EBII and the Terribly Bloated M2TW Unit System

Hello,

Argh!

Now that I finished my brief rant, I have a very important question in mind. For all of you who have already played M2TW, you know how the units feel like: not only they appear to be crawling in slow mo when they are supposed to be running, not only they seem terribly unresponsive to orders and are slow to carry them out... You know what I'm talking about. Commanding units in M2TW means having to deal with all that assorted bloated things and heaviness which is extremely unpleasant. The units themselves don't look like they are in real combat as in good old RTW, but in some sort of theatrical stunt.

Now on to the point: are the EBII units going to feel heavy and awkward like the vanilla M2TW ones? Will we see faster, more flexible and realistic fighting and movement? I think Broken Crescent was one of the mods that addressed this to a certain extent, and I can tell by playing it that the units feel much "better". I hope the EBII team can emulate them within the extent of their possibilities.

That is something I've wondered about as well. I cannot count how often I've turned the speed up because it felt like the battle was moving too slowly. The cavalry feels especially slow. I love the fast pace of RTW, and is one reason why I play EB and RTW more often than M2TW.

Tell me about it! The annoylingly unresponsive cavalry is the reason I never really got into MII

I used to hate that they'd come at the enemy full gallop, and then stop 5 feet in front of the enemy and casually stroll into them.

I think it all has to do with animations so its completely fixable. While I too hate the responsivness of Cavalry in M2TW I don't think RTW is realistic in the slightest in this respect, cavalry was never able to change direction in a spllt second like in RTW so somewhere in between would be more suitable, but defintely be closer to RTW than M2TW.

MTWII realism is really hard to get used too after playing rome and rome mods for so long...
I hope the MWII system keeps the phalangitai from changing their directions in melee so easy...^^

Nah... I personally think that cavalry system in M2TW is realistic, but even with that, i sick of a bunch of well trained mongols rode their horses as awfully as the merchant cavalry militia does (it was fine to had unresponsive cav, and slow to charge when the men on top of horse has heavy armoury, but mounted archers should look more in RTW cav...

BTW, In M2TW, all you need is sent your cav running considerable distance before charging their enemies, from the old M2TW discussion, I recall that adding charge distance value will result in more effective cav charges in M2TW, but less manouverable once they are in charging position. In my personal experience, even the mounted sergeants could devastate a dismounted chivalric knights if they had enough speed up.... (means more running distance)

Pardon? Wouldn't adding a longer charge simply tire out the unit and make it less effective? I think there is only a lower limit for range in which the cavalry will not smash, but stroll into the enemy, but any higher than that and they simply use their charge as it should be.

Cavalry is quite overpowered in MTW2 in my opinion. Their kill ratio is always higher (without chasing the routing guys) than my high tier infantry, even if I send my cavalry to charge a pack of spearmen from the front.

About the speed, I agree with Cute Wolf, the heavies are quite realistic, however the lighter ones are a bit too rigid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Owen Glyndwr

I used to hate that they'd come at the enemy full gallop, and then stop 5 feet in front of the enemy and casually stroll into them.

---

Maybe the monkey in the pc, responsible for cavalry in MTW2 is from England?

Very good thread! I hope the team can do sth about it.

Quote:

---

Nah... I personally think that cavalry system in M2TW is realistic, but even with that, i sick of a bunch of well trained mongols rode their horses as awfully as the merchant cavalry militia does (it was fine to had unresponsive cav, and slow to charge when the men on top of horse has heavy armoury, but mounted archers should look more in RTW cav...

---

lolwut?

Heavier guys use heavier horses for a reason. They should not be faster than light cavalry, but they should not "crawl" with their horses as they do now: that's 100% unrealistic. If you pay attention to the animation, you'll see what I'm talking about, it looks like the horse is in slow mo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by A Terribly Harmful Name

lolwut?

Heavier guys use heavier horses for a reason. They should not be faster than light cavalry, but they should not "crawl" with their horses as they do now: that's 100% unrealistic. If you pay attention to the animation, you'll see what I'm talking about, it looks like the horse is in slow mo.

---

AFAIK, the heavy cavalry only crawl in some initial distances before they run, as they start to gain momentum for accelerating. Just remember the Newton law of Inertia. Heavier horse means slower start-up before running...

But mongols and turkish horse archers should be very responsible and fast, unlike now...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cute Wolf

AFAIK, the heavy cavalry only crawl in some initial distances before they run, as they start to gain momentum for accelerating. Just remember the Newton law of Inertia. Heavier horse means slower start-up before running...

But mongols and turkish horse archers should be very responsible and fast, unlike now...

---

No, actually I was witnessing this with cavalry in the full run. That's the point.

I tend to play all my M2TW battles on double speed anyway. It's far more pleasant, espescially when the battle doesn't involve that much men. If I need to manage some position I just pause the game, then continue on double speed.

And the fact the cavalry seems to be crawling along is simply due to animations: I dare say they did this on purpose. The semi-slow-motion charge has a certain cinematic touch to it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by A Terribly Harmful Name

No, actually I was witnessing this with cavalry in the full run. That's the point.

---

I also knows that it was ridiculous to see byzantine kataphraktoi out-runned by Almughavars.... but, hey, at least they had really good charges...... maybe we should give a tweak on the top speed animation...

all the mead they drink has them slowed down.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by A Terribly Harmful Name

Hello,

Argh!

Now that I finished my brief rant, I have a very important question in mind. For all of you who have already played M2TW, you know how the units feel like: not only they appear to be crawling in slow mo when they are supposed to be running, not only they seem terribly unresponsive to orders and are slow to carry them out... You know what I'm talking about. Commanding units in M2TW means having to deal with all that assorted bloated things and heaviness which is extremely unpleasant.

---

These are my concerns regarding the MTWII engine. I am looking forward to EBII, but hope the above problems won't be to bad to spoil it for me.

When I have played MII, I have only played as France or Ireland, i.e. cavalry powers.

The overall speed of cavalry does annoy me in that it is too slow when units are supposedly fresh.
Though, in terms of realism, it is more correct. The light versus heavy cav argument remains a big problem.

In the mediaval times the knights should be important units, heavy then in ancient times since they were using way more heavy metals, and have more kill ratio, then peasants infantry, or sargents(wich werent no legionaries by no means). i dont see the confusion here. pardon me. But i prefer way more the cavalry in M2TW.
The thing that they stop in the charche , is understandable, if they dont have enogh spead, they wont do it properly, EB also does something similar with two handed lances cav, if they dont have enough distance, and spead they wont charge with lances, and wont do a proper charge. As it should realy. there is mods out there with combat very good. even in infantry related. so i think this wont be a problem in M2TW. i overall i prefer M2TW engine, is way better. If with enough tweeking , it could be more similar to the ancient times combat. this is possible, and im confident that EB team will pull that out.
I like the Horse archers , and archery in M2tw way more i belive they are more realistic in animations concerned, but comom guys you can argue that Rtw has more depth, overall then Mediaval, but the battle engine is way ahead of Rtw. Asweal the AI, on campaing, and in Batle.

Anyway i played mods when the cavalry doesnt do that, so this isnt a problem to fix.
Regarding the cavalry in medieval times, they should be a mobile force, and beeing in movement, Charging , been in melee, and get out, and charge again, this was their strengh so the argument that they are tired, and would be less efective, is a litle redundant, comom they are doing a batle, is normal that they get tired, so the hetaroi, and the Kats on EB. im sorry to say this i realy do understand you opinions, and i respect it, but im geting sick of M2TW bashing, from people who cleary didnt play it very much, or the manny mods out there. At least at some extend, to realize The Potencial of it.

Quote:

---

But mongols and turkish horse archers should be very responsible and fast, unlike now...

---

what?? the turks have one of the fast mobile cav in the game. The sipahis, turkomans, etc. The mongols even more, i realy dont see your points have you try to cacth a turkoman, or a mongol horse a archer with knights??? is nearly impossible. On the other hand i understand that is more easy to cacth it then in RtW, but yet again it shoulnd be impossible, like in RTW, when sometimes they do the Marathon arround the battle map, to cacth a skirmisher cav......that thing is way more anoying.

Quote:

---

About the speed, I agree with Cute Wolf, the heavies are quite realistic, however the lighter ones are a bit too rigid.
__________________

---

I agree but im glad that is so. If you take a good look they arent so light , compared to ancient times. but i belive the great fault is when they are in skirmisher mode when one guy is caught, all units instead of keep running, they turn and fight, and get killed. Anoying...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Knight of Heaven

In the mediaval times the knights should be important units, heavy then in ancient times since they were using way more heavy metals, and have more kill ratio, then peasants infantry, or sargents(wich werent no legionaries by no means). i dont see the confusion here. pardon me. But i prefer way more the cavalry in M2TW.

---

Uhmm, even Armoured Sergeants take heavy casualties if they are charged by knights from the front, I think that is quite silly there in M2TW. Even if you and your horse are armored to the teeth, a unit of trained spearmen should stop that charge without too many loss.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Apázlinemjó

Uhmm, even Armoured Sergeants take heavy casualties if they are charged by knights from the front, I think that is quite silly there in M2TW. Even if you and your horse are armored to the teeth, a unit of trained spearmen should stop that charge without too many loss.

---

That is becouse of the conceipt of heavy charge in Medieval ( norman charge) was alitle diferent then in Ancient times. i belive. At high spead, the force of inpact would be great. In anciet times, the cav, charge with moderate speed, not at full galop. there is a discussion about this on TWC, i belive. A very good hint would be mediaval lances had those hand protections, wich served for the hand dont slip when charging. But i agree, maybe in vannila they are a bit overarted, but in mods i play sometiems cav stop in is tracks when charging armoured seargents, with very few casualties for the infantry. not to mention pikemen. it depens of the situation. but against light levies, or militias, they always have manny casualties.

I rather have a problem with knight like shock cavallery in EB than with the tank like knights in MWII. :book:
Anyway I think the slower response is really a great thing, because it makes horse archers a little bit harder to manage. Heavy Horse archers in EB were ridiculus :dizzy2:

i must also confess i was somewhat annoyed by the fast pace of RTW tactical battles. especially the way infantry moved. i'd preferred back then if the the cavalry top speed was about 1.5 faster then the infantry there was and that infantry was about 0.6-0.7 times as fast at best, more like the original MTW1. that way you actually had to spend lots of time in actual pre-engagement manouvres. once the two armies did close within a charging bonus there was little time for total rearangemets as is the case in RTW where you can literaly swap the flanks before the enemy infantry actually menages to close in, rendering any formation/terrain advantage half as useful compared to MTW1. i think slower and more bulky units (especially infantry and heavy cataphracted cavalry) is way more "realistic". only some cavalry units (like parthian horse archers or numidian cavalry) should really posses great "nibleness" on the battlefield.