Cavalry way overpowered

[discovery1]

BTW, as the Greek I used an all hoplite army(barring my general) and took most of the Balkans. Then again, only the romans had a decent cav force(numbers wise). And the Macedonians. And they would waste their cav in oblique charges against my line. Although, they did seem to aim for the narrow gaps between my units.

[Sethik]

This link, provided by someone at the .com, would probably explain exactly why this would be: https://activision.custhelp.com/cgi-...PVJvbWU*&p_li=

If Activision had CA make fatigue less of a factor in battles, then I wonder what other things they changed so the new RTS/Console players would have an easier time? Maybe, less spear vs. cav bonuses? That might also explain why the RTW Prima guide is the only guide in the TW series which doesn't explain the combat system, with its penalties, bonuses, etc . . . they don't want anyone to know how the real-time battles have been "dumbed-down".

A CA developer in another thread said that wasn't true.

[Morindin]

A CA developer in another thread said that wasn't true.

I'd agree with this as well, as my men usually end up exhausted after a few minutes of fighting on the battlefield. So obviously combat is a huge factor.

The only thing that doesnt seem to get tired at all are wardogs :)

[Armchair Athlete]

1. I have NEVER seen a unit being swept off the field in 6 seconds in RTW. I would challange you to provide a replay of this. I have left Histari fighting Gaul Warbands and come back minutes later to find them still slogging it out.

How many lines of battle in Andrianople, how many men? how good were the generals? Apples to Oranges. By the same account do you really think a battle comprimised of one line and a few hundred men would last all day? I really doubt it.
Have you actually been in a war? I dont know about you, but I cant imagine a fight between two light infantry units going on for very long myself, with all the other crap happening.
The more defence the unit has the longer the battles. This is like bitching in the MTW thread because fights are two quick between highland clansmen. When people have played the campaign right through and are experiancing "20 second fights" with large armies of quality troops then Ill listen.


2. Infact, in RTW, with two good generals units generally will fight almost to the death.
And I would challange this point as well, in RTW units work much better on the invidual scale than they EVER did in MTW. Mass routs are also gone too in RTW, so if you're going to critise RTW for this you have to be more harsh on MTW. Also the ONLY units I have EVER seen rout that quickly have been exhausted Gaul pathetic units already pinned. You'd rout too.
Again I point to my example of Sacred Band infantry being charged again and again and not blinking an eye. The thing that took them down in the end was a volly of Pilum.

What game are you playing? I have defeated entire hoplite amries with pretty much just macedonian Light Lancers, wiping units off the field very quickly. Even Spartan Hoplites succumb much easier than they should from a charge to the rear. Try an all cavalry army, the results will suprise you. Cavalry is too strong due to the speed of fast cavalry, means flaking is much easier and the main counter to cavalry (phalanxes) is very slow to manouver and highly reliant on formation. Cavalry is also much too cheap to rectruit and maintain, come on I mean a basic Iberian Infantry unit having a larger upkeep cost than a 54 man cavalry unit? I would be OK with cavalry being that powerful if they were much more expensive to recruit and maintain, Elephants were balanced well this way, cav shouldn't be that expensive but at least more than basic infantrymen.

[Morindin]

What game are you playing? I have defeated entire hoplite amries with pretty much just macedonian Light Lancers, wiping units off the field very quickly. Even Spartan Hoplites succumb much easier than they should from a charge to the rear. Try an all cavalry army, the results will suprise you. Cavalry is too strong due to the speed of fast cavalry, means flaking is much easier and the main counter to cavalry (phalanxes) is very slow to manouver and highly reliant on formation. Cavalry is also much too cheap to rectruit and maintain, come on I mean a basic Iberian Infantry unit having a larger upkeep cost than a 54 man cavalry unit? I would be OK with cavalry being that powerful if they were much more expensive to recruit and maintain, Elephants were balanced well this way, cav shouldn't be that expensive but at least more than basic infantrymen.

The only times I've used Spartan Hoplites was when played that historic battle, Siege of Sparta, against a human opponent, and my hoplites chewed up everything from any direction, including Elephants.

Also I have played against Carthagians many times and their Sacred Band infantry are pretty much invulnerable to cavalry from any direction.

Early on cavalry is powerful yes, but later on its really quite pitiful. Load up some custom battles and see for yourself.

Also the only counter to cavalry isnt Phalanxs, infact due to their speed they're a pretty crappy counter. Ranged units are pretty good vs cavalry, and Triarii cut them up like theirs no tomorrow, also if you can suck a cavalry unit into melee its pretty much dead.

The speed of cavalry is also about right, i grew up on a farm and ive ridden horses. I always found the light cav quite slow in MTW.
The only problem I have with cavalry is the "school of fish" syndrome and the fact they can change direction without any regard to momentum.

[Morindin]

Maybe this topic needs to be "Lancers are overpowered", because Roman cavalry which is what I have most of my experiance with, is hardly overpowered at all.

[Armchair Athlete]

I have tried custom battles agaist high powered units and early cavalry still does quite well considering its cheap cost. The morale penalty is still the same for being charged in the rear, whether its by Sacred band Cavalry or Equites. And advanced cavalry is just as good late in the game as early cavalry is early in the game, Sacred Band cav and Companions are great. As I said before, their effectiveness I would not mind so much if they were not so cheap to maintain, as someone who grew up with horses as I did you must surely know how expensive they can be to maintain. A bit of cavalry is good, all cavalry/majority cavalry armies are not.

[Morindin]

I have tried custom battles agaist high powered units and early cavalry still does quite well considering its cheap cost. The morale penalty is still the same for being charged in the rear, whether its by Sacred band Cavalry or Equites. And advanced cavalry is just as good late in the game as early cavalry is early in the game, Sacred Band cav and Companions are great. As I said before, their effectiveness I would not mind so much if they were not so cheap to maintain, as someone who grew up with horses as I did you must surely know how expensive they can be to maintain. A bit of cavalry is good, all cavalry/majority cavalry armies are not.

Go check out the screenshots thread in the entrance hall. You will see a screenshot posted by me.

It contains a group of Praeton or whatever Cavalry charging into the flank of a group of Sacred Band, while they [the sacred band] are engaging and pinned by Legions.

Let me tell you something, not only did I take heavy loses, but the Sacred Band took minimal loses and it took a volly of pilums for them to break.

According to you, the Sacred band should have broken and routed right then. Didnt happen.

[Armchair Athlete]

Go check out the screenshots thread in the entrance hall. You will see a screenshot posted by me.

It contains a group of Praeton or whatever Cavalry charging into the flank of a group of Sacred Band, while they [the sacred band] are engaging and pinned by Legions.

Let me tell you something, not only did I take heavy loses, but the Sacred Band took minimal loses and it took a volly of pilums for them to break.

According to you, the Sacred band should have broken and routed right then. Didnt happen.

Seen that screenshot, that was a small generals cavalry unit, not a main cavalry unit. In fact I think the generals cavalry unit is much more balanced than real cavalry, due to its smaller size. I also believe I said in my original post that infantry is only good for defending and conducting sieges, cavalry for everything else, and as that was a siege, my point still holds firm. In a siege it is difficult to get a good run to build up enough speed to crash into the back of a unit, and so the charge momentum is reduced. But you're STILL missing my point. Cavalry is so cheap it can be fielded in large amounts. The best way to counter cavalry is to pin it with one unit then charge with another. Thats a minimum of two units to defeat one unit of cavalry. What are the other cavalry units doing? Charging into the back of whatever unit is attacking the pinned cavalry unit. And thats not even mentioning cavalry with a missile attack. Here is a quick table in which you can see just how cheap cavalry really is

Hastati/Iberian Infantry upkeep per unit - 170 per man - 2.125
Town Watch/Militia Hoplite upkeep per unit - 100 per man - 1.25
Equites upkeep per unit - 110 per man - 2.037
Macedonian Cavalry/Light Lancers upkeep per unit - 140 per man - 2.59

Many of the other units follow these amounts, light infantry being around 170, light cavalry being in the region of 120-140 and militia being 100. Now, to repeat myself a THIRD time, how is that balanced? Why on earth is cavalry cheaper to maintain than light infantry? It is just as easy to get too. Not to mention that cavalry has a much larger move on the campaign map too. Elephants ar every strong too. They are not overpowered I believe because of their very high cost. Now I will say it again, this time even in a new paragraph so you get the point

relative to cost, cavalry is easily the most effective units in the game. They need to be more expensive.

[Red Harvest]

1. I have NEVER seen a unit being swept off the field in 6 seconds in RTW.

WHAT??????? Check the box, you must not have the right game. They rout so fast you can't even issue an order. They will rout and be swept in a few seconds.

Sometimes the whole battle line dissolves in less than 10 seconds.

[Thoros of Myr]

adonys killing rate mod is an improvement. I played the battle of Sparta...took almost 2 hours from start to finish. Units faught long and bloody battles most taking over 5-10 mins to route. I actually had enough time to issue separate flanking orders for each engangment and never onced puased (ofcourse I never did even before this mod) and I had time to watch a little fighting, some really great animations when your down there seeing them duke it out.

[TinCow]

LOL...if the counter to cav is better cav I think that's a slight problem

Why? If you study Roman battles, cavalry almost always exclusively fought the opposing cavalry until one side one. The winner would then flank.

[Kraxis]

Why? If you study Roman battles, cavalry almost always exclusively fought the opposing cavalry until one side one. The winner would then flank.

Because cavalry was the only force that couls make subtle maneuvers. If the other troops could do that too you can be certain that cavalry would have had a very hard time as all commanders would oppose them with their spear units.
Look at Pharsalus, Ceasar was very heavily outnumbered in cavalry (1000 to 7000 or so). What did he do? He blocked the cavalry with spearmen... Cavalry is not the counter, spearmen are, and were.

[Tim]

WHAT??????? Check the box, you must not have the right game. They rout so fast you can't even issue an order. They will rout and be swept in a few seconds.

Sometimes the whole battle line dissolves in less than 10 seconds.

You said it brother. I have not fought a single batte -ok, three or four- that last more than a minute once the main forces are engaged. Its like your watching an auto-resolved battle in real-time. I realized people have different playing styles and expectations, but the combat system needs a lot of work.

Infantry speeds seem fine.
Infantry running speeds seem fast.
Ranged units running speed is insane.
I like the cavalry, but agree with the "school of fish" theory. An initial charge on the flank or rear should be devastating, but is too easy to do.
The combat speed/killing has got to be reduced.

[Morindin]

Seen that screenshot, that was a small generals cavalry unit, not a main cavalry unit. In fact I think the generals cavalry unit is much more balanced than real cavalry, due to its smaller size. I also believe I said in my original post that infantry is only good for defending and conducting sieges, cavalry for everything else, and as that was a siege, my point still holds firm. In a siege it is difficult to get a good run to build up enough speed to crash into the back of a unit, and so the charge momentum is reduced. But you're STILL missing my point. Cavalry is so cheap it can be fielded in large amounts. The best way to counter cavalry is to pin it with one unit then charge with another. Thats a minimum of two units to defeat one unit of cavalry. What are the other cavalry units doing? Charging into the back of whatever unit is attacking the pinned cavalry unit. And thats not even mentioning cavalry with a missile attack. Here is a quick table in which you can see just how cheap cavalry really is

Hastati/Iberian Infantry upkeep per unit - 170 per man - 2.125
Town Watch/Militia Hoplite upkeep per unit - 100 per man - 1.25
Equites upkeep per unit - 110 per man - 2.037
Macedonian Cavalry/Light Lancers upkeep per unit - 140 per man - 2.59

Many of the other units follow these amounts, light infantry being around 170, light cavalry being in the region of 120-140 and militia being 100. Now, to repeat myself a THIRD time, how is that balanced? Why on earth is cavalry cheaper to maintain than light infantry? It is just as easy to get too. Not to mention that cavalry has a much larger move on the campaign map too. Elephants ar every strong too. They are not overpowered I believe because of their very high cost. Now I will say it again, this time even in a new paragraph so you get the point

relative to cost, cavalry is easily the most effective units in the game. They need to be more expensive.

I had a battle last night against the Macedonians. The Macedonians had two armies mainly of hoplites and lancers.

I have 4 units of Triarii, 8 units of Principes, three units of archers, and the rest my own cavalry. I lots that battle (mainly to the damn hoplites) and completely eliminated ALL his cavarly.

My 4 units of Triarii that successfully defeated around 10 units of Lancers and other assorted cavalry and still lived to see another day. The computer even charged withdrew charged withdrew, and used some very clever tactics to lure my Triarii out into the open. Hell some of them did get draw out and surrounded and they still routed his cavalry.
These were FRESH Triarii too that had never seen battle.

You seem to be making your entire basis on the fact that cavalry are overpowered against "swords". This is true, but against Triarii and Aux Spearmen in my experiances they get slaughted.
I wish you could record single player replays because I have plenty of them now of Triarii destroying hordes of Macedonian cavalry.
I dont know what the upkeep of Triarii is (I imagine its quite high) but a 4:10 ratio is OK in my books.

Equites suck by the way, they get slaughtered by a warband in a 1v1.

[Kraxis]

I know this is probably moot, but what about an MP battle?

List here what you normally do and do it against each other.

So far it sounds like the cavalrypeople claim they can carry everything before them, frontally, flanking, whatever...
Spearpeople claim that is not possible.
(please stop me if I have jumped to conclusions)

Well, what about a test? And cheating is very counterproductive here, can't make a point if you change the parameters.
I can understand if someone is inexperienced in MP and might not believe he has a chance, but again this isn't about skill but rather situations.

[Morindin]

Good idea Kraxis

Using the paper-scissors-rock system:

I bet a full army of Triarii will beat a full army of anything cavalry, including Elephants.

I have a feeling (but do not bet) an army of 14 Triarii and 6 Aux Archers will slaugher cavalry even more, perhaps not elephants however.

I bet a full army of Cavalry will beat a full army of anything non spear, as it should do.

[TheDuck]

You said it brother. I have not fought a single batte -ok, three or four- that last more than a minute once the main forces are engaged. Its like your watching an auto-resolved battle in real-time. I realized people have different playing styles and expectations, but the combat system needs a lot of work.

Infantry speeds seem fine.
Infantry running speeds seem fast.
Ranged units running speed is insane.
I like the cavalry, but agree with the "school of fish" theory. An initial charge on the flank or rear should be devastating, but is too easy to do.
The combat speed/killing has got to be reduced.

Interesting, I've done a lot of custom battles to figure out how things compare in 1v1 slug fests as well as realistic matchups. I find it all depends on how you use your units and the experience level of the AI. Higher exp. higher armor is much tougher, and just head to head typically routing happens much much later.

If you are complaining about it being too easy to flank them, you might have a point, in ancient warfare a successful flank could easily route an entire line due to the lack of an infantry unit's ability to quickly change direction (with the exception of the Romans) (I believe this ability is called 'infantry articulation', but my memory is failing me and I'm not looking at one of my many books on Roman military history). The AI does not properly protect its flanks.. and that is bad bad bad.

That said, if you leave gaps in your front line the AI will mercilessly exploit them (unlike MTW AI), I learned that the hard way the first night playing. Now its 'nice neat lines of hastati' backed by velites and covered by equites/triarii on the wings.

I don't particulary have a complaint against the game at all.. I find it fun and challenging. I'm not an MP player, so that is coloring my judgement.. but I find the difficulties of building + defense and cost of those defense units challenging.. and 1:1 battles vs. factions other than the gauls are not a pushover with affordable units. The gauls are realistically weak in comparison to Roman units. More as I get more experience (First Gaul, then Germania!)

And note.. I'm a big fan of MTW also.. and I agree with some of the responses on that also.. To have 300 soldiers surrounding the general and have him not drop in a few seconds was a little odd to me.. but that not withstanding I adore that game (and have never uninstalled it).

Games have quirks.. they are games after all. And balancing a game for MP is something that ties the best of companies up in knots (Warcraft 3 and Starcraft have gone through extensive cycles that lasted years). Creative Assembly strikes me as a company that cares, so if there are MP problems I'm sure they will be addressed.

Veni Vidi Vici!

[Red Harvest]

Not interested in MP, thanks.

Morindin,

Wow. That is some challenge. You get an army of elite spears to face a human army of cav? LOL. That's big of you. You could easily lose in spite of that. Why? You get to be attacker. No tortoising. You have to take the field.

I've already done this fight on very hard with light cav vs. hoplites. I slaughtered the hoplites with rapid flanks on the end units to get them to rout in 2 or 3 seconds then chase or withdraw depending on proximity of enemy. One unit at a time until they were all gone.

[Morindin]

Well hoplites are slow and require their flanks to be protected. Triarii and Aux spearmen suffer no such issues and tend to go into ragged formation when engaging cavalry anyway.

According to you an army full of cavalry will beat anything. I highly contest that. Tonight I will load up a game and try it against the AI myself.

[Armchair Athlete]

what difficulty are you playing on? I was playing on hard battles/med camp map. Try it on hard battles, the AI is much smarter and this is where cavalry REALLY domiate. And I will also add that I defeated an army of about 1000 gauls (all foot troops) with pretty much just 2 units of long shield cav and generals cav, plus some Iberian Infantry and Twon Watch with barely any casualties. I might start another game as Carthage as try to do it again, then show a replay.

[Morindin]

what difficulty are you playing on? I was playing on hard battles/med camp map. Try it on hard battles, the AI is much smarter and this is where cavalry REALLY domiate. And I will also add that I defeated an army of about 1000 gauls (all foot troops) with pretty much just 2 units of long shield cav and generals cav, plus some Iberian Infantry and Twon Watch with barely any casualties. I might start another game as Carthage as try to do it again, then show a replay.

Im playing on Hard/Hard and yes the AI is very effective with its cavalry and even protecting its flanks a lot of the times.
Numerous occasions ive sent out cavalry on the flanks only to have to pull them back because the AI sent out infantry to intercept them, wheeling its infantry around to face the bulk of my main force at the last moment.

Of course after the battle is joined you can usually get your cavalry around the flanks and cause some damage.

The Gauls are easy, dont use them as any form of benchmark for anything. :)