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

Cavalty beta patch doesn't change much :/ Not sure where to post this

Rat-ee-jiK#7094Rat-ee-jiK#7094 Registered Users Posts: 194
edited September 2021 in General Discussion
I have done some testing with the BETA and heavy infantry still mash up heavy cavalry pretty well.

CA can you be a bit bolder with patch changes, many of us have been waiting for more impactful cavalry charges since warhammer TW 1 was launched in 2016. Its better to change too much and then reign in the changes, rather than be deliberately conservative and miss the opportunity to improve the game.

To compensate for this increase cavalry recruitment costs about 10-15%. A boost to cavalry health or a physical resistance buff could also be considered - naturally that would affect unit pricing as well..

TLDR you would see slightly fewer cav on the battlefield but they would be more impactful on the charge and tactically useful in battles.

Thanks
«13

Comments

  • GeneralTGeneralT Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 144
    To be fair, It's a beta.
    W hen it goes live, they might do a few changes based on your comments ;):)
  • Bayes#3307Bayes#3307 Senior Member NorwayRegistered Users Posts: 5,021
    It would be pretty cool if cavalry became dominant in singleplayer for a while, would be a nice change of pace.
  • capybarasiesta89#4722capybarasiesta89#4722 Senior Member Bath, UKRegistered Users Posts: 5,463
    Bayes said:

    It would be pretty cool if cavalry became dominant in singleplayer for a while, would be a nice change of pace.

    I hope in WH3 Infantry and cavalry will be viable as well.
    h1feizw8yzk6.jpg
  • MonerisMoneris Registered Users Posts: 351
    CA_Duck said:

    Thanks, the feedback so far seems to suggest that the power of cavalry didn't increase enough.

    From watching videos, damage from cavalry impact seems to be too low. Which means shock cavalry that relies on damage produced from the charge fails to inflict enough damage beyond scattering the formation a bit.

    Based on the Beta, Cavalry does a decent amount of damage once engaged in Melee thanks to the charge bonus. This is fine for Melee cavalry but shock cavalry is not doing well. The cavalry cannot rely on the charge to cause damage, which I feel is unrealistic, the initial shock should cause most the damage instead of relying on melee engagements.
  • EarthDragonEarthDragon Registered Users Posts: 1,180
    Of course, I hope they don’t take the OPs approach in general.

    I quickly grow tired of games that make pendulum swing changes as fixes. I’d rather improvements be made gradually then fixes that just cause several more problems
  • IamNotArobot#8850IamNotArobot#8850 Registered Users Posts: 5,758
    My favorite role Cavalty!
    *Justice, cats and CONFEDERATION ENABLED for the Tomb Kings and Vampire Coast! feat mummies and Apophas.
    *Exclusive DLCs for Tomb Kings, Vampire Coast, BM, CW and WE! #DLCsAreRacesToo
    *Remaster all WH1 and WH2 faction icons for WH3!
    *Ogre Kingdoms core race or death!
    *Bring back settlement conquering artworks!
    *Gnoblar Carpet for Greesus
    *Improve UI


  • drogarito#2548drogarito#2548 Registered Users Posts: 1,816
    If cavalry is getting stronger, then the spearmen and halbadier units should get stronger against cavalry as well. It's a fair trade.
  • drogarito#2548drogarito#2548 Registered Users Posts: 1,816
    If cavalry gets OP, races like Skaven that don't have cavalry wouldn't stand a chance against it. It would be cool if units like spearmen and halberdiers are immune to charge knockback effect
  • #387480#387480 Registered Users Posts: 111
    Hello, I was a big TT player. Not super into video games, but I played some when I was a teenager and finding TWWH has been a real joy allowing me to relive the TT experience. Anyways, I'm not an expert but I love cavalry and think that:

    1. Heavy Cavalry should be expensive.
    2. It should be able to break lines softened up by shooting or by flanking units engaged in melee.
    3. It shouldn't be great at prolonged engagements to the front of Heavy Infantry. Cavalry is challenging to use and should be cycle charged, I expect it to do lot of damage on the charge then either disengage or be overwhelmed unless the enemy unit was already damaged.
    4. Since there's monsters in this game, Cavalry should be good at tying them up. On TT monsters didn't get their thunderstomp against cavalry and could be broken by static res.
    5. Monsterous Cavalry was pretty dominant on TT. Should absolutely be able to charge and grind down infantry.

    As is I use a few units I like just to run down broken units but they're more of an expensive liability, especially as I only play on L/VH. Mid tier cavalry like Silver Helms actually lose a lot against Archers because of the damage they take going in. Heavy cavalry like Blood Knights get wrecked by low tier infantry and just don't have enough impact. I like the game and will play it anyway when I have time, but given how useless cavalry is I find that I've come to enjoy the map and city building more than battles most of the time as anything other than archer spam gets too badly damaged and is too expensive. It's better to run a few heros and 15 Glade Guard than include any Wild Riders, who are some of my favorite units, which is a real shame. Wild Riders used to just delete units on TT if you protected them from shooting and Magic, now they just die no matter what and cost too much.
  • HL230P45#1277HL230P45#1277 Registered Users Posts: 377
    CA_Duck said:

    Thanks, the feedback so far seems to suggest that the power of cavalry didn't increase enough.

    There is also an issue relavant to single-player, separate from the charge interaction itself, and that is individual infantry models behavior when counter-charging and when bracing. When you order your infantry regiment to counter charge the models seem to keep close to their targets, e.g. monstrous infantry, or cavalry, and deal a lot of damage even if you disregard the charge itself. When you order them to brace there seems to be something off, because the steady damage is a fraction of what counter-charging regiment deals even after the charge time expires. A unit of Swordmasters that braces against kroxigors loses the engagement, but the one that charges wins, and the difference in remaining health is several leagues.
  • Rat-ee-jiK#7094Rat-ee-jiK#7094 Registered Users Posts: 194
    We have some cavalry fans here. Thanks for your response CA_Duck, please take note and go further with improving heavy cavalry charges.

    cheers
  • Tajl#2208Tajl#2208 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 332
    Infantry needs buff. Not cavalry.

    Infantry is trash tier now. There is no reason to ever use melee infantry. They are slow. Ranged units slaughter them before they can even reach them. Cavalry is faster than them so they can never kill any cavalry if cavalry doesn't want to engage them. They can't kill SEMs. Best advice for SP is to delete all melee infantry you have and recruit something else. That something else is always more effective. No matter what you recruit as long as it is not melee infantry.
  • Helhound#7332Helhound#7332 Registered Users Posts: 5,374
    I'm of the mindset that perhaps a much stronger emphasis on unit roles would really help out. It isn't just cav suffering, infantry do against most as well.


    -Shielded infantry could have much higher missile block chance to allow them to screen out enemy missiles without immediately dying in the process. Allow people time to maneuver and skirmish before being forced to immediately rush in. This is accomplished through formations in other TW titles, but TWW doesn't have formations. The need for screening infantry remains all the same, as MP proves constantly. Put back in tools to do so.



    -Spears/halberds could benefit from charge reflection as we've seen in 3k. This has dual function in TWW, as large targets are not always just cav. Being able to reflect the charge of a monster or flying cav at the right angle would make cycle charging infantry into obscurity far more challenging. Charge defense isn't enough. Mobility ensures the high mass target still takes little or no damage.



    -Exaggerate the differences between weapon types more. Great weapon infantry could have near shock cav levels of charge bonus but noticeably worse staying power than their peers. Dual weapon infantry could be given the flank attack bonus that we see in Troy, and particularly elite defensive units could carry the flank immunity advantage.

    Right now many units function extremely similar to one another, both across rosters and within their own. We could afford to exaggerate unit function. For example, White Lions could have much higher charge bonus than they do now to set them apart from their Swordmaster counterparts, and then give Swordmasters flank immunity. One is frontline, the other is cycle charging infantry. Suddenly both serve a purpose instead of one existing solely for the purpose of MP.



    -Melee cavalry do not have enough health to accomplish the melee role, Shock cavalry do not have enough impact to accomplish the shock cavalry role. For example, Saurus Warriors vs Cold One Riders. Cold One Riders are not shock cav, they lack the speed and charge bonus to be used as such. They also rampage. Thankfully, they aren't too far off statistically from Saurus Warriors. However, they only have 48 models, and their mount only adds 28 health per model. So despite being melee cavalry, they have significantly less staying power than they should having near half the health of a unit of Saurus.

    Once again going to bring up Troy. Penthesilea has been my favorite faction, so when I saw the cavalry health change I had to take a look. It made all the difference in the world. Cavalry don't need the same amount of health as a unit of infantry, but it shouldn't be anywhere near as wide a gap as it is now. Give them a fighting chance, and the changes to impact that are in play now would likely be enough to make cavalry more relevant.



    -Step away from the Rock-Paper-Scissors dynamic. If unit roles were more clearly distinguished, meaning shield melee were far more resilient to missiles, spears could outright reflect damage back to charging attackers, great weapon infantry were empowered to cycle charge like cavalry etc., we wouldn't need the rote Rock-Paper-Scissors style of play we currently have. Being able to line up favorable unit to unit match ups is less engaging than manipulating the battle map to force advantageous exchanges. In my opinion, anti-infantry, anti-cavalry (despite being a staple of TW), anti-anything, brings down the stategy involved in battles. By extension, player enjoyment.

    An example one last time, Black Orks vs Bladesingers. Bladesingers can not only trade up against Black Orks in a straight up head on charge, but they've even got a higher charge bonus. This makes no sense, and it dumbs down the equation. Right now it's send Bladesinger to fight Black Ork = profit. I would personally rather see Bladesingers lose their anti-infantry, gain a massive flank attack advantage, and have Black Orks lose some MA/MD to almost if not outright double their current charge bonus. Now the engagement looks different. Black Orks trade a head on charge with Bladesingers, Bladesingers get krumped. Black Orks get caught flat footed by the Bladesingers, Bladesingers mop them up without a problem. Now the player has control over the outcome. It isn't just anti = win.



    TLDR: I agree that CA often doesn't go far enough when updating their mechanics in TWW. I also understand they are very hesitant to mess up what is beyond a doubt their most successful title. They have every reason to be conservative. The only reason it bothers me that we don't see more drastic changes to the formula is because we have seen changes to the formula in TWW's lifetime. Changes implemented in Saga games that were supposedly testing grounds, and none of the changes seem to make their way over in any capacity to TWW proper.

    Formations like those in ToB and 3k made missile units less of a one size fits all instrument, and missile block on shielded units in TWW isn't high enough to accomplish the same. Braced spears reflecting damage back on charging cavalry is a far more effective deterent as witnessed in 3k than any anti-large or charge defense could ever be. Cavalry lacks the health necessary to make any engagment past the impact a good trade for them, their mounts simply don't make up for the lower model count even though Troy fixed this issue just recently. Infantry are given simplistic anti-something bonuses instead of clearly defined and exaggerated roles. Something that Troy rocking the same engine managed to fix by creating infantry designed to cycle charge, and the simple but effective flank adavantage and immunity traits. I can only hope that a safe, risk adverse policy, does not lead to TWW3 failing to move the series forward mechanically.
  • Rat-ee-jiK#7094Rat-ee-jiK#7094 Registered Users Posts: 194
    @helhound nice post. In general I agree, I think more nuanced roles for each specific type of unit would make the game more engaging in warhammer 3. For now in warhammer 2 I think the priority is to rebalance cavalry.

    I'm posting a fresh link RE the cavalry BETA , which was very recently uploaded by dahv on youtube:



    Devs please take a look, it reiterates the point of this post. I came to similar conclusions. Heavy cavalry need to stand out as elite units, perhaps slightly more expensive elite units. Mirroring the elite knights of the tabletop game and medieval warfare wouldn't be a bad thing, in my view. Any change that makes them more distinct, fulfilling their intended niche on the battlefield would be a good one.

    P.S with Kislev on the horizon for game 3 people are looking forward to seeing some hard hitting shock cavalry.

    Thanks
  • Forista#7907Forista#7907 Registered Users Posts: 154
    edited September 2021

    Heavy cavalry need to stand out as elite units, perhaps slightly more expensive elite units.

    Yup!

    A Tier 5 unit, wathever is (infantry, SEM, cavalry, etc.) need to be POWERFUL.

    If I play High Elves I want to use Dragon Princess. Even... why I want to use one of the best cavalry in the game (Blood Knights) if a Vargheist (Tier 3 unit) can do his job a LOT better on ANY circunstance? And i'm not mentioning the sieges!!

    Shock cavalry need a brutal impact on infantiry without lances/pikes (or defense to charges), and Elite cavalry need to feel like... well, Elite troop!

    EDIT: That YouTube video is extremely well informative! Thanks for sharing!!
  • User_ClueUser_Clue Registered Users Posts: 1,572
    Forista said:

    Heavy cavalry need to stand out as elite units, perhaps slightly more expensive elite units.

    Yup!

    A Tier 5 unit, wathever is (infantry, SEM, cavalry, etc.) need to be POWERFUL.

    If I play High Elves I want to use Dragon Princess. Even... why I want to use one of the best cavalry in the game (Blood Knights) if a Vargheist (Tier 3 unit) can do his job a LOT better on ANY circunstance? And i'm not mentioning the sieges!!

    Shock cavalry need a brutal impact on infantiry without lances/pikes (or defense to charges), and Elite cavalry need to feel like... well, Elite troop!

    EDIT: That YouTube video is extremely well informative! Thanks for sharing!!
    controversial opinion: Dragon Princes aren't meant to be that elite.

    6th ed DPs where more in line with basic empire knights. The Emp knights where more durable but the elves where faster and had a slight WS and initiative advantage. Those Dragon princes were barely on par with knights of the realm. They eventually gave them an extra attack and other elf buffs but even then. They were 29 points per model. Reiksguard were 27 and questing knights were 28. Those DP where a bit underpriced but that should show where their general place in the food chain really is.
    "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
  • Forista#7907Forista#7907 Registered Users Posts: 154
    edited September 2021
    User_Clue said:

    Forista said:

    Heavy cavalry need to stand out as elite units, perhaps slightly more expensive elite units.

    Yup!

    A Tier 5 unit, wathever is (infantry, SEM, cavalry, etc.) need to be POWERFUL.

    If I play High Elves I want to use Dragon Princess. Even... why I want to use one of the best cavalry in the game (Blood Knights) if a Vargheist (Tier 3 unit) can do his job a LOT better on ANY circunstance? And i'm not mentioning the sieges!!

    Shock cavalry need a brutal impact on infantiry without lances/pikes (or defense to charges), and Elite cavalry need to feel like... well, Elite troop!

    EDIT: That YouTube video is extremely well informative! Thanks for sharing!!
    controversial opinion: Dragon Princes aren't meant to be that elite.

    6th ed DPs where more in line with basic empire knights. The Emp knights where more durable but the elves where faster and had a slight WS and initiative advantage. Those Dragon princes were barely on par with knights of the realm. They eventually gave them an extra attack and other elf buffs but even then. They were 29 points per model. Reiksguard were 27 and questing knights were 28. Those DP where a bit underpriced but that should show where their general place in the food chain really is.
    Yeah, I just want to use cavalry with the High Elves, instead of the typical Sea Lothern Ward, Sisters of Avelorn and Dragons.

    A Tier 5 unit need to be useful. If don't, they deserve be Tier 4 or 3 but not cost what they cost.

    EDIT: Damn I LOVE the Reiksguard. That Karl Franz unit stay with me all the game, even If i'm on late game and painting the whole map.
  • drogarito#2548drogarito#2548 Registered Users Posts: 1,816
    Spearmen should do more damage to cavalry and shouldn't be knocked back by the charge. If not, what is even the point of spearmen to begin with? I don't get why people testing are going over this easily.
  • EarthDragonEarthDragon Registered Users Posts: 1,180
    edited September 2021
    And half of these posts are exactly the opposite of what I would want.

    Buying Tier 5 units shouldn’t be an “I win” button. There should still be ways to maneuver and fight higher end and not dumb this game down so much. The entire “see exactly what you’ll lose” auto resolve doesn’t exactly make for engaging game play, and I’m sick of doomstackers having way too much pull in how things go.

    I’m buying a strategy game here, not a mobile game on the PC. Modders should be modding unbalance into the game the way people want it, not being tasked as the people who have to bring balance to the game in the first place
  • GloatingSwine#8098GloatingSwine#8098 Registered Users Posts: 2,686


    Buying Tier 5 units shouldn’t be an “I win” button.

    No, but getting a rear charge with tier 5 cavalry on lower tier units should be considerably more effective than it is given that it takes longer to arrange than just shooting them.

  • TheShiroOfDaltonTheShiroOfDalton Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 34,001


    Buying Tier 5 units shouldn’t be an “I win” button.

    No, but getting a rear charge with tier 5 cavalry on lower tier units should be considerably more effective than it is given that it takes longer to arrange than just shooting them.

    It's already massively effective and trivially easy to accomplish. Any more and battles become even more farcical than they already are.

    3K was absolutely ruined by this sort of interaction and so CA should not repeat that mistake.

  • Rat-ee-jiK#7094Rat-ee-jiK#7094 Registered Users Posts: 194

    Spearmen should do more damage to cavalry and shouldn't be knocked back by the charge. If not, what is even the point of spearmen to begin with? I don't get why people testing are going over this easily.

    Spearmen are generally low to mid tier units though. It sounds from like some posters here are saying 'I don't like cavalry very much, so nerf it to the point of uselessness.' Its completely understandable that higher tier units like empire halbediers and black guard of naggarond are strong vs cav. However, having skaven slave spears wreck demigryphs with haberds would seem very wrong! As for bracing, spears do reasonably well in the beta vs cav. they absorb damage well and deal a reasonable amount of damage in return. The issue for spears is when they are charged in the back and unprepared. But it makes sense that they would be much less effective when flanked or unprepared. So I really don't see why you think spearmen damage to cavalry is an issue. Their bonus vs large is already pretty generous and means they are quite effective against both cavalry AND monsters.

    Furthermore you seem to disregard the ineffectiveness of cavalry in seige battles, which is a BIG problem in the campaign. Campaign battles of this type add up to about 40% of all battles, so hey cannot easily be ignored.
    Strengthening spears further would make attacks on castles even more difficult for cavalry units, when they really need some kind of boost when fighting these sorts of battles. Ideally, of course they would be able to dismount, as in earlier total war games. this would give them a tactical flexibility that other unit types simply lack at present.
  • QuecoQueco Registered Users Posts: 272
    Overall, I agree with the OP.

    The vast majority of the cavalry in TW:W, especially the high tier units, are ALL shock cav. ALL OF THEM. Means they depend on the charge for the damage. Sure the patch has helped some, but their is no real benefit to getting them in the late game. They do not carry their weight.
  • gorgos96#5405gorgos96#5405 Member Registered Users Posts: 381


    Buying Tier 5 units shouldn’t be an “I win” button.

    No, but getting a rear charge with tier 5 cavalry on lower tier units should be considerably more effective than it is given that it takes longer to arrange than just shooting them.

    It's already massively effective and trivially easy to accomplish. Any more and battles become even more farcical than they already are.

    3K was absolutely ruined by this sort of interaction and so CA should not repeat that mistake.

    Do you think heavy cav is fine as it is?
  • gorgos96#5405gorgos96#5405 Member Registered Users Posts: 381

    And half of these posts are exactly the opposite of what I would want.

    Buying Tier 5 units shouldn’t be an “I win” button. There should still be ways to maneuver and fight higher end and not dumb this game down so much. The entire “see exactly what you’ll lose” auto resolve doesn’t exactly make for engaging game play, and I’m sick of doomstackers having way too much pull in how things go.

    I’m buying a strategy game here, not a mobile game on the PC. Modders should be modding unbalance into the game the way people want it, not being tasked as the people who have to bring balance to the game in the first place

    In the current tiers and prices why would anyone pick dragon princes over a phoenix or star dragon?
  • bli-nk#6314bli-nk#6314 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 5,980
    edited September 2021


    Devs please take a look, it reiterates the point of this post. I came to similar conclusions. Heavy cavalry need to stand out as elite units, perhaps slightly more expensive elite units. Mirroring the elite knights of the tabletop game and medieval warfare wouldn't be a bad thing, in my view. Any change that makes them more distinct, fulfilling their intended niche on the battlefield would be a good one.

    The main problem I have with many of these videos is 'good' micro seems to include frontal charges agaisnt heavy infantry.

    That was never considered 'good' micro in past TWs where it was obvious that cavalry need to attack from the flank or rear.

    Maybe some monstrous shock cavalry should be able to win with a frontal charge but most cavalry should be seeking side/rear charges.

    On that note- more of these engagements will go cavalries way but, at least in my testing- the infantry do win surprisingly often, especially with high mass so CA does need to improve cavalry a bit more.

    The vidoe above does a better job testing bracing than cavalry charge where those units with low MA seem to get more benefit from bracing than counter-charging.
    Clothes make the man. Naked people have little or no influence in society.” Mark Twain
  • Itharus#3127Itharus#3127 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 16,481

    If cavalry gets OP, races like Skaven that don't have cavalry wouldn't stand a chance against it. It would be cool if units like spearmen and halberdiers are immune to charge knockback effect

    Skaven have many direct and devastating counters to cavalry, don't worry. Just use all the tools in your tool box.
  • TheShiroOfDaltonTheShiroOfDalton Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 34,001
    edited September 2021
    gorgos96 said:


    Buying Tier 5 units shouldn’t be an “I win” button.

    No, but getting a rear charge with tier 5 cavalry on lower tier units should be considerably more effective than it is given that it takes longer to arrange than just shooting them.

    It's already massively effective and trivially easy to accomplish. Any more and battles become even more farcical than they already are.

    3K was absolutely ruined by this sort of interaction and so CA should not repeat that mistake.

    Do you think heavy cav is fine as it is?
    It's 100% fine. People just want it to be a brainless IWIN button on par with ranged units and that must never happen.


    Furthermore you seem to disregard the ineffectiveness of cavalry in seige battles, which is a BIG problem in the campaign.

    It's no problem whatsoever because you AR those anyway.
  • Rat-ee-jiK#7094Rat-ee-jiK#7094 Registered Users Posts: 194
    Ichon said:


    Devs please take a look, it reiterates the point of this post. I came to similar conclusions. Heavy cavalry need to stand out as elite units, perhaps slightly more expensive elite units. Mirroring the elite knights of the tabletop game and medieval warfare wouldn't be a bad thing, in my view. Any change that makes them more distinct, fulfilling their intended niche on the battlefield would be a good one.

    The main problem I have with many of these videos is 'good' micro seems to include frontal charges agaisnt heavy infantry.

    That was never considered 'good' micro in past TWs where it was obvious that cavalry need to attack from the flank or rear.

    Maybe some monstrous shock cavalry should be able to win with a frontal charge but most cavalry should be seeking side/rear charges.

    On that note- more of these engagements will go cavalries way but, at least in my testing- the infantry do win surprisingly often, especially with high mass so CA does need to improve cavalry a bit more.

    The video above does a better job testing bracing than cavalry charge where those units with low MA seem to get more benefit from bracing than counter-charging.
    yep the extent of needed improvement following this beta build is definitely up for debate. However, from bretonnia's point of view improvements to heavy cavalry certainly makes sense in the campaign, and to some extent in multiplayer battles. They are heavily reliant on heavy cavalry and seem lacklustre without heavy cavalry that can be consistently relied upon to get their money's worth. The tomb kings are also kind of lacklustre and would benefit from stronger heavy cavalry and possibly chariots. Lastly, the empire and undead would finally have better odds against the skaven hordes, which have a weakness to hard hitting cavalry to an extent.
Sign In or Register to comment.