Light Cavalry and Heavy Cavalry... why?

[Beorhtric]

Can anyone here tell me what the difference between Heavy and Light Cavalry is in Civ VI? As far as I can tell there is no difference between Light Cavalry units and Heavy Cavalry units.

They're both fast units, both melee, they upgrade every other era and each upgrade is stronger than both the Heavy and Light cavalry units of previous eras. The role they fill/way they are utilised is identical.. so it seems rather redundant to have two categories for them.

Am I missing something here. (And no the Scythia unique doesn't count as something I am missing)

 

[KrikkitTwo]

They get different promotions
And they don't make each other obsolete (tank tech but no oil?..you can still build cavalry even if knights are obsolete)

Heavy cavalry also ignores ZOC (forget if light cav does)

 

[glaivemaster]

They offer different promotion paths, making them useful for different things as they upgrade. Light Cavalry get upgrades that make them faster and better at pillaging and flanking (especially against siege or ranged units), while Heavy Cavalry get promotions that make them better against fortified units and defending against ranged attacks. Light Cavalry are mobile, while Heavy Cavalry are heavy hitting.

It's much the same way that Melee and Anti Cavalry units are separated into two classes, or Ranged and Siege units, to give them different promotion paths and different bonuses.

 

[criZp]

They offer different promotion paths, making them useful for different things as they upgrade. Light Cavalry get upgrades that make them faster and better at pillaging and flanking (especially against siege or ranged units), while Heavy Cavalry get promotions that make them better against fortified units and defending against ranged attacks. Light Cavalry are mobile, while Heavy Cavalry are heavy hitting.

It's much the same way that Melee and Anti Cavalry units are separated into two classes, or Ranged and Siege units, to give them different promotion paths and different bonuses.

Heavy cavalry is mobile too, knight has 4 moves like the horsemen.

There desperately needs to be more units to fill in the upgrade holes, preferably each upgrade line should have one unit per era.

take a look at the promotion trees:

Heavy Cavalry promotions:
I Charge: +10 attack vs. fortified defender.
II Marauding: +7 Combat Strength vs. units in districts
III Armor Piercing: +7 Combat Strength again other heavy cavalry units.
I Barding: +7 defense vs. ranged attacks.
II Rout: +5 Combat Strength against damaged units.
III Reactive Armor: +7 Combat Strength when defending against heavy cavalry and anti-cavalry.
IV Breakthrough: +1 additional attack per turn if Movement allows.

Light Cavalry promotions:
I Caparison: +5 Combat Strength vs. anti-cavalry
II Depredation: Pillaging costs only 1 Movement point
III: Spiking the Guns: +7 Combat Strength vs. siege units.
I Coursers: +5 Combat Strength when attacking ranged and siege units.
II Double Envelopment: 2x flanking bonus.
III Pursuit: +1 Movement.
IV Escort Mobility: Formation units all inherit escort's Movement speed.

Only charge and breakthrough steer the heavy cav to a more specific role. While only Depredation and escort steer the light cav to a more specific role. The rest are generic strenght vs X class, or enhance the general cavalry strenght of mobility. You could easily merge them to 1 promotion tree and 1 unit class without problem.

 

[masda_gib]

On a side note: I like that trice-promoted Knights or even War-Carts can have Reactive Armor.

 

[glaivemaster]

Heavy cavalry is mobile too, knight has 4 moves like the horsemen.

There desperately needs to be more units to fill in the upgrade holes, preferably each upgrade line should have one unit per era.

take a look at the promotion trees:

Only charge and breakthrough steer the heavy cav to a more specific role. While only Depredation and escort steer the light cav to a more specific role. The rest are generic strenght vs X class, or enhance the general cavalry strenght of mobility. You could easily merge them to 1 promotion tree and 1 unit class without problem.

By "mobility" I didn't mean "movement points" I meant their ability to use the mobility. Light Cavalry are better placed to actually use their high movement by getting improved flanking bonuses, targeting ranged units, pillaging and of course escorting. Heavy Cavalry have 4 movement, but they don't use it for mobility, they're just fast melee units.

Note that I'm not saying the balance between them works, or that Light Cavalry's 'mobility' is particularly useful under the current iteration, but that's what the difference is supposed to be.

 

[Roxlimn]

They're different because of context. In the early game, the Horseman's 35 Strength is as strong as the Swordsman, and it's a commanding unit because of its strength and speed. If they could also get Barding, they'd be enormously strong all around. By the time Knights roll around, having a bunch of them with Barding is very good for "poking" into tiles that could get attacked by cities or whatnot.

 

[DJ_Tanner]

Heavy cavalry is mobile too, knight has 4 moves like the horsemen.

There desperately needs to be more units to fill in the upgrade holes, preferably each upgrade line should have one unit per era.

take a look at the promotion trees:

Heavy Cavalry promotions:
I Charge: +10 attack vs. fortified defender.
II Marauding: +7 Combat Strength vs. units in districts
III Armor Piercing: +7 Combat Strength again other heavy cavalry units.
I Barding: +7 defense vs. ranged attacks.
II Rout: +5 Combat Strength against damaged units.
III Reactive Armor: +7 Combat Strength when defending against heavy cavalry and anti-cavalry.
IV Breakthrough: +1 additional attack per turn if Movement allows.

Light Cavalry promotions:
I Caparison: +5 Combat Strength vs. anti-cavalry
II Depredation: Pillaging costs only 1 Movement point
III: Spiking the Guns: +7 Combat Strength vs. siege units.
I Coursers: +5 Combat Strength when attacking ranged and siege units.
II Double Envelopment: 2x flanking bonus.
III Pursuit: +1 Movement.
IV Escort Mobility: Formation units all inherit escort's Movement speed.

Only charge and breakthrough steer the heavy cav to a more specific role. While only Depredation and escort steer the light cav to a more specific role. The rest are generic strenght vs X class, or enhance the general cavalry strenght of mobility. You could easily merge them to 1 promotion tree and 1 unit class without problem.

I think those upgrade paths should make it pretty clear the differences between the two. Heavy Calvary is a fast moving front line attacker designed to stay alive and break through the lines, while the Light Calvary is a fast mover flanker, designed to attack the back lines and/or hit and run pillaging.

 

[criZp]

By "mobility" I didn't mean "movement points" I meant their ability to use the mobility. Light Cavalry are better placed to actually use their high movement by getting improved flanking bonuses, targeting ranged units, pillaging and of course escorting. Heavy Cavalry have 4 movement, but they don't use it for mobility, they're just fast melee units.

Note that I'm not saying the balance between them works, or that Light Cavalry's 'mobility' is particularly useful under the current iteration, but that's what the difference is supposed to be.

Yeah but they are just better at that because they arbitrarily gets promotions to that while heavy cav don't, and cavalry is generally good for flanking anyway due to the mobility. Nothing in the way of giving light cav promotions to heavy cav, they would be utilized just as well.

 

[criZp]

I think those upgrade paths should make it pretty clear the differences between the two. Heavy Calvary is a fast moving front line attacker designed to stay alive and break through the lines, while the Light Calvary is a fast mover flanker, designed to attack the back lines and/or hit and run pillaging.

You can make a promotion tree that does both just fine, and eliminate the huge upgrade gaps where units have to wait around for ages before they have proper use again

 

[EgonSpengler]

On a side note: I like that trice-promoted Knights or even War-Carts can have Reactive Armor.

I'm trying to imagine what that could be. Maybe they strap a light infantryman to the side?

 

[criZp]

Unified cavalry promotion tree idea:

I Charge: +10 attack vs. fortified defender.
II Rout: +5 Combat Strength against damaged units.
III Breakthrough: +1 additional attack per turn if Movement allows.
I Coursers: +5 Combat Strength when attacking ranged and siege units.
II Depredation: Pillaging costs only 1 Movement point
III Double Envelopment: 3x flanking bonus
IV Pursuit: +1 Movement

 

[LanguishViking]

I think the general idea with the unit kinds is to stagger them.

Ancient - Chariots
Classical - Horsemen > Chariots
Medieval - Knights > Horsemen
Renaissance - Cavalry > Knights
Industrial - Tanks > Cavalry
etc so you will not focus one unit type or all ages and hopefully the nature of combat varies across the ages

 

[criZp]

But light and heavy are essentially the same unit type except you can't upgrade from one to the other

You still build ranged units, and anticav/infantry for defense/frontline

I mean, are we pretending that horsemen upgrading to knights in civ 5 was any sort of problem?

 

[gunnergoz]

I prefer the present system since it more accurately reflects the different uses that cavalry (mobile forces) were tasked with and the different varieties of mobile forces that grew from those practices. Today they boil down to tanks and attack helicopters that are supported by armored infantry and mobile artillery. But historically it began with the foot soldier and the horse soldier. As the foot soldier grew more armored in time, the horse soldier went light or heavy - the former to scout and exploit breakthroughs and pursue, the latter to use shock effect in the attack with greater mobility than the armored foot soldier. A single line of horse never really made as much sense to me which is why I was very happy to see Civ VI correct this.

 

[Proteus]

It would be nice if heavy cavalry would get some early gunpowder era upgrade ... cuirassiers.
Those were stripped of most of their armor, but retained a heavy bulletproof breast/backplate (the cuirass) and helmet.
And used pistols and swords on horse (instead of the lance, the knights used)

They would be the correct heavy cavalry counterpart to the light cavalry (like US civil war era cavalry or Hussars)

 

[LanguishViking]

MOAR units are for dlc I assume.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

I think the general idea with the unit kinds is to stagger them.

Ancient - Chariots
Classical - Horsemen > Chariots
Medieval - Knights > Horsemen
Renaissance - Cavalry > Knights
Industrial - Tanks > Cavalry
etc so you will not focus one unit type or all ages and hopefully the nature of combat varies across the ages

Yes, precisely.
The intended effect is that you are forced to diversify your military, because if you focus too much on one type of unit, your military power will yo-yo between upgrades. The melee and anti-cav units are staggered in the same fashion for the same reason.

And certain UUs (the ones that don't replace standard units) are designed to fit in between the upgrades. Like the Rough Rider comes between the Knight and the Tank.

 

[Esperr]

I....didnt even realize there was supposed to be a distinction until I read this thread. I was wondering why knights didnt upgrade to cavalry, or cavalry into tanks but helicopters..? I assumed it was just a bug.

 

[Deggial]

You can make a promotion tree that does both just fine, and eliminate the huge upgrade gaps where units have to wait around for ages before they have proper use again

Sure. And you can make a promotion path that allows to unify both melee pathes (heavy and anti-cavalry) into one just as well.
Having two separate cavalry unit types and thus more diversity is a great addition to the game. Why solve an issue (lack of "in-between" units) by reverting a worthwhile change? Isn't it better to tackle the real problem and fill in the missing units instead?