Viking Units overpowered?

[Sensei Warrior]

So we disagree, which is not a problem. Funnily enough I usually found myself at the .com arguing for greater difficulty within MTW and not what appears to be less, though I do feel that the Huscarles make it too easy for me as the player to conquer the map. This isn't too much of a problem as I don't overuse them anyway, but also when facing them, I despise using those sort of tactics mentioned previously against them.

I feel that conquering the game through the overuse of Huscarles is boring as well. I suppose if I started a VI game w/ the Saxons or Mercians I would definately entertain limiting their use. I know I use Huscarles sparingly in the Early game when playing the Danish or after I've conquered Norway, Sweden, or Denmark. A little self-restraint can go a long way.

I've conquered the whole map as the welsh several times on expert. Each time I've found that archers were of vital importance when shooting the huscarles to pieces combined with royal bodyguards and mounted nobles (one faction doesn't get mounted nobles at all, and I can't remember if it's the Irish or the Welsh?) to run them down.

I am almost positive the Welsh get Mounted Nobles, so by default the Irish don't have Mounted Nobles, although I could be wrong.

Originally Posted by FORUMRULES
Several separate forums exists for the purpose of grouping the messages by their primary topic. Care should be taken to post messages only in the forum meant for that type of content. The staff makes every attempt to keep topics in their correct forums. Topics posted in an inappropriate forum will usually be closed shortly, with a final message explaining the transfer to another forum and a link to that forum, where the discussion can continue. Please note that the supposed inactivity of some forums compared to others is not an excuse to post messages in the wrong place.

I agree with Mithrandir. I definately made an error in judgement with my initial post, thus the apology to Mithrandir. I could have made my point very easily without the historical references, and should have.

I never mind when the moderators call me to task, they seem to be very fair when enforcing the rules and often give a little leeway to boot.

[Mithrandir]

No apology needed .

The reason I enforce this rule a little tight is that I've seen many a thread drift completely off topic, leaving the original contence of the thread undebated. This is an MTW forum ,while I understand that historical references can be made and it sometimes overlaps, it should not be the main portion of a thread.

All is well.

As for the original topic:
I've only bought VI to enable me to keep playing online, I've only had a few games in that era, but it struck me as the most unbalanced era of the 4....

[Martok]

As for the original topic:
I've only bought VI to enable me to keep playing online, I've only had a few games in that era, but it struck me as the most unbalanced era of the 4....

Yup, gotta agree with you there. Not that the Viking campaign isn't still fun. It *is* the era with the biggest disparities among factions, however.

It's not like the main campaign, where the difference among factions (in terms of difficulties and playing styles) are often a matter of degrees. The Mercians, Saxons, and Vikings are far and away the easiest factions in the VI campaign; while the Northumbrians and Welsh (some would also argue the Picts and/or the Scots) are easily the hardest. And the unbalanced factor is further magnified by the fact that the VI map has far fewer factions crammed into a much smaller area. On the larger map of the main campaign, the increased number of both factions and provinces helps cover for the various imbalances that exist; VI does not have this same double buffer.

[Geezer57]

I am almost positive the Welsh get Mounted Nobles, so by default the Irish don't have Mounted Nobles, although I could be wrong.

The Welsh get Royal Bodyguards and Medium Cavalry, but not Mounted Nobles. Other than the Vikings (who don't get any cavalry other than Viking Raider Cav [puny melee stats]), the Welsh are the only ones that can't build MN's. Once they've teched up to be able to build Royal Bodyguards, they don't really miss the MN's, given proper use of the RB's. RB's are a smaller unit, so shouldn'd be thrown willy-nilly into melee - on the other hand, the valor up more quickly. It all balances out...

[Sensei Warrior]

I really should start a VI game to give me a refresher course in this stuff. I don't even remember the Med. Cavalry.

[Roark]

Uhh, yeah...

"Medium Cavalry"???

I fought my first unit of AI-produced Joms Vikings last night after a year of playing VI. Nasty. Very nasty. They made my Pictish berserkers look like bedwetting mama's boys...

Vikings are easy to fight if you're Irish. 2 Kerns to each Huscarle unit does the job nicely. Much cheaper too.

[caravel]

The Welsh get Royal Bodyguards and Medium Cavalry, but not Mounted Nobles.

By medium cavalry do you mean the Horsemen? These are light cavalry IIRC, but are they available to the Welsh? I can't remember...

I've always considered working on a mod for a more balanced VI campaign, though never found the time for it.

[Biggus Diccus]

The Welsh get Royal Bodyguards and Medium Cavalry, but not Mounted Nobles. Other than the Vikings (who don't get any cavalry other than Viking Raider Cav [puny melee stats]), the Welsh are the only ones that can't build MN's. Once they've teched up to be able to build Royal Bodyguards, they don't really miss the MN's, given proper use of the RB's. RB's are a smaller unit, so shouldn'd be thrown willy-nilly into melee - on the other hand, the valor up more quickly. It all balances out...

By 'Medium Cavalry' I assume you mean Horsemen? I have just finished a Welsh Campaign and I never missed the mounted nobles. Why? Because you can get +2 valour Horsemen with Horse Breeder and there is a +1 valour province close by the Welsh homelands (owned by the Saxons). At +3 valour they are much better than 0 valour Mounted Nobles.

[Geezer57]

By 'Medium Cavalry' I assume you mean Horsemen? I have just finished a Welsh Campaign and I never missed the mounted nobles. Why? Because you can get +2 valour Horsemen with Horse Breeder and there is a +1 valour province close by the Welsh homelands (owned by the Saxons). At +3 valour they are much better than 0 valour Mounted Nobles.

I often use the Yas Units Master Tool to refresh my memory, especially when I'm away from home and using a computer other than my own. It's usually quite accurate, but a few (mostly niggling) errors have crept in, and the name of this cavalry unit is one of them. In-game they're Horsemen, in the UMT they're Medium Cavalry - that's how the discrepancy came about, apologies to all that were confused by it.

With base charge of 6, Attack 3, Defense 0, Armor 2, and Morale 4, these units are emminently suitable for the proper role of cavalry: harrassing/flanking/pursuit. So used correctly, they do just fine - don't expect them to work out ideally in sustained melee against strong opponents. Their defense is too low for that. At valor +3 though, their stats go up to 6/6/3/2/10, and they make base Mounted Nobles look fairly punk (6/4/2/3/8). Plus their purchase/support costs are much lower. I like your thinking, Biggus!