Norman

[Eifan Roy]

When checking the military unit values in the library it says that a norman has a melee attack of 65 and defence of 0. How then does this make them into the excellent melee fighter as goes the commentary? Can someone tell if this unit that costs 1000 gold is any better than the man at arms att - 80 def - 5 that only costs 500? Are these figures right, or did Black sea make a typo in the english version? :beek:

[Frujin]

Norman is fixed in the patch

[Eifan Roy]

Thanks for the prompt reply Frujin. This may seem like a silly question but just to clarify, was that the in game values will be fixed or just the library values need to be fixed in the patch? :silly:

[William Blake]

Try Normans in a battle, you'll see that they are way better then 65/0 :)

[Eifan Roy]

Hey there William i have been reading a lot that you have written in the posts, you seem to be a rather astute person of good character, :hello: thanks for the reply.

Actually what i did was try several time to work this one out. I took against the rebel peasant armies with blank(new) marshals an army of normans only and an army of men at arms only - (I chose this combination as when you are Norman they are the same price, 500 gold). When i tried this I did it 3 times with each, saving before hand. It seemed to me that the Normans were not up to scratch even though they have all the same requirements and as I said when discounted the same cost, trying to devise a control. The men at arms usually faired better.

I did the same when comparing the vikings and the highlanders. By statistics only 20 food and 3 morale the difference. ( would have thought that vikings would have had at least a 5 in defence as to history they often carried a hefty shield even when they didnt wear chain. They do however have a better morale which seems balance this out a bit more, and they are a little bit better.

Using that as my control for the experiment, yes I am a teacher lol, I attempted the same with the Normans and Men-at-arms, to differing results. I have also tried it with the swordsmen theoretically the same in their attack and defence. And the Normans seemed to be marginally better. They get chewed up by peasants taking rather more damage than I would have expected.

As I love Normans - well Anglo-Normans from later in the period, I will keep trying. I can be very trying :angry: lol

[vanedor]

What was fixed exactly?

When I look at the stats or the men at arm comparing to the normans, I see the men at arm have some defense while Norman don't have any at all... despite their chainmail and kite shield.

Strange.

[theoverlord3]

i think this game has some blancing problems, with units stats, most units i make ;normans templar knights, M.A.As they always lose 5-12 men against pesents and when the saqud is only 20 big these casulatiys can be very damaging.