cavalry

[Highlander of Scotland]

in previous warscape games cav have been redicliously fragile, even charging a unit of skirmishes could decimate a unit. So do you guys think the cav will be underpowered or overpowered? I personally never had a problem with them however with this game having lots of pointy spears to run onto as pathfinding has never been a strong point of total war and getting a unit of cav caught on yaris or hitting a square was very annoying as the cav could not pull back. Yet even though they have stated that cav charges will be powerful I reckon that it will not be enough. To make cav strong enough they should give them redicliously high charge bonus but lower ap damage and average regular. If they carry axes or no lances switch ap for charge and balance them all out. Meanwhile in defence the cav should all have high defense skil (so that if they are tangled in a unit they can stay alive long enough to turn out) and elite cav high armour but less manouverability. Phalanxes should have a 50 50 with cav. Elite or experienced ones should not break and throw back the charge and momentum back in the riders face, although a unit of milita hoplites vs companions might turn and flee, meaning they would be butchered or stand their ground, butchering the cav.

I think this would make cav balanced and flexible, if path finding meant that the edge of a unit clipped a foe they would be able to (if he were not a hoplite or sarissa or well trained spearmen) continue moving without slowing down to much but if caught he would die instantly, equally the speed of light cav would mean they could knock through light units more efficently than heavy cav because they have more momentum.

Also arrows should not be quite as effective when the cav is charging meaning that archers can not simply stand there and shoot cav to death they have to be backed up.

Also even the lightest of formed cav could therefore slaughter a unit of spread out spartans or legionaries due to the charge bonus ( which should be at least 4 times an infantrymans.

[vietanh797]

Cavalry back then mostly not mean to charge.
Charging cavalry is something that happen in medieval time.

And honestly if a phalanx 50 50 when a cavalry charge them then you can say goodbye to Rome

[CnConrad]

Phalanxes should have a 50 50 with cav. Elite or experienced ones should not break and throw back the charge and momentum back in the riders face, although a unit of milita hoplites vs companions might turn and flee, meaning they would be butchered or stand their ground, butchering the cav.

You understand what a Phalanx is right, a row of guys with long spears pointed straight ahead.

You want a cavalry to be able to charge into this. and have a 50% chance of winning?

I would like stronger cav too but that's just ridiculous.

[Argon Viper]

Cavalry are more fragile than infantry. The guy on the horse has less room to swing his weapon and his shield is trapped on one side of his body. Add to that the fact that the horse is a pretty big target, and you can see why horsemen standing still are easy to take down.

They're also more mobile than infantry, that's just a factor of the horse being faster than a man, and the simple fact is that while horsemen standing still are easy to take down, good ones rarely stand still.

Finally, they're much more powerful than infantry. A horse weighs several times what a man weighs, and that mass crashing into you does a lot more damage than just a guy traveling shield first.

Overall, I think EB and RTR got it right; higher charge values than infantry with lower attack and defense values. Mainly cavalry would be used as a shock charge and never actually have to connect with the enemy before breaking them; but unless CA is willing to have units break and run at the sight of cavalry (unlikely), we'll probably see the high charge option.