The Infamous Cav Spam"

[Monarch]

Lol, recently played with this guy that "spammed" an entire army of cavalry, but my five units (more than id usually use myself, but it was no rules so...:P) managed to hold the mass Samartian and warlords, my inf reinforced the lines. There is a great bit where my thin line of clibs is holding this Hhuge onslaught back. Just thought I'd share the replay :P

http://h1.ripway.com/cavspamlol/RomeTW-BI2006-03-2015-56-36-15.bmp

[cannon_fodder]

Wow, funky. That screenshots looks like (ignoring the graphics) it's from one of the old TW games, where the fights were basically meat grinders into which many units fought until almost destroyed. I wish I could watch the replay, but I don't have BI. So... who won?

[Avicenna]

Wow.. seems Cannae-like. They are in a bowl shape and your infantry fit in, while some other units are coming round the back to destroy yours.

[Wishazu]

i cant see the screenshot...

[x-dANGEr]

Neither can I..

[Rodion Romanovich]

Neither can I ~:(

[Monarch]

Hmm weird. Well anyway check my xfire (link in sig), I have it uploaded in my profile.

[BHCWarman88]

I fought a guy who got all Cav, well, 14 or 15 Cav and 5 or 6 Berserkes (it was RTW,he had Germania) and I fought my clan mate,who was roman,first..

my eles were Tired, Barley Enough Spearmen and Leginoares, but I fought the spam army off

with 1515 kills :-) :-)

[Dutch_guy]

I remember one battle against a spammer ...

I played the Julii - this was pre BI - and was facing a Carthage Elephant spammer, every unit - including his general - was an elephant unit, war elephant mind you.

As I like balanced armies, I thought I had absolutely no chance of winning, however I did win...

I had brought 1 unit of flaming pigs to the battle, knowing that a carthage player might deploy 1 maybe 2 elephant units.

I sent my pig unit towards the lead elephant and set the pigs alight - every single elephant unit routed and died.

What did I learn ? Never play games which give players more than 12 K denarii...

:balloon2:

[Monarch]

What did I learn ? Never play games which give players more than 12 K denarii...

:balloon2:

Yay for lower money battles!

[BHCWarman88]

12.5K is nothing


what units can you get?? good units?? not Much,on RTW,a few urbans,but you have to settle for Weaker Armies,and/Or 18 unit Armies cuz you can't get full 20 unit cuz of 12.5K


I play 25K+ and they Much Better, you Put the Money where you Need in

I played a FFA with my clan Mates, and one of them did Farily Well as Chargte, Deafeting my Clan mate who was Egypt, and Almost beating me, I was Seleciud, on a Really hilly BI Map called
Warman Death Field

[x-dANGEr]

Ehmm.. You surely don't need to get the elite of everything..I'm acutally thinking of a new rule saying no units that cost more than 600 (Just to see some use of Hesitati) with 7.5k..

P.S. Dutch Guy: Are you the same as Dutch_Maniak or you are someone else ?

[BHCWarman88]

7.5K is really Crap, I rather play 15K then that..

I am starting to find some Fun in 15K, 15K is good, you get a few upgrades,can't get much eles or so, but you could get a good army Without spamming and without me B.S.ing about 12.5K and without you guys B.S.ing about 88K (which is still better)

now,lets talk about maps....

lol

[Monarch]

7.5K is really Crap, I rather play 15K then that..

I am starting to find some Fun in 15K, 15K is good, you get a few upgrades,can't get much eles or so, but you could get a good army Without spamming and without me B.S.ing about 12.5K and without you guys B.S.ing about 88K (which is still better)

now,lets talk about maps....

lol

Ok I've already put forward my arguments on this in the other thread. Which to be honest is wherewe should be limiting the money debate to.

x-Danger your idea actually seems really interesting and fun to play, but more for 'novelty' value sorta thing, where you could play between clan mates and stuff but for 'competitive' games like in a tournament for instance I still prefer 12.5k where you still can't spam, and you get a few upgrades in but the fun in 'what to choose' is still there.

Oh and also Roman units are very expensive, for good reason as they are top quality. Which means you get next to no upgrades installing balance into the game. Barb factions still have ok units, and axemen to kill romans as they are good vs armour but with the rule set I play I can't have all my inf as axemen as it would break rules, but you can upgrade them much more than roman factions, especially the ERE.

[Dutch_guy]

Ehmm.. You surely don't need to get the elite of everything..I'm acutally thinking of a new rule saying no units that cost more than 600 (Just to see some use of Hesitati) with 7.5k..

P.S. Dutch Guy: Are you the same as Dutch_Maniak or you are someone else ?

No my on line name I used is very different from my name here, that said I haven't played online for about a half year !

Your rule sounds interesting though, would also like to see some more variation / low tier units in MP.

Would make for osme interesting tactics with your not to hard to rout units !

:balloon2:

[x-dANGEr]

The rule is surely for fun.. We play the game for fun anuway. Just like games with max 2.. (Acutally, I remember playing a game for the 1st GS spot 1 year ago vs a Wolf.. One of the rules was max 3) (So they can still be serious sometimes)

[BHCWarman88]

7.5K and 12.5K aren't really good


I remember this well

Last December of 04/January of 05, I started RTW online, so 15K flatland,No Ele,No Art, and sometimes No Fire, was the Rules at that time..

I gladly use those rules, belvie it or not,since now I am against them
so, then,1 or 2 months later, in Ferbrauy/March sometime, Some of the Eitle Players from Hell and Wolf etc.... Refuse to play me cuz 12.5K was the "new" money. of course, it was like, 200 RTW players .vs. the Few ppl who was still with 15K, so I ended up starting to play 88K and never play it again unless I Had to, untill now..

[Monarch]

7.5K and 12.5K aren't really good


I remember this well

Last December of 04/January of 05, I started RTW online, so 15K flatland,No Ele,No Art, and sometimes No Fire, was the Rules at that time..

I gladly use those rules, belvie it or not,since now I am against them
so, then,1 or 2 months later, in Ferbrauy/March sometime, Some of the Eitle Players from Hell and Wolf etc.... Refuse to play me cuz 12.5K was the "new" money. of course, it was like, 200 RTW players .vs. the Few ppl who was still with 15K, so I ended up starting to play 88K and never play it again unless I Had to, untill now..

One thing I don't underdstand is wharts's the difference between 88k and 10000000k (unlimited)? You can pick any army with full upgrades with 88k so why did you choose '88k', why not just call it unlimited as that's what it is...

[x-dANGEr]

I think he has some army set-up that exactly takes 88k..

I remember the starting 'most' exciting games in MP.. The 'No Rules' rule. It was awesome, you could pick art, make phalanx boxes, pick full skirmish armies and so on..

[Monarch]

I think he has some army set-up that exactly takes 88k..
.

Oh yeah that would make sense.
:shame:

[BHCWarman88]

No, I got a Army setup of 69700K


Well, to Me

my Opion, which all of you know, is that I hate 12.5K and lower,Period..

how can we or I,in this case, handle it??


How about, The Host Make the Rules of His/Her Game??
Why should some people in CWC/CWB/TWPL (No Offense,cuz my clan BHC is in CWC and CWB) make other Hosts use CWB rules isntead of the rules they want?? but then again,it won't work,cuz everyone would use 12.5K anyhow..

[AquaLurker]

Because the game itself is flawed in terms of unit balance and cost, if you look at the RTW itself, Rome is overpowered and even more so in high denarri games that offer almost endless cash or around 30000 or more. Players either use urban cohort rush or preatorian cav rush which is pretty much effective against most faction. In BI East and west rome will definately dominate in such high denarii game.

12.5k~15k offer a different tactical approach, the player may be force to adopt a different config of his army to ensure the overall effectiveness of his army to as many difference circumstances as the player can imagine, sometimes strong in range, at times mobility, melee or balance. It also encourage players to alot more different type in units.

TWPL rules and the likes are alittle more restrictive and a little less dynamic when it comes to tactical "creativity", but it offers balance and fairness for players on both side. At the same time it make the player think ahead of their tactical approach, almost like the way we play chess, which can be quite challenging. But it also weaken the strenght of certain factions, example huns and nomardic horse factions.

[x-dANGEr]

Imo the best rules are this: NO rules and 10k..

[BHCWarman88]

Hey


Cavarly was Over Powerd 2000 Years Ago Aslo, so is it in Game, so it like, just fight them, playing 12.5K cuz you too worry to fight 30K games and get a "Dishonorable" name is stupid..

[Monarch]

Hey


Cavarly was Over Powerd 2000 Years Ago Aslo, so is it in Game, so it like, just fight them, playing 12.5K cuz you too worry to fight 30K games and get a "Dishonorable" name is stupid..

Also by overpowered it is my understand that this means to be upset the balance of the game or to be much more powerful than they where in real life. Now correct me if I'm wrong but if I'm right then technically nothing historically speaking can be 'over powered'

[x-dANGEr]

Monarch, stop putting him off with good arguments :P

I understand Rome is around 2000 years ago.. That's right I think. Because it is in the era when pagenisim was spread, and Jesus' birth was 2000 years ago..

It's right that Cavary WAS stronger than infantry at that era. So I think they aren't over-powered in the game.

[NihilisticCow]

For the Romans though, wasn't their infantry the strong part of their army in the earlier period covered by RTW?

I don't though think cav spamming is that infamous in game anymore though, as spears are now vaguely effective against cavalry, unlike in 1.2. I mainly play BI these days though, so I've limited exposure of post 1.2 RTW. I do know that the old fashioned melee cav spam doesn't really work in BI. Ironic for a period historically dominated by cavalry though. ~;)

[BHCWarman88]

It's right that Cavary WAS stronger than infantry at that era. So I think they aren't over-powered in the game.

Extacly Monarch

so I hate when people Whine "oh, Cav is overpowerd,we must use 6 cav max and if not,we might lose to a all cavarly"

Cav Was overpowerd in real life, and if it wasn't, Prove it,Monarch..



Aslo, I had 800 Spears today, and I got kill by a Full army of Cav, and he only flank me with 1 unit..

[hellenes]

Extacly Monarch

so I hate when people Whine "oh, Cav is overpowerd,we must use 6 cav max and if not,we might lose to a all cavarly"

Cav Was overpowerd in real life, and if it wasn't, Prove it,Monarch..



Aslo, I had 800 Spears today, and I got kill by a Full army of Cav, and he only flank me with 1 unit..

"Praetorian Cavalry"=Fake they were Batavii EXPENSIVE as hell MERCENARY Cavalry.
"Legionary Cavalry"=Fake
"Roman Cavalry"= Fake they has ONLY Equites
So if you live in the Holywood merryland and smoke some pretty weird stuff youll believe that 2000 armoured Roman horsemen stuck in a space of 4x4 meters were the uber killaz of antiquity...
Without:
SADDLES
STIRRUPS
COUCHED LANCE
Cavalry has NO chance against even merely trained infantry...

Hellenes

[Kralizec]

Lol, indeed Hellenes. A "classic" legion during Augustus' time would field only about 100-200 horsemen, versus about 5000 infantrymen.

The fact that cavalry is both overpowered and to cheap in the game when compared to what we know of history is only touching the tip of the iceberg. It's just a game, so I'll leave it at that, but arguing that stacks with 50% or more cavalry are historicly accurate is just sad :laugh4:


Cavarly was Over Powerd 2000 Years Ago

[Monarch]

Extacly Monarch

so I hate when people Whine "oh, Cav is overpowerd,we must use 6 cav max and if not,we might lose to a all cavarly"

Cav Was overpowerd in real life, and if it wasn't, Prove it,Monarch..



Aslo, I had 800 Spears today, and I got kill by a Full army of Cav, and he only flank me with 1 unit..

Hello,

Not one for ancient history, but I feel Hellenes has pretty much proven cav wern't really used for more than screening and guarding flanks until Medieval era.

But that wasn't my point. Please try to read my posts a little better. My point was you said cavalry was overpowered in real life. To which I responded very basically, nothing can be overpowered in real life. Why? Because it was my understanding that by the word overpowered one would be refering to overpowering a unit, in the game, so it was more powerful than it was in history.

So my point wasn't that cavalry wasn't strong in real life (though as Hellenes has pointed out, cavalry wasn't really very strong until Medieval times) but that something in history cannot be overpowered, it can on only be overpowered in a game.

[x-dANGEr]

Cavalry WAS strong 2k years ago, but yes their weren't armies of it. A single horse would go over 10 men in a single lance charge.

[hellenes]

Cavalry WAS strong 2k years ago, but yes their weren't armies of it. A single horse would go over 10 men in a single lance charge.

Without:
Stirrups?
Saddle?
And its 2274 years ago, no huge Medieval horses that would bite your arm off, NO COUCHED LANCE technique, NO CAVALRY STACKING (this is practically impossible)...
The game has the uber cavalry for ONE SINGLE reason:
DUMBING DOWN for the ignorant masses, to excite and entertain them, the jumping horse animation (that defeats 7 meter long pikes HEAD ON), the HUGE amount of FANTASY Roman cavalry and the total absence of balance prove that.

Hellenes

[x-dANGEr]

I do believe that someone riding a horse would have adventage on someone not. Surely, they wouldn't beat spearmen, but also sure enough they would beat Swordsmen. Their is no cav unit that can beat a phalanx head on in game, I don't know where you see that (It's fixed anyway).

[Puzz3D]

Their is no cav unit that can beat a phalanx head on in game, I don't know where you see that (It's fixed anyway).
Is it really fixed? Warman88 said his 800 spearmen lost to cavalry. I can tell you that in STW, STWmod for MTW/VI and DUXmod for MTW/VI spearmen beat cavalry decisively. In STW, a speaman can beat two cav units which each cost twice as much as the spearman. You can field 8 spearman costing a total of 1600 and beat 16 cav costing 6400 as long as you don't get flanked.

In an RPS system that works you have inexpensive spears that beat cav, medium priced swords that beat the spears and expensive cav that beat the swords. If I take 8 low cost spears, you take medium cost swords to beat them, but I have expensive cav to beat your swords. You can't take cav to beat my cav because you've spent more on your swords than I spent on my spears, so your cav will be weaker. You have to take low cost spears to beat my cav which frees me up to take some medium cost swords to beat your spears. The armies naturally converge to balanced combined arms armies without the need for any rules limiting unit types. If someone takes an unbalanced army, there exists a complementary unbalanced army which defeats it. That sets up a psychological guessing game during army purchase, and, if you guess right a couple of times, your opponent will have to come up with a different army next time.

There is also a second RPS system involving the ranged --> infantry --> cavalry --> ranged. In STW, we had a third RPS system involving cav archers --> yari cav --> heavy cav, but it's less well defined since heavy cav can't catch cav archers and yari cav can catch cav archers. Also, foot ranged units can win a shootout with cav archers.

[Monarch]

Is it really fixed? Warman88 said his 800 spearmen lost to cavalry.

Well with all due respect to Warman I highly doubt that. First of all who in the name of all things holy would choose an 800 spearmen army? I mean you don't know what your enemy will have when you choose your own units...

Also some spear units, in BI at least, are not effective against cavalry according to their unit decriptions when you hover over them when chosing your army. Perhaps Warman had 800 spearmen that arnt actually good against cav lol. Examples include Legio Lanciari (Eastern Rome Unit) and the Frank spearmen unit, which name escapes me.

Also depends on the cavalry, I'm guessing Warman was playing against all cataphract type units, heavily armoured?

[Puzz3D]

Also depends on the cavalry, I'm guessing Warman was playing against all cataphract type units, heavily armoured?
In RTW you need spearmen that are almost equal in cost to the cavalry they beat. This isn't good because cavalry have an advantage in mobility.

All the spearmen should have to do to win is maintain their facing to the cav, but this isn't possible in RTW because a cav unit can circle around a spear unit faster than the spear unit can rotate. In STW and MTW, cavalry couldn't do that so a spear could always maintain its facing to a cav unit. MTW does suffer because spears are too expensive relative to the cav they beat, and the swords are so cheap that upgraded swords beat spear and cav. As a result, spears disappeared from play and what you see are cav/sword armies since the ranged is also weak.

[NihilisticCow]

In RTW you need spearmen that are almost equal in cost to the cavalry they beat. This isn't good because cavalry have an advantage in mobility.


That isn't true in BI though, as spears costing about half as much as cavalry do defeat them. Kind of why BI armies tend to be very infantry heavy when horse archers are restricted.

[BHCWarman88]

Well with all due respect to Warman I highly doubt that. First of all who in the name of all things holy would choose an 800 spearmen army? I mean you don't know what your enemy will have when you choose your own units...



it was a BHC tryout game, I fought this Noob (I really hate noobs, I beat them easy :-) :-) )
who was Germania, after losing my cav,chariots and eles, by beating him, I added up how many spearmen I had left, and I came up with 770-800 guys..

and I told my BHC mate to get all Cav


and No, he wass Scipii

[x-dANGEr]

@Puzz3D: I really agree to what you decribed up their. And I think a unit of triarii can take out 6 units of catas if attacked head on. At least it did in my last MP game, maybe it was upgraded I don't know, but it surely gave me a headache. Though, the RTS system you mentioned should be implented in the next game, at least IMO, because as you said it limits someone choices to only choose balanced armies to have a chance against other balanced ones.

[Puzz3D]

Though, the RTS system you mentioned should be implented in the next game, at least IMO, because as you said it limits someone choices to only choose balanced armies to have a chance against other balanced ones.
You don't want the RPS so strong that a 4x4 army beats all other armies. For example, in STW 4 spears, 4 swords, 4 cav, 4 ranged doesn't beat all cav. You need at least 6 spears to beat all cav, and that prevents the 4x4 army from being the only one you ever see.

[x-dANGEr]

Well, many factors should go into the equasion of course. Like, I do think that a cheap Spearmen unit shouldn't beat 2 cav units.. But maybe an expensive one can. And so on..

[Monarch]

it was a BHC tryout game, I fought this Noob (I really hate noobs, I beat them easy :-) :-) )
who was Germania, after losing my cav,chariots and eles, by beating him, I added up how many spearmen I had left, and I came up with 770-800 guys..

and I told my BHC mate to get all Cav


and No, he wass Scipii

Oh I see where I was getting confused. Just to prevent as much lag as possible leohonorius play all our games with normal unit scaling (although most of us, myself included, can easily run with full settings on large), so a whole army usually comes up to 800 units (usually less)

So when you said you had 800 units of spears I took that to be a whole army. I'm guessing you where on huge/large?

[Puzz3D]

Well, many factors should go into the equasion of course. Like, I do think that a cheap Spearmen unit shouldn't beat 2 cav units.. But maybe an expensive one can. And so on..
Don't forget that cavalry have an advantage in mobility, and that's worth a lot on large open maps. In STWmod for MTW/VI, we have spears costing 400 and they beat cavalry costing 1200 frontally. Before we fully battle tested STWmod for MTW/VI, we had spears with 2 melee + 8 anti-cav bonus = 10 combat points. The heavy cavalry has 8 melee combat points, so the spears have a 2 point advantage in that matchup, since charge is cancelled by a spear, which is approximately a 40% combat advantage in the MTW/VI engine. A 40% advantage will give you a win about 90% of the time often with considerable losses to the winning unit (I'll look for my test results on this later.). There is another cavalry unit, naginata cav, with 6 combat points priced at 900. The spears have a 4 combat point advantage in that matchup which is approximately an 88% combat advantage which should produce a win every time.

In the ensuing battle tests in team games with players who knew how to use massed cav attacks and players who knew how to defend with spears, the spears couldn't hold against a frontal attack by massed cav. The spears have their lower morale and lower mobility (1/2 the speed of cav) working against them. Based on these tests, the anti-cav bonus of spears was increased to 10 combat points, and only then did the spears hold. We didn't want to solve this problem by increasing the morale of spears because that would reduce the ability of cav to rout them with a flank attack.

So I agree with you that there are many factors that go into determining what is "balanced" in terms of gameplay. You have to do battle testing and modify the unit stats based on the test results. It's an iterative process that will converge to a solution given enough iterations. In STWmod for MTW/VI, we had a good starting point by using the original STW stats. With only 15 units types, it still required 10 iterations of battle tests by highly skilled, veteran players to get the gameplay up to the level where the tactical play blossomed. You don't get this blossoming of the tactical play until the stat is very well balanced.

[x-dANGEr]

But wouldn't it better to keep the +8 bonus, but also make the depth of the unit matter? So if the unit is spread wide, no wonder it won't hold for a massed cav charge. But if it is fully squeezed, it should hold one I think.

Today, I tested triarii and cav on R: TW. I had a Praetorian cav unit charge a trairii one head one, while the triarii unit is braced. The fight ended with the trairii winning and having 25 men left (25/41). I did another one, but in that one, triarii was charging and cav counter-charging. Triarii won but had 30 men (30/41). Now, I understand through what you've written, that their are random factors in the procces of who wins and who loses. So, does the above 2 results confirm/proove a thing or I should it over and over till I get some percentage?

[BHCWarman88]

Monarch,

I play Large. More Bodies,the better,lol.