Ok, so we can all build praetorians or immortals and go bonk some heads. But has anyone figured out how to use numidian cavalry? I like Carthage's traits, and it has a great UB. The UU, however, is difficult to use, for me. You see, first of all, researching horseback riding takes an eternity. Not only that, but all you get out of it are strength 5 units that, unlike axemen, can't earn the CR promotion. Thus they are weaker than axemen against archers. Sure, if the AI was gaurding their cities with axes or swords the numidian cavalry would do a terrific job...but I just find that they die against archers too frequently. The standard ol swordsman seems to do a better city taking job. So...has anyone found uses for the numidian cavalry? Has anyone found a good strategy for them?

Use them for an early war to get some nice promotions. With a stable they can start with flanking 2-combat 1 (remember they get flanking 1 for free). Hannibal is charismatic so promotions come cheap.

Then after your first war these guys promote to MONSTER cavalry...

yeah, just after I posted I remembered they get flanking one...so even though they're weak, they have a chance to withdraw and fight another day.

They don't get countered as heavy by spears(come out with shock with stables) and can beat up on axemen making them perfect for a fast war against an opponent with metal units.

They were never meant to capture cities, you're using them incorrectly, It's like using a Stack of Dog Soldiers to attack a archer defended city. They're basically anti-melee units, use them to take out melee units and their obvious other ability to Flank.

They are pretty good at taking out cities in mp where people don't always use archers though...

They were never meant to capture cities, you're using them incorrectly, It's like using a Stack of Dog Soldiers to attack a archer defended city. They're basically anti-melee units, use them to take out melee units and their obvious other ability to Flank.

They are actually quite good for taking out pre-longbow cities. Give 60% of your num cavs flank II and use them in concentrated manner to soften up defence. With flank II it means you (1) at most will only lose half of these suicide bombers; (2) because you're not suceptible to first strikes you will very likely injure the defenders. Since they are 2-movement units it mean you can launch a surprise attack without giving your opponent too much time to whip defenders. Just try to do it as early as possible to avoid seeing too many cities with wall or 40% cultural defence.

I think NC are very strong units. They don't just start with flanking 1, they also get a base withdrawal of 20% compared to the HA's 10%. This means that with a single promotion, you have a unit that survives 50% of the time in an attack no matter how bad the odds are.

With a built in 50% against melee, spears are not so fearsome anymore, and axes and swords fall before them in great #s. They are like early mobile crossbows.

I find the Numidian Cavalry to be excellent at taking cities, and I would rather have them than axes or swords. The only unit that really counters them is a Horse Archer.

Combine this unit with spies to drop city defenses, and you can roll over an opponent extremely quickly.

The bonus against melee units contradicts the withdrawel chance. The better the odds of wining the worser the odds of withdrawing.


When attacking I prefer to emphasie their withdrawel chance first by sending the flanking 2 promoted units to attack cities with defence bounses without using seige weapons. The bonus against melee is usually useless against cites with defence bonuses. This garantees they will lose and likley withdraw. This attack softens the enemy up while costing me few if any casulties. Then i deploy the shock promoted units for the purpose of actually winning.

When attacking I prefer to emphasie their withdrawel chance first by sending the flanking 2 promoted units to attack cities with defence bounses without using seige weapons. The bonus against melee is usually useless against cites with defence bonuses. This garantees they will lose and likley withdraw. This attack softens the enemy up while costing me few if any casulties. Then i deploy the shock promoted units for the purpose of actually winning.


:thumbsup:

Numidian Calvary are actually one of those rare examples of something that doesn't look too good on paper, but in the game, they are awesome. When every single one of your attacking units has at least a 50% chance to live and you have a Medic III GG right on top of them, you feel like the Hunnic tribes marching on Europe. Also, with a stable you will get an additional .5 strength making a great unit even greater. Overall, with a nice trait synergy of Cha/Fin, a lucrative extra trade route from the Cothon, and the awesome NC, Carthage is one of the best civilizations in the game IMO.

Can't seem to get the withdrawal chance through my head.

When they have a higher chance of winning they have a lower chance of withdrawing. Does this mean they don't have a 50% chance of withdrawing every time?

Can't seem to get the withdrawal chance through my head.

When they have a higher chance of winning they have a lower chance of withdrawing. Does this mean they don't have a 50% chance of withdrawing every time?

They have a 50% chance of withdrawing when they lose the battle. The displayed odds of withdrawl also take into account the possibility that the unit will win, which detracts from the withdrawl chance because the unit won't withdraw from a battle that it wins.

The displayed withdrawl chance is the probability that the unit will both lose the battle and withdraw.

Right, so 80% chance of winning 20% withdrawal would mean.

80% chance of winning the fight.

20% chance of losing and withdrawing to fight another day?

You don't retreat if you win. If your unit is about to die, chance for withdrawal.

Oh, and chariots have 10%, horse archers have 20% or whatever.

thanks for the help/ideas, guys

TRJS:
Right, so 80% chance of winning 20% withdrawal would mean.

80% chance of winning the fight.

20% chance of losing and withdrawing to fight another day?

That 80%/20% example would only occur if a unit had a 100% withdrawal chance.

If a unit has X% chance of winning a battle and Y% chance of withdrawing, then,

Actual withdrawal chance = (100 - X)*Y/100

So if a unit has an 80% chance of winning a battle and a natural 20% withdrawal rate;

Actual withdrawal chance = (100 - 80)*20/100 = 4%

That 80%/20% example would only occur if a unit had a 100% withdrawal chance.

If a unit has X% chance of winning a battle and Y% chance of withdrawing, then,

Actual withdrawal chance = (100 - X)*Y/100

So if a unit has an 80% chance of winning a battle and a natural 20% withdrawal rate;

Actual withdrawal chance = (100 - 80)*20/100 = 4%

So this means that each battle they would have 80% chance of winning and 4% chance of withdrawing so 16% chance of dying?

Almost getting this.

that's it. Withdraws apply only if the unit would die, so of course, the withdrawal rate decreases when the dying rate decreases. But all in all, the survival rate increases.

I always give them Flanking 2.
After that the 1s I use as scouts get the reduced movement cost and Sentry promotions, the battlefield cavalry get Combat I and Shock.
Given that you need horses and quite a few techs to get them I don't usually get them early enough to use them for a rush strategy but they are still a pretty useful unit IMO.

Numidians are great units, very flexible (+3 promotions with stable)
On the offense, I usually mix them with CR-swords (with their withdrawl chances they make the first attacks after cats or spies, protect the stack against melee, can pillage and finish off the last defenders. Additional, they take weaker cities on their own fast.)
On defense, I've taken out entire enemy city-attack stacks with them.

Yeah, it's just that horseback riding takes an eternity to research. It takes even longer than iron working, which is already too slow for a fast rush.

HBR is an annoying tech to research, but in this case, and with Mongolia, I think it is worth it. Plus HBR opens up war elephants so if you have ivory then it's even more worth it.

Even with other civs, HBR does still fulfill a niche role. For example, that powerful neighbor you know is going to attack eventually has started building catapults really early...

And if you don't happen to have metals, then it's an improvement over your archer/chariot force.

And, of course, stables are nifty. :)


I'm curious if horse archer/swordsmen are more efficient early than chariot/swordsmen. I'll have to test it sometime.

I think that horse archers in general get a bad rap. They no longer have their -10% city attack penalty that they had in warlords. And fast moving units are :king: for ending wars quickly and decisively. With stables you can have a mix of flanking 2 and combat 1/shock or combat 2 units to take out cities quick. Because they're fast moving you can plan to pillage metals quickly and efficiently thus denying your opponent the ability to whip spears.

Frankly, I think I need to plan to beeline HBR more often if I have horses and a close enough neighbour...

So this means that each battle they would have 80% chance of winning and 4% chance of withdrawing so 16% chance of dying?

Almost getting this.

I suppose that 4% doesn't sound too impressive. But imagine a Numid Cav with flanking II (50% withdrawal chance) in a battle where it has just a 2% chance of winning. There would be a 49% chance it would withdraw, and it would have a 51% chance of surviving!

Finally someone pays respect to (in my opinion) best nation in CIV (after Huayna Capac of course). Numidian Mercenaries are now great with removed weird -10% city attack and with really powerful Flanking promotion. Sacrificing 4-5 units (well, 50% withdrawal makes that it's not a real sacrifice) can easily wipe 10-20 cats in enemy stack. Helps a LOT in multiplayer and to deal with annoying zerg rushers like Montezuma.

Only problem is to get that damned HBR to make use of it. Basically, rush like mad for commerce. Financial cottages next to river (+3:commerce: straight away) and coastal seafood are Your best friends, not to mention any gold/silver/gems.
After reaching HBR one needs a proper hammer-heavy city and with a bit of preparations nice rush can be easily pulled. I've wiped Charlemagne in one of my games way before he could get his precious landsknechts :p

They are fast, great anti-melee, can calmly face spears and with Charismatic they upgrade to really kick-ass Knights/Cavalry/Gunships :rockon: :ar15:

I think that horse archers in general get a bad rap.
I'm beginning to agree. I recently did a silly experiment (assuming I have my combat simulator working). Against City Guardian II archers, a pure 2 promotion each horse archer army is significantly better than a pure city raider 2 swordsman army in terms of the hammer cost of the units you lose. Even using the optimal mix of swordsmen and horse archers was only a miniscule improvement over pure horse archers!

(At least, when the cities have 40% or 60% cultural defense and aren't on a hill)

The thing is some flanking 2 harchers will withdraw when they lose. CR1 swords will not. Saves you some significant hammers right there. And if the cultural defenses aren't super high you can take cities without siege meaning you can whip through an enemy empire very fast. If you're worried about the capital, use harchers to take the rest of the cities and one stack of catas + harchers/swords to take the capital. This could be done in two wars. However, I would normally hit the capital first if possible, accept my losses and then take the remaining cities more easily. Hopefully enough would withdraw that the losses would be acceptable.

Flanking 2 iirc also removes vulnerability to first strikes which is big when going up against archers.

With the loss of the -10% when attacking cities I've been rethinking HAs.

In particular I had one brutally nasty game with one of the Khans, can't recall who. I tightly settled three cities, with horses in one of them, and focussed them on production. After getting Gers in each I proceeded to eat the entire continent with keshiks.

The fact that they were keshiks did make it a bit faster, but since keshiks and HAs did speed them up a bit. But I don't think the additional first strike would have substantially changed what happened if I'd been any other leader spamming stabled HAs.

So while I admit the fact that it was keshiks did influence what happened, all in all that game has made me seriously re-consider the place of horse-archers in my game-plan. Since that game I've used them to nasty effect a few times, though I still think they are a bit too slow on the research side to use for a rush. (chariot rushes I can still get behind though)

-abs

Well, they don't have to be your rush unit of choice. If you want to rush, you can use chariots. But if you are able to build some cities peacefully first--and more importantly to get your econ ready to absorb the war hit--then sending in 20-30 horse archers to wipe out an opponent can be pretty powerful imo. Just start with the mature cities first and then you can easily take out the weaker cities.

The thing is some flanking 2 harchers will withdraw when they lose. CR1 swords will not. Saves you some significant hammers right there.
Right; the question is if the survivability makes up for the lack of strength. I expected HA / swordsmen combo to be better against the archers than pure swordsmen, but I didn't expect pure HA to be nearly as good. (Nor did I expect it to be so much better than chariot/swordsmen)

(And I was testing CR2 swordsmen!)

All great talk about the cathagerian UU. I agree with them all.

One point not mentioned. They are killer city defense unit. AI brings a stack and they are great to attack it as it apporaches, iff you have enough. Combat I, shock willsurvive even against Spears. Flanking II allows the unit to survive a losing attack and stay within the city. If it wins it's within the city with a fast promotion. All wins against axes/swords will result in collateral damage to catapults/trebs.

The downside of Numidan archers as they are more succeptible to archery and mounted units. Crossbow can stop all Cathaginian units short of knights.

The stable building really makes a huge difference for the first war if you can get HAs early in the game since usually you're not going to get two promotions that early on unless you're aggressive.
After the first war you usually get a great general or two that will take care of this, but having two promotions right away for the first war can be the difference in succeeding and failing.
The 2 movement points can also be huge since it will bring your army to the enemy much faster unless they're close by and you can always fall back and pillage effectively if the resistance is to fierce. Just don't mess with the Mayans or Zulu!

All great talk about the cathagerian UU. I agree with them all.

One point not mentioned. They are killer city defense unit. AI brings a stack and they are great to attack it as it apporaches, iff you have enough. Combat I, shock willsurvive even against Spears. Flanking II allows the unit to survive a losing attack and stay within the city. If it wins it's within the city with a fast promotion. All wins against axes/swords will result in collateral damage to catapults/trebs.

The downside of Numidan archers as they are more succeptible to archery and mounted units. Crossbow can stop all Cathaginian units short of knights.

Well they're immune to First Strikes so archers aren't that great against them. They're around quite a bit earlier than crossbows too. Against cavalry its great if you can mix some elephants in with them.

Well they're immune to First Strikes so archers aren't that great against them. They're around quite a bit earlier than crossbows too. Against cavalry its great if you can mix some elephants in with them.

I was thinking of crossbows and longbows which has base 6 strength. HA typically match strightup with those units but the carthagineans are the only civilization with a weakness to them.

I agree archers stink against them and machinery is later. Fuedalsim come along faster in BTS than Warlords though.

A lot of people have brought up many good points, and I myself have found Numidian cavalry to be extremely useful and quite underrated.

To add to all this, it's always worth remembering that Hannibal is a great leader. Financial and Charismatic is an excellent trait combination, since they synergize so well. I've been earning some very nice domination/conquest wins with Hannibal.

I just thought I'd add my 2cents on the Numidian Cavalry. I'd always underestimated them in my previous games with Hannibal.

Then I started my first monarch game recently as Hannibal on an archipelago map. I Got a nice capital with gems and seafood. Then to my dismay I discovered I shared a small continent with Boudica then to compound my difficulties I had no copper or iron, so I beelined HBR since I did have horses. I managed to completely wipe her out before she was too much of a threat with only numidian cavalry archers and eventually catapults so I could take down her capital which had founded Buddhism.

I used a mix of flanking 2/combat 1 numidians with shock numidians, in about a 60/40 mix. Essentially, they won the game for me, I then teched well, built a large navy, settled the best islands and got a trade economy going to win the space race victory. So now I think they're a great UU, no praetorian or cataphract by any means but good nonetheless, just more situational.

I was thinking of crossbows and longbows which has base 6 strength. HA typically match strightup with those units but the carthagineans are the only civilization with a weakness to them.

I agree archers stink against them and machinery is later. Fuedalsim come along faster in BTS than Warlords though.

Ah, I'm stuck with Warloads unless my kids buy me BtS for Xmas.
I agree that by the medeval period they're less useful but they have a reasonably long period they are useful in. I've had games when War Chariots and Immortals were obselete before I got horses.

After reading some more posts here I decided to do a little testing with Keshiks to see how effective/useful flanking 2 would be. So far I'm not overly impressed. First of all, do you get the withdrawal chance even when defending? Do you get it if you're fortified? I suspect not after losing almost a dozen flanking 2 units wo getting a single withdrawal on the defense but maybe I've just been extremely unlucky. Ironically I'm at war with Shaka, and this just after I warned about using HAs against him, but it's just a test game anyhow.

In reply to the previous post, no HA's (or any unit that can withdraw for that matter) can't withdraw while they are defendeing. When others say that they are excellent defenders, they are referring to the NC's ability to do extra damage to melee and catapults, the primary medium of any invasion force. Even spears don't offer that good a defence against NC's, and in some cases, it's 50/50. Also, the NC's high withdrawal chance and 2 movement points allow it to attack a stack in friendly lands and then move a turn away from the stack, preventing any sort of counterattacks.

Hope that clears up any misconceptions.

Are horse archers better than swords versus weaker cities, that is, say cg1 and at most 20% culture?

imo yes...

In reply to the previous post, no HA's (or any unit that can withdraw for that matter) can't withdraw while they are defendeing. When others say that they are excellent defenders, they are referring to the NC's ability to do extra damage to melee and catapults, the primary medium of any invasion force. Even spears don't offer that good a defence against NC's, and in some cases, it's 50/50. Also, the NC's high withdrawal chance and 2 movement points allow it to attack a stack in friendly lands and then move a turn away from the stack, preventing any sort of counterattacks.

Hope that clears up any misconceptions.

Thankyou. It wasn't so much a misconception about this point as ordinary ignorance from never using the promotion, I didn't know if they could use the ability on defence on top of their good "defensive or softening" attacking capabilities. Of course impis are not the loveliest sight for ponies..

One point not mentioned. They are killer city defense unit. AI brings a stack and they are great to attack it as it apporaches
post#21 ;)

They are a great UU but the Mongolian Keshik is better IMO (and also has Ger as a UB)

Are horse archers better than swords versus weaker cities, that is, say cg1 and at most 20% culture?
If your cities are producing City Raider II swordsmen, then swords are cheaper. But not if you're producing City Raider I.

City Raider 1 swords cost 16.23 hammers to kill the archer
City Raider 2 swords cost 12.28 hammers to kill the archer
Combat 2 horses cost 12.70 hammers to kill the archer

(Also using Flanking 2 horses is no help)
(I haven't tried to quantify the value of promoting your CR1 swordsmen)

Because of stables, horses will always have a leg up in terms of getting to that next promotion. That is big imo.

Unfortunately, you have to build the stables first. Stables cost hammers - there's no good way of figuring that into the hammer cost of capturing cities. If you are building large numbers of horse archers, you probably have to build a stable in more than one or two cities. Building stables also delays your offensive, which can lead to greater hammer cost.

Of course, all of the above has counter arguments, many of which have already been made. For instance, having to build stables may delay an offensive, but the offensive will probably go more quickly once it starts.

It is pretty easy to whip/chop out a stable if you plan for it and you only really need 2 early on. 1 in the capital (high production) and 1 in your military city (high production).