Boar Rider's with polearms

We’ve moved over to the paradox forums. Please come visit us there to discuss:
You can still read the collective wisdom - and lolz - of the community here, but posting is no longer possible.

Home Forums Age of Wonders 3 Discussions Boar Rider's with polearms

This topic contains 99 replies, has 15 voices, and was last updated by  Draxynnic 7 years, 6 months ago.

Viewing 30 posts - 1 through 30 (of 100 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #134016

    HI everybody and sorry to open another thread on that. I know it has been discusssed alot already. (here just some results of the forum search)



    Personally I liked the boar rider and polearm combination. And mayvbe it has been just my wishing imagination but I thought that this had been implemented already. At least with the pikesquare ability. Now, I just installed golden relams a few weeks ago and found the boar riders lacking polearm. There is nothing of this in the patch description.

    SO was this all my mad imagination, is it a bug or did boar rider polearms actually disappear intentionally?!?!

    Thanks to everybody who can help!

    #134017

    Boar Riders never had polearm. Black Knights are the ones with it.

    #134019

    Ok thanks! Then it was just me wishing they had!

    Saying this: +1 for boar rider with polearms! (or black knights without 😉

    #134025

    Gloweye
    Member

    Nah, it’s fine as is – dwarves are already a really strong pick with very defensive units(1 Def, 1 Res bonus, bit resistance, very few disliked terrains.(1 dilike, 1 hate)). No need for them ugly suckers to get even stronger. (and no need to disadvantage the poor orcs..who have -1 Res. )

    #134059

    Epaminondas
    Member

    I prefer to see unit abilities/characteristics match the graphics though – and I don’t think it would over-power the Dwarves really.

    #134138

    I prefer to see unit abilities/characteristics match the graphics though – and I don’t think it would over-power the Dwarves really.

    They’d be really super duper powerful: black knights are countered by low resistance and no immunities, whereas dwarf boar riders have extra defense, resistance, poison resistance, cave crawling, night vision, armored, and mountaineering.

    So that means, on a normal map with underground, that they are faster than other cavalry (with better vision) for roughly half the important parts (the underground and surface mountains).

    Dreadnoughts can already increase their defense, decrease their costs, and give them pistols. Warlords can up their hp and give them martial arts.

    If you added pole arm, then that would significantly reduce the utility of flying units all around, and t-3 cavalry.

    #134198

    Old idea, give them hammers…

    #134218

    Bouh
    Member

    This idea that all spears should give pole arm…

    #134229

    Smaug3
    Member

    This idea that all spears should give pole arm…

    Actually, those dwarves are carrying halberds, not spears.

    #134258

    Epaminondas
    Member

    Actually, those dwarves are carrying halberds, not spears.

    Indeed – which is why people are talking about this particular unit more.

    #134262

    hilfazer
    Member

    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Epaminondas wrote:</div>
    I prefer to see unit abilities/characteristics match the graphics though – and I don’t think it would over-power the Dwarves really.

    They’d be really super duper powerful: black knights are countered by low resistance and no immunities, whereas dwarf boar riders have extra defense, resistance, poison resistance, cave crawling, night vision, armored, and mountaineering.

    So that means, on a normal map with underground, that they are faster than other cavalry (with better vision) for roughly half the important parts (the underground and surface mountains).

    Dreadnoughts can already increase their defense, decrease their costs, and give them pistols. Warlords can up their hp and give them martial arts.

    If you added pole arm, then that would significantly reduce the utility of flying units all around, and t-3 cavalry.

    Don’t be forgetting their 32 MP – lower than all other cavalry units. It’s as much as Shock Trooper has, who is supposed to be heavy infantry. With so little MP they fail at being cavalry.

    #134264

    Epaminondas
    Member

    They’d be really super duper powerful: black knights are countered by low resistance and no immunities, whereas dwarf boar riders have extra defense, resistance, poison resistance, cave crawling, night vision, armored, and mountaineering.

    So that means, on a normal map with underground, that they are faster than other cavalry (with better vision) for roughly half the important parts (the underground and surface mountains).

    Dreadnoughts can already increase their defense, decrease their costs, and give them pistols. Warlords can up their hp and give them martial arts.

    If you added pole arm, then that would significantly reduce the utility of flying units all around, and t-3 cavalry.

    I understand that they will be the strongest T2 racial cavalry then. Nonetheless, someone has to be the strongest – and the least strongest – and I think that there is a fairness/balance in letting the slowest race (and a race without a T3 cavalry) have the strongest racial T2 cavalry. In fact, Orcs – which currently has the strongest T2 racial cavalry – is the only other race without a T3 racial cavalry.

    And I think your concern about them displacing flying units or T3 is way overdrawn. They are still T2 units with commensurate stat deficiencies – and they are slower than the default cavalry (in the Dwarf fashion).

    #134270

    Harleyquin14
    Member

    The big selling point for the black knights is their polearm. If the dwarven cavalry were given the same advantage, would anyone bother with the black knight now that there’s a stronger package available (assuming a town that can produce it exists on the map)?

    The boar riders are strong enough as it is, giving them polearm gives them so much more than the rest of the cavalry for 10% extra cost that the movement penalty compared to other cavalry becomes trivial (it’s not 36mp, but if you have 32 that’s still plenty for rapid reaction).

    #134272

    Epaminondas
    Member

    The big selling point for the black knights is their polearm. If the dwarven cavalry were given the same advantage, would anyone bother with the black knight now that there’s a stronger package available (assuming a town that can produce it exists on the map)?

    As you yourself acknowledge, not all maps/settings have alternative racial choices.

    Further, there are quite a few racial units that are clearly superior over its racial alternatives. So we are not breaking the normal paradigm here. Using your brand of logic: Why would anyone train non-Elf archer, for instance, if available? Besides, Orc T2 racial cavalry is still better in some respects: greater damage, movement, raw HPs, etc.

    The boar riders are strong enough as it is, giving them polearm gives them so much more than the rest of the cavalry for 10% extra cost that the movement penalty compared to other cavalry becomes trivial (it’s not 36mp, but if you have 32 that’s still plenty for rapid reaction).

    I simply cannot agree with this sentence.

    #134275

    Harleyquin14
    Member

    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Harleyquin14 wrote:</div>
    The big selling point for the black knights is their polearm. If the dwarven cavalry were given the same advantage, would anyone bother with the black knight now that there’s a stronger package available (assuming a town that can produce it exists on the map)?

    As you yourself acknowledge, not all maps/settings have alternative racial choices.

    Further, there are quite a few racial units that are clearly superior over its racial alternatives. So we are not breaking the normal paradigm here. Using your brand of logic: Why would anyone train non-Elf archer, for instance, if available? Besides, Orc T2 racial cavalry is still better in some respects: greater damage, movement, raw HPs, etc.

    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Harleyquin14 wrote:</div>
    The boar riders are strong enough as it is, giving them polearm gives them so much more than the rest of the cavalry for 10% extra cost that the movement penalty compared to other cavalry becomes trivial (it’s not 36mp, but if you have 32 that’s still plenty for rapid reaction).

    I simply cannot agree with this sentence.

    Give the dwarven cavalry that polearm, and the black knights lose straight away to the dwarven cavalry. Considering the orcs don’t have a lot going against dwarves at the higher tiers (what with everyone going on about the superiority of firstborn to everything else), orcs have little choice but to rush the dwarves early to stand a fighting chance since tier 2 onwards is a lost cause.

    I don’t train elven longbows all the time even if I had the option, since cost dictates I go for mosquito shooters when available especially early on when I can’t crank out longbows.

    You might not agree with my previous sentence, but there’s no reason why I can’t do the same with your insistence that unit graphics match up with their properties.

    #134276

    Epaminondas
    Member

    You might not agree with my previous sentence, but there’s no reason why I can’t do the same with your insistence that unit graphics match up with their properties.

    No, I never denied you the right to do so. We will simply agree to disagree – after having aired our reasons, there really is nothing more to add on our part, and to do so would either 1) bore people with re-hashes or 2) get ad hominem out of frustration, etc.

    #134281

    Bouh
    Member

    Further, there are quite a few racial units that are clearly superior over its racial alternatives. So we are not breaking the normal paradigm here.

    The difference is that the unit we are talking here (the boar rider) is already among the strong ones. Boar rider only have 3hp less than orc black knight, one more armor, 3 (!) more resistance, one less damage. Boar rider is almost a T3 unit actualy.

    And just because the graphics is a hallberd (not a long one BTW) doesn’t mean the unit should have pole arm. A two metters hallberd is not a four metters lance/pike/whatever. Besides, in the french description they carry a poleaxe and not a hallberd.

    Because going in this direction why not giving polearm to greatswordmen too ? A great sword can easily serve as pike too because the only difference with a pike is that it has cutting edges, and their greatswords are probably longer than these dwarves pole axes.

    So, the boar rider doesn’t need pole arm ability, and the graphics don’t justify it. Even more, giving them polearm could make them overpowered. I think they should not receive anything.

    #134291

    Epaminondas
    Member

    Boar rider is almost a T3 unit actualy.

    I stopped here. Let’s step back and think about this. Compare the Boar Rider with both Human Cavalry (a T2) and a Knight (a T3).

    Boar Rider has 57 HP, 13 Def, 10 Res, and 12 Dam.

    Cavalry has 55 HP, 12 Def, 9 Res, and 12 Dam.
    Knight has 70 HP, 13 Def, 11 Res, and 16 Dam.

    So you propose that the Boar Rider stats are closer to the Knight’s than the Cavalry’s? (And you outright ignore the all-important movement deficit that the Boar Rider suffers from anyways.)

    As usual, your posts leave me with three possibilities:

    1. You lack sufficient capacities for logic.

    OR

    2. You lack sufficient English to communicate your ideas intelligibly in English.

    OR (most likely)

    3. You are a troll.

    None of these three possibilities – or any combinations thereof – encourages me to take you seriously.

    #134298

    Epaminondas
    Member

    Anyways, regarding this bit, which was what I was originally going to respond to before I re-read and saw your silly “Boar Rider is a T3 equivalent” comment:

    And just because the graphics is a hallberd (not a long one BTW) doesn’t mean the unit should have pole arm. A two metters hallberd is not a four metters lance/pike/whatever. Besides, in the french description they carry a poleaxe and not a hallberd.

    Because going in this direction why not giving polearm to greatswordmen too ? A great sword can easily serve as pike too because the only difference with a pike is that it has cutting edges, and their greatswords are probably longer than these dwarves pole axes.

    So, the boar rider doesn’t need pole arm ability, and the graphics don’t justify it.

    There is a simple, ready answer: Two-handed greatswords were not used primarily as anti-cavalry weapons the way halberds were (save some highly contested – perhaps even dubious – evidence such as the Song infantry 2H swords in China). As far as I know the European 2H swords were mainly used against infantry – though there are some folks here who are more knowledgeable than I regarding medieval (or at least Euopean medieval) warfare who can correct me.

    Moreover, they would not likely give you “first strike” equivalent advantage either, since they were not thrusting weapons – hence, took longer to swing around.

    Finally, at least as far as I know in English: a halberd is a polearm. A “pole”-“arm” is simply a weapon where “head” weapon – most often edged – is fitted at the end of a long stick.

    #134307

    With so little MP they fail at being cavalry.

    It’s a reduction of 4 mp on what are already very fast units. If it were infantry at 24 when the rest are at 28 then yes it’d be more of a difference.

    I think they make excellent Cavalry. They bring all the benefits of their infantry but are faster. They form a continuous wall of death. Boar Riders are imho the most underrated unit in the game. They start tough, and because of their mp bonus, they can survive auto better than most, and they just get tougher and tougher.

    Gold level Boar Riders aren’t unheard off (easier to get to than the others imho) and are incredible troops.

    Not every Cavalry is about fast flanking attacks. Think of them as Cataphracts – they move slower but they are very hard hitting.

    Now, visually, them carrying a halberd seems weird. To be honest without you, Dwarven pikemen seem a bit weird to me, but they are more understandable/explicable because everyone needs Pikemen. However, we are missing one thing here. Halberds and Pike type weapons are useful for ground troops because you can anchor them into the ground and skewer horses trying to charge onto them. That is the origin of them being counter-cavalry weapons if I’m not wrong. That stability advantage is lost on horseback, and troops that had lances on horseback tended to be quite light troops, useful for chasing off skirmishers, or providing a screen, or quick flanking.

    Gameplay wise, only the Black Knight and Phalanx can offensively use polearm, and the Charger to a degree, the other pike units have a greater need for Cavalry to attack them in order to be useful. That’s 3 units – do we need to allow a 4th unit to do this?

    Units like the Knight however, we more about that frontal charge, relying on their armour and weight to crush the enemy underfoot. I think the Knights should actually get a bit of an armour bonus and the ability to “crush” or “trample” units on foot, but go down to 32 mp as well.

    I also think that, seeing as Boar Cav are more the Knight type rather than the skirmisher type, that they should really just get rid of the Halberd entirely. Give them axes like they used to have or hammers like the FirstBorn have (and the ability to cause crushing/crippling wounds – being hit with a hammer is no fun, even for an Orc).

    Incase you were wondering why the Black Knight gets polearm, my understanding there is that polearm is being used to represent the tendencies of the Horses in question (who eat people, and thus presumably other Horses as well, and less about the weapon that Black Knights carry. I could be wrong ofcourse.

    Anyway, tldr;

    Don’t use Boar Cav the same as other cav, think of them as faster, more durable infantry.

    No need for them to have polearm, and change the weapon animation if needed.

    Why would anyone train non-Elf archer, for instance, if available?

    Obstacle ignoring Darters, cheaper.

    AoE flamers, also cheaper, and can be synergised with Elders.

    Humans, mediocre, cheaper, can get a second damage channel.

    Dwarves, more mobile, but single shot, so YMMV.

    Orcs, razorbows can cause bleeding wounds. YMMV (there’s a debate on their utility right now actually).

    Jesters, dazzle allows for excellent follow up attacks.

    You can make a strong case for using Hafling, Draconian and Goblin ranged units right now, and you can make do with the remaining 3.

    You should pick another example ;).

    So you propose that the Boar Rider stats are closer to the Knight’s than the Cavalry’s?

    I believe he is saying that Boar Cav are among the stronger of the racial Cavalry, and that for their cost, they don’t need anything extra.

    Let’s look at your stats there and then add in polearm. That will make Boar Cav handily take on Knights, who are supposed to be the best Cav in the game…

    Also bear in mind that by the time you get Knights, the other player will have levelled up his Boar Cav.

    Boar Cav are bloody dangerous, they don’t *need* anything.

    None of these three possibilities – or any combinations thereof – encourages me to take you seriously.

    Hold off on the ad hominem! It’s easy to pick apart flaws based on stats, but the overall message of Bouh’s – that Boar cav don’t need polearm – is hard to argue against.

    #134309

    though there are some folks here who are more knowledgeable than I regarding medieval (or at least Euopean medieval) warfare who can correct me.

    I’m no expert, but I believe the Saxons fought the Normans using the ‘Danish Axe’ which cut through a horse and rider in one swing.

    Axes for anti cav weapons? :).

    #134311

    Epaminondas
    Member

    Now, visually, them carrying a halberd seems weird. To be honest without you, Dwarven pikemen seem a bit weird to me, but they are more understandable/explicable because everyone needs Pikemen. However, we are missing one thing here. Halberds and Pike type weapons are useful for ground troops because you can anchor them into the ground and skewer horses trying to charge onto them. That is the origin of them being counter-cavalry weapons if I’m not wrong. That stability advantage is lost on horseback, and troops that had lances on horseback tended to be quite light troops, useful for chasing off skirmishers, or providing a screen, or quick flanking.

    Now, this is a much more intelligent critique than Bouh’s, and you do have a point – but still not a dispositive point. I’d raise two objections:

    First, polearm-type of weapons would be useful anti-cavalry weapons even at the hand of cavalrymen themselves, provided that they could construct a platform that gave them sufficient stability. Historical examples abound: The lances of Alexander’s Companion cavalry, Asian cataphracts (steppe and the Koguryo versions especially), and most famously the medieval European knights from the “couched” position.

    Second, and this applies only if you are opposing the polearm benefit on the Boar Rider in particular, not cavalry in general: A precedent is already set anyways with the Orc T2 cavalry.

    Units like the Knight however, we more about that frontal charge, relying on their armour and weight to crush the enemy underfoot. I think the Knights should actually get a bit of an armour bonus and the ability to “crush” or “trample” units on foot, but go down to 32 mp as well.

    Extra-heavy cavalry with heavy lance-type of weapons were particularly effective v. other melee cavalry as well.

    You should pick another example ;) .

    Fine, and most relevantly: Why not the Current Orc T2 cavalry? Isn’t that unit far superior to all its racial peers in melee combat efficiency?

    I believe he is saying that Boar Cav are among the stronger of the racial Cavalry, and that for their cost, they don’t need anything extra….

    Boar Cav are bloody dangerous, they don’t *need* anything…

    Hold off on the ad hominem! It’s easy to pick apart flaws based on stats, but the overall message of Bouh’s – that Boar cav don’t need polearm – is hard to argue against.

    I know that was his point, and if he stopped at that, then I would have merely respectfully disagreed – which is what I did with Harley. But he then added a truly stupid comment, along with bogus graphic/historical/linguistic comment.

    And ordinarily, I would’ve let all that pass: But given that he himself is the most relentlessly and ubiquitously offensive poster on the forum – the master of the ad hominem – I do not think he deserves a pass.

    #134333

    I’ve been doing a bit of reading. Graphically, the thing Boar Riders looks to me a bit like either a halberd, or the Lucerne hammer, all of which means it should have an anti cavalry component, based on the graphical representation.

    Gameplaywise, I think this is a bad idea, as it would obsolete the Orc cavalry.

    I’m modifying my suggestion for Boars to get hammers, and propose that they get these :), but not the 2 metre long monstrosities.

    #134335

    vota dc
    Member

    Good idea, with those they should have armor piercing, it could be a nice addition since they already cost 10% more than regular cavalry.
    With the new skill of attacking + guard mode combined the main feature of boar rider will be survive and get gold medal. For hard hitting cavalry gold pony rider is a lot better: it gets +2 attack each level and get strong will, the problem is reaching the gold level since the unmedal unit is terrible!

    #134347

    I also think there is plenty of room here to explore the effect of the mounts, and move away from the focus we have right now on the weapons, if we are looking to diversify Cavalry.

    That’s a big “if” because one could argue that the Cavalry right now are in a pretty sweet spot. In the spirit of the thing, I say we brainstorm ways to make the Cav more “interesting,” although I maintain that they are fine as is.

    Warg Riders are underrated, but can become really rather good, and their cost and upkeep is minimal.

    I tried a Goblin Druid strat once of focussing on Warg Riders and supplementing them with Summons. Not the best for sieges, but pretty mobile and surprisingly effective. A Warlord with the right upgrades makes them…deadly.

    Anyway, I would recommend they get some sort of “Warg’s howl” ability, that decreases enemy morale. It could perhaps wear off after a few turns, or be non stackable, and cause -200 morale.

    I’m looking at this especially as a counter to Haflings, because Goblins and Haflings are traditional foes, so building upon this could be cool (ditto Hafling Pony Riders being unlocked at the barracks, and being an expensive Tier 1’5 unit, so now Haflings would get the earliest Cavalry but Goblins would get the best – but later – anti Cavalry. The Nightwatch would need some perks to make up for being unlocked late…)

    Black Knights -to be honest I think these are the best Cavalry right now anyway, and lifestealing might be too powerful on them, even though the lore heavily implies it.

    Raptor Riders – solidly in the middle, and a bit boring. I think the Raptors could perhaps get a leap ability that represents the large animal jumping onto it’s foes. This could either be (i) a movement ability, allowing them an extra hex of movement once per battle (so like sprint but lesser in scope, conceptually) or (ii) a once per battle non-retaliate-able attack. I’d prefer the former, so it gives Draconians more flexibility tactically, but in a face to face fight, they’d still melt. This would fit in well with the combined arms approach of Draconians- Flamers to destroy clumped units, Chargers to fend off enemy Cavalry, and Raptor Riders to pick off stragglers.

    Humans – they evolve. Enough.

    Boar Riders – a gore type attack/effect, basically causes bleeding wounds due to the mad, aggressive Boar. Those tusks should hurt you!

    Pony Riders – well, a pony is nothing amazing lol, and really I think that is the point. Imho these should be as outlined earlier, i.e. become available with barracks. basically, the situation as it was in the original AoW. Playing Haflings, you should be relying on guile, luck and opportunity (as in even more so than you do now! For my money, love them or hate them, they are the best designed race in the game right now, and their polarising nature to me is indication of a job well done) rather than brute force (Orcs), numbers (Goblins), ability based finesse (Elves), common sense (Humans, by common sense, I mean everything fitting together in an obvious, predictable, “vanilla” manner, but still very very capable) or innate toughness (Dwarves)

    Unicorn Riders – well, they already phase, which is down to the Unicorn, so imho pretty damned good already. *Maybe,* some very limited healing with medals (I’m talking 5 hp, once per battle) or something that allows them to counter debilitating effects, if a straight up heal is felt to be too generic and overpowering, such as the ability to cure disease, (once per battle) which would allow them complement the rest of their racial line-up.

    Honourable mention for my dream race, Azracs/Nomads, if they were ever to come back, I would make them have no Pike unit (drastic lol, bear with me) but:

    Elephant Rider at tier 1. Basically the Elephants of Golden Realms, with a Mahmout on top. Tough unit, can crush walls (no rams for Azracs), low resistance, ok defence, but very good attack.

    Fast, lighter Cavalry, i.e. 40 mp, for their normal Cavalry. Very low defence for Cavalry, but their advantage is their speed and hardiness (ergo 40 mp, and decent hp)

    Tier 3 unit would be the Chieftain, and the camel should scare/debuff non Azrac Cavalry (including non Azracs in your own army) due to their stink.

    It’s a straight mashup of Azracs from AoW1 and Nomads from ShadowMagic.:)

    Hopefully that wasn’t too much of a topic derail :P.

    #134355

    Bouh
    Member

    But he then added a truly stupid comment, along with bogus graphic/historical/linguistic comment.

    If you talk about my last sentence, it was a conclusion, you know, what you write at the end of a long writing to sum up your views. Sorry if this also offend you.

    Moreover, they would not likely give you “first strike” equivalent advantage either, since they were not thrusting weapons – hence, took longer to swing around.

    This is wrong. Late medieval swords were thrusting weapons as much as cuting weapons, because cut was completely ineffective against heavy armors.

    Here my case with orc great swordmen is that their sword are greater than them (in their description) which means the sword is more than two meters long (orcs are not small). A hallberd is about two meters long. For dwarves it can even be argued that they can be shorter. How would the hallberd be more effective than the greatsword at stoping cavalry ?

    As far as I know, hallberd were not anti-cavalry weapons. Pike were. Hallberds could be used for this job, but as much as any long weapon, and in particular I doubt a hallberd would be better at stoping a cavalry charge than a zweihander (they would both be bad IMO).

    And again, the weapon the boar riders carry are pollaxes and not hallberds anyway, and this wasn’t an anti-cavalry weapon.

    But given that he himself is the most relentlessly and ubiquitously offensive poster on the forum – the master of the ad hominem – I do not think he deserves a pass.

    This is dead wrong man. I never am personal to anyone. Now, if you are so dedicated to your ideas that you melt your personality into them, it’s not my fault. I only ever attack ideas, not people. You on the other hand often attack me personaly with insults to my own person. I dare you to find such thing from me. I did it two times, and I received two warning for this, I understood the lesson. But now I’d like you to stop spiting your venom on me, and focus on my ideas instead.

    This is unfair, I feel offended and I can’t even answer back. You are vicious evil Epaminondas !

    And if I may be quite offensive against some ideas, it’s because I learned at school to be this way : bad ideas only deserve to be purged. I’m humble about my own ideas, and I have nothing against people who question them, only against people who question me. I talk about ideas, not people. I don’t care about people. Just because I don’t like your ideas doesn’t mean I don’t like you, or that you are stupid, only that I think your ideas are stupid. And this is definitely not the same. Smart people can have stupid ideas and it’s not a shame.

    #134361

    Gloweye
    Member

    Nope, and I pretty much agree with your ability assessment.

    As for the difference between Black Knights being the “best” cavalry, the above comparison showed them having a 3 Resistance less than a Boar Cav – which is an immense drawback. They might be the best cavalry, but they much more vulnerable to the likes of Berserk or Taunt(Still like the AoW SM effect better). Therefore, we don’t hear people shouting OP – cause you can do something about them. However, the dwarf cav just refuses to die – much more annoying, especially if you’re relying on archers to get some damage it.

    #134367

    Bouh
    Member

    As for the difference between Black Knights being the “best” cavalry, the above comparison showed them having a 3 Resistance less than a Boar Cav – which is an immense drawback

    It’s actualy 2 point of difference (mistake from me), but that doesn’t change anything to what you just said. 🙂

    And indeed, 13 defense is the highest for a T2 unit. That’s quite powerful in itself.

    #134369

    First, polearm-type of weapons would be useful anti-cavalry weapons even at the hand of cavalrymen themselves, provided that they could construct a platform that gave them sufficient stability. Historical examples abound: The lances of Alexander’s Companion cavalry, Asian cataphracts (steppe and the Koguryo versions especially), and most famously the medieval European knights from the “couched” position.

    Second, and this applies only if you are opposing the polearm benefit on the Boar Rider in particular, not cavalry in general: A precedent is already set anyways with the Orc T2 cavalry.

    eh ehm. For Alexander, there were two different sarissa weapons carried by different types of Macedonian cavalry (in addition to the heterogeneous weapons by irregulars, or forces incorporated from defeated/paid for steppe/greek/persian forces).

    The first is the “cavalry Sarissa” carried by the companions and other heavy macedonian cavalry. It was a twin broad headed weapon (in case one side broke) approximately 8-10 feet in length wielded by a solider wearing a composite cuirass or metal armor, and a helmet.

    Then there is the more famous “infantry sarissa” the 15-18 foot, 14 pound pike. This was wielded by the light cavalry (literally known as the sarissa bearers).

    It is true that some super heavy cavalry did have the longest spears, although they more frequently relied on shorter spears, swords, maces, and the fact that spears tend to snap when engaging heavy personal/horse armor.

    purely from a gameplay perspective, I think that polearm is better on the Orc Black Knight.

    #134370

    Epaminondas
    Member

    I never am personal to anyone… I only ever attack ideas, not people… I dare you to find such thing from me. I did it two times, and I received two warning for this, I understood the lesson.

    You keep incriminating yourself more with every post. Here’s yet another example of how you play fast and loose with words.

    You claim you “NEVER” attack people; and yet you admit in the same post you’ve done it and have been warned at least “TWO TIMES.” (Thanks for at least sparing me the need for going through your 1000-plus posts for example; but you certainly lie badly when you imply you’ve only done it twice though, given that not every violation is noted and penalized – I recall some vicious profanity-laden stuff that I’ve seen from no one else on this forum, except maybe Usana.)

    Do you not realize that “never” means “not even once”? Or in your world, is there no difference between 0 and 2?

    Once again: I return to the issue of whether words – or stable definitions – have any meaning for you.

    As for your disclaimer of being so persistently ad hominem in general: I am not the only one who has made this observation about your posts. And when virtually everyone else accuses you of doing what you yourself disclaim to be doing, then really perhaps you are indeed doing it.

    Finally, I LOL-ed at this:

    I’m humble about my own ideas,…

    Yeah, and I am Miss Universe.

Viewing 30 posts - 1 through 30 (of 100 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.