New Unit: Macedonian Companion Horseman
- Thread starter Kryten
- Start date
nonnob3
CHECKMATE!
Originally posted by Kryten
To my old pal nonnob (love that name),
Watcha matey
So, the rumours were untrue....
....there was no alien abduction and the coffin was empty!
(You have just reminded me: I have forgotten about those Wehrmacht multi-figure units that I had promised you.
Ill knock them out this weekend....I promise.)
Thanks for remembering me buddy!
I know your quite busy in creating wonderful ancient units.I can't wait til this week-end to see the MF Wehrmacht!
.........Oooops... I guess I we have revealed the "Surprise" that I promised for TRT ...
... and yes, the Alliens just missed me, and "The Death Ghost" changed his mind.
god_money
Prince
Originally posted by nonnob3
I can't wait til this week-end to see the MF Wehrmacht!
JOY! ... and a belated welcome back.
Kudos, Kryten,... an excellent unit and a most helpful chart.
If only I had the ambition and knowledge to replicate the chart
for other civs.
Kryten
Smeee heeeeed
Actually, no. The Cataphractari were not guard units (in the sense that guard units are the one of two elite units that are for guarding the emperor/king). Almost ALL cavalry units of just about EVERY army were considered to be "the most prestigious component of the army"....but many nations also had some elite guard units in addition.
Anyway, we have to work within the limitations of the game I'm afraid.
Companions were not around at the end of the ancient period. They disappeared well before the Middle Ages. And they only way to do that in Civ3 is to have them become obsolete and upgraded to something else.
Since the Seleucid Persians upgraded their Companions to cataphracts, it seemed logical to do the same.
As for the Republic, rather than answer you here and be told off for being 'off topic' (can you be off topic in a thread you have started?.....let's not find out!
), I wonder if you would like to join me in the 'History Forum'.We can then give this subject a sound good thrashing.
Kryten
Smeee heeeeed
Originally posted by mrtn
I would be arguing for the 3-1-1 archer, if it wasn't for the fact that I'd rather argue for the 1-3-1 archer.
I do know what you mean, and believe it or not, I do agree with you.
Back in the good old Civ1 & 2 days....when men were men and woman were grateful....all units only had an attack factor and a defence factor.
Some units attacked with spears, some with swords, and some with slings/javelins/bows.
It's still the same in Civ3.....a Longbowman's attack of 4 is better than the Archer's 2 because they were better at killing the enemy.
But with Civ3 we have a new ability.....the defensive bombarment.
I see this as one unit using it's missiles to SUPPORT another unit in it's stack (what the modern military calls "combined arms mutual fire support").
Traditionally, in every period, this has always been the role of light skirmishers, whether they be Republican Roman Velites, Norman Shortbowmen, or Napoleonic Light Infantry
(Although some heavy troops, such as the rear ranks of the Persian Immortals, were also equipped with missile weapons. But they were not specialized skirmishers, whos only job was to shoot).
But as you know, Civ3 is not a wargame (shame!), and in order to give these skirmishes some sort of OFFENSIVE ability, they have to have an attack factor.
Now I would be the first person to admit that it is not perfect.
Of course light skirmishers would not want to get involved with a close quarter hand-to-hand standup fight.
They would get slaughtered!
But, if you think of their attack factor as representing their offensive ability, their defence factor as representing their weak armour, and their defensive bombardment as their ability to support their heavier neighbours, it seems to work quite well.
(Anyway, it's the best we can do.
"We have to work within the limitations of the game I'm afraid".
)
Arne
King
Kryten, like all of your units this is a great one again. I like the copy and paste units much more than most 3D units, becouse they fits much better in the game. 
Penguin-Camel
Camel-Penguin
I would make it so that a units attack would be the chances of it inflicting damage on the enemy and a units defese is how good he can block an attack. That way it doesnt matter who is attacking and a unit will be equally strong in every battle.
Costa e Silva
Caudilho
Amazing unit!!!
Until now play with greeks are "unperfect".
Only one thing: There's a little "centered" problem or i have bad luck?
How about made some Numidian Horseman to Hannibal have his cavalry too!!!
Until now play with greeks are "unperfect".
Only one thing: There's a little "centered" problem or i have bad luck?
How about made some Numidian Horseman to Hannibal have his cavalry too!!!
The Last Conformist
Irresistibly Attractive
Kryten, a li'l historical question, with attendant suggestion for more work for you:
As you say, a full-length lance is great for a charge, but too unwieldy to be effectively used in a dense melee. Medieval knights carried swords, daggers, horseman's hammers et sim to fall back on once lances were broken, lost or simply made impractical - surely the Companions too must have had some sort of back-up weapons?
What I'm getting at, is that you could make a second attack animation with a shortsword or whatever would be appropriate, and have the Companion, Guerilla-style, first thrust with the lance and then resort to hacking with the sword.
As you say, a full-length lance is great for a charge, but too unwieldy to be effectively used in a dense melee. Medieval knights carried swords, daggers, horseman's hammers et sim to fall back on once lances were broken, lost or simply made impractical - surely the Companions too must have had some sort of back-up weapons?
What I'm getting at, is that you could make a second attack animation with a shortsword or whatever would be appropriate, and have the Companion, Guerilla-style, first thrust with the lance and then resort to hacking with the sword.
Kryten
Smeee heeeeed
Oops! 
Costa e Silva & Madeira were quite right....the original WAS centred incorrectly!
I have fixed it and the CORRECT version is now in the first post.
Well, to quote from the Roman historian Arrian:-
"At the battle of the river Granicus, Alexander's lance was broken. He called on Aretis, one of his grooms, for another, but Aretis was himself in difficulties for the same reason, though still fighting gallanty with the remaing half of his weapon. Showing it to Alexander, he called out to him to ask someone else, and Demaratus the Corinthian, one of Alexander's personal bodyguard, gave him his lance. The fresh weapon in hand, he caught sight of Mithridates, Darius' son-in-law, struck him in the face, and hurled him to the ground.
Now Spithridates had his sword raised, ready for a blow at Alexander from behind; but Cleitus, son of Dropidas, was too quick for him, and severed his shoulder sword and all."
From this account we can see that Alexander prefered to have another lance rather than draw his sword, and that Aretis would sooner fight on with a broken lance than draw his own sword.
However, Cleitus couldn't have severed an arm with a lance, so must have used a sword himself.
So I think I'll leave it as it is, although one day I would like to add a lance to the Civ3 Knight for the attack 'A' just as you suggested.
(In the week or two it would take me to remove the lance and add a sword, I could make a new unit....such as the Numidian Horseman that Costa e Silva reminded me about, which has been temporarily put on hold while I finish another important project)
Costa e Silva & Madeira were quite right....the original WAS centred incorrectly!
I have fixed it and the CORRECT version is now in the first post.
Well, to quote from the Roman historian Arrian:-
"At the battle of the river Granicus, Alexander's lance was broken. He called on Aretis, one of his grooms, for another, but Aretis was himself in difficulties for the same reason, though still fighting gallanty with the remaing half of his weapon. Showing it to Alexander, he called out to him to ask someone else, and Demaratus the Corinthian, one of Alexander's personal bodyguard, gave him his lance. The fresh weapon in hand, he caught sight of Mithridates, Darius' son-in-law, struck him in the face, and hurled him to the ground.
Now Spithridates had his sword raised, ready for a blow at Alexander from behind; but Cleitus, son of Dropidas, was too quick for him, and severed his shoulder sword and all."
From this account we can see that Alexander prefered to have another lance rather than draw his sword, and that Aretis would sooner fight on with a broken lance than draw his own sword.
However, Cleitus couldn't have severed an arm with a lance, so must have used a sword himself.
So I think I'll leave it as it is, although one day I would like to add a lance to the Civ3 Knight for the attack 'A' just as you suggested.
(In the week or two it would take me to remove the lance and add a sword, I could make a new unit....such as the Numidian Horseman that Costa e Silva reminded me about, which has been temporarily put on hold while I finish another important project)
The Last Conformist
Irresistibly Attractive
OK. I can only say I'm a bit surprised by the Macedonians' apparent preferences.
A lance animation for the Knight would be wonderful.
A lance animation for the Knight would be wonderful.
god_money
Prince
Interesting... thanks for that bit of history.
And,... thanks for something to look forward to;
Carthage, for some reason, is one civilization that has always
fascinated me. Unfortunetly they're one of the most factually
elusive civilizations I've come across, as well as one with the
few units made here,... so cheers and good luck and thanks for
taking on such a project.
And,... thanks for something to look forward to;
Carthage, for some reason, is one civilization that has always
fascinated me. Unfortunetly they're one of the most factually
elusive civilizations I've come across, as well as one with the
few units made here,... so cheers and good luck and thanks for
taking on such a project.
Similar threads
