Resistances- Discussion, Balance, Suggestion?!

Hi all, its been 3 years since the game DE version was launch and many more years since the original was launched in 2010 if im not mistaken.

Combat and balance has been a constant topic of “debate” for a long time, the things I bring foward today may or may have not been discussed before. Without futher blabla lets get into it.

The Issue II Resistances
This issue is not limited to infantry but applies to many units, many units have resistance vs melee, vs ranged, vs artillery. However ranged resistances applies to both gunpowder and non gunpowder units.

Rodelero has 40% resistance vs melee while its a unit near full suit in armor and has a shield (although a buckler, aka small shield) should have some sort of protection vs ranged.

The Lancer has 30% resistance vs ranged while again it has armor, The Black Knight which is ussing a full set of plate only has 40% resistance vs melee, so in other words units like Eagle Knight, Fulani archer can kill them.

Both Eagle Knights and Pavisier have shields and resistance vs ranged, while they should have this vs non gunpowder but it affects gunpowder units, Ealge Knight is even taken as an Skirmisher like unit due that, was nerfed too.

Thoughts of a Fix?
I think an option would be having gunpowder resistance splitting, gunpowder and non gunpowder units, thought that would be a lot of work. Another option would be ranged resistance to apply only to non gunpowder units, though is debatable, how much and armor/shield would be usefull againts a bullet.

If we go by history, I could think that during 15-16 century armor was either used because it helped or due custom, but after that armor was dropped, only few armies had single chest pieces as Napaoleon cuirassiers, which werent usefull vs bullets.

Resistance Percentage
Another topic are resistances and their distribution, how much equals armor, shield, skill or unit type to resistance %. by the numbers I would say it lacks an standarization.

For example the Rodelero has 40% melee resistance, the black rider has 40% too but the spanish lancer has 0 and instead has 30% vs ranged.

Thus units should have clear valus assigned due something more tangible, ex:

Armor: Plate, mail, cloth, padded, a mix, etc.

  • Heavy: 40% Melee 20% Ranged,
  • Medium: 20% Melee 10% Ranged,
  • Light 10% Melee 0% Ranged


  • Heavy 20% Melee 40% Ranged
  • Medium: 10% Melee 20% Ranged
  • Light: 20% Melee, 10% Ranged

Skill: Refers to how skilled a unit is or the type of unit it is, for example horses by being on the move are harder to target by ranged units.

Then for example the Lancer has armor but not fully as Black knight, has a medium shield and its cavalry. 20/10+10/20+0/10= 30% Melee, 40% Ranged, 10% Artillery

in other words if a pikemen deals 8*5=40 * .30 =28 (12 damage mitigated)

what its the balance issue this is trying to solve or is it more for aesthetic purpose?

Cause the og system was designed around the 2 main damage type (melee and range) so you only need the base hp and 1 resistance to calculate how much damage they can take from each before they die.

What adding double armour for certain units in DE did was just create a 3rd niche balance against artillery or abus type units, for certain units.

adding a second armour type for all units is just a massive rebalancing for no particular reason.


Dont know what aesthetic purpose you mean

Yeah and that system is pure chaos thanks to original devs and as you said they though of 2 damages, lumping all ranged damage as one.

Why does a unit has x hp? Have you ever thinked, why does x unit has 700 while others have 100/200/x quantity, its just random, like lets make this unit be able to last longer, lets increase its hp, same with damage and resistances.

Many games have armor, resistances and armor types. If you feel they created a 3rd niche balance is due the randomness of the resistance system and im afraid that inherited from the original devs, that half implemented the system.

I think, I stated the reason in the post with the examples. Yes it would be a “massive” rebalance, should they do it? Yes I think they should, Will they do it? No, I dont think so.

Still I stated my thinking.

Strictly speaking,fellow answer is right without artillery.
A unit both have melee and ranged resistance is meaningless.Because you can just give them more health.
In game,you usually doesn’t have powerful healer.Unite which has more resistance is easy to be healed.But if you don’t have healer,both have melee and ranged resistance is equal to more health.

If this is the reason you are speaking off this is what I mean by aesthetic, ie

because it looks like x, it should have y

I am not very sure what you consider random about the system tbh. It mechanically works as intended.

Resistance is not armour.

Resistance is basically an extension of Hit Points.

More HP = more amour

More Resistance → more armour against a certain thing.

If you have 20% resistance against range + melee and 30% vs Siege then this is completely equivalent to having 20% more HP and 10% resistance vs. Siege.

You can see resistance as % of extra HP against a certain type of attack.

Mechanically it works yes, other wise people would be spaming balance threads true.

Thats a very interesting way to put it, though if true it further makes it chaotic.

Visuals and stats should have a relation, its like if you put a armorless unit without weapons having a lot of health and damage (yeah pretty dramatic but its in order to make a point).

So, Why do I mean its chaotic/random, etc?, for ex:

  • Rodelero, has 135 hp, has 40% melee res
  • Lancer, has 350 hp, has 30% ranged res

If we go after what you said about Hp=Armor, we could infer they are are same unit only difference would be weapon and horse, so

  • 135 hp = a human armed with plate not fully, 215 hp is the sum of the horse + a lil extra of bigger shield

so far sounds reasonable, but lets see other units:

  • Black Rider, has 520 hp, has 40% melee res. Has 170 hp difference out of armor?, plus its tagged as Light cav

  • Cuirassier, has 425 hp, has 20% ranged res. Has 75 Hp more out of what? It has less armor and no shield.

Now onto resistances, taking the same examples, why Lancer and Cuirassier have ranged resistance but Black rider does not? Is ranged resistance given due being cavalry? but then why Rider doesnt have, is it given due shield? then why cuirassier has it. Same for melee resistance and Rodelero. This is why i mean its chaotic/random.

you are looking for order and logic where there is none to be found. vanilla and twc followed strict rules on armour, (all non mercs and few exceptions share armour types among unit classes, nats have 10rr, etc) tad broke some rules, de just threw everything out at random


also you are comparing ranged cav with heavy cav and wanting them to be same. no.

your armour math is wrong too. read this.

Well usually ranged cav is weaker than melee cav in the sense of armor/hp. But as I said it adds more chaos since its ranged cav, tagged as light cav, while is the heaviest visually of the above mentioned.

You mean my maths? I read your post and its quite interesting far more technically than mine of course, but Im not “adding” to hp to the calculations though, whats exactly wrong?