Gameplay Balance

[pezhetairoi]

@Arkanin

I can't understand why you would find the Iberian cavalry crappy, or even the Carthaginian. Surely you haven't yet tried out the Iberi Lanceari, the closest things to cataphracts you will find this side of the Bosphorus, and of course the Sacred Band cavalry are very much a match even for Brihentin. In fact, I'd say they pip Brihentin, just that the Brihentin are more widely available to other factions. Lebiponnim cavalry are also very fine medum cavalry, effective and nasty, and they look good too, to boot. Have you been trying to re-enact Crecy with your cavalry against a longbow line made of rhomphaiaphoroi behind argyraspidai instead?

[LusitanianWolf]

Are you playing in what battle dificult? If you want gameplay balancing you should play in medium battle dificult (at least in your first EB times, this is not vannilla wherewe you can play VH all the time).
Sure that EB cavalry is not the same as vannilla cavalry but still very usefull in most battles.

[Arkanin]

It really sounds like you still need to get used to a different style of cav use than what youre used to in RTW. Skirmishers will not rout as soon as contact is made with cav in EB. No cav should be left in melee too long after the charge is complete, esp if they have no shield. When charging, use alt-right click so the cav switches to their swords after they charge; then if you see that they start taking casualties, pull them out...

I keep hearing this sort of thing, but if medium cavalry are unable to defeat lower-quality missile units when they are isolated and have no infantry support, when is it desirable for me to build cavalry over simply infantry or skirmishers? If their attack is too poor to beat skirmishers, it's too poor to flank even light infantry. This makes infantry the preferable flankers, too, as they have the staying power to win while flanking other infantry. I'm just not seeing what there is to get "used to" -- they appear tactically inferior. Surely the 7-8 skirmishers I could have for the cost of two units of cavalry would have fared better against the lone skirmisher unit.

Combinatorial tactics have so much synergy in this game, there is a very large range of power level a unit can have before it becomes dominant or unusable. But all the cavalry I have encountered are so far from the middle of that range that they no longer even have a cost-justified purpose (well, one or two of the cheapest cavalry to chase routers is good). If they cannot punish undefended ranged units or flank better than infantry, they are in a lot of trouble.

The only exception I have seen to all this is the macedonian bodyguard unit, which I can only guess is much larger than other general units (62 on "large" size, when 40 is the norm) because someone made a mistake, as it is otherwise also far more powerful than other generals.

[antisocialmunky]

I almost never use cavalry to try to kill skirmishers. Main line infantry and shrug off missiles pretty well from the front.

On the other hand, if you're flanking with them and get the enemy with a formed charge from the rear... well. Its not really pretty.

I killed 1/2 of unit of Triarii with a formed frontal charge with those Iberian Lancers once. Many of the medium cavalry while not that ridiculous are fairly charge happy.

So in summation: Medium Cavalry is used to engage enemy cavalry and break units from the rear... and chase crap around the map.

[mcantu]

I keep hearing this sort of thing, but if medium cavalry are unable to defeat lower-quality missile units when they are isolated and have no infantry support, when is it desirable for me to build cavalry over simply infantry or skirmishers? If their attack is too poor to beat skirmishers, it's too poor to flank even light infantry. This makes infantry the preferable flankers, too, as they have the staying power to win while flanking other infantry. I'm just not seeing what there is to get "used to" -- they appear tactically inferior. Surely the 7-8 skirmishers I could have for the cost of two units of cavalry would have fared better against the lone skirmisher unit.

Combinatorial tactics have so much synergy in this game, there is a very large range of power level a unit can have before it becomes dominant or unusable. But all the cavalry I have encountered are so far from the middle of that range that they no longer even have a cost-justified purpose (well, one or two of the cheapest cavalry to chase routers is good). If they cannot punish undefended ranged units or flank better than infantry, they are in a lot of trouble.

The only exception I have seen to all this is the macedonian bodyguard unit, which I think is simply much larger than other general units because someone made a mistake.

use other skirmishers to keep the enemy skirmishers tied up before sending in the cav. i would imagine that a unit of 40 cav surrounded by 120 skirmishers would have a difficult time not being swarmed and pulled off of their horses when there are 3 skirmishers attacking each horseman.

i hold back my cav until they can be used decisively against a faltering enemy unit or to stop enemy cav from flanking me...

[Arkanin]

What about 120 cavalry against 120 skirmishers? Thing is, the cavalry still lose. Most have a lower attack value than slingers and my best guess is that such a low lethality mitigates much of the charge bonus as well by causing the fight to take much longer. Cavalry would seem to me to inherently get the most benefit out of operating in the smallest time window possible, and the lower lethality (which may be good but may also require a rebalancing of cavalry) greatly stretches out the time window for players to react to cavalry, greatly reducing their effectiveness.

I almost never use cavalry to try to kill skirmishers. Main line infantry and shrug off missiles pretty well from the front.

On the other hand, if you're flanking with them and get the enemy with a formed charge from the rear... well. Its not really pretty.

I killed 1/2 of unit of Triarii with a formed frontal charge with those Iberian Lancers once. Many of the medium cavalry while not that ridiculous are fairly charge happy.

So in summation: Medium Cavalry is used to engage enemy cavalry and break units from the rear... and chase crap around the map.

I will try them some more. I would like to say I have found cavalry to flank units effectively... but so far I have found infantry to be much more effective.

[pezhetairoi]

speed is the catch though. You don't want your infantry taking too many losses in the meantime. Consider the broader implications, it's not just about winning a battle, but also about having enough troops left to continue and advance and fight more battles. Unless, of course, you have a very good logistics system to keep new troops shuttling to the fronts. Cavalry is a force multiplier that way.

[Gotthard]

The western cavalry overall is pretty bad (I wouldn't be caught dead with a Lusitianian "Elite" Cavalry, for example), but their eastern counterparts are ridiculously overpowered. Good luck stopping a frontal bodyguard cavalry charge with anything but a 3 unit deep stack of some excellent spearmen. Even then, you're going to lose a single stack for sure. Balance overall seems much better in the west than the east, my current Armenia game (H/VH) has me in Babylon in 245 BC. ( I was recently declared the 'most advanced' and 'richest' nation... how I have no idea.) This was accomplished with some Caucasian spearman, some slingers, and whatever units I could scrounge from my exceedingly low level barracks. My cavalry generals basically demolished everyone. Morale is either pathetically low on units, or unbreakable (my 9 units of spearman were broken by a 1/4 strength phalanx unit. Completely surrounded, charged from every direction... *SIGH*) A combination of poor morale, little effect for spears versus cavalry, and low attack values versus defense for most units make battles slow and painful, or exceedingly quick. As Armenia, I haven't seen the point of building anything other than the cheapest foot unit, their performance has been, at best, marginally better, and they are 3x more expensive.

However, I actually find archers to be quite balanced overall, there are times you want javelins, times you want stones, and times you want arrows. There is a WIDE variety of ranged units in the east and west, and they have varying skills and abilities. It's quite well done. The problems unit balance has in the east exist in the west as well, but they are markedly reduced overall, and it's MUCH harder to play there (which is perhaps your problem as you've played Romans and Lusitianians).

[JeffBag]

Mainly the east has the ludicrously overpowered combination of excellent foot/horse archers and incredibly powerful bodyguard cataphracts, which on your King or Heir grants you an over sized unit. Its pretty much shoot till 1/2 of the unit then instarout it with 1 charge.

As I said earlier, you have to use alt-attack on your cavalry units to bring out their swords rather than their crappy charge-only spears. Also, try to use cavalry groups consisting of 3 units instead; when they are massed their power increases exponentially, as they reach that critical mass where they just instantly rout anything they rear charge.

I used to think that cavalry was useless too, taking my Legions over Gaul with no cavalry support. However, when I got to Germania, and fought every battle heavily outnumbered sometimes even two or more full stacks to one, I realized how important that one unit of cavalry which was my General unit was. When the lines degenerate into chaos with Germans coming from every side and each unit of Principe holding two or more German units, the ability of even that crappy medium cavalry to run from point to point routing troops with single charges, was massively important.

When you flank a fresh unit, use infantry, when you flank an exhausted unit, use cavalry. The burst damage of cavalry doesn't show itself until late into the battle, and unlike javelins + heavy infantry/Gasaetae charge, they are limitless.

[Decimus Attius Arbiter]

The one big thing I don't get is how you are "losing" to skirmishers. I've never gotten routed by skirmishers in EB. I did in Vanilla RTW because their stats were bugged. Cavalry can rout skirmishers. It takes longer the earlier in the battle you do it when their morale isn't shaken and they aren't winded. But it's still possible.

Also, are your comments related to how effective units are in multiplayer? Everyone here is talking about singleplayer. That's what's confusing people.

[Ibrahim]

want to turn eager units to routing in seconds? send lots of cav in 2 waves, 3-5 sec apart, 2-3 units per wave (works really well with the romani) from the side or rear preferably.

[Arkanin]

Are you playing in what battle dificult? If you want gameplay balancing you should play in medium battle dificult (at least in your first EB times, this is not vannilla wherewe you can play VH all the time).
Sure that EB cavalry is not the same as vannilla cavalry but still very usefull in most battles.

This is an interesting idea. I only play VH/VH, so that may be a significant part of why I'm getting unusually poor results with cavalry (ironclad enemy morale no doubt helps a lot against the morale damage caused by charges).

I would try VH/M, but I do still want the game to be challenging. If I want to see some of the good cavalry with a challenging campaign on those settings, what would you guys recommend the highest? Saka Ruaka, Scythia?

[mcantu]

This is an interesting idea. I only play VH/VH, so that may be a significant part of why I'm getting unusually poor results with cavalry (ironclad enemy morale no doubt helps a lot against the morale damage caused by charges).

I would try VH/M, but I do still want the game to be challenging. If I want to see some of the good cavalry with a challenging campaign on those settings, what would you guys recommend the highest? Saka Ruaka, Scythia?

that clears things up. for battles to be balanced they have to be set at Medium

[Ludens]

To expand upon what mcantu wrote, at VH battle difficulty enemy troops get something like +8 attack and +4 defence. Given the subtle stat differentiations of EB, this is enough for levies to beat high-quality troops. This cannot be modded, unfortunately. If you feel level battles (M battle difficulty) are too easy, you could try H (+4 attack), but remember that they simply aren't balanced at this level.

[Gotthard]

Balanced battles are only in medium?!? I'm trying saka on H/VH, and admittadly it's getting pretty irritating, but I'm afraid on M/VH I'd be crushing the computer mercilessly. Seems like most units break quickly anyway, and on medium it might turn into a constant rout. I'm about 10-15:1 casualty ratio on this, at medium it'd get even worse for the computer.

[antisocialmunky]

You're an HA faction, the AI therefore loses.

[Watchman]

The whole cavalry vs. skirmishers problem chiefly comes from a few issues. One, and easily the worst, is that the engine is kind of stupid when it comes to cavalry charges against loose-order units, and God forbid if they're trying to run away with skirmish mode... they should bust right through like the proverbial hot knife in butter, but engine mechanics is engine mechanics. Not much that can be done there really.

Another is simply that most skirmishers come in such godawfully big units, pure and simple. The low-level ones invariably have base unit size 60, over double that of cavalry; sheer numbers make them relatively resistant to the effects of casualties, and allow them to do surprising amounts of damage through sheer attrition in an extended fight before they finally reach the breaking point.
Again, not that much that can be done there except change tactics. Go in, do some damage, pull out and charge again; the lowly stickpickers should break soon enough with that.

[quackingduck]

calvary still eniliate everything for me usually (yes i do play medium battle difficluty). what has worked for me is taking 2 groups of a very heavy calvary (iberian HC, companion cav, sacred band, etc.) and before the battle starts and you are deploying your troops just put them right on top of each other sorta so you get 2 groups in the space of one. and keep them like this throughout the battle
when you have them like this they will eniliate skirmishers, archers, from the front and most heavy infantry from the back. espesially once they start to get 4+ experience. also having a 3rd group ready to back up your 2 doesnt hurt either. you just charge, double click away, and charge again. if you have more than 2 groups of cav take turns charging. if you do this infantry wont stand a chance.

[Arkanin]

Well, I guess that does it; I am going to try a VH/M campaign, but then the next question on my mind is whether I will have luck finding a challenging campaign as such.

Playing as Hellon Koinon and Lusotanan (sp both) I have found VH/VH to be an excellent difficulty, not insurmountable but a good challenge.

By the way, one more question, are Macedonian pike levies very broken -- as in, must be completely surrounded by superior units to kill, in my case, Greece has no real viable counter tactic -- or is that another VH/VH fluke? It would seem that VH would make pike levies overpowered given the fact that they need a lower attack and defense to be fair.

[mcantu]

VH will make any AI unit overpowered. It gives them +7 to attack and +7 to morale...

[JeffBag]

Actually I think its +7 attack, +7 defense skill, and then +7 to morale. Even skirmishers can annihilate anything. A fun campaign even on VH/M is Pontos; full stacks of Seleucid against your half stacks more than makes up for the balanced battles, and isn't so aggravating as to see Agryaspidai getting rolled over by levy pikes.

[Aradan]

I just couldn't resist posting it here as well, since so many people seem to have the wrong idea about it. :) Difficulty settings affect only attack and nothing else (in battle). -4/0/+4/+7 (for AI units)

[pezhetairoi]

...Bad enough. It makes the difference between my losing 5-8 Brihentin when they charge solo into a mass of akontistai before routing it, and losing close to half the stack instead.

[Ludens]

I just couldn't resist posting it here as well, since so many people seem to have the wrong idea about it. :) Difficulty settings affect only attack and nothing else (in battle). -4/0/+4/+7 (for AI units)

I looked up the relevant thread in the LM, and it confirms what you say. However, one of the developers suggested there was also a morale bonus.

[Aradan]

The Devs have said some things that were not entirely accurate afaik, mainly because things got changed between patches. No modder can claim perfect knowledge of the engine's inner workings, but proper testing can help give us a clue.

In case anyone's interested...

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Simple test I ran to research it:

• Set up a battle on flat ground (both campaign and custom), normal difficulty, 1 vs 1, and gave my unit uber stats, frighten enemy etc and made the AI unit useless with 1 morale.
• Started the battle and walked my unit towards the enemy, while viewing the AI's morale status. It took a specific amount of time and a specific distance from my unit until the enemy dropped from Eager to Steady. Run the test 2-3 more times after quitting and restarting the campaign and I always got the same result.
• Then I gave the AI unit +7 morale and timed again. This time their morale dropped to Steady only after they engaged me. Again repeated 2-3 times, always getting the same deal.
• And finally I restored their morale to 1, and played on VH difficulty. Got the same results as with 1st setup.
• To be sure, I tried giving the AI morale 3 in the EDU (diff=Medium), but still they didn't drop to Steady until after engagement, while on VH/morale=1 they dropped before that. So the bonus is either very very small or non-existant (I believe the latter)

On a related note, morale bonuses from buildings in campaign mode seem to not work at all. Similar way of testing it.

[Irishmafia2020]

If you are looking to create a good hard hitting and inexpensive Cav force you should consider playing as Baktria. The Bactrian Hippies are practically light Cataphracts (42 charge - pretty heavily armored as well) and I have stacked all of the money saving ancilliaries on my Bactra governor so that I am saving 30 -40 % on unit costs. That means that I am able to buy some of the best cavalry in the game for around 1800 mnai. These guys are a classic hammer to the anvil of the phalanx, but if that is not enough, elephants and cataphracts are available as well. I have focused on Bactra (the city) to develop my military, but I can obtain some brutal units with the level 4 barracks. The level 5 simply adds a few elite Thorkatai types, so most of the Elite cav can be available by the 240's or even sooner. Unfortunately you have to deal with a variety of new units and styles (HA, heavy cav, elephants etc) so you will probably end up with a lot of archers rather than a lot of cav in the early game. Still I do reccomend Bactria to a Cav lover, at least with the battles on Medium. One downside, you aren't centrally located, so don't expect to face Rome.

[pezhetairoi]

If only you piled all the upkeep savings ancillaries on your field commander with all those hippies too. Now that would rock.

[Decimus Attius Arbiter]

Keep on eye on those dirty Baktrian hippeis. Missles still hurt them. They aren't cataphracts yet young prince.

[Ludens]

The Devs have said some things that were not entirely accurate afaik, mainly because things got changed between patches. No modder can claim perfect knowledge of the engine's inner workings, but proper testing can help give us a clue.

Thanks for the information. I've posted it in the relevant thread of the Ludus Magna. For the record, JeromeGrasdyke mentioned that there was no set morale-bonus, bit instead a series of sliding scales. Unfortunatly, I cannot find the post itself, but it is cited in Froggy's R:TW guide.

[Irishmafia2020]

If only you piled all the upkeep savings ancillaries on your field commander with all those hippies too. Now that would rock.

oh yeah... I hadn't thought of that, I think I'll try it!