Ok, I will switch out the cavalry_axeman_b.xml file for _e, but where do I enable the stable to train the advanced unit? I didn't know so I just changed the _b file.

Hmm I can add the ability to train cavalry_axeman_e to structures/pers/stable.xml, but I can't get rid of cavalry_axeman_b from the parent. Will I need to delete _b and _a from the units/pers directory?

You can try -cavalry_axeman_b?

In D4674#198795, @Freagarach wrote:

You can try -cavalry_axeman_b?

Oh! Thanks, I'll do that one sec.

I tried making these changes in the mod as a means of testing, but I got simulation errors. Even including the unmodified stable or ship_trireme files in the mod results in errors.

I didn't really understand the changes only in the _e template. Will he lose armor reaching elite? Armor and velocity change cannot be done in unit_cavalry_melee_axeman.xml template? Why is it necessary to train in elite?
At the moment only Persia uses this type of cavalry but probably other civilizations will, so it makes more sense.
Getting cavalry moving at that speed makes it basically uncountable. Spearman cavalry cannot chase.

The concept is good, I think all ax cavalry should be great in raids. The idea behind him was that he was quick to destroy buildings and medium to fight. I think he released half of the objectives, should get better at destroying buildings, I would just change that. Increasing his crush damage would make him a little better in fights too.

In D4674#198858, @borg- wrote:

I didn't really understand the changes only in the _e template. Will he lose armor reaching elite? Armor and velocity change cannot be done in unit_cavalry_melee_axeman.xml template? Why is it necessary to train in elite?
At the moment only Persia uses this type of cavalry but probably other civilizations will, so it makes more sense.
Getting cavalry moving at that speed makes it basically uncountable. Spearman cavalry cannot chase.

The concept is good, I think all ax cavalry should be great in raids. The idea behind him was that he was quick to destroy buildings and medium to fight. I think he released half of the objectives, should get better at destroying buildings, I would just change that. Increasing his crush damage would make him a little better in fights too.

Thanks for the feedback @borg-! I modified the _e template so that the attributes of the elite unit could be changed from the default. These units will train at rank 3 for the persians as a unique unit similar to the skiritai commandos. Instead of armor and HP increases, they receive + 2 speed. In the parent, the armor is 3h, 2p. In the _e file, the armor encoded is 1 and 0, but this becomes 3h 2p after the elite rank designation.

I don't think the parent axecav template should get the speed increase because this is what you pay the extra 25 metal for as the Persians.

The cav should be counterable because of their weakness to pierce attacks, including building arrows. In addition, should spearcav somehow intercept them, they will lose quickly.
Thanks for the crush suggestion, I will add back the original crush dps to the parent template, which should then carry over to the hyrcanian cav.

I've no real founded opinion on this, other than it looks like a very strong unit. Especially the walk speed is _very_ (too?) fast. Also thinking about the cav speed tech -> then it's 22.

In D4674#198867, @marder wrote:

I've no real founded opinion on this, other than it looks like a very strong unit. Especially the walk speed is _very_ (too?) fast. Also thinking about the cav speed tech -> then it's 22.

Thanks for the input. Yes the walk speed is very fast, but at least it doesn't look entirely unnatural. My thoughts are that sacrificing armor and hp (from rank 3 designation) in favor of speed is a roughly equitable tradeoff. In practice, these cav should be strong at raiding, but will need to retreat should any spearcav approach (especially considering the spearcav buff) Ranged units will lose in an outright fight, but a handful of ranged units should be enough to deter the enemy. (in contrast to swordcav which can tank a lot of ranged attacks).

How should we go about testing the patch? I cannot build spidermonkey unfortunately.

You don't need to build anything on Windows. Just apply the files as a mod for instance.

I also have some concerns about this becoming impossible to counter. If a unit is so fast that it can't be caught by its natural counter (spear cav) then that is broken.

Alternatively, if you make a unit so fragile that it shatters in actual fights to other units in fights then that unit isn't good for actual fighting.

In other words, this runs this risk of being OP against women but useless in general fights (kinda like how naked fanatics currently are). Having such a limited usefulness may have a place in the game, but it is a small one and I don't think that is what you're looking for with this proposal.

To know how this really impacts things it will just have to be tested.

If this is implemented, I would like Persia to keep a useful melee cav unit for fighting (i.e., not a glass cannon). Perhaps they should get sword cav as a unit, so that they have this glass cannon for raiding and a sword cav for melee fighting.

In D4674#198894, @chrstgtr wrote:

I also have some concerns about this becoming impossible to counter. If a unit is so fast that it can't be caught by its natural counter (spear cav) then that is broken.

Alternatively, if you make a unit so fragile that it shatters in actual fights to other units in fights then that unit isn't good for actual fighting.

I think what has been put together here lies somewhere between these lines. It can be countered just not necessarily by spearcav, unless acceleration makes those engagements harder to avoid. Yet it's dps is high enough that it beats skirm cav, and trades against spearcav (a25) and spears. The tests I did with breakfastburrito were interesting, and I bet they will beat swordcav.

In other words, this runs this risk of being OP against women but useless in general fights (kinda like how naked fanatics currently are). Having such a limited usefulness may have a place in the game, but it is a small one and I don't think that is what you're looking for with this proposal.

To know how this really impacts things it will just have to be tested.

If this is implemented, I would like Persia to keep a useful melee cav unit for fighting (i.e., not a glass cannon). Perhaps they should get sword cav as a unit, so that they have this glass cannon for raiding and a sword cav for melee fighting.

One thing is for sure, it will be way stronger than the current unit, which is a glass stick XD. I actually imagine a mix of spear and these axes will be pretty strong.

In D4674#198892, @Stan wrote:

You don't need to build anything on Windows. Just apply the files as a mod for instance.

I am not on windows, but I will quickly update the mod with this setup.

If you don't do promotion anymore, you could also just ditch the basic and advanced variants?

As for compiling, you could try a snap, it has quite an up-to-date development version for 0 A.D..

In D4674#198903, @Freagarach wrote:

If you don't do promotion anymore, you could also just ditch the basic and advanced variants?

As for compiling, you could try a snap, it has quite an up-to-date development version for 0 A.D..

Ok, thanks checking to see if it works. If you two say it's working fine, I will take your word for it. In the mod, I just made cavalry_axeman_b the rank 3 unit and this works for a25. Tonight I will try to get a testing TG on the mod together and see what players think.

I updated the mod with the new crush dps (thanks to @borg- ) so that balance can be investigated without a26. Just keep in mind the differences acceleration and spear cav buff will make in a26 vs a25.

So any comments from reviewers? anything to change? @marder @borg-? other balancers?

In D4674#199010, @real_tabasco_sauce wrote:

So any comments from reviewers? anything to change? @marder @borg-? other balancers?

I really have no strong opinion on it. If you really feel like this is a good idea you will probably need to get more people to test it and give their opinion on it.

In D4674#199069, @marder wrote:

In D4674#199010, @real_tabasco_sauce wrote:

So any comments from reviewers? anything to change? @marder @borg-? other balancers?

I really have no strong opinion on it. If you really feel like this is a good idea you will probably need to get more people to test it and give their opinion on it.

ok, so you don't wan't to review? I'll add @ValihrAnt perhaps. I will make some testing games using the mod too.

How do I increase train time? It just occurred to me that they need 1.5x longer train time.
^nevermind, I see this is already baked into rank 3 status. 22 sec train time seems fine

honestly I think the patch changes unnecessary things. I think that changing the ax cavalry to phase one, and lowering cost, would be enough to have a "special" unit. Its low cost would make it a unit capable of being trained quickly and in large quantities, being able to be very effective in small fights especially in phase 1. Maybe it would increase its crush damage a little, so that it would be more effective against buildings, and maybe also a higher capture rate.

There is a buildtime in the cost component http://docs.wildfiregames.com/entity-docs/a25.html#component.Cost

In D4674#199086, @borg- wrote:

honestly I think the patch changes unnecessary things. I think that changing the ax cavalry to phase one, and lowering cost, would be enough to have a "special" unit. Its low cost would make it a unit capable of being trained quickly and in large quantities, being able to be very effective in small fights especially in phase 1. Maybe it would increase its crush damage a little, so that it would be more effective against buildings, and maybe also a higher capture rate.

what do you mean unnecessary? Axe cav are pretty much the worst unit in the game.
Would people rather I get rid of the rank 3 idea and just let them train with the parent class stats? (https://code.wildfiregames.com/D4683)

I think allowing a cheaper axe cav with more crush attack in p1 would be OP. Couldn't one just destroy the enemy CC by 3 minutes? You can already destroy a cc in under a minute with 20 or so.

In D4674#199087, @Stan wrote:

There is a buildtime in the cost component http://docs.wildfiregames.com/entity-docs/a25.html#component.Cost

Thank you for that. I think the train time is good as is, since rank 3 units train slower 15 sec -> 22 sec.

Do you all think this decision should come down to the vote? If so, I would like at least 8 to 10 votes before we make a decision. It seems borg- doesn't really like the idea. I have yet to hear from @ValihrAnt, so I am adding @LetswaveaBook as a reviewer.
I can say for sure that people in the game lobby have been mostly supportive.
We need to decide on something fast, and I don't know if we could put together borgs suggestions in their entirety soon enough. I say better to balance axecav as a unit now and reconsider when they can be trained later as part of a larger Persia differentiation effort. Thoughts?

Do all balancers refuse to accept the revision, or is there something I have yet to do?