Multiplayer rules thread

**Fondor_Yards** · 06-13-2007, 21:11

Um the steppe people, who were very poor, were able to field huge amounts of HA, there's no reason they should cost more then infantry. Everyone out in the steppe had at least one horse, if you didn't you were probably dead. Nobles had what, several thousand of them? If anything, HA current cost too much and should have their costs dropped down a tad.

I find slowly wittling away an enemy's army with arrows from afar, then crushing their forces underfoot with a mighty cataphract charge to be just as exciting and fun, or even more then an infantry battle.

So has anyone done a HA battle?

**Pharnakes** · 06-13-2007, 21:15

Its fun for you, less fun for the impotent infantry comander...

especialy if they have artilery

**Fondor_Yards** · 06-14-2007, 07:04

Then the impotent infantry comander can learn how to kill cavalry. It's rather easy, normal HA like the defensive and attack stats of a small child.

**The Internet** · 06-14-2007, 09:04

If you can find someone willing to battle you with a HA army then thats great, but good luck to you.

**mAIOR** · 06-14-2007, 13:37

The step people had tons of horses but that doesn't mean they were cheap. Take horses (war horses mind you) in Greece or Rome. they were a luxury only affordable by rich people..
It depended on the culture I guess. And as far as HA are concerned, as I said, thdey're a real advantage against unarmored civs but, against civs like the Diadochi or Romans, they're usefullness is only marginal provided you don't let them outflank you. Even so, they won't be so usefull. In RTR they were way overpowered (I remember testing sarmatia out and being able to trash armies 3X the size of mine because of the attack value of arrows being 6 or something. that with the fact that every single unit were archers and the foot nobles doubled as elite spearmen... that was an easy camapign...
In EB with the reduced attack and the heavy armor of some units (from 10 armor (without counting shields or DS just armor) upwards things get tricky to HA from the front. And with 12 armor even the flanks get tricky...
Not to mention dosidataskelli or thorakitai agriaspidai as those guys are invulnerable to arrows. Only slings from the flanks seem to have marginal success against those beasts...

Cheers...

**Pharnakes** · 06-14-2007, 13:59

Yeah, I do remember playng fondor, when he had half a dozen HAs, He took out my slingers and archers, i the end I just sent out a unit of thorakitai argyraspiadai to sit in the middle of the field, and only one of them died from protracted arrow fire.

**Fondor_Yards** · 06-14-2007, 22:00

Actually, it does mean they were cheap. If your basic, dirt poor peasant steppe guy can get a horse. A horse was costly for normal folks because, a number of things, somethings they need to import the horse and gear, ship in/buy proper food, hire someone to train and horse and the guy to ride, and such. A steppe pony *which is what your normal HA ride*, would have those problems. A real warhorse *like a Nisean* yea would cost a pretty penny, and thats why only the heavy nobles and cataphracts have them*which are in turn pretty expensive.*

Heh yea. Dam artillery, there was those like last 4 guys who keep going go back to man them. Luckily that last unit of HA unrouted, I was able to get the last ones and some slingers/archers with him.

**[EB]Demulon** · 06-15-2007, 05:48

For the sake of the tournament, the only rule concerning HA's should be eastern versus western factions. From my experiences, infantry-based armies such as Casee and Sweboz get messed up by HA arrows before the actual engagement begins. And in every game I have played against steppe factions, the players used fast Ha to run away and launch other volleys, resulting in half my army being mowed down before I can inflict a single casualty. So, for the sake of fairness, and somewhat realism, steppe factions should be limted to steppe/Hellenistic factions. If people want a steppe battle it would be best if it were arranged as such.

Peace