Let's see how different factions react to large battles...
- 主题发起人 Mirathei
- 开始时间
正在查看此主题的用户
Hietala
Grandmaster Knight
Ah, the old 'nord huscarl vs Swadian knight thread'
i think they are each other equals in battle, it depends on the first charge wether the nords will fail or not, and i've seen MANY people who fail breaking the charge using nords, because they didn't handle them correctly, and (even) i fail too sometimes, mostly due to lack of time.
in the field, swadians mostly have the advantage
in sieges, i don't even start about it, nords are there superiors i must say
i think they are each other equals in battle, it depends on the first charge wether the nords will fail or not, and i've seen MANY people who fail breaking the charge using nords, because they didn't handle them correctly, and (even) i fail too sometimes, mostly due to lack of time.
in the field, swadians mostly have the advantage
in sieges, i don't even start about it, nords are there superiors i must say
I don't think anyone is going to argue that Swadian Knights aren't the best cavalry.
I find fault with you labeling Vaegir Marksmen as the top archers. I find that Rhodok Sharpshooters are much, much better in the field and especially in sieges.
I'm surprised that Khergits fared so poorly against everyone because they are the worst to fight against in my experience.
I find fault with you labeling Vaegir Marksmen as the top archers. I find that Rhodok Sharpshooters are much, much better in the field and especially in sieges.
I'm surprised that Khergits fared so poorly against everyone because they are the worst to fight against in my experience.
Hietala
Grandmaster Knight
- yeah, there are alot of swadian fans here, i think their cavalry fares pretty wellGerg 说:
-vaegir marksmen suck according to my experience with them >< i used them for an attempt to take sargoth, but my army was decimated by throwing axes and nord archers shooting little arrows
-i think the khergits fare bad in big battles, when i fight them i always take a big army with me, they only fare well in the field if it's a small battle
Pretty impressive test you did there.
As mentioned before, the results are not that unexpected, but I am surprised that the Nord Archers didn't do sooooo bad.
Would be nice to see how different bandits do against each other. Even though that's not how the game works.
As mentioned before, the results are not that unexpected, but I am surprised that the Nord Archers didn't do sooooo bad.
Would be nice to see how different bandits do against each other. Even though that's not how the game works.
AlienKnight
Veteran
Thanks for the test, I appreciate the hard work. The results are more or less to be forecasted basing on the gameplay experience.
They do not mean however that you should keep the party of Nord infantry only.
First thing to be addressed is the player affects the result of the battle very very much. Both because of the personal "valour in combat" as well as in result of a clever use of commands and some tactics that work well against specific enemies. For instance:
I scatter the formations of infantry riding through on a heavy charger to avoid my cavalry to get stuck in the middle of it (which of course reduces the advantage of the horsemen and makes them prone to the infantry) which works quite well against Nords
or that after the initial charge of cavalry I keep a tight formation (including cavalry) on a hill against Khergits rather than try to chase them for 10 minutes all over the field while they use their bows. They come and get into my formation and then usually get killed while trying to get out before they manage to do it. All the time they cruise around they get some of my archers "warm welcome" as bonus
.
Another thing is that I find essential to have properly balanced party for the task. I use another set of troops for a field battle, and another for siege...
For reasons explained the test has little direct significance for gameplay, however gives important tips on what units seem to provide advantage when one makes his set for the task.
They do not mean however that you should keep the party of Nord infantry only.
First thing to be addressed is the player affects the result of the battle very very much. Both because of the personal "valour in combat" as well as in result of a clever use of commands and some tactics that work well against specific enemies. For instance:
I scatter the formations of infantry riding through on a heavy charger to avoid my cavalry to get stuck in the middle of it (which of course reduces the advantage of the horsemen and makes them prone to the infantry) which works quite well against Nords
or that after the initial charge of cavalry I keep a tight formation (including cavalry) on a hill against Khergits rather than try to chase them for 10 minutes all over the field while they use their bows. They come and get into my formation and then usually get killed while trying to get out before they manage to do it. All the time they cruise around they get some of my archers "warm welcome" as bonus
.Another thing is that I find essential to have properly balanced party for the task. I use another set of troops for a field battle, and another for siege...
For reasons explained the test has little direct significance for gameplay, however gives important tips on what units seem to provide advantage when one makes his set for the task.
psfalk 说:
Now that you say it, it makes more sense.Poc
Squire
Made the same mistake, yo.
And to the 2nd above, I think the whole point was to simulate an experience without player influence. We all know that the player's decisions will drastically alter the course of the battle. Any faction can overpower another withe right skill. This was just a test to see who fared best without player bias.
And to the 2nd above, I think the whole point was to simulate an experience without player influence. We all know that the player's decisions will drastically alter the course of the battle. Any faction can overpower another withe right skill. This was just a test to see who fared best without player bias.
Yo
Ludial
Knight at Arms
this.Fei Dao 说:
nords fail miserably(I just love this phrase
) against everybody else in purely A.I. battles I have taken part in(somebody was fighting against nords and I went to help with only my character). And it`s mostly Khergits and Vaegirs that mash them up badly, the others not so much.nords are impermeable to arrows? wtf
my favorite targets for archery practice with their ridiculous shields that cover only the chest and head!btw I just had a fight of nords vs. vaegirs. The ones left in the end were mostly the vaegir cavalry...
Rhodoks completely mash up nords with their glaives(the advantage of a polearm against an axe as short as a butchering knife). I noticed that nord recruits actually fare better than higher tier troops sometimes because of their tendency to be armed with 2h axes and spears. coupled with numerical advantage, that makes quite some trouble in close combat.
In marksmen vs. swad sharps the marksmen win definitely. The only good thing the swadians have is their cavalry, and mostly because of brutal stats and tough armor(same thing goes for huscarls). I personally never use swad knights, prefer either lancers or vaegir knights.
stoertebecker
Recruit
For a whole picture, one could figure in training times,too.
Example: Rhodock sharpshooters vs vaegir marksmen.
1:1 they may be more or less evenly matched...the rhod clearly having advantage in close combat.
*However*, the sharpshooters are much faster trained. Let's say you start with 30 recruits, a charackter with training and high enough level (so he can train them to the top tier); you start the battle when one side has only top tier troops. My guess is, it will be 30 Rhodock sharpshooters vs. 15 Vaegir skirmisher, 10 archers and 5 marksmen. The 'docks would certainly own
Example: Rhodock sharpshooters vs vaegir marksmen.
1:1 they may be more or less evenly matched...the rhod clearly having advantage in close combat.
*However*, the sharpshooters are much faster trained. Let's say you start with 30 recruits, a charackter with training and high enough level (so he can train them to the top tier); you start the battle when one side has only top tier troops. My guess is, it will be 30 Rhodock sharpshooters vs. 15 Vaegir skirmisher, 10 archers and 5 marksmen. The 'docks would certainly own
The Mercenary 说:
the swadians won vs khergit, vaegir with a wide margin. rhodok with a small margin and where evenly matched with nords.
where is the losing part?
Tzsak
Sergeant at Arms
The lack of complete failure on behalf of the Rhodoks confuses me, especially considering IIRC 0.960 still had 0 power strike 0 athletics 0 iron flesh 5 inventory management sergeants =D (only a very slight exaggeration). I'm tempted to revert Rhodoks back to their preboost status for amusement purposes.
AlienKnight
Veteran
Ludial 说:...
nords are impermeable to arrows? wtf
...
I noticed the same, the best tactics against Nord infantry (very strong in close combat) is to for a line of top tier archers on a hill and just wait them come. Not many of them make it to get close enough to actually fight
I have been practising it for last few days and it works perfectly up to 3:1 numbers disadvantage with difficulty settings at 101%.
Please, do the reading part, shield mechanics have changed since 9.60
agreesUther 说:
