IGN Faction Feature: Holy Roman Empire

[Kraxis]

I have also noticed that the dismounted knights don't have any sort of polears, which was the general way to go about on foot for the High middle ages knights.
One of the best MTW units was the Dismounted Chivalric Knights. I see no comparable unit.

Also, I'm rather surprised that there are no rock solid backbone of the army, such as the everpresent FMAA or CMAA of MTW. They weren't terribly fun (though as the HRE the FMAA were indispenseable and a great joy when they finally arrived), but they gave a good sense of of catholic armies. Strong, slow, solid and well armoured.

[econ21]

I'm wondering if the dismounted knights are replacing the MAA? I never found the distinction between knights and men-at-arms in MTW that convincing anyway. The standard Catholic Medieval warrior was a man-at-arms ie an armoured melee fighter, usually with a horse. He might have been a knight in status or not, but I am not sure it meant that much difference in terms of combat function.

The English chivalric knights at Agincourt have polearms. Maybe the HRE (and the French) are supposed to rely on pikes and halberds? That could be how M2TW represents the English as having better dismounted knights, while the Continentals get better mounted ones.

[Monarch]

I think I'll play these guys first :)

A nice northern faction, with alot of different ways to go, should also see alot of action due to position. Plus Huscarls and Zwiehanders :D

[Kraxis]

I'm not so much for the MAA in terms of historicity, but as a good core for the army in gameplay.
I doubt you will get many knights very easily. They are bound to be rather expensive (elite and cavalry). So I think armies could end up lacking some oomph in the infantry regard. Besides the dismounted knights seems to lack the lance, and only go about with their maces and swords.

If you really want to talk about the MAA in historical terms, then you can regard them as household infantry. Trained and equipped by the lord to be good troops, like Sergeants, but without the 'political' aspirations of the latter (to become knights). That is certainly not far out.

I wonder if the king's bodyguards can be dismounted. I found that when I 'unlocked' dismounting for all mounted troops, that the king's and princes' bodyguards were absolutely killers when dismounted in High. Especially against cavalry of course, but also in general on defense.

I have to agree with others, that if I get this game, I will likely try out the HRE first. All those MTW experiences really pull at me. So when people start posting faction AARs of the HRE I will read carefully. And if it sounds like MTW just a bit, I'm sold.

[Nathanael]

Re: polearms vs. maces for dismounted knights -

It's not yet certain whether polearms have the giant bonus vs cavalry (or even any bonus) like they did (and should) in MTW. If they don't have that, and both polearms and maces are effective vs. armor, then it's only going to be a cosmetic difference (except for bonus abilities, like spear wall).

[the_mango55]

Re: polearms vs. maces for dismounted knights -

It's not yet certain whether polearms have the giant bonus vs cavalry (or even any bonus) like they did (and should) in MTW. If they don't have that, and both polearms and maces are effective vs. armor, then it's only going to be a cosmetic difference (except for bonus abilities, like spear wall).

They did in the demo.

[Barkhorn1x]

I have to agree with others, that if I get this game, I will likely try out the HRE first. All those MTW experiences really pull at me. So when people start posting faction AARs of the HRE I will read carefully. And if it sounds like MTW just a bit, I'm sold.

HRE for sure for me.

BTW, new rig just arrived and is sitting in the box right next to my desk. Only 4 hours to quitting time!!!

Barkhorn.

[Gurkhal]

The HRE looks good to me. My all time favorite faction from the previous MTW.

[Furious Mental]

In case anyone was wondering, these are the Reiters and Forlorn Hope.

[Cheetah]

I'm wondering if the dismounted knights are replacing the MAA?

The Sicilians have Dismounted Italian MAA (which seems to be slightly inferior to dismounted knights), so it seems some factions will have them, whereas others will not. Which is good news IMO.


ps. the thing I dont't understand is that they don't have mounted MAAs, not that they need any more cavarly ...

[econ21]

The Sicilians have Dismounted Italian MAA (which seems to be slightly inferior to dismounted knights), so it seems some factions will have them, whereas others will not. Which is good news IMO.

Good point. I think reinforces the idea that there might be slight variations in the quality of dismounted knight:
England (polearm knight)>HRE (mace knight)>Sicily (sword MAA)
From Agincourt, France seems to get both the polearm type and the sword/shield type knight. I agree some differentiation would be good news at least for variety. (& for history, the English do need some anti-cav dismounted knights)

ps. the thing I dont't understand is that they don't have mounted MAAs, not that they need any more cavarly ...

They being Sicily? My hunch is that Sicilian high period knights dismount to be MAAs. Of course, Sicily does have Mounted Sergeants but this time round I think they may dismount to be spearmen or something. The IGN description of the Italian dismounted MAAs sound more like what I understood the term MAAs to refer to in history - ie a heavily armoured fighter, usually with horse. The faction preview says they are knights + lesser troops, but wear plate.

[Drake]

It sounds like they may have cut down the HRE's starting position. In M:TW HRE started with a lot of provinces and facilities, whereas now they kick off with 6 (I count?) settlements. Possibly a more fair reflection of the time, since the Western Roman Empire wa sin decline by this stage?

EDIt: Hit post too early. My point being that this might make the HRE easier to play since it gives them less territory to cover and manage. In the first game there was so much to be done before you could start getting into everyone else properly. Having cities like Prague nearby for easier conquest should allow expansion at a more comfortable rate but is this proximity to the Pope accurate? Being next door to him and Sicily seems a bit off to me, but then I'm no history buff.

[Faenaris]

... snip ...

EDIt: Hit post too early. My point being that this might make the HRE easier to play since it gives them less territory to cover and manage. In the first game there was so much to be done before you could start getting into everyone else properly. Having cities like Prague nearby for easier conquest should allow expansion at a more comfortable rate but is this proximity to the Pope accurate? Being next door to him and Sicily seems a bit off to me, but then I'm no history buff.

The same reason why I am looking forward to playing the HRE this time. In MTW, you had a huge empire, lots of hostile (and opportunistic) neighbours and a distrustful pope. Combine that with the fact that in one turn, the enemy could be all over you and the HRE was one though cookie.

This time, you will get some more advance warning and a smaller empire to start. Me like that. :) And those Zweihanders are just drop dead gorgeous. I'll be using them alot. :)

About the proximity to the pope, I have no idea either. I thought Venice, Milan, the other Italian city states and Sicily were much much closer neighbours to the Pope when compared to the HRE.

[aWisler]

looks to be a fun faction, im gonna play england and french campaigns first though, than sicily or this. im not as interested in this because im not a big fan of mostly pike infantry. does the holy roman empire start out with control of the pope or what?

While im at it, i cant make new topics for some reason so ill ask this question
ive never played the midieval games, only rome TW, can someone explain in detail the religious aspect of the game, for example if im england and i declare war on france, will i be excommunicated no matter what if i keep attacking? and if i am excommunicated, after i take over france could i restore relations with the pope?