Results 1 to 30 of 38

Thread: Cavalry

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    EB II Romani Consul Suffectus Member Zaknafien's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Somewhere inside the Military-Industrial Complex
    Posts
    3,607

    Default Re: Calvary

    cavalry was primarily used to smash a pinned force in the "hammer and anvil" technique perfected by Alexander. its uses before and after this have also mainly been scouting and screening, and was never intended to be used as a decisive arm.

    regardless of training, a horse will NOT charge into a line of spears and shields. The best you can get is have it close enough to allow you to swing a longer sword or thrust with a spear, but the fear effect of a line of horses bearing down on the enemy was what broke them. IF a line of infantry holds, it will defeat cavalry anytime. When they turn and break is when cavalry will slaughter them with better speed and reach.


    "urbani, seruate uxores: moechum caluom adducimus. / aurum in Gallia effutuisti, hic sumpsisti mutuum." --Suetonius, Life of Caesar

  2. #2
    Now sporting a classic avatar! Member fallen851's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    799

    Default Re: Calvary

    Quote Originally Posted by Zaknafien
    cavalry was primarily used to smash a pinned force in the "hammer and anvil" technique perfected by Alexander. its uses before and after this have also mainly been scouting and screening, and was never intended to be used as a decisive arm.

    regardless of training, a horse will NOT charge into a line of spears and shields. The best you can get is have it close enough to allow you to swing a longer sword or thrust with a spear, but the fear effect of a line of horses bearing down on the enemy was what broke them. IF a line of infantry holds, it will defeat cavalry anytime. When they turn and break is when cavalry will slaughter them with better speed and reach.
    Well horses will charge into a line of spears, but I think this is a pretty good description.

    One thing to remember is the intimidation factor. It is scary to have a line of horses charging at you at a gallop. Poor trained conscript infantry may run before the cavalry even hits. This is why I believe much of the cavalry in the game should have the "frightens_infantry" line added in the export_descr_units.txt. The intial charge value of the cavalry should also be very high.

    Only determined infantry would stand and fight, and if they survived the fear factor and the initial charge, then the cavalry would be slaughtered. Thus cavalry would not have near the armor of infantry.

    This system is the most realistic because it forces people to time their cavalry charges just right. Charge too soon and you don't break the enemy line, cavalry slaughtered. Charge at the right time and you'll break the morale of the enemy, and cause them to rout.

    Cavalry would be great for mopping up archer/peltasts as well.
    "It's true that when it's looked at isolated, Rome II is a good game... but every time I sit down to play it, every battle, through every turn, I see how Rome I was better. Not unanimously, but ultimately." - Dr. Sane

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6eaBtzqqFA#t=1h15m33s

  3. #3
    Texan Member BigTex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Arlington, Texas, United States of America.
    Posts
    1,187

    Default Re: Calvary

    Quote Originally Posted by fallen851
    Well horses will charge into a line of spears, but I think this is a pretty good description.

    One thing to remember is the intimidation factor. It is scary to have a line of horses charging at you at a gallop. Poor trained conscript infantry may run before the cavalry even hits. This is why I believe much of the cavalry in the game should have the "frightens_infantry" line added in the export_descr_units.txt. The intial charge value of the cavalry should also be very high.

    Only determined infantry would stand and fight, and if they survived the fear factor and the initial charge, then the cavalry would be slaughtered. Thus cavalry would not have near the armor of infantry.

    This system is the most realistic because it forces people to time their cavalry charges just right. Charge too soon and you don't break the enemy line, cavalry slaughtered. Charge at the right time and you'll break the morale of the enemy, and cause them to rout.

    Cavalry would be great for mopping up archer/peltasts as well.
    Gah cavalry dont need to have their charges amped up. Cavalry are there to destroy the opositions cavalry and then to move on and start a rout by charging a already weakend and engaged foe.

    Cavalry in EB's timeframe werent built like knights were, their purpose was not to soley crush infantry with a massive charge. Heck they don't even couch their lances. Lowering their armor would be unrealistic, they were wealthy landowners for the most part. They could afford the best of the best as far as armor. Cavalry is fine the way it is, and whenever it gets ported to 1.5 it will be perfect.
    Wine is a bit different, as I am sure even kids will like it.
    BigTex
    "Hilary Clinton is the devil"
    ~Texas proverb

  4. #4
    Now sporting a classic avatar! Member fallen851's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    799

    Default Re: Calvary

    I didn't say they were built like knights, and that was not my intention. Rather as someone who is around horses a lot, they are often very intimidating to people who don't know or don't understand them, mostly because the way they communicate is extremely subtle, and of course they have the power at any moment to take your life.

    So having men on horses with the ground shaking charges is intimidating, no matter if they are armored or not.

    Essentially what I'm saying is cavalry should frighten infantry, and conscript town guard crap should rout easily to a charge of a decent cavalry unit. Furthermore, the power of cavalry is in the charge, not the ability to fight on horseback, thus this should be represented. So if the cavalry does not break the infantry with their charge and intimidation factor, it should be slaughtered.

    It should be noted that horses are frail creatures, and to defeat a even a heavily armored horseman only takes a good stab into a critical area of the horse. If the horse is armored, then going after the legs or under the armor to the horses belly (As Carrus has his son's cavalry do at Carrhae to the cataphracts) is quite effective.

    Heavy armor sacrifices mobility, which means the horse should be slower using the "general_horse" designation, and should reduce defensive skill and attack, as you're reducing the mobility and stamina of the fighter.

    So for those reasons is why cavalry would be easier to kill than infantry. I would much rather face a Companion than a Hoplite, simply because I know how to take down a horse, it would be quite easy, and the Hoplite would require much more skill. But to the average person, I'm sure they would not want to face a horseman.

    Lastly, your unwaving support for EB's balancing put into question why I even wrote this, you seem to think everything they do is perfect. That is fine, but it is likely the relationship of cavalry to infantry is going to change dramatically in EB 0.8 because the changes in the stats system in RTW 1.5.

    So it is likely that cavalry charges will be more effective vs infantry in EB 0.8, at least based on what members have said. So now do you still hold onto your claim that cavalry charges are fine in 0.74 ? I think not, because you also advance the claim that whatever the EB team does is fine. So If I decide to increase charge values, it is not ok, but if they do, that's fine, regardless of whether or not you think charge values are ok, because you actually don't have an opinion on the matter, you simply mirror your opinion to whatever the EB team believes at the moment, and since you believed the EB wasn't changing charge values, you attacked me. But since you now know the EB team is likely to make charges more powerful (perhaps not in the form of increasing stats, since the charge system was messed up in 1.2), you have no right to attack me on that issue.

    Ahh blind faith and ignorance at its best.

    Based on the information you had then esentially the only difference between the EB team and I in the way we will adjust stats for 1.5 is I am adding "frightens_infantry" for the reason I described above (EB plans to adjust the charges to make them work properly as well, as at this point they are broken), but of course you didn't attack that point, only the charge value point which is going to change in .8 by the EB team anyway.

    Now I will also be reducing the size of cavalry units for a variety of reasons, though I do suspect that my armor and attack stats will be lower, but my charge values higher, as this have given me a more realistic feel, but you had no way of knowing this.

    Of course when EB 0.8 comes and I adjust the stats and release it, you're free to give your opinion (if you even try my stats... I have a feeling you'll be one of those "I HATE MICHAEL MOORES 9/11 MOVIE... but I never saw it"). I'll welcome corrections to my stats and will present people with research (in the form of in-game tests) about why my stats are correct, that I think most people will agree with if I find someone's correction unnecessary. Otherwise I'll be happy they helped me make my game more realistic.
    Last edited by fallen851; 09-27-2006 at 17:34.
    "It's true that when it's looked at isolated, Rome II is a good game... but every time I sit down to play it, every battle, through every turn, I see how Rome I was better. Not unanimously, but ultimately." - Dr. Sane

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6eaBtzqqFA#t=1h15m33s

  5. #5
    Arrogant Ashigaru Moderator Ludens's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    9,064
    Blog Entries
    1

    Lightbulb Re: Calvary

    Quote Originally Posted by fallen851
    Essentially what I'm saying is cavalry should frighten infantry, and conscript town guard crap should rout easily to a charge of a decent cavalry unit. Furthermore, the power of cavalry is in the charge, not the ability to fight on horseback, thus this should be represented. So if the cavalry does not break the infantry with their charge and intimidation factor, it should be slaughtered.
    I would like to see this also, but I don't know if the A.I. will respond well to that.
    Looking for a good read? Visit the Library!

  6. #6
    Senior Member Senior Member econ21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    9,651

    Default Re: Calvary

    I've noticed infantry in RTR Platinum Edition tend to have the "frightened by nearby enemies" message when near cav, so I assume that mod makes infantry fear cavalry. I've grown to like the modelling of cav in that mod - with the charge, they are devastating - especially if hitting in the rear. But they are very vulnerable to infantry and don't kill much without getting a proper charge off.

  7. #7
    Now sporting a classic avatar! Member fallen851's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    799

    Default Re: Calvary

    The AI seems to do ok with cavalry, as I have balanced vanilla like this. I mean they do as well with cavalry as they do with their other units (ie not very good).

    It makes using cavalry quite a bit harder for the human, and makes battle a lot more interesting in general in my opinion. Cavalry becomes very specialized unit, they are very good at charging and breaking conscript town guard infantry (provided they don't have spears), archers and peltasts, or decent infantry that has been severly weakened or has been charged from the rear. And with the other changes to stats, they fit in very well. One of the general things I've noticed is that units on both sides will rout and reform during battles. So often the AI might be able to rout a group of infantry with a combined infantry/cavalry attack.

    Previously, especially in vanilla, you would just run your cavalry around without much regard for them. Make one mistake and you'll see the remaining horsemen heading for the hills like this. But if you do it right, the enemy will be the one heading for the hills.

    Lastly, just because cavalry is more "armored" doesn't mean they are better than less armored cavalry. Companions will be entirely different (not worse or better) than cataphracts for instance.
    Last edited by fallen851; 09-27-2006 at 19:19.
    "It's true that when it's looked at isolated, Rome II is a good game... but every time I sit down to play it, every battle, through every turn, I see how Rome I was better. Not unanimously, but ultimately." - Dr. Sane

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6eaBtzqqFA#t=1h15m33s

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