How combat should work

[Ajidica]

I agree that some of my examples were odd, but I must disgress on English Dsmtd Knights and Cavalry of Charles Martel.
English Dsmtd Knights were the backbone of their army, if they werent their, the longbowmen would be slaughtered becasue the French cavalry directed their attacks agaisnt the knights becasue they were nobles and more likely to be considered a threat.
Charles Martels Cavalary I consider cavalry because they went from battle to battle on horses. Cavalry only means riding horses, not having to fight on them nescisarily.

On cavalry being better than infantry: in a one-to-one fight, that is undeniable, but shock cavalry are limited in numbers, militia are not. The Knights will eventualy loose due to mass of numbers.

Why are archers anti-cavalry units? With the exception of English Longbows, archers were very weak to cavalry, unless they can force the cavalry to flee, they are slaughtered in a charge.
In addition: If foot archers have composite bows, like the HA's, the foot archers would win becasue they have stability on their side and they can have larger bows. HA's were best against Heavy Infantry and Cavalry.

 

[Ahriman]

English Dsmtd Knights were the backbone of their army, if they werent their, the longbowmen would be slaughtered becasue the French cavalry directed their attacks agaisnt the knights becasue they were nobles and more likely to be considered a threat.

Agincourt: 5/6 archers, 1/6 dismounted men-at-arms.
Most of the men-at-arms were NOT nobles, only a fraction were, and these weren't primarily knights.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Agincourt

Charles Martels Cavalary I consider cavalry because they went from battle to battle on horses. Cavalry only means riding horses, not having to fight on them nescisarily.

The cavalry units in the mod that we are considering giving city attack penalties to are mostly lancers and knights. These are stirrups-using units whose strength is in the charge. If you're talking about mobile mounted infantry, thats an entirely different question.

On cavalry being better than infantry: in a one-to-one fight, that is undeniable, but shock cavalry are limited in numbers, militia are not. The Knights will eventualy loose due to mass of numbers.

I don't understand your point here; in the mod, you can have as many "light cavalry/lancer" units as swordsmen or spearmen units, and as many knights as pikemen regiments. A unit in civ represents a regiment, not a single soldier.
My point is that while a regiment of heavy cavalry may well crush a regiment of infantry, but if that regiment of cavalry dismounts they will probably lose badly to the same infantry unit.

Why are archers anti-cavalry units?

Archers are anti missile cavalry units. Historically, foot archers have always been the best counter to horse archers. Just realised that my replacement post had a typo, and said mounted instead of missile. The original long one did.

HA's were best against Heavy Infantry and Cavalry.

Right. The intention is for missile cav to get a bonus vs melee units. Not vs other mounted; mounted units can still perform relatively well against HAs because they are much more likely to be able to catch them than are infantry.

So: melee units are either sword/axemen (bonus vs melee) or spearmen/pikemen (bonus vs mounted/chariots) or halbards (hybrid, lower bonus vs both).
Archers are city defenders and hill defenders and get a bonus vs missile cavalry.
Some archers (crossbows, handgunners maybe?) also get bonus vs melee units.
Shock cavalry are anti-archer (and have high strength so also perform well against sword/axe melee or other non-spear units).
Missile cav get bonus vs melee units.
Chariots get bonus vs melee units.

Any maybe some shock cav/missile cav should also get bonus vs chariots.

 

[Ajidica]

Okay, I agree with the above points, I havent played the mod in a while and dont know what units are limited and such. One thing I have never understood is why chariots are so powerful. In almost every situation there is, cavalry would be a better choice than cavalry.

 

[Ahriman]

Okay, I agree with the above points, I havent played the mod in a while and dont know what units are limited and such. One thing I have never understood is why chariots are so powerful. In almost every situation there is, cavalry would be a better choice than cavalry.

This is a weird warhammer thing. In history, chariots are not really very effective and are only really used in societies that don't yet have saddles (let alone stirrups).
But in warhammer, many factions have powerful chariot units that are fast attack anti-infantry units. So the mod should reflect that, even though its a little whacked. Hence; fantasy mod in a semi-medieval setting.

 

[Ajidica]

I knew that it was a warhammer thing, it is just that it is so strange. In battle at least warhammer is somewhat accurate. I have no real objections to the units in the base concept. You have actualy played Fantasy Battles, I havent.