolls should be reflected in STR + Era-Mod
Ini should be reflected in firststrikes and or maybe withdrawal chances
Movement should be reflected in withdrawal chances and of course movement

@Olleus
For this much firststrikes, think we can have the game calculating the combatodds display correctly?

Extraordinary powerful units could be firststrikeimmune in this system

Weapons we can reflect via promotionsettings later:

i.e Lances +20% strength attacking etc.
and of course also reflectng the paper-stone scissor system


Does everyone ROUGHLY agree with this? Then we can make up the details...
Edit: This all shouldn't change the basics of civ combat at least not for now.

Ok, if we want it to be for average joe, then we shouldnt change the system, but we should make use of the systems values.
And i read about calculating combat odds and how combat works.
The chance to hit a unit in a combat round is calculated by A/(A+D) and D/(D+A) where A&D are Strength of Attacker and Defender. So the Ratio is very important!!!
So using firststrikes and firststrike chances is a very good idea, cause it works well for us and can resemble a bit better the tabletop system. (one unit with a higher initiative would strike first in tabletop and in civ, both firststrike numbers are compared and the higher one gets the difference (2 firstrike for A versus 3 firststrikes of B will result in one firststrike for B).

I fully agree with it.

Strength and Toughness added and a percentage multiplier for wounds and attacks(as a combat not strength modifier)! This should give us extreme nice Basic Strength. The rest is can be done by Weapons, Equipment and Armor.
the save should be a +strength giving promotion like stated above and could be reduced by armor penetrating weapons.

Avarage Unitsize maybe better just be reflected in costs. To prevent heros and wizards to be too powerful respective to other units we don't need a system imo. That is a small alteration.

Ok is this just two poeple talking again?

No, i'm here.

WS/BS(whichever is higher) should give firststrike chances
STR+Toughness+Attacks+Saving Rolls should be reflected in STR + Era-Mod
Ini should be reflected in firststrikes and or maybe withdrawal chances
Movement should be reflected in withdrawal chances and of course movement

I agree

both firststrike numbers are compared and the higher one gets the difference (2 firstrike for A versus 3 firststrikes of B will result in one firststrike for B).

Is this the way it works in WH, cIV, or both?

I think it is important, If we want to use that much firststrikes.

And Promotions that give firststrikes will be not as valuable IMO if Units get much more Firststrikes right from the start - But this should be no problem.

Civ of course Duke. So this means you disagree because you want to keep the promotions valueable?:confused:

No, I would rather disagree If every Unit would get all of its Firststrikes.

I think It´s fine if it breaks down to one unit having one first strike against the one with less firstrike chances.

But maybe promotions should then give 2 extra firstrikes/firststrikechances (could somebody explain the real difference between those two for the pathetic me?)

But that talk should go into another thread for promotions, which I will most certainly open soon, because I think some of those that are in the mod are odd - That will be after we had at least one round of playtesting with Unitstats from a system we decide upon here.

i love my firststrikes system (and i read that it works like this)!!! and the rest of the basic stats system is fine as well!!!

We should create promotions for each weapon, armor and equipment which has different boni, and then simple add the promotions to the units from start on. this would be a nice thing in my eyes, cause the basic stats could be easily worked out with the "formula" above and then be easily modifiied by promotions. give each a nice picture (there are enough out there) and we got a nice system to start working with, and after playtesting we can adjust things. But we should start working on the details then!

No, I would rather disagree If every Unit would get all of its Firststrikes.

I think It´s fine if it breaks down to one unit having one first strike against the one with less firstrike chances.

But maybe promotions should then give 2 extra firstrikes/firststrikechances (could somebody explain the real difference between those two for the pathetic me?)

But that talk should go into another thread for promotions, which I will most certainly open soon, because I think some of those that are in the mod are odd - That will be after we had at least one round of playtesting with Unitstats from a system we decide upon here.

A firststrike is a given firststrike and a chance on a firststrike is a 50% chance to get one or not, i think you know what i mean?!
Promotions will have to be adjusted any way!
And i think the firststrike system can nicely reflect the warhammer system and make the mod more unique without altering basic civ gameplay too much

OK, thx pointing that out, I thought it was that way, but wasn´t quite sure. And I don´t want to join the discussion if I´m not that sure, so maybe I´ll keep on asking some details.

My Conclusion: give the new system a go and calculate the stats, adjustments will be made after playtesting, but that would be true anyway, no matter what.

Ok, ill summarize what we have, to get into the details and finally get some unitstats done for testing purposes.

if something gives a plus or multiplier in something, it should be calculated from the Basic Value

Basic CIV Strength of a Unit
WH Strength + Toughness


Weaponskill (WS) (and for Archers replace WS with BS)
WS of 1and2: no chance on a firststrike
WS of 3: 0 chance on a firststrike
WS of 4: 1 chances on a firststrike
WS of 5: 2 chances on a Firststrike
WS of 6: 3 chances of a Firststrike
...

Initiative(I)
I of 1: 0 Firststrike
I of 2: 0 Firststrike
I of 3: 0 Firststrike
I of 4: 1 Firststrike
I of 5: 1 Firststrike + a chance
I of 6: 2 Firststrike
I of 7: 2 Firststikes + a chance
I of 8: 3 Firststrikes
I of 9: 3 Firststrikes + a chance
I of 10: 4 Firststrikes

Attacks(A) will modify this:
A of 1: + 0% Combat
A of 2: + 20% Combat
A of 3: + 40% Combat
...

Wounds (W):
W of 1: +0% Strength
W of 2: +50%Strength
W of 3: +100%Strength
...


Leadership, Movement and Moral have to be done by someone else.

The next big thing are Weapons, Armor and Equipment.
These should be done via Promotions (recieving a nice Icon)

This is a modifiied List from Dutch

Close Combat Weapons list:
Hand Weapon
- No special rules, +25%versus Archers
Great Weapon
- WH: +2strength, requires two hands, strikes last
- CIV: combat bonus (40%), no first strikes by initiative, + 50% versus Monsters, ignores Armor
Flail
- WH: +2 strength bonus in first turn of combat, requires two hands
- CIV: combat bonus (20%)
Morning Star
- WH: +1 strength bonus in first turn of combat
- CIV: combat bonus (10%) when attacking,
Halberd
- WH: +1 strength bonus, requires two hands
- CIV: combat bonus (20%), +50% vs Monsters, ignores Armor
Spear (infantry)
- WH: fight in two ranks
- CIV: +50% versus Cavalry, +10% Defense Bonus
Spears (cavalry)
- WH: +1 strength bonus in first turn when charging
- CIV: combat bonus (10%) when attacking
Lance
- WH: +2 strength bonus in first turn when charging
- CIV: combat bonus (20%) when attacking
Pistol (in hand-to-hand combat)
- WH: +1 attack (strength 4 armour piercing in first turn of combat)
- CIV: ignores the armor promotion


Missile Weapons list:
"All units with shooting weapons have the ability to ‘stand and shoot’ when attacked and can shoot from a distance. This must be represented as a first strike when the square is attacked and when the unit is attacking." (didnt alter this yet)

City and Hill defense it should be
Shortbow
- WH: 16 inch, strength 3
- CIV: +5% city defence bonus
Bow
- WH: 24 inch, strength 3
- CIV: +15% city defence bonus, + Collateral Damage, +1 Firststrikechance
Longbow
- WH: 30 inch, strength 3
- CIV:+25% city defence bonus, + more Collateral Damage, +1 Firststrike
Crossbow
- WH: 30 inch, strength 4
- CIV: +25% city defence bonus, ignores Armor, + 10% Combat
Repeater Crossbow
- WH: 24 inch, strength 3, 2x multiple shots
- CIV: +25% city defence bonus, ignores Armor
Sling
- WH: 18 inch, strength 3, 2x multiple shots if enemy within 9 inch
- CIV: +5% city defence bonus
Javelin:
- WH: 8 inch, strength as user
- CIV: No city defence, +5% stength
Throwing Star/Knife
- WH: 6 inch, strength as user
- CIV: No city defence, +5% stength
Throwing Axe
- WH: 6 inch, strength as user +1
- CIV: No city defence, +10% stength
Handgun
- WH: 24 inch, strength 4, move-or-fire, armour piercing
- CIV: +30% city defence bonus, ignores Armor
Pistol
- WH: 8 inch, strength 4, armour piercing
- CIV: +20% city defence bonus, ignores Armor, + 10% Combat

sorry have to go, this list isnt perfect or complete, but it is a Start, please go on and contribute and criticize

what about immune to first strike ability? This would get far to powerful. we should try to limit first strikes to ranged and elite units only.

Good list so far.

I´ll only comment on two things, because I haven´t thought about everything yet.

Ok, ill summarize what we have, to get into the details and finally get some unitstats done for testing purposes.


Pistol (in hand-to-hand combat)
- WH: +1 attack (strength 4 armour piercing in first turn of combat)
- CIV: ignores the armor promotion

If 2 Attacks in WH get 20% Combat Bonus in cIV, then the +1 Attack from the Pistols should be rated higher then only giving the ignore armour bonus IMO.

I suggest +10% or +20% against Melee Units.


Bow
- WH: 24 inch, strength 3
- CIV: +15% city defence bonus, + Collateral Damage, +1 Firststrikechance
Longbow
- WH: 30 inch, strength 3
- CIV:+25% city defence bonus, + more Collateral Damage, +1 Firststrike

If those weapons are supposed to inflict collateral damage (good idea IMO) I would suggest to limit this collateral damage to only 1-2 Units and let them deal no high %, like 10-25%.

I´ll have a closer look and comment on other things later.

The problem with this method is that there is going to be almost no difference in strength between units of different ages. I suggest a multiplier per age for strength (x1 for the first age, x1.25 for the second age, x1.6 for the third age, x2 for the fourth age).

Also, what was wrong with my list of weapons on the previous page (or two) ?

what about immune to first strike ability? This would get far to powerful. we should try to limit first strikes to ranged and elite units only.
I thought you agree on the basic system and it was written that firtstrike immune ability should be given to exceptionally powerful units only;)

And yes we get era none specific values with that but we only have three real eras and it shouldn't be to hard to take acount of that aferwards. Let's see first if we can manage some differences in power by weapon modifiers. Ancient units can simply be made weaker since they are made up we don't have any WH-rules for them anyway.

So lets see what we get:

Empire core units would have a basic Str of 6, no firststrike chance and no firststrike.

The Gladeguard(if melee) would have a basic strength of 6, 1 firststrike and 2 FS chances! if Archer they evebn get three FS chances!

weapon modifiers not included

Think the Empire Soldier got any chance? I think not much of it.

If we want to convert WH-Rules to civ we should be careful to not overexceed effects of WH-stats.

What's the effect of WS and STR/T in WH exactly?

A human attacking a Human has (WS 3 against WS 3) means he has a 50% chance to hit. If he hits he gets another 50% Chance to wound (Str 3 against Toughness 3). So what we have is a chance of 25% to kill his opponent(since he only has 1 wound). For the defender this means a 75% chance to survive the first blow and strike back. That means his chance to kill the attacker is about 19%.

The gladeguard has a chance of 66% to hit and the same chance to wound(fighting a human). Chance to killl is therefore 33%. The Empire Soldiers chance to survive the attack and kill the elf instead would be round about 16,5%.

The chances would stay the same if the elf had a WS of 4,5,6 - no matter!

here the tab for dice rolls to hit:

Def WS

AT 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
2 3 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 5
3 3 3 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5
4 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 5 5
5 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4
6 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4
7 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4
8 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4
9 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4
10 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4

Sorry for the chaos: vertical line is Attackers value horizontal line defenders WS.
See what I mean? Weaponskill 10 sounds impressive but it doesn't matter much regarding hit chances if the attacker has WS 10 or just 4 against a def with WS 3. I counts just a little more if the defender got a WS value more than two times higher than the attacker, that's all.
So if we use WS I recommend small steps:

WS 1-3: no FS chance
WS 4-6: 1 FS chance
WS 7-9: 2 FS Chances
WS 10: 3 FS chances

With ini it's also overpowered in your suggestion, seZ.
In the example above (human against human) a higher ini would decide who gets the 25% and who the 19 %. The difference is just 6%. Of course striking first gets more powerful if also str and ws are higher.

I recommend something similar as above:
Ini:0-2: nada
Ini:3-5: 1 FS
Ini:6-8: 2 FS
Ini: 9-10: 3 FS


So in my version the gladeguard still would get 1 FS + 1 chance(since th Empire soldier got a FS too, he disables 1 firststrike of the gladeguard) and normaly win-so I guess he should be more expensive. In WH he costs roughly about 50% more than the Empire Soldier and since the Elf will likely get some boni in woodterrain too and maybe even move faster he should indeed cost at least 1,5 times the shields of the Empire Soldier. I think somewhere in this direction we can balance this.
Note: Ini of less than 3 normally are really slow units like undead and Dwarfs. Elves have normally Ini 6. Humans 3. Values in between or above apply mostly to monsters and heros(powerful individuals)

Weapons and Armor not yet taken to account(I recommend we put this after we decided about the basic stats-small steps!)

You're forgetting that initiative is only used from 2nd round of combat. The first round the charger get's to have a try first. Can this be implied? otherwise it's useless to attack a stronger opponent.

But i like the way you want to implement I and WS.

Who can charge in WH and who is normally defending is normally decided by Movement. Don't worry I didn't forget that. But it's something I want to simulate roughly by weapon and trooptypes. Cavalry getting boni attacking i.e.(that's possible). Troops with higher ini are mostly faster troops too so they will be more likly to charge also. But I don't want to reflect this in much further boni, this could easily get unbalanced. Lets push aside this for now and first decide the basics.

Ok, as i stated, i am not expreienced in whfb tabletop, so i prefer Ploeperpengels calculations and would say he is right with his new reduced firststrikes suggestions (but i really want to keep them).

@Olleus: i didnt see your list, i simply missed it, really sorry. Had a look at it and it sounds good concerning the melee weapons (considering small collateral Damage or armor piercing for ranged). and by this list you would get your "age constant", cause a spear not giving bonus against heavy cavalry makes heavy cavalry extremely powerfull... and something like this could be done with the rest too. And perhaps if a weapon in WH gives +1 or +2 strength, give it the same in CIV.

@Dutchjunkie: "You're forgetting that initiative is only used from 2nd round of combat. The first round the charger get's to have a try first. Can this be implied? otherwise it's useless to attack a stronger opponen" this could be reflected by a +20% Attack for every unit ;) or something like that.

Ok, we then should get to a conclusion about that, so we can try it and create the weapon, armor promotions.

Well first someone should calculate the basicstats for the units of the empire and elves for comparison. I'd prefer having some data before we go to more finetuning.

well someone could easily write a fast excell sheed, where you type in the WS, A, I ... stats and get a calculation for the CIV stats... that should be fairly straightforward, i will go now and study, and later i will get into the formations and continue cleaning up / modifiing the unit graphics.... if i ever can open the unitinfo... (it did not respond, i think it is simply too big, will have to try it with fresh RAM...) furthermore, i think you forgot to set the officer meshgroups to the last one. will have to do that too...

yep sorry I didn't change much in unitinf since version 4 except the undead.
an excelsheet would be nice but I can't write or use it since I don't have excel:D

I made a beginning for an Excel Stats Calculator .. (was bored at work)

You can fill in:
- WH-unitstats
- Weapons (binary)
- Age (binary)
to get the strength and bonusses for the Civ-unit

You can determine in the tabs:
- How strength is calculated
- The age-multiplier
- The weapon bonusses

Other things haven't been implemented yet .. i will only do so if someone is gonna use it ;)

ONLY CHANGE THE WHITE PARTS! .. i hope it's kinda usable :mischief:

edit: small strength calculator update

Ok, i missed alot in my speed reading , and now im confused:sad:

So here are my ideas:

First Strikes:

I=5-6 --- 1 first strike
I=7-8 --- 1-2 first strikes
I=9-10 --- 2-3 first strikes



Strength:


the base strength of (4, 8, 12, 16) plus all of the modifiers below:
WS or BS= 1 --- -3 strength
WS or BS= 2 --- -2 strength
WS or BS= 3 --- -1 strength
WS or BS= 4 --- +0 strength
WS or BS= 5 --- +0 strength
WS or BS= 6 --- +0 strength
WS or BS= 7 --- +1 strength
WS or BS= 8 --- +2 strength
WS or BS= 9 --- +3 strength
WS or BS= 10 --- +4 strength

And also add this modifier

S+T= 1 --- -2 strength
S+T= 2-4--- -1 strength
S+T= 5-7 --- +0 strength
S+T= 8-10 --- +0 strength
S+T= 11-13 --- +1 strength
S+T= 14-16 --- +2 strength
S+T= 17-19 --- +3 strength
S+T= 20-- +4 strength

And also add this modifier

W = 1 --- +0 strength
W = 2 --- +1 strength
W = 3 --- +1 strength
W = 4 --- +2 strength
W = 5 --- +2 strength
W = >6 --- +3 strength



Movement:

M = 1-4 --- 1 movement
M = 5-8 --- 2 movement
M = 9 or more --- 3 movement

Other things haven't been implemented yet .. i will only do so if someone is gonna use it ;)

ONLY CHANGE THE WHITE PARTS! .. i hope it's kinda usable :mischief:

edit: small strength calculator update

I´m quite sure we will have the need for such a calculator!

But I don´t have Excel, so I can´t use it :(

BTW what is the SMALL strength calculator?

I´m quite sure we will have the need for such a calculator!

But I don´t have Excel, so I can´t use it :(

BTW what is the SMALL strength calculator?
the update is SMALL not the calculator or the strength ;)

Thanks for the Editor, we will have to wait for everyone agreeing on the System and then we can use the editor to work itr out. i will have a look at it and see if i can make use of it for testing purposes...

the update is SMALL not the calculator or the strength ;)

Thanks for the Editor, we will have to wait for everyone agreeing on the System and then we can use the editor to work itr out. i will have a look at it and see if i can make use of it for testing purposes...

I was bored so made it .. :lol:

So can adjust all weapon effect etcetera .. so that can be changed easily ..
It's purpose is simply to fill in the WH stats and find out what the CIV-stats should be ..

I'll update it if i'm bored again ..

I don't have excel either unfortunatly but am curious could you post a few example rsults of what you got with it?

So which method did you end up choosing for calculating unit stats?

I don't have excel either unfortunatly but am curious could you post a few example rsults of what you got with it?

Well .. I just tried the basic human stats :mischief: ..

Human: 5,5
Knightly Orders: 9
of the inner Circle: 10
Eternal Guard: 9
Forest Dragon: 22

this is without weapons, but with armour (sorry, lack of time this morning)

The era suggestions I took over are a little bit too much .. would give the dragon in last era (appropiate place for a dragon) 44 strength :crazyeye:

So which method did you end up choosing for calculating unit stats?

I read somewhere that the basic human strength should be around 6. The forumula at the moment is (Ws-4) +(Bs-4) +S +T +W +A +(-(Sv/2)+3), which gives the average human strength 5,5 in the first Era.

Can anyone tell me what the necessry CIV-stats are? Now I got only strenght (and strength when, offensive, defensive, versus etcetera), firststikes and first strike chances.

Dont know guys, but we should agree on one method, and i simply dont want to have later units replace units from the era after ancient, the militia should stay the main part of the army through the game and the more modern units should be the specials, which fill out special tasks or are just a strong addition (i think we have this concept included by making those units limited number) ... The militia Swordsman should be upgradeable to royalguard, but the royalguard should NOT be the modern militia Swordsman!!!! And you still should be able to build a spearman, after you researched a pikeman. they simple should fullfill different tasks!

So i liked the idea of giving the units not too different strength, but manage it with bonus against different classes. the Units have bonus against their era and the era before. So you will have to research if you want to counter heavy cavalry or big monsters.
I am very busy with creating the formations.xml (have to add every unit (more than 150) by several copy paste steps...), so we will have some more time to think about it. I liked the system from Ploeperpengel, but would like any other too if it shows to be good.

Dont know guys, but we should agree on one method, and i simply dont want to have later units replace units from the era after ancient, the militia should stay the main part of the army through the game and the more modern units should be the specials, which fill out special tasks or are just a strong addition (i think we have this concept included by making those units limited number) ... The militia Swordsman should be upgradeable to royalguard, but the royalguard should NOT be the modern militia Swordsman!!!! And you still should be able to build a spearman, after you researched a pikeman. they simple should fullfill different tasks!

So i liked the idea of giving the units not too different strength, but manage it with bonus against different classes. the Units have bonus against their era and the era before. So you will have to research if you want to counter heavy cavalry or big monsters.
I am very busy with creating the formations.xml (have to add every unit (more than 150) by several copy paste steps...), so we will have some more time to think about it. I liked the system from Ploeperpengel, but would like any other too if it shows to be good.

Spearmen is strong vs Cavalry and good in defense. Pikemen will have the same, only it'll be stronger as it is more modern. This is true because Pikemen wear armour and are more trained.

I agree that units shouldn't become obsolete; the Pikeman is stronger, but also more expensive to build! But can you give an example in characteristics you want to give the Spearmen and Pikemen to be different and to be used for different purposes.

In many cases that just isn't possible, they only greatly differ in strength and cost.

Spearmen -- Pikemen
Bowmen -- Imperial Bowmen
etcetera ..

The only thing that sounds logic to me is the appearance of monsters, will also make monster-hunting possible .. that is units more affective against monsters ..

I totally agree with you seZ Age of Discovery should stay the main amount of troops. There is where the coretroops come from.
And DJ of course it's possible to diverse Spears-Pikes-Halberds why shouldn't it?
We just didn't agree on it yet. Also what's missing are armorrules we agreed on. I got some ideas and some where alreadfy posted. But could we try to get some data for what we agreed on earlier?
That means without weapüons and armor for now! I vote we do them as promotions later. And in a new thread.

@P.L.
I don't like your list because it stronly based on era mods and they should be a last add if needed at all(and lead to weird results like DJs calculator shows)

I summarized in the third post what we got so far(without weapons and armor)

well, more modern era Units should be 1. slightly stronger from base and 2. should be a unique addition to your Troops, furthermore most of them have special abilities in WH tabletop

(an Empire Greatsword and a Swordsman:
Greatswords (12): m4 ws4 bs3 s3 t3 w1 i3 a1 ld8

- great weapon, hand weapon, full plate armour
- stubborn; take ld tests on unmodified ld
- Only one unit allowed

Swordsmen (7): m4 ws3 bs3 s3 t3 w1 i3 a1 ld7

- Sword (hand weapon), light armour, shield
- Halberdiers, Handgunners, Swordsmen, Spearmen can use the detachment rules

Weapon rules:
- Light armour: 6+ save
- Shield: 6+ extra save (6+ and shield gives 5+ save)
- Fighting with hand weapon and shield only gives 6+ extra save in close combat

you see, their stats dont differ too much, but in ws and in ld (1 each), but the greatswords got another equipment and the stubborn rule, this is what makes them different, and you can only field one unit of them in tabletop!!!)

And another Example for Civ is this:
a militia_spearman normaly carries a shield, which should give bonus against Archers, and he should get bonus versus light cavalry, a Pikeman doesnt carry a shield (i know he is more armored, but that is still the worse variant against a missile), is with that less effective against ranged, but should get bonus versus light and heavy cavalry. A Halbard is a mix between a spear/pike and an axe, so it should give bonus versus L&H Cavalry (less than a pike, cause not such long) and a bonus versus Armor/Melee.
So you see, one can differentiate here.

A bowman and a Longbowman is harder to differentiate, but perhaps we can think of something here too instead of making the longbowman simply better.
(Archers (8): m4 ws3 bs3 s3 t3 w1 i3 a1 ld7

- Bow and hand weapon
- Skirmishers
- One unit can be huntsmen (2)

Huntsmen
- Longbow and hand weapon
- Skirmishers
- Scouts

Weapon rules
- Skirmishers fight in loose formation; no ranks -- no rank bonus when attacking or attacked, 360 degree view
- Scouts can be deployed when all other forces are deployed and outside the deployment zone
- Bow: shoots 24 inch strength 3 shot
- Longbow: shoots 30 inch strength 3 )

indeed .. the bonusses can make the difference .. and I like that .. that way all humans will be equally strong (almost) but tactics become more important. The other positive thing is that all units will be produced all game long ..

still .. the pikeman is an improved spearman .. but we should do our best to involve tactic as much as possible in the way you describe. THAT will make this mod unique.

Edit .. i'll implement this (and the 3rd post) in my excel sheet and give some examples of the outcome. By the outcomes we can judge our decisions. But I also need to post all unitstats (of almost all races!!!) so this could take a while. I'm busy at work so no free time there too :(

To differentiate the Longbowman from the Archer I would suggest to give him +1 firstrike (because he has a longer range and other units need longer to engage into melee combat), but that is certainly not enough to differntiate them from one another.

I also suggest to give the longbowman a bonus versus armor, because the english longbows in RL history were able to pierce even heavy armor, that´s why the english fielded them as their main-force when beginning the 100 years war against "Continental Europe" and took the mos of the rest of their Knights down from their horses, thus ending the age of "knightly combat tactics".

To differentiate the Longbowman from the Archer I would suggest to give him +1 firstrike (because he has a longer range and other units need longer to engage into melee combat), but that is certainly not enough to differntiate them from one another.

I also suggest to give the longbowman a bonus versus armor, because the english longbows in RL history were able to pierce even heavy armor, that´s why the english fielded them as their main-force when beginning the 100 years war against "Continental Europe" and took the mos of the rest of their Knights down from their horses, thus ending the age of "knightly combat tactics".

I agree with both:
- longer range = more time to shoot
- bigger bow = stronger shot

But saves are part of strength for the moment, so longer bows should give a strength bonus?

I agree with both:
- longer range = more time to shoot
- bigger bow = stronger shot

But saves are part of strength for the moment, so longer bows should give a strength bonus?

Yeah, that´s logical, but the problem is, it wouldn´t diverse them tactics-wise, so I think a simple strength modifier will not work :(

I agree with both:
- longer range = more time to shoot
- bigger bow = stronger shot

But saves are part of strength for the moment, so longer bows should give a strength bonus?
We didn't decide yet how saverolls are implemented exactly. I would reflect saves in icombats but via promotion and not affecting the basic strenght.

@Everyone
But I'm stating this the third time now. Could we please, PLEASE! have some unitvalues calculated based on what we agreed(third post). LEAVING OUT armor and weapons. It really makes not much sense how much firststrikes or whatever a weapon gives without knowing what values the basic units have in the first place! I really don't want to see another 10 weaponlists without having the basic system worked out.:(

OK, my vote goes for your suggestion, like stated in the first post, but i would try to leave the era modification or at least keep it very low (perhaps add not multiply), cause special rules and equipment will make the era difference by coming available there. units tending to be too week can be fixed by hand (after testing!!!)
So everyone post a vote for ploeperpengels "third post" or suggest something new

The Era mod can't be added until we get some value for units without equipment and after that with it. I thought that's also clear already:confused:

-First basic values for at least three different races I suggest to have a range of data.

-Next step is Weapons and Armor. They will have to be done in a way no civ gets overpowered(this can even mean some trooptypes could be needed to be affected slightly different by weapons if different costs isn't enough-or we use average groupsize).

-Last step would be eramods IF weapons aren't enough to give tactical advantage by discovering a new tech to build it.

We already have Empire, woodelves WH-values here. As soon we have the orcs too we have something to compare.

STR+Toughness+Attacks+Saving Rolls should be reflected in STR + Era-Mod

We didn't decide yet how saverolls are implemented exactly. I would reflect saves in icombats but via promotion and not affecting the basic strenght.

Attacks(A) will modify this:
A of 1: + 0% Combat
A of 2: + 20% Combat
A of 3: + 40% Combat

So am I right that the strength of the Unit in cIV is supposed to be "WH STR" + "WH Toughness" + "Attackmodifier in %" :confused:

Do we Have any WH Unitstats converted to cIV Stats right now? If not I´ll do the ones for the Empire RIGHT NOW!

Please read post 3! That's all explained with two examples there.;)
Ok you the Empire and I do the Woodelves. Boss is outa house:D

The problem with the examples is that you didn´t give the WH stats there and didn´t show the way you calculated any strength (no example for that there).

So please - how do you want it to be calculated EXACTLY?

The WH stats are given in the threads by DJ and PL!
Str is as seZ stated Str+Toughness.
We need to come up with something for the wounds though, Just noticed whats posted won't work.(wounds higher than 3 what about that?)
I suggest
wound 1 is +0%STR
wound 2 is +20% STR
above 2 every wound adds 10% to a total of 100% with ten wounds

And Attacks give +20% Strength every step above 1?

A 1 is +0& STR
A 2 is +20% STR
A 3 is +40% STR
up to a total of 100% with 6 Attacks (If any Unit got that much)

All the Core Units of the Empire get at least 1 FS with Ini of 3 (which seems to be the average value for this) maybe we should give +1 FS with an Ini over 4 instead??

Or is it intended that every unit gets 1 FS at least??

All the Core Units of the Empire get at least 1 FS with Ini of 3 (which seems to be the average value for this) maybe we should give +1 FS with an Ini over 4 instead??

Or is it intended that every unit gets 1 FS at least??
Undead, Dwarfs and Orcs have Ini2(at least in the old rules) so yes that's intended to make a difference to slow units(since we haven't got negative firststrikes). But I explained that in post 3 already.

furthermore: if a unit with firststrike 1 battles another unit with firststrike 1, it will result in no unit carriing out firststrikes! so i think that is a really good system to carry out initiative and WS !

There are Monster and heros which get a lot of attacks. I also made an alternative propousal for attacks in the third post.
Puh I'm close of just making up the stats without a system. At least for Monsters and heros.

As those are 1 against 9 or 10 units in a Regiment, we actually should make up the Values for those, AFTER we did the ones for everything else!!!!!!

Here you go, the basic stats for the Empire (without weapons and mounts):

Core Units:

Spearman:
STR: 6
FS: 1
M: 1

Halberdiers:
STR: 6
FS: 1
M: 1

Swordsman:
STR: 6
FS: 1
M: 1

Free Companies:
STR: 6
FS: 1
M: 1

Archers:
STR: 6
FS: 1
M: 1

Crossbowman:
STR: 6
FS: 1
M: 1

Handgunners:
STR: 6
FS: 1
M: 1


Units of which I don´t know what type they are (wasn´t stated in the Empire thread)

Knightly Orders:
STR: 6
FS: 2
M: 1

Knights of the White Wolf:
STR: 6
FS: 2
M: 1

Greatswords:
STR: 6
FS: 2
M: 1

Pistoliers:
STR: 6
FS: 1
M: 1

Flagellants:
STR: 8,4
FS: 1
M: 1


Lords:

Elector Count:
STR: 19,2
FS: 2
M: 1

Templar Great Master:
STR: 20,8
FS: 3
M: 1

Wizard Lord:
STR: 14
FS: 2
M: 1


Heroes

Captain:
STR: 15,2
FS: 2
M: 1

Warrior Priest:
STR: 13,6
FS: 2
M: 1

Master Engineer:
STR: 9
FS: 2
M: 1

Battle Wizard:
STR: 9
FS: 1
M: 1



!! Riding a Horse would Result in a M of 2 for the respective unit !!

As you clearly see, we need to come up with some rules for the weapons and an Era Modifier!

And the stats for the Artillery have to be made up completely IMO

As you clearly see, we need to come up with some rules for the weapons and an Era Modifier!

And the stats for the Artillery have to be made up completely IMO

hell yea thats what i wanted! some more similar stats and a great weapons / armor system like i gave some examples for earlier...

have to go now, see the formations thread ;)

Weapons(without question) and era modifier looks like.
The spearman seems to be wrong(should be Str 6 I suppose).

here are some woodelves:

Stats conversion:

Treeman: Str 25, 1 FSC, M 2

Treekin: Str 16, 1 FSC, 1 FS, M 2

Dryads: Str 10, 1 FSC, 2 FS, M 2

Gladeguard: Str 6, 1 FSC, 1 FS, M 2

Gladeriders: Str 6, 1 FSC, 1 FS, M 3

Eternal Guard: Str 7(+1 due to fighting style), 1 FSC, 1 FS, M 2

P.L. came up with own conversions and left out the original rules for most of the special units so I can't really take everything into account:(

It seems to me that we can really ONLY seriously build the coreunits with the system:sad:
that means it's quite useless imo
Maybe better we just make some generic civstats and diverse with some flavor promotions. What do you think?

well that will be as complecated as doing it by wh stats.... but hell yea give some basic strenght to a race or type, like Basic Humans, well trained Humans, Elves, Elite Elves, whatever.... and then make it diverse by special rules, armor and weapons, thats what i think would be best... think about something and remember that!!!!

Wait Duke! How the hell did the Elector Count get so strong.
In my calculation it's just Str. 13(rounded up) or did you use seZ unaltered Attack and Wound modifiers?(I updated that)

Edit: ok seZ we can still try though I'm pessimistic herewith.

Yeah, definitely, will take a lot of time, but since we got MUCH more units (because of the eras) than are in the Armybooks it will be a necessary thing I fear.

So we need the folks with the armybooks to post all Units as fast as possible (or everybody can just have a look at the GW site - I think all are there too

I´ll come up with the stats for the Empire (and suggestions what the equipment should do for them) until tomorrow after I finish the Pedia today.

We need to get something done on this topic - all those gfx and resource talks are nice, but I fear we have to come up with the basics first, before we can focus on those things again.

Ok I think a new thread for weapon and armor rules would be best. This one's already chaotic enough.

@Duke
just wanted to bump this again::bump:
Wait Duke! How the hell did the Elector Count get so strong.
In my calculation it's just Str. 13(rounded up) or did you use seZ unaltered Attack and Wound modifiers?(I updated that)

Edit: ok seZ we can still try though I'm pessimistic herewith.

First: the spearman was a typo :blush:

Second: I took all FSC from the WS/BS as FS :hammer2:

Third: Elector Count:

S4 + T4 = cIV strength of 8

W3 = +100% cIV strength

A3 = +40% combat (cIV strength?!?)

100% + 40% = 140%

140% of 8 = 11,2

8 + 11,2 = 19,2 :confused:


In which way are you calculating this?

Yes that are seZ' modifiers I think we'll take em out. Too unbalanced. Use my altered ones in the third post. They aren't perfect either but still get better results.

Hehe, you edited that post while I was doing the calculation! I printed it out just minutes before I started to calculate.

I admit that:D I noticed too strange results with the Treeman and treekin.
The Treeman would have had a Str something about 40! No way! Too weird!
Hope you see my reasoning now why I wanted to have some basic values first before we start Weapons:D

So, what to do now?

Make them all up from the Ground?

Create generic stats and then alter them for each civ and every single unit?

I fear that this is the way we´ll have to go - and I also think that it will provide the best results.

We could go this way:

Stats for Coreunits(Infantry)
Human:
Str 6, 1FS, M1
Elf:
Str.6, 1FSC, 1FS, M2
Orc:
Str.7,M1(Animosity)
Dwarf:
Str.7,1FSC,M1
Goblin:
Str.5,M1(Animosity)
Beastman:
Str7,1FSC, 1FS,M1
Skeleton:
Str.5,M1(+Fear)

For every WS below 3 unit gets an additional -1 Str
WS 5 additional +1 Str
Only working for Coreunits. But maybe it is still better to make them up. I'm really not sure about.

Well that list sounds good so far. you have to remember, that the equipment will add alot of strength and stuff against certain types of units too.
And smaller numbered units should get some -strength, so a elector count would have 13 but compared to a regiment of 10 units, he should not have more than the half or one third or something!!!

Well that list sounds good so far. you have to remember, that the equipment will add alot of strength and stuff against certain types of units too.
And smaller numbered units should get some -strength, so a elector count would have 13 but compared to a regiment of 10 units, he should not have more than the half or one third or something!!!

So we should add some sort of rank bonus? well it certainly is realistic. then we should put the formations in groups something like this:

- loners, small groups, skirmishers
- 'normal' unit
- large unit

then give them negative bonusses.

So we should add some sort of rank bonus? well it certainly is realistic. then we should put the formations in groups something like this:

- loners, small groups, skirmishers
- 'normal' unit
- large unit

then give them negative bonusses.

well no... i actually would say, give a unit 10 or archer 9 (cause of formations.xml) units, and a strength and then look that a single unit is not stronger than a whole regiment. if you want to field large groups, than simple build 2 cheaper regiments of 10 goblins and field em against one regiment of a more expansive unit...

I do talk of Heros and Monsters, and by the way Cavalry, which has 5 units in his regiment. But unit size simply should not be too detailed!

OK i downloaded the warmaster rulebook and will have a look at it, perhaps this will help us with stats and stuff... for everyone who wants to have a look too, go to this side (http://www.specialist-games.com/warmaster/default.asp) and download some rulebooks in pdf files.. . . .

After that we can have a better decision about strength and stuff....
And hell guys, the gfx rocks ass, so lets get a gamemechanic which at least doubles this fun!!!!!

We could go this way:

Stats for Coreunits(Infantry)
Human:
Str 6, 1FS, M1
Elf:
Str.6, 1FSC, 1FS, M2
Orc:
Str.7,M1(Animosity)
Dwarf:
Str.7,1FSC,M1
Goblin:
Str.5,M1(Animosity)
Beastman:
Str7,1FSC, 1FS,M1
Skeleton:
Str.5,M1(+Fear)

For every WS below 3 unit gets an additional -1 Str
WS 5 additional +1 Str
Only working for Coreunits. But maybe it is still better to make them up. I'm really not sure about.

Are those suggestions meant to be for the Ancient Age? Just want to be sure.

And If I understand you right - do you want the units from the Age of Magic to replace the Units from the Ancient Era (except the Monster maybe)? And the Units from the Discovery and Mechanical Age are meant to be used alongside the Units from the Age of Magic?

So the Units from the Age of Magic make up the core army for most part of the game and the ones from the Age of Discovery and Mechanical are meant to be "special units"?

That values would be basics for age of magic but I think it 'll really be better to check out this Warmaster rules. I'm not happy with our value conversion.:( I'm trying to dl Warmaster now!

And yes Age of magic units should be the core imo.

I would take a step away from conversions!

Just take those basic values and then create stats around those for the other units.

I will give this approach a try for the Empire today.

Will try to adjust the Strength for the other ages by ca. -2 for Ancient, or +2 for Discovery - Mechanical: I just don´t know right now.

Had a look at Warmaster yet? I really think this should be convertable since the game has a scale of battles quite fitting civ!
The best thing is all rules and armylists are for free dl!!!:
http://www.specialist-games.com/warmaster/default.asp

I know, already dled that, will have a look at it while doing the stats for the empire.

It has less stats then Fantasy Battle and that may help, because FB stats were already converted for this game.

Yes we won't come around making up some values to make use of the rock, paper, scissor but we can get a good orientating about basic str. with that.
However I won't have much time this weekend. But try took look into it too.
till later;)

Had a look at Warmaster yet? I really think this should be convertable since the game has a scale of battles quite fitting civ!
The best thing is all rules and armylists are for free dl!!!:
http://www.specialist-games.com/warmaster/default.asp

Is it still necessary for me to type all the unitstats? i have to do that manually and that's a lot of work .. i don't mind that if we use it .. but ..

If we are gonna use warmaster the regular stats become useless ..

The regular stats can all be found on the official GW site, so I think you don´t need to post them here.

We could go this way:

Stats for Coreunits(Infantry)
Human:
Str 6, 1FS, M1
Elf:
Str.6, 1FSC, 1FS, M2
Orc:
Str.7,M1(Animosity)
Dwarf:
Str.7,1FSC,M1
Goblin:
Str.5,M1(Animosity)
Beastman:
Str7,1FSC, 1FS,M1
Skeleton:
Str.5,M1(+Fear)

To get back to these "Standard Stats" for the civs - If we give Elves a movement of 2 maybe Cavalry Units need to get a Movement of 3, because Horses and the like are still somewhat faster than an Elf. but maybe this way Cavalry gets too fast and the elven units have to be too expensive (because double Movement Rate sounds really strong IMO).

Maybe we should change the Movement rate of all Units and give the Terrain differnt Movement points - but then again this may be too much, I heven´t made up my own mind for now.

So I would go like this for the next release: Elves M 2, Cavalry M 3 - and then Playtesting and public Feedback will g