Where are my horses hoves?

[Arcaani]

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.

Edit: Minor rephrasing, minor additions to clarify some grammatical errors.

[Agema]

A skirmish command would be perfect for light cavalry.

Horse archers are expensive, and I've never seen much use for them in Dom, except those reasonably tooled up for melee as well. I guess they're pretty versatile with a high mapmove, though, if you want to dash armies around quickly.

I do think that hoof attacks for light cavalry is very unrealistic though. Light cavalry were never used as shock troops. Even heavy cavalry are overrated. There's barely a battle in history where there was a decisive cavalry charge against infantry which won the battle.

In the ancient era heavy cavalry were used to drive off light infantry and defeat the opposing cavalry on the wings, not to charge heavy infantry.

In the medieval era, knights were used as shock troops. However, they were successful because the infantry of the era were unprofessional, so tended to be both disorganised and of poor morale, who could be broken up. Whenever knights attacked infantry with resolve and cohesion, the infantry were comfortable winners (e.g. Bannockburn, Battle of the Golden Spurs, lots of battles with the Swiss). The myth of knight superiority is added to by the fact they were essentially the ruling classes, who ensured that their performance and skill was emphasised or exaggerated when historians and poets spoke of their deeds.

[Tuidjy]

You are underestimating charges. Both battles you're mentioning involved really
long spears (pikes) as well as disciplined infantry. And the Swiss were famous
for using them.

Without pikes, standing up to a heavy horse charge would be suicide, no matter
how disciplined the unit. And course, the only thing that pikes are good for,
against horse archers, is impersonating a pin cushion.

Firearms/longbows protected by pikes is what ended cavalry's reign, and mobile,
accurate field cannons eventually beat that combination.

[Agema]

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.

[quantum_mechani]

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.

[Juzza]

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.