Lancer Lines (one-man lines of upgraded lancers)

[Dionysus9]

So, whats the verdict?

Start with one of the most powerful units in the game. Speed, power, armor...string them out in long lines and rush a bunch of em at the enemy. By the end of the battle you can get 3--even 4 points in bonus valor by the time your done.

Is this a valid tactic? Or is it exploiting a design flaw in the game, to win at all costs?

[Knight_Yellow]

i hate lancers with a passion but u know when ur up against them since whoever goes spanish will almost always take lancers.

except for me im sneaky i take swords so they cut up the anti lancer units.

[Nobunaga0611]

First time someone did this to me, I was kinda mad. Now I'm used to seeing armies like this, so its just kind of a part of the game for me now. The only time I get mad now is when people get all pissy with me the very RARE times I do this, and don't stop complaining until I play them again with a *usually* weaker than average army. People just need to be a bit smarter, and if someone chooses Spain, make sure you're ready for the cav rush. Nothing much any of us can do now except make a "4 max no ashi" rule.

[Acronym]

I personally don't like it, not cauz it's cheap, but because it's more of a pain than fun. But no point in complaining, you think the gauls and celts could have asked the romans to stop throwing the pila before a charge because it was unfair?

Anyways when they use more than 4 of the same unit, the price goes up, and lancers are xpensive as it is, so unless its a 99k game the valor won't be that high. What works is having a bunch of pikemen hold formation and position and let the cav charge, if the pikemen are in thick blocks the cav doesn't really do much(i usually go valor 3-4 pikes so they usually hold), of course if your all byz inf your screwed.

[Mithrandir]

I don't really care, it's in the game and it looks cool. However I consider it to be one of the most boring things, little strategy involved. I hate it when a newbie ally tries it in a 3v3 or 4v4, thus screwing it up for the rest of the team, It also cuts playing time back to only 5 minutes or so when done properly.

[Acronym]

Yeah I got rushed right off the bat by amp, then his ally(it was 4v4) was behind him. Of course amp had all cav and they started so close to me all i could do was watch. My army slaughtered, but I absorbed it long enough for my ally on my right to flank them. We barely won, but I was slaughtered in a short time.

[baz]

i dont mind if they are used but i tend to pick spain also now if my opponent has them in 2v2 and less, what annoys me is the fact that units will not even stand and fight these lancers .. if a couple of lines of lancers att your line of 4 chiv MAA thats it they run without even a fight (rout on impact) and then to make matters worse they take the rest of the army with them .. this gives a very slim chance of victory against good opponents

[Mithrandir]

aye, you said it right against good oponents, however, if they manage to pull that off, it's very likely that they can beat you with another army as well. However, I noted you wrote "if a couple of lines of lancers att your line of 4 chiv MAA" ,that's the point, you have to keep swords to the back while spears absorb the impact, they dont suffer as much penalty I think (at least not as much casualties) as swords, then use the swords to enhance the lines and maybe for a flank attack.

Plenty of people have managed to defend succesfully (even vs AMP). I am one of them,though I must admit, it was a newbie trying it, I doubt I could succesfully keep my wits when AMP does it within the first minute though, I'd probably panick and sit in awe to witness the massacre .

[Cheetah]

I sincerely advise to everyone to buy an all cav army (around 15000-20000 florins), deploy it in 1 men deep lines and make a head-on rush against your closest opponent. Please report back with your kill counts

Of course, you should do this against experienced players, n00bs dont count.

[Puzz3D]

These wide lines of lancers can be beaten, but I'm not going to say it's easy. The lancer is easy to use because it beats all other cav and swords. In addition, the lancer is the best buy in a cav unit providing more combat power per florin than other cav units. By all means play with rules if it enhances your enjoyment, but I don't feel the need to make rules with MTW the way you had to with WE/MI. You could improve the playbalance with some well thought out rules. However, I get the sense that most players don't want to play with rule restrictions.

I purposely don't use either the Spanish or the Byz and have concentrated my efforts on finding strategies that beat those two factions. Checkout the "Irresistable" replay
of LadyAn manhandling AMP's vaunted Spanish cav army, although, he does have 4 pav arbs in that one and a paltry 12 cav. It is true, that if you stack your army with anti-cav, you will loose to a sword army. So, there is a guessing game going on at army selection time.

[vexatious]

I find it hard to have strong opinions on unit balancing issues. There is a tension between the principle that "anything that the game permits is fair" and the need to maintain strategic diversity in unit selection and army composition. So, for instance, the problem with the all cav army is that there are only a few possible army compositions that can beat it. Imagine what would happen if EVERY ATTACKER used the all cav army...every defender would have only a few options in terms of army composition. The fun-value of the game would be greatly reduced if everyone was forced to take a certain kind of army (i.e. spear wall armies, all cav army) just to beat the all cav army. We would lose what I term "Strategic Diversity"- the idea that in any given match, a player has the realistic option to take any one of a number of possible armies. Thus far, it is not the case that everyone uses the all cav army...but it could happen. I know that this is not directly on topic, but here is my standard for determining whether my army composition is "slimy":

Principle: If the use of an army leaves opponents with so few viable options that the game loses "strategic diversity," then use of the army is unfair.

I realize that a number of ppl would object to this principle on the grounds that choosing a superior army is an integral part of the game. I agree. But, as stated above, any army that is so powerful that it simply cannot be beaten except by an army expressly designed to beat it undermines the playablility of the game by denying opponents the fun of strategic diversity. Moreover, it reduces the importance of "on the field" generalship by entirely determining the outcome of the battle in the unit selection phase. I hope that this post is not hopelessly unclear.

WRT to Lancers, the single line approach is risky. The single line is easy to flank, and if double teamed by 2 units of decent cav, it fails. It's also easy to generate a rear attack against the single line. The use of the Lancer single line does not unfairly restrict an opponents army composition options and hence does not run afoul of the above stated fairness principle.

[LittleGrizzly]

the long lines of lancers really annoy me whats the point and whoever said gauls and celts ask romans to stop throwing pilla before battle did they ever use a bunch of cav in single lines ? no and that was real war which is unfair this is a game which we aim to make balanced so theres a difference i have a problem with lancers and most have a problem with byz inf so just tone those 2 down ever so slightly......

[Magyar Khan]

vexatious, your post is exactly how i look at things, but yours is much more well written than i can ever produce. but these discussions are wasted for the most of the online players.

[Puzz3D]

Vex,

The designer has expressly stated that he wants unbalanced armies to require tailored counter armies. For instance, a 4x4 army is not likely to beat all cav or all swords. FearNC's all cav beat Magyar's swords and arbs, but we've already known for months that all cav beats swords and ranged.

Regarding individual unit choice, good players quickly identify the better units and that's what they field. It wouldn't be smart to do otherwise if opponents are not doing the same unless you want the challenge. Unless all players start with exactly the same units, the win/loss ratio is not a fair judgement of skill on the battlefield. If you can beat these superior armies 50% of the time, then you are certainly more than equal to your opponent in tactical skill. The game would need better unit balance than it now has to allow players to choose from all the units without incuring significant disadvantage. The faction I usually use had 4 spear units, but 3 of them are inferior to the 4th. I'm certainly going to choose the better spear when I buy my army.

I think all players have a built in win/loss ratio they want to maintain. A top player is under pressure, most of it self imposed, to maintain a high win/loss ratio. He especially doesn't want to loose to someone who is going to gloat about it. Nothing in the game is unfair unless a prearranged rule is broken. The controversial "red zone" is no more. You simply can no longer go in the red zone. However, I think many players are not able to play in a style of their choice because the units don't allow it. This is probably causing dissatisfaction on their part which someone who simply tries to adapt to what the game allows doesn't feel. I have my own limit on how much imbalance I can accept and the "handgunner" exceeds mine. I can't abide that degree of imbalance, and I don't play late era because of them.

Essentially, when you go up against four v0 lancers you are conceeding a handicap of about 600 to 700 florins. More important is the fact that your cav cannot compete one-on-one against the lancer and win since they have 2 less combat points than the lancer. If you pump four mounted knights to v1 to equal the lancers combat it gets worse because v1 knights cost 1100, so you are now at a 1200 florin handicap in the rest of the army. Personally, I think you are better off conceeding the initiative to the Spanish player and fielding strong anti-cav inf. Lancers can be beaten but it takes combination unit tactics to do it. For simple head-to-head, one-on-one parity in cav and inf you have to take Spanish yourself.

[LadyAnn]

Ehheh, Puzz3D. Are you trying to make the prophecy come true or what? Don't want to be roasted at the stake...

*hide from Amp*

Annie

ps.: hear yee, hear yee fearOfSegomo is probably having one of my heads displayed prominently somewhere. Yes, I did lose against FearOfSegomo in a 2x2. Now everyone know it.

[LadyAnn]

Only in late era that the Russian (my Rush-on) army could have some chance, precisely of the handgunners. Not in open steppe of Elmo games, but in a sparcely woody map. Handguners are not-so-secret weapons of the Russ and the Almohad in late era. Handgunners are the cheap swords Russian army always want to have. Plus, it can give a blast or two from behind the spear wall is a bonus.

Annie

[vexatious]

Puzz-

You said:

The designer has expressly stated that he wants unbalanced armies to require tailored counter armies. For instance, a 4x4 army is not likely to beat all cav or all swords. FearNC's all cav beat Magyar's swords and arbs, but we've already known for months that all cav beats swords and ranged.

Regarding individual unit choice, good players quickly identify the better units and that's what they field. It wouldn't be smart to do otherwise if opponents are not doing the same unless you want the challenge. Unless all players start with exactly the same units, the win/loss ratio is not a fair judgement of skill on the battlefield.

Puzz- Your position (forgive me if I am mischaracterizing it) appears to be that there is no such thing as unfair exploitation of game imbalances. That it is the natural and fair result of competition that players will always choose the best possible units.

I agree that good players choose the best units. My point is that there comes a time when choosing the best units amounts to exploiting game imbalance problems. What I am proposing is a standard for drawing the line between vigorous competition (i.e. choosing the best unit) and exploiting a game imbalance problem. I am saying that if you choose an army that can only be beaten by a handful of other armies, you have made the game a bit less fun--and that's where we should draw the line.

[Cheetah]

Quote[/b] (vexatious @ Jan. 21 2003,16:57)]What I am proposing is a standard for drawing the line between vigorous competition (i.e. choosing the best unit) and exploiting a game imbalance problem. I am saying that if you choose an army that can only be beaten by a handful of other armies, you have made the game a bit less fun--and that's where we should draw the line.

Only if the counter army does not have any counters. But the anti-cav army has counters. So, actually it opens up a new tactical level.

Hm, just a question: why is it that almost no one plays with all cav armies (except AMP and perhaps UglyPolar, I say perhaps because I have not seen him playing all cavs for a long time), if all cavs -and especially the thin line lancers- are so powerful?

[LadyAnn]

Newbies play the all cav often. Not the same newbies. They goes through the discovery periods. You know, not in any particular order, but there is a pattern:
1. Camper with many serpentines (or mangonels ;p )
2. All cav
3. Rush foot army
4. All missiles

Only Amp and Elmo are stuck at one of the four above, most newbies progress eventually

Annie
ps: working hard to be as newbies as Amp and Elmo. Will try to use an all cav russian army next time, allies be warned.

[Magyar Khan]

well many wise words are spreaded.

we knew ashis with some muskets were -too- strong. and i remember clearly at start of MI who of teh old vets found tehm at quickest and who were defending totomi on comp with it. one of them is even quoted somewhere in HOF as a very skilled and somewhat honourable player... and not allowing others a rematch.

well he was (not seen since MTW) a limited player. ofcourse a good player will find teh stronger units quick. that doesnt say he must use them. imaginin what would happen if we all used the ashimusket combo...

well, i also read here that u say this can be counterd and that can be countered. ofcourse all armies can be countered succesfully.
but in theory, 2 best players with either 10 best armies at their proposal could end up in a 100-0 score for one of them.

u just dont know what is facing u when u deploy. if a balanced army cant beat an army that relies either heavily on rock, scissor or paper than teh balanced army is doomed. but even if u take rock, teh enemy may choose for paper and so on.
teh game as is now has to many pickrightunitluck elements.

EDIT btw teh use of ashirushmusket combo or thin lloose lines cav requires some skill and knowledge to maximize effect.
i myself dont want to waste time on things that should be solved in the patch/addon but others find joy in finding ingame valid exploits.

[FearofNC]

is this thread about lancers or putting units into 1 line? I think we can all agree that lancers are the most powerful cav unit in the game and any way they are used unbalances the game. but there are h2h units that beat lancers very nicley...i have one that will slaughter a v4 lancer that costs under 1000 florin, so there are tools available to counter lancers, but i still think they should return to the prepatch 1100 florin level ... however, imho, the use of 1 line troops is a viable tatic. there is a great risk in using one line troops and great rewards if done properly.

since my battle with magyar seems to be a part of this discussion...id like to remind all that i had the french faction, no lancers, and magyar had germans with 7 cav, 1 catapult, 3 pavs, 3 swords, and 2 spears. this is not exactly the most balanced army either. the game b4 that one.. the one that we lost, he brought 8 cav, 2 pavs, 3 spears, 2 swords and 1 catapult. now after i saw the army he brought the first game, i naturaly tried to devise an army to counter his army in the second game. there are a few choices:

balanced 4x4x4x4- not a chance... vs 8 cav and arty your well balanced will go down hard. especialy when your facing kocmoc and magyar.

missle heavy- possible, but you must rely on your oppenent being a bit timid ...hoping that he/she doesnt attack right away or that the attack is not well timed. i really dont think magyar is timid, and he generaly likes to attack weather he plays defense or offense...i dont put his timing into question...so missle heavy is out.

spear heavy- again, another possibility..and a good option for defeating the above mentioned army...but since we had recently been accused of corner and tree camping i decided it was best not to play with a slow army that requires a defensive stlye to play, + the map was set in arid, which makes the spears and other foot troops tired and further increases the capability of the cav heavy army such as the one with 8 cav he had brought the game before.

sword heavy- a good option to retain my honor as a true attacker... but equally a stupid army to send against a cav heavy army commanded by an elite general.

sun tzu " know yourself and the enemy and you shall win a thousand times, know yourself but not the enemy then you will win half the time, know your enemy but not yourself and you shall never win "

seems to me good advice.. i knew what magyar was going to bring, but he didnt know what i would bring. he calls it unfair...i say its part of war. i guess im supposed to bring the same army as he does to be considered "fair" but instead i choose a counter army to the one he would bring.. if he wants a fair match then i let him pick the army... and we can both use it. thats the only way to make a battle fair... but even then im sure he would pick a favorite of his... something he thinks i couldnt control... how bout a 1v1 match using your fun turk army magyar? i would enjoy that.

well sense i hope i cleared the air on the battle between me and magyar... shedding a little light into his supposed spear and arb army ( that would have defeated my french cav ) i hope we can get back to the topic of 1 line troops..im intrested to hear what some people actually think about this instead of another discussion on lancers...which has been basicly concluded to the effect of a general belief that lancers are overpowered. again i restate my opinion that 1 line troops are a vaiable tatic that has certin rewards as well as definte disatvantages and would like to discuss this with everyone if given a chance

[Magyar Khan]

well nc as in every post u try to make a fol of me. i didnt say it was unfair. neither did i in teh game. u can call me lazy not to listen where u were.

and i think when listing all cavs dont forget to mention what part of tehm are horsearchery based cav. u know my weakness, my love for them and ur the first to use that knowledge.

i know enuf about sun tzu and if we allw ould live according to it it would get boring online soon.

[FearofNC]

actually my post was not in respone to your "many wise words are spreaded" reply magyar... i was writing mine when you posted yours... i was trying to address yuuki and vex concerning their current discussion of our match, as well as trying to steer the discussion onto something i generally wished to discuss... 1 line units..


" i didnt say it was unfair. neither did i in teh game. u can call me lazy not to listen where u were."

i have not complained about your army nor have i said you complained of mine even though you threatend to destroy my clan and tried to enlist fear members in a mutiney after the battle. if your trying to take the high road by posting one thing here in the org...while saying and doing something else online, then dont expect me to sit here silently reading.

once again you have managed to highjack a thread and turn it into your own personal attack on me and fearfulways ...during my post i said that you were an elite general, your timing was excellent, and you always prefer to attack even while playing defense. three complaments but in return you claim i called you a fool. if you wish to discuss lancers, one line units, or the advantages and disatvantages of having different army types, then by all means plz stay with us.... if not i would suggest you stop with your petty attacks on me before you get one of those nice looking yellow cards for violation of org policy.

[1dread1lahll]

In old STW the same arguement was done on the red zone useage,....some said it was a game feature, others said it was unintended game feature...as it cant be used any longer it seesm the devs 'fixed' a unintended game feature (red zone), question though are 'lancer line' intended by thr devs? Plz dont answer that cause you cant no... at least till RTW is out and can no longer strech a unit out into a line of one..for myself they are unrealistic...much of the crud of lancer lines comes from the unit imbaliance of this unit though,..

[baz]

well ive watched the replay, of your battle and i agree with NCs latest post to some extent, picking an army to counter yours (magy) is a viable tactic and one that is not guaranteed, as for all NC knew you could of bought a spear heavy army (we talk about paper scissors stone, isn't it about what unit you bring in that game too?) in this case it payed off and Nc got the victory. However imo tactics like these don't always make fun game playing because to be honest, refering to replay, im not sure there is much magy could of done to avoid defeat and im not sure there was much skill in NC's play either. basically what im saying is that nicely even armys of 4 cav 4 swords 4 spears 4 missiles make better gameplay and therefore are more fun for everyone but if you guys play competitively then sadly this wont be the case.
i agree with puzz's statements that " the win/loss ratio is not a fair judgement of skill on the battlefield" imo it is mainly a judge of unit selection and this is put luck to a certain extent, if we want this variable of the battle taken out then we should set armies that should be used in competeitive battles .. just my opinion of the situation as a neutral

getting back to lancers in a line anyway, i think its lancers that are the problem here not the single lines, single lines are are viable tactic but as i said above perhaps not the most fun for game playing

[LittleGrizzly]

im no expert on this but the one line tactic works because of charge bonus doesnt it?

(if not ignoore all below and laugh at me )

well how is it at all realistic that u spread 4 lines on lancer out into thin line making roughly 240 lancers hit 180 units (3 swords) or 200 units (spears) or a few cav with the 3 swords each sword gets charged by 3/4 of a lancer unit but receives 4 charge bonuses against them so is it really fair that 3/4 of a unit has 4 times the charge of a full one ?

on lancers in general i think they need a price increase and byz inf need a price increase and spears in general need a morale raise and all range should shoot slightly faster with a bit more ammo added to make them more effective versus a rush

grizz out.....

[Acronym]

I wonder if anyone using all cav army has come across an all pike army spread one line thin

[Magyar Khan]

hi nc

plz let me point out that i didnt hijack this thread till u started mentioning my name, by saying "he calls it unfair".

and u asked me to try to destroy your clan remember....

good day
-----------------------

to teh org staff,
if i am wrong in my chonology of who is hijacking or accusing who of what plz inform me if i am close to a yellow card. it seems after Tgate and the stringed friends another one is on my back.

[youssof_Toda]

Quote[/b] (Puzz3D @ Jan. 21 2003,13:49)]Vex,

The designer has expressly stated that he wants unbalanced armies to require tailored counter armies.

That's the same thing I'd say if I designed a game and messed up the balancing issues.

[Magyar Khan]

well we come back to teh same point youssof, its about teh game is aimed for sp. and spain needed a boost i read somewhere.