Slitherine

I think to get pikes to really drag things out they perhaps they should also be receiving and imposing +1 to CT when in combat with other heavy infantry?

one more thing, I think perhaps we should split into two threads here, one for historical analysis and one for gameplay balancing pike POAs and other attributes.

Schweetness101 wrote: ↑Sat Apr 04, 2020 4:27 pm one thing is because pikes both impose a POA loss on offensive spears, but only when steady, and also suffer themselves a POA loss when not steady, there is a very large swing in net POA when you go from steady pike vs steady offensive spears to disrupted pikes vs steady or disrupted offensive spears, perhaps too much?

Melee:
Steady Pikes (100 base) vs steady spears (100 base -25 vs steady pikes, or 75) for a net +25 for pikes
Disrupted Pikes (100 base reduced to 50 because of disruption) vs steady spears (100 base and no longer vs steady spears so not reduced) for a net +50 to spears

is that too much? should it not be getting burnt from both ends as it were in that way? Maybe disruptions/disorderings for pikes should reduce them in Melee from 100 to 75 to 50 instead of from 100 to 50 to 0?

Edit: although even with the above 10 pikes are defeating 10 armoured hoplites with ease, losing only 2 units and hoplites losing 7

The 75 POA swing seems fine. I'm picturing a Hoplite getting close to a phalangite, at which point, the large shield and shorter spear become a distinct advantage. Same with swords. Reinforces the idea that maintaining the formation is key. Flanking, terrain, and protecting your line become key.

How long does it take for the new pikes to defeat the armored hoplites? My sense is that it would still be slower than what we see now, correct? Depending on how much of an advantage they have, that would give us another baseline of where their cost should be. In this case, they should be more expensive than the armored hoplite (54 points) but hopefully still less than 72 points. Still trying to make sense of the official cost table.

Schweetness101 wrote: ↑Sat Apr 04, 2020 5:10 pm one more thing, I think perhaps we should split into two threads here, one for historical analysis and one for gameplay balancing pike POAs and other attributes.

Agreed. Why don't you start it with a title like "Pike Testing Workshop"?

I should have checked the number of turns, but I think it was 5 almost at the end, so maybe 6 or 7 turns. Certainly slower than now where a whole line of 10 pikes would be breaking some of the hoplites in like 1 or 2 turns and then flanking them. Any idea how long the hoplites alone and at equal number to pikes should be able to hold them off?

And I'm testing now with pikes at 480 to see how that alters things

Geffalrus wrote: ↑Sat Apr 04, 2020 5:23 pm

Schweetness101 wrote: ↑Sat Apr 04, 2020 5:10 pm one more thing, I think perhaps we should split into two threads here, one for historical analysis and one for gameplay balancing pike POAs and other attributes.

Agreed. Why don't you start it with a title like "Pike Testing Workshop"?

ok posted

Athos1660 wrote: ↑Sat Apr 04, 2020 4:08 pm If you discard the Ancient authors, what remains as evidence ?
Even if they are gappy, unclear, incomplete or even wrong, there is no other 'primary' source, isn't there ? No archaeological evidence of tactics (apart from the equipment and weapons) to put them to the test, right ?

Everything else is only hypotheses.

Hypotheses are nice, sometimes interesting ; some can certainly be enjoyable in a game but are only hypotheses.

I'm not saying discard. I'm saying build upon. You can't just take 16 ranks and stop there. Why is it 16 ranks? In what context? We use the primary sources to give us a starting point - but then - we use testing, comparative historical analysis, and investigation to build a better understanding of what happened. We don't just stop at the written word.

My explanation incorporates the 16x16 syntagma as an organizational unit, and as a description of how the phalanx changed density as it approached the enemy. And that density needed to change if you wanted the skirmishers to filter back through the heavy infantry. How else do people think the skirmishers passed through the dense phalanx? There's a reason that the file, a line of 8 men with officers at the front and back, was the smallest organization unit within the phalanx.

if you are still watching this thread, inside of the OP of the related thread here:

viewtopic.php?f=477&t=98056

I've updated the download link and the description includes all of the changes thus far if you want to check those out and discuss.

thanks!

Just some number crunching on your changes. Assuming you coded the changes correctly, these are the expected results.

NB. Assumptions

1) No breakoffs and then re-engagements. This does occur with regularity from what I see in the mod and represents an opportunity for players to reset positioning and change the conditions of the battle line. With so many variables in a real battle, it is kind of pointless to continue.

2) The W/D/L ratios are derived from empirical observation as with all the previous work I have done and represent *some* but not all of the manpower bonus the 3rd rank of pikes will give vs a 2 rank infantry unit as the rounds go on. What is not modeled is the times when one side loses but passes their CT and thus has taken a larger chunk of damage and would suffer a more adverse W/D/L ratio vs pikes. In general, this means that the figures presented slightly undersell the efficacy of pikes.

3) Calculated to only 3 turns or 6 rounds of combat (1 Impact phase + 5 Melee phases). After the 3rd turn since combat was initiated, I feel that has given sufficient time for players to react or not react to events or non-events in a Pike vs whatever battleline.

4) Observations are gameplay related only, I offer no comment on the "historical accuracy" of such this mod. I personally feel no one really can say with any reasonable certainty what actually happened in Antiquity beyond very broad guesses. I also only looked at the two contemporary heavy infantry units that they will likely face.

5) By breaking on the spreadsheet I mean failing a CT test and falling into disrupted status. The game punishes units who lose cohesion and its rather pointless to continue calculating. At that point the disrupted unit will almost never win a combat phase and it largely boils down to RNJesus to see how quickly they break.
General Observations:

Your point costing is quite good, or maybe that is just the result of a good base system laid out by RBS, and the reflects the in game experiences posted by some others. At 58 points for a regular Pike unit now upgraded with some armour along with CT changes, the Pikes feel very much like a fixing force though it is one that will inevitably grind out a win if left to their own devices more often than not vs units with lower point values. Against drilled Hoplites and equivalents for example, they cost 10 points more and will, in the long run, produce a failed CT against their opponent by the end of the 3rd turn of combat just under 33% of the time. They themselves will suffer a failed CT roll around 12% of the time and can expect combat to grind past the 3rd turn at least 55% of the time meaning that you have successfully altered the nature of the pike unit as a primary attacker vs other infantry.

Of note is the undrilled variant of the same unit which will enjoy a 16 point discount. Costing just over 70% of the Pike unit, one can find a cost-efficient "fixer" if their army list supports it that can be expected to hold the line for a period of time.

The math against the Romans is also very interesting. Gone is the "all or nothing" charge of the Romans who gambled everything on Impact and the -3 CT check. At 58 points vs 61 for Hastati, you can see that they are quite evenly matched with the Pikes enjoying a very minor advantage during Impact thanks to their extra +1 CT vs the Pikes but as combat wears on and casualties are taken, Pikes now slowly even the playing field so by the end of turn 3 the odds of one side breaking is around even at 20%. 60% of the time, a Hastati vs Pike combat that remains locked will continue without a victor past 3 turns. The long-run will see the slightly cheaper Pikes as the winner though the drilled status of Hastati and their ability to savage other infantry units of their era in the open during Impact can be offered as justification.

Against Veteran Hastati, an interesting situation occurs. At 58 points vs 78 points, the 20 point discount vs Rome's best for that time period isn't at all irrelevant but the Pikes are in some danger. Each could see the matchup as a honey trap for the other as the Pikes are scheduled to break more than 1 in 3 times over the course of 3 turns though a dose of overconfidence on the Pike player's behalf could see Vet Hastati punch a hole and run rampant if competent reserves are not on hand in the event a Roman player tries to crack a Pike line head-on. Yet one could argue that a 20 point discount is more than fair a price to pay for being able to tie down such elite and dangerous units over 60% of the time.

MikeC_81 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 24, 2020 4:23 am Just some number crunching on your changes. Assuming you coded the changes correctly, these are the expected results.

...

great work Mike! Do you have any advice about how various numbers, POA, armor, cost, quality, poa changes from disruption, etc...ought to be tweaked from this point onward?

Perhaps in the pike testing workshop thread you could help us resolve some of the most recent questions on how if at all to alter casualty mitigation or anything else!

thanks again