Lame cav tactic being employed

[Rowan11088]

I'm setting up to play MP for the first time soon, and kinda looking forward to figuring out a way to beat up a cav blob :) I would say, from my admittedly less experienced viewpoint, that the key is having a few very strong defensive units to take the charge, and as long as you can hold the cav blob for a little while, flanking will destroy them (since more massed cav means more kills per second for flankers, and no worries about defending against additional units). Maybe an infantry blob is the answer in defense? Maybe not quite in the same unit space, but partially overlapping, so the front is wide enough to avoid flanking? Then flank with a phalanx, if you have enough time, cav if you don't, and watch 'em squirm :) In my experience with cav, they really lose their manueverability advantage once the first charge hits home, especially if there are tons of them all together getting in the way of each other, so I would expect even if your front breaks they won't be able to turn around/escape through the hole.

[Imorthorn]

to prevent cav spamming in most of our games our clan restrict cav to a max of 10 units, even if they are a cav based civ (you really dont need anymore if you know what you are doing) people moan of coarse this is why i then pick a cav based civ and only use 10 units of cav mixed with a few archers and throw away inf, and give them a sound whooping

(i dont want to offend anyone but i beleave anyone who needs to use 20 units of cav to win a battle, dont deserve to play the game)

[Puzz3D]

i then pick a cav based civ and only use 10 units of cav mixed with a few archers and throw away inf, and give them a sound whooping

You shouldn't be able to win that way. It demonstrates how unbalanced the game is. No infantry, and you are going around whooping people.

[Loinnreach]

This is one of few ways to win overpowered cavalry spam army Yuki.

For example MTW had different problems, which people like to exploit right? It is always something.

I hope that this BI expansion pack will be good. If not, this will be the last product I will bought from CA and I'm not the only one who will react like this.

There is many companies, issuing patches almost every day to improve game problems their customers have.

I simply can't understand why someone has policy for one patch only, etc.

I don't won't to criticize, but this is the normal sense of marketing. If you won't to be good you need to do almost everything for the customer.

I apologyze for going off topic, but this I had to mention.

VorCid

[Puzz3D]

For example MTW had different problems, which people like to exploit right? It is always something.

True, but there are qualitative differences in how good or bad something is. You can show by objective measurment that the RTW gameplay is less balanced than MTW. Without upgrading units you can demonstrate that cav beats phalanx frontally. That didn't happen in MTW. What happened to the rock, paper, scissors in RTW?

Also, you have 25% more units to control and they move 50% faster in RTW. That doesn't improve the gameplay if tactical maneuver of all the units in the army in a coordinated manner according to a strategic plan is supposed to be the method of achieving victory.

[R'as al Ghul]

I think it's interesting to note that there're obviously two kinds of players.

The first kind is happy to play a game just because it's new and shiny.
The don't want a "realistic" representation of ancient battles, they want quick fun.
Having to learn a game, let alone tactics is asking too much of these with too short attention spans.
But, they apparently rule the fields of MP with ridiculous "blobs" or "swarms".

The second type bought this game because he enjoyed the other Total War games
and is expecting similar gameplay, including a representation of ancient warfare.
These players expect minor bugs and glitches, yes, but certainly are not prepared to
face "blob"-armies.

For these two type of players it's absolutely pointless and time-wasting to even
consider to play against each other.
Therefore, I say that a mod doesn't need to be for all players.
If you could make a mod known to a small community that plays regularly
it would be good start. Other players would then recognize that there are
games played they can't join and would download a mod if they are intersted
to join those games.
Those that aren't interested can play vanilla,
while those that want a different gameplay play the mod.
The community will be splitted but that seems the case already?

I'm just offering my opinion here. Keep in mind that I haven't played a single game
of R:TW Multiplayer.

[Puzz3D]

If you could make a mod known to a small community that plays regularly
it would be good start.

There are easily exploitable characteristics in the RTW battle engine that cannot be corrected with a mod. Since CA is stonewalling on these gameplay issues, I see no reason for optimism concerning improved gameplay in the add-on.

[Imorthorn]

You shouldn't be able to win that way. It demonstrates how unbalanced the game is. No infantry, and you are going around whooping people.

what I ment by "throw away" was i would use hillmen or some other cheap form of infrantry

sorry for any confussion

[Orda Khan]

People are trying to make out that MTW was a wonderful MP experience. This was not so, there were bugs in MTW too.

....and lest we forget....Spear units were pathetic

......Orda

[Orda Khan]

Imorthorn, the tactic you describe is a Cav Spam army and you have CoH in your signature??

.....Orda

[Mongoose]

OMGZ1!!!!1!! I OWND U WIT TEH CAV ARMIEEE11!!!11!!!!!111! I HVE TRAINER!!111!1 YOu SuXORRRzzzZ!!111!!!!!!!!!!!111!!


What's the point, if you want to win 100% of your battles why not play against the AI?

[NihilisticCow]

How else exactly can people play as Parthia for example, without taking a force consisting of considerable cavalry numbers? The infantry that you take is not expected to kill that many, but to just bog down your enemy. So they will be just "throw away" units. A cavalry spam army is more an army consisting primarily of melee cavalry units, not just cavalry in general for cavalry factions. This does depend on how the missile cavalry is used though.

I regard these kind of mixed melee and missile cavalry armies with a concrete infantry component as perfectly within the CoH as they are playing an army that would correspond with a faction's expected army. It would be unfair to state that people cannot use horse archers because they are cavalry so would make the player a cavalry spammer.

The rules I like to play are a limit of 5 maximum melee cavalry and 5 max missile cavalry, which I think allows for this opportunity while limiting spamming as much as possible (though it can be abused).

[Loinnreach]

There are easily exploitable characteristics in the RTW battle engine that cannot be corrected with a mod.

I can't agree becaus Adherbal is doing a great job with Chivalry TW mod for RTW. This mod will be enjoyable to play and I do belive that MTW/VI and even STW players will be statisfied with it, when they will try it.

Imagine. All those 550 signatures raised for the petition. If all those people would simply install this mod, we have community as many would like to see.
This will never happen thought.

I would be glad if at least majority who don't play RTW, would try Chivalry TW mod on it. You will not be dissapointed.

There is also one more mod with shogun theme in development. There is quit few possibilities, but people are tired of TW. Some are too lazy and even if one their reaction might change something, this is simply too much for them.

I'm looking foward for Chivalry TW mod second era.

[Mongoose]

Me too. Look's good so far

[NihilisticCow]

Are there actually many people now playing the Chivalry mod online? I installed it a while a go, but never actually found anyone to play it against, so eventually uninstalled it again....

[Lord Adherbal]

no, we currently organise games through the forum or MSN. There was quite some activity the first 3-4 days after the release of last beta, but it didn't sustain. There are currently about 8 people playing the mod frequently, which definitly helps improving the balance though.

I hope that with the next beta - which will be huge and finally include a working SP campaign - it'll attract enough people to get games going for atleast a week or two. All we need is a couple of people playing so that when new players look for a game online then can find one easily. If they don't then they will probably not try again, which will mean the community will diminish again.

If only there was a way to convince everyone who was slightly/very disappointed in RTW to give this mod a try for atleast a couple of days after next beta release...
We'd have a MP TW game that is controlled by the MP community itself for the first time (next to the Samurai Mod, but I fear the time of the MTW engine is over for a lot of us)

PS: If anyone wants a game of ChivTW add adherbal_barca@hotmail.com to you MSN contacts and just ask.

PPS: latest screenshots

[Imorthorn]

Imorthorn, the tactic you describe is a Cav Spam army and you have CoH in your signature??

.....Orda

That is a bit unfair for you to to claim that, maybe i didnt explain it clearly enough, just read what NiNilist says he explains it better then i could

How else exactly can people play as Parthia for example, without taking a force consisting of considerable cavalry numbers? The infantry that you take is not expected to kill that many, but to just bog down your enemy. So they will be just "throw away" units. A cavalry spam army is more an army consisting primarily of melee cavalry units, not just cavalry in general for cavalry factions. This does depend on how the missile cavalry is used though.

I regard these kind of mixed melee and missile cavalry armies with a concrete infantry component as perfectly within the CoH as they are playing an army that would correspond with a faction's expected army. It would be unfair to state that people cannot use horse archers because they are cavalry so would make the player a cavalry spammer.