Welcome

Please register for Total War Access to use the forums. If you're an existing user, your forum details will be merged with Total War Access if you register with the same email or username. For more information please read our FAQ’s here.

Categories

Undocumented change to Jade Lancers and its' implications

2»

Comments

  • The_real_FAUST#6885The_real_FAUST#6885 Registered Users Posts: 2,112
    I'd have to see evidence if that playing out. They have a 1.4 second advantage in attack speed over emp knights, that is huge.
    3.7 vs 5.1
  • mightygloin#2446mightygloin#2446 Karaz-a-KarakRegistered Users Posts: 6,123
    edited July 2022
    Varghulf has the lowest attack interval and it visibly attacks fast in the game. (Did they once increas it and reverted it back asap? Not sure). Guess thats also why it has relatively low WS.

    Same story for Arachnarok afaik, and i think for Kholek too. So at least sometimes attack interval = faster attack speed? Or the units with fast attack have tighter intervals? Does the egg come out of chicken, or chicken comes out of egg? Wuteva.
  • RazeAndBurnRazeAndBurn Registered Users Posts: 475

    Varghulf has the lowest attack interval and it visibly attacks fast in the game. (Did they once increas it and reverted it back asap? Not sure). Guess thats also why it has relatively low WS.

    Same story for Arachnarok afaik, and i think for Kholek too. So at least sometimes attack interval = faster attack speed? Or the units with fast attack have tighter intervals? Does the egg come out of chicken, or chicken comes out of egg? Wuteva.

    Decreasing the attack interval on the same unit does increase its dps. I was proposing this change for the Demigryph Knights because in-game they have attack animations for both the rider and the mount making it look organic and they kinda fell off by the end of the game with all the DLC powercreep.
  • Spellbound1875#4610Spellbound1875#4610 Registered Users Posts: 2,047

    Varghulf has the lowest attack interval and it visibly attacks fast in the game. (Did they once increas it and reverted it back asap? Not sure). Guess thats also why it has relatively low WS.

    Same story for Arachnarok afaik, and i think for Kholek too. So at least sometimes attack interval = faster attack speed? Or the units with fast attack have tighter intervals? Does the egg come out of chicken, or chicken comes out of egg? Wuteva.

    SEM attack intervals are balanced individually around unique animations of each unit. The Rogue Idol is another great example of this style of balance having very long animations that trigger fairly infrequently but hit for a massive amount of damage. Attack interval as a stat exists entirely so that CA can make the wide range of visuals in the game produce a measurable performance (though it's not always perfect. Horse Lords often attack much less often than their attack interval would indicate because of targeting issues).

    When looking at units with a class that is balanced against each other (like cavalry) CA's been pretty clear that they use attack interval to standardize damage output. Winged Lancers have the same attack interval as Empire Knights and the same MA and WS (with matched ap ratios) to both Empire Knights and Jade Lancers. If you put the units in sustained combat with a target they deal about the same damage over a set period of time, something you can test in game though it's a bit of a pain to avoid charging. In this case the difference is the Winged Lancers use the same lance animations which are pretty short, efficient jabs whereas the Jade Lancers have a different animation set which includes some fancy slashes since they have edged weaponry rather than the European style lance.

    So attack intervals primary purpose is a means of making damage output predictable which allows adjustments to MA, CB, and WS to produce consistent results. Messing with it throws off a lot of the assumptions baked into the MA/MD system and while it could be used as a balance tool it would be less precise than just changing the stats used to simulate combat directly.
  • Bastilean#7242Bastilean#7242 Registered Users Posts: 2,945
    edited July 2022
    SPEEDS

    Personally, I would be a lot happier if the Doomwheel was 95 and the Broodhorror was 75.


    I would be happy with Bears and Demi-gryphs moving at 66. Give them a much higher charge speed since they are predators. For instance, Juggernauts have run speed of 62, but they have a charge speed of 110. Doesn't have to be this extreme, but it's a great example. FYI, it doesn't take a unit icon like snottling pump wagons to have note worthy divergence in charge speeds. Maybe it should since this information isn't on the unit card.


    I am fine with Reiksguard moving faster. With all the AP and fast monstrous infantry out there, standard heavy cavalry could use a little assist.


    The winged lancers don't bother me, but lets redesign the Silverhelms and the Knights Errants to be faster like that.


    If you want, reduce Slayer speed to 35 but give them a higher charge speed to compensate might be more lore friendly.


    I like faction diversity and unit diversity, but I also really like standardized function.


    As far as Attack Interval, until you actually test it, it's not answered. So if Indy Pride wants to test Cathayan Jade Lancers vs. Empire Knights for us, I would love to hear about the results if it doesn't break his NDA.
  • RazeAndBurnRazeAndBurn Registered Users Posts: 475

    Varghulf has the lowest attack interval and it visibly attacks fast in the game. (Did they once increas it and reverted it back asap? Not sure). Guess thats also why it has relatively low WS.

    Same story for Arachnarok afaik, and i think for Kholek too. So at least sometimes attack interval = faster attack speed? Or the units with fast attack have tighter intervals? Does the egg come out of chicken, or chicken comes out of egg? Wuteva.

    SEM attack intervals are balanced individually around unique animations of each unit. The Rogue Idol is another great example of this style of balance having very long animations that trigger fairly infrequently but hit for a massive amount of damage. Attack interval as a stat exists entirely so that CA can make the wide range of visuals in the game produce a measurable performance (though it's not always perfect. Horse Lords often attack much less often than their attack interval would indicate because of targeting issues).

    When looking at units with a class that is balanced against each other (like cavalry) CA's been pretty clear that they use attack interval to standardize damage output. Winged Lancers have the same attack interval as Empire Knights and the same MA and WS (with matched ap ratios) to both Empire Knights and Jade Lancers. If you put the units in sustained combat with a target they deal about the same damage over a set period of time, something you can test in game though it's a bit of a pain to avoid charging. In this case the difference is the Winged Lancers use the same lance animations which are pretty short, efficient jabs whereas the Jade Lancers have a different animation set which includes some fancy slashes since they have edged weaponry rather than the European style lance.

    So attack intervals primary purpose is a means of making damage output predictable which allows adjustments to MA, CB, and WS to produce consistent results. Messing with it throws off a lot of the assumptions baked into the MA/MD system and while it could be used as a balance tool it would be less precise than just changing the stats used to simulate combat directly.
    You forgot the part where Jade Lancers have:

    - 34/40 MA/MD while their passive is active
    - 55 CB vs 48 CB
    - 6480hp vs 6240hp
    - 800g price tag vs 850g

    All that in return for 10 more armour on Empire Knights.

    And while you claim that attack intervals only normalize the damage output constrained by the attack animations your words are still just that: a claim. No way to prove it or disprove it.

    Unless you can mod a second unit of Jade Lancers and give them the lance attack animations which I believe should be fairly easy.

    If what you say is true then Jade Lancers with western style attacks and Empire Knights attack intervals stat should perform just as good as regular Jade Lancers.
  • yst#1879yst#1879 Registered Users Posts: 10,000
    Att speed is never a thing ppl should know that after 6 years, it’s completely dependent on animation that cannot be translated into a real number
    https://imgur.com/a/Cj4b9
    Top #3 Leaderboard on Warhammer Totalwar.
  • RazeAndBurnRazeAndBurn Registered Users Posts: 475
    yst said:

    Att speed is never a thing ppl should know that after 6 years, it’s completely dependent on animation that cannot be translated into a real number

    But it can...
  • Spellbound1875#4610Spellbound1875#4610 Registered Users Posts: 2,047

    Varghulf has the lowest attack interval and it visibly attacks fast in the game. (Did they once increas it and reverted it back asap? Not sure). Guess thats also why it has relatively low WS.

    Same story for Arachnarok afaik, and i think for Kholek too. So at least sometimes attack interval = faster attack speed? Or the units with fast attack have tighter intervals? Does the egg come out of chicken, or chicken comes out of egg? Wuteva.

    SEM attack intervals are balanced individually around unique animations of each unit. The Rogue Idol is another great example of this style of balance having very long animations that trigger fairly infrequently but hit for a massive amount of damage. Attack interval as a stat exists entirely so that CA can make the wide range of visuals in the game produce a measurable performance (though it's not always perfect. Horse Lords often attack much less often than their attack interval would indicate because of targeting issues).

    When looking at units with a class that is balanced against each other (like cavalry) CA's been pretty clear that they use attack interval to standardize damage output. Winged Lancers have the same attack interval as Empire Knights and the same MA and WS (with matched ap ratios) to both Empire Knights and Jade Lancers. If you put the units in sustained combat with a target they deal about the same damage over a set period of time, something you can test in game though it's a bit of a pain to avoid charging. In this case the difference is the Winged Lancers use the same lance animations which are pretty short, efficient jabs whereas the Jade Lancers have a different animation set which includes some fancy slashes since they have edged weaponry rather than the European style lance.

    So attack intervals primary purpose is a means of making damage output predictable which allows adjustments to MA, CB, and WS to produce consistent results. Messing with it throws off a lot of the assumptions baked into the MA/MD system and while it could be used as a balance tool it would be less precise than just changing the stats used to simulate combat directly.
    You forgot the part where Jade Lancers have:

    - 34/40 MA/MD while their passive is active
    - 55 CB vs 48 CB
    - 6480hp vs 6240hp
    - 800g price tag vs 850g

    All that in return for 10 more armour on Empire Knights.

    And while you claim that attack intervals only normalize the damage output constrained by the attack animations your words are still just that: a claim. No way to prove it or disprove it.

    Unless you can mod a second unit of Jade Lancers and give them the lance attack animations which I believe should be fairly easy.

    If what you say is true then Jade Lancers with western style attacks and Empire Knights attack intervals stat should perform just as good as regular Jade Lancers.
    https://forums.totalwar.com/discussion/comment/1814321#Comment_1814321

    https://forums.totalwar.com/discussion/comment/1924216#Comment_1924216

    https://forums.totalwar.com/discussion/comment/1914076#Comment_1914076

    https://forums.totalwar.com/discussion/comment/2071422#Comment_2071422

    Here are some links to CA_Duck describing attack intervals impact on the game. There have been multiple dev statements to the effect that it's used to standardize damage output and based on my experience with the game I see little reason to doubt this. Still if you want actual testing I'll see what I can do.

    Not much of a modder so I'll be trying to compare Jade Lancers and Winged Lancers who have the same disparity in attack interval. No promises on a timeframe for that I'm busy enough I haven't been able to play much for the past couple weeks.

    If you're talking about the balance between Jade Lancers and Empire Knights beyond speed you first need to use the updated stats where empire knights also have 30 MD (+2) and the same 6480 hp. At that point I'd probably cut 50 gold off empire knights and call it good (after putting both back to 66 speed). Harmony is supposed to be a buff when active so the unit over performing in that context doesn't both me. Beyond that keeping harmony active on the Jade Lancers is pretty difficult given Cathay lacks any fast missile units, a trend I expect to continue. I think 10 armor and 2 MD is better than 7 CB so the Empire Knights are slightly better without harmony and notably worse with harmony which seems fair.
  • RazeAndBurnRazeAndBurn Registered Users Posts: 475

    Varghulf has the lowest attack interval and it visibly attacks fast in the game. (Did they once increas it and reverted it back asap? Not sure). Guess thats also why it has relatively low WS.

    Same story for Arachnarok afaik, and i think for Kholek too. So at least sometimes attack interval = faster attack speed? Or the units with fast attack have tighter intervals? Does the egg come out of chicken, or chicken comes out of egg? Wuteva.

    SEM attack intervals are balanced individually around unique animations of each unit. The Rogue Idol is another great example of this style of balance having very long animations that trigger fairly infrequently but hit for a massive amount of damage. Attack interval as a stat exists entirely so that CA can make the wide range of visuals in the game produce a measurable performance (though it's not always perfect. Horse Lords often attack much less often than their attack interval would indicate because of targeting issues).

    When looking at units with a class that is balanced against each other (like cavalry) CA's been pretty clear that they use attack interval to standardize damage output. Winged Lancers have the same attack interval as Empire Knights and the same MA and WS (with matched ap ratios) to both Empire Knights and Jade Lancers. If you put the units in sustained combat with a target they deal about the same damage over a set period of time, something you can test in game though it's a bit of a pain to avoid charging. In this case the difference is the Winged Lancers use the same lance animations which are pretty short, efficient jabs whereas the Jade Lancers have a different animation set which includes some fancy slashes since they have edged weaponry rather than the European style lance.

    So attack intervals primary purpose is a means of making damage output predictable which allows adjustments to MA, CB, and WS to produce consistent results. Messing with it throws off a lot of the assumptions baked into the MA/MD system and while it could be used as a balance tool it would be less precise than just changing the stats used to simulate combat directly.
    You forgot the part where Jade Lancers have:

    - 34/40 MA/MD while their passive is active
    - 55 CB vs 48 CB
    - 6480hp vs 6240hp
    - 800g price tag vs 850g

    All that in return for 10 more armour on Empire Knights.

    And while you claim that attack intervals only normalize the damage output constrained by the attack animations your words are still just that: a claim. No way to prove it or disprove it.

    Unless you can mod a second unit of Jade Lancers and give them the lance attack animations which I believe should be fairly easy.

    If what you say is true then Jade Lancers with western style attacks and Empire Knights attack intervals stat should perform just as good as regular Jade Lancers.
    https://forums.totalwar.com/discussion/comment/1814321#Comment_1814321

    https://forums.totalwar.com/discussion/comment/1924216#Comment_1924216

    https://forums.totalwar.com/discussion/comment/1914076#Comment_1914076

    https://forums.totalwar.com/discussion/comment/2071422#Comment_2071422

    Here are some links to CA_Duck describing attack intervals impact on the game. There have been multiple dev statements to the effect that it's used to standardize damage output and based on my experience with the game I see little reason to doubt this. Still if you want actual testing I'll see what I can do.

    Not much of a modder so I'll be trying to compare Jade Lancers and Winged Lancers who have the same disparity in attack interval. No promises on a timeframe for that I'm busy enough I haven't been able to play much for the past couple weeks.

    If you're talking about the balance between Jade Lancers and Empire Knights beyond speed you first need to use the updated stats where empire knights also have 30 MD (+2) and the same 6480 hp. At that point I'd probably cut 50 gold off empire knights and call it good (after putting both back to 66 speed). Harmony is supposed to be a buff when active so the unit over performing in that context doesn't both me. Beyond that keeping harmony active on the Jade Lancers is pretty difficult given Cathay lacks any fast missile units, a trend I expect to continue. I think 10 armor and 2 MD is better than 7 CB so the Empire Knights are slightly better without harmony and notably worse with harmony which seems fair.
    Two things I have to say:

    1. In these very quotes CA_Duck says they use them as a balancing measure to counteract the animation. IE it's an attribute that affects the gameplay but was used as a balancing tool.

    2. Those are statesments from 2017 from a time before the slide-in zero collision chariots, broken cavalry charge and ranged units shooting through infinite amount of friendlies. There's no guarantee that this is still the case. After all so many of VC units just got attack interval reworks both ways which means that CA are actively embracing this balancing tool.


    As for the testing - no, testing two different units is pointless because the amount of variables becomes a couple dozen instead of literally two: attack animation and attack interval.
  • Bastilean#7242Bastilean#7242 Registered Users Posts: 2,945
    Looking forward to seeing the actual test between the two cavalry units.

    Did anyone notice that Black Knights attack interval was reduced from 5.1 to 4.0 in Indy's video? Do you think they changed the animation between WH2 and WH3? I sincerely doubt it. That was a balance adjustment.

    I get that CA would generally rather balance with stats than with attack intervals, but it's a factor they are using it to adjust performance.
  • RazeAndBurnRazeAndBurn Registered Users Posts: 475
    Bastilean said:

    Looking forward to seeing the actual test between the two cavalry units.

    Did anyone notice that Black Knights attack interval was reduced from 5.1 to 4.0 in Indy's video? Do you think they changed the animation between WH2 and WH3? I sincerely doubt it. That was a balance adjustment.

    I get that CA would generally rather balance with stats than with attack intervals, but it's a factor they are using it to adjust performance.

    I did a test in Wh2 using the Demigryph Knights with Lances vs Grail Knights.

    Vanilla stat for Melee Attack Interval in the melee_weapons_tables is 4.7 seconds
    Modded is 2.0 seconds for the sake of demonstration.

    Demies lose decisively in Vanilla:

    Vanilla 1
    Vanilla 2
    Vanilla 3

    And win decisively with a single hidden attribute changed:

    Modded 1
    Modded 2
    Modded 3


    Conclusion: Melee Attack Interval affects in-game perfomance of a unit. IE there's such thing as attack speed and it can be affected.

    Is it tied to the animations? Probably. I can see a case where a model can't attack more than the attack animation allows it to. But where this threshold lies for each unit is unknown and I suppose there's plenty of wiggle room around the standard 4.4-5.1 seconds for balancing purposes.
  • Bastilean#7242Bastilean#7242 Registered Users Posts: 2,945
    The wiggle room is probably 3+ seconds in most cases. Many ogre units have an attack interval of 3.2 which makes up for their lower entity counts to a degree.
  • The_real_FAUST#6885The_real_FAUST#6885 Registered Users Posts: 2,112

    Bastilean said:

    Looking forward to seeing the actual test between the two cavalry units.

    Did anyone notice that Black Knights attack interval was reduced from 5.1 to 4.0 in Indy's video? Do you think they changed the animation between WH2 and WH3? I sincerely doubt it. That was a balance adjustment.

    I get that CA would generally rather balance with stats than with attack intervals, but it's a factor they are using it to adjust performance.

    I did a test in Wh2 using the Demigryph Knights with Lances vs Grail Knights.

    Vanilla stat for Melee Attack Interval in the melee_weapons_tables is 4.7 seconds
    Modded is 2.0 seconds for the sake of demonstration.

    Demies lose decisively in Vanilla:

    Vanilla 1
    Vanilla 2
    Vanilla 3

    And win decisively with a single hidden attribute changed:

    Modded 1
    Modded 2
    Modded 3


    Conclusion: Melee Attack Interval affects in-game perfomance of a unit. IE there's such thing as attack speed and it can be affected.

    Is it tied to the animations? Probably. I can see a case where a model can't attack more than the attack animation allows it to. But where this threshold lies for each unit is unknown and I suppose there's plenty of wiggle room around the standard 4.4-5.1 seconds for balancing purposes.
    Very interesting thanks for running it
  • BloodyStream#7178BloodyStream#7178 Registered Users Posts: 249
    Peasant horsemen overperform a bit as well IMO
  • Spellbound1875#4610Spellbound1875#4610 Registered Users Posts: 2,047
    @RazeAndBurn

    So I feel like we're talking passed each other a bit. I'm not trying to say that the rate at which entities attack has no impact on performance, it obviously does in a game where attack rolls are synced to animations. What I'm saying is that attack interval is set to compensate for differences in animations such that units perform to the standard they are balanced against. It should be ignored because it is set to make units perform more similarly to each other in the same that you simply unnecessary elements in a math problem to make it easier to read.

    CA has noted using what I'll be calling "Anchor Units" to test performance effectiveness. Units of X price in Y class should perform about as well as unit Z because that's the balance standard for the class of units. Since CA balances primarily with price and combat stats attack interval producing a consistent and comparable rate of attacks between units in a class is important to allowing price and combat stat adjustments to produce the results CA expects. To add asymmetry units that are meant a factions strength or weakness will be given stats or a price that's off of this anchor to provide an advantage or disadvantages that's still relatively predictable.

    This is why I find the idea that CA would abandon such a system unlikely. If attack intervals are not standardizing the difference between animations than the entire combat system (interaction between MA, MD, CB, and WS) becomes useless as a point of comparison. The charge bugfix at the end of WH2 was done because factors other than MA, MD, CB, and WS impacting the combat simulation (at least in sustained combat) is undesirable because it makes predict outcomes based on stats unreliable. You'd have to assume that CA had a system they used to address a problem in predictability in 2017-2018 then decided that they actually didn't want the system that was still serving a purpose and so through it out in between without any commentary and seemingly with no replacement. I don't think that's a reasonable stance to take, especially when we can observe the fact that the combat simulation produces results reflective of a consistent attack rate between units (i.e. bloodletters deal more damage to infantry with more than 90ish armor than Dual Axe Khorne Warriors).

    Your demigryph example is instructive here since demigryph lances are balanced to lose against Grail Knights in Vanilla. If you math out the damage per attack, assume each entity attacks at about the same rate, and then expect a similar amount of the entities to be engaging in combat at once Grail Knights deal significantly more damage.

    Quick and Dirty math ignoring CB and health per entity both of which favor Grails
    Demi’s attacking
    .43 to hit, 36 damage per hit to grail knights after armor and physical resist.
    248 per 16 attacks
    Grails attacking
    .49 to hit, 26 damage per hit to Demigryph Knights (Lances) after armor.
    382 per 30 attacks

    Grails are about 130 damage ahead in sustained combat with CB and would be expected to win the engagement decisively which they do.


    When lowering the attack interval for demigryphs what you are doing is letting them make more attacks than the grail knights over the same time which produces an unintiutive result, i.e. the unit with the worse stats is winning. As a non-total war example, if you are given the choice to choose between a 50% chance at winning 100 dollars and a 33$ chance at winning 100 dollars you'd be inclined to select the 50% chance based on that information. However if secretly you were not informed that the 33% chance actually ran 3 times you'd have selected incorrectly based on hidden information.

    Without attack intervals being used to standardize the each units performance you'd effectively be unable to know the number of times a unit gets to roll the dice in comparison to another and so you could never be expected to pick the correct option based on available information. This is bad for a whole host of reasons. First it without standardization this means unit stats need to vary much wider to produce the results you'd expect (Demis would need to have notably worse stats to lose against Grails in this context). Second it makes end users unable to intuit outcomes from the MA, MD, WS, and CB comparisons which makes the game harder to understand. Attack Interval is a hidden stat because it causes more confusion than it solves since as a standardizing factor it varies wildly based on animation differences. The amount of time and effort spent explaining what this stat means and the number of people who still want to try and use it for balancing is pretty solid evidence that CA concealing information is a good idea in this context.

    As to testing the attack interval of existing cavalry, I don't really think mods are necessary here since we can control for factors beyond attack interval and animations pretty easily by when we start are measurements. To do this I charged Winged Lancers and Jade Lancers into a unit of Jade Warriors and then I waited 30 seconds before I started measuring and continued measure for about a minute. I measured damage done and damage value accrued over 5 seconds increments but I think 10 second increments are probably more useful in this case since within 5 seconds increments you could get some pretty large differences. Damage value also was basically useless here since the numbers were too small to provide much insight (ranging from like 2 to 10 depending on 5 second increment). This avoids issues with any elements other than sustained combat stats since those effects would have occurred before we started measuring.

    The TLDR is that over 10 seconds after CB has worn off Jade Lancers and Winged Lancers deal fairly similar damage though the Winged Lancers are actually a bit ahead in the 10 second increments on average (107 vs 116). If you look at the animations you can clearly see Winged Lancers have much more efficient animations using short stabs primarily while Jade Lancers have more elaborate swings mixed in with some stabs. As such the decreased attack interval is just allowing Jade Lancers to keep pace on damage in sustained combat. I can't test this for Empire Knights at the moment since I can't access them in game 3 but I see no reason to suspect there is a difference there. This means that if you do the math on Jade Lancers vs Winged Lancers performance using only the combat simulator stats (MA, MD, CB, WS, Armor) the results you get will be broadly reflective of in game performance, with some effect from chance being present.

    Numbers!
    Time JL damage WL damage
    80 2611 2472
    85 2717 2570
    90 2857 2669
    95 3004 2780
    100 3032 2876
    105 3097 2911
    110 3139 2994
    115 3195 3051
    120 3256 3083
    125 3372 3171
    130 3423 3213
    135 3523 3328
    140 3560 3369
    145 3572 3438
    150 3603 3475
    155 3634 3550
    160 3676 3588
    165 3725 3642
    170 3738 3711
    175 3802 3759
    180 3841 3759
    185 3841 3839
    190 3889 3850
    195 3889 3850
    200 3984 3870
    205 3994 3905
    210 4006 3952

    JL 10 second damage dealt on average: 107

    WL 10 second damage dealt on average: 116

    Both units show a pretty clear downward trajectory as they continue to fight which is a reflection of the units tiring out and entities dying. Towards the end attacks get notably more synced which is a bit interesting, not sure exactly why that occurs. I calculated some averages out of individual segments and compared them but the results were all pretty similar so I think the overall average is a good representation.

    Jade Lancer's do a notably larger amount of impact damage from the 200 extra mass that may be intended to help counteract their less effective animations and compensate for the slower speed and the lack of By Our Blood (Empire heavy cav, Bret heavy cav, and high elf heavy cav are at the same 1100 mass so we'd expect them to have a similar level of improved performance on the charge). That however is secondary to the impact of animations on performance which as we can see is small enough to be within the margin of error here. None of these results suggest that a lower attack interval is increase Jade Lancer performance above and beyond Winged Lancers.


    As a bit of an aside, the fact that we saw attack interval adjustments on vampire units may not indicate that the changes were meant to buff the units but were a re-standardization. Undead units have pretty low CB which meant for most of the games history they were being hit less hard with the charge bug than basically every other factions offensive infantry (Grave Guard GW have a CB of 12, Bret men at arms have a CB of 10). Additionally they had much better sustained combat stats since they were designed to be a grindy faction. My guess is the bugfix revealed that some of the assumptions baked into Grave Guard stats just didn't work properly after the fact and so their attack intervals were re-standardized to bring them back in line with the new Anchor Unit performance. Just from looking at the improvement in units like Forsaken after the fix it was pretty clear the change was going to require a rebalancing of basically every unit after all.

    Black Knights are in a similar boat, but they've also just been bumped up a performance tier which may mean their anchor unit has been changed significantly. Without seeing what's been done under the hood to other units in the game looking at a change to a standardizing factor and theorizing it's meant as a buff seems unwise given it's possible other units have seen a similar re-standardization to match game 3's Anchor Unit performance.
  • Bastilean#7242Bastilean#7242 Registered Users Posts: 2,945
    I am expecting all heavy cavalry to get a faster attack interval since cavalry are under performing and the charge withdraw charge meta-mechanics make many of us frustrated since it inverts the value of mass and penetration unless your cavalry is rhinox crushers and you can just waltz through braced halberds doing mega collision damage.
  • Spellbound1875#4610Spellbound1875#4610 Registered Users Posts: 2,047
    Bastilean said:

    I am expecting all heavy cavalry to get a faster attack interval since cavalry are under performing and the charge withdraw charge meta-mechanics make many of us frustrated since it inverts the value of mass and penetration unless your cavalry is rhinox crushers and you can just waltz through braced halberds doing mega collision damage.

    I'm not thinking this is the case, mostly because when CA has boosted the offensive stats of cavalry they've just done so through the combat simulation stats.

    As an example Glade Riders with spears got +1 WS and Wild Riders got +2 MA (above and beyond the change back to +10 MA from Frenzy though I'd be skeptical of how intentional changes around Frenzy are on this build) in addition to the +2 MD and the health increase we've come to expect (it seems to range by unit with +4 per entity being the most common value I've seen). Both are pulled from this video at the end which includes a test comparing Kislev cavalry to Wood Elf cavalry in direct combat.

    The buff to the Glade Riders is particularly welcome and I'd expect to see light cav across the board to be standardized around the 28 WS value since dark riders and Ellyrian Reavers have also been bumped to 28 WS. I'm not sure if the Skeleton Horsemen or Mounted Yeomen have had visible stats at this time but I know both units have featured so someone interested could probably confirm my theory.

    Though again I'd caution against taking anything we're seeing here as final. CA is implementing a lot of changes to the game 3 races and we're looking at an outdated build that is no longer receiving updates. At best I think it's safe to say CA are intending to buff the performance of cavalry as a unit class but specifics beyond the standard health and MD buffs indicated by Duck way back when we were discussing the impact of the charge bugfix aren't discernible at this time.
  • Bastilean#7242Bastilean#7242 Registered Users Posts: 2,945
    Those examples are all light cavalry. I specifically said heavy cavalry. Your argument is invalid mansuer
  • Spellbound1875#4610Spellbound1875#4610 Registered Users Posts: 2,047
    Bastilean said:

    Those examples are all light cavalry. I specifically said heavy cavalry. Your argument is invalid mansuer

    I'd quibble on the Wild Rider classification but then we'd have to try and define light, heavy, and potentially medium cavalry which would be challenging to say the least. I'd still argue there is precious little evidence to suggest a mass adjustment to attack interval makes sense here given that if they're properly synced CA could just boost MA, WS, or CB. Generally speaking that's what we've seen done in game 3. You could argue the changes to primal fury have that effect on the cold one cavalry, but again whether they count as heavy is debatable since it's not a clear category.

    Could it happen? I guess, though again trying to adjust a standardizing factor that is inconsistent across units to a new value seems much more difficult than just increasing offensive stats in a manner much easier to predict. More importantly I doubt CA is planning to make changes that discourage cycle charging, in fact CA has seemed to be moving towards a strengthening of impact damage as of late, with the caveat that it's reduced at a much greater rate by bracing which seems to solidify the cycle charge as central to cavalry use. It would be a pretty big reversal and I'm not entirely sure how they'd go about it given impact damage is both quick to apply and 70% ap.

    Obviously CA seems to be playing their cards close to their chests with most of the changes and with the embargo the way it is we won't be learning much for some time either way.
Sign In or Register to comment.