The current problems with cavalry (Poll)

[Arkonor]

The current problems with cavalry is how versatile they are. Lets go over the good and the bad of each standard unit.

Infantry :

The good:
1. Highest damage output on the battlefield in full head on engagements.
2. Can endure the most hits.
3. (Shielders) have the ability to slow down the fighting if they see reinforcement near.

The bad:
1. Have the lowest mobility and can find themselves unable to get out of an unfavorable situation.
2. Do need more space around them to have full function. (Highly gathered up infantry is prone to be team-hit quite a lot and need to cancel their swings more often).

Ranged :

The good:
1. Can do damage from a safe distance.
2. Can enforce certain attack paths to be taken by the enemy if they work as a team.
3. Usually can retreat to safer grounds when engaged by infantry.

The bad:
1. They do need to be defended either by using the environment or by having the protection of other troops.
2. They die pretty quickly if they get cornered.
3. Have the lowest armor.

Cavalry :

The good:
1. They do decent vs singled out aware enemies.
2. They do great vs unaware enemies and usually kill them in a single blow.
3. They have the mobility advantage so they can pick favorable scenarios.
4. They do great as support for infantry by bumping enemy shielders so they can easily be finished off.
5. High knowledge/skill of the game is best demonstrated as cavalry due to less random factors like team-hits.

The bad:
1. When they find themselves faced with attacking a balanced group of ground forces they have few options to engage.
2. When they get unmounted they are heavily vulnerable for few seconds before they stand up again.
3. When they get unmounted they might be located far from any reinforcements and need to find/fight their way back.
4. If they only spend about the same as the infantry and ranged on gear they will only be using light armor and can endure fewer hits then infantry.

What I gather from reading over that list is that cavalry needs teamwork the least. On public servers that is a big bonus when teamwork is lacking.
Ways to balance the cavalry out a bit is to make them less successful in situation where the enemy is aware of them. This will make the cavalry more of a support unit for infantry and defenders of the ranged units.
Having them single hit an unaware ground-troop is in my opinion still a good idea.

Please do add good and bad points to each in your replies. If they are true pluses and minuses and don't crossover with others I will add them to the main post.
Having a better overview of the strength and weaknesses is always better when balancing things out.

[Casimir]

To fix cavalry you want them to be even more useless against aware players?

I understood the main gripes of teh cRPG community with cavalry was that they were cowards who only backstabbed / went for easy kills?

[Arkonor]

To fix cavalry you want them to be even more useless against aware players?

I understood the main gripes of teh cRPG community with cavalry was that they were cowards who only backstabbed / went for easy kills?

I want them to be forced to team-play. I see no other way to do that.

[Torben]

Ways to balance the cavalry out a bit is to make them less successful in situation where the enemy is aware of them. This will make the cavalry more of a support unit for infantry and defenders of the ranged units.

you have to see cav in the context of organized battles next to the everyday brawl on the battle servers.  As you mentioned above,  cav has little to no viable options to engage  versus an organized and balanced group,  rendering it highly dependable on teamwork with the main infantry corps.

in an organized battle,  cav can only attack in limited situations,  of which the most are created by their teammates.

in short:  they already are a support troop.

[Casimir]

Worse at fighting people who are aware of you =/= Better teamwork

[Overdriven]

Fixed ranged = current cav problem solved

[MeevarTheMighty]

Completely agree with Casimir.

Nerf cavalry as hard as you want, it will always be able to kill by ganking and hunting peasants and afks.

Cav can't expect a fair fight with alert 2h or pole infantry, so most cav players stay out of reach until they're sure their prey isn't paying attention.

Before the lance nerf, cavalry were their own worst enemy, because good cav could easily obliterate subpar cav. These days, cavalry combat is less interesting and more avoidable, so cavs spend their time doing all they're now good for: backstabs and ganks.

If you make a class have to act badly to feel good, there is something amiss.

[Torben]

Genemeve,  hopefully you dont take it personal that i dont agree with many of your posts : /
if anything,  the lance angle nerf only buffed maneuver in cav vs cav fights,  but it still seams to me that the better cav only go down if they make a crucial mistake...

also,  only since the nerf,  cav vs inf and pole is fair.  before,  the inf was always on the receiving end.

may I ask what your setup is?

[MeevarTheMighty]

Not at all, hope it's mutual. =)

I agree with you that better cav will still rarely go down to their inferiors, but I think cav generally pay a lot less attention to each other now. Even a mediocre cav can simply shrug off a pursuer and get back to infantry support/ganking.

I am in disagreement with your idea of the relationship between 2h/pole and lance cav. Even when cav had the LoC, an aware and intelligent pikeman would win every time. Now cav range and available tactics have been reduced and as a result, the group of weapons that automatically defeat cav has grown. Regardless of which lance you're using, it's nothing short of stupid to charge at a readied claymore now. In my opinion infantry has always had control in anticav fights, because even if they had to resort to couch dodging (rare if you can reliably chamber, but most can't), their relative manoeuvrability gave them the final say in who lived and who died. The infantry player also gets to choose where the fight takes place and in many situations, this will be somewhere unfavourable to cavalry.

As you asked, I have ~20 characters, about as varied as possible of course. Though I rarely touch my main these days, because it reminds me of how badly certain things have changed in the mod, it was a courser/light lance with plain cavalry shield and sword of tears.

[Torben]

ah,  wonderful. your clarification did help a lot.  I must say I only thought of the encounter of cav-inf as in,  both stare at each other and thrust away.  considering the infs mobility and option of taking the fight to a favorable position does once again show the cavs situational dependance (if that actually has a meaning,  sry for my english).

considering the claymore:  i will always,  always,  aaaalways go for any twohander welcoming me.  I consider it a treat for the good 2handers,  as they deserve a fighting chance instead of a backstab,  and a welcome sparing session with anyone else,  as the new lanceangles did make it more challenging ^^

than again I must say,  my playstyle is often a bit suicidal and foolish,  and I always feel compelled to run head on into any shitstorm that wants me,  so this isnt an example for anythin : /

damit I hope my post makes remotly sence,  I havent slept in for ever.....

[Vanular]

if anything,  the lance angle nerf only buffed maneuver in cav vs cav fights,

Well that's certainly debatable. The new angle on lances limits the cavalry to only approach a target head-on, and not from an angle (an angle of himself, not the target ... that's obviously still possible). If anything, cav vs cav is now very easy to avoid and if you do decide to go against a cav it is more about a timed release of the lance (and therefore also more about lag) than anything.

[seddrik]

Ways to balance the cavalry out a bit is to make them less successful in situation where the enemy is aware of them. This will make the cavalry more of a support unit for infantry and defenders of the ranged units.

The game has been "balanced" and "rebalanced" again and again.  There will never be total equality until all weapons are the same speed and length and weight and damage.

Everything has a counter.  People just need to figure out how to play smarter and USE those counters, rather than appealing for Devs to make changes in the game system/weapons.

Like Meevar said, it gets to a point where u don't want to play what was once a fun character because of "how badly certain things have changed in the mod".  I like disparities in weapon types.  Make the poles longer again, for example.  And bring back the lvl 40+ characters.  Tougher opponents makes the game challenging and fun.  How did you feel when you finally brought down that lvl 45 guy who killed 30 people?  GREAT!  lol   The game is missing that now tho...

You need another option in your poll:
"NONE OF THE ABOVE."  Roll back the clock on nerfs.

[Torben]

words

to clarify:  ...buffed manueverable horses in cav vs cav fights...  as you now use the movement of the horse to guid the lance a lot more in cav duels.  thats why the arab will always be the most dangerous  opponent if the rider is of same skill as you are.

[CrazyCracka420]

The game has been "balanced" and "rebalanced" again and again.  There will never be total equality until all weapons are the same speed and length and weight and damage.

Everything has a counter.  People just need to figure out how to play smarter and USE those counters, rather than appealing for Devs to make changes in the game system/weapons.

Your first point I totally agree with.  It's nerf-rpg, not c-rpg.  Reminds me of the book Harrison Bergeron by George Orwell. 

Totally agree with the 2nd point and is basically verbatim to what I've been saying for months.  I'm tired of the dev's nerfing shit instead of telling the whiney players to learn how to use tactics to counter the natural weaknesses of a class or piece of equipment. 

[Arkonor]

Your first point I totally agree with.  It's nerf-rpg, not c-rpg.  Reminds me of the book Harrison Bergeron by George Orwell. 

Totally agree with the 2nd point and is basically verbatim to what I've been saying for months.  I'm tired of the dev's nerfing shit instead of telling the whiney players to learn how to use tactics to counter the natural weaknesses of a class or piece of equipment.

The piece of equipment needs to be fun as well. Running around with a spear and shield with one attack direction and shield autoblock is pretty boring to be honest. And you need pretty much one guy wanting to play that boring style to every player playing cavalry that most people would agree is way more dynamic and fun.