Protection and Defense

[Amorphous]

Originally Posted by Peter Ebbesen

Do you have some sort of evidence that the parry part of the total defense attribute is not counted as part of the defense? My understanding is that it is added on top of the total defense (which already includes the shield parry attribute) for purposes of checking for a shield hit.

The reason that I am of this belief is that it seems to fit what I observe and that, in addition, that is how the mechanic is described very explicitly in the manual.

I cannot offer any substantial evidence, but I can tell you why I think that shields work as I said.

There are essentially two reasons for my line of though:
1. The description in the manual in combination with how defence is displayed in game makes me think so.

As you correctly noted, the given example does not really support my reading, but that presupposes that we already know that the 17 defence of the Black Centaur includes the parry value of the shield. It is not mentioned anywhere in the example text.

When you look at the break down on the defence value in game, the parry value is added separately as parry value and not anything else. It seems very strange to me that the parry value should be counted twice in addition to the defence modification - a much simpler way would have been to instead have a defence value that included the defence bonus from parry and just count parry once.

If you discount the example, just counting parry once seems in line with the rest of the text.

2. The performance of shields I have observed in game seems in line with my interpretation.

I know that you say the exact opposite, but consider e.g. the performance of light or medium shield-bearing infantry armed with spears. As a general rule they should not be able to hurt each other at all for quite a few rounds if your interpretation were correct. This is not consistent with what I have seen.


I know that this cannot be said to be a strong argument, so you should in no shape or form feel obligated to accept it. However, I am sure enough of my in game observation that I will not abandon my belief on the strength of the example in the manual. (I should add that, in general, I am not at all averse to count the manual as significant evidence - it is more often correct than not.) If enough members of the community tell me I am wrong, I will, though.

[Agema]

Originally Posted by Agema

Not including shield...

So no, I wasn't including shields.

* * *

Shields simply cannot be "double counted" as per Peter Ebbesen, The example in the book with the black centaur should not be 17 Def including shield. I would rationalise it as follows.

Let imagine a Hastatus/Principe is being attacked by a fairly generic unit (10Def, 10Str, 5 damage weapon). The Hastatus has 12 protec armour and a tower shield, 15prot, +7parry. This gives a total Def (including shield) of 15.

To hit the Hastatus at all, the attacker needs a DRN roll 6 higher (10Att v 15Def). That occurs 11% of the time.

If the shield parry is added to Def including shield, then shield hits occur when the attacker's DRN roll is 6-12 higher, which occurs 10% of the time. Then, the attacker needs to beat the Hastatus's protec by 13 on a DRN roll (10Str+5Weapon v 12armour+15shield). That would mean a shield hit has a 1% of inflicting damage.

To hit armour naturally and bypass the shield entirely, the attacker would need to win the Att v Def DRN roll by a massive 13. That's 1%.

Consequently, you'd expect a Principe or Hastatus in combat with a generic infantryman to take damage well under 2% of the time. It is entirely obvious that this is not the case, and they take far, far more hits in melee.

[MaxWilson]

Originally Posted by Agema

I would expect here again over 30 Def is vanishingly unlikely. That will partly be because there are much better ways to equip an SC rather than Def boosters: 30Def is made useless by all sorts of spells like earth meld, tangle vines, paralyze, and so on, and due to -2Def per attack, it quickly degrades if the SC is swarmed by many attackers.

If an attack is stopped by luck/ethereal, it doesn't degrade defense. Lucky, ethereal thugs/SCs with high defense are basically impossible to swarm unless you happen to have troops with magic weapons (like Dawn Guards). That makes high Defense a worthwhile investment, and it doesn't degrade with fatigue as fast as Prot does. (Ideally you'd have both but sometimes you have to choose.)

-Max

[Peter Ebbesen]

Oops, I forgot to thank Amorphous properly for actually bothering to run a test to discover whether the manual was wrong or not on the shield issue (it clearly was; A good test beats anecdotes or revealed wisdom any day of the week).

So, thank you Amorphous.

[Ironhawk]

I dont know if physical att/def ever maxxes out. But I know that you cant get more than... I think 25 in either attack or defense from a weapon. Mod commands cap out at something like that even if you try to go over.

[Gregstrom]

Don't forget Def is boosted by levels in W. To boost Prot to hefty levels, you can trick yourself out with Fire Helm, Bracers, Cat Charm, good torso armour and an E9 bless. Adding Ironskin/Invulnerability is just gravy at that point.

[Quitti]

Cat charm doesn't affect protection - second bracers do though afaik. Cat charm does give defense though.

[Redeyes]

The cat charm gives extra protection if you have an earth bless though, but you are better served with two bracers of protection. The bracers used as a pair is pretty much the only item that's worth more than the sum of the pair.

[Gregstrom]

Well, that shows what happens if you don't know all the information. I knew Cat Charm counted as armour for the E9 bless, but didn't know you could get the benefits from wearing 2 Bracers. Ho hum.

[Redeyes]

Well, you can also get the benefit if you wear three bracers

Thinking of Ashdod, who have an extremely easy time hitting the protection cap with an earth bless...