PyrrhicVictoryGuy

well i think sword cav already performs better than spear cav against ranged units and i am not in favor of this.

We can compare what i have drawn this situation(although it is a bit extreme) to this video below , just imagine that the janissaries were javelineers, if the lancers didn't have the stats they have like melee resist and bonus vs inf this fight would be a disaster.Even so you can clearly see the problems that i posted before too.

I see your point and that strategy for making them effective at countering ranged units would certainly work if this were a total war like game were a clean charge would disable the group of ranged units from fighting back effectively and can quickly retreat with minimal casualties. But this is a AOE type game were the cavalry will attack the first thing they see leading to collision problems when switching targets or when charging and them overkilling individual units , so what happens ? Sure you kill the guys on the front of the formation but you bet that the other 20 or so guys in the back are going to have a field day with your imobilized cav that you commited. These losses are really bad , not only did you make cav which does not benefit your eco( depends on map but cav that is hunting is not battle ready) but costs a lot when compared to ranged inf and what do you have to show for it? So cav becomes more efficient in theory only.

I too have my two cents on Thorfinn's comment ,his proposals for the melee cavalry aren't that great as the game already implements these to an extent. Instead i would see an overlap in the functions of both melee variants: all cav should specialize in dealing with ranged infantry period, then sword cav could soft counter artillery much like their foot counterpart and spear cav could keep being a softcounter to cavalry in general. My reasoning for this is that while sword cav civilizations usually also have spear cav, spear cav civs don't normally have sword cav. Also @ChronA sword cav generally have a shield so i think them being a sponge for arrows makes sense.

Does this mean you are bringing Delenda Est to A25 already?

What's the period why are talking about? Lysimachus' hellenic thrace or the Odrysians? Th Ardiaei for the illyrians?

they look like regular sarissaphoroi

----> Point 3 <-- ---

oh well we'll see in A25

Is it just me who thinks the stone thrower ballista feels meh, even bad?

I give a perfect score of 10/10 for the flying acrobactics made the persian(archer) atheleets , truly a wonderous display of skill and sportmanship , we some beautifull rolls here today. Also you can clearly see that they stay on groung until the video maybe for dramatic effect. #CavSupremacy

Honestly i see no reason to not nerf ranged units to the ground, don't take this the wrong way as i am not ranting, but because ranged units will always have range ( duh) and will always be good in defending something and even better when in large groups. But right now i feel it is very difficult to exploit and punish a ranged army( not even an archer based army , even a 65 skirms and 20 spears army) for being out of position but this may also be to due to the fact that setting up defenses is rather easy and you aint gonna do jack **** to defensive buildings without siege.

oh well, back to being a pincushion for A25 then hehehe. @BreakfastBurrito_007 I don't think antiochus iii is a good cav hero, indibil is way better since he cuts both the cost and opportunity cost of making cav.

God bless your heart my good man

But you have to be really early , which is easier with ptol. I think it could against slow civs like the greeks

Yeah Ptolemy Soter's bonus is dope, and he also has an elephant which is just icing on top.

Ranged infantry having different roles make sense to me although it kinda seems pointless because if you have archers you're gonna use the archers no matter what ( this ain't total war were javelineers have limited ammo but have armor pierce or archers that counter other ranged infantry) but melee is melee cav, like if we give sword cav to ptol , mac and sel, nobody will make spear cav with these civs anymore. It will be like the prodromos/ hippikon thing in AOM , as the prodromos is so specilaized against cav that is worthless to use since hoplites do their job better and cheaper. I don't wish to see this happen again here.

What i don't understand is why there has to be a diference in roles , i mean there aren't many roles melee cav could have

"Pirrians" ? You mean the mollossian epirots surely but no way they are too close to macedon both culturally and strategy wise, maybe in the future could be a hero idk as he did rule macedon very briefly. The numidians are inserted in the carthage faction as well as phoenicians , i mean Tyre is know for the dye and being besieged like all the time.

Who ? The iberian fellow?

Cleo boots cav? Everyday is a school day i guess

Perhaps I'm exaggerating, I did a 4 man FFA with sneaky rams and companions.

Even my boy phillip synergizes better with the champ xbows and thracian swordsmen than with the companions. Meanwhile Gaul has the "superior cavalry" bonus that gives their cav 10% more attack.

well gameplay wise i prefer sword cav too but my love will always be shock cav. I agree that maharbaal's bonus is better period, seleucids have the extra upgrade but that is another investment on top of the first upgrade plus the cost of making champ cav in the first place (and the less efficient type of cav at that). Another thing the that upgrade also increases training time by 10% therefore you must also take the training time upgrade.

Thats boring . get maharbal and go nuts with merc cav