It's called MOUNT & Blade for a reason... or is it?

[Bratok]

So, seriously. I am trying to analyze, which method is preferrable from the gameplay point o view, regardless of roleplaying, lore and culture background factors.

Mounted combat pros and cons:
+ Speed and mobility in both combat and campaign modes.
+ Weapon damage bonus.
+ Riders do not care about armor weight.
+ Can safely ignore shields, if armor is heavy enough, and wield more weapons.
+ Better overview and control of the battlefield situation.
+ Riding skill levels up FAST in conjunction with weapon skills.
+ Girls love horses and riders.
+ Filthy peasants can clearly see who's the boss.

- Maximum efficiency is expensive (a good mount + saddle/horse armor)
- If your polearm is shorter than theirs, you are ****ed.
- If your mount is killed in an enemy crowd, you are ****ed.
- Speed damage bonus works both ways, ouch.
- Horseman is a bigger and, thus, easier target for ranged troops.
- Much worse performance in woods, hills/mountains, and villages.
- Much worse performance in static melee.
- Long pikes and some ranged weapons are not available.
- Two-handed weapons are less efficient than on foot.
- Useless in siege combat.
- Girls may not like the odor.
- Enemy footmen WILL call you a *****.

Foot combat pros and cons:
+ All weapons are available and at 100% efficiency.
+ Easier to get additional cover from allied footmen.
+ Works much better in woods, hills/mountains, and villages.
+ Works MUCH better in siege combat.
+ You can pick up weapons from the ground.
+ Easier to get in cover, lower profile, harder to hit with projectiles.
+ No need to spend lots of money on horses and horse equipment.
+ Can stand and die with your battle brothers shoulder to shoulder, like a man.
+ Gives the exclusive right to call enemy horsemen pussies.

- Much lower speed and mobility in both combat and campaign modes.
- Heavier armor further decreases speed and mobility.
- No weapon damage bonus.
- It is hard to control the tide of battle, when you cant see **** in that crowd.
- The corresponding skill levels up way too slow.
- Performs worse on flat battlefields (steppe, desert).
- Shield is very very advisable.
- Girls still love horses and riders.
- Filthy peasants can't clearly see who's the boss.

The thing is, despite all the abovementioned pros and cons, I still eventually switch to mounted combat in all my playthroughs, no matter what culture I choose. Foot combat just feels much less dynamic and gets boring fast for some reason.

 

[Fixer]

*+1 on the back of a trusted camel!

 

[Ananda_The_Destroyer]

Useless in siege combat.

Oh are you sure about that? I find the horse incredibly useful in the siege, in fact I don't think I could solo an entire town without one.

Horse is 10X better, not to mention mounted archery. Foot combat is clunky, riding around with a bow and a glaive is the best!

 

[black_bulldog]

Oh are you sure about that? I find the horse incredibly useful in the siege, in fact I don't think I could solo an entire town without one.

Horse is 10X better, not to mention mounted archery. Foot combat is clunky, riding around with a bow and a glaive is the best!

Ah this cheese is so delicious.

 

[anoddhermit]

Let's get real here, if you're on foot you're roleplaying.

The player is dramatically more effective with a horse. And you can dismount it in all circumstances in which you might want to be on foot anyway.

I'm just here for butter (and beer) though. And to deliver grain to Tevea, and Tools to Neocorys.

 

[froggyluv]

Game needs a Nemesis -that being an AI unit(s) who trains exactly in way to counter whatever it Cheese the player is using. Be it sniper or whatever - that would make it alot more interesting

 

[EmptyPepsiCans]

So, seriously. I am trying to analyze, which method is preferrable from the gameplay point o view, regardless of roleplaying, lore and culture background factors.

This whole thing reads like one is forced to choose between being a footman and being a centaur when, in fact, one may get on or off the horse whenever one chooses.

 

[Bratok]

Oh are you sure about that? I find the horse incredibly useful in the siege, in fact I don't think I could solo an entire town without one.

Okay... you know, there is nothing to be ashamed of. I sometimes jump on a flat rock in Battanian tournaments, so enemies cannot reach me, or hide in Imperial arena side entrances... It is absolutely normal, all BL players do that. Just make sure you lock your room and always wash your hands afterwards. LOL

This whole thing reads like one is forced to choose between being a footman and being a centaur when, in fact, one may get on or off the horse whenever one chooses.

Yeah, but it makes leveling skills much slower. Also I usually have at least two sets of weapons and armor for mounted and foot combat, and switching them every time is sooooo tedious.

Anyway, even if you are a foot combat purist, you will still need horses and mules to increase campaign map speed and weight limit respectively. Foot parties of 80+ men WITHOUT any mounts move like snails, they cannot catch anyone and cannot run from anyone. Even Scouting won't help much (like +12% party speed at level 300), and leveling up Scouting is even more tedious than Athletics.

 

[Ask]

- Heavier armor further decreases speed and mobility.

True but at least there's a few athletics perks that increase speed/decrease weight so it's not too terrible at high athletics. Specially since armor isn't all that relevant and you can get away with lighter armor to a degree, also because you do get a few health bonuses which helps with survivability. At the very least you can be faster than the fastest foot soldier even if not by too much while being tankier.

- No weapon damage bonus.

There's one perk that gives 4% bonus melee damage (Taleworlds is so generous!!) and another for the move speed damage but... Yeah. Also there's the vigor/control bonus attributes so that... Sort of counts? Ish?

You do get double kick damage so get ready to get your butts kicked peasants ?

- The corresponding skill levels up way too slow.

...But all the previous points are practically irrelevant because of this. I don't know if athletics simply levels slower or if it's because chasing guys on foot takes forever, but athletics is a chore to level up, and it sucks.

I have a playthrough that I'm roleplaying about and I fight on foot all the time, still have barely broken past ~170 athletics. If it wasn't because I WANT to fight on foot, I'd never do it, being mounted is better for most situations.

 

[Bratok]

Honestly, from the roleplaying and (pseudo)historical point of view, ALL current factions are supposed to prefer mounted combat.

Even Battanians, since they are based on Scots/Celts/Thracians. By the 13th century, Scots had heavy cavalry on par with other European powers. While Gallic and Tracian auxiliaries comprised the bulk of Late Republic Roman cavalry.

In terms of BL gameplay, Battanians don't really need any cavalry at all, they have Fians LOL. All other factions cannot disregard cavalry without gimping themselves.

 

[niekdegrijze]

I usually play a mounted character, but I had one play through as infantry focussed on long 2H pole arms with only thrusting weapons. I cheated to get a lot of polearms weapon skill en perks unlocked in the beginning as you definitely need them.
It was a fun and totally different experience, you can get a lot of kills from the 2nd or 3th row, but anytime a higher tier enemy is breaking through you have to quickly kill him or run and pray for backup.

It really makes bigger battles very hectic and intense. it was a nice chance from the normal mounted combat and the normal swinging weapons on foot.

 

[archaicwarrior]

Firing arrows from my castle, on the back of my fav war elephant.

.

 

[Earth Dragon]

Real bosses ride Camels. They are taller then horses and offer the best vantage point!!

 

[Medivhtratos]

Always playing on foot. Horse feels so cheese, I only use it for speed on the map. Tip for weapon lvling? Movement speed! You always have to clash with the enemy. If you or your opponent just stay like tree 8n a landscape you will gain nothing.

On horse you get always a difficult multiplier+ weapon speed, that is the reason why ure lvling weapons, especially bow or crossbow much faster(headshot comes on top to the exp mathematics)

In short, if you want to lvl weapons fast, get urself a horse and use its speed. Defend a castle or town with siege engines for throwing weapons(easy way) . That's it

 

[AJAJP_Juan]

Defend a castle or town with siege engines for throwing weapons(easy way) . That's it

Not anymore, siege engines now grant only engineering xp.

 

[Medivhtratos]

Not anymore, siege engines now grant only engineering xp.

Ah thats nice. I have waited for that

 

[mujadaddy]

Real bosses ride Camels. They are taller then horses and offer the best vantage point!!

I would absolutely be doing this if there was better camel armor

 

[Medivhtratos]

I would absolutely be doing this if there was better camel armor

You mean the design right? Cause changing Armour values are easy

 

[EverKira]

So, seriously. I am trying to analyze, which method is preferrable from the gameplay point o view, regardless of roleplaying, lore and culture background factors.

Mounted combat pros and cons:

+ Girls love horses and riders.



- Girls may not like the odor.