power_charge ????

[Panama Red 51]

Can anybody tell me what power_charge does or valve it adds ???

Since the stirup was invented about this time (multiple answers depending on where you look), does it represent the added shock power that allowed cavalry to become the dominate battlefield force for the next 1,000 years ???

[Lusted]

Moved to the mod workshop as this is related to modding.

I believe this value just adds extra shock to cavalry charges, making it more realistic. Plus i thought the stirrup was invented in china around 1000 ad?

[Snevets]

Moved to the mod workshop as this is related to modding.

I believe this value just adds extra shock to cavalry charges, making it more realistic. Plus i thought the stirrup was invented in china around 1000 ad?

Can someone tell me why everyone thinks everything was invented in China now? Sure we Westerners are egotistical yeah yeah, but the crossbow was invented by archimedes, the stirrup was not invented in China but in Scythia (went east to the xiongnu who used it in their raids and to the Chinese from them), movable type cannot be Chinese because they use a pictographic writing system, guns were invented by muslims, exploratory naval vessels by the portuguese.... I could go on and on but I fear I'm ranting.

And now to avoid this being declared spam, the answer to your question: it adds a weak launching and formation breaking capacity to simulate the sheer mass of armored horses.

[player1]

And now to avoid this being declared spam, the answer to your question: it adds a weak launching and formation breaking capacity to simulate the sheer mass of armored horses.

Good to know.
Makes sense since it awarded only to some heavy cavalry units (in BI).

[Panama Red 51]

Snevets:
Thanks, I was hoping that some one could tell me exactly what it did without having to guess.

[Panama Red 51]

I really do not think this is a mod, since I am only asking what it does. But any way, here is one history version of the stirrup:

The stirrup was invented surprisingly late in history, considering that horses were used for bareback riding and to pull carts or war chariots since the fourth millennium BC. The true stirrup was apparently invented in northern China in the first few centuries AD, although a simple loop through which the rider placed his big toe was already to be seen in India either by 4th century BC (Desmond Morris, Horse Watching 1998), or the 2nd century BC.

It was invented at first as a single mounting stirrup only used in gaining the saddle; the first dependable representation of a rider with paired stirrups is in a Jin tomb of about 322 AD. The stirrup was spread throughout Eurasia by the great horsemen of the central Asian steppes. It is uncertain when it was first adopted by the nomads. The first attested use is by the Alans. Some historians believe the Huns must have used them to enable their conquests, but there is no evidence for this.

Vendel Age stirrup from Uppland, Sweden. Stirrups reached Sweden in the 6th century, leading to the establishment of mounted Thegns during the Swedish Vendel Age. From this period have been found rich graves of mounted elite warriors, which include stirrups . The importance of the horse during this time is reflected in the later Norse sagas, where the 6th century Swedish king Adils is said to have been a great lover of horses and to have had the best horses of his days. Interestingly, all accounts of this king's warfare describe him as fighting on horseback, although the later Vikings never or rarely did so. To add a 6th century source, Jordanes claimed that the Swedes had the best horses beside the Thuringians, reflecting the importance of the horse during this time.

Stirrups were first indirectly documented in Central Europe during the reign of Charles Martel in the 8th century, when verbs scandere and descendere among the Franks replace verbs denoting "leaping" upon a horse. A pair of stirrups have been found in an 8th century burial in Holiare, Slovakia.

[ellewellyn]

There was a book about medieval Knights a hundred years or so ago that said stirrups helped a lot with shock cavalry. This has since ben proven to be untrue - a historian named Peter Connolly reconstructed a "four-horned" saddle, used by the Romans much earlier, and it's thought they got it from the Gauls. This saddle allowed cavalrymen to be very effective shock troops without the stirrups.

There is other evidence as well - the battle of 1066 was depicted showing cavalry with stirrups, but not using couched lances, even though they had had them for about 100 years by this time.

I did read one account where a man tried various attacks from a mounted horse (on dummies), and found that all stirrups did was provide more power on a down stroke with a sword. Useful, but not devastating.

--Ed

[Red Harvest]

ellewellyn,

I've read the same things. I suspect it is *easier* to be effective with stirrups and saddle, but I don't see that as the only way to accomplish much of what was done with later developments. The more I study these sorts of things the more I find it safe to discount many pre-1950 theories as poorly tested pre-conceptions of the authors. Even many of the better historians of the first half of the last century had major erroneous ideas that were widely accepted. It's not so much that they were wrong headed or intentionally biased, it is that they were not widely enough tested or supported, particularly with respect to learning what other "marginalized" cultures of today still know about the subjects.

For the original topic: I have not tested the new power_charge feature. Should be fairly easy, just test a unit charging with and without the attribute versus some swordsman. Run a few tests and count casualties (enemy and friendly) from the initial few seconds after impact. If it makes a substantial difference you should be able to see it clearly.