Printable View
Well, after all, can you say that Kingdoms are well balanced? In my opinion they are not and here is why:
https://img260.imageshack.us/img260/2673/0038wj6.jpg
https://img260.imageshack.us/img260/1389/0039mu5.jpg
I can understand about horse lowering defence of rider, but why mounted unit of same kind got lower charge bonus and attack is a mystery for me. This is only one example of what i find unacceptable. Yeah, cavalry still can all, but who need it?
Calvary has mass. Mass matters more in charge than anything else pretty much.
And? Is that something new?Quote:
Originally Posted by antisocialmunky
Yes, mass has gained more importance in Kingdoms because it's been tweaked upwards for cavalry, adding to their charge.
You're on a bit of a mission here, mate, aren't you?
Do we know the exact proportion mass takes in charges now?
This kind of balance discussion should never be based on stats only. How would you like a Tartar cavalry unit with 12 attack? With the charge bonus this cheap, medium cavalry unit could take down pretty much everything. How about good spearmen with an attack of 7? Who would take them seriously? Stats never tell the whole truth. Ever heard of "animation"? (Sorry, I just had to say that...) To me their stats seem pretty balanced. If you find it "unacceptable" just mod the game.
- Guru
May be someone from ascended, those, who know the "real" balance and stats, will tell me truth about units, so i will be able adjust it to my actual gameplay? So, you say:" dont beleve in what you see in game". Lol. Mod it? Lol. The secret mass of horse riders?Lol. Bye, bye, TW.
My belief is that the current "new balance" is making cavalry quite a bit worse than it should be.
From running a test, late general's bodyguards (i.e. plate horses and high attack + charge) couldn't even kill more than 2 spearmen head-on.
While I understand speamen are anti cavalry, they are supposed to kill a few horses on impact more than other units rather than not lose a single man basically against very-heavy cavalry. Afterall, that mass of plated horse crashing into a mass of men (in addition to a late era lance) will definitely take a lot more with them than it does now.
A better balance would be a middle ground between inbalanced post-shieldfix 1.2 units and the new balance, but tilted more towards the old balance.
Bye, bye Zaher!
Seriously, stats are nice but in-game performance is a different issue. Always has been with TW games. Lower-stat units will sometimes outperform others in an actual battle, due to all kinds of factors that can't easily or reasonably be put on a unit's info card. You can't just look at the numbers and then scream about the injustice of it all.
Oh, wait. I guess you can.
What is your point? You post a thread claiming that Kingdoms is unbalanced because of the different stats of mounted and dismounted units. It's ok, an opinion like any other. People reply and present opinions why the stats might be the way they are. Yet you reply to those replies with unnecessary irony, or even mockery, one might say.Quote:
Originally Posted by zaher
How does this statistic unbalance affect gameplay after all? Are spearmen overpowered? Is cavalry underpowered? So far you have only presented screenshots of unit cards. That proves little about balance on battlefield because there are so many factors. Due to this I can't really see what is the problem. If you'd be so kind and explain how this unbalance is apparent on the battlemap, and without irony this time if I may ask.
- Guru
I think what zaher means is that cavalry is underpowered.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sinan
And are absolutely right.
"What is your point? You post a thread claiming that Kingdoms is unbalanced because of the different stats of mounted and dismounted units. It's ok, an opinion like any other. People reply and present opinions why the stats might be the way they are. Yet you reply to those replies with unnecessary irony, or even mockery, one might say.
How does this statistic unbalance affect gameplay after all? Are spearmen overpowered? Is cavalry underpowered? So far you have only presented screenshots of unit cards. That proves little about balance on battlefield because there are so many factors. Due to this I can't really see what is the problem. If you'd be so kind and explain how this unbalance is apparent on the battlemap, and without irony this time if I may ask."
- Guru
I dont really see what was a problem in original MTW2 after patch 1.2 ...
You can read my whinings in another thread below. I am not concurent company espionage expert to have a facts of game hidden or codded from me. And everyday i find something new, and ppl telling me: "its ok", "its a mass", "theese are not actual statistics", "your cavalry will die because of missile fire, but if it reach it can charge". I think that cavalry in MTW2 just wasnt acted honestly, it killed peasants, some was charging without orders, and some was able to keep their line until charge, so, now, they kinda getting therapy like a hero of "Clockwork Orange" had.
After all, some changes overall in game are good ( i am talking about money balance, i like, that i never have useless stacks of armies and other strategic changes ).
In game experience for me has not really proved or disproved unit balance. Certain tactics still apply. I've had calvery charge into the rear of an enemy stack and take out 2/3 of the units in the initial charge. I can't recall that happening in vanilla.
Just an opinion.
Zaher i can send you the money you paid for kingdoms if you're so unhappy mate
Yeah, with M2TW in general there is more to a unit then their stats.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guru
Overall Kingdoms is balanced, a few tweaks here and there would be nice of course but compared to the M2TW 1.0 it's alot more balanced.
In M2TW i could send a single generals bodyguard against 2 units archers and 2 units of cheap spears defending a town square and win 9 times out of 10. In kingdoms i would get eaten 9 times out of 10 so something has changed bad or good to early to tell new animations changed stuff.
I wouldn't say cavalry is underpowered. I played some custom battles (VH, medium unit sizes). 21 general's bodyguards (late, teutonic) against 76 Novgorodian spearmen (Armour upgraded to heavy mail) - heavy cavalry charging braced spearmen in schiltron (sp?) formation. The bodyguards had no problems wasting those spearmen and lost only 4-7 men. I admit having charged a few times but that's what you do in most battles anyway? Swordsmen still seem to beat spearmen; 60 armoured swordsmen (english) beat 75 order spearmen (teutonic). Both have partial plate, spearmen have a bit better stats and 15 soldiers more. It was almost a draw though.
In my campaign as New Spain one unit of conquistadores ended up with over 350 kills plus loads of prisoners. Most of the kills came from frontal charges against braced native formations. The conquistadores lost only 3-4 men in the process. The Americas campaign clearly favours cavalry; the natives lack proper spearmen and conquitadores have 2 hp. Bodyguards 3hp!
I haven't been playing Kingdoms very much yet but I think like current balance. (or unbalance :bow: )
- Guru
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gaius Terentius Varro
Thanks, mate, better send me normal units. I like TW, but even unpatched RTW is more balanced for me ( taken from legend of RTW times ).
Pretty much bullshit. With 2 units of MILITIA spearmen and 2 of peasent archers you can kill any general unit. Why i say it? Because i had already did it, with 3 units of militia spearmen and 1 of peasent archers i beat 1 bodyguard unit and 1 unit of mailed knights. How? Schiltron formation. Peasents and militias against heavy cavalry and they won. I did this myself in VH so no excuses.Quote:
In M2TW i could send a single generals bodyguard against 2 units archers and 2 units of cheap spears defending a town square and win 9 times out of 10. In kingdoms i would get eaten 9 times out of 10 so something has changed bad or good to early to tell new animations changed stuff.
I seriously think cavalry is higher underpower here in Kingdoms. It seems some people believe that heavy cavalry was only for rear charges. No, no, no, VERY wrong, the point is, rear charges with heavy cavalry was the ultimate weapon in a battlefield. See how 6k heavy cavalry from hannibal destroyed 88k infantry from the romans in cannae. That's what, 2 units attacking the rear of a 20 unit's army (using total war numbers)? And still see the monumental damage it did. Heavy cavalry was made to take the opponents HEAD ON. Rear and flank charges was simply a genius way to maximize their effect to a degree of mass destruction and mass decrease on moral. But they were made for charges head on. See how alexander won the battle of Chaeronea for example. He made a breach with, guess what, a front charge and with only 2k heavy cavalry (against 35k...). If he tried that in kingdoms he would probably killed :lol:. Or see Carrhae's example, in which 1k heavy cavalry and 9k hourse archers beat the hell of 35k elite legionairs... AND archers alone were especially good demoralizing the foe since just some volleys were never enough to make much extendable damage, only prolongaded fire made significal damage. Or do you think that archers were LOTR elves, that kill a man with every single arrow?
Cavalry is only underpowered when it gets stuck in an infantry unit. Its overpowering on impact and average in Horse vs Horse. They produce less MAD vs spears in head on in Kingdoms though as my experience in the Jerusalem Campaign. They tend to survive charges even head on fairly well against spears and usually come off better than the spears. The mistake that people run into is letting them stay in melee after the initial charge. That's where they get shredded.
My technique for frontal charges is to walk my infantry and cavalry into arrow range and then ctrl+r everyone and then pull my horses bakc after the initial impact. This leaves the enemy disordered for my infantry to mop up. Its better when the enemy infantry try and chase after my cavalry and get steamrolled by dismounted Knights.
Though, I think the effect of arrows on knights is a little exaggerated. Partially armoured horses and knights should take more arrow damage than they do IMHO.
Well what can i say: easy to test start a venice campaign VH/VH take zagreb with just the genaral then pop antonio selvo out of ragusa, hire mercenary cog sail to durazzo and take it with just the general I do it a lot since i want the fair in battle trait for both of them so i keep re-fighting those battles at 6x the speed till i get it. But then again you could be an old woman.Quote:
Originally Posted by ixidor
Edited to select more politically correct epitaph for poster
...and then you wake up .Quote:
Originally Posted by Gaius Terentius Varro
Perhaps you could regale us with the time you conquered the entire map with only one unit of peasants .
will it mess up the thread if i prove it?
Zaher, stat numbers shown in unit information window don't mean very much in unit's performance when we talk about M2TW. Even they aren't the real numbers.
Also, animations and such other stuff are more important than that.
Believe me.
Here goes:
(bit fuzzy towards the end tried to slow it down to 0.1 speed to take shots)
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
So, this proves what? That AI doesn't know how to fight you off. I had already killed 2 units of spearmen and 1 unit from mercenary crossbowmen with 1 single unit of jinetes with only 20 losses. Do you want to see the print screen? But normally would i win? Or at least against someone how actually knows how to use his troops properly? No. Fight against a human player, be trapped between 2 schiltron formations in a entrance of the town and under arrow fire, and see yourself losing your general.
Since when was this thread about multiplayer, wake up and pay attention,
Quote:
Originally Posted by CeltiberoMordred
Beleve me, i am in mood to recieve good things. I like TW, and i WANT to play it. Those picture are only a small example of my total disorientation. But even if i will try hard to beleve your words, the actual perfomance of units prove opposite. Put Giltine chosen or Sarmagatian axemen vs Polish guards and you will see how 32/48 footmen unit with 1 hp killing armoured "tanks" in 2 seconds with minimal loses. And they are not special anti-cav units. Just to make those who dont know Giltine chosen unit laughing - its a foot polearm unit with attack 19 charge 9 and defence 23, without shield in animations and on picture, but +8 shield at stats.
P.S. I just want to add , that on VH difficulty, any cavalry cannot make sucsessfull charge even when not under missile fire, they just acting like untrained drunk stupid peasant childs which riding horse first time.
That's funny, I routinely flatten Egyptian stacks with the patented right click ctrl+R. The only good way of getting a grasp of M2TW is trial and error. There's just too many things that effect a battle. It jsut comes down to if you're willing to adapt to the system, you'll do well. Forget everything you think you know and start from the ground up. If you can't then you'll just hate the game and should just go and buy an FPS.
Hah! Owned!Quote:
Originally Posted by Gaius Terentius Varro
I honestly don't know what the problem is. I keep winning Heroic Victory after Heroic Victory due to cavalry. A direct charge will still inflict 60%-80% losses on a unit, often causing them to rout right off the bat. A charge that's actually worthwhile, with several units of knights into an opposing force's open flank, will throw an entire army into disarray.
Heavy cavalry exists to control the battle by altering the enemy's morale, not to slaughter everything by charging head-on into a hail of bullets.