Cavalry comparison

[aluenser]

Hi everyone!

I played R:TW with Julii and found it extremely great.
Now I started a new (long) camapaign with the Seleucid Empire and it's even better. Phalanxes simply rock ;)

Unfortunately, I fancy that the balance of the factions is not quite perfect.
Rome seems to be the mightiest faction around.
This may historically be correct, but in terms of gameplay the factions should be (more or less) perfectly balanced, in my opinion.

But to get down to business: Am I the only one here to mistrust the balance of cavalry units between the factions?

For example, I have the impression that the Roman Praetorian Cavalry is actually one of the best cavalry units at all?! Weren't the Romans supposed to have a "limited" cavalry?
Cataphracts are also pretty nice, but the Companion Cavalry seems pretty shitty to me.
The stats found in export_descr_unit.txt (or whatever the name of the file was), though, let me think else.

Is it possible that there are still a few bugs in R:TW concerning unit/faction balance and/or unit attributes? (playing v1.1)

Did anyone else encounter similar problems w/ Companion Cavalry, or am I doing anything wrong?
What cavalry unit do you like the most?
Please share opinions!

Thanks in advance and greetings,
Arne

PS: Please excuse probable clumsy sentence constructions ;)

[CBR]

The Companions have higher charge value but the Cataphracts have lower upkeep so I just focused on Cataphracts. 4 on each wing to support my center of 8 Phalanx pikemen and you got a nice army

The Romans does have very good cavalry compared to history. SO much for limited cavalry heh


CBR

[aluenser]

The Companions have higher charge value but the Cataphracts have lower upkeep so I just focused on Cataphracts. 4 on each wing to support my center of 8 Phalanx pikemen and you got a nice army

Well, upkeep doesn't bother me much, as in my current campaign (Seleucids) I acquired a fortune of ~1M Denarii.
I want just the best possible infantry slaughterer.

Greets

[CBR]

Well it depends how you are going to use the cavalry. Cataphracts have better overall combat power: att/def 7/23 v Companions 10/17

So Companions are best when doing the rear/flank attack while Cataphracts are better at the frontal attacks.


CBR

[aluenser]

Well it depends how you are going to use the cavalry. Cataphracts have better overall combat power: att/def 7/23 v Companions 10/17

So Companions are best when doing the rear/flank attack while Cataphracts are better at the frontal attacks.

That's exactly what I had expected from Cataphracts/Companions... but I'm having the impression that Cataphracts perform better on both occasions.

[CBR]

In my Seleucid campaign my Cataphracts did fine in both roles. If they already can rout most enemy infantry with flank/rear attacks then there is not much need for the overall weaker Companions.

If none of them can rout some elite infantry unit then the Cataphract's overall better stats will give it an advantage over Companions.


CBR