5k florin battles suck!

[CBR]

Yes laugh all you want but I must say I'm very interested in trying them out some more. I have not met much interest in the foyer and most likely no one will bother with it no matter what reasons I come up with...but at least I will try this last and long rant...

We now got a +2 morale increase in VI but people still wanna play at 15k..yes some are playing 12k now. People want the money so they can buy valour so units fight longer..the question is do they really fight that much longer and what other effects do we get from playing at such high florins compared to 5k?

My guess is that no matter what florin level we pick some will like and some will hate it and it will have some kind of problem regarding balance.

I dont have much experience in 5k battles but I do see a lot of advantages..at least in theory.

We want lots of money so we can buy valour for units so they fight longer right? But that means spears gets weaker even if they actually have v2 because what is it they encounter? v3-4 men at arms and militia sergeants.

Having just one more valour compared to spears is really enough to make orderfoot a waste of money against chivalric men at arms. From a rather equal fight it turns into a clear defeat for the spears...yes you have 4 more in morale with v2 but with higher casualty rate and losing badly most of the time I would say its one step forward two steps backward.

So what about cavalry then? It would rule even more now that you cant upgrade your infantry? First of all we dont have the valour gain during a battle and you cant buy much cavalry with 5k anyway. Yes your heavy cavalry will be important but with less of it and more spears I would say that the infamous all cav rush army is not that strong anymore.

All in all a 5k army is a lot more balanced than a 12k or 15k army. Shock units cant get all these silly upgrades to wipe out spears and low valour shock units have big problems against cavalry so you need spears. Maybe missile units are a bit expensive but if we take High era then pav crossbows is only 225 florins and even archers are better as you cant buy just the best armoured units...you simply dont have enough money.

One of the arguments against 5k games has been that units just rout so quickly and games only last a few minutes. To that I will say that any rush, even at 15k, will really only last a few minutes before someone has lost and with more spears (because they have more defense than attack) in the armies, maybe 5k rushes could even last longer. And I dont understand the idea that just because its 5k and lower morale its all about rush?

Some of the problems is really when people try to use same army that they use in 15k games: loads of shock units and few if any spears... they charge with everything and expects to roll over enemy spears while not caring that much about enemy cavalry.

So whats the conclusion? Gameplay at 5k is different but it shouldnt be considered a waste of time nor simple. Yes someone might find some good reasons/examples of why 5k suck but several of the arguments I have heard so far is more myth than fact.

The morale increase in VI is an excellent chance to consider 5k games...at least try them out seriously. Playing some 5k battles is IMO the only way to judge how good or bad it is.

CBR

[ichi]

CBR:

Nothing wrong with 5K battles. At low florin levels I see people using units that never get used in high florin games, so it provides diversity.

Quote[/b] ]People want the money so they can buy valour so units fight longer..the question is do they really fight that much longer and what other effects do we get from playing at such high florins compared to 5k?

I think that units do fight longer at higher valor levels. One reason the I like 15-20K games is that I can afford to balance out my units - I like high valor spears/OFS/Byz Inf. At V4 they hold up long enough to get shock troops to help.

What I see a lot of, but do not really care for, are the very high florin games.

I think its fun to play at different levels.

ichi

[Skomatth]

One thing that's better with 5k is definitely less upgrades. IN my opinion upgrades rui
n THE balance originally intended. Upgrades would work if all the units were priced the same but since they're not...

One combat point in either attack or defense different usually results in the winner having 10 men more or less when the loser routs. This is why a small couple of points can be exploited and turn a unit into a "super unit".

I'll try some with you as I've resolved not to play 2.0 15k battles after some goofy ones. We both know how easy it is to change morale too. We could have some fun making all morale 6 (best for vi i think) and then trying 5k battles.

[Alrowan]

well they are fun, but my alamohad 4 naptha/4 Muribitan army can rout nearly anything in 5k.. i tried it last night... amazing to say the very least (4 napthas on one target, simultaneus hit will just about automatically rout them, forcing a chain rout)

[alioven]

I'm interested in trying those 5k games too. New air for the game, even if everything routs easily, there is always a way to avoid a chain rout (although I don't always find it )

[Div Hunter]

You're wrong about the cav CBR they aren't just a bit more potent they totally dominate 5k battles. A single all cav army can rout an army in seconds on just as easily wrap up the rest of their enemies.

5k battles do suck because they are either about fear or cav. A balanced army almost cannot win against an army with guns, naptha or is cav heavy with 2 exceptions. A balanced Swiss or Papacy army may be able to defeat an all cav army because of the quality pikes.

[tgi01]

Well I did host/play 5k and even 2 k battles quite often in 1.1, the main difficulty with them was that they were very difficult to fill up and you got a mix of veterans who actually dared trying something new ( very very few ) and complete noobs who obviously didnt had a clue about what 5k was ....

At 2k due to the imbalanced army values byzantines were unbeatable ( byz inf + alans ) ....

at 5k cavalry rules, what you had to do was simply to appera on someones flank and look menacing ...the low base morale spears and archery units became useless quickly...

As i most often couldnt get enough people to fill up a 3 vs 3 at 5k when there were 120 ppl in the lobby it feels like a waste of time to even try to host those in 2.0.

And it is quite obvious from the polls and games being hosted that a clear majority want 15k a smaller but sizeable number want 12k and basically noone wants to play belov that...

Anyway if anyone sees me in the lobby and wants to play 5k just say so


TGI

[CBR]

Quote[/b] (Alrowan @ June 01 2003,04:30)]well they are fun, but my alamohad 4 naptha/4 Muribitan army can rout nearly anything in 5k.. i tried it last night... amazing to say the very least (4 napthas on one target, simultaneus hit will just about automatically rout them, forcing a chain rout)

Hm yes naptha might be very powerful. I'll see how quickly I rout next time we meet on the server

CBR

[CBR]

Quote[/b] (Div Hunter @ June 01 2003,07:13)]You're wrong about the cav CBR they aren't just a bit more potent they totally dominate 5k battles. A single all cav army can rout an army in seconds on just as easily wrap up the rest of their enemies.

Well I have seen all cav armies do that in 15k games too.

All I know is that in 5k there is a smaller difference in cav power for the all cav compared to the balanced army and at 5k spears are less crap against shock foot.

Yes morale is lower so a cav flank/rear attack can be more devastating.

But as I said in the first post, there might be some balance issues in 5k battles too, its just that some of the main reasons I have heard so far are not that good reasons when you think about it. It took some time for us just to realize how to fight lots of cav at higher florins and with 5k that might take some experience too.

And Im willing to get cav rushed just to see it for myself

CBR

[Brutal DLX]

I've never seen a 5k game being hosted in VI. But I would join, just to give it a try.
Those 4v4 on steppe are becoming boring. Maybe they're over more quickly at 5k.

[CBR]

Well we had some nice 5k battles yesterday. I found the 2 3v3 to be very good. I saw lots of cav archers being used and playing in early means a bit shorter battles as you dont have crossbows.

But try to play on other maps than steppe We even have a very good mappack with lots of large maps.

CBR

[Brutal DLX]

Lol. I try to avoid steppe at all costs, but at certain times, those are the only games you'll get. Map packs are nice and well, but they need to be spread which isn't the case currently.
An instant download feature would help, a la Warcraft3, or perhaps declaring one pack the "official" MTW/VI map pack, which then would also be downloadable from .com and maybe even by use of the "check for updates" feature in the MP entry area.

[Louis de la Ferte Ste Colombe]

Yep fun battle at 5K CBR... Actualy I had bad expectation about 3v3 5K and thought 5K would be more appropriate at 1v1, but those games proved me wrong

Was good and enjoyable, I am looking forward the next 5k round. CBR count me in Alioven, I want my head back Congratulation for your good games

Louis the Simurgh,

[Kocmoc]

i said many times 15k is too much but sadly CA did balance the game on that amount of florin

so if we change the florin the game become unbalanced....(lets say, more unbalanced)

i think, that many of the current problems was caused by the first patch, wich improved the cav too much. thatswhy we moved to higher florin to stand a chance vs the cav.
1 more point was, that before the first patch we played without elitecavs. now near all cavs are elite

yes u cant buy so much cav for 5k, but if u bring somewhere 3 knights (v0 ofcourse), this 3 units still spoil it away.
imo the cav and the bugs, makes it impossible to balance that game and bring some normal gameplay.

i think we cant balance it right now, the 15k games (mabye 12k) is the best what we can get with the current gamemecanics. We need major changes to bring this back to a point, where we can again start to work. we moved in a wrong direction and now there is just a way back. We can move forward as this just bring more problems and no general solutions.

all this intentions we got with MTW are nice and for the SP are great but with so many units, unitsizes, bonusses, upgrades, elite-nonelite units.....well its impossible to balance it and we cant change the important mecanics.

we had this point already, i always prefer more fun as historical correct. if both is possible, nice

koc

[shingenmitch2]

CB, Your theory breaks down because of morale.

The problem with 5k is morale of infantry versus the horses, not spears vs. swords.

The spears vs. swords imbalance scales evenly with the money (i.e. the imbalance of sword vs. spear at 15k is same, in relative terms as sw vs. sp at 5k) Because the morale for both scales evenly -- ie. I have v3 swords and v2/3 spears at 15k, at 5k I have v1/2 swords and v1/2 spears.

The imbalance (and where the real difference is felt) is with the Cav. In a 12-15k game you get Cavalry around morale 10 (v0 or v1) and infantry around morale 6-8 (v3), thus they will stand and fight versus a charging cav and not simply flee w/o contact (tho even this does happen occaisionally at this morale level)

In 5k the Cavalry is still up around morale 8-10 ( v0 still) while your infantry is down around 2-4. (v1) unless u can somehow afford elite footies.

What does this mean in game terms? You get infantry of lesser ability that run from horses who are fighting at the same level as they do in 12-15k battles.

This has to make the Cav better in lower florin games. Now if Cav is generally acknowledged as too strong to begin with, the 5k florin game cannot be good for promoting balanced armies.

[CBR]

Yes but there is just one thing you are missing Mitch: amount of cavalry. Playing at 15k you can get 16 heavy knights if you want. You are not going to get that in 5k.

Spears dont have problems with morale fighting cav even in 5k. Its when they are getting flooded by enemy knights they get problems.

A high era 5k game you can get about 4 chiv and 4 feudal knights plus 4 light cav. A 5k balanced army is more like 2 chiv and 2 feudals plus foot. In early era you dont have any crusader knights so feudals is the best you can get. That is a huge difference compared to 12-15k games.

But instead of talking about it, Im more interested in seeing it on the battlefield

CBR

[Puzz3D]

The base difference in morale of units is from 0 to 8 (peasants might be below 0). Contrast that with the 6 to 10 useable morale range for fighting units. In general, units below 6 rout too easily and units above 10 fight too long. You can see the problem is one of trying to center an 8 point unit range over a 4 point functional range. At 15k, valor upgrades are being used to bring units within the 4 point functional morale range. Without upgrades, you might as well elimate most of the units when selecting your army.

All things are not equal when increasing valor. The reason is that the difference in cost of two upgraded units doesn't stay constant. A v0 cmaa costs 250 and a v0 order foot costs 400. The difference is 150. A v3 cmaa costs 1228 and a v3 order foot costs 1965. The difference is 737. The player with the swords picked up 737 - 150 = 587 florins to spend on something else.

The morale level has to be set before any unit balancing can be done. Changing the morale level changes the balance, so the game can only be balanced at one morale level. The +2 morale of VI constitutes a 10% increase to morale. You see the extreme reaction of some players to this 10% increase? See how sensitive the game's balance is to morale? Before the +2, it was said that cav was too strong and spears were too weak. After the +2, it's now being said that 100 man units (spears) are too strong.

The move from 10k to 15k after the v1.1 patch was due to the cost of valor going from 50% to 70%. That's a 40% increase which is close to the 50% florin increase that the extra 5k represents. Playing v1.0 at 10k and v1.1 at 15k is a means of setting the morale to about the same level. Playing VI v2.0 at 15k is partly an attempt to make spears viable because spears did not get an individual cost adjustment back to their v1.0 levels, and everyone who played v1.1 at 25k knows that cav became less effective at +2 morale. It looks like the runthrough bug is less effective at that level as well. So, I don't think playing v1.1 at 15k was too much. If anything, it was slightly too low.

It may be sad that CA balanced the game at 15k, but that's where people were playing, and that's the florin level from which the player feedback came. I don't know how we would generate feedback for a florin level that almost no one played. The all v2 and all v3 games that I hosted a few months ago was an attempt to generate feedback for v1.1 games that simulated 5k battles at +4 and +6 morale, but there was very little interest from players to investigate that and accumulate the necessary experience with it to make balance suggestions. I suggested to LJ making the "morale off" setting a +6 morale in the multiplayer balance thread for VI, since I never see anyone using "morale off", as a last ditch effort to get something we could play at 5k, and nobody here showed any interest. Now a bunch of people are bitching that they can't play the game at low forins. Well tough.

[Magyar Khan]

puzz somethimes u amaze me how u make your conclusions concerning what we write here and how its translated in a patch.
the fact that noone plays morale off doesnt imply that we cant use a better use of the morale off/on option by adding +6 morale.

people started playing at 10k an dlater 15k cuz it "felt" better than playing the current system on 5k. ofcourse another thing comes around as well that people like to buy stuff (upgrades) but the average feeling is teh reason why it changed.

without blunt guessing i can safely say that increasing florins that matches a "feel" will happen faster than lowering florins to match a "feel".

make the morale at 15k +4 and the most will lower the florin amount in a given time (after moaning in here).

but beyond your sharp one-sided diagoneses i am more concerned on how LJ manouvres between what he thinks is good for us, what he reads in here and how he correct things.

[shingenmitch2]

CB

Well I suppose the fact that a person can buy fewer cav. is all good for me, because I never have more than 5-6 anyway... so they just more effective

My thought would be to get 7-8 cav. or so, pump them... buy a bunch of missles and perhaps 3-4 swords just in case. But that just seems like a worse trend to me as I'd like to see armies a bit closer to their historical roots. My guess is that the inf. would be a side show in this and the game won or lost with the cav. primarily -- with the overall feel of the game being a much quicker rush-style - first hit and either u get it right or its over.

Right now in 12K High, on average, I typically see armies with about 5 cav, 4-6 ranged troops and the rest infantry. (weather spear or sword matter little). The foot clash usually determines the game, though flanking cav have a big impact. This seems more like what I would believe was intended for the game.

THAT SAID, I'm willing to give 5k a go and see if my intuition on this is correct

[CBR]

Quote[/b] (shingenmitch2 @ June 02 2003,20:45)]THAT SAID, I'm willing to give 5k a go and see if my intuition on this is correct

And that is really all I want Mitch: To get people to try it out with an open mind to see what the gamesplay is like and find any balance issues.

I will be the first to admit that 5k sucks if it does suck but I just want to see it as I simply dont buy most of the arguments I have heard so far.

I am getting so fed up watching pav crossbows/arbs hold even when getting hit by heavy knights, valour 4 archers that have super morale and damn good melee stats and a complete lack of spears because of upgrades on swords and spears really not needed to defend against cav unless you buy 12+ cav and use thin lines but that is of course cheesy tactics..

I really liked the few battles I had yesterday..they were different and the low morale didnt feel that bad really. But maybe that will be different when someone discovers the perfect super rush army that ruins balance..I dont know... all I know is that so far it looks nice and things have been like I imagined.

CBR

[Kocmoc]

good one puzz

CBR, ur right i agree with u and i would love to see many go back to the 5k games. 1 important point is, the game is very unbalanced with 5k. yes u cant buy many cav, but the cav can easy spoil the a game wit hthe current stats.
u can easy field 4 or 5 knights (v0) and this knights will do a very nice job. compared to the h2h units, this cavs are much more worth the money. we could easy raise the valour of a few units but we are not able to lower the moral of units.

i wised the standart unit would be v1, so we could at least lower 1 valour to get some money and balance some units back.

the current online balance is just about raising valour, if u could lower falour it woudl help. on the other hand, the cav is just to strong, still the cav has to much power especially in low florin games and in later stages of a game.

think about this solution.

back to normal moral
no armour or weapon upgrades
and jsut 1 or max 2 valourup or downgrades
a hard florinamount
and a system wich calculate every battle and change the prize automatical

yes, automatical .....i thought a long time about a system wich would solve the problem

everytime a unit get used the system make this unit more expensiv, just a small piece.....if units dont get used the become cheaper....this system would be very easy and it would automatical calculate the prizes of the units.

after a while the "uberunits" become more expensiv and some wont buy them so much....cheap units reach a prize, where they become used again.

after a while, the system would balance on his own.
just make sure u cant do many upgrades....thats all.

koc

[Puzz3D]

I suggested making morale off be +6 since I had played v3 games. I didn't see any counter suggestions to make it +4 at the time. The debate could have been about +4 or +6 being the better setting. No one tested equal valor games except me. There was practically no interest. Nobody made any suggestions for using the morale on/off, ammo on/off and fatigue on/off options in a different way than they are currently used except me.

[Skomatth]

I did a quick little mod that gives all units 6 morale (what I feel is best for vi) so that you can play low florins but have decent morale. I didn't realize it at first but the +2 morale was so we could play at lower florin level and thus less imbalance. UPGRADES CAUSE IMBALANCE. I'll repeat myself by saying that one combat point results in a difference of about 10 or so men as opposed to when it isnt there. This means the base stats are more balanced to each other except in the case of morale. Since the florins for units are different when the units get upgraded it upsets the balance that was originally intended. See how spears get usually v2 arand swords v3? thats because of a little difference in florin cost. Then when they fight swords cut throught the spears a lot quicker than they were probably meant to, making spears less desireable to take. (Apart from the fact they dont work too well against cav anyway.)

15k is too high to be playing right now. The +2 morale should have been given just to spears and we could have continued to play at 15k. Unfortunately I didn't speak up in the balancing thread. I'm sure others realized it too unfortunately after it was too late. So I guess we'll have to live with units lasting too long in 15k or crappy spears in about 12k. 9k isnt bad if you use ur 15k army and take 1 valour off each unit. Thx yuuki for that calculation.

So I'll continue to be involved with mods (not just mine) and if I'm playing 2.0 it will be just for fun. I don't know how some people praise it so much don't you see when your flank takes so long to work that you might as well engaged frontally? Or all these people who praise their own creativenss. You cant force others to be like you unless it will help them win and you can do that by making the game balanced.

[Puzz3D]

Skomatth,

Actually, LJ said the +2 morale was for people who wanted their units to stick around and fight a little longer. Some players were complaining that all you had to do to win was pile a bunch of units up against the enemy line and it would break or you could often crash a single cav into the line and the enemy would break because the morale bonuses were too big. Raising overall morale makes the morale bonuses effectively smaller.

It's interesting that it didn't result in the majority of players lowering the florins. That +2 morale makes the 15k game more playable when the units are very tired and get hit with -3 morale. With regard to flanking, there is a +5 combat bonus for attacking the flank of a unit, and a +7 combat bonus for attacking the rear of a unit. So, flanking is still important at 15k, but it can take a long time to win. It helps to flank with units that have a high attack value which allows them to win more quickly. What I've never seen discussed on this board is how long a player should have to bring a unit to the assistance of a friendly unit that's loosing. If units are fighting too long at 15k, then how long should they fight?

I would say that you hit it right on the money with the morale = 6. That would put units in VI right in the middle of the range which I think of as the useful morale range. However, you are going to meet with opposition from players who want less fighting and more routing. A morale 6 order foot will fight for a long time which is fine with me. Since spears are the defensive unit in this game, they should stand and fight for a long time, otherwise, they aren't a very good defensive unit.

[baz]

Quote[/b] ]Puzz3D Posted on June 03 2003,00:53
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Skomatth,

Actually, LJ said the +2 morale was for people who wanted their units to stick around and fight a little longer. Some players were complaining that all you had to do to win was pile a bunch of units up against the enemy line and it would break or you could often crash a single cav into the line and the enemy would break because the morale bonuses were too big. Raising overall morale makes the morale bonuses effectively smaller.

Quote[/b] ]Puzz3D Posted: Feb. 06 2003,21:57

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sounds good LongJohn. I think the +2 morale will allow 10k florin/player games where morale factors and kills are of about equal importance, and flanking is a very strong tactical element. Playing at this level will also remove the prospect of ranged units becoming the equal of non-ranged units in hth ability by way of their discounted upgrades. Thanks for compromising on this point.

sorry but if im not wrong it appears you have changed your stance yuuki? if you truely beleive the stats 2.0 should be played at 15k then i really dont understand why you played MTW at 15k

the morale on/off setting would of been a good solution, which i beleive CBR mentions first in the VI balancing thread, it is a shame that LJ could not implement this feature. I would reconmend playing skos mod as it is looking very nice, i will upload as soon as its 100% complete ..currently 90% ..

[baz]

IF there is a patch i say we all lobby for the incresed (+4 now??) morale option when the morale setting is turned off can we plaese all stick together on this point we have nothing to loose

[CBR]

Kocmoc: In the balanced armies I have used so far I have 4 v0 knights and I really expect a balanced army to have that amount of knights. 4 feduals in early, 2 feudals/2 chiv knights in high.

If I want I could replace 2 feudal knights and buy mounted sergeants instead and gain 500 florins...and 500 florins is a lot in 5k battles.. I can turn my spears into mostly italian/order foot.

We had a 4v4 yesterday with one guy complaining that rushing was too good in 5k games(after he made a blunder and opened up for enemy cav by moving his spears)

But with an army of: 1 feudal knight(v2), 5 highland clansmen(v1), 4 longbows, 4 roundshield spears(v1) and 2 pav crossbows he already had problems from the start. If you dont want much cav you need more spears and/or play more defensively and you really have to be think more about your upgrades. But its easier to blame it on the 5k and the resulting lower morale.

CBR

[Puzz3D]

Baz,

CBR did post first about the +6 morale for the morale off option. He was one of the players who participated in the all v3 games, and he had made a stat prior to that where all units had +6 morale. I know he and I had discussions about raising morale and by how much, but, you're right, CBR did post first.

The suggested +6 morale for the MTW v1.1 morale off option was a compromise in my mind rather than an optimal value. It didn't remove really high morale games (15K + morale off), but gave you something that was non-cav dominated at 5k, and really low morale games were preserved if you played at 5K + morale on. We saw an improved gameplay in the MTW v1.1 all v3 battles (effective +6 morale) in the sense that cav didn't dominate. You couldn't buy a lot of cav because it was too expensive at v3, and you weren't likely to get any battlefield upgrades at v3. However, the gameplay is more sensitive to morale than I thought a month ago. The objection has been raised that units fight too long, and you can see that +6 is going to boost a knight up to a morale of 14 which is very high. Also, playing at all v3 effectively lowered the cost of ranged units relative to hth units which is an effect you don't get in a true 5k battle. We did play some all v2 games in MTW v1.1, but I can't remember what if any conclusions we came to about them. I think VI v2.0 at +2 morale (that's equivalent to MTW v1.1 at +4 morale) is worth further investigation. You can simulate this by playing all v1 games in VI v2.0 and make the florins 5k x 1.7 = 8.5k. It seems clear that neither setting is going to solve all the problems. A global adjustment to morale trades off one set of problems for another which can really only be addressed properly by individual unit adjustments.

I posted that the +2 morale would allow 10k games, but that was before I played it, and before I knew the spears didn't get any adjustment. It does take the edge of the ranged unit discounts, but overall 10k seems less balanced than 15k.

I haven't said VI should be played at 15k. I said somewhere between 10k and 15k, and that I was leaning toward the upper end of that range after I tried 10k, 12k, 12.5k, 13k and 15k. It plays fine for me at 12k, if I don't use spears. I played MTW v1.1 at 15k because that's where most were playing it. I tried playing MTW v1.1 at 12k, but didn't care for it. I was allied with CBR in a 4v4 VI v2.0 10k game where he took his 12 cav army and routed a player very quickly. This has nothing to do with battlefield upgrades. It was the same strategy that we used successfully in many MTW v1.1 15k games. That 12 cav army doesn't work as well in VI v2.0 15k because the infantry do not run away so easily. The majority feeling on this board was that cav was too strong in MTW v1.1 at 15k. My position was that you could defend against cav heavy armies with a balanced anti-cav inf army in v1.1 15k, but it wasn't easy. It seems to me that the majority want the cav toned down from MTW v1.1 15k levels, and playing VI v2.0 between 12k and 15k does that, but in some situations units can fight for a very long time.

[Skomatth]

Problem with +6 morale off is that cav are going to be much higher than everything else. I think that there should be no upgrades that effect melee stats and the host should be able to pick the morale level instead of the florin level. Like people who like 15k could host 8 base morale games (archers lower) and people 9k 6 morale. Making morale standard would make spears better and cav not so good.

[Puzz3D]

Skomatth,

I was editing my post concerning that issue with the +6 when you posted, and we see the same problem. It's an issue, but, at the same time, I see cav and foot knights routing in VI v2.0 at 15k (effective +6 morale over MTW v1.1 5k). It's not easy to rout them, but it's easier than routing a pumped handgunner in MTW v1.1 15k.