Mixing units

[Zakilevo]

Is it really bad to mix units? I mean I know it will affect SF units but will it matter for other unit types?

Like if I recruited 80-4/50 units initially and recruited 70-4/40 later, will this affect anything beside weapon/armour?

[Chenier]

Is it really bad to mix units? I mean I know it will affect SF units but will it matter for other unit types?

Like if I recruited 80-4/50 units initially and recruited 70-4/40 later, will this affect anything beside weapon/armour?

I don't think so...

Also, I heard it was bad to mix SF. Can anyone with the knowledge of the code actually confirm if there actually is a drawback to it?

[Bedwyr]

There are no drawbacks to mixing SF with the exception of range mixing, which functions (I'm pretty sure) the same as archers and MI range mixing.  Although, come to think of it, I have no clue what happens if you mix ranged and non-ranged SF.

There are no "drawbacks" to mixing units beyond weirdness with differently ranged units in general.  It just uses a weighted average of the stats.

[Chenier]

There are no drawbacks to mixing SF with the exception of range mixing, which functions (I'm pretty sure) the same as archers and MI range mixing.  Although, come to think of it, I have no clue what happens if you mix ranged and non-ranged SF.

There are no "drawbacks" to mixing units beyond weirdness with differently ranged units in general.  It just uses a weighted average of the stats.

Are you sure there are no drawbacks to mixing SF? What about those "special abilities" that some devs seriously hinted at, without giving realm confirmation? Some SF are, for example, reported to be exceptionally good at sieges, while others, I think, are reported to act like cavalry. I'm not sure if either of these are true, but I'm guessing people had a reason for stating such things at first.

[Zakilevo]

Do they even have these so called special abilities? maybe there should be a description about it.

[Chenier]

Do they even have these so called special abilities? maybe there should be a description about it.

In my opinion, such information should be made readily available.

Devs didn't want to share that info without approval from Tom, which I'm not sure if they actually asked or not.

As such, they said we should test it ourselves. Which is easier said than done.

[egamma]

Search the forums, there are some confirmations about the SF in Makar.

Now, I'm not sure if there are special, grandfathered in SF centers, and the newer ones don't have any extra abilities.

[De-Legro]

Search the forums, there are some confirmations about the SF in Makar.

Now, I'm not sure if there are special, grandfathered in SF centers, and the newer ones don't have any extra abilities.

If you are referring to this post http://forum.battlemaster.org/index.php/topic,397.0.html

Then the only "confirmations" were players insisting they had seen things, they lacked hard evidence of any abilities.

[Chenier]

If you are referring to this post http://forum.battlemaster.org/index.php/topic,397.0.html

Then the only "confirmations" were players insisting they had seen things, they lacked hard evidence of any abilities.

This.

All "evidence" thus far presented in the threads I stalked were dubious at best.

[egamma]

If you are referring to this post http://forum.battlemaster.org/index.php/topic,397.0.html

Then the only "confirmations" were players insisting they had seen things, they lacked hard evidence of any abilities.

Read further to see what Sordnaz's player has to say:

The Barony has in fact three special forces and I know about the two oldest ones and have a pretty good knowledge about their special powers.

Icegate has two centers, Behexed artillery and Mystic monks.
Fiddleford has a new center with for me unknown powers.

Mystic monks are pure melee with increased attack values and  what looks like a charge  they are hard to wipe as well, their special perk is that they do not get penalties when scaling high walls and siege engines only slows them down 

Behexed Artillery is mixed infantry with a range of 5 rows, they sometimes do devastating damage on range but always hit hard in melee.


My experiment with mixing the two above has showed some interesting results with the range dropping from 5  rows to 1 row but they still seam to keep their original strengths. Are we really supposed to be able to mix different kind of sf forces?

For those of you who doesnt know I can tell you that both centers produce troops with 99/99 in armour/weapons but they require a small fortune from the recruiting viking so its not for the common noble. The effects the troops have on the battlefield seam to be heavily depending on their position and stance...

[^ban^]

I find it funny that there were five devs posting in that thread, yet the post you quote is from Sordnaz' player

[egamma]

I find it funny that there were five devs posting in that thread, yet the post you quote is from Sordnaz' player

Like...this one?

Intentionally vague, but in the "we're bound to not say something outright but trying to hint" way.  As I said on the other thread, dev team is currently discussing how much information to release on this, but until a firm conclusion is reached no one can say anything beyond vague hints.  We recognize this is annoying, hence why discussions are going on about how to change what information the playerbase gets.

[^ban^]

Yes, that would be one of them. Was there a point you were trying to make by quoting that one in particular?

[De-Legro]

Read further to see what Sordnaz's player has to say:

I read it, they are just WORDS. A charge effect is TRIVAL to prove, one turn they will do massive hits compared to the next. Yet for all their talk there is not one battle report posted to prove it. Like I said, the only confirmations were claims by players with no hard evidence to back them up.

[Bedwyr]

In my opinion, such information should be made readily available.

Devs didn't want to share that info without approval from Tom, which I'm not sure if they actually asked or not.

As such, they said we should test it ourselves. Which is easier said than done.

The question was asked, and steps were being taken, although they have taken a back seat to the Doctrine move.  That is, unfortunately, all I think I can say.