|
|
|
View Poll Results: Do you think that MA Ulm is underpowered?
|
Yes
|
  
|
52 |
85.25% |
No
|
  
|
9 |
14.75% |
 |
|

September 23rd, 2007, 10:45 AM
|
 |
Colonel
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Finland
Posts: 1,617
Thanks: 179
Thanked 304 Times in 123 Posts
|
|
Re: Some more tests.
I took some time today to make some experiments regarding Ulmish Infantry. I wanted to test how they fare against the current heavy infatry favourite (Pricipe) mano'a'mano.
I bidded 20 Ulmish Black Steel troops with different weapons against 20 Pythium Pricipes. The Pricipes lost most of the fights (expect against shielded infantry), but when the Pricipes lost they inflicted heavy (7-9) casualties, and all Principes that fled, survived (expect a couple of cripples). Losses were usually 5-7 Blacksteels to 10-14 Priciples.
Then I made a bit more "realistic" test of 30 principes against 20 Blacksteel (due to resource cost you can build 1,5 principes for each blacksteel guy, gold cost is *much* less limitng factor when building troops than gold). It was brutal, not even Guardians had anything against Priciples in this case. The losses were usually 13-17 blacksteels to 8-12 Priciples.
So what does this mean? Ulmish Infantry doesn't *suck*, exactly (they have some results against *the heavy infatry*, but only when magic and resource complications are stripped) , but they're nothing too amazing either. Personally (I have nearly zero experience with Pythium/MA Ulm previously) from watching the fights, I'd take Principles over Blacksteels anyday -> They don't run away so easily, you can make more of them, they move faster, have javelins..
And I think that this is wrong. Ulmish infantry should be awesomely good and badass, since it's pretty much all they've got outside capitol. Not medicore, especially with their magic weakness. While I look at their stats I see base attack & defense 10, they're just your regular infantry in extremely heavy armor. I don't think that it would be at all unbalancing nor unthematic to give them some training bonuses. a mere +1 attack, +1 defense, -1 encumberance, +1-2 action points and +1-2 morale would proabably go a long way to make Ulmish infantry something to actually mention when talking about Ulm's strenghts.
And about Master Smths. CUunknown has a point. They don't excatly *suck* as mages. They're just not enough to give anykind of late-game power (and late-game power is the power you need to have to have chances at winning), taking a heavy-magic pretender can only take you so far. There have been many suggestion regarding twiddling with their randoms and I wholly support them.
Hmm, I just had another idea. How about giving them a slighly tweaked LA Ulm's fortune teller (without the blood pick, perhaps)? Ulmish people are a superstitious folk, afterall. It would allow a lot easier diversification.
__________________
I have now officially moved to the Dom3mods forums and do not actively use this account any more. You can stll contact me by PM's, since my account gives e-mail notifications on such occasions.
If you need to ask something about modding, you can contact me here.
See this thread for the latest info concerning my mods.
|

September 23rd, 2007, 12:24 PM
|
Captain
|
|
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 947
Thanks: 1
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Some more tests.
Tuidjy, it's as if you've done your best to be misleading with the analysis you've chosen..
Quote:
I know that, which is why I have divided them into kills and damaging hits, and
have displayed the average damage.
|
But why even bother dividing it up in this way, unless you're trying to obscure the fact that the arbelest does the most damage against a range of common protection values, even adjusted for rate of fire?
|

September 23rd, 2007, 12:45 PM
|
 |
Major
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,055
Thanks: 4
Thanked 29 Times in 13 Posts
|
|
Re: Some more tests.
Principes are one of the best national flood troops in the game. Not to mention, they counter Ulm troops pretty solidly since their main strength is their high defense. Ulm troops are more or less used to be fast expander, walls for your indie archers/xbows/master smiths. Granted they aren't as uber as Principes, it's not too fair to match them like that.
|

September 23rd, 2007, 01:02 PM
|
BANNED USER
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,463
Thanks: 165
Thanked 324 Times in 190 Posts
|
|
Re: Some more tests.
On the other hand, principes use shortswords and javs, which aren't the best for overcoming Ulm's armour. There are plenty of other national troops which would mangle them more in a fight.
|

September 23rd, 2007, 02:30 PM
|
 |
Colonel
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Finland
Posts: 1,617
Thanks: 179
Thanked 304 Times in 123 Posts
|
|
Re: Some more tests.
Quote:
KissBlade said:
Principes are one of the best national flood troops in the game. Not to mention, they counter Ulm troops pretty solidly since their main strength is their high defense. Ulm troops are more or less used to be fast expander, walls for your indie archers/xbows/master smiths. Granted they aren't as uber as Principes, it's not too fair to match them like that.
|
Why shouldn't Ulmish infatry be as uber as Priciples?
Pythium has Uber-magepower, extremely good national summons and Principles.
Ulm has a *much* worse magepower, no national spells to speak of and infantry that sucks when compared to Principles.
[sarcasm]Yeah, Ulm is fine as it is[/sarcasm]
Ok, I admit that might have been a bit overly-dramatic comparison since Pythium is a major MA power, but there is a problem when two nations in the same age cannot even be compared against each other. But the thing is, Ulmish Infatry should be able to do more tha just die slowly and "buy time". They need to be strenght of Ulm in itself. They have a huge weakness in sucky mr, they should get something to "balance" that weakness (being extremely good in non-magic battles sounds like a good strenght). Their high prot is already balanced by high encumberance, high resource cost and low def.
__________________
I have now officially moved to the Dom3mods forums and do not actively use this account any more. You can stll contact me by PM's, since my account gives e-mail notifications on such occasions.
If you need to ask something about modding, you can contact me here.
See this thread for the latest info concerning my mods.
|

September 23rd, 2007, 01:02 PM
|
 |
Colonel
|
|
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Kansas, USA
Posts: 1,538
Thanks: 289
Thanked 194 Times in 94 Posts
|
|
Re: Some more tests.
I by no means want to get into this discussion.
Just going to add my own simple opinion, and that is that MA Ulm does not suck.
They are one of my favorite nations and easy, early expansion is one of their strengths and not a weakness. I don't have much use for arbalests myself as I tend to recruit independent crossbow/bowmen instead and I have had no problem supplementing my beloved smiths with indy magi to good effect. My experience is limited to many single player games and a handful of multiplayer games which I am sure has shaded my own view just as each individuals view has been shaded by his/her own game experiences with them.
That is my two cents. 
|

September 23rd, 2007, 03:06 PM
|
 |
Major
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: La La Land (California, USA)
Posts: 1,244
Thanks: 0
Thanked 30 Times in 11 Posts
|
|
Re: Some more tests.
> > I know that, which is why I have divided them into kills and damaging hits, and
> > have displayed the average damage.
>
> But why even bother dividing it up in this way, unless you're trying to obscure
> the fact that the arbelest does the most damage against a range of common
> protection values, even adjusted for rate of fire?
You troll. Read the post that you are quoting. It answers your question. It shows
that once again, your 'facts' aren't. I'm done talking to you, retard. If anyone
still believes that you know anything, or that you can be made to understand
anything... Well, that person is on his own.
__________________
No good deed goes unpunished...
|

September 23rd, 2007, 03:12 PM
|
First Lieutenant
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 674
Thanks: 7
Thanked 15 Times in 10 Posts
|
|
Re: Some more tests.
Tuidjy, if you think that CUUnknown is a troll, you don't know what real trolling is, m'kay?
|

September 23rd, 2007, 03:20 PM
|
 |
Major
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: La La Land (California, USA)
Posts: 1,244
Thanks: 0
Thanked 30 Times in 11 Posts
|
|
Re: Some more tests.
One can be a troll without being the worst troll in existence.
By the way, I am stuck at home, sick as a dog. Anyone of those who think
that Ulm is "not that bad" wanna play a quick one on one? I'll take any
human race. Ermor, Man, Pythium, Marignon, the rather underpowered Tien Chi,
you name it.
__________________
No good deed goes unpunished...
|

September 23rd, 2007, 03:27 PM
|
 |
Second Lieutenant
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: country of stinky fromages
Posts: 564
Thanks: 29
Thanked 15 Times in 13 Posts
|
|
Re: Some more tests.
I...Well I would...But...Some work you know...Stuff and the like....May you recover promptly.
Ah, I know...I have an enormous map to test!!! Yeah this one is THE excuse.
__________________
10 times more numerous, by nigth and backstabbing.
Senior member of the GLIN !
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Hybrid Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
|
|