Cavalry stuff

[BD_Guard_Bane]

So, yes, cavalry is OP.

Prior to the last big patch, the amount of ranged spam kept them in check to a degree.

The arguments that cav only do so well due to unaware players are partly true, but it isn't just awareness. With a certain amount of cav, awareness won't help. The same goes for organisation. Anyway, cRPG shouldn't be balanced only for dedicated, organised clans or teams.
The argument that cav only do well on certain maps is also invalid, since any cav player can dismount and play as effective infantry with no penalties at all.

Currently its very easy to get a lot of kills as cavalry, with not much effort. Of course, its easier for some types of cavalry than others.
But I don't think buffing ranged is an answer. Currently ranged don't suffer the most from cavalry, infantry do. Since infantry are less able to protect ranged players from cav, ranged also suffer. Ranged do fine against cav, its just that the cav have killed the rest of their team.
Nor do I think nerfing the stats of horses in general, or nerfing the effects of the riding skill, are a good solution.

So, my suggestion is to make playing as cav more difficult, and to internally rebalance horses a bit. I think light cav (horses below destrier or warhorse maybe) should have to play a support role. At the moment, while some players do indeed perform a support role very effectively, the problem is that they don't have to. Lance or 1hand/shield + armoured horse cav can quite easily act completely alone and get lots and lots of kills.
Armoured horses should be far more effective than they are now. The only players I've seen get any use out of them are 1hand+shield cav, because they can combine horse and player durability. Horse archers also do quite well with them.

So:

1) Increase difficulty requirements of all light horses except sumpter, rouncey, and palfrey by 1. Also increase cataphract and charger difficulty by 1. So then you have Sumpter tier 2; Rouncey and Palfrey tier 3; Steppe and Desert tier 4; Courser, Arabian, Destrier, Warhorse, Large Warhorse tier 5; Cataphract, Charger, Mamluke, Plated Charger tier 6.

3-4 riding is quite low for dedicated cav. 5 riding (15 agi) becomes the standard for a dedicated cav player. This still leaves an option of playing a more strength or agility orientated character - not forcing cav to be agi stackers only.

2) Give tier 3-4 horses more variety and use.

Make the rouncey a cheap all rounder (increase its hp, armour and charge to courser level). Increase Palfrey speed by one, reduce manoeuvre by two.
Give the steppe horse more speed and less manoeuvre and more hp (+8,-7,+5, so 46,42,90). Give the desert horse one more manoeuvre.

3) Increase tier 6 (cata, charger, mamluke, plated) horses manoeuvre and speed by 2 points each. Increase their armour by 10 and hp by 15, and charge by 2.

4) Sort out warhorse and large warhorse. Give warhorse +1 manoeuvre, +5 armour, +5hp, and give large warhorse +1 speed, +5 armour, +10hp, +2 charge.

5) Include horse scale stat in equipment menu - it does have an effect in choosing a horse.

6) Increase price of all unarmoured horses by 25%, increase price of all armoured horses by 50%.

So then you'll see fewer players with the ubiquitous courser/arabian. You'll see more people choosing lower tier horses, and actually making a decent choice between them - rouncey for all round stats, palfrey for speed, or one tier up: steppe for speed and desert for manoeuvre.
You'll see even fewer armoured horses, but they'll actually be worth the cost for a change.
You'll also see cav nerfed, because of even more crippling costs, and higher difficulty. More common weaker horses (tier 2-4) will mean they die faster and are less effective.
Unarmoured horses will be forced to play more support roles and not charge around racking up kills. Armoured horses will be devastating, but so expensive people will cry.

None of that solves the issue that some types of cav are far more effective than others (both in cav vs cav and cav vs inf fights), but I'd rather see all cav nerfed (and some types hit far harder) than the current situation. It won't stop lance cav being more effective than all other types, or 1hand shield cav being more effective than 2hand cav, but then that's the way its always been (except for a brief period when lance rotation was locked).
This may also make horse archers more effective, since they'll be shooting weaker horses, and can afford far more upkeep than other cav.

Anyway, I'm sure you're glad you read all that. Discuss etc.

[Bulzur]

The increased difficulty requirement would certainly be a good thing.
For points 2), 3) and 4), i must say i don't know at all how much impact thoses changes will have. But i believe there's people who knows who can tell us if it's balanced or not.

Point 6) seems a bit too much for the armoured. I'm sure +25% of price "only" would be enough, since their base price is already pretty high.

Glad to see people accepting the fact that cavs are overpowered at the moment, and trying to fix it, rather than completely nerfing them. We don't want another throwing case, we want to be more afraid of a group of 5 infantry than of 2 light cav.

[Dezilagel]

Horses need their maneuver lowered drasticly and lances shortened abit imo.


 Check out this http://forum.c-rpg.net/index.php/topic,4970.0.html for more cav-related discussion. Would appreciate more debate of the subject

Good read op, (+1 fo' you^^)

[BD_Guard_Bane]

Horses need their maneuver lowered drasticly and lances shortened abit imo.

I don't agree with the manoeuvre nerf thing. If you've ever used the Arabian Warhorse (50 manoeuvre), you'd know that if it didn't have that manoeuvre, it'd be useless. Its the weakest horse, it's agility allows it to avoid arrows and bolts at medium-long distance.

If you reduced the Courser's (42) manoeuvre, it'd also become useless, since the high speed would no longer be controllable effectively. The courser makes very wide turns as it is.

I think there is an misconception about manoeuvre created by cavalry players. Cav do not ride at full speed all the time. If you slow a horse down, it is easier to turn. The faster the horse is travelling, the harder it is to turn (and decelerate).
Good cavalry players know how to control the speed of their horse for the situation. It may seem like a courser can twist aside from your pike, but that's because the cav player is experienced and knows when to slow his horse and turn. Yes the manoeuvre stat helps, but both Courser users and Arabian Warhorse users generally know their horse quite well, and they know exactly when to slow down and make turns. Also, after a lot of experience, most cav players know the exact range of whatever weapon you're trying to kill them with.

I don't know about shortening lance length either. Yes, lance cav is the most effective type of cav by a long way. But it'd be kind of silly for them all to have really short lances.
I preferred the rotation lock, but I doubt that'll ever be brought back.
 

[EponiCo]

What do you mean with supportive?
Because a horseman that stays close to infantry to protect them/kill enemies out of fights usually spends a lot of time riding at low speed close to all kind of melee and ranged weapons. You are simply going to take some hits, so the light horses aren't very useful for this.
In cav vs cav it's the other way round, the light horses can outmaneuver you and all your horse hp means nothing when a lance hits you.
So imo, that would be a better fix, reduce the ridiculous amount of damage lances do (which I don't know how it's caused, if they are really stacking str than higher riding requirement might help). There's really no reason a standing horsemen should oneshot a mailed guy with a lance stab, if they are at speed they get a huge damage bonus anyway. It might also mean that not every pass is a kill, just a hurt guy.

[Dezilagel]

I don't agree with the manoeuvre nerf thing. If you've ever used the Arabian Warhorse (50 manoeuvre), you'd know that if it didn't have that manoeuvre, it'd be useless. Its the weakest horse, it's agility allows it to avoid arrows and bolts at medium-long distance.

If you reduced the Courser's (42) manoeuvre, it'd also become useless, since the high speed would no longer be controllable effectively. The courser makes very wide turns as it is.

I think there is an misconception about manoeuvre created by cavalry players. Cav do not ride at full speed all the time. If you slow a horse down, it is easier to turn. The faster the horse is travelling, the harder it is to turn (and decelerate).
Good cavalry players know how to control the speed of their horse for the situation. It may seem like a courser can twist aside from your pike, but that's because the cav player is experienced and knows when to slow his horse and turn. Yes the manoeuvre stat helps, but both Courser users and Arabian Warhorse users generally know their horse quite well, and they know exactly when to slow down and make turns. Also, after a lot of experience, most cav players know the exact range of whatever weapon you're trying to kill them with.

I don't know about shortening lance length either. Yes, lance cav is the most effective type of cav by a long way. But it'd be kind of silly for them all to have really short lances.
I preferred the rotation lock, but I doubt that'll ever be brought back.

Even if we appear to be disagreeing, I actually think were onto basically the same track.

The maneuver nerf should be combined with a major hp/armor buff (some increase in charge also) across the board to stop the silly circle-lancing that is going on atm (which is exactly the same thing as rotation lock tried to achieve!), and to redefine the role of a cav-charge, requiring cav to predict the movement of whatever they're going to charge, and making awareness once again an effective cav-counter. In return, cav-charges would be more deadly but also more importantly, harder to stop using ranged (2 arrows to kill an arabian is abit stupid imo).

Also, reducing maneuver instead of just adding rotation lock brings along the benefit that cav can actually side-lance, which is perfectly ok imho.

Lance length reduction should be nothing major, just enough to allow 1h spears or 2h awlpike to have the range to actually stop lancers (IF aiming for the horse ofc!).

[NuberT]

what about increasing difficulty for lances as well?

Heavy Lance 21 Str
Lance 19 Str
Light Lance 17 Str

[Tristan]

First of all very coherent OP. Nice read.

Secondly I support your suggestions.

A big +1!

[HentziTheHun]

Let poor horsemen in peace. They are nerfed enough.
Arabian Warhorse is already nerfed a lot.

[Bonze]

Everything is fine with heavy and light horses they dont need any buff or nerf .
the real problem with cav is the  unreal  300 °  thrust attack.

Remove all lame ,bugged ,  fantasy,  no risk,   300 ° thrust attacks from lances. Make them couchable only.
Set new times for  couchable lances.  (2-8) sec
Problem with OP Cav solved.

[Akincibegi]

ppl always whining about classes.every time they cried cus of archery it get nerf at every patch.now they r cryin cus of cav.tell me wasnt cav the most powerful force in battlefields of medieval times?if u say yes so there is no need to nerf horses or skills.also it heavily nerfed.if u cant remember i can tell at first days sumpter was 1,palfrey rouncey steppe and rabian was 2,courser,sarranid and hunter for 3,warhorses for 4,charger and chatap for 5 and plated and mamaeluke was 6 riding.and they nerfed horse archery too.u could give 1/3 skill point to horse archery skill but now 1/6 and every archery nerf nerfed horse archery too.so u guys just stop crying and playin better.and i got a question in medieval times can a pikeman  kill a swordman with shield or 2h swordman in close fight?noo.admins talkin about items historical correct for adding mod but why they dont look to historical reality in wars?another didnt english longbowmen defeat french knights at agincourt?yes.so archery nerfs r sucks but thanks god bows r still good enough at a good player hand.horseman nerfs sucks too but horses and lances still powerful at good players hand.
btw u got 3 option:
1)go a high ground or get in a building,
2)get a pike(i know what u say my 2h sword got 2 slot and if i get pike too i cant use my xbow or whatelse like that.but damn if u got  a xbow or throwin stay at high ground with archers)
3)just become a cav and if u r thinnkin u r good fighter u ll be good cav too.

Everything is fine with heavy and light horses they dont need any buff or nerf .
the real problem with cav is the  unreal  300 °  thrust attack.

Remove all lame ,bugged ,  fantasy,  no risk,   300 ° thrust attacks from lances. Make them couchable only.
Set new times for  couchable lances.  (2-8) sec
Problem with OP Cav solved.

bro in european cav style chouhing is the main cus of the weigth of lances but in east lances have less weigth and they mostly used as thrusting.and im asking again if cav thrustin unreal pikes in close fight is real?

[Bonze]

Yes, lance cav is the most effective type of cav by a long way.

Thats a joke?? 
1H Cav is more  powerful,  but you need skill, experience and teamwork.

[Sir_Mateusz]

Thats a joke?? 
1H Cav is more  powerful,  but you need skill, experience and teamwork.

Only when you bump slash infantry lol
Skilled lancer will not give you chance to get close enough to strike.

[BD_Guard_Bane]

Let poor horsemen in peace. They are nerfed enough.
Arabian Warhorse is already nerfed a lot.

I can understand why you didn't read past the first sentence, it was a pretty long post. But to make it clear, I didn't suggest any change to Arabian Warhorse's stats. I think its fine.
Also, this wouldn't really be a nerf, just an increase in difficulty and price. The stats I suggested changed aren't nerfs, they're mainly buffs or shifting around stat focus.

Thats a joke?? 
1H Cav is more  powerful,  but you need skill, experience and teamwork.

No, it isn't a joke. 1hand&shield cav can of course be very effective. Two players who do so very well are Merc_Lizardman and Merc_Phazey (or whatever that alt of his is called). Those two play very smart - they know how to support effectively, and they do very well.
I've seen others do well, some 22nd guys too.
But of course because of the way they have to play (they have to get closer and risk more than lance cav), they're not as able (though far more able than 2hand cav because of the shield, faster weapon, and usually longer range weapon) to rampage all over the map. And obviously in cav vs cav fights, lance cav have all the advantages.

Also, couchable only lances is silly.

(click to show/hide)

ppl always whining about classes.every time they cried cus of archery it get nerf at every patch.now they r cryin cus of cav.tell me wasnt cav the most powerful force in battlefields of medieval times?if u say yes so there is no need to nerf horses or skills.also it heavily nerfed.if u cant remember i can tell at first days sumpter was 1,palfrey rouncey steppe and rabian was 2,courser,sarranid and hunter for 3,warhorses for 4,charger and chatap for 5 and plated and mamaeluke was 6 riding.and they nerfed horse archery too.u could give 1/3 skill point to horse archery skill but now 1/6 and every archery nerf nerfed horse archery too.so u guys just stop crying and playin better.and i got a question in medieval times can a pikeman  kill a swordman with shield or 2h swordman in close fight?noo.admins talkin about items historical correct for adding mod but why they dont look to historical reality in wars?another didnt english longbowmen defeat french knights at agincourt?yes.so archery nerfs r sucks but thanks god bows r still good enough at a good player hand.horseman nerfs sucks too but horses and lances still powerful at good players hand.
btw u got 3 option:
1)go a high ground or get in a building,
2)get a pike(i know what u say my 2h sword got 2 slot and if i get pike too i cant use my xbow or whatelse like that.but damn if u got  a xbow or throwin stay at high ground with archers)
3)just become a cav and if u r thinnkin u r good fighter u ll be good cav too.

Yeah, cav was the most powerful force at certain times in history. So?

Also Akinci, yeah obviously I remember what horse requirements and stats used to be like. It doesn't make a difference. The game changes, the balance changes. Otherwise we might as well say 'remember that time when you could use GLA from horseback? Cav have been nerfed enough!'.
I don't want any stat nerfs to horses. I want armoured horses made better, and lower tier horses more common (and interesting). I want cav to be difficult again.
Light cavalry shouldn't be riding around with triple the kills of every other player. They should be support.

The historical realism argument is a bit suspect, since cRPG (and warband) take a lot of liberties with historical accuracy. The way I understand it, cRPG is aesthetically modelled on the medieval world.

And:

1) Not always an option. And it shouldn't really be the answer to cavalry dominance, I don't want to see more roof camping.
2) Not everybody wants to play a pikeman.
3) I am a cav player    (also, its different skills, so a good fighter won't necessarily be good cav).

This isn't a suggestion to nerf horse stats. Its to rebalance horses, and make armoured horses worth the cost. Also, to raise difficulty and price to compensate for how easy it is to be cav.

Also, to restate another point: none of the suggestions will affect the issues of cav weapons. I don't see how you can realistically change lance effectiveness without changing game mechanics.

[Gurnisson]

Skilled lancer will not give you chance to get close enough to strike.

I keep away from lancers most of the time on my 1H cav alt, but when they come for me, they're not that hard to take down. You just have to use your head.