Dude, your channel is *EXACTLY* everything I ever wanted in a Total War: Rome 2 channel and I am so glad I found you. Mechanics I think are so interesting in this game and I love to see someone giving them the attention they deserve.
Basically, but i believe there is a cap for some stats such as melee defense and melee attacks. 1000 melee attack doesn't mean that you're going to 1 hit 1 kill them.
If a missile unit A shoots a unit B from behind, my understanding is that B's shield blocking chance (of 10-20-30% or more) is ignored, right? Now in terms of base damage inflicted, should the dice roll be between 1 and B's amour value of ("Base Value" + "Shield value"), or between 1 and B's "Base Value" only? The latter would be more logical I guess ... is it what happens in the game though? Thank you !!
If two Macedonian Shield Bearers fight each other, you have 41 Melee Attack vs 57 Melee Defence. Rolling anywhere between 1 and 41 means the unit attacks, but if it's between 42 and 57 then the attack is blocked. Is that a correct understanding of Melee Attack and Melee Defence? If a unit have higher Melee Attack than the defenders Melee Defence, then you will hit every time? Is that how the Attack roll works?
No, from what I've read that is not how it works. I can't for the life of me find it, but I read somewhere way back that a chance to hit is never lower than 20% and never higher than 75%. So units that can get melee defense in the 100s will still not get less 20% of the time against anything. Not 100% on this. More like 40%.
lol, those percentages. After venturing "far and wide on the borders of Google's search results" I've come to the source of it all here: www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?620767-Statistical-Combat-Analysis&p=13627047&viewfull=1#post13627047 Does that sound familiar?
If a missile unit A shoots a unit B from behind, my understanding is that B's shield blocking chance (of 10-20-30% or more) is ignored, right? Now in terms of base damage inflicted, should the dice roll be between 1 and B's amour value of ("Base Value" + "Shield value"), or between 1 and B's "Base Value" only? The latter would be more logical I guess ... is it what happens in the game though? Thank you !!
Really need subtitles in this. I can't make sense of most things he says. Stopping background music and using a better microphone would be good too. Thanks for the effort to explore these unexplained stuff of the game.
is this still valid for warhammer? :) i mean i think it should.. but heroes deal soo much damage, their normal damage alone is so crazy high, i dont think any units have enough armor for the armor piercing to have any effect.. that damage may as well be regular damage and it wouldn't change a thing... cause from how i understand.. armor piercing is good when enemy armor is greater then your regular dmg... on that note.. make a warhammer version of the videos :) im sure ppl will love it
More or less. However, Shields no longer increase Armour; they increase Melee Defense and a flat 30% missile damage avoidance *from the front*. What "from the front" encompasses, I have no idea, though i'd guess the front 180 degree arc. Note that "missile" doesn't apply to artillery. So the main difference between units that have Armor Piercing damage and those that don't (e.g. bows vs. guns and swords vs great weapons) is unit cost efficiency. If money is no object, then take the armor piercing option every time. There are some other considerations, such as the lower Melee Defense from taking Great Weapons or not being able to shoot over friendly units with guns.
