Areukoi heavy cavalry are pinballs

[Thuycidides]

Areukoi heavy cavalry, if it wants to, can run straight through formations of spearmen in guard mode. When they do this they start bouncing around like pinballs between the spearmen, and it continues until the spearmen formation has no cohesion whatsoever. Note that this is not a charge that breaks up the formation, they're simply running inside the formation and then pinballing around.

In EB1 spearmen had real stopping power versus all kinds of cavalry. In EB2 only a pike phalanx seems to put the brakes on them.

[QuintusSertorius]

EB1's engine had vastly superior physics to EB2's engine. Not a lot we can do about that.

[Thuycidides]

EB1's engine had vastly superior physics to EB2's engine. Not a lot we can do about that.

Too bad.

[+Marius+]

EB1's engine had vastly superior physics to EB2's engine. Not a lot we can do about that.

I understand that there are certain differences between RTW and M2TW in regards to unit collision and such, but you claim that the engine itself is superior?

Could you please elaborate?

[HaHawk]

EB1's engine had vastly superior physics to EB2's engine. Not a lot we can do about that.

I have to politely disagree. The engines are the same, only with some minor differences -- most of which are improvements. To be sure, Medieval II has some unfortunate quirks, such as too many cavalry going through gates at once "spazzing out" as discussed here, but in general I think the physics are superior to Rome I and much more realistic. Rome I physics are slightly more simplified and units are more responsive to click orders (ex: cavalry can turn on a dime , change direction instantly, etc. with almost zero delay); this makes Rome I's battles easier and more intuitive as an RTS game (like Age of Empires or Star Craft), whereas M2TW is a bit more restrained and unit mass feels more consistent. I recently jumped into Rome I for a few custom battles and was sorely disappointed; from my perspective, Medieval II -- which is a refined and updated version of the Rome I engine -- has far more positives than negatives. But to each his own.

[Thuycidides]

Rome I physics are slightly more simplified and units are more responsive to click orders (ex: cavalry can turn on a dime , change direction instantly, etc. with almost zero delay);

AI skirmisher cavalry still dart back and forth like fish in a pond in EB2, but your observation about click orders is shared.

M2TW battles are a chaotic mish-mash of infantry units slugging it out. I don't get the impression of intra-unit teamwork at all. But I should hedge that criticism because it's still much better than later TW games.

[Draewn]

Meanwhile, in the recent games...

They've got a lot of redeeming features, but good lord is physics not one of them. What's really fun is when you've got a bunch of guys trying to get into a small space and then they all start swooshing about within the mix like an interpretative dance on the theme of Brownian motion.

[delra]

.

[delra]

Don't know about you guys but having played it for a couple months this Summer, I just really don't like battles in EB2.

Cavalry is useless because it can't break nor fight any serious unit without getting decimated, skirmishers are useless as they do little damage and get caught all the time, ranged units are useless as they never damage the sort of units that matter, all elites are useless due to their small size that weakens them down to the level of regular units.

Somehow we've ended up with the sort of balancing that makes mediocre heavy infantry units the only useful thing in the entire roster and that's what the whole stacks should be composed of. 19x Hastati, 19x Hoplitai, 19x Dorks + General and you're all set for world conquest. You build an army like that - enemy can't touch it with anything other than his own cheap heavies. There's zero reason for variety.

On top of everything, you don't even know what's going on because the most useful interface icon - allowing to highlight friendly and enemy units - is for no reason whatsoever removed from the mod.

With this setup, it's probably best to go down to medium and just autoresolve everything... Gives AI a fair chance and you can build lighter and more balanced armies for yourself.

[Thuycidides]

skirmishers are useless as they do little damage and get caught all the time

I don't agree that they are useless. However, you are right that skirmisher units do not skirmish in EB2. Even skirmisher cavalry has to be babysat or it will get caught by pursuing infantry.

[HaHawk]

Don't know about you guys but having played it for a couple months this Summer, I just really don't like battles in EB2.

That's a shame to hear... I've been playing M2TW on a regular basis for 3 years, before which I played Rome I. Out of all the Total War games and mods, EB2's battles are currently my favorite, tied only with SS6.4 — which has somewhat incomparable battles anyway due to the different eras (especially after gunpowder is introduced). In particular, EBII's more realistic battle pace, morale/routing behavior, and greater importance of stamina, among other changes, make battles very interesting and rewarding to play. That's not to say that there isn't room for improvement, of course. But as they stand now, field battles are excellent and are far better than at initial release thanks to the team's consistent fine-tuning of mechanics, unit stats, and battle AI.

Cavalry is useless because it can't break nor fight any serious unit without getting decimated, skirmishers are useless as they do little damage and get caught all the time, ranged units are useless as they never damage the sort of units that matter, all elites are useless due to their small size that weakens them down to the level of regular units.

While I can't comment with certainty on the balancing of elite infantry units, I have to strongly disagree with you about cavalry being "useless". On the contrary, I'd say cavalry are nearly OP when used by the player (though less so than in most other M2TW mods due to EBII cavalry having lower mass and charge bonuses). And while the AI seldom commits multiple charges, z3n said that this will be improved in the next major release; this should make cavalry fielded by the AI much more dangerous. Also, unlike every other mod I've played, when you withdraw cavalry from the fray in EBII, you seldom lose even a single man/horse. In SS, if you withdraw a unit of cavalry from a fight, you'll often lose 15% to 20% of your unit!! In other words, it is much easier to achieve multiple cavalry charges in EBII than in other mods, increasing their usefulness and staying power. Even horse archers (unit size of 100 in huge) can pull off a devastating charge when used at the right moment.

As for skirmishers, I seldom use their skirmish ability (K) to actually skirmish. However, this was the case in Rome I and vanilla M2TW as well (including archers, crossbowmen, javelinmen, etc.). They have always required some micromanaging on the part of the player to be especially effective. Otherwise you can just leave them behind your main line with skirmish mode off and fire at will mode on. This is not unique to EBII. The best use I've found for "K" (skirmish mode) is to use it as "self-preservation mode". In other words, only enable it temporarily on units that you want to stay out of melee while you're busy managing something else. When you're ready to give them orders — such as to flank the enemy — it's time to turn skirmish mode off and take command yourself. I would like to make a video about tactics sometime... Not necessarily for you, but for newer players and those less familiar with M2TW's mechanics.

Somehow we've ended up with the sort of balancing that makes mediocre heavy infantry units the only useful thing in the entire roster and that's what the whole stacks should be composed of. 19x Hastati, 19x Hoplitai, 19x Dorks + General and you're all set for world conquest. You build an army like that - enemy can't touch it with anything other than his own cheap heavies. There's zero reason for variety.

You could say the same thing about fielding an all-cavalry army, no? Anyway, the player can pretty much always win against any AI army regardless of its composition as long as the player fields a full stack of decent units. Even so, depending on the terrain and which faction you're up against, I would say that an all medium infantry army isn't very wise if you're going against a full enemy stack that includes phalanxes, horse archers, and heavy cavalry. Especially after z3n perfects the AI's use of cavalry charges...

On top of everything, you don't even know what's going on because the most useful interface icon - allowing to highlight friendly and enemy units - is for no reason whatsoever removed from the mod.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the devs stated that this function will be added/restored in the Autumn Release. It won't make a difference to me anyway as I only use the minimal GUI which does not include this function. I quite prefer more messy and chaotic battles anyhow. If it causes me to make a small mistake here and there, then so be it. The AI needs all the (non-cheating) help it can get, and battles in real life were anything but orderly.

[torzsoktamas]

I took a shot at Stainless Steel,because I read that it had good battles.I only played just a few of them and can't tell if it has good balance but the units do show good responsiveness and cohesion.Maybe you should take a look at their formula,if it is possible?