Favourite Cavalry Units

[Quintus.JC]

Just like to ask what's everyone's fave Cavarly unit. There are many out there. (but consider the recuritment price, upkeep, morale and all the other attributes.......) :idea2:

[Caius]

I personally love the Barbarian bodyguards.

[Charge]

Praetorians are uber ones...Bodyguards just O.O: two times assaulted Arretium with full stack gallic army, and both battles was completely won by 3 roman generals which stood like wall on the street.

[Gaius Scribonius Curio]

I'm a romantic. I prefer Cataphracts.

[Quirinus]

Arr, I personally don't like cataphracts much. Way too slow, in addition to being really high-tier and a b*tch to maintain. I'd take elite infantry over cataphracts any day.


I have two favourite cavalry units-- the basic Horse Archer and the Long Shield Cavalry of Carthage (and Numidia). I like them for two different-- indeed, opposite reasons.

The horse archer unit looks unremarkable, but its sheer killing power from afar is awesome. Aside from having a decent damage stat, the horse archer has loads of ammo. In melee the horse archer will get mowed over by pretty much any other unit, but since they are fast as hell, that isn't usually a problem. Personally, I find it very gratifying to take an infantry army to pieces with minimal or no casualties.

Being fast also has an additional advantage-- they are excellent for running down routing troops.

They are also cheap and low-tier, meaning it's possible to train hordes of these wily bastards.



As for the Long Shield Cavalry unit, I have to say, the main reason I like it is because it looks cool as hell-- everything from the eponymous long shields they carry to their nice helmet decoration to their light-coloured steeds. Also, it's not too shabby in action, especially when up against the Romans' pathetic cavalry.

[Phoenix]

Cataphracts are my favorite since they have AP maces and excellent armor.

[guineawolf]

me too,also favor cataphracts excellent armor and outlook,and gothic cavalry too!!!

I favor gothic cavalry becoz their excellent morale and fighting capability!:2thumbsup:

[mrdun]

I just don't like equites, even with upgrades. PLaying as r=Rome early on I recruit Barbarain cav or just use my generals body guard if none are availiable. Plus I like the valour/ scarred traits the general gets.

[Fate]

I love Numidian cavalry, is it easily the best skirmisher cavalry in game .
And then the Glorious HA's provided by Armenia, they kick ass aswell, and coming in close third is Scythian HA Mercs.

As for Melee Cavalry, im not too sure, long shiled cavalry are pretty damn good, as are cataphracts, but the upkeep is too damned high.

[Omanes Alexandrapolites]

When it comes to cavalry, I find the Armenian Cataphract Archers to be fairly dynamic. Although they don't have exceptionally low purchase costs/upkeep they combine strong abilities in both melee and ranged combat. This removes the weakness of the typical horse archer - once the units arrow's have run out its fairly vulnerable.

Of course, like any Cataphract its fairly slow. This allows certain faster cavalry units to catch it up fairly quickly (although most fast cavalry units are too weak to stand up to its melee blows). It also makes it not quite as well adapted at chasing down routers as other lighter units, which results in other units being required for that purpose.

Sadly one of their key problems is their lack of availability - Armenia only. Pontus and Parthia I think can get their hands on a fairly medium Horse Archer (Persian Cavalry), but it doesn't have the strength and versatility of the powerful Cataphract Archer.

~:)

[Quintus.JC]

recurit horse archers in masses and they'll make it hell for enemy infantry, personally never played Parthia for long but the Hunnic horse archers were really useful. and their cheep cost and upkeep means money won't be a problem.

[Hound of Ulster]

the Parthian combo of Horse Archers and Cataphracts.

weaken the infantry with arrows and disrupt thier formation, then hit the isolated infantry units with the iron fist of the Azadvan.

also effective as the Sassinsids, but with Clibnarii cataphract archers as a bonus.

The Sassinsid general's bodyguards are also superb.

[Quintus.JC]

Armoured Roman Generals and Armoured Eastern Generals are easily the best cavalry in the game.

[_OctavianAugustus_]

Yes, yes Roman Armoured Generals are the best!:whip:
Also Catapracth, Praetorians and in some case Companions...

[Caeser The III]

i like to go with Cataphracts and equites

[Quirinus]

I just don't like equites, even with upgrades. PLaying as r=Rome early on I recruit Barbarain cav or just use my generals body guard if none are availiable. Plus I like the valour/ scarred traits the general gets.
But don't the Barbarian Cav Mercs have even crappier stats than the Roman Equites?

I find Equites to be.... okay, but only as a supplement to the General's Bodyguard.

[mrdun]

But don't the Barbarian Cav Mercs have even crappier stats than the Roman Equites?

I find Equites to be.... okay, but only as a supplement to the General's Bodyguard.


They are better attackers/ more realistic. Equites seem to die rather quickly also IMO

[Quintus.JC]

They are better attackers/ more realistic. Equites seem to die rather quickly also IMO

Clump Equites together in masses and they seems to make fine flankers. early on 3 units of Equites grouped together could rout a unit with 1 single charge.

[Quirinus]

Yah, but then again the same is true for most non-cataphract cavalry anyway.

[Quintus.JC]

cosidering all the attribes Legionary cavalry seems to have a good stats. although the Romans were given too good cavalry, which isn't true compared with history books.

[mrdun]

Is the Thracian bodyguard one of the worst on the game, that isn't reaistic if it is true.

[Charge]

Is the Thracian bodyguard one of the worst on the game, that isn't reaistic if it is true.early is greek bodyguard, that one is of course BS, you surprised? Generals aren't meant to be best cavalry btw, those stupid 2hp is just awful....

[Barbarian]

Heavy cavalry: Roman general's bodyguard. I once routed 1500-2000 gauls with 45 of them.

Light cavalry: Numidian light cavalry/mercenaries. Cheap, fast moving. Their range is not large, but their javelins do good damage, so they can even win horse archers.

[mrdun]

early is greek bodyguard, that one is of course BS, you surprised? Generals aren't meant to be best cavalry btw, those stupid 2hp is just awful....

I did not know that the Greeks bodyguard was the worst, quite suprising.


45 !!! 45! thats a lot of family

[Omanes Alexandrapolites]

Is the Thracian bodyguard one of the worst on the game, that isn't reaistic if it is true.Their bodyguard unit(s) are equal with to those of other Greek nations - "Greek Bodyguard" (pre-marian) and "Armored Greek Bodyguard" (post-marian). I do believe that all pre-marian bodyguards, with the exception of chariot bodyguards/missile cavalry bodyguards, have equal armor, attack and defense skill stats. Likewise, so do post-marian bodyguards.

~:)


****



early is greek bodyguard, that one is of course BS, you surprised? Generals aren't meant to be best cavalry btw, those stupid 2hp is just awful....I'm sorry, yet I have to disagree with that Charge. I find general's bodyguards to be exceptionally good units both on the charge and in prolonged melee combat. Having two hitpoints, when compared with many other units single hitpoint, is one of the key reasons for the units seemingly powerful nature and its survivability in combat. This often results in them being one of the best heavy cavalry units available for many factions, its only weakness being its fairly slow speed (for a cavalry unit) and its low number of containing troops.

~:)

[mrdun]

spartans have two hitpoints don't they?

[Charge]

I'm sorry, yet I have to disagree with that Charge. I find general's bodyguards to be exceptionally good units both on the charge and in prolonged melee combat. Having two hitpoints, when compared with many other units single hitpoint, is one of the key reasons for the units seemingly powerful nature and its survivability in combat. This often results in them being one of the best heavy cavalry units available for many factions, its only weakness being its fairly slow speed (for a cavalry unit) and its low number of containing troops.

~:)
Omanes, I mean generals shouldnt be as a backbone, but they are with vanilla stats. You can freely take 3-4 family members, especially heir or FL, and they will beat quite easily even full stack of low-end to medium infantry, and heal all casualities soon enough - how is that possible in reality? no to mention multiple hp's are unrealistic, having 3hp translates in ability to survive after 2 very powerful javelins throwed right into naked target (multiple hp's and 'berserker' morale (animations) are the things which I hate in EDU)

[GamblerTuba]

Yes, the Spartans have 2 hit points.

My favorite BI cavalry so far are the Clibinarii Imortals (Sassanid Generals) They are amazing for early game units and you just keep getting more and more. It almost seems cheap having a general unit that has a nice ranged attack and devastating melee. They do not have the greatest speed but i try to think of them like elephants or fast infantry instead of cavalry.

[Punicus]

For the money you spend on them in comparison to their effectiveness... I'd go with Long Shield Cavalry. But overall favorite, I have to go with Cataphracts.

[Omanes Alexandrapolites]

Omanes, I mean generals shouldnt be as a backbone, but they are with vanilla stats. You can freely take 3-4 family members, especially heir or FL, and they will beat quite easily even full stack of low-end to medium infantry, and heal all casualities soon enough - how is that possible in reality? no to mention multiple hp's are unrealistic, having 3hp translates in ability to survive after 2 very powerful javelins throwed right into naked target (multiple hp's and 'berserker' morale (animations) are the things which I hate in EDU)Sorry Charge - I completely misunderstood you there :embarassed:

I do understand your point though, and do, in a way, agree with you. Although I can find a certain level of rational in general's units regenerating troops over time, I do feel that they are a little too dominating on the battlefield and probably would have been better to play with toned down by a fairly large amount in all areas.

~:)

[Caeser The III]

:2thumbsup:

[Quintus.JC]

Cataphracts are a bit slow compared to other cavalry.

[Quintus.JC]

Just by looking at the stats ain't Gothic Cavalry meant to be the best cavalry in the game, they have a better attack than Companion and a higher defence than Sacred band.

[mrdun]

Plus they are faster than eastern heavy cav

[Omanes Alexandrapolites]

Just by looking at the stats ain't Gothic Cavalry meant to be the best cavalry in the game, they have a better attack than Companion and a higher defence than Sacred band.I do believe that they are one of the best, and could be compared to a trainable Late Germanic General's Bodyguard without two hit points. Some cavalry units do beat them on certain stats though (Cataphracts, for example, are much better armored).

~:)

[Quintus.JC]

ain't the Gauls meant to have better cavalry than the Germans and the Romans, historically.

[Charge]

Definitely not better than german. Romans used later germanic/other cavalry as mercenaries - what they cant do in game so everything is ok.

[Caeser The III]

germans definetly have good calvary:yes:

[Hannibalbarc]

Greetings to all, this is my first post.
Roundshield cavalry, just spam these little buggers early on in a campaign and you'll be suprised what they can do, plus there are also the cheapest cavalry.
My favorite elite cavalry is sb because they look awsome and they are carthaginian.

[Caeser The III]

~:wave: once again welcome hannibal:2thumbsup:

[Spartan198]

I'm a horrible economist,so I use the money cheat to bypass the cost thing. :embarassed: But my absolute favorite cav units would have to be Companions,Legionary Cavalry,and Sacred Band in Rome;Scholae Palatinae and Sarmatian Virgins in Barbarian Invasion;and the Royal Squadron and Alexander's Companions in Alexander.

[Quirinus]

Greetings to all, this is my first post.
Roundshield cavalry, just spam these little buggers early on in a campaign and you'll be suprised what they can do, plus there are also the cheapest cavalry.
My favorite elite cavalry is sb because they look awsome and they are carthaginian.
My brother! Tee hee, Carthagenian cavalry rocks my socks too. I'm a sucker for Long Shields.

By the way, welcome to the Guild!

[mrdun]

II looked into the equites vs Barb merc Cav and found that barb have a higher attack/ charge bonus, I think by 3/4 but equites have a +2 defence over them. So barb are better, i think.

[Quintus.JC]

Equites V.S Barbarian Cavalry
Equites: 1 hitpoint, morale 4, discipline normal, trained
Attack: 6 Defence: 12 Charge: 5 cost: 390

Barbarian Cavalry: 1 hitpoint, morale 4, discipline impetuous, untrained.
Attack: 8 Defence: 10 Charge: 7 cost: 500

Which is better, decide for yourself.

[Charge]

Actually you need to present stats that way:

Barbarian Cavalry

type barb cavalry gaul
dictionary barb_cavalry_gaul ; Barbarian Cavalry
category cavalry
class light
voice_type Medium_1
soldier barb_cavalry, 27, 0, 1
mount medium horse
mount_effect elephant -8, camel -4
attributes sea_faring, hide_forest
formation 1.5, 4, 3, 6, 4, square, wedge
stat_health 1, 0
stat_pri 8, 7, no, 0, 0, melee, simple, piercing, spear, 25 ,1
stat_pri_attr no
stat_sec 0, 0, no, 0, 0, no, no, no, none, 25 ,1
stat_sec_attr no
stat_pri_armour 3, 3, 4, leather
stat_sec_armour 0, 0, flesh
stat_heat 2
stat_ground 0, -2, -4, 2
stat_mental 4, impetuous, untrained
stat_charge_dist 40
stat_fire_delay 0
stat_food 60, 300
stat_cost 1, 400, 90, 40, 60, 400
ownership gauls

Equites

type roman light cavalry
dictionary roman_light_cavalry ; Equites
category cavalry
class light
voice_type Light_1
soldier roman_equites, 27, 0, 1
mount light horse
mount_effect elephant -8, camel -4
attributes sea_faring, hide_forest, hardy
formation 1.5, 4, 3, 6, 4, square, wedge
stat_health 1, 0
stat_pri 6, 5, no, 0, 0, melee, simple, piercing, spear, 25 ,1
stat_pri_attr no
stat_sec 0, 0, no, 0, 0, no, no, no, none, 25 ,1
stat_sec_attr no
stat_pri_armour 3, 5, 4, leather
stat_sec_armour 0, 0, flesh
stat_heat 1
stat_ground 0, 0, -6, 0
stat_mental 4, normal, trained
stat_charge_dist 40
stat_fire_delay 0
stat_food 60, 300
stat_cost 1, 420, 110, 50, 70, 420
ownership roman

Barb Cav. - attack, charge, morale, grounds, cost, horses mass;
Equites - def. skill, stamina....

[Quintus.JC]

What is the upkeep for Barbarian mecenary cavalry?

[Hannibalbarc]

mount medium horse
The barbarian cavalry also seem to have a greater mass then equites.
Oh, and I just checked and rs cavalry have medium horse too.

[mrdun]

What is the upkeep for Barbarian mecenary cavalry?

Slightly more than Equites

[Hannibalbarc]

I think the upkeep for barbarian cav is 90 denarii.

[Good Ship Chuckle]

I find Barbarian noble cavalry to be the best that can be produced in one turn.
A Story:
Once I was attacked by two roman armies (believe it or not). Their commander was in the small garrison force. I clumped three barbarian nobles together and slammed them into their stationary commander. Disemboweled the entire unit with out losing a single man. An assassin couldn't do much better.
The story is over.

[Hannibalbarc]

In a cavalry battle I think rs are slightly better than barb cav because rs cav have swords, thus better attack and same def as the barb cav, I'm taking about my experience, and as for murdering roman generals, I could even count how many generals my rs have slaughtered.

[Quintus.JC]

I still don't understand how Rome got the best cavalry in the game?

[Caius]

I still don't understand how Rome got the best cavalry in the game?
I think because the game is called Rome : Total War

[Omanes Alexandrapolites]

I still don't understand how Rome got the best cavalry in the game?The game is bias towards Rome throughout for some reason. They have some of the best cavalry and infantry which both makes them well rounded, unlike other nations (Gaul for example is an infantry specialist and Parthia has good quality cavalry), henceforth exceptionally powerful and versatile.

This, in my opinion, is a little unbalanced and results in Roman dominance in nearly every game. Although this does make sense, Rome was a very powerful nation, they in my opinion are a little easy to play as and probably would have done well to be toned down a little and have a slightly less dominating rouster.

~:)

[placenik]

The game is bias towards Rome throughout for some reason. They have some of the best cavalry and infantry which both makes them well rounded, unlike other nations (Gaul for example is an infantry specialist and Parthia has good quality cavalry), henceforth exceptionally powerful and versatile.

This, in my opinion, is a little unbalanced and results in Roman dominance in nearly every game. Although this does make sense, Rome was a very powerful nation, they in my opinion are a little easy to play as and probably would have done well to be toned down a little and have a slightly less dominating rouster.

~:)
Romans historicly mostly used Gaul mercenaries as cavalery forces. And almost no archers.

[Quintus.JC]

Gallic and Germanian cavalry in the early empire, which was later changed to Sarmatian cavalry. while Cretan archers and Rhodian slingers were used, very few times though.

[Quirinus]

The game is bias towards Rome throughout for some reason. They have some of the best cavalry and infantry which both makes them well rounded, unlike other nations (Gaul for example is an infantry specialist and Parthia has good quality cavalry), henceforth exceptionally powerful and versatile.

This, in my opinion, is a little unbalanced and results in Roman dominance in nearly every game. Although this does make sense, Rome was a very powerful nation, they in my opinion are a little easy to play as and probably would have done well to be toned down a little and have a slightly less dominating rouster.

~:)
Exactly. And they have very good archers post-Marius, to boot. I can understand the need to make Rome dominate, but having a focus on infantry, like pre-Marius is more than sufficient. Having legionary cavalry and then praetorian cavalry is overkill.

But then again, I'm playing the Julii now, so I shouldn't be complaining. :laugh4:

[Quintus.JC]

ON my current Julii campaign Romans rule over 3 quarters of the world. Major powers such as Greece, Seleucids and even Egypt were wiped out. Rome has the best infantry, cavalry, arteillary and technology. It really seems no fun when one faction over dominate the map. right now i don't see anyone standing up to the Romans and win.

[Omanes Alexandrapolites]

I agree with you over the lack of challenge and enjoyability once a certain number of provinces have been reached.

Although it is understandable that larger funds should be available to a more extensive faction, it is simply too easy to recruit stack after stack after stack once the faction has passed a certain stage.

This massive level of man power results in almost guaranteed dominance, with ultimately no point in continuing due to the sheer ease and predictability of the rest of the game. I remember at one stage (as the Julii) my coffers reaching the 1 million denarii mark, pumping out approximately one stack every few turns. This was literary transforming two of the remaining three factions (Egypt and an already collapsed Parthia) to dust (although I don't think the power of the Roman unit roster was doing them any favors).

~:)

[Quintus.JC]

(although I don't think the power of the Roman unit roster was doing them any favors).

~:)

why?

[Omanes Alexandrapolites]

why?I was commenting on the Roman unit selection's power, and how my possession of it combined with everlasting wealth was deadly to my surrounding neighbors. It might have been a little more level should I have been a different faction which had a few more weaknesses in its unit list.

Sorry if I was a little unclear ~:(

[Quirinus]

I agree with you over the lack of challenge and enjoyability once a certain number of provinces have been reached.

Although it is understandable that larger funds should be available to a more extensive faction, it is simply too easy to recruit stack after stack after stack once the faction has passed a certain stage.

This massive level of man power results in almost guaranteed dominance, with ultimately no point in continuing due to the sheer ease and predictability of the rest of the game. I remember at one stage (as the Julii) my coffers reaching the 1 million denarii mark, pumping out approximately one stack every few turns. This was literary transforming two of the remaining three factions (Egypt and an already collapsed Parthia) to dust (although I don't think the power of the Roman unit roster was doing them any favors).

~:)
Well, I think, by that stage, the game should have been over. The late-game challenge for the Roman player, I think, is to slug it out against other Roman factions with access to a similarly devastating unit roster and empire, while for the non-Roman player, whose early-game challenge would have been to carve out regional dominance, it would be facing four post-Marian Roman factions.

So I would say that the game does provide a decent challenge up till the victory scroll of 50 provinces + Rome.

But then again, I'm a crappy player, so...... :laugh4:

[Quintus.JC]

I was commenting on the Roman unit selection's power, and how my possession of it combined with everlasting wealth was deadly to my surrounding neighbors. It might have been a little more level should I have been a different faction which had a few more weaknesses in its unit list.

Sorry if I was a little unclear ~:(

Right.

[Quintus.JC]

Should of made this into a poll.

[The Wandering Scholar]

Can you not add one?

[Omanes Alexandrapolites]

Sadly, Members can sadly only add polls onto threads which they have posted within the previous ten minutes.

If you wish QuintusJulius-Cicero, I could organise the addition of a poll to this thread. Drop me a PM (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/private.php?do=newpm&u=22106) with the options you want in the poll, and any other extras such as the poll being public or closing after a certain number of days, and I'll try and organise its creation for you.

~:)

[The Wandering Scholar]

Omanes for Hof07

[Omanes Alexandrapolites]

Poll added to the thread. Thank you for your cooperation ~:)

[The Wandering Scholar]

What a brilliant person :balloon:

[Quintus.JC]

Carthage got some awsome cavalry. if only they could train SacredBand in large cities.

[IceWolf]

I voted Praetorian. Truth be known my favorite listed is Horse Archers, but I classify them as archers, not true cavalry, maybe that's just me.

IceWolf

[Punicus]

Carthage got some awsome cavalry. if only they could train SacredBand in large cities.It's quite easy to get around this. Poeni Infantry are decent infantry, they can hold their own against many different Roman units. Besides, the fact is that your infantry will only have to hold the line for a small amount of time before your cavalry come in from the flanks and demoralize the enemy infantry. The fact that the AI is so infantry-based helps a lot here, too.

[Caeser The III]

me,i perfer the Cataphracts
because of their strong armor and attack, but i do not like their speed, to slow

[Quintus.JC]

Also the Cataphracts looks awsome. their shinny armour could blind their enemies' eyes.

[Permenion]

erhmm sorry for this, it may have been asked many times: why can't I vote the poll? Is it bcoz i'm junior member or because it has been voted (...) times?

[The Wandering Scholar]

It is, you are a junior member, you are not alone :beam:

errgghh why are catas winning? :turtle:

[Lord Chu]

Companion Cavalry...I think they look cool and are powerful.

[whtdoesitmatta]

I like Gothic Cav the best... though I'm biased towards Germany.
Persian Cav is another one of my favs.

Camel archers and Elephants are nice too.

[The Wandering Scholar]

I'll keep spreading anti cata propaganda.. :turtle:

[Hannibalbarc]

Catas are awesome, but just because they are the best cavalry unit in rtw doesn't mean they are my favorite.

[Quintus.JC]

one advantage to Cataphracts is their amour piercing mace. this gives them the edge against other heavily amoured cavalry and also infantry. although their speed really sucks.

[Quintus.JC]

I'll keep spreading anti cata propaganda.. :turtle:

Who would you vote for? my anti-Cata friend.

[The New Che Guevara]

Greek Cavalry.


They have cool hats!:laugh4:

[Quirinus]

Lies! The Long Shields have the best hat. :laugh4:

About the cataphract's armour-piercing mace, how does it work? Does it ignore armour altogether, or is there just an attack bonus against heavy armour?

[Punicus]

one advantage to Cataphracts is their amour piercing mace. this gives them the edge against other heavily amoured cavalry and also infantry. although their speed really sucks.
Their speed isn't that of missile cavalry, but then again who are you going to be chasing around where speed would be really needed? They outspeed infantry, and if you ask me that's all they need to do their job. I would have voted for them had I not taken convenience into consideration (Long Shields are one turn and very effective when used correctly).

[Quintus.JC]

I think they get fighting bonus against armour. though i'm not sure myself.

[Hannibalbarc]

If a unit has armor piercing attack, the unit attacking them have their armor divided by 2.

[The Wandering Scholar]

I like my cav to be able to keep up with other cav, I also like them to own other cav of the same speed. Possibly SB or Companion. Companion seeing as though they haven't got any voters yet.

[Quintus.JC]

If a unit has armor piercing attack, the unit attacking them have their armor divided by 2.

So if Cataphracts attack Legionary cohort, which have 12 armor, 5 shield + 5 natural, with a total of 22. The defence would be lowered to 16?

[Quintus.JC]

I like my cav to be able to keep up with other cav, I also like them to own other cav of the same speed. Possibly SB or Companion. Companion seeing as though they haven't got any voters yet.


While Companion cavalry are excellent cavalry but overrated, although once you can afford them it's ok. I personally like legionary cavalry but voted for Cataphracts.

[Omanes Alexandrapolites]

I like my cav to be able to keep up with other cav, I also like them to own other cav of the same speed. Possibly SB or Companion. Companion seeing as though they haven't got any voters yet.Cavalry is usually either speedy and low powered, or slow and high powered - there are a few exceptions though.

This is a fairly well thought out balance - if heavy cavalry could run as fast as horse archers then the horse archer unit would be pathetically worthless. Likewise if fast cavalry was also the most powerful then lower class cavalry units would not be able to stand a chance against them.

I prefer my cavalry units to be more on the powerful and armoured side than fast in all honesty. The majority of the lighter ranged units may struggle to cause a significant level of damage to armoured units. This often results in a minimal level of losses. The powerful unit then can then cause as much damage as possible when ammunition has run out. Other light cavalry units which are not ranged simply charge in and get slaughtered.

~:)

[Quirinus]

I prefer cavalry units that is, if not super-fast like barbarian cavalry or horse archers, at least fast enough like Long Shields or Roman cavalry. To me, armour and fighting ability is secondary to maneuverability, as IMO that's the whole point of cavalry. If I want some heavily armoured shock troop, legionaries are just fine for me.

Also, light cavalry are normally easily retrained. ~:)

[Quintus.JC]

I find Macedonian Light Lancers surprisingly good, they're the type of troop that could turn the tide of battle early on in the campaign. clump them toghter and charge. i usually have 4 units of them charging stimutioues at a single unit and the results were always positive(except spearmen). their charge is incredible, their attack is also not too bad, but their defence ensures that they can't stay in melee for too long.

[Slug For A Butt]

I voted Cataphracts, but Praetorian are fantastic too with upgrades. But what the hell, I love Sarmatians too if you are a faction that can't recruit Praetorian or Cataphract.
I don't really deal in HA, archers take care of them. The way I play, the horseytanks take care of the enemy infantry, cavalry, skirmishers and HA that come too close too (AI obviously).
I sound like a HeavyCav fanatic but I'm not, I prefer infantry complemented by heavy cav.
:turtle: :turtle: :turtle: but boy ... do they hit hard!

[hamilcarX]

I'd choose for sacred Band Cav, not the best stats, not the best cav, BUT one of the most efficient cav, he has a good price for his stats and can turn the tide of battle, even war!
I have had MANY victories only beceause of The Sacred Band Units (inf and cav)
And the numidian cav helped me out soo many times too,

Once i fought a battle with: 3 units of Iberian infantry, 10 Units Sacred Band Infantry, 6 Units Sacred Band Cavalry, 10 Units of peasants, 3 units of numidian cavalry, and 5 units of elephants

My losses: 3 units of iberian infantry, just blown away, 1 unit elephants and 6 units of peasants, the rest could stand, if i had other kind of infantry and cav, i would have lost battle


i don't like cataphracts .... too slow:turtle:
sacred band cav is better (not in power, but in speed and effectiveness) :charge:

[Quintus.JC]

Sacred band is more than an reasonable choice. Cataphracts' speed is an real let down.:shame:

[Quirinus]

Though doesn't the Sacred Band require a prohibitively high tier to build? Since melee cav sustains plenty of casualties, I'd say that it's a bother, at least for me.

[Quintus.JC]

The infrustracture required for most of the top cavalry are all either large or huge cities, which gives long shield cavalry the edge. but what about Roman cavalry, you only need a large town to train one of these.

[Quirinus]

Yeah, I find Roman cavalry to be a decent cavalry unit, if not the best. Sure beats the equites-- what I've never been able to understand was that the equites were supposed to be rich people, yet they ride to war in light, unadorned tunics and a crappy-looking helmet. Surely they should have been more..... decorated. They look like levy cavalry, like maybe Ligurians or something.

[Quintus.JC]

Equites were like the first cavalry of Rome dated back to Romulus. At that time you'd be rich if you could afford to keep a horse. by the time the game starts they were all like bankers and merchants. Equite is an just an title. It's like Knights, back in the mid ages they fought in wars and were called sir. Lancelot and all that, but nowadays you got bussiness men and rock star as Knights, no one expects sir.Elton John or Sir. Alex Ferguson to be fighting on horsebacks. before the Marian reform I think the Romans mainly used Auxilia Cavalry borrowed from it's Latin neighbours. also cavalry from it's allies (Numidian cavalry at Zama, Heavy Greek cavalry at Magnesia).

[The Wandering Scholar]

Gah them Romans always borrowing.

[Quirinus]

Heh...... well, everyone always borrows from somewhere.