Troop type maths uncovered.

[Tuna-Fish]

Yes, I got too much time on my hands. luckily 1.02 just came so that can be fixed.

To make the table tad bit more readable, I'm substituting
K = Knight
LC = Light Cavalry
P = Pikemen
HI = Heavy Infrantry
A = Archers
LI = Light Infrantry

The orginal table i did was faulty, use an excellent one made by gratianus instead:

So, how is that monstrosity read?
Always multiply a number by the percentage amount of power of the social class in question. Sum together all the number*power% of a single troop type, and divide by the sum of number*power% of all troops in the unit to find out how much of the unit will be composed of that special troop type.

Also, if all troop types are summed up, the total numbers can be compared: That is, on feudal system giving all power to the nobles results in total troop amount of 5 and giving it all to peasants gives amount of 2. So full noble power in feudal system gives 2½ times the troops you'd get with full peasant power.

Examples, better make a lot of them:
First, the standard Traditional law on plains with 25% for each class.
Amount of:
Pikemen (1*0.25)/(2*0.25+2*0.25+3*0.25+3*0.25) = 0.25/2.5 = 1/10
Archers, knights and LI like Pikemen.
HI (0.25+0.25+0.25+0.25)/2.5 = 1/2.5 = 2/5
LC (2*0.25)/2.5 = 0.5/2.5 = 1/5

Giving as a grand total of 1 so I didn't do too much errors.

Just to use a little harder numbers, Feudal with 30% burghers, 10% peasants, 60% Nobles.
Knights: (2*0.6)/(2*0.1+2*0.3+5*0.6) = 1.2/3.8 = 6/19 ~32%
LI: (1*0.1+2*0.6)/3.8 = 1.3/3.8 = 13/38 ~34%
Pikemen: (1*0.1)/3.8 = 0.1/3.8 = 1/38 ~3%
Archers: (1*0.3)/3.8 = 0.3/3.8 = 3/38 ~8%
HI as Archers
LC as Knights

Also, the feudal 10/30/0/60 regiment is (3.8-2.5)/2.5 = 52% larger than the first example.

 

[Nevil]

Well done a very interesting table

 

[Varyar]

Very interesting indeed. Should be put in the FAQ section

 

[unmerged(15623)]

So burghers are usless when compared to peasants? Same amount of troops, but peasants give more money? Can this be WAD?

Hmmm... I think I'll give traditional custom with 50% to peasants and 50% to cleregy a try... Might prove to be intresting...

Have you looked into how exactly do the different church laws affect the ability of cleregy to provide troops? Ie. If I have church supremacy and give all the power to the clerics do I really gain 0% income and 0% troops?

 

[Peder P]

I thought culture was a factor as well?

 

[C.N.]

I remember someone stating that you only get Knights from non-Plains provinces if you have Royal and Feudal laws.
You might want to check if it is true also.

EDIT:
Peder, I think that culture affects the possibility of getting horse archers.

 

[Tuna-Fish]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but i dont think europeans get horse archers at all. Really, I haven't yet seen any in any european army.

 

[unmerged(6777)]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but i dont think europeans get horse archers at all. Really, I haven't yet seen any in any european army.

That is correct.

 

[Tuna-Fish]

There goes the nice table. Culture DOES have effect on troop types. *sigh* more work. I'll sort it out, at least with the more used cultures. In the meantime, that table works AT LEAST with the dutch. Also, differences seem to be rather small: There is some basic setup and all countries are minor modifications of it. Expect new tables by sunday earliest.

 

[Lambert Simnel]

Terrain also has an effect. In Scotland there is a hilly province with 100% noble power that produces no knights due to the combination of terrain and law.

 

[unmerged(15623)]

Terrain also has an effect. In Scotland there is a hilly province with 100% noble power that produces no knights due to the combination of terrain and law.

Actually, it seems that if one is using popular law or traditional custom the knights get converted into heavy infantry outside plains provinces.

I have yet tested this extensively though, but my Croatia (a hilly country) produces 1/5 LC, 1/5 P, 2/5 HI and 1/5 A on popular law 50% nobels 50% peasants.

 

[Peter Ebbesen]

So burghers are usless when compared to peasants? Same amount of troops, but peasants give more money? Can this be WAD?

What a weird conclusion.

• Under Royal Preorgatory, Burgers give heavy infantry vs the peasants pikemen (both give archers), and though pikemen are better vs. knights, heavy infantry gets the better overall stats from advances.
• Under Feudal Contract and Traditional Law, Burghers are the only way to get archers, and archers fire in every phase...
• Under Popular Law, Burghers and Peasants produce the same

On balance, I would rather say that peasants never produce better troops than burghers - unless you are facing an enemy that concentrates solely on knights.

 

[unmerged(15623)]

What a weird conclusion.
*snip*

Well, I naturally took all that into account, but are the better (and only in case of feudal contract in any significant way IMHO) troop types really worth it?

I also think that you might be underestimating pikes here. It is true that the crossbowmen are best HI killers (and HI is the dominant troop type under normal conditions) but after your pikemen actually get the pikes they gain bonuses against LC as well as Knights (and LC is the second most dominant troop type). It should also be noted that the missing L5 tech for pikes might not be such a significant disadvantage as the L5 techs are supposed to be very hard to get anyways. Lastly the pikemen, of all the units, gain largest shock bonuses from the tactics techtrees (at least if the DB files are ot be belived - the game itself lists rather different bonuses).

If the bonuses listed in-game and in the game files are both valid, it would seem that the pikmen will end up as the most shocking infantry units in the game.

 

[Peter Ebbesen]

Well, I naturally took all that into account, but are the better (and only in case of feudal contract in any significant way IMHO) troop types really worth it?

Yes - and I dispute your IMHO Note that I am not advocating NOT using pikemen at all (personally I prefer a combined arms approach), just refuting your original assertion:

So burghers are usless when compared to peasants?

Which, as shown, was patently false under some law systems and questionable under others.

I would have to note, though, that under Feudal Contract and Traditional Law, you might be in for a world of hurt in drawn out battles due to having no archers whatsoever. On the other hand, if you manage to win in just the first iteration of the combat steps, that will not be a problem.

If the bonuses listed in-game and in the game files are both valid, it would seem that the pikmen will end up as the most shocking infantry units in the game.

True, they get the 1.2 shock bonus for being drilled pikes, though what exactly that means in practice is a good guess. I have not played enough to know whether it is in any way significant. In a 100% Peasant Power army it might prove VERY significant. The real question (since I don't know all the combat mechanics), is whether the shock bonus scales with the weapon base damage or is solely based on the number of men.

On the other hand, heavy infantry gets consistently good weapons no matter which of two tech-paths you choose to follow: crush or slash, making them more versatile than Pikemen (only the pike-path), and they do not miss the L3 slot for damage advancement that Pikemen do, and heavy infantry gets consistently better armour as well after L1 as they can use armour from the plate category, a category that most players will be investing in due to their knights.

It certainly does not make pikemen useless - they are great against LC and HC as you observed - but increasing the number of pikemen in my armies at the expense of both HI and AR is not something that sounds like a sensible strategy to me. A mix of troops sounds much better.

 

[Tuna-Fish]

Now with the Swedish. Will be doing English, France and German next. Any help with any other cultures out there is appreciated. If you do some, just post to this thread and I'll merge them all to the first post. I'll of cource give proper credit to everyone who contributes.

Oh, and I've decided NOT to try to make them comparable between different cultures, as that would definately be an assload of extra work. However, somehow I feel they will be comparable between each other anyway.

Note for the swedish: Traditional law with 100% peasants not only gives the most cash, but also gives very decent infrantry regiments. 50% more QUALITY troops for the settings that gives most cash? PFFFT, I thought this was the only paradox game where the Swedes didn't get an unfair advantage...

 

[Tuna-Fish]

I'm geting really weird results on english 100% noble hill provinces, at least under feudal system. Plains English Feudal is 2K 2LI 1LC. Hills English Feudal seems to be something like 1K 1LC 1HI 3LI ???

 

[unmerged(24829)]

It must be taken into account that although nobles give more troops, peasants and burgers give more gold - and so more troops

 

[Peder P]

Here's a bit of help (not much - but a bit). Hope there's not too many mistakes in here

Traditional Custom Lettigallish (Forest)

100% Peasants: 1P 1HI 1A
100% Burghers: 1HI 1A
100% Clergy: 1LC 1LI
100% Nobles: 1LC 1LI 1HI

Looks a lot like the Swedish one at first glance.

 

[Tuna-Fish]

It must be taken into account that although nobles give more troops, peasants and burgers give more gold - and so more troops

No, they dont. Even if you give all the power to the clergy under Church supremacy (so no gold AT ALL), the province income is not modified. What is modified, is the amount of the province income that you collect as tolls and census taxes. And the troop count bases on the provincial income, not tolls or taxes.

Also note that loyalty of the social groups does modify provincial income: if you give all the power to the peasants under 25%/25%/25%/25%, at first your income DROPS. After that, it rises back slowly as you regain the loyalty of the social groups.

Social group power affecting income directly seems to be a common misconseption, I wonder why everyone believes in it.

 

[Hungry Joe]

Social group power affecting income directly seems to be a common misconseption, I wonder why everyone believes in it.

Your social setting does seem to affect the province base income, though that's not always readily apparent from the total income displayed in the province window, as the changes to the base income are quite small.