Can you explain...Cavalry Vs Spearmen

**Cheetah** · 12-20-2006, 01:29

Originally Posted by Keith_the_Great

if what i've been reading here is true about cav vs spear, and CA aren't likely to change this with any future patch,

CA is aware of the problem.

**Puzz3D** · 12-20-2006, 13:53

Originally Posted by Cheetah

The game is enjoyable as it is.

The game is not enjoyable as it is. When CA and Palamedes deliver what they promised, I'll buy the game.

**R'as al Ghul** · 12-20-2006, 14:14

Personally I enjoy parts of the game. Right now I'm having fun with the campaign map. That's 50% of the game, the campaign part.
The other 50% part is the battle engine and I don't enjoy that very much. The game is out for a good 4 weeks now and the community is still busy with figuring out how to play and what units actually do what. Excuse me, but this is so ridiculous that it would be funny if it wasn't so sad at the same time.
In this thread alone are assembled some very good long time players who should be able to get a grip of the game in a few hours. After all, it's just Medieval 2. We've all played MTW 1 and should be able to understand what's going on by playing alone. It's the same units all over and the same basic principles of army combat.
Yet, there's much confusion on topics like "Spearman vs. Peasants", "Cav vs. Spears" and "Is there even an anti-unit for Cav at all".
I don't understand the unit matchups at all and neither do I understand what happens in combat. Yes they fight but not all of the men are fighting. Yes, a unit can beat another unit but why are peasants stronger than Armoured Sergeants. Yes, sometimes ArmSergeants even beat Cav but under what circumstances I can't reproduce. Two handed weapons are bugged and it was even rumored that units fighting uphill have an advantage because the animations of the downhillers can't hit low.
It seems all is the same and yet completely different.

What do I have to do to understand the unit matchups and the combat model? Do those that have played many hours of MP have a better understanding of these essential principles? I doubt it.

I really would like this game to be good for several reasons but as it is now it's a game of chance, not of tactics.
I haven't played M2TW MP and until I understand the game I don't intend to do so.

R'as

**Keith_the_Great** · 12-20-2006, 14:59

I've spent many hours last night trying most spear\milita\sword unit types in all modes ie guard\schiltrom formation, 5,4,3 rows etc nothing works vs frontal attack by cav (except late era pikemen)
my feels are similar to what R'as al Ghul wrote:

I really would like this game to be good for several reasons but as it is now it's a game of chance, not of tactics.

Cheetah Quote:

CA is aware of the problem.

I really hope so

**Puzz3D** · 12-20-2006, 17:10

Originally Posted by R'as al Ghul

Right now I'm having fun with the campaign map. That's 50% of the game, the campaign part. The other 50% part is the battle engine....

Well, CA markets the MP game without a campaign. If you are a dedicated multiplayer, MP is 100% of the game. All there is for an MP'er is the battle engine. Their 3D engine is nowhere near ready to simulate combat. I play Fighting Steel which uses probability tables to simulate surface combat between ships. These tables have been refined over several years by the Fighting Steel Project to better refect historical results, and the gameplay is great. CA could have done this as well, but instead they tied combat results to simplistic animations, and on top of that men stand around waiting for the two men who are fighting to resolve their combat.

Originally Posted by R'as al Ghul

What do I have to do to understand the unit matchups and the combat model?

You don't get it R'as. You aren't supposed to understand what you are doing. The game is now aimed at 12 year olds. Just have fun moving stuff around and seeing what happens. In chess, we call players like that wood pushers.

**Orda Khan** · 12-20-2006, 18:31

Originally Posted by Cheetah

Yes.

Yes, including CA guys and Palamedes.

The game is enjoyable as it is. Have you tried it Louis? Ask Elmo or Hasty if you dont believe me. Admittedly it has bugs and balance issues but still enjoyable, and I hope that most of these issues will be solved with the 2nd patch.

ps. ask Elmo which one is his favourite faction and how much cav he has in his favourite army ...

Cheetah,
Why do you ask a question like this? You seem to be doing a heck of a lot of PR about this game, I could be synical here but I will avoid that. I am sure Louis is concerned about gameplay and doubts the current gameplay will suffice. I share his thoughts and I am sure there are many others.

btw Palamedes also told us the AI on VH would be a challenge....Is it?

.......Orda

**Stig** · 12-20-2006, 18:46

btw Palamedes also told us the AI on VH would be a challenge....Is it?

It is, unless your like all those kids:
Oh I'm soooooooooooooooooooo good, I pwn the AI on VH and want everyone to know

**R'as al Ghul** · 12-20-2006, 19:06

Originally Posted by Puzz3D

Well, CA markets the MP game without a campaign. If you are a dedicated multiplayer, MP is 100% of the game. All there is for an MP'er is the battle engine. Their 3D engine is nowhere near ready to simulate combat. I play Fighting Steel which uses probability tables to simulate surface combat between ships. These tables have been refined over several years by the Fighting Steel Project to better refect historical results, and the gameplay is great. CA could have done this as well, but instead they tied combat results to simplistic animations, and on top of that men stand around waiting for the two men who are fighting to resolve their combat.

Well to be fair, CA doesn't market the game as MP only. MP is one feature. What's interesting is that the battles are the main marketing factor (plus they're pretty proud of it), so it seems that they see this part as larger as 50% of the whole package.
However as it is now the MP or SP battle part of the game doesn't work as expected. I'd like to hear an official response to all the charges against the battle system. Doesn't matter where you look, in the Citadel or here, you'll find many reports and research/ tests that clearly show that, pre- and post-patch, the units aren't working like supposed, explained by the advisor or described on the unit cards. They just don't.
Nevertheless and this sounds absurd as I write this, it's playable and enjoyable. It's just that after the initial joy a dedicated player would like to get more into depth and get more into the real gameplay. I'd imagine that the more competitive MP players among us, those that buy the game for MP only, should be pretty frustrated right now. That is, of course, only if they experience the same confusion about unit behaviour like me.
I've no idea yet of what the new system is capable of. It's clear that a unit's combat stats are not determined alone by their numerical stats but also on their given animations. I don't see the point in splitting the data and given that CA claims the game is more moddable at the same time it's even more of a mystery to me. The standing around, not fighting while engaged is really annoying. I constantly find myself trying to activate them by clicking. I guess that's what we got when we asked CA to slow down the gameplay. I've found out that the units eventually sort it out after a long while and one of them routs but don't ask me why. I'm a total noob again.

You don't get it R'as. You aren't supposed to understand what you are doing. The game is now aimed at 12 year olds. Just have fun moving stuff around and seeing what happens. In chess, we call players like that wood pushers.

See you on Sunday in Samurai wars.

**Shahed** · 12-21-2006, 01:52

I feel quite comfortable speaking here, it's much more straightforward, should we say.

There is 100% a spear vs cavalry (vs anything) issue.

1. All cavalry have heavy charge. You don't need Chivalric Knights to do it, just use Hobilars (as pointed out by Kraxis in The Citadel).

2. This is the one I personally find more of a problem: The spears can't hold up to a damm thing, not a single unit. They can't beat a single unit in the game 1 vs 1. If you use spears in conjunction with your own cav, or the enemy cav does'nt get a charge off you can kill enemy cav with them. If the enemy cav get a charge off, they are dead. They can even rout on first impact.

3. The anti-cavalry units don't work i.e Billmen, Halberds etc. Their animations are not working after the charge. So we have no spears and no anti cav...

About the game itself, never could log on for more than 5 minutes, never bothered to try very much coz you know why waste the time.

The following is my opinion after playing every day for 3 weeks now. I'm not blowing anyone's trumpet, least of all CA's. I believe they need to fix this game up but I'm not very sure they will. It remains to be seen.

As with most of you here, who have been here a few years, I believe it when I see it.

I really enjoyed the SP campaign so far as the Turks. It's a lot of fun, it's no battle simulator and it's totally not serious. It's a hell of a laugh, specially playing the Turks I was laughing my butt off. If you read some of the AARs you'll catch the idea very quickly, they are a laugh. It's a very light and simple game, unlike MTW and STW, which were MUCH more serious, and took themselves much more seriously.

This game could be really GREAT. It needs to be:

1. Completed. (it has obviously not been completed)
2. All major bugs (spears, 2Hs etc) fixed.
3. Enhanced (Expansion, rebalancing etc)

Now these 3 steps can either be taken by the developers or by the community. For the community to do it requires a monumental effort.

I have an example of the kind of monumental effort I am talking about. There is a submarine simulator called Silent Hunter 3, puts you as captain of a Uboot in World War 2. The game was launched exceptionally flawed, with so much potential. One of many groups of people galvanised to finish the game. They recently released their latest expansion to the game, COMPLETELY radically improving the game. Here is the manual included in the FREE expansion (which fixes a huge amount of unfinished items and resolves many bugs). Please have a quick click and scan through for a minute or two:

http://www.users.on.net/~jscones/GWX/GWX_MANUAL_EN.pdf

That is a far better manual than with the original game. And the game is now just the best !&^%##! submarine simulator I ever seen, ever. It WILL drive drive you nuts, that's how great it is now.

I'm not holding my breath but I think the game fundamentals are fantastic and this game really has potential. It could be a LOT more than what it is now, but right now it isn't. It could be an incredible battle simulator.

You know it's like with women, you take her on what she is now, not what she can be in 5 years.

**FearSimbol** · 12-21-2006, 14:27

Well i am sure we can find a way to beat Cavs charges.. is a Strategy problem.. just like in real life.. what was the most feared enemy in batle field? a super cav charge and a super cav flank charge.

A tip, put misile units warding your infantery, dont allow they to fire until cavs are close to finish the charge, then make then all fire at same time. cavs will lose 20% - 30 % of his unit..

**Paolai** · 12-21-2006, 16:56

there is no way to beat a cav charge if you havent pikes.
I have written that many times a long time ago. The patch is out but we have still the same prob. I assume they do not listen to us. Palamedes asked to open a topic "can you explain..." for what? To gain time? Not an answer about this important issue yet.

**Puzz3D** · 12-21-2006, 17:32

Originally Posted by Paolai

there is no way to beat a cav charge if you havent pikes.
I have written that many times a long time ago. The patch is out but we have still the same prob. I assume they do not listen to us. Palamedes asked to open a topic "can you explain..." for what? To gain time? Not an answer about this important issue yet.

I think Palamedes did answer this when he said the strong cav charge mechanic was left in for the players who want men to go flying when they are hit by cav, and the weak charge mechanic is there for the players who want less powerful cav. So, the tactical problem to be solved for players who don't want overpowering cav is to find ways of preventing the strong charge from ever taking place or else use a faction that has pikes. I'm not saying Palamedes wants overpowered cav, but somebody at Creative Assembly wants it, and I think it's somebody in a powerful position.

**|Heerbann|_Di3Hard** · 12-21-2006, 17:38

Originally Posted by Puzz3D

I think Palamedes did answer this when he said the strong cav charge mechanic was left in for the players who want men to go flying when they are hit by cav, and the weak charge mechanic is there for the players who want less powerful cav. So, the tactical problem to be solved for players who don't want overpowering cav is to find ways of preventing the strong charge from ever taking place or else use a faction that has pikes. I'm not saying Palamedes wants overpowered cav, but somebody at Creative Assembly wants it, and I think it's somebody in a powerful position.

Rules for games in the future: No Art, No Ele, No Cav, No Musketiers, No Vets

**Stig** · 12-21-2006, 17:39

Originally Posted by |Heerbann|_Di3Hard

Rules for games in the future: No Art, No Ele, No Cav, No Musketiers, No Vets

nah, peasants only

**Paolai** · 12-21-2006, 17:53

in BFME (battle for the middle earth) men "fly" when they are hitted by a cav charge but then they stand up and fight.

**CeltiberoMordred** · 12-21-2006, 19:36

I can accept cavalry charges causing disruption, disorganization and men thrown to the ground that recover in a while.

But not total anihilation in 2 seconds.

It makes no sense. I often see men of the fourth/fifth rank dying even before horses or lances reach them. Amazing, isn't it? Like swipe, but easier: just click-click.

Cavalry kills always the whole infantry unit, no matters which infantry or which cavalry we are talking about. Gendarmes Vs Town Militia or Hobilars vs Chivalric Knights. Only halberds and pikes in "phalanx" formation can stand.

Surprisingly, cavalry Vs Cavalry charges are very "soft". Few casualties before melee begins. I don't find this according with the actual cav vs inf charges.

Another irritating issue: cavalry against pikes: if you click behind it instead of charging them, your horses won't receive a single casualty when you hit the pikes.

We are aware of all this stuff, but when I read the forums, I get dissapointed and don't expect anything from this game. Let's take a look what TW fans posted at .com when they read what Palamedes wrote at the blog:

Originally Posted by Palamedes

As a teaser for Update 2, we’re currently playing with some of the fixes and tweaks and have to say, you will absolutely love the more aggressive Scotland and Mongol campaign AI, more naval assaults, an even more consistent less powerful cavalry charge, less devastating gunpowder units and last but not least, stronger 2-handed axe men and billmen.

Comments:

A cavalry charge could, and should, be a battle winner if handled correctly, let's not go back to the Medieval: Total War days where cavalry simply offered a height advantage.

I'm going to be *excited* about unrealistically weak cavalry and gunpowder?" Having weak cavalry in the era when cavalry ruled the battlefield is a huge error...

Definitly do not weaken the cav. units, they work fine

...And so on for several pages.

And regarding gunpowder:

They shouldnt nerf the gunpowder, they should double gunpowder damage

I like firing a few volleys and seeing men drop, it's what gunpowder does.

etc.

I didn't see a single poster enjoying with Palamedes' statement. Unfortunelly, the thread was removed so you can't check the quotes. It was http://p223.ezboard.com/fshoguntotal...ID=11572.topic

I found similar comments at The Citadel too. Let's take our own conclusions.

Regards

**Cheetah** · 12-22-2006, 03:56

Originally Posted by Puzz3D

The game is not enjoyable as it is.

How do you know?

Originally Posted by Puzz3D

When CA and Palamedes deliver what they promised, I'll buy the game.

Please tell me what did they promise?

**Cheetah** · 12-22-2006, 04:10