Slitherine

Posted: **Tue Apr 28, 2020 11:54 pm**

Hello,

as per a discussion here:
viewtopic.php?f=477&t=97786&p=847092#p847092

I've decided to try out a mod for some of the in game cavalry behavior, just as a way for the community to test some changes.

So far I have added these changes:
1) Non-light Infantry units charged by non light cavalry this turn a) lose their secondary (NOT Primary) ZoCs this turn only and b) lose 4 AP for the next turn (their turn to move).

EDIT:
additional v1.1 changes:
-fixed logic that was permitting a cav unit to fallback from a previous turns combat and then, now having ap on its turn, charge past the non light infantry it fell back from.

additional 1.2 changes:
-increased AP loss from 4 to 6 so diagonal facing ZoC trap doesn't work either

additional v1.3 changes:
1) extra -1 to ct for non light cav vs non light cav on impact and in melee
2) 33% more casualties in non light cav vs non light cav on impact and in melee
3) added extra 25 poa to heavy lancers and light spear cav on impact vs medium foot

additional v1.4 changes:
1) removed extra 25 poa for lancers and light spear vs medium foot
2) added extra mandatory CT on charge for non light cav vs non light cav

*should i make versions of 1.3 without the additional poa vs mediums, or only doing 2 or 3, or only 2 or 3 in melee or impact?

This makes it so that
1) Non-light infantry are less able to ZoC lock multiple cavalry units at once on one turn (so long as one of those cav is willing to charge them that turn)
2) Non light infantry cannot ZoC trap cavalry by always following up to face them after the cavalry fall back (they would only be able to follow up one square on the next turn).

I think part of the idea/justification here is that on a given turn all moves are supposed to be happening at the same time, so if one of your cavalry units is charging straight at an enemy infantry and fighting and distracting them this turn, then another friendly cavalry unit of yours should have the opportunity to charge past that infantry on this turn. Please discuss.

concerns:
2) it is not imposed on light foot because they a) don't impose zoc on non light cav and b) flee from them anyway, but maybe I should do it to them anyway?
3) not sure how much this will effect a whole big line of infantry facing cavalry (as opposed to just some infantry holding flanks against some cavalry). ie it might weaken the ZoC of a large infantry line by too much.
4) should the ZoC loss on this turn from a charged infantry unit occur for all units facing that charged unit or only for other cavalry? ie if side A's cav charges side B's infantry and then falls back should side A's infantry unit now be able to ignore the secondary ZoC of that side B infantry or only other side A cavalry
5) what exploits will this open up?
6) will this unbalance cavalry? will it mess up the balance of cavalry heavy vs infantry heavy engagements?

Here is a link to this first version of the mod. Please Click Download > Direct Download from the dropdown in the top right:

Cav Mod (OLD):
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/l171694y1f6w ... 2LfFa?dl=0

Cav Mod v1.1 (OLD):
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/gq9kvwo1vkqy ... m9T8a?dl=0

Cav Mod v1.2 (OLD):
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/cl0fx2vyzht4 ... fD_Oa?dl=0

Cav Mod v1.3:
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/ut0zyvry1mqg ... avF3a?dl=0

Cav Mod v1.4 (Newest Link):
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/jovvwuj2eesf ... 2Y1Va?dl=0

Then extract the file to:

C:\Users\YourName\Documents\My Games\FieldOfGlory2\CAMPAIGNS

to be able to launch the mod in custom battles

and if you copy the Pike_Mod folder over to:

C:\Users\Name\Documents\My Games\FieldOfGlory2\MULTIPLAYER

you should be able to use it in multiplayer games

I am open to trying to mod just about anything so definitely let me know what ideas you've got below.

thanks

Posted: **Wed Apr 29, 2020 4:23 am**

If the infantry lose 4AP, but are charged by multiple cavalry in the one turn, do they suffer multiples of 4 AP or just the single reduction?
If light infantry stand when charged but the attacker bounces off, can they still evade that turn if charged by someone else? (I know you can't evade twice, but not sure if standing counts as their evade chance for the turn) If they do get to evade afterwards, would the -4 AP already be applied?

I don't think light cav should be able to do this, if they bounce off (even from a flank) they have often only done casualties in low single figures. If they do more or disrupt then they are likely to stick, which would stop all movement.

Posted: **Wed Apr 29, 2020 5:28 am**

Mairtin wrote: ↑Wed Apr 29, 2020 4:23 am If the infantry lose 4AP, but are charged by multiple cavalry in the one turn, do they suffer multiples of 4 AP or just the single reduction?
If light infantry stand when charged but the attacker bounces off, can they still evade that turn if charged by someone else? (I know you can't evade twice, but not sure if standing counts as their evade chance for the turn) If they do get to evade afterwards, would the -4 AP already be applied?

I don't think light cav should be able to do this, if they bounce off (even from a flank) they have often only done casualties in low single figures. If they do more or disrupt then they are likely to stick, which would stop all movement.

1) only a single 4 AP loss.
2) I have not changed evading at all. The -4ap change is also not applied to light infantry. Light infantry cannot ZoC non light cavalry anyway so they weren't the target of this mod.
3) i think that's correct, light cav shouldn't be able to impose this ap and secondary zoc loss, and they don't in this mod

Posted: **Wed Apr 29, 2020 5:54 pm**

as a note I think that this mod would complement the pike mod well by enabling flanking with macedonian/hellenistic cavalry in pike armies just a little bit better, leading perhaps to more of that classic anvil and hammer tactical gameplay. If there is interest in doing a version that combines them I could put that together pretty quickly.

Posted: **Fri May 01, 2020 5:49 am**

as per discussion in some other threads I'm considering some of the following changes:

1) extra cavalry poa on charging medium foot in the open
2) extra negative ct modifiers in cav vs cav melee and/or impact
3) extra casualties in cav vs cav melee and/or impact combat
4) mandate fallback in cav vs cav melee that extends beyond 2 turns (for non cataphracts perhaps)
5) light spear cav not evade on impact, similar to lancer cav (but don't change other cav)
6) decrease number of turns evading beyond which the unit disperses for broken non-light cav
*maybe only if pursued by other cav
7) don't permit pursuing cavalry (whether pursuing other cav or anyone?) to be charged by infantry
or shot at (shot at by anyone or just by light foot?)
8 ) decrease distance/turns that cav pursue other cav

is there any interest in or in discussing the above changes?

Posted: **Fri May 01, 2020 8:30 pm**

Schweetness101 wrote: ↑Fri May 01, 2020 5:49 am as per discussion in some other threads I'm considering some of the following changes:

1) extra cavalry poa on charging medium foot in the open
2) extra negative ct modifiers in cav vs cav melee and/or impact
3) extra casualties in cav vs cav melee and/or impact combat
4) mandate fallback in cav vs cav melee that extends beyond 2 turns (for non cataphracts perhaps)
5) light spear cav not evade on impact, similar to lancer cav (but don't change other cav)
6) decrease number of turns evading beyond which the unit disperses for broken non-light cav
*maybe only if pursued by other cav
7) don't permit pursuing cavalry (whether pursuing other cav or anyone?) to be charged by infantry
or shot at (shot at by anyone or just by light foot?)
8 ) decrease distance/turns that cav pursue other cav

is there any interest in or in discussing the above changes?

1) Seems ok, but probaly should be negated by spearmen.
2) Not sure about this, non-superior cavalry already struggles with passing cohesion test, making it even harder is imo a bad decision.
3) Also not sure this is a good idea, seems like it would make it more difficult for cavalry to fight infantry after the calvalry battle is won, while making no real difference in cav vs cav combat (as both sides would take increased casulaties keeping relative POA the same).
4) Probably would favour lancers?
5) Absolutely disagree on this one, it basically makes light spear cav a much worse type of lancers. Also, I'm pretty sure ancient cavalry is supposed to fight in a more skirmisher-ish way so removing ability to evade doesn't make much sense history-wise. If anything, it's lancers who should be able to evade when charged non-frontally.
6) Whatever, I guess?
7) On one hand, it seems quite logical and would definitely reduce cases of cavalry units dying in some stupid annoying way, on the other pursuers getting themselves in a hard situation is pretty realisitc situation, i think? Also, there's already huge penalty for shooting at pursuers, it generally isn't worth it.

Isn't it just random? Also I think cavalry being too busy pursuing to return back to actual fight is pretty historic behaviour?

Posted: **Fri May 01, 2020 9:04 pm**

Schweetness101 wrote: ↑Fri May 01, 2020 5:49 am as per discussion in some other threads I'm considering some of the following changes:

1) extra cavalry poa on charging medium foot in the open
Yes I like that idea

2) extra negative ct modifiers in cav vs cav melee and/or impact
Yes this or 3 but not both. That would resolve combat on the flanks quicker as suggested by Graymouser.

3) extra casualties in cav vs cav melee and/or impact combat
Yes or 2. I think this would be better than 2.

4) mandate fallback in cav vs cav melee that extends beyond 2 turns (for non cataphracts perhaps)
Not sure

5) light spear cav not evade on impact, similar to lancer cav (but don't change other cav)
No I don't agree with this

6) decrease number of turns evading beyond which the unit disperses for broken non-light cav
*maybe only if pursued by other cav
Mmmm not sure

7) don't permit pursuing cavalry (whether pursuing other cav or anyone?) to be charged by infantry
or shot at (shot at by anyone or just by light foot?)
Dont agree with this

8 ) decrease distance/turns that cav pursue other cav
Strongly disagree. Cavalry did pursue and often did not return.

is there any interest in or in discussing the above changes?

Posted: **Fri May 01, 2020 10:08 pm**

Nosy_Rat wrote: ↑Fri May 01, 2020 8:30 pm
Schweetness101 wrote: ↑Fri May 01, 2020 5:49 am 1) extra cavalry poa on charging medium foot in the open
2) extra negative ct modifiers in cav vs cav melee and/or impact
3) extra casualties in cav vs cav melee and/or impact combat
1) Seems ok, but probaly should be negated by spearmen.
2) Not sure about this, non-superior cavalry already struggles with passing cohesion test, making it even harder is imo a bad decision.
3) Also not sure this is a good idea, seems like it would make it more difficult for cavalry to fight infantry after the calvalry battle is won, while making no real difference in cav vs cav combat (as both sides would take increased casulaties keeping relative POA the same).

1) being offensive/defensive spearmen (medium or heavy) receiving a charge from lancers already reduces the lancer POA separately, before the modded additional vs medium foot POA. That is, if I did number 1 here and added say +50 poa to lancers and light spear cav vs medium foot on impact, the resulting Lancer Impact POA (just the lancer part, not including quality etc...) for initiating charges against enemy foot in the open would be:

heavy foot spearmen (50) < heavy foot non spearmen (100) = medium foot spearmen (100) < medium foot non-spearmen (150)

does that ordering seem about right? and that's just for lancers who get the special loss of poa when initiating charges against spears. For light spear cavalry with the same modification of +50 vs medium foot it's:

heavy foot spearmen (50) = heavy foot non spearmen (50) < medium foot spearmen (100) = medium foot non-spearmen (100)

does that seem a decent modification? how would you change it? both in who is affected and by how much extra beyond vanilla.

2) the idea is all non light cav would lose ct facing one another, but it could be proportionately harder on lower quality cav, not sure about the dice rolls odds exactly. The idea is just to speed up the resolution of non-light cav combat, which it does, but would be bad if it messed up the current cav vs cav balance in favor of superior units.

3) so because whether you take a ct test at all in melee is dependent on the casualty delta going beyond a certain fixed value, increasing casualties means that the odds of taking a test from a given round of combat, and of getting the extra -1 from suffering severe losses, are both more likely. Increasing casualties 33% and adding an extra -1 to cav vs cav ct I found about halved the time that cavalry units melee one another on average. If the combats are resolved in half as many turns but involve 33% more losses per turn they should both free up the winning cav to face infantry sooner and leave them with a few more men remaining.

Posted: **Fri May 01, 2020 10:11 pm**

so it looks like perhaps I'll just add something to resolve cavalry combat more quickly, and to improve cavalry poa vs mediums in the open

for the latter, should it be in melee and impact, or just impact? And by how much? and to all medium foot?

Posted: **Fri May 01, 2020 10:35 pm**

I've been fiddling with this myself. I tried giving cavalry +50 at impact against medium foot but toned it down to +25 and am happier with it. So xystos are at +25 or 8% advantage against thureos. From a gameplay perspective you are now incentivized to make charges but the advantage isn't so large that there isn't the issue of taking attrition losses on your lancers from tied combats.

Other example matchups would be:
Byz lancers are +37 or roughly 12% advantage against medium foot with light spear (currently +12 or roughly 4% advantage) [to be frank this project was started by me being annoyed at my byzantine lancers making repeated charges to little effect on irregular foot]
Superior lancer cavalry attacking light spear or heavy weapon would be at +75 or 24 % advantage, currently +50 or 16% advantage. This might be too much?

Posted: **Sat May 02, 2020 11:43 am**

Schweetness101 wrote: ↑Fri May 01, 2020 10:11 pm so it looks like perhaps I'll just add something to resolve cavalry combat more quickly (...)

How will you do that ? Which factor(s) will you modify ?

Would it possible that you also make a separate/extra mod with this feature alone (no ZoC modification, no cav vs medium mod.) ?

Posted: **Sat May 02, 2020 1:18 pm**

People seem to want to treat mediums as if they were mobs.

In the manual:

pp.102-3
Heavy Foot, Medium Foot and Warriors are all capable of repelling mounted charges in open terrain when they are steady, but will be at risk if disrupted.

p.119
Medium Foot
Foot troops who fight in close formation, but are more lightly equipped, such as Hellenistic thureophoroi or Roman auxilia palatina. They are still capable of fighting in the main battle line, but are not as resilient as heavy foot. However, their lighter equipment means that they are less affected by terrain.

p.146
Medium Foot have been divided into Bowmen and Medium Foot – the latter representing close combat types such as thureophoroi, Thracians and Spanish scutarii. These are no longer as vulnerable to mounted troops in the open, allowing them to take their historical place in the battle line. This also makes medium foot armies viable.

Where they become vulnerable is when they take cohesion tests.
Given no modifiers other than being average mediums vs heavy/mounted:

chance they will drop at least 1 level: 15/36 (41.67%) [6/36 (16.67%) for heavy foot, 10/36 (27.78%) for others]
chance they will drop 2 levels: 3/36 (8.33%) [0/36 for heavy foot, 1/36 (2.78%) for others]

That's without any of the other modifiers they're likely to be getting for casualties etc. A single extra -1 gives a 58.33% chance they will drop cohesion.
Heavy foot also get a +1, so start at 2 higher than the mediums for the same circumstances.

Posted: **Sun May 03, 2020 4:17 am**

Athos1660 wrote: ↑Sat May 02, 2020 11:43 am
Schweetness101 wrote: ↑Fri May 01, 2020 10:11 pm so it looks like perhaps I'll just add something to resolve cavalry combat more quickly (...)
How will you do that ? Which factor(s) will you modify ?

Would it possible that you also make a separate/extra mod with this feature alone (no ZoC modification, no cav vs medium mod.) ?

I was thinking about doing one or both of the following:

-extra -1 to ct for cav vs cav
-33% more casualties in cav vs cav

the two together seem to about halve the time that cavalry combat takes to resolve

yes, it would be pretty straightforward to make a separate mod that changes only one thing. Do you want one that just does the faster cav resolution stuff above and none of the zoc or vs medium foot modifications?

Posted: **Sun May 03, 2020 9:44 am**

Schweetness101 wrote: ↑Sun May 03, 2020 4:17 am
I was thinking about doing one or both of the following:

-extra -1 to ct for cav vs cav
-33% more casualties in cav vs cav

the two together seem to about halve the time that cavalry combat takes to resolve

Interesting!

Schweetness101 wrote: ↑Sun May 03, 2020 4:17 am yes, it would be pretty straightforward to make a separate mod that changes only one thing. Do you want one that just does the faster cav resolution stuff above and none of the zoc or vs medium foot modifications?

Yes, that would be really kind of you to take the time to make such a mod.
I think it would be interesting to test such a major change alone.

Posted: **Sun May 03, 2020 1:34 pm**

Athos1660 wrote: ↑Sun May 03, 2020 9:44 am
Schweetness101 wrote: ↑Sun May 03, 2020 4:17 am
I was thinking about doing one or both of the following:

-extra -1 to ct for cav vs cav
-33% more casualties in cav vs cav

the two together seem to about halve the time that cavalry combat takes to resolve
Interesting!

Schweetness101 wrote: ↑Sun May 03, 2020 4:17 am yes, it would be pretty straightforward to make a separate mod that changes only one thing. Do you want one that just does the faster cav resolution stuff above and none of the zoc or vs medium foot modifications?
Yes, that would be really kind of you to take the time to make such a mod.
I think it would be interesting to test such a major change alone.

here you go:
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/sa5xemmlezib ... IYFra?dl=0

it does both:
-extra -1 to ct for cav vs cav
-33% more casualties in cav vs cav

you can see these messages in the combat log:
Non-light Cavalry Fighting Non-light Cavalry: -1
Combat between Non-Light Cavalry: Damage Increased

if you want to edit the values got to:

for the -1 to CT, MoraleTools.bsf, line 426:

Code: Select all

			if ((IsMounted(me)) && (IsMounted(enemy)) && (IsLightTroops(me) == 0) && (isLightTroops(enemy) == 0))
			{
				modifiers -= 1;
				PrintStringLiteralX(UIString, 0, "\n");
				PrintStringLiteralX(UIString, 0, "Non-light Cavalry Fighting Non-light Cavalry: -1");
				Log("Non-light Cavalry Fighting Non-light Cavalry -1", me);
			}

and change the modifiers -= 1; to modifiers -= x where x is you desired value

for the increased casualties go to CloseCombatLogic.bsf, line 693:

Code: Select all

			if ((IsMounted(me)) && (IsMounted(enemy)) && (IsLightTroops(me) == 0) && (isLightTroops(enemy) == 0))
			{
				//from testing this appears to not include elephants or light cavalry BUT does include chariots
				//if (phase == 1)//only in melee//ie in the cav mod doing this both in melee and in impact
				//{
				meDamageInflicted *= 4;
				meDamageInflicted /= 3;
				enemyDamageInflicted *= 4;
				enemyDamageInflicted /= 3;
				PrintStringLiteralX(1, test, "\n");
				PrintStringLiteralX(1, test, "Combat between Non-Light Cavalry: Damage Increased");
				//}

			}

and edit the *= 4 and /=3 to be whatever fractions you want (you must use whole fractions, you can't just put in *= 1.333 or whatever)
if you uncomment (remove the // before the lines) the if(phase==1){...} bit you can make it just melee or just impact if you like, where phase 0 is impact and phase 1 is melee.

Posted: **Sun May 03, 2020 1:58 pm**

Thank you so much for the mod and the instructions in order to edit it (as I know nothing about script modding) !

I will test it, do some tweaking/editing for the fun and certainly post a feed-back (from my SP point of view).

Posted: **Mon May 04, 2020 6:50 am**

@Schweetness101 : your mod is indeed very effective in shortening the times of cavalry fights. it does the job perfectly well. Of course I need more testing to see what a cavalry free to attack the enemy infantry earlier than in Vanilla really brings to the gameplay

I also have a question about editing your mod. If I get it right, the extra -1 to ct for non-light cav vs non-light cav applies to both the impact and the following melees. Is it possible (and simple to code) to make it happen only during the impact ?

if you want to edit the values got to:

for the -1 to CT, MoraleTools.bsf, line 426:
Code: Select all
			if ((IsMounted(me)) && (IsMounted(enemy)) && (IsLightTroops(me) == 0) && (isLightTroops(enemy) == 0))
			{
				modifiers -= 1;
				PrintStringLiteralX(UIString, 0, "\n");
				PrintStringLiteralX(UIString, 0, "Non-light Cavalry Fighting Non-light Cavalry: -1");
				Log("Non-light Cavalry Fighting Non-light Cavalry -1", me);
			}
and change the modifiers -= 1; to modifiers -= x where x is you desired value

Posted: **Mon May 04, 2020 8:35 pm**

Athos1660 wrote: ↑Mon May 04, 2020 6:50 am I also have a question about editing your mod. If I get it right, the extra -1 to ct for non-light cav vs non-light cav applies to both the impact and the following melees. Is it possible (and simple to code) to make it happen only during the impact ?

To do so, I added in MoraleTools.bsf : 'if (phase == 0)' and 'int phase', this way...

Code: Select all

FUNCTION CohesionTest(me, enemy, reason, combatLog, shot, notional_turn, fullReason)
{
	int morale_state;
	int score;
	int modifiers;
	int drop;
	int quarter;
	int strength;
	int previous_morale_state;
	int uniqueModifier;
	int severe_close_combat_loss;
	int general;
	int randomScore; // v1.3.0 addition
	int UIstring; // v1.5.4 addition. UI string to use for CT report.
	int alreadyDropped; // v1.5.4. Used to determine if morale already dropped for shot 1
	int bespoke; // v1.5.4
	int unadjustedDrop; // v1.5.24
	int phase;

Code: Select all

			//added for Cav_Mod
			// any non light mounted vs non light mounted
			//does not include elephants or light cav, but does include chariots
			if ((IsMounted(me)) && (IsMounted(enemy)) && (IsLightTroops(me) == 0) && (isLightTroops(enemy) == 0))
			{
				//from testing this appears to not include elephants or light cavalry BUT does include chariots
				if (phase == 0)
				{
				modifiers -= 1;
				PrintStringLiteralX(UIString, 0, "\n");
				PrintStringLiteralX(UIString, 0, "Non-light Cavalry Fighting Non-light Cavalry: -1");
				Log("Non-light Cavalry Fighting Non-light Cavalry -1", me);
				}
			}
			//end added

...but it does not seem to work as during the Melee phase, the message 'Non-light Cavalry Fighting Non-light Cavalry: -1' can still be seen in the combat log.

Posted: **Mon May 04, 2020 11:36 pm**

you have the right idea, but for some reason in moraletools.bsf, impact and melee are designated reason 1 and reason 2 respectively, rather than phase 0 and phase 1 like in closecombatlogic lol. So you want something like this:

if ((IsMounted(me)) && (IsMounted(enemy)) && (IsLightTroops(me) == 0) && (isLightTroops(enemy) == 0) && (reason == 1))

Posted: **Tue May 05, 2020 3:58 am**

updated op with a v1.3 description and link, with these changes:

1) extra -1 to ct for non light cav vs non light cav on impact and in melee
2) 33% more casualties in non light cav vs non light cav on impact and in melee
3) added extra 25 poa to heavy lancers and light spear cav on impact vs medium foot

Slitherine

Cav ZoC/AP Mod Testing Workshop

Cav ZoC/AP Mod Testing Workshop

Re: Cav ZoC/AP Mod Testing Workshop

Re: Cav ZoC/AP Mod Testing Workshop

Re: Cav ZoC/AP Mod Testing Workshop

Re: Cav ZoC/AP Mod Testing Workshop

Re: Cav ZoC/AP Mod Testing Workshop

Re: Cav ZoC/AP Mod Testing Workshop

Re: Cav ZoC/AP Mod Testing Workshop

Re: Cav ZoC/AP Mod Testing Workshop

Re: Cav ZoC/AP Mod Testing Workshop

Re: Cav ZoC/AP Mod Testing Workshop

Re: Cav ZoC/AP Mod Testing Workshop

Re: Cav ZoC/AP Mod Testing Workshop

Re: Cav ZoC/AP Mod Testing Workshop

Re: Cav ZoC/AP Mod Testing Workshop

Re: Cav ZoC/AP Mod Testing Workshop

Re: Cav ZoC/AP Mod Testing Workshop

Re: Cav ZoC/AP Mod Testing Workshop

Re: Cav ZoC/AP Mod Testing Workshop

Re: Cav ZoC/AP Mod Testing Workshop