Overhand Spear Cavalry?

[A Terribly Harmful Name]

I think this issue was raised on the Nomad Generals Thread, but why exactly does overhand spear cavalry suck so bad at charging? Also, why would cavalrymen ever use it if they could just carry it underhand for a better effect and negligible differences? In EB, overhand spear cavalry tend to have a very weak charge and fare very badly in melee, whereas even the lightest underhand guys could pack quite a punch in their charge. Yet, a lot of cavalrymen across the map tend to use it, and generally for a detrimental effect since they are expensive and ineffective.

[Maion Maroneios]

I've been wondering this as well myself, as I don't see the reason why a cavalryman would use the overarm grip instead of the much more flexible and less tiresome underhand grip. Plus, as Basileos correctly remarked, the unerhand grip provides a more powerful charge.

Maion

[team_kramnik]

I don't think cavalry can just switch to use their spears underhand. WHat is used underhand are lances. Lances are longer than spears and therefore hit the opposition before the cavalry is in contact an important point of a charge. More "medium range" weapons better compared to pistols of renaissance cavalry while spears are more like long swords used for close combat trusting at opposition left and right of the horse.

[Tyrfingr]

Overhand cavalry uses their spear as a main weapon, where as underhand cavalry charge in with their Xyston/Kontos and then switch to swords (just imagine yourself to fight a battle on horseback with twohanded pole)

[SwissBarbar]

I think, its because the underhand-long-lance-likewise-medieval-knight-attack was used by sarmates hundred of years later as when EB begins, or am i completely wrong? These overhand Spears are simply Spears and not cavallery lances. They are used as if the warrior fought on ground, the only difference is that he's mounted, which means he's faster, heavier and that's why his charge is stronger, but he's not a medieval knight.

I don't know if this is true, at least its the way i explain it to myself. Looking forward to someone expert who can explain it to us.

[Strategos Alexandros]

http://pds10.egloos.com/pds/200810/10/82/e0069582_48eee9ffdbae4.jpg
-A picture depicting the overhand, couched, and underhand spearing techniques-

I don't know how accurate this is, and I know it's medieval.

[Ca Putt]

iirc kontos were already made to be used on horseback tho true whereas one could imagine a foot soldier wielding a kontos but not a medieval lance :D

isn't there some celtic cavalry that uses a rather short spear underhand? correct me if i'm wrong.

[Strategos Alexandros]

Leuce Epos and Brihentin both do. Personally I would say that the Hippeis use an overhand grip because they are, in essence, mounted infantry and Jesus, these christmas cursors are good! I mean.. er... :beam:

[Watchman]

I think IRL most cavalrymen just went between the two as tactical situation demanded - regular spear-type cavalry lances work just fine either way; the late-Medieval heavy European lance was a hyperspecialised "charge impact" weapon and pretty much totally useless for melee - just like infantry, but on the whole the overhand technique seems to have been the one preferred for close melee. Particularly well suited for thrusting down at infantry, one imagines, and seems like the combination of your arm rotating around the shoulder as a lever and the slight assistance given by gravity would make for more powerful thrusts to boot. Plus the grip allows the spear to be thrown without further ado if need be, quite useful given that much of the period cavalry were at least half skirmishers. Heck, until around the mid 11th century AD overhand and throwing was the industry standard of spear use among European knights too...

The underhand grip is conversely good for strong linear thrusts at the charge - not sure if "couching" under the armpit was a viable tactic with period equestrian gear, at least the Hellenistic lancers don't seem to have used it - as you're more or less transmitting the momentum of the horse-rider combination directly behind the tip. Not quite sure if that's a very good grip for melee though, as it'd seem the maneuverability of the long weapon was rather limited by the rider and the horse getting in the way thus rather restricting the angles of attack possible.

Anyway, in game terms this amounts to the underhands being high-impact AP chargers that aren't all that hot for extended melee (the high attack delay they get further emphasises this), and the overhands being basically melee fighters with a moderately high charge value - not as high as the underhands, but markedly better than swords and axes and such get. Strictly speaking the lances shouldn't be getting AP after the charge anymore - no momentum - and most would probably actually switch grips to overhand anyway, but meh, you gotta work within the limitations of the engine.