Lance couching seems useless right now.

[kweassa]

Actually at the battle of hastings the Norman cavalry used throwing spears fighting from horseback with a spear is crap going over the horses head is awkward a sword is a far better option for that situation.

The overhand position as depicted in the Bayeux Tapestry is more commonly interpreted as simply an overhand thrust with the spear, rather than a throwing the spears -- although, no doubt some of the Normans did throw spears. However, at least, more depiction of what are clearly javelins, are associated with the Saxons (soldiers holding multiple spears). And of course, couching was in the battle.

(ps: ironically, the tapestry also depicts a fairly long spear easily matching the size of late-medieval ones, but this is usually viewed as the artist's creative choice)

As for time period i seriously wouldn't get too caught up on that we have counterweight trebuchets, coats of plate, stone castles, mail and plate horse barding to name just a few items that are from later dates.

IMO it comes down to the choice of which depictions matter more, and why such a choice is made. And in this case, the shorter lances IMO do make sense. The cavalry we have are not the Swadian Knights which you could line up and order a frontal charge with those long lances, and I think the intent of the devs (if there was an intent behind the choice) is for us players to recognize the couching method as an opportunistic method of attack, rather than the "ultimate charge weapon" it was back in Warband.

As it is, with the shorter cavalry spears, we are to rely more heavily on conventional thrusting with the lance, but when an opportunity arises, we can couch it for maximum effect. I wouldn't hesitate to couch the longest lances back in Warband, but in this game, I wouldn't try to couch the lance against spearmen that are already in position and aware of my approach.

I think this makes better sense with the overall feel of the game.

 

[drallim33]

Again you reference the idea that the devs did this deliberately in order to more faithfully represent a chosen period of history. But do you have any evidence for this or did you just make it up?

Doesn't seem like it to me, seems like it is just unfinished like everything else in the game.

 

[kweassa]

Pretty much this early couching was just getting the end of the shaft under the arm advancements came later that allowed for better more stable grips and better transferrance of energy into the blow.
All lances should be couchable but unuseable on foot and they certainly need to be longer sorting out where they are held will go some way to addressing the issue.

If you apply that same logic, the wheel is just any material cut round, and the pike/sarissa is simply a really long spear as well -- but it only appeared after certain developments in history, and there IS a reason why such things happen.

So "the lance is just a really long spear" is a very poor argument. What are stirrups but foot-pads attached to a saddle? And yet, it took considerable amount of time before finally it became the norm in Europe only somewhere between the 8th~9th centuries. For that matter, also the advent of the stirrup and better designed saddles played a significant part in helping the rider better balance himself with longer, heavier weapons, which led to the evolution of better cavalry lances. (Although admittedly the "Great Stirrup Debate" is still ongoing in the field of academia)

IMO the M&B franchise built its house upon historical realism. To distance itself for trivial matters of user convenience would be a mistake.

 

[kweassa]

Again you reference the idea that the devs did this deliberately in order to more faithfully represent a chosen period of history. But do you have any evidence for this or did you just make it up?

Admittedly, it's an educated guess, knowing the amount of detail they put into their games since back in 2005.

However, that doesn't detract from the fact that it better fits the theme of the historical era they are basing their game off of.

Doesn't seem like it to me, seems like it is just unfinished like everything else in the game.

Perhaps. It's a possibility. But again, still doesn't change the fact the shorter lances fit the era better.

 

[Jagati Khan]

The overhand position as depicted in the Bayeux Tapestry is more commonly interpreted as simply an overhand thrust with the spear, rather than a throwing the spears -- although, no doubt some of the Normans did throw spears. However, at least, more depiction of what are clearly javelins, are associated with the Saxons (soldiers holding multiple spears). And of course, couching was in the battle.

(ps: ironically, the tapestry also depicts a fairly long spear easily matching the size of late-medieval ones, but this is usually viewed as the artist's creative choice)




IMO it comes down to the choice of which depictions matter more, and why such a choice is made. And in this case, the shorter lances IMO do make sense. The cavalry we have are not the Swadian Knights which you could line up and order a frontal charge with those long lances, and I think the intent of the devs (if there was an intent behind the choice) is for us players to recognize the couching method as an opportunistic method of attack, rather than the "ultimate charge weapon" it was back in Warband.

As it is, with the shorter cavalry spears, we are to rely more heavily on conventional thrusting with the lance, but when an opportunity arises, we can couch it for maximum effect. I wouldn't hesitate to couch the longest lances back in Warband, but in this game, I wouldn't try to couch the lance against spearmen that are already in position and aware of my approach.

I think this makes better sense with the overall feel of the game.

Overhead thrusting from horseback just no.... no no no not at all you just woulddn't do it.
Think about it an overhead thrust from the back of a horse against foot soldiers and think how much of your body you expose in doing so.
Overhead thrusts are also inherrently weaker and those artists creative choise are actually thrown spears not creative license.
The video i posted they actually go over this near the start btw.
Couching is certainly not an opportunist attack it is an attack with intent hard to be opportunistic when you are galloping at the enemy lance in hand.


Historical realism lol did you miss the part about counterweight trebuchets coats of plate and plate armour on horse barding not to mention stone castles etc.
The game is in a fantasy setting loosely based on reality.

 

[drallim33]

Admittedly, it's an educated guess, knowing the amount of detail they put into their games since back in 2005.

Ok so you made it up. Good to know.

However, that doesn't detract from the fact that it better fits the theme of the historical era they are basing their game off of.

How well it fits the theme of a fictional world is a matter of opinion, not fact. There's nothing realistic about the way lances are handled in this game, in my opinion. Just look at the animation. If you think that's how people couched lances in any time period I think you are mistaken.

 

[kweassa]

Overhead thrusting from horseback just no.... no no no not at all you just woulddn't do it.
Think about it an overhead thrust from the back of a horse against foot soldiers and think how much of your body you expose in doing so.
Overhead thrusts are also inherrently weaker and those artists creative choise are actually thrown spears not creative license.
The video i posted they actually go over this near the start btw.
Couching is certainly not an opportunist attack it is an attack with intent hard to be opportunistic when you are galloping at the enemy lance in hand.

I'm not sure what the "no" is about, because the overhead thrust and underhand thrust with one hand/two hands were very popular spear techniques on horseback in both the west and and the east. Until the couch method was developed, they were practically the only two methods practiced by horsemen.

And yes, it is weaker, as well as more dangerous like you said. Studies comparing the difference in overall force assertion place conventional spear thrusting on horseback as slightly more powerful than the shock of being hit by arrows at close range, whereas the impact delivered through couch method goes off the scale -- from which we can easily deduce why the couched method was developed in the first place: through couching, you can drive the horse faster, and attack with more stability, and deliver an much powerful force.

HENCE, the development of stronger armor for both the rider and the horse, better stirrups and saddles to absorb the shock, longer lances to more decisively and safely deliver the impact, to maximize the shock effects of the cavalry charge -- because so long as that impact delivered on horseback was absolutely powerful, all other techniques with spear fighting on horseback were trivialized. You don't need to do the skillful stabs and pokes with the overhand and underhand thrust, if you can just deliver the couched impact.

Before the couched lance technique, cavalry charge and its shock effect weren't necessarily the same as that of the High Medieval era and later eras. So all your "problems" mentioned are true. The attack force is weaker, the rider is more exposed to attacks. It's just how cavalry was like back in the 11th century. The advent of the "age of knights" changed it.

Historical realism lol did you miss the part about counterweight trebuchets coats of plate and plate armour on horse barding not to mention stone castles etc.
The game is in a fantasy setting loosely based on reality.

But the "cream of the crop" in this game is not the sieges, is it. It has always been field battles, and smaller details that may remain cumbersome to the players, but faithful to history, have always existed in abundance in this game -- which is why so many fans got addicted to it in the first place.

In the end every game is a fantasy. The difference is in what matters in which way. People can easily ask for full plate armor and halberd polearms we had back in Warband. Some people actually do. But a lot of people resist the notion, because they know and understand that this is a game based on a different timeline of this particular fantasy, and thus, refraining from such depictions help better in maintaining the illusion of that difference in timeline.

Same with lances. They've made concessions in armor styles, but stuff like lancing techniques in combat is way closer to the heart of the game. And what better way is there to clearly portray the difference between the cavalry of 11th century Calradia, and the 13th century Calradia, if not for the arms, armor, and technique?

 

[kweassa]

Ok so you made it up. Good to know.

How well it fits the theme of a fictional world is a matter of opinion, not fact. There's nothing realistic about the way lances are handled in this game, in my opinion. Just look at the animation. If you think that's how people couched lances in any time period I think you are mistaken.

If you're going by the superiority of your own "opinions" and would just simply drop the historical motive behind the game which the devs have clearly mentioned time again, then I can just as much simply rely on the superiority of my own "opinion" and say,

"Your opinion sucks, and just want to homogenize the cavalry into the exact same thing we had in Warband, which is dumb and boring, and stinks of laziness because someone needs to gid gud with couching."

You really sure you want to make this a matter of opinion?

I mean, if that's the case, I don't really even need to engage in the discussion. A simple, "No. Your opinion sucks, and your reasoning also has no facts whatsoever, and you're arguing based on your own preference." would do. Clearly, some other objective standards would be needed, which, in cases such as these, usually come to justification by historicity.

Otherwise, what's to stop people from demanding cannons in the game? Or lightsabers.

It's a fantasy, right? So it won't matter.

 

[Jagati Khan]

I'm not sure what the "no" is about, because the overhead thrust and underhand thrust with one hand/two hands were very popular spear techniques on horseback in both the west and and the east. Until the couch method was developed, they were practically the only two methods practiced by horsemen.

And yes, it is weaker, as well as more dangerous like you said. Studies comparing the difference in overall force assertion place conventional spear thrusting on horseback as slightly more powerful than the shock of being hit by arrows at close range, whereas the impact delivered through couch method goes off the scale -- from which we can easily deduce why the couched method was developed in the first place: through couching, you can drive the horse faster, and attack with more stability, and deliver an much powerful force.

HENCE, the development of stronger armor for both the rider and the horse, better stirrups and saddles to absorb the shock, longer lances to more decisively and safely deliver the impact, to maximize the shock effects of the cavalry charge -- because so long as that impact delivered on horseback was absolutely powerful, all other techniques with spear fighting on horseback were trivialized. You don't need to do the skillful stabs and pokes with the overhand and underhand thrust, if you can just deliver the couched impact.

Before the couched lance technique, cavalry charge and its shock effect weren't necessarily the same as that of the High Medieval era and later eras. So all your "problems" mentioned are true. The attack force is weaker, the rider is more exposed to attacks. It's just how cavalry was like back in the 11th century. The advent of the "age of knights" changed it.




But the "cream of the crop" in this game is not the sieges, is it. It has always been field battles, and smaller details that may remain cumbersome to the players, but faithful to history, have always existed in abundance in this game -- which is why so many fans got addicted to it in the first place.

In the end every game is a fantasy. The difference is in what matters in which way. People can easily ask for full plate armor and halberd polearms we had back in Warband. Some people actually do. But a lot of people resist the notion, because they know and understand that this is a game based on a different timeline of this particular fantasy, and thus, refraining from such depictions help better in maintaining the illusion of that difference in timeline.

Same with lances. They've made concessions in armor styles, but stuff like lancing techniques in combat is way closer to the heart of the game. And what better way is there to clearly portray the difference between the cavalry of 11th century Calradia, and the 13th century Calradia, if not for the arms, armor, and technique?

It is more that an overhead thrust would have been very situational it is not something you want to be doing when going against a spear wall for the reasons i stated. As for the timeline Coats of plate for example are 12th century stone castles were first built around the 10th -11th century i would say this game is supposedly around that sort of time period to state any earlier puts this further and further into the realm of fantasy.
Couch lancing -
The best known usage of military lances was that of the full-gallop closed-ranks charge of a group of knights with underarm-couched lances, against lines of infantry, archery regiments, defensive embankments, and opposition cavalry. Two variants on the couched lance charge developed, the French method, en haie, with lancers in a double line and the German method, with lancers drawn up in a deeper formation which was often wedge-shaped. It is commonly believed that this became the dominant European cavalry tactic in the 11th century after the development of the cantled saddle and stirrups (the Great Stirrup Controversy), and of rowel spurs (which enabled better control of the mount). Cavalry thus outfitted and deployed had a tremendous collective force in their charge, and could shatter most contemporary infantry lines. Recent evidence has suggested, however, that the lance charge was effective without the benefit of stirrups.
So we are in the right timeframe for proper couched lances as already stated more advances came later but the basics were already around in the period we are set in.
And this mentions the use of couched lances in a formation they would certainly have been used couched before this too.

 

[Maximum997]

Lol why are you even discussing this?

We have some feature in the game.
It is totaly useless, becouse even 1h spear will oneshot everything on couch speed, and you can just take 2 h swingeble polearm or 2 hander. They are better at oneshoting and fighting then any couch lance

 

[paladinx333]

This isn't even a problem, the tip only starts wobbling when you leave the lance couched for too long. You can just reset it to get it steady, or only couch just before impact.

That is not the problem people are having. The problem is that they are too short and you get out-ranged by a looter with a pitchfork.

This is a 270 length crafted couchmaster, it is only as long as the shorter lances in warband, and doesn't even use a proper lance head, had to use a blade to get maximum length. It still does not have as much reach as it should, although it 100 times more useable than the default lances. At 200 length they are just too short and barely reach past the horse's nose. The animation being completely wrong does not help.

I love that pic and the name of the lance. You are right about the lances in game. They are simply too short. I also find couching so awkward that I gave it up entirely.

 

[Maximum997]

I love that pic and the name of the lance. You are right about the lances in game. They are simply too short. I also find couching so awkward that I gave it up entirely.

And he is holding lance almost in the midle of a grip.

 

[Nickname]

And what better way is there to clearly portray the difference between the cavalry of 11th century Calradia, and the 13th century Calradia, if not for the arms, armor, and technique?

What age it is if Vlandia has pavise crossbowmen as a regular unit?

The pavise has it's first firm reference in the 1260s in Italy

The pavise appears in English records around 1356-60

 

[Stratigo]

(ps) In other words, based on the period of history this game is modeled after, the heavy shock cavalry were not yet the fully armored knights capable of smashing well armed infantry positions with a frontal assault of barrage of lance charges, like how they did in Marignano (1515).

Rather, the cavalry we have in the game are "getting there"... and would probably "get there" in 200 years... in the age of Warband. I think, if the short cavalry lances we have in the game (180-190-ish) are a result of conscious choice from the devs, then I think it would be for the reasons above.

The crusades, a mere 30 years after hastings, had several battles won by couched lance charges. Indeed, Anna Komene claimed, hyperbolicly, that on horseback, with a lance, a norman knight could drill through the walls of Constantinople itself. And she hated the normans.

Indeed, I'd consider the late 11th and early 12th century the actual height of couched lance charges. Sure, they kept getting better in an absolute term, but relative to how other armies managed and faced a couched lance charge from heavy cavalry, this period would be the biggest gap between an army relying on the tactic and one not.

The overhand position as depicted in the Bayeux Tapestry is more commonly interpreted as simply an overhand thrust with the spear, rather than a throwing the spears -- although, no doubt some of the Normans did throw spears. However, at least, more depiction of what are clearly javelins, are associated with the Saxons (soldiers holding multiple spears). And of course, couching was in the battle.

(ps: ironically, the tapestry also depicts a fairly long spear easily matching the size of late-medieval ones, but this is usually viewed as the artist's creative choice)




IMO it comes down to the choice of which depictions matter more, and why such a choice is made. And in this case, the shorter lances IMO do make sense. The cavalry we have are not the Swadian Knights which you could line up and order a frontal charge with those long lances, and I think the intent of the devs (if there was an intent behind the choice) is for us players to recognize the couching method as an opportunistic method of attack, rather than the "ultimate charge weapon" it was back in Warband.

As it is, with the shorter cavalry spears, we are to rely more heavily on conventional thrusting with the lance, but when an opportunity arises, we can couch it for maximum effect. I wouldn't hesitate to couch the longest lances back in Warband, but in this game, I wouldn't try to couch the lance against spearmen that are already in position and aware of my approach.

I think this makes better sense with the overall feel of the game.

Commonly by who? Over hand strikes make especially little sense on horseback attacking foot troops. Most historians I have read consider it an error by the artist or thrown spears. Very few think the norman horsemen stabbed overhand.

I'm actually wondering whose interpretation of the Bayeux tapestry you've read.

 

[Pejot]

Couched lances are designed more for flank/rear attack or hunting down running enemies. Frontal charges are less effective in Bannerlord and I think it's good approach. The problem is lack of fear factor in case of all units in the game. All of them are cold blooded. Battles lack psychological aspect but I think it would be really hard to implement something like this without adding some new variable that differs between tiers. They would need to add a variable deciding the possibility that unit will run seeing frontal charge and at the same time a variable deciding that horseman will stop the charge seeing spearmen in front.
That could lead to fun outcomes but it's not an easy thing to implement.

 

[metafa]

Couching is broken atm. Completely op in MP

This. It should be disabled in MP

 

[kweassa]

This. It should be disabled in MP

Just curious. How so?

What makes couching so different in MP, as compared to how some people are complaining it is "useless"?

 

[metafa]

Just curious. How so?

What makes couching so different in MP, as compared to how some people are complaining it is "useless"?

It may or may not be useless in SP but in MP you just couch it and run around. When you meet someone around a corner that guy's either dismounted or dead, since he had no way of knowing what's on the other side of the corner and preparing, no matter even the impact speed. It's a horrible mechanic.

 

[Jagati Khan]

It may or may not be useless in SP but in MP you just couch it and run around. When you meet someone around a corner that guy's either dismounted or dead, since he had no way of knowing what's on the other side of the corner and preparing, no matter even the impact speed. It's a horrible mechanic.

So it is bad in MP because you can walk around a corner and die to it..... seriously thats all you got lol
You could walk around a corner and take a Javelin to the face and you do know there is a minimum speed needed to couch a lance right?
And you obviosuly also know that if you have a lance couched it starts to wobble all over the place if left too long.
Pikes should be more of a thing though cavalry charging a pike formation = dead cavalry unless they get around the flank.
And spears in bannerlord have a reach advantage over lances as it is anyway.

 

[babelfisch]

Citation needed?

I think, if the short cavalry lances we have in the game (180-190-ish) are a result of conscious choice from the devs, then I think it would be for the reasons above.