1hcav, 2hcav and lancers

[Torben]

the balancing has come a far way,  and I think we can say that the different cav classes are well  balanced against each other now.  I would like your opinion on this.

[Torben]

the "no" voters want to elaborate?  any well trained one and twohander is as high and depending on map and equipment higher threat than a lancer.

[Digglez]

as a very good 1h cav, I can hold my own while several lancers come at me, so I'd say its fine.  You dont see alot of 2h'ers just because they are more vulnerable while on horseback.

There still needs to be a reason to use light, regular & couch only lances though

[Penitent]

I think the different cav classes are balanced. 
yes, some of the lances themselves can use some tweaks (great lance) but overall "lance cav" is a balanced and viable class, just like 1h and 2h cav.

[Torben]

Although intrigued by the idea of balancing lances internally,  I dont see why a big fuzz is made out of it.

People like the italian sword better than the simple sword for obvious reasons,  its just as if I as a polearm cav would start whining that the former should be made a viable option to the latter,  aside of money.

what.  the.  fuck.

[Xol!]

As a lifelong cav/infantry player (I've picked 2h cav because I like playing 2h on the ground), 2h cav is inferior to both lancers and 1h cav.  There's really nothing that a 2h cav player can do that a 1h cav player can't do better.  Since 2h cav takes a pretty hefty (~25% to both speed and damage) nerf when used on horseback, can't use a shield, and has no real reach advantage on the majority of the 2h weapons useable on horseback, there's no real reason to go that route (unless, like me, you really, really like 2h weapons).

In all honesty, that suits me just fine, as it keeps the number of 2h cav players down and I never have to worry about my class being nerfed.  However, I'd like to see some of the old 2h cav weapons brought back for some variety.  The bar mace/long iron mace/studded warclub for example, were originally removed because they had crushthrough (almost 100% crushthrough chance when used on horseback).  Now that they don't, there's no reason for them not to be used on horseback again.

I don't want to sound like I'm complaining, because I'm not.  I like 2h cav the way it is.  It's plenty viable, and its ground game is way more fun (to me).  BUT, if you take the same player, put them in a generic lancer, 1h cav, and 2h cav build, the lancer and 1h cav will outperform the 2h cav 90% of the time.

[Torben]

...

I hole heartedly agree,  and was inclined to not even mention 2h cav here.  two things made me reconsider:

1:  being highly effective when dehorsed,

2)  that insane cataphrac/morningstar bashibazuk. kastamanulu iirc.  he seems more effective than any lancer or 1h but reyiz out there atm,  maybe due to his heavy load out,  but he shows that its a viable option.  if one can do it,  many can.

[Penitent]

As a lifelong cav/infantry player (I've picked 2h cav because I like playing 2h on the ground), 2h cav is inferior to both lancers and 1h cav. 

I think you ended your own debate.   2h cav is not inferior than 1h or lancer cav, because it can be better on the ground...when you are inevitably de-horsed.

[Tzar]

Lancers are the best an most easy class to play both on foot and on horseback i miss my old lancer build.

1h cav is medicore at best unless u ride a armored war tank like reyiz an can charge into everything...

2h cav... well i dunno lol its been a long time since i played that imho is viable if u ride like cataphrac/morningstar bashibazuk. kastamanulu

Lancers are cheap an effective while 1h/2h cav needs a bigger horse to take some punishment closing the gab between you an your target where as lancers can do lightning fast charges in an out an have great reach..

Hands down lancers win the day.. not everyone have sold their mom an daugthers to afford riding heavy armored war horses playing as 1h/2h cav 

Anyways about the poll i guess u can say all classes are viable but i would say lancers are the best option if you wanna be cav

[Torben]

...

disagree.  mobility is of highest value with weapon range decreasing.  its a given that a tank helps,  but 1h/2h on an arab are very deadyl,  against inf and cav alike. 

[Tzar]

disagree.  mobility is of highest value with weapon range decreasing.  its a given that a tank helps,  but 1h/2h on an arab are very deadyl,  against inf and cav alike.

You can attack alot more targets as a lancer then a 1h/2h cav player if using a light horse go ahead respec an try out 1h or 2h cav an comeback an tell me its more easy picking targets 

[Gnjus]

What Tzar is trying to say is that Lancer has a chance against aware opponent while 1h/2h cav......hardly. They mostly pick off their targets from behind or bump 'em while they're busy fighting. Riding a tank only allows you to make few more mistakes as it can survive some hits while on weaker horses your first mistake is probably the last you'll make for that round. 

[Torben]

You can attack alot more targets as a lancer then a 1h/2h cav player if using a light horse go ahead respec an try out 1h or 2h cav an comeback an tell me its more easy picking targets 

I was referring to this:

1h cav is medicore at best

which i disagree with holeheartedly.  higher damage at lower speeds,  a very dangerous and mulitisituationally applicable bumpslash make them very,  very dangerouse against inf,  and a lancer has to keep his distance strictly when fighting 1h cav to not be outbreaked and cut to peaces.

[Casimir]

2h cav performs best when dehorsed but can hold its own on horseback.

Lancer cav is by fr the most effective form of cavalry, with far more benifits on both horse and foot than 1h.

As ever, 1h strikes a relatively poor balance, although that arabian cav sword has some super reach, its not great once dismounted.

[Stabby_Dave]

1h Cav is better  for getting a lot of kills quickly if the enemy is unaware but a good lancer should usually beat a good 1h cav and you are basically useless vs aware polearmers/2handers. The shield makes you more likely to survive if you are dehorsed around a load of enemies. Also, being as you have to get closer to the melee, mistakes are much more common so unless you take a heavy horse, you are likely to die pretty quickly.

Lancers are better all around vs aware and unaware players but cant always rack up as many kills since the recovery time in between lance thrusts is higher than a 1 hander. That said, lancers tend to be more survivable since they dont have to put themselves in as many risky situations.

Finally, 2 hand cav is clearly the worst of the 3 classes since lancers and 1h cav are both generally superior on horseback and even when dismounted, an 18/18 2h cav isnt necessarily better than a 1h/polearm equivalent. As xol said, the only reason to choose 2h cav is for style/fun.

Edit: Ah gnjus beat me to basically all my points.

As ever, 1h strikes a relatively poor balance, although that arabian cav sword has some super reach, its not great once dismounted.

With a 21/15 build I kill as many people dismounted as I do on a horse with an unloomed arabian cav sword. The high damage means I can 2-3 shot most people. It is slow so I generally dont feint but I get most my kills by just doing a few simple holds.