Available units for each factions

[Louis de la Ferte Ste Colombe]

http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wave.gif

Maybe that shall be posted in VI forum. A simple post to express my confusion regarding units availability in some armies for MP.

I wonder how many Alan cav units were really part of any English, Spanish or other western cath faction?
I think Alan cav shall be available only for Byz. This would make fast light cav more attractive for Turk, Russian, etc as western armies would not have any reliable light cav without Alan.

On the other hand, I would not mind seeing swiss pike or SAP available for France, HRE and Italy.

Highland clansmen shall be available for England (and France?).

I am getting somehow tired of Order inf and Crusader knight in Early armies. That makes all western early kind of blend of a crusader army. I would like to see those taxed if more than 2 instead of 4.

All that would create more armies diversity.

What else? Any idea guys?

Louis,

[LadyAnn]

Louis, agree with most of your points, especially the crusader units in early period.

Actually, crusaders should always field units that are as good as the best available in the era, but not better. So it is an aberration that the crusaders could have knights but his king can't hire any.

However, I don't think tax at max-2 will help, nor SAP available to France or Italy is a good thing. Perhaps France should get good knights...

Annie

[Kongamato]

Every faction needs a fast cav unit. AMC provide the factions with a vanilla fast cav unit. The Alans are supposedly mercenaries - historically available but not always used. I support the addition of more unique fast cav units that are superior to Alans, so one could be directed to a certain faction should their style require fast cav.

Crusader Knights are being moved to the High period in VI. I think that Order Foot should stay in all periods as a high-end spear unit.

[Louis de la Ferte Ste Colombe]

Kongamato,

Every faction needs a fast cav, or need to find an answer to fast cav.

After all Turks don't have pav arbs.
I think not having AMC would make the game more challenging for western armies, and would also make some eastern light cav units more valuable (steppe cav, turco horse...).

Up to western general to find an answer to this problem with their available units (Hobilar? Jinetes?).

I think it would be tough to improve other light cav, without bumping into heavy cav units.

Louis,

[Kongamato]

I am for improving the faction-specific fast cav units so as to make AMC the weakest, or least economically feasible option of fast cav, like Spearmen for spears etc. This may have to involve weakening AMC as well. And also, this would not make the light cav just as strong as HC, as they must have less armor and a charge that maxes out at 6(no lances or momentum). LC needs to be Faster than HC, less armored than HC, less disciplined than HC, and most of all, have weaker defense than HC. LC needs a high attack, weak defense, and weak charge.

[ErikJansen]

I'm an Alan addict and admit that I always bring at least 2 of these to the field no matter what faction I play.

However I do agree with Louis in his observation. Either limit the Alans or create better fast cav for the specific eastern factions.

Very interesting idea, but one I fear will pass by unnoticed by the devs.

Regards,

[Kongamato]

Well, the new Hungarian faction gets a cav unit called the Szekely. It will definitely be eastern-influenced.

[Aelwyn]

Alans don't really bother me at all, they're not a unit that really changes how a battle is fought, not too much anyways.

Pavise Arbs however, do. They annoy me in that if you don't bring them you either have to rush, skirmish far too much, or basically bring crossbows spread out and play the missle battle defensively. Of course this doesn't apply in desert games really, or early. I just get tired of the same 10 minute arb battle at the beginning of most battles. I get tired of seeing the same people rush my arbs (I know you're coming for them http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/tongue.gif ) so lately I've taken to bringing at least a unit of archers, usually Longbowmen, to put right behind my front line, so I can continue to fire on these cavs as they come in, hopefully to take out more than I would just by rushing them with my own cavs.

[ErikJansen]

I get where Louis comes from regarding Alans as we've shared many a battle working together as the Turks. The PavArb/Alan combination makes it almost impossible for the Turcoman to operate and harass. Then you look at the Heavy Chiv Knight/Teutonics etc and Alan combination. Its lethal.

So I have to disagree most humbly, Aelwyn, but Alans actually dictate a lot of the aggressive tactics Cav heavy western armies use. They influence a lot.

Pavs influence even more, agreed, but the time spent exchanging arb rounds can be wisely spent manuevering your forces either defensively or offensively. That said I'm not very fond of Pavs and will kill them on sight http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

[Kongamato]

We all need to try to develop better tactics that work along with arb fire. Sitting there duking it out is unentertaining and tactically unfeasable. Make battle stage 1 more interesting by finding ways to destroy enemy cavalry and infantry with your arbs.

May I suggest:

Expendable inf attack http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif (Remember though, Thing Warfare rarely works http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif)
I employ an expendable inf unit, a thin line of Fanatics. I think cav is too valuable to send head-on at the enemy arbs, so I send the crazies at one end of the enemy arb wall first. They can draw out cavalry, which will rout them, but this tends to have the enemy counterattack straight into a timed volley(the arb move I described in another thread). It also gives you a chance to advance one end of the wall, which will result in more powerful shots with a free volley at regrouped arbs. If not countered, the expendables will take out the arbs quite quickly. If you play Turks, you also could employ a few units of Ghazi inf to do the same thing to the entire arb wall. This opens up the possiblity for a massive pre-rush arrow shower during the window provided by the Ghazis' melee with the arbs or countering forces. Hopefully the routing Ghazi will have less effect on your forces than your men's arrows will on the enemy.

[ErikJansen]

Yep Kongamato, we need to work at finding better tactics vs PavArbs than just another set of PavArbs.

Believe me when I say that during the four months I played Turks exclusively I tried most anything. Very often with good results as well, but a lot of this is stressful work and the often intricate moves needed to do it successfully are high risk. Like for example the Hashishin ambush and followup push which brings your 6+ missile units into range. Its risky and hard to pull off. You often have to coordinate both cav, hashishin and inf just right. But if it works it is beautiful. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif

Oh and just to prove im not couping the thread, I'm thinking that Alans are the no.1 used anti-pav weapon and relieving western factions of them would further promote those silly arb exchanges... hrm http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif

[7Bear7Polar]

well i agree with most of what yall are saying, but a pavs war can be very useful - ex: in planning a new strategy or for buying time for allies - but other than that they are pretty boring

[tgi01]

Kongamoto :


Quote[/b] ]Well, the new Hungarian faction gets a cav unit called the Szekely. It will definitely be eastern-influenced - Kongamoto

Do you have any more info ?

Szekelys ( pronounce sekel ) were / are extremely tough freemen border guards who did not had to pay taxes to the kings of Hungary in exchange of gurading to borders in the Carpathians. Hope that CA does their homework on them the right way http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

tgi01

[Kongamato]

Well, I think it was mentioned in one post by a CA member.

I cannot find it under search, but be confident as the term "Szekely" would not just magically appear in my head.

[theKyl]

The horses' name is "Alan Mercenary Cavalry".

They are mercenaries and mercenaries fight for those who give them the most money (or in our case 200 florins)

[Louis de la Ferte Ste Colombe]

Kyl,

I was thinking more about gameplay than realism or historical accuracy.

A few units, available in some eras are making some armies 'blend' and are detrimental to army variety; pav arb is one, so are crusader units in early, and also Alan.

Alan available are enough to make life difficult for harassers / HA, etc. The problem is that there are easily available for all factions, making a complete category of troup more or less obsolete.

Louis,

[Aelwyn]

Quote[/b] (Louis de la Ferte Ste Colombe @ Mar. 24 2003,20:56)]Alan available are enough to make life difficult for harassers / HA, etc. The problem is that there are easily available for all factions, making a complete category of troup more or less obsolete.
This all depends really upon how you use them of course. I agree that seeing the same units in every game can get to be quite tedious, but its just kind of the way it is. Horse archers can easily deal with charging Alans. For instance, if an Alan charges you, just bring it back to your line http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif . But of course besides this, bring two Horse Archers. Send one forward, on a flank of course, with the other one a ways behind the first, maybe off to the side a bit. Let the Alan charge the first Horse Archer, then use the other one to cut it down as it charges (and as you quickly withdraw your first H.A.)

So then, your opponent brings two Alans, well good for him. If he's got them on one side its a good idea to be ready for it. You use a Heavier cav on one Alan, then double the other with the two Horse Archers. If done correctly, the Alan will chase the one HA, the other one can be used to attack the rear of that Alan.

Of course this always changes due to the situation, but you get my point. I still stick by my view that Pav. Arbs. dictate how the battle will be played, more than Alans. I do understand your point of view though.

[Louis de la Ferte Ste Colombe]

Aelwyn,

The initial post deals with 3 kinds of unit as examples; pav arb / Alan / crusaders in early.

I agree that pav arb have a most significant impact on the game than Alan or Crusaders.

Alans are a minor annoyance for a specific category of units. Pav arb unit is by itself a whole category.

Part of the solution to this annoyance would be to restrict those units to specific faction / era.

Louis,

[Aelwyn]

True, and I'm glad that this will be changed in VI. I won't really care if Pav. Arbs are only in Late, as most games are either Early or High.