I open this space for debate by proposing the idea of a slight restructuring of the factions' troop tree. In my opinion there are quite a few units which have a redundant role in both equipment and performance. Also, the noble troop line seems to me to want to stretch the gum; Imean...I think that following the criteria of three tiers like with minor factions would be much more interesting and straightforward.
All this comes after my realizing that the Empire Tree is lacking one unit compared to the others and that Battania does not follow a criteria in my opinion that is appropriate for the noble line; the whole of it, ranged troops as opposed to the other factions with pure cavalry lines.
Well, here I have created this troops scheme with the help of
mountandblade.fandom (There are some names that have not been updated but the structure is the same). As I said, I've reduced the noble line to 3 tiers and slightly altered the regular troop tree.
Original left, modified right:
Vlandia: Vanguard and
Squire are two redundant units and therefore I would dispense with them. Also, and as a substitution of role, I would move Gallant as a regular troop in the cavalry branch.
Empire: Vigla Recruit is redundant, while
Equite would be relocated as regular cavalry.
Sturgia: Warrior Son redundant and
Vetaran Varyag may switch its equipment to
Varyag, moving it to the regular infantry branch.
Khuzait: No change to the regular branch. However,
Noble's Son and
Qanqli would not fit into this 3-Tier system even though they don't contribute anything either as they are redundant (This faction already has enough cavalrymen).
Battania: I consider that the noble line should be exclusive to the cavalry (horse as a symbol of power) and therefore the current one should be absorbed by the regular branch.
Highborn Youth and
Highborn Warrior are two units that are too similar and contribute little to the ranged line; therefore, I would personally get rid of them.
Fian and
Fian Champion, on the other hand, in my opinion would fit much better in the regular branch as what they are, a specialized ranged swordman. After these changes, we would have a fairly complete tree with a combination of infantry, ranged, riders and skirmishers. The noble line would consist of
Scout and
Horseman, who would jump from the regular line directly to the noble line and as a complement a new unit need to be created (or transformed).
In my opinion, the Battania noble line should play a role as heavy skirmishers (archetype of Celtiberian - Gallic horsemen).
Aserai: No change in the regular branch. However,
Youth and
Tribal horseman would not fit into this three-tiered system even though they do not contribute anything, as they are redundant.
What do you think?
Do you think that the trees would need a revision? Could the noble line be simplified to three tiers? Are there redundant troops among the trees?
----
Analysis Expanded:
Here I bring a little analysis that gathers what is commented in this thread. As I mentioned earlier I believe that in the Native there is redundancy of troops and I truly believe that there is an undefined system of strengths and weaknesses for each faction. In the regular troop tree each of the units should be well defined and framed within their role by function. Imo, only the noble troops should have "versatile" functions, which as I said, I would reduce to three units.
In the regular troop tree each of the units should be well defined and framed within their role by function. In my view, only the noble troops should have "versatile" functions, which as I said, I would reduce to three.
At this point, a number of questions arise... For example:
Can (light-heavy) infantry be equipped with missiles? - throwable as pila or other type of spears when they do not exceed the pair of them, yes. Equipping an infantry unit with one or two bags of javelins would already be framing it in a role of which it does not belong; we would be turning it into a skirmisher.
What defines heavy cavalry in general lines? -essentially the horse's bard (and the type of horse) and the rider's panoply.
Should a ranged troop have high melee skills? The high tier would, however, never be more efficient than an average infantry tier; their function is what it is, role function ranged.
Can a shock troop have throwables? My answer is no because it would be performing a skirmisher function indirectly. This is where I put the focus on Fiann's units. High level ranged units which perform shock functions with high levels of efficiency in both melee and athletics; in my opinion they are a nonsense.
Do you see where I'm going?
So, here is a reformulation of the troop trees with defined function roles.
(Native troops - Native function - Function proposal)
Vlandia: Cavalry push. Function role lines defined in a missiles-infantry-cavalry balance. Weaknesses, they don't have skirmishers. The noble troops would be framed within the role of Cavalry complementing itself with a high performance in melee.
Sturgia: Pure muscle structure. Role lines of function that tend towards the branch of pure infantry. Weaknesses, low level of ranged troops. The noble troops would frame them within the role of heavy cavalry being complemented with a performance in good melee.
Khuzait: Mounted archers. Role lines of function that tend towards the branch of mounted archers, pure steppe tactics. Weaknesses; they have neither shock nor skirmishers. Noble troops would frame them within the role of mounted archers with the equipment of the heavy cavalry (bard+panoply).
Empire: All in one. All types of function roles are part of the tree in a balance of missiles-infantry-cavalry. Weaknesses; it has none, it is the Empire. The noble troops would frame them within the role of heavy cavalry complementing itself with a good performance in melee.
Battania: Hit and run. Role lines of function that tend towards the branch of infantry and missiles. Weaknesses: No heavy cavalry. The noble troops would frame them within the role of skirmishing cavalry complementing itself with a high performance in melee.
Aserai: Mobile force. Lines of role of function that tend towards the branch of skirmishers and missiles. Weaknesses; little presence of pure infantry or shock. The noble troops would frame them within the role of skirmishing cavalry with the equipment of the heavy cavalry (bard+panoply). With this restructuring there would be room for light cavalry camel units.
. Bear in mind that after a long period (Europe) where it was hardly used at all, the crossbow came back in the 10th century or so, in siege warfare in Northern France, and quickly spread throughout Europe. It is plausible to think that the Normans were already using it at the beginning of the 11th century, astonishing the Byzantines in 1096 who were completely unaware of this weapon (and they certainly did not use it in such a significant way afterwards that it appears in the game as a Byzantine reference.).
