Sturgian Druzhinnik identity?

[Caps]

Yeah, I really like the idea of a mounted heavy infantry unit that can use their horses to manuever around the enemy line, dismount, then engage the enemy flank on foot.

If they take a page from Age of Empire's book they could allow them to hit multiple units per swing as a sort of "trample damage" if the engine allows for them to adjust individual troop type parameters like that. If it does, they could increase the Charge/Trample damage for Cataphracts like AoE does, or any other unique faction cav line for that matter.

cataphracts already have one of the highest charge damages ingame.

 

[Bannerman Man]

cataphracts already have one of the highest charge damages ingame.

Gotcha. I had a feeling that might be the case. Is that mostly because of the horse that they ride?

I'm sure it would also be problematic to program the Druzhinnik's behavior to act in the way I described.

 

[Caps]

Gotcha. I had a feeling that might be the case. Is that mostly because of the horse that they ride?

I'm sure it would also be problematic to program the Druzhinnik's behavior to act in the way I described.

All horses have charge damage when they bump into someone at high speed. The cata ones are just the biggest horses and the tankiest ones (or at least similar on vlandia level). Tyal (Sturgian) horses are average around the board.

 

[vota dc]

Dude this isn't open for interpretation, it is lore explained by devs. Battania on warband times is extinct/assimilated. The Sturgians are the predecessors of the Vaegir, who lost a lot of land to Nord invaders sometime between BL and WB. The reason they may feel nordish to you is that they have Nord influence from settled Nord adventurers and mercenaries they assimilated (A sort of parallel with real life Kievan Rus)

Rhodoks are a rebel faction that split from Swadia, so they are not Battanians, they are actually Vlandians.

A mess because both Vaegir and Sturgians are slavic but Vaegir are focused on foot archers and their infantry often has two handed and no shield, even cavalry has no shield sometimes. In Sturgia the only two handed Is the less slavic unit!

 

[Bannerman Man]

All horses have charge damage when they bump into someone at high speed. The cata ones are just the biggest horses and the tankiest ones (or at least similar on vlandia level). Tyal (Sturgian) horses are average around the board.

Got it. I was just wondering if they had an innate bonus modifier to charge damage or if it was all tied to which horse they were equipped with.

 

[Caps]

Got it. I was just wondering if they had an innate bonus modifier to charge damage or if it was all tied to which horse they were equipped with.

charge stat should show up if you look at the tooltip, dunno exactly about singleplayer

 

[Bannerman Man]

charge stat should show up if you look at the tooltip, dunno exactly about singleplayer

Yep, it's all there. Sorry haha, I knew about that part, but I just didn't know if any behind the scenes game parameters conferred a bonus to certain troops.

 

[Folca]

Yeah, I really like the idea of a mounted heavy infantry unit that can use their horses to manuever around the enemy line, dismount, then engage the enemy flank on foot.

Is there any real life equivalent of this? From a tactical point of view this sounds like complete gibberish to me. If you're already on horseback, at the flank, just cavalry charge in... Why take your time to dismount only to run in on foot? It's something that could happen if you missclick something in a strategy game, but not on purpose surely?

Sturgian special unit should just be a continuation of the Varyag, no cavalry at all. It's supposed(?) to be Sturgia's hallmark anyway: the best infantry. Every other faction's unique troop line already exemplifies their strengths (Battania get best archer, Khuzait best horse archer, Aserai best skirmish cavalry,...), yet Sturgia's left out for some reason. It's not the only thing they get left out on to be fair, their entire troop roster needs an overhaul if you ask me:

I'm waiting for an all encompassing, total overhaul mod for the Sturgians that does a full blown, proper recreation of Russ type troops with a few alternate/optional Varangian/Norse troop trees . I've seen a couple that are shaping up over at Nexus but mostly incomplete and/or buggy.

This basically, only I'm hoping I won't have to rely on mods and TW will do this themselves as it's pretty crucial to the base game.

 

[Bannerman Man]

Is there any real life equivalent of this?

As far as dismounting and flanking? Probably not haha, ya got me.
I'm not a historian, but afaik mounted infantry was for sure a thing. Mostly for enhanced mobility and to arrive to the battlefield fresh. Other factors would be poor battlefield conditions for horses and poor quality of horses available. Unsurprisingly, I'm having trouble finding any credible sources but here are some iffy ones:
[1]

Horses, although used for their mobility, were probably dismounted for battle.

[2]

They often made use of horses in their campaigns to raid across wide areas and possibly also to deploy before/during battle, but they appear never to have fought on horseback.

[3]

The heavy cavalry charge, while it could be effective, was not a common occurrence. Battles were rarely fought on land suitable for heavy cavalry. While mounted riders remained effective for initial attacks, by the end of the 14th century, it was common for knights to dismount to fight, while their horses were sent to the rear, kept ready for pursuit.

Then of course there's the classic example of the dragoon, which is obviously out of era.

So make of that what you will. Again, not a historian, so go easy on me if I'm way off base.

 

[Badcritter]

When I started playing BL, I just naturally assumed that the Sturgian noble unit would max out as the best heavy infantry unit in the game based on the theme linkages and the distributions of various tactical flavours. When I encountered them and found they weren't I was like wait... what? Then I double checked all the noble units and found that 3 of the 4 core unit types are represented but not infantry I was just like... but why?

So obviously my vote is to make them heavy infantry.

To the subject of axes, the unique point is supposed to be their effectiveness against shields. Some tuning is required for this to matter though, shields take too long to break at the moment for this perk to be important in practice.

 

[kweassa]

The Druzhinas aren't cavalry. Don't be fooled by the horse.

They are essentially mounted infantry. Move into position like flank or rear, have them dismount, and watch them destroy enemy ranks like a lawnmower. The Sturgians aren't a cavalry-strong group. The real 'cavalry' they have are the Brigands and Raiders, and even these guys skirmish cavalry, and better used on foot.

So don't expect to play the "cav game" like other factions -- Sturgian cav, you group them up, set them in position, and dismount.

 

[ElCrisp]

To the subject of axes, the unique point is supposed to be their effectiveness against shields. Some tuning is required for this to matter though, shields take too long to break at the moment for this perk to be important in practice.

I feel bonus shield damage alone will never be enough to make you choose an axe. Just on the basis it take like 2-3 hits to kill someone in this game even if the shield went down in 2-3 hits (which would seem very fast) You still once in melee have to beat their block the same number of times. For single player where each individual kill is not so valuable one shield is even less so. Also if you are hitting someone's shield you are still getting mini stunned and as result possiblly counter hit. Breaking someones shield is a consolation prize for non optimal play.

 

[Badcritter]

I agree that the value of breaking shields doesn't offset the stats that axes give up for my personal use. But in single player's "serious battles", having infantry that can easily break shields makes a big difference.

In Warband (where shields broke more readily) the best infantry unit was the Nord Huscarl, in part because they were a higher level but also because they had shields and axes. A line of Huscarl would beat a line of any other infantry in the game pretty easily by breaking their shields. Except for the Vaegir's heavy infantry, who had 2 handed axes. The Vaegirs could break any shieldwall including the Huscarls, but without shields of their own they took lots of losses in the process and were thus rarely used by most players.

 

[Koshkasa]

Vaegirs are northen guys from the mountains.

You seem so certain that I even had to launch Warband and double-check...
And there's a total of two mountain castles for Vaegir, one city on a hill, the rest of the settlements are on flat snowy surface. Don't think it would qualify as "mountains" by any stretch.

Also from the location of the kingdoms and the banners I can say that the Sturgians should be closer with NORD culture , where the Battanians should be on the VAEGIR culture. So that I think That heavy horseman of the Sturgians are in the wrong kingdoms troop tree..

Except developers stated otherwise, linking Sturgia with Vaegir, and making Battania extinct circa 1257. That's canon. Any other interpretation isn't, and while I myself also don't like Battania's canon assimilation, we don't get to demand canon be rewritten to suit our imagination xP.

 

[CZII]

The Druzhinas aren't cavalry. Don't be fooled by the horse.

Druzhinniks used to have higher one handed skill but that was fixed in 1.3.0. Now they are just knights with worse equipment. I did some tests in custom battles and they are way worse on horses, most likely due to short lances and swords, and are about equal on foot. Elite cataphracts destroy both knights and druzhinniks dismounted. All dismounted T6 heavy cav is significantly worse than T5 heavy infantry (tested against legionaries, veteran warriors and sergeants).

 

[Bannerman Man]

I agree that the value of breaking shields doesn't offset the stats that axes give up for my personal use. But in single player's "serious battles", having infantry that can easily break shields makes a big difference.

In Warband (where shields broke more readily) the best infantry unit was the Nord Huscarl, in part because they were a higher level but also because they had shields and axes. A line of Huscarl would beat a line of any other infantry in the game pretty easily by breaking their shields. Except for the Vaegir's heavy infantry, who had 2 handed axes. The Vaegirs could break any shieldwall including the Huscarls, but without shields of their own they took lots of losses in the process and were thus rarely used by most players.

Axes were invaluable in VC too, as that game was centered around shields and shieldwalls, and archers and cavalry were generally less effective. One of my favorite tactics in VC was to have my troops hold their javelins until the enemy was only 20 yards out or so, then release them all at once in a kind of roman-esque pilum volley. You'd score tons of kills and break many shields from volume of fire before the melee engagement even started, giving you the advantage.

That's kind of what I envision as the purpose of throwing axes in this game. Give em a capacity of 3-4 and a bonus vs. shields so that 2-3 will destroy a shield. This can differentiate them from javelins a bit, as otherwise javelins pretty much totally out class them. It even has precendent in history too:

...each man carried a sword and shield and an axe. Now the iron head of this weapon was thick and exceedingly sharp on both sides while the wooden handle was very short. And they are accustomed always to throw these axes at one signal in the first charge and thus shatter the shields of the enemy and kill the men.[2]

Then there's the popular theory that throwing axes would bounce off the ground and still cause harm even if they fell short of their targets. If they could be programmed to have a chance to bounce and still hit for lesser damage that would be a really fun mechanic IMO!

Could be a great way to boost Sturgian troops a bit.

 

[Earth Dragon]

Nope you are wrong..

Rhodoks was closer to the Empire with that big shielded spear men and crossbowed units.

Vaegirs are northen guys from the mountains - not directly russians but mixed -- with mostly using one & two handed axes , best archers and good heavy cavalry
Nords -- were the Vikings with rounded shields and no cavalry units they had huscarls and good archers

Also from the location of the kingdoms and the banners I can say that the Sturgians should be closer with NORD culture , where the Battanians should be on the VAEGIR culture. So that I think That heavy horseman of the Sturgians are in the wrong kingdoms troop tree..

Thats why I wrote the troop trees must be rechecked according to the culture histories.

Battanians get assimilated, just like the Gauls were assimilated. Nords already exist in game lore, they just haven't moved as far South yet. Vaegir come from the Sturgians, and should have Cavalry.


Making all the noble lines different JUST to make them different is a silly idea honestly. Having the Noble lines almost all end in Cavalry is thematic in and of itself to the setting. The Sturgian noble line is important because that is your ONLY source of strong Cav, while Vlandia has a second route. It seems like people just want to play Vikings, and that's why they want the change. My thoughts are you should just create an entirely new faction via mods and have them be Vikings (Nords) and not crap on Sturgia being Slav

 

[TheycallmeCoconutJones]

The Sturrgian noble unit the champion druzhinnik seems to me to lack a unique identity.
I feel we already have so many lance cavalry:

1. Imperial Cataphract - Two handed lance + Mace
2. Asarai Faris - Lance + Javlins give it a cool hybrid niche
3. Vlandian Banner Knight Top in class as classic lancer.

I really like the kievan rus aesthetic but the champion druzhinnik doesnt excite me to recruit as just a sub par version of the Banner Night, or if they were to buff them, I dont want the noble units to be simple reskins of one another as I think they provide a cool point of faction difference.

Here are possible changes that take my fancy:

• I think it could be cool if the champion druzhinnik didnt have a lance. Instead having the best one handed skill in game, and have excellent athletics, so he is still as much a menace if ever dehorsed.
• Move a weaker Cav unit back onto the main tree and have the Sturggian noble unit be some sort of infantry unit while still looking Kieven Rus
• Perhaps Heavy cav with a two handed axe + high athletics.

A sepperate but adjacent problem for this units identity I feel is the state of axes, I like axe use as a point of difference for this unit, but currently I dont understand the point of axes, they dont appear to have any thing they do better than either swords or maces and for different reasons appear to me just to be the inferior of either.

Anyway what do other people think? What does your sturgian noble look like?

i completely agree that the identity of the noble cavs between all factions is getting blurred, they are all just lancers at this point, the faris is the most uunique one, valandia and the khan is perfect the way they are, but sturgia and the empire should be much more versatile cavalry, historically speaking both of them made use of mounted archery along with their heavy armor and powerful melee weapons.

i personally think the cataract should roll around with a bow/arrows lance and mace as they did historically, they dont really need a shield as they have the highest armor on both their horse and themselves in the game, this would let them be a versatile offensive heavy cav with lots of options to make use of in terms of tactics

Sturgia should be similar but based entirely on the Russian boyars which they are but this sudo hybrid melee infantry into cav bs needs to go to just cav, they should be equipped with bows/arrows shield& axe and be a anti-cav that focuses on drawing the enemy horse at them with arrows and baits them into ****ty terrain where they can lock their cav up and beat there skulls in with the aforementioned axe.

 

[panxo_dakilla]

Battanians get assimilated, just like the Gauls were assimilated. Nords already exist in game lore, they just haven't moved as far South yet. Vaegir come from the Sturgians, and should have Cavalry.


Making all the noble lines different JUST to make them different is a silly idea honestly. Having the Noble lines almost all end in Cavalry is thematic in and of itself to the setting. The Sturgian noble line is important because that is your ONLY source of strong Cav, while Vlandia has a second route. It seems like people just want to play Vikings, and that's why they want the change. My thoughts are you should just create an entirely new faction via mods and have them be Vikings (Nords) and not crap on Sturgia being Slav

This, pretty much. Slavs have a strong cavalry tradition anywhere you look.

 

[panxo_dakilla]

i completely agree that the identity of the noble cavs between all factions is getting blurred, they are all just lancers at this point, the faris is the most uunique one, valandia and the khan is perfect the way they are, but sturgia and the empire should be much more versatile cavalry, historically speaking both of them made use of mounted archery along with their heavy armor and powerful melee weapons.

i personally think the cataract should roll around with a bow/arrows lance and mace as they did historically, they dont really need a shield as they have the highest armor on both their horse and themselves in the game, this would let them be a versatile offensive heavy cav with lots of options to make use of in terms of tactics

Sturgia should be similar but based entirely on the Russian boyars which they are but this sudo hybrid melee infantry into cav bs needs to go to just cav, they should be equipped with bows/arrows shield& axe and be a anti-cav that focuses on drawing the enemy horse at them with arrows and baits them into ****ty terrain where they can lock their cav up and beat there skulls in with the aforementioned axe.

Well wikipedia (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_Russian_army) says Druzhina would be the historically accurate noble troop. Also apparently they DID dismount for battle.



Huh

Edit: Citation needed probably