Is RTW Cavalry a bit too much?

**antisocialmunky** · 07-21-2005, 16:10

Yes.

**econ21** · 07-21-2005, 16:23

Yes, I agree that cavalry is overpowered in vanilla RTW. I'd recommend you try Rome Total Realism - they weaken light cavalry a fair bit. I think it gets cavalry back to the kind of power it had in MTW. This particularly affects the Romans, as they lose their fictious but extremely powerful "legionnary cavalry". Nonetheless, cavalry can still be very strong in RTR - horse archers and javelin cavalry are good and recently I have been marvelling at the power of Companion bodyguards.

**conon394** · 07-21-2005, 16:32

Yep cavalry is ridiculously overpowered.

Cavalry in classical times was often (as it is today in armored format) the arm of decision. Alexander of Macedon, Hannibal Barca, and others gained much of their success through the correct use of cavalry. Scythia and Parthia

It may have been the arm of decision used by the above generals and nations, but none of them could or did drive it through any decent quality heavy infantry (Hoplites, Macedonians, Romans etc..), head-on like you can in RTW.

**Ptah** · 07-22-2005, 11:10

Originally Posted by conon394

It may have been the arm of decision used by the above generals and nations, but none of them could or did drive it through any decent quality heavy infantry (Hoplites, Macedonians, Romans etc..), head-on like you can in RTW.

But then again, none of the ancient heavy infantry were merely 5~6 ranks deep.

**Oaty** · 07-23-2005, 06:53

Originally Posted by Ptah

But then again, none of the ancient heavy infantry were merely 5~6 ranks deep.

Hate to tell you but historically the Romans fought in ranks that deep or that is how historians believed they fought.

A cohort would march around in a square formation due to that is the most maneuverable formation. But when they engaged they filled in the gap. A cohort with 80 men would make almost a perfect 9 by 9 square. So when they filled the gap they were probably only 4-5 ranks deep

**Cheater** · 07-23-2005, 11:27

Yes, I agree that cavalry is overpowered in vanilla RTW. I'd recommend you try Rome Total Realism - they weaken light cavalry a fair bit. I think it gets cavalry back to the kind of power it had in MTW. This particularly affects the Romans, as they lose their fictious but extremely powerful "legionnary cavalry". Nonetheless, cavalry can still be very strong in RTR - horse archers and javelin cavalry are good and recently I have been marvelling at the power of Companion bodyguards.

Actually, it's the Praetorian cavalry that gets ousted in RTR. The Legionnary cavalry stays... or at least, they do in version 5.1. I don't know about the other versions, though.

**antisocialmunky** · 07-23-2005, 16:40

If my understanding is correct.

The only true Shock Cavalry in that period were possessed by the Macedonians- who had superior horses, and the Selucid and Parthians.

Lancers, Companions, and Cataphracts.

Most other cavalry was used for maneuvering and flanking.

**Ptah** · 07-23-2005, 18:49

Hate to tell you but historically the Romans fought in ranks that deep or that is how historians believed they fought.

A cohort would march around in a square formation due to that is the most maneuverable formation. But when they engaged they filled in the gap. A cohort with 80 men would make almost a perfect 9 by 9 square. So when they filled the gap they were probably only 4-5 ranks deep

So a typical Roman army of, let's say, 10 thousand men would line up its soldiers 4~5 ranks deep in a single line, which would spread the formation of 2000 x 5 men for 4 kilometers wide?

Or would they be stacked up with individual units of 80 men/5~6 ranks in the first line, second-line units behind them, third-line units behind, and reserves in the rear?

**edyzmedieval** · 07-23-2005, 20:52

I agree about this.

A single unit of a Gaul general completely smacked my 3 units of Hastati, 2 units of Principes and 2 units of Roman Archers...

I was so furious....