Cavalry + terrain

drogarito#2548

I think that the steeper the terrain, the stronger the charge and knockback of the units should be but in turn, knockback should be less effective on flat terrain. I do know that there are already some bonuses when fighting downhill but this is where cavalry units and monstrous infantry should shine.

bli-nk#6314

Normally I am in favor of CA making terrain more important in battles and height currently does not offer much advantage but what advantage is should give is rather bonus to ranged, bonus to melee defense, bonus to morale.

Then there is the issue with attacking from higher ground on campaign map resulting in actually occupying the lower ground in the battle, the AI not knowing to hold higher ground or chokepoints, etc.

User_Clue

Ichon said:

Normally I am in favor of CA making terrain more important in battles and height currently does not offer much advantage but what advantage is should give is rather bonus to ranged, bonus to melee defense, bonus to morale.

Then there is the issue with attacking from higher ground on campaign map resulting in actually occupying the lower ground in the battle, the AI not knowing to hold higher ground or chokepoints, etc.

Height actually does give significant bonuses. Ranged and melee units do up to 30% more damage firing or attaching down hill. You also take up to 30% less damage when you have a Hieght advantage.

There's also relative fatigue costs when you're doing anything up or down hill.

Also, cav do get better charges going downhill because the extra speed adds to the impact damage.

drogarito#2548

Still I think that maps aren't made well regarding these buffs.

User_Clue

drogarito92 said:

Still I think that maps aren't made well regarding these buffs.

I don't really know what you mean. You wanted hills to be especially favorable for cav and they are. There are a lot of maps with hills. Not every map is going to have a huge 60° hill right in the middle. Some maps will barely have any major terrain features.

bli-nk#6314

User_Clue said:

Height actually does give significant bonuses. Ranged and melee units do up to 30% more damage firing or attaching down hill. You also take up to 30% less damage when you have a Hieght advantage.

There's also relative fatigue costs when you're doing anything up or down hill.

Also, cav do get better charges going downhill because the extra speed adds to the impact damage.

When did they change that? I swear in WH1 height only gave 15% and the difference had to be +25 meters, quite a large hill and higher than all city walls.

If CA lowered the height differntial enough so city walls could be included that would finally offer some reason for ranged to stand on the walls though I think walls should give at least gold shield block chance to missiles.

30% less damage on a height? Not +30% melee defense or something? It definitely does not seem like units on a hill have +30% ward save in battles.

I can definitely tell when Large units are in forests or marsh, they move slow in forests and faster in marsh and get other penalties in forests while ranged missiles do get blocked by trees but other than forests most of the terrain modifiers CA has put in don't really feel impactful- not sure if it is due to precisely how it is coded (IE more than 50% of a unit has to be in the terrain or something else weird).

User_Clue

Ichon said:

User_Clue said:

Height actually does give significant bonuses. Ranged and melee units do up to 30% more damage firing or attaching down hill. You also take up to 30% less damage when you have a Hieght advantage.

There's also relative fatigue costs when you're doing anything up or down hill.

Also, cav do get better charges going downhill because the extra speed adds to the impact damage.

When did they change that? I swear in WH1 height only gave 15% and the difference had to be +25 meters, quite a large hill and higher than all city walls.

If CA lowered the height differntial enough so city walls could be included that would finally offer some reason for ranged to stand on the walls though I think walls should give at least gold shield block chance to missiles.

30% less damage on a height? Not +30% melee defense or something? It definitely does not seem like units on a hill have +30% ward save in battles.

I can definitely tell when Large units are in forests or marsh, they move slow in forests and faster in marsh and get other penalties in forests while ranged missiles do get blocked by trees but other than forests most of the terrain modifiers CA has put in don't really feel impactful- not sure if it is due to precisely how it is coded (IE more than 50% of a unit has to be in the terrain or something else weird).

You're a bit confused. Melee damage scales to +/-30% at only 1 meter. Ranged damage though scales up to 40m which is really high, but they are ranged units after all and getting something like 15% extra missile damage/resistance for flying units and units on walls is a pretty big deal.

The effects of height is also entity based, not unit based. These numbers are in the games data tables.

bli-nk#6314

I'll take a look at the tables then, I haven't looked since WH1 since I hadn't seen it making much difference in my own battles and in multi I rarely see players make much effort to use terrain which I'd assume they would if the bonus/penalties were significant.

saweendra#3399

Ichon said:

I'll take a look at the tables then, I haven't looked since WH1 since I hadn't seen it making much difference in my own battles and in multi I rarely see players make much effort to use terrain which I'd assume they would if the bonus/penalties were significant.

On sp it doesn't matter much. Because you can buff stack to high heavens. But in MP Hill camping is a thing..