|
|
|
 |

April 28th, 2004, 10:00 PM
|
Corporal
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 54
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
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.
|

April 28th, 2004, 10:02 PM
|
|
Re: I dont understand Serpent Cataphracts
Quote:
Originally posted by Pocus:
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.
|
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.
|

April 28th, 2004, 10:06 PM
|
 |
Major
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,177
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
|
Re: I dont understand Serpent Cataphracts
Quote:
Originally posted by Pocus:
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.
|
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.
__________________
God does not play dice, He plays Dominions Albert von Ulm
|

April 29th, 2004, 09:33 AM
|
Captain
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Italy
Posts: 839
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
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.
__________________
- Cohen
- The Paladin of the Lost Causes
- The Prophet of the National Armyes
- The Enemy of the SC and all the overpowered and unbalanced things.
|

April 29th, 2004, 09:42 AM
|
 |
Lieutenant Colonel
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,276
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
|
|
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.
|

April 29th, 2004, 10:52 AM
|
Lieutenant Colonel
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Nuts-Land, counting them.
Posts: 1,329
Thanks: 1
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
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)
__________________
Currently playing: Dominions III, Civilization IV, Ageod American Civil War.
|

April 29th, 2004, 12:24 PM
|
 |
Lieutenant General
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 2,555
Thanks: 5
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
|
|
Re: I dont understand Serpent Cataphracts
Quote:
Originally posted by Pocus:
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)
|
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).
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Hybrid Mode
|
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
|
|
|
|
|