Welcome

Please register for Total War Access to use the forums. If you're an existing user, your forum details will be merged with Total War Access if you register with the same email or username. For more information please read our FAQ’s here.

Categories

What's New In Battles?

Grace_CAGrace_CA Creative AssemblyRegistered Users, Moderators, Administrators, CA Staff Mods, CA Staff, Community Team Posts: 893
edited May 2018 in General Discussion


Today we're taking a look at the changes we made to make Thrones of Britannia faithful to the time period:
Post edited by Grace_CA on
«1

Comments

  • bbeslybbesly Member GermanyRegistered Users Posts: 269
    edited April 2018
    First :)

    well, despite there wasn't really anything I din't know before...
    The battles look MUCH better than Attila's...
    Those rearing cavalry, when refusing to charge a braced enemy - just great!

    Siege- and small settlement maps look just beautifull!

    I can't wait to get my hands on it.
  • riadachriadach Registered Users Posts: 161
    Aww, I was hoping for a Bardr video.
  • YarevYarev Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 246
    I was hoping for: we fixed this, tweaked that, improved this and changed that
    "War does not determine who is right - only who is left" Bertrand Russell
    "The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other bastard die for his" George S. Patton
  • bbeslybbesly Member GermanyRegistered Users Posts: 269
    Yarev said:

    I was hoping for: we fixed this, tweaked that, improved this and changed that

    while I get your wish, it was the community that pointed out the problems.
    Why not let them point out the improvements as well?

    just a thought...


    If one did not follow the "problem" at first, why bother him with improvements - instead of showing the "as it is"?
  • SuliotSuliot Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 687
    The cavalry not being able to charge into shields, that's an interesting change, I like the sound of that. And the new settlements designs look pretty cool.
  • ronmartheonlyronmartheonly Registered Users Posts: 19
    I wonder if the calvary not charging into shield will be contrasted with the Norman "knights" being able to charge into shields head-on.

  • Jack_Lusted_CAJack_Lusted_CA Creative Assembly Brighton, UKRegistered Users, CA Staff Mods, CA Staff Posts: 1,384

    I wonder if the calvary not charging into shield will be contrasted with the Norman "knights" being able to charge into shields head-on.

    Nope, Norman Knights didn't charge into the shield wall at Hastings, they moved along the shield wall, trying to find weakspots. No cavalry in Britain and Ireland in this era is like later Medieval knights.
    Game Director - Three Kingdoms DLC

    Disclaimer: Any views or opinions expressed here are those of the poster and do not necessarily represent the views or opinions of Creative Assembly or SEGA.
  • BlackenedLokiBlackenedLoki Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 159

    I wonder if the calvary not charging into shield will be contrasted with the Norman "knights" being able to charge into shields head-on.

    Nope, not a thing.

    Norman 'Knights' did not cavalry charge in that manner. It was very much an approach the shield wall and poke with spears, then retreat and repeat.

    A couched lance cavalry charge ala 100 years war was a much later thing.
    Yes, I am one of those people who liked Rome 2 and yes my opinion is still valid.
  • tak22tak22 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 2,386
    ... it just occurred to me, the new cavalry mechanics are probably going to be one of my favorite battle mechanics, although maybe for a different reason than most might think.

    It's always frustrating when you order a cavalry charge into a disorganized unit, and they manage to pull themselves together just in time. Esp. if they have pikes or spears, since that means instant death for your cav. Having them pull up short & engage carefully should minimize that - and give visual cues, and more time, to let you pull out if you want.
  • alstlalstl Member Registered Users Posts: 319
    I wonder if the battles will be longer with the emphasis on shield walls providing more defense and flanking the enemy while taking precaution against being flanked a key to victory.
  • riadachriadach Registered Users Posts: 161
    I wonder will there be ways of coaxing armies out of shield wall formations. I know that's one of the reasons for javelin and stone throwing in Irish warfare, annoy the enemy enough so they break formation and then rip through them.
  • HunorHunor Registered Users Posts: 132
    so "deployable defence " (traps) is GONE ????
    (i like them use in siege defend battle)
  • jamreal18jamreal18 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 9,280
    edited April 2018
    Regarding new maps, will there still going to be deployable traps?

    Will there be some units that are able to break shield wall?

    Also, please remove the sync movement or exactly the same response time of all entities in a unit just like the gif below...



    Even cavalry are the same. They are turning in perfect sync.


    Post edited by jamreal18 on
  • ronmartheonlyronmartheonly Registered Users Posts: 19

    I wonder if the calvary not charging into shield will be contrasted with the Norman "knights" being able to charge into shields head-on.

    Nope, Norman Knights didn't charge into the shield wall at Hastings, they moved along the shield wall, trying to find weakspots. No cavalry in Britain and Ireland in this era is like later Medieval knights.
    Thank you for the response, Mr. Lusted. Since I have some bit of your attention, please forgive me for asking a follow up question.

    Can you reveal whether the calvary not charging into shields will be a trait attached to the calvary or is it more "hard coded" into the calvary in a way that modders will be unable to remove. I only ask for the possibility of mods for later time periods (namely a potential War of the Roses mod that someone -- not me -- may consider making [though proper castles probably may be hard to implement]).
  • jimmy44jimmy44 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 351
    Some nice changes but CA it would be nice if you could answer a few questions about the rather large elephant in the room, battle AI. Any chance the AI have been taught how to flank properly or hold units in reserve? Any updates on changes to AI would be great : )
  • alstlalstl Member Registered Users Posts: 319
    Refresh my memory with guard mode and default guard mode. It makes your unit stand and fight for that piece of ground is that right? If it's on default I'm guessing you can still order the unit to move?
  • TheEmperorTheEmperor Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 671
    If cavalry in this era did not charge head on into braced infantry, did cavalry in the Attila or Rome 2 eras do that?
  • KregenKregen Member Registered Users Posts: 487

    If cavalry in this era did not charge head on into braced infantry, did cavalry in the Attila or Rome 2 eras do that?

    it shouldn't have
  • kuryakinkuryakin Registered Users Posts: 78

    If cavalry in this era did not charge head on into braced infantry, did cavalry in the Attila or Rome 2 eras do that?

    It depends on the cavalry unit and civilisation. Greek cavalry was used for scouting,raiding,pursuing no more. Macedonian companion cavalry were known for charges-typically flank and rear and mostly against lesser armoured persian infantry. Roman cavalry was multipurpose, could do all the above, charges were against unarmoured tribesmen or Parthian cavalry. Parthian/Sassanid cavalry had horse archers for harassment and Cataphracts who could charge infantry at a trot. Byzantine cavalry was similiar.

    The restriction on cavalry charges was mainly due to the lack of stirrups which were introduced only by the Alans in 500-600 AD. Sassanid/Roman and Byzantines had four cornered saddles which could provide better stability. It was also the function of the size of horses. Horses in western Europe at the time were much smaller, more like ponies or the modern Arabian. Only the Parthian/Sassanids had larger horses found in their homeland, Nissean I think.

    In the late middle ages, plate armour, horse armour, stirrups, couched lance, Destiers/Large horses etc combined to produce the charging knight again not at full gallop but at fast trot. The fully galloping cuirassiers came only in the 17th century and Adolphus, Frederick and Napoleon were the leading proponents of the art.
  • jamreal18jamreal18 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 9,280
    kuryakin said:

    The restriction on cavalry charges was mainly due to the lack of stirrups

    I thought it was because of horses' instinct.
  • kuryakinkuryakin Registered Users Posts: 78
    jamreal18 said:

    kuryakin said:

    The restriction on cavalry charges was mainly due to the lack of stirrups

    I thought it was because of horses' instinct.
    Definitely, horses instinctively dont want to charge a solid mass. However they can be trained to do so. This is what happened in the later centuries when equipment and horses changed. Also very rarely do cavalry charge frontally. Its normally flanks/rear. Alexander was one of the few crazy enough to do it and he got away with it because he wasnt facing roman legions!
  • TheEmperorTheEmperor Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 671
    @kuryakin Do you know how horses can be trained to run into spears? I know the Chinese put a piece of black cloth on the horses' eyes just before the charge to do that, but since you said trained, I guess there is a way to make the horses do that knowingly?
  • tak22tak22 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 2,386
    kuryakin said:

    jamreal18 said:

    kuryakin said:

    The restriction on cavalry charges was mainly due to the lack of stirrups

    I thought it was because of horses' instinct.
    Definitely, horses instinctively dont want to charge a solid mass. However they can be trained to do so. This is what happened in the later centuries when equipment and horses changed. Also very rarely do cavalry charge frontally. Its normally flanks/rear. Alexander was one of the few crazy enough to do it and he got away with it because he wasnt facing roman legions!
    I was under the impression even Alexander generally tried to exploit vulnerabilities in the enemy formation - it was the role of the pikes and peltasts to create them. So still not really a 'frontal charge.'

    @kuryakin Do you know how horses can be trained to run into spears? I know the Chinese put a piece of black cloth on the horses' eyes just before the charge to do that, but since you said trained, I guess there is a way to make the horses do that knowingly?

    later medieval harnesses & facial armour for warhorses generally covered the horses eyes.
  • kuryakinkuryakin Registered Users Posts: 78

    @kuryakin Do you know how horses can be trained to run into spears? I know the Chinese put a piece of black cloth on the horses' eyes just before the charge to do that, but since you said trained, I guess there is a way to make the horses do that knowingly?

    Yes, training sometimes involved covering/shielding a horses eyes. However in most cases, there was no realistic "live arms" training. Training did not involve charging a spear wall. The poor horse never knew what he/she was in for! Training in ancient ages involved the rider getting to know his mount, stability while riding, formations like wedge and rhombus and most of all, not pursuing and wheeling about. Most riders had multiple mounts since the first battle was often the horses last- death, wounds, trauma.

    As I mentioned, the Macedonians and Romans never had to charge spear walls/pikes since their enemies werent so equipped. Same with Sassanid/Byzantines. It was the advent of plate armour knights cantering on Destiers that the pike made a re-appearance first used by the Scots .
  • kuryakinkuryakin Registered Users Posts: 78
    tak22 said:

    kuryakin said:

    jamreal18 said:

    kuryakin said:

    The restriction on cavalry charges was mainly due to the lack of stirrups

    I thought it was because of horses' instinct.
    Definitely, horses instinctively dont want to charge a solid mass. However they can be trained to do so. This is what happened in the later centuries when equipment and horses changed. Also very rarely do cavalry charge frontally. Its normally flanks/rear. Alexander was one of the few crazy enough to do it and he got away with it because he wasnt facing roman legions!
    I was under the impression even Alexander generally tried to exploit vulnerabilities in the enemy formation - it was the role of the pikes and peltasts to create them. So still not really a 'frontal charge.'


    Yes, Alexander charged at gaps at Granicus, Issus and Gaugamela. However these were frontal on the battle line, not flanks and small gaps at that. The Persians were not very good at plugging the gaps or having reserves in the rear. The Macedonian cavalry was the hammer and the pikemen the anvil.
  • 123223123223 Registered Users Posts: 42
    edited April 2018

    I wonder if the calvary not charging into shield will be contrasted with the Norman "knights" being able to charge into shields head-on.

    Nope, Norman Knights didn't charge into the shield wall at Hastings, they moved along the shield wall, trying to find weakspots. No cavalry in Britain and Ireland in this era is like later Medieval knights.
    Hi developers!
    Make the Shield Wall active by clicking on the green button.Please.
  • IntranetusaIntranetusa Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 607
    kuryakin said:

    If cavalry in this era did not charge head on into braced infantry, did cavalry in the Attila or Rome 2 eras do that?

    It depends on the cavalry unit and civilisation. Greek cavalry was used for scouting,raiding,pursuing no more. Macedonian companion cavalry were known for charges-typically flank and rear and mostly against lesser armoured persian infantry. Roman cavalry was multipurpose, could do all the above, charges were against unarmoured tribesmen or Parthian cavalry. Parthian/Sassanid cavalry had horse archers for harassment and Cataphracts who could charge infantry at a trot. Byzantine cavalry was similiar.

    The restriction on cavalry charges was mainly due to the lack of stirrups which were introduced only by the Alans in 500-600 AD. Sassanid/Roman and Byzantines had four cornered saddles which could provide better stability. It was also the function of the size of horses. Horses in western Europe at the time were much smaller, more like ponies or the modern Arabian. Only the Parthian/Sassanids had larger horses found in their homeland, Nissean I think.

    In the late middle ages, plate armour, horse armour, stirrups, couched lance, Destiers/Large horses etc combined to produce the charging knight again not at full gallop but at fast trot. The fully galloping cuirassiers came only in the 17th century and Adolphus, Frederick and Napoleon were the leading proponents of the art.
    That depends on the time period in Roman history and type of Roman cavalry. The majority of Roman cavalry for the majority of classical Rome's history were not multipurpose and were lighter cavalry.

    In pre-Marian Republican times, Roman citizen cavalry was similar to Greek cavalry for much of their history - used for scouting, skirmishes, engagements against lighter opponents, etc and couldn't hold in melee for very long. Roman auxiliary cavalry were sometimes better. Later post-Marians didn't really have standardized native cavalry, and relied on auxillaries for cavalry. There were Roman cataphracts who were capable of charging infantry by the 4th century, but these were going to be a minority in number compared to much more common lighter Roman cavalry.
  • TheEmperorTheEmperor Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 671
    @kuryakin Damn, I always thought shielding the eyes was cruel to the horses. Didn't know the whole world was doing that.

    How would a rider be able to mount on his second horse if his first one died? Does he tie the horses up like a chariot? I can't imagine a rider running back to his camp to get a second horse if his first horse was killed by arrows or in melee combat.
  • AstraeusAstraeus Member BrittonisRegistered Users Posts: 377
    Are the unit cards in battle meant to reflect the Bayeux Tapestry?
  • kuryakinkuryakin Registered Users Posts: 78

    @kuryakin Damn, I always thought shielding the eyes was cruel to the horses. Didn't know the whole world was doing that.

    How would a rider be able to mount on his second horse if his first one died? Does he tie the horses up like a chariot? I can't imagine a rider running back to his camp to get a second horse if his first horse was killed by arrows or in melee combat.

    If the mount dies, the rider is riderless for the remainder of the battle, unless he is able to remount a riderless horse in the heat of battle. All spare mounts, equipment etc were in camp and available only after battle.
Sign In or Register to comment.