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 the point of charge bonus in cavalry beta?

2

Comments

  • Dragonsteel82Dragonsteel82 Registered Users Posts: 139

    OK, no elf cav then. how about empire knights (high armour) vs AP Anti Large 44MD eternal guard?





    Thanks for taking the critique and adjusting your testing. I appreciate the new data. I'm not getting similar results but it might have to do with how exactly you are running your test. I used a bit chunkier infantry blocks but the empire knights I have were not trading effectively, nor was I see as great of a distinction in unit health. You mentioned earlier this was over 10 seconds, do you mean cycle charging over 10 seconds or are you just charging once? My tests may have used chunkier lines than you were using and we were informed that thin lines may be slightly worse on the beta.

    In my experience bracing is better at mitigating damage but is not helping infantry to trade effectively in the way counter charging is, which suggests more work needs to be done.
    I'm going to make the same comment a million times, I think there should be reflective damage or some counter damage to charging an anti large unit that is braced.
  • Spellbound55Spellbound55 Registered Users Posts: 637

    OK, no elf cav then. how about empire knights (high armour) vs AP Anti Large 44MD eternal guard?





    Thanks for taking the critique and adjusting your testing. I appreciate the new data. I'm not getting similar results but it might have to do with how exactly you are running your test. I used a bit chunkier infantry blocks but the empire knights I have were not trading effectively, nor was I see as great of a distinction in unit health. You mentioned earlier this was over 10 seconds, do you mean cycle charging over 10 seconds or are you just charging once? My tests may have used chunkier lines than you were using and we were informed that thin lines may be slightly worse on the beta.

    In my experience bracing is better at mitigating damage but is not helping infantry to trade effectively in the way counter charging is, which suggests more work needs to be done.
    I'm going to make the same comment a million times, I think there should be reflective damage or some counter damage to charging an anti large unit that is braced.
    Why if cav is currently too weak should we take steps to make the unit class weaker? And this entire beta is predicated on the fact that cav is too weak (though infantry charges being too strong is a big factor in this).
  • BlissBliss Registered Users Posts: 580
    They said in the patch note that bracing "bonus" is related to how deep ranks are (max bracing bonus 8 rank deep).

    Maybe you should test the different outcomes depending on how deeps ranks are.
  • Lotus_MoonLotus_Moon Registered Users Posts: 11,554
    edited September 9

    OK, no elf cav then. how about empire knights (high armour) vs AP Anti Large 44MD eternal guard?





    Thanks for taking the critique and adjusting your testing. I appreciate the new data. I'm not getting similar results but it might have to do with how exactly you are running your test. I used a bit chunkier infantry blocks but the empire knights I have were not trading effectively, nor was I see as great of a distinction in unit health. You mentioned earlier this was over 10 seconds, do you mean cycle charging over 10 seconds or are you just charging once? My tests may have used chunkier lines than you were using and we were informed that thin lines may be slightly worse on the beta.

    In my experience bracing is better at mitigating damage but is not helping infantry to trade effectively in the way counter charging is, which suggests more work needs to be done.
    I'm going to make the same comment a million times, I think there should be reflective damage or some counter damage to charging an anti large unit that is braced.
    It be a horrible idea and will never happen, lucky Duck said on discord he doesn't like the idea of reflective dmg so save some energy and try come up with an idea that actually is fair.

    I did go into detail more in another thread abotu Ducks response as well as a better solution.
  • littlenukelittlenuke Registered Users Posts: 809

    OK, no elf cav then. how about empire knights (high armour) vs AP Anti Large 44MD eternal guard?





    Thanks for taking the critique and adjusting your testing. I appreciate the new data. I'm not getting similar results but it might have to do with how exactly you are running your test. I used a bit chunkier infantry blocks but the empire knights I have were not trading effectively, nor was I see as great of a distinction in unit health. You mentioned earlier this was over 10 seconds, do you mean cycle charging over 10 seconds or are you just charging once? My tests may have used chunkier lines than you were using and we were informed that thin lines may be slightly worse on the beta.

    In my experience bracing is better at mitigating damage but is not helping infantry to trade effectively in the way counter charging is, which suggests more work needs to be done.
    I just charged them in for 10s, no cycle. I'll do some more detailed testing over the weekend if I have time
    Karaz-A-Karak discord: https://discord.gg/UZV6F5N

  • eumaieseumaies Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 8,342

    OK, no elf cav then. how about empire knights (high armour) vs AP Anti Large 44MD eternal guard?





    Thanks for taking the critique and adjusting your testing. I appreciate the new data. I'm not getting similar results but it might have to do with how exactly you are running your test. I used a bit chunkier infantry blocks but the empire knights I have were not trading effectively, nor was I see as great of a distinction in unit health. You mentioned earlier this was over 10 seconds, do you mean cycle charging over 10 seconds or are you just charging once? My tests may have used chunkier lines than you were using and we were informed that thin lines may be slightly worse on the beta.

    In my experience bracing is better at mitigating damage but is not helping infantry to trade effectively in the way counter charging is, which suggests more work needs to be done.
    I'm going to make the same comment a million times, I think there should be reflective damage or some counter damage to charging an anti large unit that is braced.
    It be a horrible idea and will never happen, lucky Duck said on discord he doesn't like the idea of reflective dmg so save some energy and try come up with an idea that actually is fair.

    I did go into detail more in another thread abotu Ducks response as well as a better solution.
    That's actually straight up not true. He simply said some games went too far with it.
  • y4g3ry4g3r Registered Users Posts: 505
    Rome, Atilla and Shogun - if your cavalry even caught a whiff of a spear, the cav would evaporate like the snow in the Sahara. It made cavalry units incredibly unfun to use.

    So only 80% of their catalogue then.😂
  • Lotus_MoonLotus_Moon Registered Users Posts: 11,554
    eumaies said:

    OK, no elf cav then. how about empire knights (high armour) vs AP Anti Large 44MD eternal guard?





    Thanks for taking the critique and adjusting your testing. I appreciate the new data. I'm not getting similar results but it might have to do with how exactly you are running your test. I used a bit chunkier infantry blocks but the empire knights I have were not trading effectively, nor was I see as great of a distinction in unit health. You mentioned earlier this was over 10 seconds, do you mean cycle charging over 10 seconds or are you just charging once? My tests may have used chunkier lines than you were using and we were informed that thin lines may be slightly worse on the beta.

    In my experience bracing is better at mitigating damage but is not helping infantry to trade effectively in the way counter charging is, which suggests more work needs to be done.
    I'm going to make the same comment a million times, I think there should be reflective damage or some counter damage to charging an anti large unit that is braced.
    It be a horrible idea and will never happen, lucky Duck said on discord he doesn't like the idea of reflective dmg so save some energy and try come up with an idea that actually is fair.

    I did go into detail more in another thread abotu Ducks response as well as a better solution.
    That's actually straight up not true. He simply said some games went too far with it.
    From discord, i see you were part of that chain of discussion so i do believe you know what im talking about

    "CA_Duck — Yesterday at 9:07 AM
    I'm not a massive fan of the charge reflection mechanic as it was in Rome 2 and Attila though
    CA_Duck — Yesterday at 9:08 AM
    as it really just weaponised the charger's charge bonus against the unit
    so it didn't really matter if the spear was a spear levy or a spear noble"


    Not sure why you feel its not true what i wrote, am i misinterpreting it?
  • mightygloinmightygloin Karaz-a-KarakRegistered Users Posts: 4,992
    edited September 9
    325g chaff having full reflection would suck for sure. Maybe there could be tiers depending on the unit, or none at all if it's Skavenslave Spears.

    On the other hand i'd like it if such a mechanic led to the reduction of AL bonus on spears which is too much especially on the cheap ones imo.
  • eumaieseumaies Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 8,342

    eumaies said:

    OK, no elf cav then. how about empire knights (high armour) vs AP Anti Large 44MD eternal guard?





    Thanks for taking the critique and adjusting your testing. I appreciate the new data. I'm not getting similar results but it might have to do with how exactly you are running your test. I used a bit chunkier infantry blocks but the empire knights I have were not trading effectively, nor was I see as great of a distinction in unit health. You mentioned earlier this was over 10 seconds, do you mean cycle charging over 10 seconds or are you just charging once? My tests may have used chunkier lines than you were using and we were informed that thin lines may be slightly worse on the beta.

    In my experience bracing is better at mitigating damage but is not helping infantry to trade effectively in the way counter charging is, which suggests more work needs to be done.
    I'm going to make the same comment a million times, I think there should be reflective damage or some counter damage to charging an anti large unit that is braced.
    It be a horrible idea and will never happen, lucky Duck said on discord he doesn't like the idea of reflective dmg so save some energy and try come up with an idea that actually is fair.

    I did go into detail more in another thread abotu Ducks response as well as a better solution.
    That's actually straight up not true. He simply said some games went too far with it.
    From discord, i see you were part of that chain of discussion so i do believe you know what im talking about

    "CA_Duck — Yesterday at 9:07 AM
    I'm not a massive fan of the charge reflection mechanic as it was in Rome 2 and Attila though
    CA_Duck — Yesterday at 9:08 AM
    as it really just weaponised the charger's charge bonus against the unit
    so it didn't really matter if the spear was a spear levy or a spear noble"


    Not sure why you feel its not true what i wrote, am i misinterpreting it?
    that's not at all rejection of charge reflection of some kind; just as it was done in those games. which is explicitly not what people are requesting here.
  • Lotus_MoonLotus_Moon Registered Users Posts: 11,554

    325g chaff having full reflection would suck for sure. Maybe there could be tiers depending on the unit, or none at all if it's Skavenslave Spears.

    I dont wanna preach my idea like an idiot, but do you think it would help? or basically is it missing something? I think it makes it easier to balance due to ability to alert CB of the bracer, and works for expert charge defense in small vs small + it works in cases of large vs large (snakes or abilties vs cav/monsters)
  • User_ClueUser_Clue Registered Users Posts: 959
    I completely agree with Lotus. Charge reflection is a stupid mechanic that disproportionality punishes high tier shock cav for no reason. Why should the damage that a polearm unit does to a cav unit depend on the quality of the cav unit rather than the quality of the polearm unit?

    You don't need to add bad mechanics into the game to make bracing better and you don't necessarily need to fudge the numbers. The unit AI just needs to be ready to attack on contact when a unit is braced. This shouldn't just be the case for units with charge defense, it should just be the way all units behave. Polearms already have a BvL to represent their effectiveness against cav, they just need to be able to use it when cav attack.

    @Disposable Hero made a similar point but again I don't think you need to make it so complicated, they just need to attack period, as soon as an enemy is in range.
    "Daemons are abroad again, and the servants of the foul gods march south with the storm at their backs. But as the winds of magic stir, other powers rise to contest it.
    I have seen the Lady, my brothers. She came to me from the waters and told me of the trials to come. This is why I call you here, so that her summons may be answered. I call Errantry, a crusade to strike at the heart of the new darkness"


    -- The Lionhearted
  • eumaieseumaies Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 8,342
    User_Clue said:

    I completely agree with Lotus. Charge reflection is a stupid mechanic that disproportionality punishes high tier shock cav for no reason. Why should the damage that a polearm unit does to a cav unit depend on the quality of the cav unit rather than the quality of the polearm unit?

    You don't need to add bad mechanics into the game to make bracing better and you don't necessarily need to fudge the numbers. The unit AI just needs to be ready to attack on contact when a unit is braced. This shouldn't just be the case for units with charge defense, it should just be the way all units behave. Polearms already have a BvL to represent their effectiveness against cav, they just need to be able to use it when cav attack.

    @Disposable Hero made a similar point but again I don't think you need to make it so complicated, they just need to attack period, as soon as an enemy is in range.

    almost no one is proposing the damage be related to anything other than the braced units' stats and attacks.

    This whole re-defining of charge reflection as a way to undermine reasonable suggestions is gettng absurd.
  • User_ClueUser_Clue Registered Users Posts: 959
    eumaies said:

    User_Clue said:

    I completely agree with Lotus. Charge reflection is a stupid mechanic that disproportionality punishes high tier shock cav for no reason. Why should the damage that a polearm unit does to a cav unit depend on the quality of the cav unit rather than the quality of the polearm unit?

    You don't need to add bad mechanics into the game to make bracing better and you don't necessarily need to fudge the numbers. The unit AI just needs to be ready to attack on contact when a unit is braced. This shouldn't just be the case for units with charge defense, it should just be the way all units behave. Polearms already have a BvL to represent their effectiveness against cav, they just need to be able to use it when cav attack.

    @Disposable Hero made a similar point but again I don't think you need to make it so complicated, they just need to attack period, as soon as an enemy is in range.

    almost no one is proposing the damage be related to anything other than the braced units' stats and attacks.

    This whole re-defining of charge reflection as a way to undermine reasonable suggestions is gettng absurd.
    As far as I recall, charge reflection has never meant anything other than reflecting an attackers CB. 3K did it, Rome did it, and I believe shogun did it. Anyone using the term in some other way are the ones redefining it. The term itself is also pretty self explanatory. It reflects the charge.

    Regardless of how you define it, I don't like it. Polearms already have a BvL, they just need to be better at using it.
    "Daemons are abroad again, and the servants of the foul gods march south with the storm at their backs. But as the winds of magic stir, other powers rise to contest it.
    I have seen the Lady, my brothers. She came to me from the waters and told me of the trials to come. This is why I call you here, so that her summons may be answered. I call Errantry, a crusade to strike at the heart of the new darkness"


    -- The Lionhearted
  • Disposable HeroDisposable Hero Registered Users Posts: 6,893
    User_Clue said:

    I completely agree with Lotus. Charge reflection is a stupid mechanic that disproportionality punishes high tier shock cav for no reason. Why should the damage that a polearm unit does to a cav unit depend on the quality of the cav unit rather than the quality of the polearm unit?

    You don't need to add bad mechanics into the game to make bracing better and you don't necessarily need to fudge the numbers. The unit AI just needs to be ready to attack on contact when a unit is braced. This shouldn't just be the case for units with charge defense, it should just be the way all units behave. Polearms already have a BvL to represent their effectiveness against cav, they just need to be able to use it when cav attack.

    @Disposable Hero made a similar point but again I don't think you need to make it so complicated, they just need to attack period, as soon as an enemy is in range.

    Yea my idea was just to force the attack to trigger earlier than it does now.

    According to duck in chat he did however say that this is happening already now, ie attack is initiated on impact, so it might be a bit technically difficult to make it resolve immediately for the models being hit.

    He also explained synced attacks with 0.3 secs are synced by the faster attack waiting for the slower attack, which wouldn't work for charge - brace exchange. I think it would require to sidestep normal damage application procedure so it may be too much work.
    Don't fear the knockdown. Control it. Embrace it. Love it! :smile:
  • RawSugarRawSugar Registered Users Posts: 1,349
    edited September 10
    User_Clue said:

    eumaies said:

    User_Clue said:

    I completely agree with Lotus. Charge reflection is a stupid mechanic that disproportionality punishes high tier shock cav for no reason. Why should the damage that a polearm unit does to a cav unit depend on the quality of the cav unit rather than the quality of the polearm unit?

    You don't need to add bad mechanics into the game to make bracing better and you don't necessarily need to fudge the numbers. The unit AI just needs to be ready to attack on contact when a unit is braced. This shouldn't just be the case for units with charge defense, it should just be the way all units behave. Polearms already have a BvL to represent their effectiveness against cav, they just need to be able to use it when cav attack.

    @Disposable Hero made a similar point but again I don't think you need to make it so complicated, they just need to attack period, as soon as an enemy is in range.

    almost no one is proposing the damage be related to anything other than the braced units' stats and attacks.

    This whole re-defining of charge reflection as a way to undermine reasonable suggestions is gettng absurd.
    As far as I recall, charge reflection has never meant anything other than reflecting an attackers CB. 3K did it, Rome did it, and I believe shogun did it. Anyone using the term in some other way are the ones redefining it. The term itself is also pretty self explanatory. It reflects the charge.

    Regardless of how you define it, I don't like it. Polearms already have a BvL, they just need to be better at using it.
    the problem is number of attacks when braced. if the braced unit did the same number of attacks as it does when charging there wouldnt be an issue. its doubly weird since bracing is supposed to be a spearwall ie several ranks attacking
    Post edited by RawSugar on
  • ShiroAmakusa75ShiroAmakusa75 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 33,937

    OK, no elf cav then. how about empire knights (high armour) vs AP Anti Large 44MD eternal guard?





    Thanks for taking the critique and adjusting your testing. I appreciate the new data. I'm not getting similar results but it might have to do with how exactly you are running your test. I used a bit chunkier infantry blocks but the empire knights I have were not trading effectively, nor was I see as great of a distinction in unit health. You mentioned earlier this was over 10 seconds, do you mean cycle charging over 10 seconds or are you just charging once? My tests may have used chunkier lines than you were using and we were informed that thin lines may be slightly worse on the beta.

    In my experience bracing is better at mitigating damage but is not helping infantry to trade effectively in the way counter charging is, which suggests more work needs to be done.
    I'm going to make the same comment a million times, I think there should be reflective damage or some counter damage to charging an anti large unit that is braced.
    Why if cav is currently too weak should we take steps to make the unit class weaker? And this entire beta is predicated on the fact that cav is too weak (though infantry charges being too strong is a big factor in this).
    What's it too weak for? Charging
    y4g3r said:

    Rome, Atilla and Shogun - if your cavalry even caught a whiff of a spear, the cav would evaporate like the snow in the Sahara. It made cavalry units incredibly unfun to use.

    So only 80% of their catalogue then.😂

    Yeah, that's totally untrue, but I don't presume any Warhammer players ever bothered with other TWs anyway by now.

    Attila BTW, had massively OP cavalry for most of its builds.
  • BovineKingBovineKing Registered Users Posts: 673
    edited September 10
    I don’t like the idea of reflecting damage I can see braced unit maybe getting automatic hits in for 1st round of attacks(know idea if this made sense but idea is entities that can attack have 1st attack as automatic success)that they do probably just on AL units though against large targets.

    I know that some people would be against this to but hear me out a entity has to be AL braces and able to attack to receive the benefit not all entities in said unit would be able attack even if they counted as braced it also doesn’t change when attacks are done either.
    Post edited by BovineKing on
  • Dragonsteel82Dragonsteel82 Registered Users Posts: 139
    I think cav should be punished for charging into an anti large braced unit. I obviously skavenslaves should basically do nothing compared to deep guard pole arms or chosen halberds.

    There needs to be an incentive for bracing, especially the anti large units.
  • NinaranNinaran Registered Users Posts: 422
    edited September 13
    Cavalry frontal charging into braced CDvL infantry should just be subject to a 100% hit chance attack by every model they strike.

    Kinda hard to miss your attack when the dude runs straight into your weapon willingly.
  • Lotus_MoonLotus_Moon Registered Users Posts: 11,554

    I think cav should be punished for charging into an anti large braced unit. I obviously skavenslaves should basically do nothing compared to deep guard pole arms or chosen halberds.

    There needs to be an incentive for bracing, especially the anti large units.

    There is though, you reduce dmg taken by denying opponents CB, thus in theory should be able to deal more dmg in return as less of your models die and thus others last longer.
  • ystyst Registered Users Posts: 9,491
    Nah the reflect can easily be based on the reflecting unit itself.

    A slave reflecting their wep dmg is not even remotely close to a chosen hakberd reflecting theirs.

    Its up the implementation, if its a toggle with cooldown and duration its an easy thing to put in once tilean pikes get added to the game.
    https://imgur.com/a/Cj4b9
    Top #3 Leaderboard on Warhammer Totalwar.
  • BastileanBastilean Registered Users Posts: 2,293
    edited September 13

    There is though, you reduce dmg taken by denying opponents CB, thus in theory should be able to deal more dmg in return as less of your models die and thus others last longer.

    This is coming from the same people who want charging cavalry to be able to easily disengage from infantry and have longer knockdowns.

    I do get it though because counter charging is so good at entangling.

    What if Bracing gave a 3 second 30% acceleration reduction to enemies to make the braced infantry more sticky, so they get a round of attacks? The 3 second slow would require cavalry to make a full round of attacks before booking it if they want full acceleration (say ~5 second charge). 3 seconds after the last cavalry model to charge a braced unit has finished the acceleration nerf ends. Would be nice if it effected the whole unit just so that the slow is visually transparent.

    Alternately, and more easy for CA it could be an on melee 5 second slow or acceleration nerf with an out of melee refresh for Charge Defense which only works on Large and is deactivated if moving. I think I could make that ability. This would be far less punishing than SFO contact slow, because it's got a short duration that doesn't refresh until the units are separated from melee. Refresh could be 5 seconds.

    Bracing rank bonus mass multiplier could be adjusted based on the magnitude of the slow to maintain collision damage.
  • Lotus_MoonLotus_Moon Registered Users Posts: 11,554
    Bastilean said:

    There is though, you reduce dmg taken by denying opponents CB, thus in theory should be able to deal more dmg in return as less of your models die and thus others last longer.

    This is coming from the same people who want charging cavalry to be able to easily disengage from infantry and have longer knockdowns.

    I do get it though because counter charging is so good at entangling.

    What if Bracing gave a 3 second 30% acceleration reduction to enemies to make the braced infantry more sticky, so they get a round of attacks? The 3 second slow would require cavalry to make a full round of attacks before booking it if they want full acceleration (say ~5 second charge). 3 seconds after the last cavalry model to charge a braced unit has finished the acceleration nerf ends. Would be nice if it effected the whole unit just so that the slow is visually transparent.

    Alternately, and more easy for CA it could be an on melee 5 second slow or acceleration nerf with an out of melee refresh for Charge Defense which only works on Large and is deactivated if moving. I think I could make that ability. This would be far less punishing than SFO contact slow, because it's got a short duration that doesn't refresh until the units are separated from melee. Refresh could be 5 seconds.

    Bracing rank bonus mass multiplier could be adjusted based on the magnitude of the slow to maintain collision damage.
    Well i personally do not think braced units should be knocked down, more so countercharging ones, i cannot speak for others though.

    Bracing wokrs currently issue is that its easy to go around it, thats always been the problem with it, and its also why its so strong in boxes simply as you cannot just go around it, i do wish this changed a bit though and there was an interval where you still benefit from bracing effect even if not in formation for x seconds so long as you are facing the charging unit and are not charging yourself.

    I do agree that 1s cycle charging should maybe have their acceleration slowed though, i do think its weird how units hit on full momentum and are ready to pull out same second, might be hard to implement though, what you propose the 3s period seems very fair. Only issues i got is what if only 1 model touches a zombie etc or you change mind last second and want to pull out of the charge without connecting?.

    I'm extremely opposed any form of dmg reflection but solutions like those are good.
  • Loupi_Loupi_ Registered Users Posts: 3,073
    edited September 13
    I think its a very bad idea to give infantry an acceleration debuff vs cav. If you want to make cav get stuck more in infantry (I dont know why you would want to do so when they already get stuck easily) then a less cheesy and abuseable way to do it would just be to lower the acceleration and deceleration of cav.
  • ThibixMagnusThibixMagnus Registered Users Posts: 737
    edited September 13
    I like the suggestions along the way of reducing the pace of cycle charging as a way to balance out an increased charge damage (whichever solution is picked after the beta). Though my bet would be on simply reducing rotation speed while in melee, in exchange for more devastating charge damage overall.

    This should not necessarily be all shock cav, but in some cases fast-paced cycle charging just does not fit the unit aesthetic at all (and this is a problem I had since game 1, not patch-specific). I'm fine with wild riders optimal play being pulling out after 3 seconds, but chaos knights are not specially known for their hit-and-run tactics. It does remove some coolness off them. Having some variety in the way shock cav is supposed to be used (frantic vs limited cycle charging) would cater to different skills and playstyles.
  • BastileanBastilean Registered Users Posts: 2,293
    edited September 13
    Feel free to try this out. The mod wasn't able to remove the passive on the infantry charging, so CA can make it right if they want to use it. But you can test various cavalries into braced charge defenders with a short acceleration debuff and accelerated response. Overall, I thought the cavalry felt relatively good.

    Bracing Charge Defense Passive
  • WojmirVonCarsteinWojmirVonCarstein Registered Users Posts: 1,594

    I'm really thankful for all the discussion that's been happening.

    I'm a noob, but my 2cents on the bracing is that it is clunky and hard to pull of in a pinch. And I wish for my low APM clicking skills that we'd have like a "brace toward that unit all the time" button or something. But then again, that'd be a bit unfair and cheap for the experience. idk :p

    Honestly this would be awesome. We currently have something similar with skirmish mode. It's basically "follow that unit and shoot when in range, if target tries to get close retreat and keep retreating until target stops chasing and then turn around and shoot target and follow etc". This is all with one click.

    There should be a button (maybe double clicking "guard" mode and call it "brace") to make unit turn towards closest target by default if given not direct "attack" order. If given a direct "attack" order, the unit would keep turning while braced towards that target.
  • User_ClueUser_Clue Registered Users Posts: 959

    I'm really thankful for all the discussion that's been happening.

    I'm a noob, but my 2cents on the bracing is that it is clunky and hard to pull of in a pinch. And I wish for my low APM clicking skills that we'd have like a "brace toward that unit all the time" button or something. But then again, that'd be a bit unfair and cheap for the experience. idk :p

    Honestly this would be awesome. We currently have something similar with skirmish mode. It's basically "follow that unit and shoot when in range, if target tries to get close retreat and keep retreating until target stops chasing and then turn around and shoot target and follow etc". This is all with one click.

    There should be a button (maybe double clicking "guard" mode and call it "brace") to make unit turn towards closest target by default if given not direct "attack" order. If given a direct "attack" order, the unit would keep turning while braced towards that target.
    I'm not sure how useful that would really be. You'd have to know what unit is going to charge that unit ahead of time which isn't always possible. I guess it could maybe frighten units away, but a clever enemy could easily use that to turn a unit out of position and attack it. It seems like it would be pretty easy to abuse.
    Formations can't necessarily turn that fast anyway.
    "Daemons are abroad again, and the servants of the foul gods march south with the storm at their backs. But as the winds of magic stir, other powers rise to contest it.
    I have seen the Lady, my brothers. She came to me from the waters and told me of the trials to come. This is why I call you here, so that her summons may be answered. I call Errantry, a crusade to strike at the heart of the new darkness"


    -- The Lionhearted
  • AimeryanAimeryan Registered Users Posts: 2
    Taken this from Wikipedia:

    Historians such as John Keegan have shown that when correctly prepared against (such as by improvising fortifications) and, especially, by standing firm in face of the onslaught, cavalry charges often failed against infantry, with horses refusing to gallop into the dense mass of enemies,[4] or the charging unit itself breaking up. However, when cavalry charges succeeded, it was usually due to the defending formation breaking up (often in fear) and scattering, to be hunted down by the enemy.[5] While it was not recommended for a cavalry charge to continue against unbroken infantry, charges were still a viable danger to heavy infantry. Parthian lancers were noted to require significantly dense formations of Roman legionaries to stop, and Frankish knights were reported to be even harder to stop, if the writing of Anna Komnene is to be believed. However, only highly trained horses would voluntarily charge dense, unbroken enemy formations directly, and in order to be effective, a strong formation would have to be kept – such strong formations being the result of efficient training. Heavy cavalry lacking even a single part of this combination – composed of high morale, excellent training, quality equipment, individual prowess, and collective discipline of both the warrior and the mount – would suffer in a charge against unbroken heavy infantry, and only the very best heavy cavalrymen (e.g., knights and cataphracts) throughout history would own these in regards to their era and terrain.

    This inspired me to consider perhaps the effectiveness of a charge against a braced unit should in some form also be based on the Leaderships involved? Simple way would be just to consider the Leadership delta in the calculation too, however, I would be interested in something more complex:
    • Would only occur in a contest of a charging unit vs a bracing unit.
    • Both units lose Leadership at a fast rate as the charge occurs (modifiers as seen fit).
    • If the bracing unit breaks then bracing is lost, and of course a broken unit will try to flee as normal.
    • If the charging unit breaks then it flees as normal - probably to rally later.
    • If neither unit breaks, and the charge is not called off, bracing allows for an instant attack by the bracing unit in addition to the other effects of bracing (mass multiplied, etc.).
    • If the charge is called off the Leadership contest is stopped and the units very rapidly regain the lost Leadership.
    The modifiers would include things like charge defence, bonus vs [whatever the charging unit is], vigor, etc. A unit that is exhausted, not got charge defence, not got a bonus, etc., should very easily break. The reverse should result in the unit standing firm. If the unit is not breaking, try another unit. Alternatively, flank and charge the unit when it cannot brace.
Sign In or Register to comment.