Horsearchers in TWR2

[Dumanthis]

I remember that in RTW the horsearchers were quite OP and in MTW2 they were a bit weaker, but in ETW, NAPO and Shogun 2 they seem to me bit too stiff being unable to fire on their rear or sides. I think in R2 the horsearchers should be more flexible to enable the "Parthian shot" at least. What do you think?

[Greve Af Göteborg]

Yes

[Stath's]

A lot of attention must be given to HA, they should be a strong addition to an army but you should not be able to win a battle by using only them. They should be able to weaken the enemy, but not destroy him.

[Shocked]

Ya they should be able to fire side and backwards, they're too weak otherwise

[HappyGoodVibes]

Horse archers are probably the greatest challenge that Rome faced, so they should reflect that by being very effective at harassing infantry that are not protected properly.

[zg0301zg]

Horse archers are probably the greatest challenge that Rome faced, so they should reflect that by being very effective at harassing infantry that are not protected properly.

not only the romans but also Alexander the great, later on he has recruited them for the Indian campaign

[Marcus Aemilius Lepidus]

not only the romans but also Alexander the great, later on he has recruited them for the Indian campaign

Or Darius the great. Outside the realm he had only two threats and one of them were the Sakai Horsearchers.

[Ayleid]

Horse archers can easily be balanced by how much ammo they can carry. They're supposed to be annoying due to their title 'harrassing cavalry' they are supposed to fire and then retreat. Hopefully the CA goes to town on this.

[HappyGoodVibes]

A horse archer army did destroy those legions one time... The commander brought extra arrows with him so they didn't run out. That must have cost loads of money to do though.

[Sneaking Viper]

A horse archer army did destroy those legions one time... The commander brought extra arrows with him so they didn't run out. That must have cost loads of money to do though.

Never heard about that before, which legion was destroyed by only horse archers?
Sounds very fiction, that means the horse archer army should have at least 20000 arrows! (5400 in the main legion and 5000 allies is one full legion) and that is considering they killed on every second arrow, which is already fiction.

[Boom S]

Never heard about that before, which legion was destroyed by only horse archers?
Sounds very fiction, that means the horse archer army should have at least 20000 arrows! (5400 in the main legion and 5000 allies is one full legion) and that is considering they killed on every second arrow, which is already fiction.

just because YOU did not bother to learn history does not give you the right to call a historical event fiction.

"ignorance is not a valid point of view"

please educate yourself.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Carrhae

p.s. how difficult is it for a HA army to have 20k arrows ? even 800 horsemen with 25 arrows each would have 20k arrows in all. and 800 is quite a small number as far as armies go.

[thebestant]

Never heard about that before, which legion was destroyed by only horse archers?
Sounds very fiction, that means the horse archer army should have at least 20000 arrows! (5400 in the main legion and 5000 allies is one full legion) and that is considering they killed on every second arrow, which is already fiction.

battle of carrhae, although the parthians did use some cataphracts the ha were the main part

[kambiz]

Another thing I hope to be featured (probably for the first time in the series) in ROME II is the units to be able to carry more than 2 weapons. This is very important if they want to authentically design the Pahlavan (parthian) units. Because historically they used bow to harass enemy ,then lance to charge the enemy and later raised their swords or mac for close combat.

[Marcus Aemilius Lepidus]

Another thing I hope to be featured (probably for the first time in the series) in ROME II is the units to be able to carry more than 2 weapons. This is very important if they want to authentically design the Pahlavan (parthian) units. Because historically they used bow to harass enemy ,then lance to charge the enemy and later raised their swords or mac for close combat.

But than you have only a few types of units for the parthians. Light Cav, Cataphrakts, and the same on infantery. In shogun you would have also only 2 types of units, Ashigaru and Samurai, but they made extra Spear and Katana Samurai. In reallity they would use Both inclusive bow.

[athanaric]

But than you have only a few types of units for the parthians. Light Cav, Cataphrakts, and the same on infantery.

You'd still have at least three types of cavalry. And more unit diversity can easily be brought into the game by adding regional specialties (like Hyrkanian infantry or non-Iranian units) and grouping by social status (free but low-ranking tribesmen, and various kinds of knights including cataphracts).

In shogun you would have also only 2 types of units, Ashigaru and Samurai,

Well no, actually. You'd still have a certain degree of specialization, for example ashigaru with spear and sword, ashigaru with bow and sword, and ashigaru with gun and sword. Plus those with naginatas or other "special" weapons. With samurai, there could still be a distinction between gunslingers and bowmen, as well as between spearmen and naginata wielders. And again, some samurai who prefer crazy stuff like nodachi.

but they made extra Spear and Katana Samurai.

Which is awful. No knight in his right mind would carry only a sword into battle, especially not when on horseback. The Japanese are no exception, they may be insane, but certainly not retarded.

[Kinjo]

While I will agree horse archers were very effective they should be balanced game-play wise for both single and multi-player. Make obvious counters for them like foot archers or faster light cav. Foot archers had a hard time targeting bow cav in shogun 2 because of the slow first firing animation. Horse archer armies in MP can be extremely annoying with battles lasting over an hour unless you had a cav spam to counter these types of armies.

[swoosh so]

While I will agree horse archers were very effective they should be balanced game-play wise for both single and multi-player. Make obvious counters for them like foot archers or faster light cav. Foot archers had a hard time targeting bow cav in shogun 2 because of the slow first firing animation. Horse archer armies in MP can be extremely annoying with battles lasting over an hour unless you had a cav spam to counter these types of armies.

Yes i hate that new mechanic of the foot archers arrows taking an accuracy test then have a chance of missing completely anyway due to movement mechanics, despite what was said it reeks of a bug to me.

[Ichon]

Horse archers could be given a bit more limited ammo while not quite the range of foot archers, light cavalry could catch most HA but not sure how that would help if the HA could simply shoot them down before entering melee. Foot archers/slingers or other HA would be the main counter to HA. Cavalry might work but with the low armor of ancient era most cavalry would be shot down before being able to enter melee.

[Ichon]

Also for Carrhae they were without water, shade or any cover. Hopefully arrows will have trouble hitting while units are in a forest so HA will be quite dominate on clear ground even if outranged by foot archers and slightly lower ammo than foot archers but HA won't be so powerful where there is cover for infantry.

I don't want to see any 'counter' for HA just for multi. That destroys the campaign game- to make multi counter it should be HA are more expensive simply and with lower ammo so its unlikely they can completely win without any melee.

[Boom S]

Also for Carrhae they were without water, shade or any cover. Hopefully arrows will have trouble hitting while units are in a forest so HA will be quite dominate on clear ground even if outranged by foot archers and slightly lower ammo than foot archers but HA won't be so powerful where there is cover for infantry.

I don't want to see any 'counter' for HA just for multi. That destroys the campaign game- to make multi counter it should be HA are more expensive simply and with lower ammo so its unlikely they can completely win without any melee.

Ichon, arrows not hitting targets in forest is part of TW game engines since RTW. also, cav gets a -ve bonus in forests IIRC.
secondly, their range would be lower than foot archers who would also be more accurate.
I am against artificial inflation of HA cost, esp for factions that had them by the thousands.

even the romans used horse archers in the imperial era, called equites sagitarii.