I dont understand Serpent Cataphracts
 

When playing Pythium Default, why should one ever purchase a Serpent Cataphract?
They cost more than any other standard heavy cav unit around, and are slower, not sacred, are cold blooded but without any type of swamp survival or special resistances. "armored in the heaviest possible barding" my foot -- they have 18 protection, which is quite good but nothing to write home about.
Why 60 gold? More scary: why 58 resources?? I dont get it. I'd much rather wait to pounce upon Indy heavy cav. What am I failing to see?
thanks in advance

Re: I dont understand Serpent Cataphracts
 

The lizard continues to fight after the rider is dead. Still not very good though, I don't think I've ever build any except for curiosity's sake.

[ April 28, 2004, 17:11: Message edited by: Teraswaerto ]

Re: I dont understand Serpent Cataphracts
 

The costs should be lowered. Hydra and Hatchling aren't sacred in 'Default' too and they are both cheaper then in 'Serpent Kult'.

Re: I dont understand Serpent Cataphracts
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">That's as heavy as Pythium's armor gets.

Re: I dont understand Serpent Cataphracts
 

They have a decent bite. Pythium is already a strong nation due to high protection, high attack, high defense soldiers (some with javalins). Making their cav equal to others would make them a dominant race (as if they aren't already).

Re: I dont understand Serpent Cataphracts
 

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

Re: I dont understand Serpent Cataphracts
 

I dont quite follow you. If the rational is to give a crappy unit, that nobody will ever use, just so that we can say 'see Pythium has weak units too, so they are not overpowered', then I dont understand.

Re: I dont understand Serpent Cataphracts
 

Personally I have found the cataphracts rather useful. But only in limited contexts. As the hydras and other pythium troops generally don't mix (unless you get flying hydras on attack rear), pythium is left with a bunch of slow moving troops that don't do any damage to the enemy until they reach javelin range. Cataphracts (standard not holy) can be build everywhere, and serve nicely on the flanks, where they are likely to resist a long while against heavy oposition, and do serious damage against light oposition, not to mention flanking possibilities. Of course, native knights are probably equally good and cheaper, but a lot harder to come by in numbers. Their additional size comes in as an additional bonus when facing annoying things such as iron boars, etc; which eat up size 2 troopers all too easily.

Re: I dont understand Serpent Cataphracts
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">The Serpent Capharact is usable, not neither is it cheap nor usable in every situation. That means that it can and will fill a gap, but it's not going to be a standard to be on par with every other nation because Pythium has no need for them to be powerful/strong.

If the Capharact was on the same level as Arco's cavalry I would say it's useless or weak and you would never have a reason to build them. But as they stand now, you don't really build them right now for the most part but you could if you needed it is not because they are weak, but because Principe's are very decent and more cost effective unless you need a cavalry charge.

NOTE: Now with Serpent Cult, it should be modified to be built at any Fortress that is one thing I think should be done with the Capharact.

Re: I dont understand Serpent Cataphracts
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I'd prefer that to making Serpent Cataphracts powerful enough to match the knights of Man or Ulm. Anyway, they're not _that_ crappy. Until you find better independent cavalry, they're your fastest unit and may find a use as flankers. Or to raid C'tis/Miasma if you need to move fast and/or can't afford Hydras.

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'.

Re: I dont understand Serpent Cataphracts
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Last time I checked they would disappear after the battle. Maybe it has changed in Last few Versions?

Re: I dont understand Serpent Cataphracts
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I had a riderless serpent in my army in the low magic serpent cult game I'm playing, so it seems to be the case now.

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'. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Devil's advocate?

Re: I dont understand Serpent Cataphracts
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Not quite. You can play the Devil's advocate and still admit it - then 'avocat du diable' would be used in French, which is a litteral translation without any pejorative meaning. When you say about someone, he is 'de mauvaise foi', it's a rather negative judgement: you mean he acts insincerely, and is trying to misguide others (as well as himself, sometimes). Eg, usenet trolls are often 'de mauvaise foi'.

Or could it be that 'Devils' advocate' is used in both cases in English?

[Edit: it seems Babelfish translates 'de mauvaise foi' as 'insincerely']

[ April 29, 2004, 18:36: Message edited by: Nagot Gick Fel ]

Re: I dont understand Serpent Cataphracts
 

Well to clarify, Devil's advocate would have been more appropriate for what I think of Nagot's stance. I know he likes to argue http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif


Ok, so your crappy cataphracts saved your day because they were size 3 and not 2. Does it proves that they are not subpar? That they find a use in 0.1% of the situation is rather the proof they have a very small window of opportunity.

btw, what are the exact damages of a light lance, the description says 'dependant charge bonus' ???

Re: I dont understand Serpent Cataphracts
 

Well, interesting exchange of arguments...
Myself I've found SC to be just "not good", that means I don't use them often, but neither do I find them "absolute crap" as say, Arco Cav http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif .
So I think I'm more on NGF side (sorry Pocus http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif ). Indeed Pythium is strong in nearly all game aspects, a less-than-average, costly cav is justified. Usually they just aren't needed, but if you have to get a cav corps they'll do it - expensively...
In addition I believe than in 2.11 SC got the "Light Lance", making them a bit more punchy on 1st round of combat, isn't it ?

Re: I dont understand Serpent Cataphracts
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">They are subpar when compared to other nation's knights - and I've already said or implied this 3 times in this thread, so I'm not trying to prove the contrary - ou alors je serais vraiment de mauvaise foi. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Your point was:

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I proved this to be wrong.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Saving one player's butt doen't match my own definition of 'useless', and I - and others - have given other examples of their (limited, I agree) usefulness.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I wouldn't mind about them getting Swamp Survival. Otherwise, as it's been said several times, Serpent Cataphracts don't need to be improved further, just because Pythium doesn't need another rope to its bow - it has plenty already.

Quote:

That they find a use in 0.1% of the situation is rather the proof they have a very small window of opportunity.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I estimate the probability for Pythium to start close to Pangaea to be more than that. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Anyway I'm not going to beat this dead horse - or should I say dead serpent? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif - any longer.

Quote:

btw, what are the exact damages of a light lance, the description says 'dependant charge bonus' ???

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">It's dependent on the distance your charger moved in the round. I don't know the exact formula, I guess it must be something like +1 damage/square.

Re: I dont understand Serpent Cataphracts
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">IIRC it's +AP/3, or about +5 for Cataphracts.

Re: I dont understand Serpent Cataphracts
 

<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.

Re: I dont understand Serpent Cataphracts
 

I still dont think that SerpCats should be more powerful, but I also still do not understand them. I still feel that they should be less expensive (not: more powerful). Even: Less expensive and less powerful. Not: A new rope, simply give the Pythium player an incentive to purchase his or her own national national troops instead of independent ersatz. Being an inferior unit is perfectly fine, for many reasons outlined here and in other threads; but being inferior and more expensive makes reduces the unit in question to a bizarre "emergency break" you pull only when your train is already starting to derail, not part of any normal plan. Don't: make the SerpCat more like a viable Indy heavy cav; Rather: just make it a viable, interesting unit.

Re: I dont understand Serpent Cataphracts
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">IIRC it's +AP/3, or about +5 for Cataphracts. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">restricted to the first round of attack in a battle?

Re: I dont understand Serpent Cataphracts
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Not quite. You can play the Devil's advocate and still admit it - then 'avocat du diable' would be used in French, which is a litteral translation without any pejorative meaning. When you say about someone, he is 'de mauvaise foi', it's a rather negative judgement: you mean he acts insincerely, and is trying to misguide others (as well as himself, sometimes). Eg, usenet trolls are often 'de mauvaise foi'.

Or could it be that 'Devils' advocate' is used in both cases in English?</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">No, your first analysis of 'Devil's advocate' was quite accurate. In fact, this phrase generally implies admission of one's status thereas. But 'de mauvaise foi' really is best translated as 'in bad faith'. We're talking about the 'mauvaise foi' that Sartre was so fond of invoking, n'est-ce pas? The term formally used in philosophy to describe this attitude is 'bad faith'. And its sense is exactly that which was being invoked below. But as I said, that's formal and technical (or at the very least erudite) terminology. Most folk wouldn't recognise it.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">For quotidian English, I would have to agree with Babelfish... même si les resultats donné par la traduction automatique des expressions sont typiquement atroces...

[ April 30, 2004, 14:43: Message edited by: E. Albright ]

Re: I dont understand Serpent Cataphracts
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">The phrase "devil's advocate" actually comes from a Catholic institution (or function) Advocatus Diaboli whose function is to argue against the beatification or canonization of any person put forth for that. I.e. he's to take the "devil's side" and try to explain why someone shouldn't become a saint, arguing all the negative points about the person.

Now, to me this is mainly interesting because of the religios connection, and the question then becomes: When will Illwinter create a unit based on the devil's advocate? :-P

Re: I dont understand Serpent Cataphracts
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">IIRC it's +AP/3, or about +5 for Cataphracts. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">restricted to the first round of attack in a battle? </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Yes.

Re: I dont understand Serpent Cataphracts
 

Hmmm, what if the serpent's bite was mildly poisonous, and the riders had 50% poison immunity? This would give the SC's more uses (e.g. combined with Hydras), but wouldn't be overly powerfull.

Then again, does Pythium really need a new trick?

Re: I dont understand Serpent Cataphracts
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">(Just one more lash! That persnickety 'ole horse can't possibly be dead yet!)

Reflection has drawn me to the conclusion that a better quotidian translation of 'de mauvaise foi' would probably be 'not in good faith', which (unlike 'in bad faith') is a phrase one does hear bandied about.