Why do the English not have the ability to build Norman Knights?

For reasons of balance? IMO, they should have the ability to build Norman Knights, since it is the Norman's who are ruling the Country at the start of the game.

Time for me to mod something else in my game.

Exactly....and considering that England became the Norman stronghold (and Ireland too 1168)..makes you wonder what is up!

Also ...one word Crossbows! lol Normans used crossbows...!

Nobody expects uber accuracy..but at least a passing nod to real event would help a tad

Good points.

...because balance always trumps "history".

This is not a historical wargame.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cos3

For reasons of balance? IMO, they should have the ability to build Norman Knights, since it is the Norman's who are ruling the Country at the start of the game.

Time for me to mod something else in my game.

---

Because Norman knights are just Feudal knights (which the English have) with amusing helms. Norman knights and feudal knights are identical in most functional ways. Plus CA needed to give the Sicilians unique to them only units. Beyond Norman knights and Muslim archers what does Sicily have that's their's alone?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lars573

Beyond Norman knights and Muslim archers what does Sicily have that's their's alone?

---

The ability to spam spies/assassins without ever letting up.

The mafia

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cos3

For reasons of balance? IMO, they should have the ability to build Norman Knights, since it is the Norman's who are ruling the Country at the start of the game.

Time for me to mod something else in my game.

---

good point

CA isnt known for exact history. They are usually lucky to get close enough. To be fair though game balance comes into play and also Norman knights arent that much different than Feudal Knights IMO. I consider Norman Knights a subclass of Feudal Knights personally. I mean all knights were feudal. Normans are just a sub type of them. As are knights of other nations at the time. Doesnt mean they are bad or anything. Just a little different.

nothing different between feudal and norman knights so ca could have gave norman knights instead of feudal ones to the english without any balancing issues

Yeah, they could have but like someone mentioned CA probably gave them to Sciliy just to be unique unto Sicily. I'm betting the MTR team will make some slight difference in their stats somewhere though. Just to make them somewhat different in more than just name/title.

I always thought Norman Knights were better than Feudal Knights. If not, the Normans, like someone said, have very amusing helms. I use Norman knights all the time, as Sicily seems to be one of the only exciting factions for me to play as.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skott

Yeah, they could have but like someone mentioned CA probably gave them to Sciliy just to be unique unto Sicily. I'm betting the MTR team will make some slight difference in their stats somewhere though. Just to make them somewhat different in more than just name/title.

---

For start, they have 13 attack (Feudals only 10) and also Very Good Stamina, Feudals only Good Stamina. Their horse is not so good thought.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Musashi

The mafia

---

EXACTLY!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Revenant

For start, they have 13 attack (Feudals only 10) and also Very Good Stamina, Feudals only Good Stamina. Their horse is not so good thought.

---

I knew I liked them for a reason. However, I use them mostly dismounted, seeing as they are quite flexible that way and one can rarely find good infantry mercenaries, until later of course.

The purpose of the faction specific units is NOT to accurately depict history. Faction specific units are there to give you the _flavour_ of that nations military and what made them unique in history. The game designers thought about the iconic and unique soldiers from medieval history: like English Longbowmen, Egyptian Mamlukes, Byzantine Katas. They put them in the game to give each faction its own feel and flavour.

It would come as a surprise to alot of people that there were Norman Knights in southern Italy. Alot of people are not familiar with the turbulent history of Medieval Italy. Its great that this unique and interesting part of history is highlighted in the game.

If you take a step back from the nitpicking quibbles there is so much of the flavour of medieval history that MTW gets right. The awesome power of a cavalry charge, the speed and stamina of desert horse archers, the political power of the Pope etc.

I've heard people defend MTW by saying its not supposed to be historically accurate. I would argue rather that it is not supposed to be historically _detailed_. The game does do a good job of giving the feel of medieval history.

Tony

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pilum

I've heard people defend MTW by saying its not supposed to be historically accurate. I would argue rather that it is not supposed to be historically _detailed_. The game does do a good job of giving the feel of medieval history.

---

I agree completely. I think CA succeed where they induce you to play a faction in a roughly historical way. England has lots of longbow types, so it inclines you to play archer-heavy. Giving them superior heavy cavalry early on muddies the waters and may not even be accurate (should English knights really be riding down French ones?).

I hope in due course we will get Total Realism and EB type mods that fill things out to be more historically accurate. But the English line up has a reasonable flavour, IMO (especially after the 2H bug is fixed). Other factions (eg the Russians) sound much more questionable.