NeverUseCavalry的最近内容

What advantage does it give you to do it in one day vs two? How many times do you need to train an entire army from scratch in one day?

Lord Brutus 说:

NeverUseCavalry 说:

Yep, balanced elite scimitar is my 1h of choice as well, unless I'm going with a military hammer for prisoners.

点击展开...

Meh, you want prisoners?  Rescue manhunters from bandits, recruit them into your army.  They upgrade eventually to slaver chiefs and the entire troop tree carries blunt weapons.  Instant prisoners.

点击展开...

I don't use cavalry.

Yep, balanced elite scimitar is my 1h of choice as well, unless I'm going with a military hammer for prisoners.

I don't really use any of these weapons.  The Morningstar is fantastic as a 2h weapon on foot (the only situation in which it has no penalty).  The short reach for a 2her can be a blessing in a lot of situations, like sieges or just close scrums in the field.  And of course guard crush and piercing damage.

As a 1h weapon, though, I think the Military Pick is clearly better on foot companions.  I don't see what argument could be made otherwise.  Now, the player is a different story because the player is actually capable of utilizing the versatility.  If you don't have the slots for a dedicated 1h and a dedicated 2h, the Morningstar is a good all purpose weapon.  A great one in fact.

The one place you could make a good argument for the Morningstar as a 1h weapon is on horseback.  The speed bonus will increase the damage and the guard crush effectiveness.  Weapon speed doesn't mean much on horseback, but reach does. 

So to sum up, I would say:

Human, foot, dedicated 1h: Pick
Companion, foot, dedicated 1h: Pick

Human, foot, true 2h/1h usage: Morningstar
Companion, foot, true 2h/1h usage: N/A (can't do it)

Human, cav, dedicated 1h: Morningstar
Companion, cav, dedicated 1h: Morningstar

And bonus, even though not relevant to your question:
Either, foot, dedicated 2h: Morningstar could be the best dedicated 2h weapon in the game in certain situations, but will be outperformed by the big cutting 2hers (Great Bardiche) in most situations with some power strike.

You make a pretty compelling case, but from an efficiency standpoint it's just not something I would do.  I personally don't see a need to train from zero to top tier in one day vs two.  You've also pointed out the inefficiency yourself.  You're raising int for only one skill, which is causing a lot of wasted skill points.  A guy with 30 str, 10 power strike, 10 iron flesh, and 10 power draw is quite a bit more powerful than 15/5/5/5.  I'll take that and "only" train my entire army to max in 2 days.

But hey, if your plan is working for you, then more power to you.

Making them all 30 int is a waste of the resource.  10 trainer on every companion is way overkill.  I have 10 trainer on my two int heroes and on myself.  My combat companions each have 3 trainer.  My entire army stays top tier all the time.  Having every companion get 30 int just for trainer deprives you of a lot of combat power while the additional training is wasted.

I understand the theory that some people have expressed when it comes to party skills and companions.  It goes like this: you get most of your combat power from regular troops, since you can have 100+ troops and only 8 companions.  On the other hand, regular troops can't get party skills.  Therefore, the real use of companions is for party skills.  Yes, entirely true... up to the point that you've attained all useful party skills.  If you're going int yourself, that only takes one to two more int heroes.  The only one that stacks is trainer, but even with that you reach a point where enough is enough.  At the same time, people that subscribe to this theory underestimate just how powerful a companion can get.  A single companion that is leveled purely for combat and geared out properly can eventually be as powerful as several top tier troops while never dying and always improving both in skill and equipment.

To answer your question about horse archer companions, though: yes, they will be worse as horse archers than as melee cavalry.  They will get less kills as they waste time riding around firing arrows which will virtually never hit anything, and even when they do hit something it will do significantly less damage than a melee strike.

They don't dominate field battles at all.  In theory they should, but in reality they are nearly as useless in field battles as they are in sieges, for the reasons I stated above.  Just take any faction's top infantry unit, supported by that faction's top ranged unit.  Everyone hold position.  Infantry take ten steps forward x3.  Infantry move closer together x3 or 5 or whatever.  Khergits will charge straight into your infantry.  The moment before they arrive, everyone charge.  Game over.  Khergits will be slaughtered with their poorly armored troops atop their mostly unarmored horses.  You as the player can either be on foot with a big two hander to join in on the fun, or you can be on horseback and pick off stragglers that escape the scrum.  It really doesn't matter.  As long as you have levelled up troops and you're only outnumbered 2 or 3 to 1 rather than 10 to 1, you will win with minimal casualties.  I play on max difficulty settings.

I don't know because my favorite troops are from the wrong era.  But if I can just ignore that problem, then it would be either:

1. Based on Roman legions.  Main troop is heavy infantry with short sword and javelins.
2. Based on Greek phalanx.  Main troop is heavy infantry with spear and shield.  Of course the game would have to be recoded so that spear and shield actually worked.
3. Based on the later Eastern Roman Empire (referred to by many as the Byzantines).  Main troop is heavy cavalry with lance and bow.  I guess this third one is actually in the right era.

I've made companions to be these troops just for fun.

Yeah, it's crazy how bad throwing is.  It's okay if you're keeping her infantry AND you have no cavalry such that you let every enemy just march to you.  That way she uses the throwing weapons while she's just standing there waiting for them to come.  But if you're fighting in any kind of fluid way, she just wanders around.  The thing that is strange is that I never really see Huscarls or other regular troops doing that even though they also have throwing weapons.

She would definitely be better with a crossbow, but I just have a thing about wasting those 3 points in throw power.  Would like to make it work... somehow.

Thanks.

I agree 100%.  It's all about what you enjoy playing.  The factions are pretty well balanced.  And even if there are slight differences in power, the advantages that a human inherently enjoys will more than make up for it.  As I said, in my opinion the only possible exception to this would be the Khergits.  I think it may be a bit more difficult to beat the game with them.  Then again, I have to be honest and say I have never actually tried.  I suppose if you built up a field army of 100% Lancers and a siege army of 100% KVH, you could get it done. 

Yeah, it would definitely be cool.  Another related idea I had is that it would be cool if there were no set companions but you could have any lord as a companion.  You would get companions from the pool of lords that don't currently have a faction, or you could even recruit a lord away from his faction.