Combat in the Med II engine

[vartan]

This is actually easily rectified via statting, its just that most mods (at least those I've played) seem to like stronger charges.

It's like with the more volume-less fidelity in music production in the past decade and half. Or like Hollywood with 300 and Co. The mods would like to appeal to a greater audience (i.e. the greater, not lesser part of the teen/20-something male audience), hence the stronger charges. They aren't that much stronger anyway. CA already used this tactics in vanilla, so it's just keeping those ridiculously strong charges. Wish there was an activism campaign against these strong charges in mods in the TW series...

[Rolling Thunder]

What exactly is ridiculous about strong charges? A full-on lance charge will decimate an enemy unit and usually put them to flight unless they are extremely disciplined, and, like I said, most of the Medieval II modders who try for realism employ exceptionally strong charges.

[vartan]

What exactly is ridiculous about strong charges? A full-on lance charge will decimate an enemy unit and usually put them to flight unless they are extremely disciplined, and, like I said, most of the Medieval II modders who try for realism employ exceptionally strong charges.

It is as is low-fidelity hi-volume and 300 and Friends. I predict half EB charge values would be just about right. At any rate, it's hard to imagine if you've played using such values consistently. It is far easier to remain than to change, and convenient.

[Cyclops]

Routing before contact would make many battles almost unplayable or that only elite units would be used by human players since a handful of elite units could wipe up a full stack of low morale/prone to rout AI units. ...

That sounds historical to me. I guess you're right that the AI will not handle it.

...increasing the rate fatigue sets in and also the rate units recover from being tired. With tired and exhausted units much more likely to rout it would encourage rotating units or at least keeping a reserve but that tired units wouldn't be finished for the entire battle...

That sounds intriguing.

... The most annoying thing in battles for me ... is when exhausted units sprint away at the same speed as fresh units chasing them.

Yep. I tend to keep back a swift unit for pursuit (either fast skirmisher or light cav) and only allow myself a "full pursuit" (ie not end the battle at the first prompt) if I have one of those in good order, few or no casualties and not tired.

[Ichon]

Yep. I tend to keep back a swift unit for pursuit (either fast skirmisher or light cav) and only allow myself a "full pursuit" (ie not end the battle at the first prompt) if I have one of those in good order, few or no casualties and not tired.

Yes... keeping a cavalry for pursuit is a big help but I haven't yet played a mod where light infantry can run down heavy infantry even when the heavy infantry is exhausted and running up a hill the light infantry might close the distance of 2-3 model ranks in the whole battlemap.

[Rolling Thunder]

It is as is low-fidelity hi-volume and 300 and Friends. I predict half EB charge values would be just about right. At any rate, it's hard to imagine if you've played using such values consistently. It is far easier to remain than to change, and convenient.

I must politely disagree with you. If you go by the historical accounts of many battles, lance-armed cavalry charges are utterly, utterly devastating to infantry units. A couched lance can tear through a shield, punch through armour and there are plenty of accounts of a lance shearing clean through two men in a tight formation. The addition shock effect of the mass of a full warhorse smashing into an enemy at full gallop, plus the result that occurs when the rider drops his lance and starts laying about the dazed and shaken infantry with sword, axe or mace is usually described as nothing short of catastrophic to the cohesion of an infantry formation. Just taking the accounts from many Napoleonic cavalry actions (which used an even lighter form of cavalry than those in EB) would suggest that high cavalry charge values are closer to realistic behaviour for warfare.

[Cyclops]

Yes... keeping a cavalry for pursuit is a big help but I haven't yet played a mod where light infantry can run down heavy infantry even when the heavy infantry is exhausted and running up a hill the light infantry might close the distance of 2-3 model ranks in the whole battlemap.

Actually I was deviating OT into how I roleplay. What I mean is nothing gets to pursue unless I have one fit "pursuit unit" so FM heavy cavalry doesn't get to mop up a fully routed enemy army unless I kept back some psiloi or whatever.

I hope what you are suggesting about fatigue gradation and degradation is moddable. It was a tangible feature in MTW (I used to shuffle my overall formations oh-so-carefully and really paid attention to generals positioning) so here's hoping it can be done with the M2TW engine.

I love the idea of say barbaric troops roaring forwards and crumpling backwards as they tire and recover, and really being inspired by the proximity of their warchief (and diminished by his absence), contrasting perhaps with the top end elites and proffesionals soldiering on steadily with less reference to whether they can actually see their general.

[antisocialmunky]

I would also like lower unit cohesion so its harder to withdraw undisciplined troops.

[bobbin]

I must politely disagree with you. If you go by the historical accounts of many battles, lance-armed cavalry charges are utterly, utterly devastating to infantry units. A couched lance can tear through a shield, punch through armour and there are plenty of accounts of a lance shearing clean through two men in a tight formation. The addition shock effect of the mass of a full warhorse smashing into an enemy at full gallop, plus the result that occurs when the rider drops his lance and starts laying about the dazed and shaken infantry with sword, axe or mace is usually described as nothing short of catastrophic to the cohesion of an infantry formation. Just taking the accounts from many Napoleonic cavalry actions (which used an even lighter form of cavalry than those in EB) would suggest that high cavalry charge values are closer to realistic behaviour for warfare.

The main problem with this view is that horses will, under no circumstances, charge headlong into well ordered infantry. Try getting a horse to run into a brick wall, no matter how much you try to train it to, it will never happen.
Cavalry charges in any era relied on exploiting gaps in infantry formations, these could be formed by soldiers breaking formation out of fear or impetuousness or by showering them with missiles forcing them to break up or spread out (the tactic commonly used by the parthians).

Also as far as I am aware there were no couched lances in EB's timeframe, I recall a mention of some parthian cataphracts having their kontos's chained to the horse but that is all.

[Tudhaliya]

The main problem with this view is that horses will, under no circumstances, charge headlong into well ordered infantry. Try getting a horse to run into a brick wall, no matter how much you try to train it to, it will never happen.
Cavalry charges in any era relied on exploiting gaps in infantry formations, these could be formed by soldiers breaking formation out of fear or impetuousness or by showering them with missiles forcing them to break up or spread out (the tactic commonly used by the parthians).

Also as far as I am aware there were no couched lances in EB's timeframe, I recall a mention of some parthian cataphracts having their kontos's chained to the horse but that is all.

You don't need couched lances if you can get a horse to charge. Look at this: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/06/us...de.html?src=mv Just happened last weekend. Two horses panicked at a parade, and bolted. The person in the carriage was thrown free and died, and 23 people were injured. Now, that's two horses hitched to a carriage, with no armor or riders with weapons. Normal horses won't charge a body of infantry, but a panicked herd of horses will. I think the history channel did something on this, saying that the idea is to get the horses to think their in a stampede. It doesn't seem like it would be hard to do in battlefield conditions, which must have been a scary place for horse and men alike.

On the other hand, elephants don't need encouragement to charge, because they know they can plow through most things. That's one of their advantages actually. When they are calm they are tractable and will charge with ease. When they panic they tend to run wherever they want. Hmm...I wonder if this is why elephants were always used at the beginning of battles. They could charge on a cold start, but horses needed to be warmed up and scared a bit.

[Ichon]

Well I can say with some experience that horses won't charge a solid wall or cliff but that is a big assumption that a horse thinks a group of men standing together is as solid as a good wall or cliff. Having been put on horses before I could walk most horses know they are stronger than a person and don't hesitate to charge over a man in the right circumstances whereas the only time I have heard of horses running off cliffs or into walls is when blinded though most horses simply stop running when blinded. (blinding a horse is one method to catch them for sale to meat factories as recently as a few years ago in the US).

However there aren't many battle accounts I am aware of in EB time frame of cavalry charging straight into the front of a ready heavy infantry formation. Skirmishers, archers, maybe but usually cavalry were used to penetrate between formations and separate them so following infantry can defeat in more detail or just sowing confusion with dust and movement when in this time period command and control was usually limited to direct LoS or shouting/horn distance. This probably was not because horses couldn't be trained to charge into heavy infantry but that such charges were not very efficient. Costing nearly as many cavalry as infantry. In battles where many times 20,000 infantry to 3,000 cavalry that is not a good exchange. Of course maybe for a horse culture with access to more horses it might happen more often but most horse cultures respect horses too much to "waste' them in such a manner when many would break bones and get extreme wounds from such an encounter tough in emergencies maybe it happened. If you know many accounts of such instances please share though because I haven't heard of them.

A horse given an option will choose the path of least resistance usually but a mass charge by horses does recreate a stampede a bit when only the horses on the edges and front have much of an option or awareness to halt or change direction. Some charges did end badly for the cavalry when the horses in front stumble or were slowed by some obstacle but on clear ground most often the opposing infantry unless set with pikes/long spears of some sort were swept away at least a few ranks deep.

Couched lances and extreme shock impact of medieval cavalry is not what is going on in EB times. However the infantry being charged were also quite often less well armored relatively to medieval times and often maintained more rigid formations(good for disciplined attacks, less good when the line of battle is broken by terrain or enemy tactics or rout of neighboring unit or separation due to cavalry).

I think EB cavalry should work well if the charge values are set lower. I typically charge with horse archers in many MTW2 mods where that light cavalry have charge values of 4-6 and can kill 1/4 enemy unit in a few seconds and then maybe another 1/4 in melee after but losing most of that cavalry in the melee as well. That charge stat set over 8 is when cavalry basically evaporate entire units with 2/3 dying in initial charge and 1/3 in quick melee after. Sometimes you can get 95% + on a nice lined up charge but most of the time battles chaotic enough you only get 1 or 2 of those. So light cavalry charge in EB 4-5 and elite heavy maybe 7-8 but not the 12-16 stats you see in many MTW2 mods. Elite are elite not just due to the shock of a charge but higher armor and morale values as well. I think MTW2 allows to set the mass of a unit as well so lowering the mass means cavalry don't penetrate as deeply into ranks of an infantry unit and the shock charge bonus touches less men.

[bobbin]

You don't need couched lances if you can get a horse to charge. Look at this: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/06/us...de.html?src=mv Just happened last weekend. Two horses panicked at a parade, and bolted. The person in the carriage was thrown free and died, and 23 people were injured. Now, that's two horses hitched to a carriage, with no armor or riders with weapons. Normal horses won't charge a body of infantry, but a panicked herd of horses will. I think the history channel did something on this, saying that the idea is to get the horses to think their in a stampede. It doesn't seem like it would be hard to do in battlefield conditions, which must have been a scary place for horse and men alike.

That wouldn't sound like a good idea to me, the first thing a panicked horse would do is try to throw its rider, then it would bolt following the path of least resistance ie away from the mass of infantry. Looking at the article you linked they seem to have done the same thing, running down the parade route as opposed to the pavement where most people were standing.

Besides there are plenty of mentions of panicking horses in battles, and it never ends well.

[Rolling Thunder]

The main problem with this view is that horses will, under no circumstances, charge headlong into well ordered infantry. Try getting a horse to run into a brick wall, no matter how much you try to train it to, it will never happen.
Cavalry charges in any era relied on exploiting gaps in infantry formations, these could be formed by soldiers breaking formation out of fear or impetuousness or by showering them with missiles forcing them to break up or spread out (the tactic commonly used by the parthians).

Also as far as I am aware there were no couched lances in EB's timeframe, I recall a mention of some parthian cataphracts having their kontos's chained to the horse but that is all.

I'm afraid that again I find myself disagreeing with you. A trained warhorse will, with enough goading, charge itself onto infantry arrayed in good order. The Battle of Crecy attests to that, as do the numerous battles of the Napoleonic Wars and the campaigns of Megas Alexandros. The charge may be disrupted as some horses are more recalcitrant, but the mass of the charge can and will be maintained if the horses are trained and the riders disciplined enough. They will usually balk at impaling themselves on a pike, spear wall or row of sharpened stakes, but a mass of infantry is in itself not particularly likely to resist a shock charge by cavalry.

Also, the Kontos is a lance, and it was definitely used underarm (and quite possible couched), as using to unwieldy a weapon overarm is just plain impractical and counterintuitive.

[antisocialmunky]

The horse conversation is the one we've had a million times. Should we really derail an engine thread to have it again?

[bobbin]

I'm afraid that again I find myself disagreeing with you. A trained warhorse will, with enough goading, charge itself onto infantry arrayed in good order. The Battle of Crecy attests to that, as do the numerous battles of the Napoleonic Wars and the campaigns of Megas Alexandros.

When in the Battle of Cercy did any knights charge a full gallop into organised infantry? From what I've read the charges repeatedly failed because most had their horses shot out from under them and the ones remaining couldn't penetrate the english lines. In the Napoleonic wars the whole concept of infantry squares worked on the principle that horses won't charge into them.

I'm not saying that cavalry couldn't attack a dense mass of troops, just that they wouldn't run at full speed into it.

Also, the Kontos is a lance, and it was definitely used underarm (and quite possible couched), as using to unwieldy a weapon overarm is just plain impractical and counterintuitive.

This doesn't mean it was couched, it was used in a 2 handed underarm fashion. Couching is a one handed technique invented (or at least first attested to) during the medieval period.

[Rolling Thunder]

When in the Battle of Cercy did any knights charge a full gallop into organised infantry? From what I've read the charges repeatedly failed because most had their horses shot out from under them and the ones remaining couldn't penetrate the english lines. In the Napoleonic wars the whole concept of infantry squares worked on the principle that horses won't charge into them.

I'm not saying that cavalry couldn't attack a dense mass of troops, just that they wouldn't run at full speed into it.

But that's the point. They did. At Crecy, the French knights, despite being strafed, tripwired and staked, still nearly managed to break the English foot lines due to sheer shock and mass. And at Waterloo, they damn well hit the squares at force, and were repelled by the wall of bayonets. The same thing happened in 1683 - three thousand winged hussars charged directly into an ordered infantry line and broke it into pieces.
The only thing that is capable of stopping a charge of lance-armed heavy cavalry purely in melee is a pike. You can wear them down and butcher them, you can melee them to death, you can strafe them. But if they hit your lines in mass and with force, everything in front of them is going to be impaled, smashed, trampled and then hacked apart.

This doesn't mean it was couched, it was used in a 2 handed underarm fashion. Couching is a one handed technique invented (or at least first attested to) during the medieval period.

It was still used underhand to transfer the force of the charge to the target. The manner in which it's use merely precludes the use of a shield in antiquity, which wasn't really a problem for heavily-armoured horsemen.

[vartan]

The horse conversation is the one we've had a million times. Should we really derail an engine thread to have it again?

Listen to bobby! Heh. Horses and the TW engines go hand in hand. Nothing more relevant.

[MisterFred]

Is there a reason we haven't brought up stirrups yet?

Edit after Ichon's post: I did know stirrups were not present in the EB time-period, but I was hoping someone would ensure lurkers and commenters not super familiar with ancient history that EB would naturally have weaker charges than other Med II mods for this reason. And thankfully, Ichon did, and much better than I could.

[Ichon]

Stirrups and saddles plus the size of the horse and type of armor the rider wearing all bear on the shock of impact and how much force able to be transferred through a lance. I'd assumed most people are familiar that in EB time frame most cavalry(maybe all cavalry though the record is not totally clear) did not use stirrups or much of a saddle.

Stirrups probably aren't that important for light cavalry unless they are archers since a good rider does not benefit hugely from stirrups when unencumbered. Heavier armor on rider, longer lances, and throwing/shooting missiles benefit greatly from stirrups since all those things affect the riders balance/weight distribution and the horse maintaining a steady speed. Riding without strirrups or a good saddle that secures rider and distributes weight makes a big difference in how fast a horse can run and carry home a charge as well.

It shouldn't be that charges are impossible or totally ineffective for EB era cavalry but less effective and more prone to cause casualties to the cavalry with generally smaller/less armored horses compared to medieval heavy cavalry and riders plus no strirrups/saddles seems reasonable.

A cavalry charge hitting the side or rear of a phalanx would still be quite effective and the problem of RTW phalanx ability to compeltely turn 180 in 2 seconds isn't in MTW2. A cavalry charge hitting heavy infantry frontally is something that should be possible but cost high casualties for the cavalry- even elites though elites should be able to fight in the melee after with much less losses and withdraw to charge again. Though cavalry should be able to scythe down most skirmishers(perhaps not peltasts though depends on EB portrays such medium infantry units). If only MTW2 mechanics could be such that cavalry only scare certain types of infantry units in certain relative positions but that isn't how it works. So best compromise is probably give most heavy infantry spear units bonus vs cavalry and low enough cavalry charge value that trying to take one of those spear units down from a frontal charge is a very poor tactic wasting precious cavalry but allows rear charges and cavalry that toss javelins, shoot missiles, engage enemy cavalry and skirmishers without huge losses is ideal. How to balance skirmishers vs heavy infantry vs cavalry is probably the most difficult for MTW2 engine. It's not totally rock, paper, scissors, but a bit of that. Balancing it so skirmishers having high enough missile attack to cause damage to infantry but not enough to completely wipe out smaller cavalry units who charge by is difficult.

[seienchin]

Hardcoded. The looser always loses every injured man.

[Ichon]

Unless ransomed or whatever EB will call it. Probably enslaved though I'm not sure how they will script that so ransom fee is not subtracted from defeated faction.

How do draws work in MTW2? I've only had a draw one time and don't recall noticing what happened to the wounded casualties.

I thought the system of traits and ancillaries that carried over from RTW and exists in MTW2 works fairly well. Without anicllaries/traits for healing winner only heals 5-25% of losses while with traits etc around 50% can be healed.

BTW- last time I read on the subject I think the Avars are credited with introducing strirrups to western Europe. The Scythians or Samartions are generally credited with the adoption of leather toe loops that evolved into the current stirrups but the adoption and spread of rigid stirrups took less than a couple hundred years probably. Which is actually quite short amount of time when efficiency of communications was as poor as that era.

I've read some arguments that most Roman cavalry used a saddle which had a hand grip that allowed 1 hand on the grip and 2nd hand to hold a weapon while reins could be gripped in teeth or leg pressure used to steer. That sounds awkward to me but I could see the reins simply being dropped shortly before a charge made contact and 1 hand steadying against the shock using one of these hand grips. Sort of like modern western saddles horn but placed on the part of the saddle strap that ran over a horses shoulder on ancient saddles. I've seen pictures of a couple bronze statues and some friezes that apparently show such a handle.

[seienchin]

The main problem with this view is that horses will, under no circumstances, charge headlong into well ordered infantry. Try getting a horse to run into a brick wall, no matter how much you try to train it to, it will never happen.
Cavalry charges in any era relied on exploiting gaps in infantry formations, these could be formed by soldiers breaking formation out of fear or impetuousness or by showering them with missiles forcing them to break up or spread out (the tactic commonly used by the parthians).

Also as far as I am aware there were no couched lances in EB's timeframe, I recall a mention of some parthian cataphracts having their kontos's chained to the horse but that is all.

Well at least medieval history prooves you wrong. Knights (at least in the late)medievial times used to atack headlong in a tight formation.(Thats why their fighting power decreased against pikes, guns etc.) and the cavallery in later times charged against dense musket fire. No modern horse would charge against that eather. ;)
The thing is that war horses were trained different and in medieval times sometimes they used somethng to cover the eyes of the horse so that it couldnt se much of the enemy.

Anyway, if we are speaking of the cavallery in EBs timeframe, I would agree with you that head long charging might have been nothing of strategical values. Although at magnesia the seleucs seemed to have succes with it. On the other hand: No spurs, no saddle, no way of stabilising your lance....^^ Even if the horses woud charge against the enemy it doesnt seem likely that they had an impact like knights had

PS: You can disagree about everything in my post, but not medieval knights charging straight on. With heavy protection, helmets blocking your side, no way of communicating and next to no modern military drill, it wasnt possible to make quick turns or maneuvers so they had to atack that way.

[Ibrahim]

Well at least medieval history prooves you wrong. Knights (at least in the late)medievial times used to atack headlong in a tight formation.(Thats why their fighting power decreased against pikes, guns etc.) and the cavallery in later times charged against dense musket fire. No modern horse would charge against that eather. ;)
The thing is that war horses were trained different and in medieval times sometimes they used somethng to cover the eyes of the horse so that it couldnt se much of the enemy.

Anyway, if we are speaking of the cavallery in EBs timeframe, I would agree with you that head long charging might have been nothing of strategical values. Although at magnesia the seleucs seemed to have succes with it. On the other hand: No spurs, no saddle, no way of stabilising your lance....^^ Even if the horses woud charge against the enemy it doesnt seem likely that they had an impact like knights had

PS: You can disagree about everything in my post, but not medieval knights charging straight on. With heavy protection, helmets blocking your side, no way of communicating and next to no modern military drill, it wasnt possible to make quick turns or maneuvers so they had to atack that way.

are you implying that french cavalry have no discipline?

actually, it does make me wonder though: did medieval knights slow down a little as they crashed into the enemy? I ask because french cavalry tended-though noot always-to basically contact the enemy at a quick trot in the 18th century; figured they might have done it in the middle ages. it makes me wonder about what determines the speed of the charge on the battlefield..

[Ichon]

actually, it does make me wonder though: did medieval knights slow down a little as they crashed into the enemy? I ask because french cavalry tended-though noot always-to basically contact the enemy at a quick trot in the 18th century; figured they might have done it in the middle ages. it makes me wonder about what determines the speed of the charge on the battlefield..

I wondered that as well... I would think it depends on who they are charging and if it is lances or swords drawn. Couched lances with a longer reach would would likely lend to a faster charge since the more force of impact the more damage done at least with barded horses.

With swords or shorter lances I'd guess a slower charge for better aim and also to protect the horses since the defending formation might have nearly equal reach or even greater reach if longer spears. It would depend on the terrain and deployment of the enemy as well. Probably alot went into it and most cavalry would have some basic tactical training in manuever though I am not sure how many cavalries were discplined and coordinated to follow instrument calls or shouted orders in the midst of a charge.

[seienchin]

are you implying that french cavalry have no discipline?

actually, it does make me wonder though: did medieval knights slow down a little as they crashed into the enemy? I ask because french cavalry tended-though noot always-to basically contact the enemy at a quick trot in the 18th century; figured they might have done it in the middle ages. it makes me wonder about what determines the speed of the charge on the battlefield..

18th century cavallery were basicly no lancers. Although some countries still imployed spear wielding cavallery, the task of cavallery in that age was not to atack full speed head on, esspecially since musket fire and bayonetts were deadly to that kind of charge.
The lances of medieval knights were (not in the early years^^) really long and wielded in a manner that the whole body plus the horse and saddle supported the strike so it would be a waste of energy not to atack really fast. Of course the horses had the heavy armour to carry and were rather trained for beeing massive than fast and agile so maybe the charge wasnt that fast.

[antisocialmunky]

Its too bad you can't scare infantry with mock charges in EB. It is nice to pulling units out of position but its useless for morale breaking purposes.

[Ichon]

I thought charges were applied before contact for morale purposes. That is why cavalry charge to the rear can break a wavering unit before contact or multiple charges on a single unit break its morale before contact. It's not instant though so not sure when it gets applied.

[MisterFred]

That's a combination of (worried about being flanked) and (upset about facing a cavalry unit) or something similar to those two. If those penalties are enough to break the unit, it'll rout before the cav hits. You can see the same thing with infantry charges to the back if (worried about being flanked) is enough to break the units. Most of the time, additional casualties, in particular the speed of them, is required to break the unit. Multiple charges to a unit break it primarily because casualties mount, and penalties from being flanked, in addition to some others, get worse the longer they apply.

I think :).

[Rahwana]

Actually pike with low stats are pretty effective vs most units in MTW2 due to the pathfinding and coherent units. IE- longer reach mean pike usually get at least 2x attack vs opposing unit and also if the opposing unit is dense/high cohernent it takes long time to even reach into range where they can hit pikes. As well MTW2 has better modeling of armor/shields. IE- heavy armored cavalry with shield is pretty tough for most infantry without really high attack or bonus vs cavalry to take except thru mass numbers but soon as cavalry turns to disengage they become very vulnerable for a few seconds. Cavalry in RTW move so fast disengage almost instant.

Charge bonus works pretty well depending on stat as well. IE- many mods put charge shock bonus of 12 and higher which means one unit of 50 cavalry can kill 150 infantry unit in a few seconds. Mod that stat down to 6-8 and it is much better especially for the timeframe of EB when heavy cavalry charges weren't quite on the devastating level of armored knight with couched lance of medieval times. Though still devastating in the right situation head on charges into set infantry formations should probably only be possible for a very few elite cavalries without large losses. Hopefully the generals bodyguard units are more varied in EB and someway to make them smaller without adversely affecting AI generals killing themselves even more quickly.

Even more important though might be model the difference between speed of light and heavy infantry and cavalries... never seen a MTW2 mod yet where heavy cavalry can't eventually catch light cavalry on the map corners because the difference in speed is so small.

Rohan in TATW they just have the perfect charge kills ratio....

Well at least medieval history prooves you wrong. Knights (at least in the late)medievial times used to atack headlong in a tight formation.(Thats why their fighting power decreased against pikes, guns etc.) and the cavallery in later times charged against dense musket fire. No modern horse would charge against that eather. ;)
The thing is that war horses were trained different and in medieval times sometimes they used somethng to cover the eyes of the horse so that it couldnt se much of the enemy.

Anyway, if we are speaking of the cavallery in EBs timeframe, I would agree with you that head long charging might have been nothing of strategical values. Although at magnesia the seleucs seemed to have succes with it. On the other hand: No spurs, no saddle, no way of stabilising your lance....^^ Even if the horses woud charge against the enemy it doesnt seem likely that they had an impact like knights had

PS: You can disagree about everything in my post, but not medieval knights charging straight on. With heavy protection, helmets blocking your side, no way of communicating and next to no modern military drill, it wasnt possible to make quick turns or maneuvers so they had to atack that way.

well, and in some Asian cultures, warhorses are traditionally trained with method that today will be called animal cruelty, starting when they are still small, and barely could start following a trainer, they are repeatedly force-slammed into wooden wall with ropes and sharp spiky whip (the horses are small enough in their age, just barely separated from their mum), then they regularly trained to pull enermous weight behind them, and had weighting box placed on top of their back all the time (snce they are young), after that, their outer ears are cutted and their nose pierced with steel ring, and they regularly whipped for even smallest mistakes. True, many will die in the process, but the surviving one will be greatly prized as full trained warhorses and could be used to charge anything headlong without fear.

And I bet the Europeans and another Civilizations in EB timeframe also had their own cruel ways to train their most prized warhorses.

ADD: and those who die will mostly end up as the stablemen's dinner

[Apázlinemjó]

That's a combination of (worried about being flanked) and (upset about facing a cavalry unit) or something similar to those two. If those penalties are enough to break the unit, it'll rout before the cav hits. You can see the same thing with infantry charges to the back if (worried about being flanked) is enough to break the units. Most of the time, additional casualties, in particular the speed of them, is required to break the unit. Multiple charges to a unit break it primarily because casualties mount, and penalties from being flanked, in addition to some others, get worse the longer they apply.

I think :).

Yeah, you can rout even the infamous Gaesatae, if they lost at least ~20% of the troopers and they are surrounded. They have 22 morale.