Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: Romans limited cavalry?

  1. #1
    Member Member bones58's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Glasgow, Scotland
    Posts
    61

    Question Romans limited cavalry?

    Why do the games descriptions of factions ie"Gauls:strong close combat troops etc"Then why say that the romans have limited cavalry when clearly they dont.

  2. #2

    Default Re: Romans limited cavalry?

    That may be because the Romans are strictly limited to horse-based troops for calvary, whereas other factions get chariots, chariot archers, horse archers, elephants, etc. All Roman calvary are melee-only. A unit of praetorian calvary is fundamentally no different from a unit of equites, only with better stats/morale

  3. #3
    Alienated Senior Member Member Red Harvest's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Searching for the ORG's lost honor
    Posts
    4,657

    Default Re: Romans limited cavalry?

    I think it is more a description of how it should be, but not what is reflected in the game. The cav upkeep and availability are way out of balance. The Romans do get mounted javelins, as do some other factions, and they have many other special units.
    Rome Total War, it's not a game, it's a do-it-yourself project.

  4. #4

    Default Re: Romans limited cavalry?

    That's true, I totally forgot about the calvary auxilia. Perhaps if you limit the Romans to legionary calvary as their top unit...?

  5. #5
    Squirrel Watcher Member Sinner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    390

    Default Re: Romans limited cavalry?

    I suspect that the flavour text was written a long time ago with the content detailing how the factions should have been, but over time playtesting showed that the Roman cavalry was too weak for the current game engine and rather than revamp that (ie. lots of work) they just tweaked the Roman cavalry stats (ie. a quick fix).

  6. #6
    Iron Fist Senior Member Husar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    15,617

    Default Re: Romans limited cavalry?

    I don´t really understand that as well, especially because the greeks´ cavalry is crap compared to the roman cavalry(no, I don´t mean macedonians, I am talking about the city states ) If the bug that prevents generals from being upgraded would be fixed, the greek cities would at least have good generals, but as it is now, the romans do have their praetorian cavalry which is a pretty good heavy cavalry unit, not really what I expected "weak cavalry" to be, I´d say take the praetorians away and give the greeks some greek heavy cav.


    "Topic is tired and needs a nap." - Tosa Inu

  7. #7
    For TosaInu and the Org Senior Member The_Emperor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    The United Kingdom of Great Britain
    Posts
    4,354

    Default Re: Romans limited cavalry?

    This has been discussed before, and historically even the Greeks had better Cavalry than the Pre-Marius Romans...

    Equites should really, really suck. Sadly they don't.

    At any rate the Europa Barbarorum MOD for RTW will address this.
    "Believe those who are seeking the truth; doubt those who find it."

  8. #8
    Squirrel Watcher Member Sinner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    390

    Default Re: Romans limited cavalry?

    Praetorian Cavalry is powerful, but as a tier 5 unit it takes a lot of resources and time to build up to and then is also expensive and slow to recruit. Comparable heavy cavalry in other factions only requires tier 3 or 4.

    Given that the later Roman heavy cavalry was very reliant on Germanic recruits, I think the Praetorian Cavalry compares well with Gothic Cavalry, the sort of elite German horsemen you'd expect to find their way into the Praetorians.

  9. #9

    Default Re: Romans limited cavalry?

    An answer to the first post:

    Personally i dont think that the Romans have limited cavilry. However i think i reason for this "limitation" could be as someone explained earlier: That essentially the actual HORSE used for Equites, Roman Cav, Legion Cav and Praetorian Cav does not change. I dont see any difference in the amount of armour the horse wears or how the horse looks.
    forums.clankiller.com
    "Ive played 7 major campaigns and never finished one. I get tired of war."

  10. #10
    Squirrel Watcher Member Sinner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    390

    Default Re: Romans limited cavalry?

    The Roman horses are unarmoured, but so are those used by most other factions since they all use the same mount models... it's only the few cataphract units, available to the Armenians, Parthians and Seleucids, that have armoured horses.

    There are some differences between the Roman cavalry types: Cavalry Auxlia use light horses while Legionary Cavalry use heavy, while the others all use medium.

  11. #11
    Alienated Senior Member Member Red Harvest's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Searching for the ORG's lost honor
    Posts
    4,657

    Default Re: Romans limited cavalry?

    The cav armour is not changing, but the horses are of course. Equites/Roman Cavalry are on "medium horse", cav auxilia on "light horse" (as befits missile skirmishers), legionary/praetorian/general's cavalry are on heavy horse.
    Rome Total War, it's not a game, it's a do-it-yourself project.

  12. #12
    green thingy Member the tokai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    over here you silly
    Posts
    246

    Default Re: Romans limited cavalry?

    If you don't count legionary cavalry as pre-marian cavalry (and it shouldn't be) then roman cavalry is actually quite limited. Not nearly as limited as greek cavalry put equites aren't that powerfull and although the auxillia cav can be usefull, it isn't that strong either. Not much more powerfull than the jav cav of the greeks but with much higher requirements.

    Post-marian cavalry on the other hand is way to powerfull, not only for roman cavalry, because it is simply to powerfull for any faction of that time to have.
    Wheel down, wheel down to southward! Oh, Gooverooska, go!
    And tell the Deep-Sea Viceroys the story of our woe;
    Ere, empty as the shark's egg the tempest flings ashore,
    The Beaches of Lukannon shall know their sons no more!

    Rudyard Kipling, Lukannon

  13. #13
    Squirrel Watcher Member Sinner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    390

    Default Re: Romans limited cavalry?

    Compare Praetorian Cavalry with Gothic Cavalry, Scythian Nobles, Sacred Band Cavalry, Cataphracts, Cappadocian Cavalry, Companion Cavalry and Sarmatian Mercenaries - they all have comparable stats.

  14. #14
    Member Member bones58's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Glasgow, Scotland
    Posts
    61

    Default Re: Romans limited cavalry?

    Personnaly i thought preatorion (spelling?) cavalry were far to overpowered maybe reduced the roman calvery to equties,roman cavalry and auxilla.

  15. #15
    Lesbian Rebel Member Mikeus Caesar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Ostrayliah
    Posts
    3,590

    Default Re: Romans limited cavalry?

    especially because the greeks´ cavalry is crap compared to the roman cavalry
    Fool!! You do not know the power of just 2 units of greek cavalry when it is flanking!!! Thanks to greek cavalry, i have won many a battle....
    Quote Originally Posted by Ranika
    I'm being assailed by a mental midget of ironically epic proportions. Quick as frozen molasses, this one. Sharp as a melted marble. It's disturbing. I've had conversations with a braying mule with more coherence.


  16. #16
    green thingy Member the tokai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    over here you silly
    Posts
    246

    Default Re: Romans limited cavalry?

    Yeah but roman cavalry can do that too, and most of them even better. Greek cavalry is still effective because all cavalry is overpowered. Some are just more overpowered than others.
    Wheel down, wheel down to southward! Oh, Gooverooska, go!
    And tell the Deep-Sea Viceroys the story of our woe;
    Ere, empty as the shark's egg the tempest flings ashore,
    The Beaches of Lukannon shall know their sons no more!

    Rudyard Kipling, Lukannon

  17. #17
    Senior Member Senior Member Oaty's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    2,863

    Default Re: Romans limited cavalry?

    Was Roman cavalry weak in the terms of numbers or performance? The Romans never relied on high amounts of cavalry too often.

    An easy way to reflect this is to have a CAVALRY POPULATION.

    Not only do you have to have enough men but you also need enough horses. Now all that would be needed is a good base number for each territory and the horse/stable class buildings can increase there production rate just like farms can. I think this would actually be a good implementation into the game. This would also prevent running into 15 units of Macedonian cavalry.

    I think this needs a thread of it's own and with luck we'll see it in a patch
    When a fox kills your chickens, do you kill the pigs for seeing what happened? No you go out and hunt the fox.
    Cry havoc and let slip the HOGS of war

  18. #18
    Needs more flowers Moderator drone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Moral High Grounds
    Posts
    9,286

    Post Re: Romans limited cavalry?

    Quote Originally Posted by oaty
    An easy way to reflect this is to have a CAVALRY POPULATION.

    Not only do you have to have enough men but you also need enough horses. Now all that would be needed is a good base number for each territory and the horse/stable class buildings can increase there production rate just like farms can. I think this would actually be a good implementation into the game. This would also prevent running into 15 units of Macedonian cavalry.
    Maybe a scheme similar to the mercenary availabilty? Some territories with the ability to generate lots of cav (spain, scythia), some with very little. I like this idea.
    The .Org's MTW Reference Guide Wiki - now taking comments, corrections, suggestions, and submissions

    If I werent playing games Id be killing small animals at a higher rate than I am now - SFTS
    Si je n'étais pas jouer à des jeux que je serais mort de petits animaux à un taux plus élevé que je suis maintenant - Louis VI The Fat

    "Why do you hate the extremely limited Spartan version of freedom?" - Lemur

  19. #19

    Default Re: Romans limited cavalry?

    All cavalry in the game strikes me as packing far too much a punch for the stuff of pre-stirrup days. However, from a gameplay perspective realism in this respect would probably result in players coming to the same conclusion that militaries of the day did: cavalry is of limited use relative to its high costs. If scouting and other more utilitarian concerns were a part of the game, players might still feel motivated to invest in cavalry units. But, as they aren't, the impact of cavalry in the game has been upgraded to more medieval-like levels to make cav units more desirable in combat. Combat is much more dynamic as a result, if less realistic. (Of course, where realism's concerned these armies of 3,000 men should run at least ten times that size, so strict realism isn't in the offing anyway.)

    Archery seems a bit impressive for Roman times, as well. So far as I can tell, Archery Auxilia with foundry-level weapons might as well be carrying English longbows. It isn't particularly realistic, but it certainly makes those AI sieges more survivable without massive garrisons.

    --Warspite

  20. #20
    Magister Vitae Senior Member Kraxis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Frederiksberg, Denmark
    Posts
    7,129

    Default Re: Romans limited cavalry?

    Quote Originally Posted by oaty
    Was Roman cavalry weak in the terms of numbers or performance? The Romans never relied on high amounts of cavalry too often.
    You have got it... The Equites were neither bad warriors nor were they badly equiped. But considering that there were 300 of them to a legion there would only be 1200 to a full consular army. Hardly a force to fear if you had a more regular ancient army. The romans knew it so they only intended the equites to keep up for long enough to let the infantry win.
    When the equites fought, they fought bravely, hard and with great determination (they were after all the most roman of all, and thus had to be that much more stoic in battle, social conventions demanded it). They were dashing and with great flair but simply too few and employed by amateurs and people who generally didn't know what to do with them (romans were infantrymen even when commanding the equites). When there were commanders who knew how to use cavalry the equites didn't let them down.
    You may not care about war, but war cares about you!


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO