Re: I dont understand Serpent Cataphracts
 

Well ... if they could match Ulm or Man knights ... this would be very unbalanced ...

I think too Ulm knights are not so strong with stats, considering they've not recover as Man ones, takes a lot of Res to build (I know you can build them everywhere), and IIRC Man AvaKnights have alicorn, instead of hoofs.

Re: I dont understand Serpent Cataphracts
 

I never wanted to suggest making the Serp Cats like someone else's cav. My question was more along the line of Pocus' thought: When am I supposed to use this unit? As it is, I do not, ever. I like to build castles in Indy provs with heavy cav instead, preferably with some sort of archer as well. I just think that is a shame.

Please note: I never suggested making a super-cataphract. But I had imagined that something like swamp survival would be appropriate, or a small reduction in cost (both gold and resource) -- the latter being an incentive for Pythium players to purchase their own troops instead of Indy ersatz-troops. Actually, I like having troops be as different as possible -- I would suggest reducing the movement even more for decreased cost and swamp survival.

Re: I dont understand Serpent Cataphracts
 

they are underpowered enough to never be built, at least if you play MP. So by definition they are useless. Either trash the unit, or bring it to average level (swamp survival, why not)

Re: I dont understand Serpent Cataphracts
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I'll agree with Pocus here - they are too expensive for what you get. I'll suggest giving them something else to make them worth building (swamp survival or sacred or allow us to keep the lizard after the rider is dead - like Machakan spiders).

Re: I dont understand Serpent Cataphracts
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">You do keep the lizard for the Serpent cult Version.

Re: I dont understand Serpent Cataphracts
 

I feel like you are arguing for the sake of arguing Nagot (how do you say 'mauvaise foi' en anglais, Jacques? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif ).

True, I can tell you too that an army of slingers with wind guides, aim and fire arrows can save my butt where hoplites fail to do so too. Would it proves something about the (lack of) usefulness of slingers, in 99% of the situations? No. Same thing with the cataphracts. Its possible that one time, in a given game, and in exceptionnal circonstances, they can find their moment of grace, but still. They are damn underpowered (for their price)! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

a reduction in resources to the heavy cav level would be of interest (even if they keep their too high price).

And I'm not discarding solo play. But solo play dont really care about unit balance. in solo play, I recruit plenty of velites as frontline, to pretend I have Roman legions...

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I've used them in a Dom 1 MP game, and they saved my butt, while my other troops couldn't. And I'll do it again in Dom 2 if I find myself trapped in the same situation.

Quote:

So by definition they are useless. Either trash the unit,

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I can't see how trashing them would change anything to the current situation, and you're writing off SP players completely. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">

Re: I dont understand Serpent Cataphracts
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">

What, you don't believe me when I say I used them in MP, and survived thanks to them? I don't argue out of thin air - it really happened and I'll do it again if need be. My cataphracts proved their usefulness on one occasion, and that one time is enough for me. I fully agree with you about them being subpar when compared to other national cavalry, but - I'm happy I could recruit them this time, or that might have been game over for me.

Maybe you'll understand that when your Pangaean neighbour, located 4 province away, decides to invade you as soon as turn 11, and you've got no battle magic to speak of (no Air Elementals I mean - after all it was a Dom 1 game http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif ). 20+ war minotaurs backed by heavy Tangle Vine support (and I mean heavy) and a bunch of Maenads trashed all my infantry (even EGs defend very poorly vs trampling when entangled). Hydras weren't really an option. Size 3 cataphracts were what I really needed to destroy this army, and they did the job nicely - they killed almost all these War Minos by themselves.

Mauvaise foi? Moi???? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: I dont understand Serpent Cataphracts
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Assuming that this question was not rhetorical (which it probably was), the phrase is transparent: 'bad faith'.

Re: I dont understand Serpent Cataphracts
 

I agree with NGF that the Cataphracts aren't so bad. Compared to Man's Knights they have a bunch of minor drawbacks: 2 points less Armor and Morale, a point less defense, only a light lance, and reptillian. Their bite is much better than a Knights hoof, plus they'll fight riderless.

Still, they are weak enough that I have never used them, and I could see them improved a bit, e.g. +2 morale and less resource cost. I don't think they need to be among the better HC however, as pythium has plenty of strength elsewhere.

Note that with the addition of light lances in 2.11, they are better than they were in Dom 1.

Re: I dont understand Serpent Cataphracts
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Assuming that this question was not rhetorical (which it probably was), the phrase is transparent: 'bad faith'. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">'Mauvaise foi' is used in French to describe the behavior of someone who firmly supports a belief or point of view in a discussion, while thinking otherwise and not willing to admit it. I've seen an English translation some time ago, but I don't think it was 'bad faith'.