|
|
|
|
|
February 25th, 2008, 02:33 PM
|
First Lieutenant
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 792
Thanks: 28
Thanked 45 Times in 31 Posts
|
|
Re: \'Skirmish\' command
You can have a look at Byzantine tactics. The Cataphract was their battlefield equivalent of a knight, but they did not carry out full-frontal charges. They were dual armed, bow and lance. If the enemy closed ranks to protect against a potential charge, they used bows. Similarly they used the cavalry more for flank envelopment, not as a frontal shock force. Therefore their tactical doctrines suggest they did not consider it wise to chuck heavy cavalry at an opponent who was not frail.
A full charge from knight was devastating, and commanders went to lengths to minimise the chances of receiving such a charge. However, against quality infantry - pikes or not - a frontal charge was also very painful for the knights. Historically, virtually every time knights charged heavy infantry it was done because the enemy was considered to be low quality, disordered or close to rout.
|
February 25th, 2008, 03:00 PM
|
Lieutenant General
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Alaska
Posts: 2,968
Thanks: 24
Thanked 221 Times in 46 Posts
|
|
Re: \'Skirmish\' command
Quote:
Arcaani said:
Hi, everybody!
All types of cavalry thoughout history which have been used in an assault role (i.e., all cavalry which were not used as archers/skirmishers) have been very powerful while charging. That is to say, while moving/delivering the first (and in some cases, subsequent (Macedonia's Companion cavalry and the Brinhentin of the Gauls, among others, were adept at not only delivering a single blow at the end of their charge, but several)) hit(s), cavalry would smash into and destroy the cohesion of any infantry troop (barring, of course, those which were able to either impale the horses on pikes/spears, or use makeshift weaponry to imitate that effect, e.g. the Romans and their use of pila (javelins) dug into the ground as makeshift spear walls).
But when their [the cavalry's] momentum is broken... They lack the agility and tactical mobility of regular footmen. That's why cavalry oftentimes would break off, form up, and charge again (and again and again, etc...).
Now, when the cavalry hit the infantry, the horses, while not necessarily using their hooves, would certainly cause some havoc on their own. I see the "Hoof" attack of the horses in Dominions as a rough (and forgive my improper usage of the word) translation of the multiple charges that cavalry would execute when they broke off from melee combat (which they, as we all know, are unable to do in the Dom3 battle engine).
To summarise: Hoof attack simulates the whole horse's movements, not just its forelegs'. All horses should, in my humble opinion, have a Hoof attack, which will be weaker for lighter horses.
|
This is exactly the interpretation taken by the CB mod. While other interpretations are also very reasonable, this one has the advantage of being good for balance.
|
February 26th, 2008, 06:12 AM
|
|
Second Lieutenant
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Canberra, Australia
Posts: 409
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
|
Re: \'Skirmish\' command
Thankyou Arcaani thats the point I was trying to get across int he first place. I just couldn't word it as well as you.
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
|
|