Experience factor - far too powerful?

[Narwhal]

OK, I did some testing of my own, including a few extra datas :



The numbers in killed closely match the result by Emx, and confirm his results were not bad luck.


I actually have more losses as the POP if I use a leader. The reason seems to be that, when you have a leader, each of your units has more chance to "succeed" the quality test necessary to enter a melee combat. When a unit is in melee combat, it deals damage but also can receive damage, hence more damage for both sides.
The "Quality Fail" is the number of times in the round an element of POP or OPT failed such a quality test. 1,5 more melee actions between test 2 and test 3 represent +8,5% opportunities for both side to inflict damage. In this case, it was transformed into circa 20% more losses - either due to a stasticical fluke (battle 5 and 6 of test 2 are weird outliers - maybe the RNG went mad - I double checked and what I wrote is correct) or due to yet another reason we do not see.

Also, it takes ages (>1 hour) to make.

Charge has no impact whatsoever I believe. NEither has counter-charge - with 5 in damage infantry don't need countercharge to one-shot cavalry.

[yellow ribbon]

brief question for the empirical mind:

are he rounds of combats alway the same number, or is the leader systematically prolonging the fight?

[Narwhal]

Same number of rounds in ALL combats.

[Emx77]

@Narwhal, does this mean that only impact of leader is in providing higher chance for elements to engage in combat? In your AAR you wrote about 10% bonus for every point of leader ratings. However, in above tests I don't see such benefits or they are very samll compared to other factors.

[Narwhal]

@Narwhal, does this mean that only impact of leader is in providing higher chance for elements to engage in combat? In your AAR you wrote about 10% bonus for every point of leader ratings. However, in above tests I don't see such benefits or they are very samll compared to other factors.

The leader brings a +20% modifier to discipline.

A leaderless pop legion has, in chance to hit : Discipline (8) * Assault (9) * 0,5% = 36%
A led pop legion has, in chance to hit : Discipline (9,6) * Assault (9) * 0,5% = 43%.
"Bonus" : 43/36 = circa +20%

That's the first advantage.

The second advantage is the higher chance to pass the TQ test (since you test vs 9,6 instead of testing against 8), but given that if you pass the TQ test you are going to give more damage but also receive more, it is a mixed blessing.

Overall, I am surprised to see that in the example, I do inflict +20% damage overall, whereas I would expect significantely more...

[Emx77]

I repeated tests to see what has changed regarding battle mechanics in official 1.01 patch. My overall impression is very positive. Some weaknesses has been fixed but unfortunately some other problems emerged (which are hopefully easy to fix).



What is good:

1.) As you may see from above tables leaders now have their merit in battle. Contrary to beta, now it is obvious that leaders have important impact on battle results. Before we had weirdness that troops without leader had lighter losses then those with leader. That is not a case anymore. From test results you may see that Populares legion without leader has on average 70% more losses compared to Optimates legion. With 3-2-2 leader that difference drops to 0%. When you attach defensive genius (Marius, 6-3-5) it reverses situation causing Optimates to have 30% more losses. Also, pay attention that average Populares losses are more or less constant. It's Optimates losses which are increasing depending on what commander is on opposite side.

2.) No more consistent retreats when one side has a good commander. In beta, I couldn't finish Marius test as Optimates almost always retreated before melee phase. That has gone. Yes, they will be able sometimes to break contact (approximately 1 in 4 times) but it is not a serious problem anymore.

What need to be fixed ASAP:

1.) I really don't get how victory is credited to Optimates in some of the above battles. I circled these battles for easy reference. For example, 11th battle in Marius test (I have save for this one if needed). In this battle Optimates lost badly. They suffered 4.797 infantry casualties while Populares suffered only 2.706. That is a huge difference! Also, Optimates lost entire cavalry while Populares didn't lose a single horseman. By all standards this is a clear Populares victory but still, they retreated and Optimates were declared victorious. As you may see, this is not a single outlier but systematic phenomenon. I appeal to devs to fix this promptly as it is unfair and kills enjoyment (especially if someone is playing against human opponent).

What I would like to see fixed if possible (or just better represented):

1.) IMO opinion there is still problem with marginal unit stats difference having too much impact on battle outcome. This is evident from down-left table where only 10-20% difference in discipline and assault stat leads to 70% difference in losses (higher than in beta). At moment, I realize this is something characteristic to AJE and I'm not sure if Devs are able to fix it without too much rebalancing. However, maybe it would be enough just to somehow represent it more clearly via pwr estimation. In that way players would have approximate idea how unit is strong without need to memorize stats for various unit types.

All in all, 1.01 is huge step forward, at least in battle mechanic segment. Congratulation .

[Meagher]

I just got this game and started playing 1.01 as POP. I came to the same conclusion, so this thread caught my eye. I was unable to dislodge 3 legions with no leader (pwr 700 or so) even with an army of 60,000 (pwr 3000+) under my best leaders. I repeatedly brought up reserves and attacked again but was unable to even wear them down. Finally, I "won" a battle, but I still took heavier casualties and the OPT army went on a rampage while mine recovered. I also had battles where a single OPT legion effortlessly defeated much larger forces which sometimes included my less experienced legions.

Emx has already covered most of the points I would make. I would just like to say that it should be changed because it detracts from the game. If it is all but impossible to defeat more experienced troops by using superior numbers, the game is much less interesting. Even the best legions can be overwhelmed if they are vastly outnumbered and out generaled.

[Narwhal]

I just got this game and started playing 1.01 as POP. I came to the same conclusion, so this thread caught my eye. I was unable to dislodge 3 legions with no leader (pwr 700 or so) even with an army of 60,000 (pwr 3000+) under my best leaders. I repeatedly brought up reserves and attacked again but was unable to even wear them down. Finally, I "won" a battle, but I still took heavier casualties and the OPT army went on a rampage while mine recovered. I also had battles where a single OPT legion effortlessly defeated much larger forces which sometimes included my less experienced legions.

Emx has already covered most of the points I would make. I would just like to say that it should be changed because it detracts from the game. If it is all but impossible to defeat more experienced troops by using superior numbers, the game is much less interesting. Even the best legions can be overwhelmed if they are vastly outnumbered and out generaled.

On which terrain ? If it is on open terrain, it is a bug. On difficult terrain, your number won't help due to frontage.