Byzantine Kataphractoi Discussion

[HistGamer]

I have seen several contentious posts about the kataphractois of the Byzantines. This units looks awesome in their middle-eastern/greco armour but how useful and effective are they really compare to other cavalries of the western powers.

The kataphractois have overall weaker stats in terms of armour, charge, morale and attack.

The advantanges however are that
: AP Secondary Weapon/Maces
: Disciplined
:Highly Trained
:Less Fatigue

So what do you guys think about kataphractoi, and how well do they fare against those chilvaric and noble knights of the western powers.

What else did I miss out on in terms of battle prowess and advantages during certain situations of the Kataphractoi, please tell me.
Give your overall comment and thoughts about this unit.

[Mithrane]

Never attempt to examine troops in a 1 v 1 comparison. That is now how the game works. That is not how fighting works. Compare them AND the compliment of troops which acompany them to the entirety of the opposing faction.

Also, make a point to mention single player campaign, sing player battle, and multiplayer battle.

One should, in regards to campaign, remember that the faction's location as well as their ease of access to a particular troop at a given time is an important factor. For example.... Constantinople can quickly build up to high end infantry. All byzantine castles have Vardiotai (sp?) which are missle cavalry and near-heavy cavalry in one. And these are easily gotten early. Novgorod, though, needs a great deal of time to reach comparable troops, but does not need them as early as they face only vast lands and rebels.

As to my opinion on the unit.... I find very little need for the super-heavy cavalry. I rarely get to that stage of the game. Even then, I tend to be either an infantry focused or missle-cavalry focused player. When playing either, the general and a few medium cavalry tend to do more than fine for that purpose, especially considering how much of the enemy army tends to be spear and pike.

[Silent Assassin]

The only thing I can say is that they are not half as good as they were in RTW

[AnthoniusII]

Tagmatic cavalrymen[Scholarii] known as well as cataphraktoi/clibanophoroi are totally worthless and in a inaccurate position in "vanilla" M2TW or even in kingdoms...
The delima CA had wa how to input a real "tank" unit without unballance the entire game...
That is where the mods come(unfortunatly not all)...
In "vanilla" the best way to use cataphracts is to use them in large numbers in only one side of the formation to have some chance to win and then to attack from the rear...
In real after 1204 cataphracts were no longer existed for reasons this topic is not proper to discuss...

[Viking Prince]

I personally find the earlier units more interesting because I get to use them in the campaigns. A better unit for me would be the Vardariotai -- the best of the basic cavalry that are easy to recruit.

[Sodbuster]

In multiplayer I find that they tend to get rolled by Chivalric Knights and the equivalent. I've never tried it in a custom battle though... That's the best way to test your question out in my opinion, play some custom battles against AI controlled knights and charge at each other, see who wins. Then see who wins when you do 2 units against 2, 3 against 3, etc.

[Old_Scratch]

The problem with cataphracts is price really. They are the same as imperial knights expect that they cost more, have more expensive upgrades, and a weaker charge. They are decent early on but aren't really worth it in the high period. The Byzantines don't really have any decent heavy cavalry options. They do have great horse archers though as Viking Prince said. Vard's actually have better melee stats than cataphracts, have a powerful bow, and are fast moving. They don't have a lot of armor though, most of their defense is defense skill so watch out for arrows.

The only problem with Vardariotai is in multiplayer where horse archers are usually limited to 2 or 3 at the most. It's a good rule because mounted xbows are very dangerous, but it can limit some factions that rely on less powerful horse archers, like the Mongols, Byzantines, Turks, and Egypt.

[AnthoniusII]

The problem with cataphracts is that the time they are ready to reqruit they are tottaly worthless and unhistorical...
It is natural and realistic that cataphracts could not be real opponets for
chivalric knights...but they should be available earlier than those knights in the game tp present the real superiority the Roman Empire had until 1204!!!!

[Viking Prince Olaf]

Actually Kataphractois is one of my favorite units; they have really good melee stats not just for their era their in, but compared to most HA.
Though it dosn't say I think that their armour piercing, because when it comes to facing chivilric knights in melee they would stand up pretty good
to chivilric knights, and hands down win because they're much faster
therefore can shoot and tire chivilric knights down unloading there quivers and once then easily pick them off in melee.

[frontier-auxilia]

Imo glorified flanker and speed bump against more potent cavalry unit. The only neater touch that they have is the armor piecing mace. If your using them to protect your flank that work as your enemy's heavy cavalry is going to lose some man thus making them a lesser threat. But if your putting these guys on the assualt, it pains me to say that the latinkon serve a better choice. Therefore they just those "alright so and so" unit to me instead of a decisive thump card. Deploy with tactic for them in mind. Or just get a great big stack of vards.

However if the cataphract in question are from broken crescent or CBUR, double click and watch them crush anything without pointy sticks under their hooves. Find a sport without spear,rip a big in that part of their line and hit other units from the rear while your infantry make frontal contact with other section of his army(or alternatively engage their archers, if enemy have infantry reserve, pull your cavalry back and slam them head on again if they got no stick) or do the normal vanilla function in much better ways.

[Viking Prince Olaf]

I don't know if i'm on A mod or not, but my Kataphractois have Middle Eastern curved swords not armour piercing maces...

[AnthoniusII]

I don't know if i'm on A mod or not, but my Kataphractois have Middle Eastern curved swords not armour piercing maces...

Then they are not like them...

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[St Naffatun]

To reflect the reality a Kataphract would be more heavily armoured than any other cavalry but the price of armouring the horse means a slower impact charge (that's the assumption anyway).

The main mods for Med 2 address this, in these mods knights like the Templars ride unarmoured horses and get a better charge bonus. They are reckless and utterly commited. Kataphracts are more lumbering but still have an ok charge bonus and a significantly higher armour rating and in a protracted melee their immense weight of armour is often decisive.

Armouring the horse was a natural response to troops who would simply kill an unarmoured horse in protracted melee. Some light troops in medieval times like the Almughuvars didn;t even need to be in melee, they used heavy javelins similar to the ancient Roman pilum to kill unarmoured horses before killing the freshly dismounted knight. Takes some skill and balls to run around in sheepskin with a clutch of javelins killing knights but they were pretty crazy by all accounts.

Actually many of the Kataphracts the ancient Romans fought against were horse-archer katahracts as well as lance charging impact cavalry but I've not seen any hybrid heavy-cavalry-archer units like that in Medieval 2 mods probably for balance reasons. Might be in Broken Crescent.

[AnthoniusII]

To reflect the reality a Kataphract would be more heavily armoured than any other cavalry but the price of armouring the horse means a slower impact charge (that's the assumption anyway).

Yes they wear three armors (one on top of the other)the same time!
Chain mail,lamellar quirass and padded suit!

The main mods for Med 2 address this, in these mods knights like the Templars ride unarmoured horses and get a better charge bonus. They are reckless and utterly commited. Kataphracts are more lumbering but still have an ok charge bonus and a significantly higher armour rating and in a protracted melee their immense weight of armour is often decisive.

Armouring the horse was a natural response to troops who would simply kill an unarmoured horse in protracted melee. Some light troops in medieval times like the Almughuvars didn;t even need to be in melee, they used heavy javelins similar to the ancient Roman pilum to kill unarmoured horses before killing the freshly dismounted knight. Takes some skill and balls to run around in sheepskin with a clutch of javelins killing knights but they were pretty crazy by all accounts.

Actually the impact an infantry man receives from a horse man is relative
by the horse speedxhorse weight!
The armored horses had slightly higher impact but...they could not run long distances comparing with unarmored horses...
The reason eastern warriors armored their horses (medeival Romans too)
was the huge number of arrows in their battlefilds(something the westerns had to wait the english/french wars to see!!!

Actually many of the Kataphracts the ancient Romans fought against were horse-archer katahracts as well as lance charging impact cavalry but I've not seen any hybrid heavy-cavalry-archer units like that in Medieval 2 mods probably for balance reasons. Might be in Broken Crescent.

That depends from the era we focus on!After 1080 ad cataphracts/scolarii/imperial tagmatic horsemen were shock units and after 1204 they did not exist!
From 946 to 1025 there were both archers and lancers cataphracts or even some javelinears!!!
After the death of Heraclius and the arab expansion there were NO cataphract style troops AT ALL !!!!!