cavalry archers, and other lost units

Pocus · #1 September 28th, 2003, 09:44 PM

What has been done to get us have a bit more interest in cavalry archer (a shortbowman on horse costing 30 gold in doms I). It was debated a time that perhaps they would have a bonus in province movement, but I think this was abandoned. So do they simply cost less now?

And what about some forgotten units that few if any players (the experienced ones at least

) used, like the velites, cardaces, etc. ? Are they now tweaked (cost a bit less, or a slight increase in stats).

Psitticine · #2 September 28th, 2003, 10:42 PM

I can't tell you much about how they've changed (I haven't had time to play Dom I yet, but I'm a Dom II beta-tester) but I can definitely say mounted archers are very useful troops in Dom II. I'd have to check on their costs but I don't remember them being that expensive, for mounted troops at least, and they pack a heck of a punch as support troops for an infantry line or a few regular cavalry. Make for good skirmishers too, especially with the Fire And Flee command set for them.

I use the Velites and other javelin throwing units quite a bit when playing the appropriate nations. You can rapidly field a huge army of them, and those javelins hurt! They can't take much abuse but they are quick and cheap to replace.

You probably knew all that though . . . my point here, really, is just to say that I'm finding the costs and usefullness of these troops to be balanced in Dom II.

Pocus · #3 September 29th, 2003, 08:28 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Psitticine:
I can't tell you much about how they've changed (I haven't had time to play Dom I yet, but I'm a Dom II beta-tester) but I can definitely say mounted archers are very useful troops in Dom II. I'd have to check on their costs but I don't remember them being that expensive, for mounted troops at least, and they pack a heck of a punch as support troops for an infantry line or a few regular cavalry. Make for good skirmishers too, especially with the Fire And Flee command set for them.

I use the Velites and other javelin throwing units quite a bit when playing the appropriate nations. You can rapidly field a huge army of them, and those javelins hurt! They can't take much abuse but they are quick and cheap to replace.

You probably knew all that though . . . my point here, really, is just to say that I'm finding the costs and usefullness of these troops to be balanced in Dom II.

ok for the mounted cavalry. I suppose they are less costly. Using fire and flee is not that interesting, in doms I anyway, as you spread your troops in another province, even if you win the battle. Is it changed in doms II? I mean, are the fleeing troops still with your army when you win the battle?

Velites in doms I cost 9 gp and 10 resources. They have the same price that legionaries, but cost roughly -30 to -50% of the resources. With that in mind, you will recruit legionaries, because they have a javelin too, and are far better protected.

PDF · #4 September 29th, 2003, 09:46 AM

Well, IMHO the problem with Horse Archers is rather a problem of orders available : those guys have bows, mobility and are armed with spear.
Their usage should be "harass", that is come in range, shoot, retreat, rince & repeat, wait for rout or flanking position, then attack !
Problem : we have "attack" and "fire" orders only, that are good for "one usage" troops (Heavies attack, Bowmen Fire) but don't go well with Light Cav.

A "Harass" order should be nice and unveil the true power of Horse Archers !

Pocus, about Velites, maybe you can use them as Hypaspist for Arco : less resources-costly infantry, good enough against indies in start game when you're light on resources.
Maybe ...

[ September 29, 2003, 08:50: Message edited by: PDF ]

Pocus · #5 September 29th, 2003, 10:15 AM

Harass or skirmish would be a better order which define well what they should do. Basically, a fire and flee, where units stay with your army win the province, would solve elegantly (understand not to bothersome to code I suppose) the problem.

I'm waiting for the response of Psitticine in fact, perhaps it works like that in doms II.

Velites cant be used as hypaspysts, because :

hypaspysts have a very high morale, meaning that they are used throughtout the game to bolster troops with weak morale, whereas velites are average on that.
But mostly because hypaspysts are worth their cost, as they have a high defence. They are produced 2.5 faster compared to hoplites. On the other hand, for nearly the same cost (9 gp versus 10 for a legionary), you will get velites which have an average morale, and are produced only **slightly faster**(+30% faster compared to the ( lowest cost in resource )legionary, which is anyway far better than a velite).
So in essence there is no real justification to choose building a velite compared to the lowest (cost in resource) legionary.

Psitticine · #6 September 29th, 2003, 07:30 PM

Fleeing units still scatter into neighboring friendly provinces, alas, even if their army wins the battle. (I guess they're too chicken to come back to the camp right away and get laughed at.

) If their flight is interrupted by victory (in other words, if they don't exit the map before you win) then they're still with the army after the battle.

The benefit I've been finding with Fire and Flee is that they'll fire away for 3 turns, but then retreat before the enemy can close ranks and whomp them back. It works especially well against infantry, obviously, including those with the shorter-ranged javelins. I don't use it all that often, for the exact reason you cited: it is dull having to round them up again afterwords. Still, even though I can't recommend it as a universal tactic, I've found it useful, especially in the early game where the low income situation means rounding them back up is a lot less costly, relatively speaking, than replacing them. In that early game, they will often end up having only one place to retreat to anyway.

st.patrik · #7 September 29th, 2003, 08:35 PM

It would be nice if there was a 'controlled retreat' option which preserved structure - and pretty realistic, since tactical withdrawal is not the same as a rout. Would this be difficult to implement?

Nerfix · #8 September 29th, 2003, 09:10 PM

No offence st.patrick, but "tactical withdrawal" reminds me from LAN-games with my friends...

Anyway, "controlled retreat" idea is very good IMO.

Pocus · #9 September 29th, 2003, 09:21 PM

tactical withdrawal or fall back, whatever. Thats would not ask for too much works to make a test before scattering them, and if you win, abort the dispersal.

methink that if the mounted bowmen perform like this, you wont see many players using them in dominions II (well perhaps the same than in dominions I).

Nerfix · #10 September 29th, 2003, 09:31 PM

I agree with Pocus and st.patrick. This would make at least mounted bowmen more usefull.