Two questions about cavalry weapons and infantry swords

[QuintusSertorius]

I respectfully disagree. Lots of tests have been done that have shown that the secondaries are inferior to the lances, slow animations and all. The high lethality more than makes up for it.

Really? I've found even more lightly-armoured Epirote bodyguard using swords against an equal number of Seleukid, Ptolemaic or even Karthadastim bodyguard still using lances tends to win in a melee.

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

Really? I've found even more lightly-armoured Epirote bodyguard using swords against an equal number of Seleukid, Ptolemaic or even Karthadastim bodyguard still using lances tends to win in a melee.

Its not a major disadvantage to switch to secondaries though I feel that serious MP contestants know better than to switch. In campaign mode there are too many factors including experience, morale bonuses, uneven terrain, unit numbers, command bonuses from generals, armor upgrades, etc etc. The only way to reliably test is a multiplayer battle against a friend just charging the two home on a flat grassy plain.

In any event, some tests were done a while back and it was concluded that lances were superior mostly due to lethality and ap. Some reach around 0.4 which is almost twice even the Celtic longswords and almost 4 times as deadly as a kopis at 0.11. The extra attack points and slightly faster animations don't even matter especially considering that unlike sword animations, lance animations cannot be canceled. There are only attack animations as well, getting rid of the pointless "dodging" animations.

[Burebista]

Its not a major disadvantage to switch to secondaries though I feel that serious MP contestants know better than to switch. In campaign mode there are too many factors including experience, morale bonuses, uneven terrain, unit numbers, command bonuses from generals, armor upgrades, etc etc. The only way to reliably test is a multiplayer battle against a friend just charging the two home on a flat grassy plain.

In any event, some tests were done a while back and it was concluded that lances were superior mostly due to lethality and ap. Some reach around 0.4 which is almost twice even the Celtic longswords and almost 4 times as deadly as a kopis at 0.11. The extra attack points and slightly faster animations don't even matter especially considering that unlike sword animations, lance animations cannot be canceled. There are only attack animations as well, getting rid of the pointless "dodging" animations.

In MP , lances beat secondaries w/o AP any time. That is why celtic heavy cavalry and german heavies too are very weak in a heavy cavalry fight. Also , i've noticed in MP that when a cav unit wants to hit with a sword or an axe it moves for aprox 1 sec towards the target and then strikes , while the lance dudes just hit. they even create sometimes focus -fire on a target unit , killing it before it gets the chance to get an attack with a secondary off.

Also , in MP , cavalry with overhans spear as secondaries (AKA little charging bonus) is highly disregarded as they get chopped both in melee fights and in charges. the exception for this is the skirmisher ones which can be used as decoys , kiters or harrasers , but never in a real melee fight. the epithome of cavalry is imho Curepos , which are the most cost effective cav troop in the game with their high charge /high speed /skirmishing /high ammo .

As a rule , i consider that any high lethality high attack no AP strike fails miserably against high armour/shield values from the front.

[QuintusSertorius]

Its not a major disadvantage to switch to secondaries though I feel that serious MP contestants know better than to switch. In campaign mode there are too many factors including experience, morale bonuses, uneven terrain, unit numbers, command bonuses from generals, armor upgrades, etc etc. The only way to reliably test is a multiplayer battle against a friend just charging the two home on a flat grassy plain.

In any event, some tests were done a while back and it was concluded that lances were superior mostly due to lethality and ap. Some reach around 0.4 which is almost twice even the Celtic longswords and almost 4 times as deadly as a kopis at 0.11. The extra attack points and slightly faster animations don't even matter especially considering that unlike sword animations, lance animations cannot be canceled. There are only attack animations as well, getting rid of the pointless "dodging" animations.

In almost every case I'm experiencing, the AI has the better general (and thus all the bonuses to defense and morale that come with it), so those things go their way.

I don't play MP, so I can't comment. Surely you could also try it out with one-on-one in Custom Battle? Since there's no generals stars or the like there.

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

In almost every case I'm experiencing, the AI has the better general (and thus all the bonuses to defense and morale that come with it), so those things go their way.

I don't play MP, so I can't comment. Surely you could also try it out with one-on-one in Custom Battle? Since there's no generals stars or the like there.

The AI has an annoying tendency to disengage and attempt to charge again, presumbably to get the bonus. They just end up getting cut down as they turn their backs.

[Rahwana]

4 or 5 AP attack maybe strong enough, but when they have pathetic 2 or 3 attack

[gamegeek2]

Remember the formula: const1 * leth * 1.1 ^ (ATK - DEF + BONUSES)

Lethality and attack skill are interchangeable. -1 attack skill is compensated equally by multiplying lethality by 1.1 - thus, kopides are strictly worse than maces and axes in EB, which makes no sense.

[antisocialmunky]

Really? I've found even more lightly-armoured Epirote bodyguard using swords against an equal number of Seleukid, Ptolemaic or even Karthadastim bodyguard still using lances tends to win in a melee.

The Eperiote Bodyguard has extra defense instead of armor. If they had more stamina, they would beat Persian cataphracts. Indeed, if you fight 2 of them online lance vs lance, the Eperiote BGs will have periods where they will be winning due to their slightly better stamina. But then the stamina equalizes and they start dropping.

The high lethality units are always good. They just need an decent attack that can cut through high armor + defense stats. That's why high lethality + low attack + AP like axemen are so good against high tier heavily armored units while they die like flies to other cheap units with high attack and no AP. Therefore you want to employ units with lower armor and higher defense vs these sorts of cheap barb units. Thus, high lethality units with high attack stats like Drapnai, Bastarnae, Indian Longbows, and Indian Guild Warriors are able to pretty much kill everything in their way.

[VikingPower]

I think it rather strange that Falcata and Kopis have so low lethality in comparison to axes since these weapons are really axes in sword-form. Also when using hybrid swords like falcatas then they should give the wielder a better skill with them for attack and defense than by using clumsy axes. Its similar like longswords v.s blunt weapons in medieval times.

I know how the Thracian and Indian units have both a great lethality and AP with their two handed weapons, but why do the thracian peltats get so high lethality with their one-handed swords in comparison to the falcata and kopis? I still think that the answer is not answered about the value of those Celtic longsword units who lack AP feature and whether they can stand up to heavier opponents with some decisive success above other units.

[gamegeek2]

I can't speak for the developers of the EB stat system. I don't think that stats were as well researched at that time, unless Aradan had already published his guide, though the EB team still seems to have come up with a good formula anyways. EBNOM's stats will be based on EB's, though generated with a different tool.

I can say for a fact, that EBNOM stats will have axes, maces, and kopides similar in stats, though variable atk vs. defense

[Dram]

Different lethality is a good idea but as far as I'm aware the swing speed for 'swords' in general is the same and not moddable, meaning that the gladius (or any of the other short/normal length 0.13 lethality swords) cant have a faster attack to make up for the lower lethality. In game I find that 0.225 longsword units are absolute killing machines even against heavily armoured targets and I pretty much wont recruit any infantry that dont have a longsword unless I have no other options (which is why bataroas are my favorite line infantry for cost vs effectiveness). The scordisii elite inf are a good example of a unit which is pretty gimped by its low lethality sword. Change it to 0.225 and see how huge the difference is.

It says in a few of the celt unit descriptions that they 'twirl the swords around over their heads to gain momentum' which certainly makes it sound like they would not be matching the swing speed of a guy thrusting a smallsword back and forth. Mind you I would not want the Roman units to be any better offensively than they are already, due to their low cost and great equipment they are already very powerful.