why are chariot not wheeled category?

[L4cus]

this has been bothering me for a while,the only reason i see to this decision is that they wouldnt benefit from the wheel speed bonus tech,which would make them almost op

[godOfKings]

Isnt chariot already 4 speed? There r many 5 speed and 6 speed 3 turn cavs

[L4cus]

yes! that why i say the only reason i see to not make them wheeled is that they would benefit from the wheel speed buff tech so they wont be 5 speed units

[DreJaDe]

yes! that why i say the only reason i see to not make them wheeled is that they would benefit from the wheel speed buff tech so they wont be 5 speed units

I actually like that If that would be the case.
It doesn't even look OP from my POV since they are still easily counterable.

It's like an up for then again. Lol
I think if this is added to them, this guy might be the most tech-heavy unit there is.

[L4cus]

well, in the late game chariots might be really anoyoing with that tech, since with 3 turns u are geting a high hp unit for the cost as well as a carrier

[Endru1241]

this has been bothering me for a while,the only reason i see to this decision is that they wouldnt benefit from the wheel speed bonus tech,which would make them almost op

And like already noticed by others - it's reason enough.

I created the category for having easy way to add units later affected by a tech.
Plus in many cases categorising allows for later usage in e.g. bonuses.
But as it was created by the need with keeping balance in mind - I haven't been thinking of flavour.

Chariots could easily be given the category, but tech would be changed to affect [Wheeled], except [Chariot],[Building Sized], [Deployed].

yes! that why i say the only reason i see to not make them wheeled is that they would benefit from the wheel speed buff tech so they wont be 5 speed units

I actually like that If that would be the case.
It doesn't even look OP from my POV since they are still easily counterable.

On that note lets add a tech giving +1 speed to all infantry.
It's not a problem, because they would be still easily counterable.

[godOfKings]

Chariot is not a problem cuz they cant use wagons, infantry can use wagons and now they can use 6 speed wagons so its definitely a problem to increase their base speed further

Also chariot base speed is 4, may b we can ignore celt chariot since its culture specific and their druid can handle their speed so they dont need the wheel tech to give additional speed

[Endru1241]

But chariots can use posthouses.

They already have monstrous movement on roads with it.
11 on normal and 13 on stone ones.
Equal to light cavalry.

Meanwhile knights have 10 on both.
Shield knights 9 on normal and 10 on stone.

Adding another +1 to speed would make it 13 and 15.

[godOfKings]

I see, so their speed is much higher on roads, didnt know that before, still a late game factor too

but if we suppose the two sides r in a stalemate then neither side would b making roads in the contested territories so its still debatable how effective roads r in increasing chariot's combat potential

[Endru1241]

Still - the possibility exists - there are maps with roads since the start plus it could be much more useful on owned territories defence, where roads can be safely constructed.
So even though not very common to appear there is clear direction in which chariots would be OP.
Are they weak?
Do they need a boost currently?

[godOfKings]

Even if it works well on maps with road, i m talking about general situation and not specific case, and i m not asking for permanent increase but the advanced wheel tech to boost speed to 5 in late game, wagon will already have 6 speed at that time, even packed siege units that r bigger than chariots will have 5 speed

Also even in maps with roads chariots wont necessarily b able to move 13 tiles since they r held back by sight limit, at most the chariot built in the initial base will simply move to frontline territory, and i m also talking about the general chariot not the celt ones, the celt ones base speed can already b increased to 6 by druid which will still b more than normal chariots

[DreJaDe]

In regards to building roads, I don't think there's ever one who would do that in the normal game.

The only time I ever built one seriously is when we have this 3v1 game where im the farthest from the enemy, so I built roads for fun... I mean serious.

In my games, just building a castle and fort post accompanied by wagons is enough. It's my oldest strategy that given enough time, I could send 1-2 wagons across the whole map in just a single turn (50x50 if you want). Building roads won't ever do that and there's no need to do that all too more in defense, the fort and castle network that is more safe is better and faster, and more economical.

The roads are not cheap after all.

[DreJaDe]

Well connecting that to chariots. I honestly don't know much about chariots. But I don't think it's still profitable to do on the case for road network defence.

I don't really think the 5 speed is needled but I just thought it's nice to have.

The reason for infantry is too much of a stretch definitely even by just using GOK's reason. It's not even comparable. Connect that to what my statement earlier and that's even more OP by so much times.

[Endru1241]

I know about inifinite wagon transport (and personally I think of it as a bug), but please not compare to infantry with wagons, but to other mounted units.
My point is - if chariots would get +1 speed, then other mounted units would need +1 (or more) to keep the balance.

[makazuwr32]

Infinite wagon transport as for me actually is not a bug.
At very least it was an actual real structure of fast delivering mails, products when essential and even troops in Russia of late 15th century.

But i think that after exiting wagons troops must not be able to attack or use abilities for 1 turn (can be implemented via aura with range 0 that gives -10 actions to units for 1 turn). That is what i am planning to add in aof at least.

[DreJaDe]

but please not compare to infantry with wagons, but to other mounted units.

Yeah. I just said it because you did.

I know about inifinite wagon transport (and personally I think of it as a bug)

Well, that kinda makes my point on roads much easier to go across. Though suggesting a change to roads seems unplausible so I won't even try.

But i think that after exiting wagons troops must not be able to attack or use abilities for 1 turn (can be implemented via aura with range 0 that gives -10 actions to units for 1 turn). That is what i am planning to add in aof at least.

That's quite sad. I will definitely miss AOF.

[godOfKings]

Hmm i actually prefer this idea, war will finally b realistic, where both sides pit man against man, sword against sword, knight against knight, meat against meat until finally one side run out of meat to send and then they will lose,

This method will actually make ballista and catapults more useful, mounts actually can do something against infantry without being reduced to defensive shock troopers and meat walls anymore, and trebs will b harder to kill with infantry wagon combo so it will b better for offensive siege

Anyways back to topic the only other 3 turn cavs r the medium cav, as far as i remember both the dmg output and dmg received from pole arm atks r similar for both chariot and medium cav, the only difference i guess is hp and armor but for example a late game roman aux knight can reach 6 armor, so that reduces the difference between chariot and medium cav to only 6 hp and 1 speed (elite axe knight also has bonus against buildings)

[godOfKings]

Ow ya i forgot the most important reason y i support chariot speed boost:

Roman 3 turn medium cavs can have a base speed of 6 with aenator
Axe knight can have a base speed of 7 with bard
Celt chariot can have base speed of 6 with druid

4 turn 5 speed knights have a final tier with 45 hp and 14 dmg while 3 turn final tier chariot has less hp and armor than 1st tier knight

[makazuwr32]

but please not compare to infantry with wagons, but to other mounted units.

Yeah. I just said it because you did.

I know about inifinite wagon transport (and personally I think of it as a bug)

Well, that kinda makes my point on roads much easier to go across. Though suggesting a change to roads seems unplausible so I won't even try.

But i think that after exiting wagons troops must not be able to attack or use abilities for 1 turn (can be implemented via aura with range 0 that gives -10 actions to units for 1 turn). That is what i am planning to add in aof at least.

That's quite sad. I will definitely miss AOF.

In return we finally can let for wagons to be upgraded and get extra things. Armored wagons, spacious wagons, self-defending wagons and so on.

Another problem that will be solved this way is ability to summon something without leaving wagons. For example ability to summon wolves by druids inside wagons or free corpses by grave diggers from wagons.

Not that it will happen anytime soon alas.

And also wagons are wagons. With this change we might add different transport which will allow for units to act right after exit from it. Ofc along with some extra additions. Battering rams might get extra speed up to even 4 and they will keep that trait that allows units to act from inside and to exit and act.

[Endru1241]

Personally - I wanted to have aura variant to only affect units inside before this change.
Because it would affect even units outside of wagon, but within the same outer garrison.

[phoenixffyrnig]

Might not be the best place, but since it's already been brought up I feel inclined to speak in defence of wagons. Changing how they work would really effect the attacking dynamic.
I agree that this is an issue...

ability to summon something without leaving wagons. For example ability to summon wolves by druids inside wagons or free corpses by grave diggers from wagons.

... but I don't agree with this....

But i think that after exiting wagons troops must not be able to attack or use abilities for 1 turn

- why should it be that troops who have been sitting down are unable to fight upon reaching destination?

I know about inifinite wagon transport (and personally I think of it as a bug)

Presumably this is the daisy chain of waiting wagons? I appreciate that "teleporting" units to the far side of the world is a bit out of keeping - done many times this is clearly not desirable, but done once it is good logistics, and clearly feasible, like the transport equivalent of a forced march/an all night sleep-in-your-seat journey. I think the repetition should be curtailed, but not the idea itself.

war will finally b realistic, where both sides pit man against man, sword against sword, knight against knight, meat against meat until finally one side run out of meat to send and then they will lose,

disagree I'm afraid. So basically a meat grinder, a scrum, a show of brute strength alone? What of flanking moves, ambushes, feints, stealing a march? As we both well know GoK, a wagon is an investment in time, to accelerate the plans of a forward looking general - to remove the capacity to attack after exiting a wagon will lose the power of insicive attacks and forward planning, and merely serve to speed more meat to the grinder.


This would also be problematic in the already difficult task of making a beach head on an enemy shore - we would be obliged to deliver our invaders in small doses of 2 to 4, or to leave them as sitting ducks against all the defences the defender has to muster.

Ditto a blind-side attack to the opponent's base. If someone has taken the risk to send some troops the long way round whilst still holding out in a diversionary frontal assault surely they deserve to be rewarded by being able to execute the attack rather than watch their attackers be executed.

Ambushes and flanking would become much harder, in fact barely possible - neither are particularly effective when you're obliged to give your enemy a full turn's notice of the surprise you are about to pull.

A simple 1 turn unit could block a train of wagons, necessitating one guy to exit, wait for the full moon, attack and... oh, hang on, the one turn unit has moved, so now my guy has to move, attack, clear the way, and be left behind!

What of builders that are in a wagon, would they also lose the capability to travel, exit, work - and if so, why?

This would essentially put all your army that is in transit out of commission for one turn. Imagine you are gearing up for a big attack - you have 6 wagons bringing troops from 3 different directions to the point of departure (let's say a high castle next to a TC, plenty of space to rearrange everyone into separate attack parties for next turn). Suddenly, your opponent has launched his attack against you, trebs are setting up, rams and siege towers have appeared, cavalry and missile troops appear on the horizon.... but none of your men are allowed to attack because they started that turn in a wagon!

The possibilities of being able to transport, then move, and then action your units is something that adds much depth to this game, it reflects the legitimate rewards of good logistics in warfare, it encourages different facets of plans and attacks, gives onus to the initiator, maintains an element of surprise/creativity, and facilitates quicker better play.

Given that :
It's so easy to block wagons, either with boots on the ground or traps, or defences,
They are already limited by terrain,
Their great weakness is destroy the wagon and only 1 / 3 units remain,
and just recently
Horses are barred from wagons
All units have a reduced max speed anyway (buffers rework) -

I am struggling to see why good use of wagons is being seen as something to penalise.

[makazuwr32]

Personally - I wanted to have aura variant to only affect units inside before this change.
Because it would affect even units outside of wagon, but within the same outer garrison.

That is why i am delaying this change.

[DreJaDe]

Hmm i actually prefer this idea, war will finally b realistic, where both sides pit man against man, sword against sword, knight against knight, meat against meat until finally one side run out of meat to send and then they will lose,

This method will actually make ballista and catapults more useful, mounts actually can do something against infantry without being reduced to defensive shock troopers and meat walls anymore, and trebs will b harder to kill with infantry wagon combo so it will b better for offensive siege

Honestly, I think the current one is still more realistic than worker strat going tow to tow with an army. All to more when many unit lost their bonus against unfinished structures and such.

[makazuwr32]

Uhm but they still have bonus against unfinished structures.
It just depends on construction rate of mentioned structure: if construction rate is 500% than any unit will do x5 times more damage, if 120%. If to be more correct than actual formula is next:
TD — total damage
CB — Construction rate of attacked building
A — attack of assaulter unit
D — defence of structure against type of attack of assaulter unit
B — bonus of assaulter unit against target structure
TD = (A×(1+B)-D)×CB
For example we have assaulter unit with 10 attack, 300% bonus against target buildings and 2 unfinished buildings of same category both with 25 armor against attack type of asssaulter unit and but one with 200% consturction rate and other with 2000% . Assaulter unit to finished building will do 10×(1+3)-25=40-25=15 damage, to unfinished building 1 (with 200% construction rate) it will do 15×2=30 damage and to unfinished building 2 (with 1000% construction rate) it will do 15×10=150 damage.
Not 10×4×10 - 25 = 375.

So if unit at base to finished building with 500% construction rate deals 10 damage than to unfinished it will do 50 damage. If 1 than 5.

[DreJaDe]

In AOS. It's reduced or from what I see. Some units don't have any extra damage against unfinished building.

[Endru1241]

In AOS. It's reduced or from what I see. Some units don't have any extra damage against unfinished building.

The reason is simple - most constructions have construction affected <= 100%.
Fortresses, Ballista or Cannon towers, factories all have values like that.
But e.g. forts or castles should still net more damage.

When somebody would build walls, guard towers it would be more noticeable.

[b2198]

Wow, big discussion about wagons... In the previous version (1.156) I would've agreed instantly that wagons were way too strong, but since now cavalry can't enter them anymore and speed buffs have a heavily reduced availability, I don't think they're all that op anymore. Just a small point to consider is that it's a bit too hard to destroy them with melee units (for ranged I think it's a tiny bit too easy, but that might be just me), because they lack bonuses against them (from what I remember, the only units in the game that has bonuses against wagons are those with fire arrows, with the small bonus vs incinerables, and ruined fortresses, that have a BIG bonus that lets it one-shot 2 of them in a single turn), so I think adding a small bonus against [Machine] in general (not just [Siege Machine]) to some units could help in regards to this.

Currently I'm still testing their usage for this version, so not sure if a big change like the ones suggested above are necessary or not for them, but I'll get back to it if I think they are. Right now my stance is that they are a bit too strong. I mean, they are basically a must-have for infantry in any map bigger than 15x15, and more often than not for archers and supports too, and are spammed by most experienced players (and this is not specifically against you, phoenix, I also spam them, and so does zded, GoK, 3M, Foxious, and many others), and while I don't think being a must-have is a problem by itself (see workers and trebs), I think their usefulness still outweights their cost and associated risks by a not so small margin.

I also consider infinite-wagon a bug (though not a critical one, the main usefulness of using their infinite load/unload per turn for me is to overcap the carry limit of castles, forts and TCs), there should be a limit to how much it could be used, but I don't see a way to implement that without engine changes (even if it's just to fix that issue with makazuwr's solution), and even then, I'm not sure in which way would be better to change it in the engine in a way that all variants could benefit from it. Also a bit off-topic, but there might be a new bug with actions of garrisoned units that was probably caused when fixing the siege mantlet inside wagons issue, I'm doing the tests for that right now, will create a post if I'm able to figure out how it works.

Uhm but they still have bonus against unfinished structures.
It just depends on construction rate of mentioned structure: if construction rate is 500% than any unit will do x5 times more damage, if 120%. If to be more correct than actual formula is next:
TD — total damage
CB — Construction rate of attacked building
A — attack of assaulter unit
D — defence of structure against type of attack of assaulter unit
B — bonus of assaulter unit against target structure
TD = (A×(1+B)-D)×CB
For example we have assaulter unit with 10 attack, 300% bonus against target buildings and 2 unfinished buildings of same category both with 25 armor against attack type of asssaulter unit and but one with 200% consturction rate and other with 2000% . Assaulter unit to finished building will do 10×(1+3)-25=40-25=15 damage, to unfinished building 1 (with 200% construction rate) it will do 15×2=30 damage and to unfinished building 2 (with 1000% construction rate) it will do 15×10=150 damage.
Not 10×4×10 - 25 = 375.

So if unit at base to finished building with 500% construction rate deals 10 damage than to unfinished it will do 50 damage. If 1 than 5.

This has always bothered me, because it doesn't make sense in my head that when you upgrade their resistance (with masonry or massive walls), they still get about the same percentual damage from an attack (unless effect damage like fire is involved, because their damage doesn't take into account the construction aff. stat afaik), so you're building something more durable, but while building that durability increase is not applied. I think they should have an additional stat that determines the damage multiplier applied while being built. That would also allow more control on the balance of different structures without having to change their build cost.

[makazuwr32]

Well i discovered that not too long ago as well when i and stratego discussed walls of various races.
I wanted to increase toughness of walls during their construction stage and than found that. Even further we discovered (stratego i think forgot about that so, yes, "we") that damage multiplied by construction rate after reduction from armor of wall. Stratego also tried to change construction rate from current for dwarven wall to 1000% and even more in order to not let it be downed in single hit by basic orc warrior while it is under construction but... damage increased completely by same amount as extra hp that wall gained by speed up in construction.