Castle Cavalry Recruitment Fixer/ Mod

[Rockrocks]

Does anyone find automatic recruitment of cavalry from castle weird? No stables perequisite needed. and for comparison you'll need every upgrade of barrack line of buildings to get the infantry you wanted. I have modded the export_descr_buildings.txt to fix this problem. Under the fixer (tested, works fine), Every cavalry unit except the most basic ones require stable line of building.

For instance, Motte and Bailey no longer offer any cavalry, nor does the Wooden Castle, the Castle only offers Mounted Sergeant level of cavalry (Hobilars, Scouts, Border Horse, etc) and up to Citadel only so. every other Horse units require a stable line of building.

Also, the Castle will provide low level infantry at a low rate. e.g if you don't have a mustering hall within a Castle, it will still provide peasant at around one unit per five turn rate.

The mod took into account the traditional horseback nations of Turks, Russia and Moors, their Castles can recruit cavalry at a lower level and faster rate, but they still need complete stable building lines to recruit their special cavalry units.

To install, just replace your export_descr_buildings.txt with mine. Leave the original backup as it might not work on yours even if it worked on mine.

[Rockrocks]

OOPS forgot to upload file, it's here http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=548692

[shikaka]

Does anyone find automatic recruitment of cavalry from castle weird? No stables perequisite needed.

No.

When a noble was awarded the right to build a stone fort, he already had enough land to have vassals - who were cavalry just as the lord's family.
In Byzantium the state lands were granted to not too wealthy freeman, who in exchange provided border guard duty mainly as anti-raiding patrols (since enemies were mounted, they had to mounted too, except in mountain regions). In Hungary every freeman had to go to war with a horse (at least when m2 starts)

What is strange is that the castle doesn't provide footsoldiers (= followers of the lord).


I think the best would be that the castle allows EVERY unit on it's level, just at a small replenishment rate and low availability. So you would have to expand barracks if you wanted more then say 1 dismounted knight.

took into account the traditional horseback nations of Turks, Russia and Moors, their Castles can recruit cavalry at a lower level and faster rate

Poland and Hungary should go into this group too. (if we are talking about 1080 AD)

[Maklodes]

I'd say castles are already a fairly tough value proposition (especially if you're from a faction with decent militias). If you have to build knights' stables before you can recruit mailed knights and such, that makes it harder, especially considering that castle military buildings are twice the cost per level of the city militia line (getting to knights' stables (tier 2 cav) requires 3600 florins. That's close to the amount needed to get you to city watch (tier 3 militia) in a city, 4200 florins).

Also, if you're, say, Venice, you get a diversity of units just by upgrading your militia buildings (first a short spear unit, then a long spear unit, then a crossbow unit, then a cavalry unit, then a pike unit...). Compare this to castles. Stables? Cavalry. Knights stables? More cavalry. Baron's stables? More! You want crossbowmen and archers? Build the bowyer/practice range/archery range/marksmen's range line -- each of which is also more expensive than the city militia buildings. Getting all the way from nothing to tier 4 castle recruitment buildings (armoury/earl's stables/marksman's range) requires 54,000 florins. Getting all the way to the tier 7 militia building -- royal barracks -- is cheaper, at 45,600 florins. Getting to tier 4 militia, militia drill square (which, yes, generally doesn't have citadel-grade troops) is a mere 9,000.

Muslims' race tracks are also a better deal, costing 1200 for earlier cavalry and 1200 for the upgrade, not 1200/2400.

So if you take away the "free" cavalry, I think that you'll find castles get even worse.

I'd say it might be worth it if you cut the cost of castle military buildings in half: make stables cost 600 florins, knights' stables 1200, baron's 2400, earl's and king's 4800. Some for archery ranges and barracks.

I do understand the desire for consistency: why can a castle that doesn't even have stables recruit cavalry? However, if you're going with that approach, I think it might make more sense to think about a system of modular unit design -- horse archers require stables and bowyers, armored knights require blacksmiths and stables, etc. (I discuss this idea in previous thread.) How do those feudal knights get their heavy armor in a fortress that doesn't have so much as a leather tanner, after all?

Or whatever. I don't mean to harp on my own solution for everyone and say it's the one true answer. I just do think that making castles even weaker isn't the right approach.

[Rockrocks]

So if you take away the "free" cavalry, I think that you'll find castles get even worse.

I'd say it might be worth it if you cut the cost of castle military buildings in half: make stables cost 600 florins, knights' stables 1200, baron's 2400, earl's and king's 4800. Some for archery ranges and barracks.

Hey nice point. Have an update here The cost of the stable is lowered and so is the construction time. Basically following your advice.

Plus I do think the Cavalry power in this game is kind of exaggerated. While historically the cavalry charge is devastating as is in the game, there are way less knights on the battlefield. Some kind of change is needed to make the game more balanced toward infantry.

[PapaRosario]

Hey nice point. Have an update here The cost of the stable is lowered and so is the construction time. Basically following your advice.

Plus I do think the Cavalry power in this game is kind of exaggerated. While historically the cavalry charge is devastating as is in the game, there are way less knights on the battlefield. Some kind of change is needed to make the game more balanced toward infantry.

A big reason why heavy cavalry is so overpowered in Vanilla is because they cost so little. In Stainless Steel, for example, the upkeep costs on knights ranges from 600 to 800 florins per turn. So sure, it might be worth it to keep one or two units of knights in your army so you can use them where they are most critically needed in a battle, but if you try to have armies of knights, you will go bankrupt within a few turns. Light cavalry are still pretty cheap - usually 150 to 225 florin upkeep cost. So this favors using light cavalry over knights to form up most of your cavalry. I think increasing unit costs is the best way to fix the system in Vanilla.

It was like this in Medieval 1, one of the features dropped, never understood why. (the others were rebellions with faction splits and - pre-battle - dismountable cavalry)

In M1, for a heavy cavalry unit, you needed:
- royal estate, castle, farmland and horse breeder
- spearmaker (if you didn't do it, you could train non-lance cavalry only)
- armorer (if you didn't build it, you could train only non-armored units like horse archers)

That would be pretty simple to mod in. But it would be a bit tedious.

[PrestigeX]

I don't think it's weird to have units available from castles or from walls, but I did prefer to have units recruitment focused on the specific buildings.
Darth Mod is like that... you get maybe peasants, and a bodyguard (super slow refresh rate) from the castles by themselves but infantry , archers, or cavalry, etc only come from their respective buildings.

I usually prefer a more restrictive recruitment option. It would be cool if some units came from Blacksmiths, or ... in order to advance a baracks/stables line of building you needed a certain level of armor-building to produce those units. Ie. armor sergeants wear level 2, chainmail , so you need level 2 armor (blacksmith) in order to be able to produce the armor, then you need a barrak-upgrade to train more dudes / better quality of troops.

Maybe would be annoying to a lot of players that want to start up, and 10-15 turns in already running around with DFK's, and soon after plate dudes etc... I think it would be fun if the early-era style troops had a longer shelf-life ,,

[shikaka]

I usually prefer a more restrictive recruitment option. It would be cool if some units came from Blacksmiths, or ... in order to advance a baracks/stables line of building you needed a certain level of armor-building to produce those units. Ie. armor sergeants wear level 2, chainmail , so you need level 2 armor (blacksmith) in order to be able to produce the armor, then you need a barrak-upgrade to train more dudes / better quality of troops.

It was like this in Medieval 1, one of the features dropped, never understood why. (the others were rebellions with faction splits and - pre-battle - dismountable cavalry)

In M1, for a heavy cavalry unit, you needed:
- royal estate, castle, farmland and horse breeder
- spearmaker (if you didn't do it, you could train non-lance cavalry only)
- armorer (if you didn't build it, you could train only non-armored units like horse archers)

[Aeratus]

If it's weird to train feudal knights without a stable, then I suppose it's even more weird that the Timurids can train Khan's Guard and Cannon Elephants from a castle in Norway without a stable.

[liqidzen]

I made this for my own personal use, but I added the requirements to have the appropriate levels of blacksmith (leather tanner for leather armoured guys, blacksmith for armoured sergeants etc). Feel free to use if anybody wants. This is for medieval 1.05 original. I used the condition "requires_min_level smith" thing at each line of buildings.

Kind regards,
Liqidzen.

[MDCCLXXVI]

If it's weird to train feudal knights without a stable, then I suppose it's even more weird that the Timurids can train Khan's Guard and Cannon Elephants from a castle in Norway without a stable.

seems legit

maybe they regularly shaved woolly mammoths