Medieval Europe v4 Discussion Thread

Discussion on Scenario Projects for Art of War
User avatar
e_i_pi
Posts: 1113
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2009 4:38 pm

Medieval Europe v4 Discussion Thread

Postby e_i_pi » Fri Sep 01, 2017 1:50 pm

Hi all,

Now that we've played a fair few games in Medieval Europe v3, there's enough info in there to get some stats together to see where the Scenario needs to be improved.

While v3 resolved quite a bit of the imbalance from v2, it introduced some new imbalance and shifted the success or failure of certain Empires and Factions. This was always going to be the case as we made big changes to the Era as well as the Scenario.

This discussion thread is going to be a lot looser than the previous one. I'll post some stats and areas that I think definitely need twinking or nerfing, but I'd like to get feedback from the community on how the scenario plays out,

OLD - v2 of Medieval Era Factional Domination
NEW - v3 of Medieval Era Factional Domination, i.e. the proposed changes
FACTION - A playable faction in the scenario
EMPIRE - A playable empire in the scenario
**/DSP - A disparity measure. For fair game balance, Factions should be between -25 and +25, and Empires between -10 and +10
IN/DSP - Income Disparity: a measure of how much income an empire gets in the first 10 rounds on average
WR/DSP - Win Rate Disparity: a measure of how often an empire wins weighted against how often they should win
OA/DSP - Overall Disparity: An average of the Income Disparity and Win Rate Disparity. This number multiplied by about 8 is the amount of troops (in gold) should be added/removed from a Faction or Empire
Proposed Changes - These are my proposed troop changes. The changes are always to the home territory, unlkess otherwise stated in brackets.


BYZANTINE CHURCH
The Byzantine Church is strong but not overly so, though could do with a slightly slower start. All Empires have acceptable Win Rates but Income Rate is to high for Bulgaria (+26) and Byzantine (+17) and too low for Croatia (-25)

Code: Select all

IN/DSP: +29 (OLD value -35)
WR/DSP: +6  (OLD value -56)
OA/DSP: +18 (OLD value -43)

Proposed changes:
  • Bulgaria: Remove 1 Cavalry
  • Byzantine: Remove 1 Navy
  • Greece: Remove 1 Cavalry, add 2 Infantry
  • Croatia: (Carinthia) Remove 1 Cavalry
  • Hungary: (Greater Moravia) Remove 1 Infantry



CELTIC KINGDOMS
Celtic Kingdoms were twinked too much last version, most likely because the new siege rules favour cavalry in forts. Brittany (+22) and Scotland (+14) have high Win Rates. Income Rate is low for Ireland (-16) but high for Scotland (+17)

Code: Select all

IN/DSP: +6  (OLD value -7)
WR/DSP: +42 (OLD value -13)
OA/DSP: +23 (OLD value -10)

Proposed changes:
  • Brittany: Remove 1 Cavalry, add 1 Infantry
  • Ireland: (Connacht) Remove 1 Cavalry, add 1 Infantry
  • Scotland: Remove 3 Infantry
  • England: -
  • Leon: (Castilla) Add 2 Infantry



EASTERN ORTHODOX CHURCH
Eastern Orthodox Church have gone from reasonably well balanced, to grossly weak. Start positions are difficult around the centre of the map, and expansion is also difficult. Income Rate is high for Kiev (+17) but terrible for Poland (-29) and Novgorod (-36). To compound problems, Novgorod has a low Win Rate (-17). They are also extremely hard to balance because if they are given too many troops initially, they can instantly defeat Finland.

Code: Select all

IN/DSP: -57 (OLD value -7)
WR/DSP: -25 (OLD value +31)
OA/DSP: -41 (OLD value +12)

Proposed changes:
  • Kiev: Remove 1 Cavalry, (Pereyaslavl) Add 1 Cavalry, (Volhynia) Remove 1 Fort
  • Poland: Add 1 Siege Engine, Add 1 Cavalry, Remove 3 Infantry
  • Volga Bulgaria: -
  • Prussia: -
  • Novgorod: Add 1 Cavalry, Add 1 Fort



ISLAM
Islam were severely nerfed from last version (mostly by making Levant more difficult to capture), and they're almost right but still a touch imbalanced within the faction - some Empires are too strong others too weak. Win Rate is low for Abbasid (-20) and high for Tulunid (+13). Income Rate is low again for Abbasid (-15) and high for both Fatimid Hejaz (+20) and Tulunid (+19)

Code: Select all

IN/DSP: +34 (OLD value +114)
WR/DSP: -9  (OLD value +72)
OA/DSP: +13 (OLD value +92)

Proposed changes:
  • Abbasid (aka Iraq): Add 1 Siege Engine Remove 2 Infantry, (Ray) Remove 1 Cavalry Add 1 Infantry
  • Fatimid Caliphate (aka Tunisia): -
  • Fatimid Hejaz (aka Saudi): Remove 1 Cavalry
  • Seljuk (aka Syria): Remove 1 Fort, Remove 2 Infantry, Add 1 Siege Engine
  • Tulunid (aka Egypt): (Damietta) Add 1 Cavalry, (Cyrenaica) Add 1 Cavalry



MOORS
The Moors were slightly under-powered, and that has worsened unfortunately. I think they have trouble expanding throughout Sahara and Italy, and also defending against Europe. Progress through Sahara has to be made easier, while also giving them enough starting troops to expand without leaving swathes of undefended territory. Win Rate is terrible for Sicily (-22) and low for Almoravid (-11). Income Rate is low for Sardinia and Corsica (-16)

Code: Select all

IN/DSP: -15 (OLD value -2)
WR/DSP: -49 (OLD value -32)
OA/DSP: -31 (OLD value -17)

Proposed changes:
  • Almoravid (aka Algeria): Add 1 Cavalry, Remove 1 Infantry
  • Cordoba (aka Spain): -
  • Sardinia and Corsica: Add 1 Siege Engine, Remove 1 Navy, Remove 1 Infantry
  • Sicily: Add 2 Infantry
  • Zenatan Caliphate (aha Sahara): Remove 1 Fort Add 1 Cavalry, (Tahert) Remove 1 Cavalry



ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH
The RCC have gone from one of the hardest to play factions to one of the easiest. This will be largely due to siege changes when cavalry are inside forts, but I think Italy expands too fast now, and France/Burgundy is too easy to defend. Rome's Income Rate is too high (+23), and the Win Rates are too high for Domaine Royal (+21) and Burgundy (+14)

Code: Select all

IN/DSP: +44 (OLD value -52)
WR/DSP: +43 (OLD value -78)
OA/DSP: +43 (OLD value -64)

Proposed changes:
  • Domaine Royal (aka N.France): Remove 1 Fort
  • Aquitaine (aka S.France): Remove 1 Infantry
  • Burgundy: Remove 1 Siege Engine Add 1 Cavalry, (Lower Burgundy) Remove 1 Infantry
  • Holy Roman Empire (aka Germany): Remove 1 Cavalry Add 1 Infantry
  • States of the Church (aka Rome): (Lombardy) Add 1 Infantry, (Verona) Add 2 Infantry



TURKIC HORSE TRIBES
Perenially under-powered, the Turkic Horse Tribes are hard to balance and also start in a hard position. Most of their zones are split up with rivers making it hard to expand, and balancing that by giving them extra troops means they can overrun Russia too easily - I think the key here is to remove a lot of the Cavalry both in starting positions and surrounding territories, making expansion easier. Income Rate for Pecheneg is way too low (-31), and Win Rates are poor for Bagratuni (-14), Cuman-Kipchak (-12) and Ziyarid (-15)

Code: Select all

IN/DSP: -10 (OLD value -49)
WR/DSP: -30 (OLD value -22)
OA/DSP: -20 (OLD value -35)

Proposed changes:
  • Bagratuni (aka Armenia): Remove 1 Fort Add 1 Infantry, (Kakheti) Remove 1 Cavalry, (Vasporokan) Remove 1 Fort Add 1 Cavalry
  • Cuman-Kipchak (aka S.Russia): Remove 2 Cavalry, (Derbent) Remove 2 Cavalry
  • Khazar (aka Crimea): Remove 1 Cavalry Remove 1 Navy Add 1 Infantry, (Circassia) Remove 1 Cavalry
  • Pecheneg (aka E.Ukraine): Add 1 Fort Remove 1 Cavalry, (Alania) Remove 1 Cavalry
  • Ziyarid (aka Kazakhstan): (Azerbaijan) Remove 1 Infantry



VIKINGS
Vikings were nerfed too much in the last update. I think this comes down to the amount of Forts in Britain and Europe, and that Russia tends to have Cavalry - this makes it difficult for early game for Vikings: invest in Siege or Cavalry? I think the answer is to start them with more cavalry and answer the question for them. Income Rate for Iceland is poor (-20) along with Win Rate (-14). That is what seems to be dragging down Vikings the most, though some tweaking is required elsewhere too.

Code: Select all

IN/DSP: -32 (OLD value +40)
WR/DSP: -22 (OLD value +19)
OA/DSP: -27 (OLD value +29)

Proposed changes:
  • Iceland: Add 2 Navy Remove 3 Infantry, (Snaeland) Remove 2 Infantry
  • Denmark: Add 1 Cavalry Remove 3 Infantry
  • Norway: Add 1 Infantry, Add 1 Cavalry, Remove 2 Navy
  • Sweden: -
  • Sami (aka Finland): Add 1 Cavalry, Remove 1 Infantry


User avatar
e_i_pi
Posts: 1113
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2009 4:38 pm

Re: Medieval Europe v4 Discussion Thread

Postby e_i_pi » Thu Sep 14, 2017 11:40 am

If no-one has objections within the next week or so, I'll make the changes, then we'll be able to play a (hopefully) more balanced Medieval Europe :)

User avatar
e_i_pi
Posts: 1113
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2009 4:38 pm

Re: Medieval Europe v4 Discussion Thread

Postby e_i_pi » Sat Sep 16, 2017 4:38 pm

Righto, I've made the changes, and the map still looked a little unbalanced so I made these changes as well:
  • Burgundy doesn't get the extra cavalry, they start with 2 forts, 2 cavalry, 4 infantry, which should be sufficient
  • To stop Rome getting rushed from Sardinia or Sicily, Tyrrhenian Sea now has 2 navy. To make up for this, Sea of Sardinia now has just 1 navy.
  • To stop Iceland/Ireland clashing too early, Far North Atlantic Ocean now has 2 navy.
  • Norway change is now add 3 infantry, add 1 cavalry, remove 1 navy, as it would have been impossible to capture as a neutral.
  • Crimea change is now remove 2 cavalry instead of remove 1 cavalry remove 1 navy, as they should probably start with a basic navy to expand eastwards.
If anyone's interested to see what the map will look like now, you can visit the project page here:
Project #247: Medieval Europe Factional Domination

Also, I'm thinking about putting in a new asset type, called something like "Diplomatic Envoys". You would be able to have up to 4 at any one time, and you'd accrue maybe 1-2 a turn. These could be used to annex territories, or transfer gold or territories to allies. The main reason I want to get this in is because I'm thinking of putting in some other in game functions - sabotage, and bribery. Sabotage would target non-sentient troops (i.e. navy, forts, siege engines) and would use one diplomatic envoy and some gold for a chance to destroy one at random. If it is a sea territory, it wouldn't allow you to destroy the last navy. Bribery would use one diplomatic envoy and some gold for a chance to transfer one random troop from the enemy to come to your territory - again, it wouldn't allow the last navy on sea to transfer, or the last infantry/cavalry on land to transfer. I'm not sure how sensible it would be for say a siege engine to be bribed from one navy to another, so I'll have a think about it.


Return to “Scenarios”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests