Archery vs. Cav

[tbox]

Hey guys,  I disappointed at the effectiveness of archery vs cav in the current beta stage.  Its seems generally it takes too many shots to stop a cav. This is only exaserbated  with each additional cav troop on the team. I understand with  xbow and maybe bow that a headshot to a horse will kill the the horse fast. But takig into consideration the movement speeds of  horses  its extremely hard to in general  kill a horse relatevely effectively via archery.    The shield skill force field or just the shield blocking in general  on  a horse makes killing the rider even harder then hiting the horse.    Now I am not  going to say how they should balance it.  If archers are not supost to kill cav any easyer then they are able to now then I beleive infantry needs some  boost to killing cav.  Cav horses and riders are not overall dieing fast enough for the damage they can inflict and the relative defence/surviability .  If you can one shot someone with lance our couch it should come at a cost to defense  and currently their defense is so so so much better then any infantry or archer.  Speed, moniveablity, and  non death when horse dies.

 

[sadnhappy]

I and the majority of the players disagree, I'd say. It's been said hundreds of times that cav is actually way too easy to kill, not the other way around. Killing tier 1-3 horses is very easy, whereas warhorses and chargers are supposed to take in huge amounts of damage. Coursers go down with just few shots, lower tier horses even more easily.. Hunters take 2-4 shots, I don't see a problem at all.

 

[DanAngleland]

I think you identified the root of the problem when you mentioned the shield blocking tbox. This is preventing many arrows from finding their rightful home- in the right side of the cavalryman's torso or either foot! If this was amended so that shields block only arrows that are on a trajectory to hit the shield, then the problem would be solved as far as I'm concerned.

 

[okiN]

Only if you then give cav some other advantage to make up for the fact that they're suddenly even more vulnerable to missiles than they already are. Which is plenty, by the way. There's already only so much you can do with a shield, and it's very easy to shoot a horse out from under a rider.

So basically... yeah. I disagree with you.

 

[Úlfheðinn]

As a primarily melee inf player, even I find killing cav(either the rider or the horse) to be rather simple. They present a large target that is relatively easy to avoid if one has a decent SA(Situational Awareness)

So, I shall respectfully disagree.



Inf has various pikes, throwing weapons, spears and 2H(if you know how to use them well).

Generally, Cav is a threat when it is employed with hit and run tactics. If they present themselves to archers or crossbowman or get stuck in melee combat, their lifespan is usually very very short.

 

[PsykoOps]

I think you identified the root of the problem when you mentioned the shield blocking tbox. This is preventing many arrows from finding their rightful home- in the right side of the cavalryman's torso or either foot! If this was amended so that shields block only arrows that are on a trajectory to hit the shield, then the problem would be solved as far as I'm concerned.

Also arrows that should land on the horse land on the shield. Even headshots are sometimes covered by the force field effect. Hopefully they do away with the whole force field soon and then we'll be ok.

 

[axemaster]

In our clantraining I oneshotted with xbow one horse.
So I think I disagree.
Rider get himself almost easily killed by archers if he is not doing his job right.

 

[HTAPAWASO]

I think light cavalry works pretty well at the moment, it fills a good niche as a support troop, but very vulnerable on its own.

Heavy cavalry could use some work though I think. Maybe as simple as increasing trample damage for heavy horses.

 

[tbox]

Ok lets break it down.  1 v 1 cav v. infantry  if your not  rhodok (pike access longest weapon reach for infantry non projectile)  or Nord (throwing axe) and your  not lined up dead center infront of the horses's chest then your going to be lanced by a good cav outside of the infantry player's weapon reach.  In fact  any good cav player can lance you without any side outside directly infront of the horse before your spear etc "reaches" them.  Now add  in many horses and even with a pike 1000 ft long you cant spin around fast enough to keep one or 3 from lancing you in the back.  I am  not saying nerf them to the ground but when you have a  good ratio of cav troops on one team it because extremely hard to defend against them.  It can be done but its like too easy to zerg lance/couch people then to defend against a horse "zerg".   

One small change I propose would be to disallow lancing angles outside of 20 degrees to either side.  Meaning  the horse/rider  is a line and then the lance turned to  a side  is the other line.  Right now it seems like the side lance turn limintation is like 45 degrees.

Make blocking with a shield on horse back have same or longer delay as the delay that 2handed long weapons have when  activating block after a swing.

 

[Úlfheðinn]

1 vs 1 cav vs inf:

a) Inf player constantly moves to the sides, uses a spear to poke the horse or rider as he passes (ideally of course scoring a center hit that causes the horse to rear).
b) Inf player constantly moves to the sides, uses virtually any weapon to cut horse or rider as he passes.
c)Inf player seeks cover or uses the environment to force horseman into melee range.
d)Inf player dodges until Cav player gets bored and pulls out sword, allowing a better chance to hit him.



Of course if you are surrounded by Cav as Inf in the open, you are done. However, the same goes for any class against any other class.

Inf surrounded by ranged.
Cav surrounded by ranged.
A ranged troop surrounded and forced into melee.
Inf or Range surrounded by Cav.



Any faction working together (see teamwork) has a good chance to eliminate a large number of Cavalry.



That said your suggestion is nice, a lance should not be switchable across the horse as easily as it is.

 

[DanAngleland]

Only if you then give cav some other advantage to make up for the fact that they're suddenly even more vulnerable to missiles than they already are. Which is plenty, by the way. There's already only so much you can do with a shield, and it's very easy to shoot a horse out from under a rider.

So basically... yeah. I disagree with you.

Cavalry are devastating when used to their proper advantages. Yes, they are a big target, but if moving across your vision they are damn hard to track because of their speed and maneuverability, and what is more if there are a few enemy horsemen rather than one or two, there is a danger of being swarmed by them or being killed by one you never even saw. You are going to be vulnerable when galloping towards a group of archers, but if you have fellow cavalry with you, you are likely to be able to survive. Just remembered; I played on your team as the Sarranid Sultanate against the Rhodoks earlier, you know how well our cavalry did in the more open maps when we were all working well together!

Also, there is only so much you can do with a shield, you are right, but I don't think that's unreasonable. Perhaps we should have a bit more possible movement to cover the head (not sure if we can't do this already?), but we shouldn't be able to cover our legs easily. A kite shield might be able to cover some of the leg but still not the feet.

@Ulf (your 1st post), when you have a good situational awareness, yes, but that isn't possible if there are too many different threats at the same time. If there are two horsemen coming at you, or you are fighting a footsoldier whilst the cavalryman comes up behind you, you are in trouble. It all comes down to the cavalry teamwork and individual horseman's tactics. Quickly getting away from an enemy and attacking another somewhere else on the map is one of the big advantages of cavalry.

 

[Úlfheðinn]

Of course, however that is the same regardless of what class you are or what class you face.

If you are outnumbered and in a strategically disadvantageous position chances are you will lose.

 

[Vermin]

@Ulf, when you have a good situational awareness, yes, but that isn't possible if there are too many different threats at the same time. If there are two horsemen coming at you, or you are fighting a footsoldier whilst the cavalryman comes up behind you, you are in trouble. It all comes down to the cavalry teamwork and individual horseman's tactics. Quickly getting away from an enemy and attacking another somewhere else on the map is one of the big advantages of cavalry.

The problem with this situation is that you people always represent it from a 2vs1 point of view. If you and a teammate select the awlpike, stand back to back, there isnt a single horseman who can touch you. The awlpike, ashwood pike and pike are very effective cavalrykillers. If I play cavalry I try to avoid head-on clashes with people wielding a long pointy weapons. Instead I use the one advantage I have over my enemy; mobility. I try to get behind him or wait until he is occupied with a teammate to strike.
In fact, the only cavalry that can take out pike-users effectively are Khergits horse archers. For regular cavalry, (regular) infantry with pike is a far greater threat than archers could ever be.

 

[DanAngleland]

You don't need to be outnumbered by cavalry, at least not for long periods- they can be threatening one group and seconds later they are twenty feet away surprising someone else. I don't agree that the situation is the same regardless of troop type, cavalry can usually make themselves scarce if the situation hasn't immediately gone their way; that's not something that infantry can do. Also, the time you have to shoot an infantryman before he reaches you is much longer.

 

[CalenLoki]

disagree - hitting horse from 50m is easier than hitting footman from 20. I would rather see more hp for horses (+20-30%) and trampling damage increase. Forcefield must be fixed, but it has little to do with horses.

 

[TurambarMakart]

Leave in peace cav... ! 

 

[tbox]

Of course, however that is the same regardless of what class you are or what class you face.

If you are outnumbered and in a strategically disadvantageous position chances are you will lose.

No you are mistaken.    Many cav can move extremely fast so they infact have more opertunites to use their outnumbered advantage way more outnumbering infantry or archers shooting from the same direction.  because they can all be in attacking reach more often due to speed more often then any other troop minus  archers  fireing from  opposites sides.  So  infantry troops outnumber another infantry member have to work to stay with in reach of eacher. That happens far  far far less then when many horse cav are on one infantry.  Its not one horse that is the problem is many. Their effectiveness goes too too  too high when they are in a high ratio as to other troops on the team.

 

[Úlfheðinn]

Again, their effectiveness is high because in all the examples you give they are using the one advantage they have to its full extent.

Speed.



Its akin to WWII energy fighters, they would employ their speed and altitude in combat to quickly "Boom and Zoom" their slower opponents.

If you either through poor planning or just the luck of the draw end up fighting an opponent on their terms, you will mostly lose.

 

[DanAngleland]

@Ulf, when you have a good situational awareness, yes, but that isn't possible if there are too many different threats at the same time. If there are two horsemen coming at you, or you are fighting a footsoldier whilst the cavalryman comes up behind you, you are in trouble. It all comes down to the cavalry teamwork and individual horseman's tactics. Quickly getting away from an enemy and attacking another somewhere else on the map is one of the big advantages of cavalry.

The problem with this situation is that you people always represent it from a 2vs1 point of view. If you and a teammate select the awlpike, stand back to back, there isn't a single horseman who can touch you. The awlpike, ashwood pike and pike are very effective cavalrykillers. If I play cavalry I try to avoid head-on clashes with people wielding a long pointy weapons. Instead I use the one advantage I have over my enemy; mobility. I try to get behind him or wait until he is occupied with a teammate to strike.
In fact, the only cavalry that can take out pike-users effectively are Khergits horse archers. For regular cavalry, (regular) infantry with pike is a far greater threat than archers could ever be.

Exactly, when infantry is using the weapon that should beat cavalry, and working together closely, they win, as they should. You also say that as a cavalryman you wait until your enemy is preoccupied, again this is the right tactic and works well. If people fought with pikes all the time and used great teamwork, then they should win against cavalry and there should be no change made to bias against that. However, that situation isn't very common is it? So far I have found my biggest enemy as a horseman to be lag. Certainly removing the shield problem (invisible forcefield for man and part of horse) is the only change I have advocated in this thread and one that can;t reasonably be opposed in my view. If cavalry combat is so 'nerfed' by this then either something else needs to change, or some of you are constantly fighting extremely well organised groups of spearmen who never have to deal with an infantry or ranged threat.

 

[tbox]

Again, their effectiveness is high because in all the examples you give they are using the one advantage they have to its full extent.

Any idiot can load a cav and horse zerg with the horse swarm.  Now there is no counter to this that does not require a person of very good skill or standing inside a building or a cliff on 3 sides.  I mentioned in my 2nd post on this thread how ineffective spear and warspear are on a decent cavary.  If they make a pike like reach weapon option for infantry for all factions I would be  happy alone.  But currently its too hard to defend against the horse zerg.