Comprehensive Retinue Comparisons for Horse Lords 2.4.x

[Secret Master]

• Pikemen Offensive +120%
• Heavy Cavalry Offensive -210%
• Heavy Infantry Offensive -210%

But he's right, timid advance requires heavy infantry to fire.

Aha, that's the key. If you don't have 1% heavy infantry, it doesn't matter.

So, actually, if I'm running pure cavalry nomad armies, organizer can be quite good. Combat out on the steppe is fast anyway, so being able to move faster than the other guy without getting a crappy tactic in actual combat is a good thing.

As for craven, I don't like it for other reasons and never use leaders with it (except by accident or in bizarre situations).

 

[Eslin]

A yup. For some reason, paradox cannot into basic arithmetic - for some reason they think if you have +30% heavy cavalry offense and +30% horse archer offense and a 50/50 (talking value here) split of each is somehow equal to a pure set of heavy cavalry and +60% heavy cavalry offense.

0.5x1.3+0.5x1.3 DOES NOT EQUAL 1.0x1.6. How is that a difficult concept?

 

[Korashy]

A yup. For some reason, paradox cannot into basic arithmetic - for some reason they think if you have +30% heavy cavalry offense and +30% horse archer offense and a 50/50 (talking value here) split of each is somehow equal to a pure set of heavy cavalry and +60% heavy cavalry offense.

0.5x0.3+0.5x0.3 DOES NOT EQUAL 1.0x0.6. How is that a difficult concept?

Because Cataphrancs are actually good in skirmish (HA) and melee (HC). They were the best retinue until retinue cost increases.

 

[Peter Kirby]

\common\buildings\00_CastleCulture.txt

“All cultural buildings follow the same pattern: tech required is 0, 1, 2, 4 for the levels of the buildings.”

And here are the nomad buildings (with unit bonuses).

\common\buildings\00_nomad.txt

Lamellar Armor Crafter

+5% / +10% / +16% / +23% / +31% / +40% / +50% / +60% Defensive (all units)

Horse Breeder

+3% / +6% / +10% / +15% / +20% / +25% / +30% / +35% Heavy Cavalry Defensive
+3% / +6% / +10% / +15% / +20% / +25% / +30% / +35% Light Cavalry Defensive
+3% / +6% / +10% / +15% / +20% / +25% / +30% / +35% Horse Archers Defensive

Riding Contests

+4% / +8% / +12% / +17% / +22% / +27% / +33% / +39% Heavy Cavalry Offensive
+4% / +8% / +12% / +17% / +22% / +27% / +33% / +39% Light Cavalry Offensive
+2% / +4% / +7% / +10% / +14% / +19% / +24% / +30% Global Movement Speed

Hunting Parties

+4% / +8% / +12% / +17% / +22% / +27% / +32% / +38% / +44% Horse Archers Offensive

Composite Bow Crafter

+10% / +20% / +30% / +40% / +50% / +60% / +70% / +80% Horse Archers Offensive
+10% / +20% / +30% / +40% / +50% / +60% / +70% / +80% Archers Offensive

Camel Breeder

+10% / +20% / +30% / +40% / +50% / +60% / +70% / +80% Camel Cavalry Defensive
+0% / +0% / +0% / +0% / +0% / +10% / +20% / +30% Camel Cavalry Offensive

Elephant Camp

+10% / +20% / +30% / +40% / +50% / +60% / +70% / +80% War Elephants Defensive
+0% / +0% / +0% / +0% / +0% / +10% / +20% / +30% War Elephants Offensive

And morale bonuses only:

Wrestling

+3% / +6% / +9% / +12% / +16% / +20% / +24% / +28% Morale (all units)

Baghatur Council

+2% / +4% / +6% / +8% / +10% / +12% / +15% / +18% Morale (all units)

If you built all the buildings (and let's not worry about the incompatibility of elephant and camel buildings--you'll use one or the other or neither), you'd have:

+30% Global Movement Speed

+46% Morale (all units)

+60% Defensive for "infantry+pikes+archer" / "non-cavalry" types (non-LC/HC/Camel/Elephant)
+80% Archers Offensive

+39% Heavy Cavalry Offensive
+95% Heavy Cavalry Defensive

+39% Light Cavalry Offensive (not counting "Tengri" -- but that'd bump it another 30% to 69%)
+95% Light Cavalry Defensive (not counting "Tengri" -- but that'd bump it another 30% to 125%)

+124% Horse Archers Offensive
+95% Horse Archers Defensive

+30% Camel Cavalry Offensive
+140% Camel Cavalry Defensive

+30% War Elephants Offensive
+140% War Elephants Defensive

 

[MrParadux]

- If you have 50% or more horse archers you can no longer trigger the harass tactic

How does this change the effectiveness of horse archers?

 

[omega20056]

Why are cataphracts bad? How more OP can you get than super-knights?

 

[Korashy]

Why are cataphracts bad? How more OP can you get than super-knights?

It's entirely because of their of their troop/retinue cap ratio

 

[Peter Kirby]

\common\buildings\00_CastleCulture.txt

I've checked the wiki numbers on the Retinues page against the text file, and they're the same when it comes to the "starter" bonuses.

\common\retinue_subunits\00_retinue_subunits.txt
http://www.ckiiwiki.com/Retinues

If you combine the data about the "starter" bonuses with the maxed-out cultural buildings in the capital holding, you get the following (ignoring "generic" retinues).

Note that the data is displayed as: zero buildings / first building / second building / third building / fourth building. The cumulative figure is calculated.

Longbow -- Welsh and English

+20% / +35% / +50% / +65% / +80% Archers Offensive
+10% Archers Defensive

Schiltron -- Scottish

+20% Pikemen Offensive
+40% / +55% / +70% / +85% / +100% Pikemen Defensive
+20% Pikemen Morale

Baltic Warrior -- Baltic group and Finno-Ugric group

+30% / +45% / +60% / +75% / +90% Heavy Infantry Defensive
+10% Heavy Infantry Morale

Horse Archer --- Altaic group and Iranian group

+20% / +30% / +40% / +50% / +60 Horse Archers Offensive
+12% / +17% / +22% / +27% / +32% Horse Archers Morale

Knight -- French, German, Occitan, Norman, and Breton

+10% / +25% / +40% / +55% / +70% Heavy Cavalry Offensive
+10% Heavy Cavalry Defensive
+20% Heavy Cavalry Morale

Caballero -- Iberian group

+20% / +35% / +50% / +65% / +80% Light Cavalry Offensive
+20% Light Cavalry Morale

Pike -- Italian

+20% Pikemen Offensive
+20% Pikemen Defensive
+40% / +55% / +70% / +85% / +100% Pikemen Morale

Druzhina -- Russian

+10% Heavy Infantry Offensive
+50% / +65% / +80% / +95% / +110% Heavy Infantry Defensive
+20% Heavy Infantry Morale

Housecarl -- North Germanic group and Saxon

+40% / +55% / +70% / +85% / +100% Heavy Infantry Offensive
+20% Heavy Infantry Morale

Hussar -- Hungarian and West Slavic group

+60% / +75% / +90% / +105% / +120% Light Cavalry Defensive
+20% Light Cavalry Morale

Camel Warrior -- Bedouin, Egyptian, Levantine

+20% Camel Cavalry Offensive
+20% / +35% / +50% / +65% / +80% Camel Cavalry Defensive
+20% Camel Cavalry Morale

Andalusian Cavalry -- Andalusian

+20% / +30% / +40% / +50% / +60% Light Cavalry Offensive
+40% / +50% / +60% / +70% / +80% Light Cavalry Defensive
+20% / +30% / +40% / +50% / +60% Light Cavalry Morale

Berber Cavalry -- Maghreb

+50% / +60% / +70% / +80% / +90% Light Cavalry Offensive
+0% / +10% / +20% / +30% / +40% Light Cavalry Defensive
+30% / +40% / +50% / +60% / +70% Light Cavalry Morale

Cataphract -- Byzantine group

+10% / 17.5% / 25% / 32.5% / 40% Heavy Cavalry Offensive
+10% Heavy Cavalry Defensive
+20% Heavy Cavalry Morale
+0% / +7.5% / 15% / 22.5% / 30% Horse Archer Offensive

Gallowglass -- Irish

+40% / +55% / +70% / +85% / +100% Heavy Infantry Defensive
+20% Heavy Infantry Morale

Ethiopian Skirmisher -- Ethiopian

+50% / +65% / +80% / +95% / +110% Light Infantry Offensive
+30% Light Infantry Defensive

Somali Skirmisher -- Somali

+40% Light Infantry Offensive
+40% / +55% / +70% / +85% / +100% Light Infantry Defensive

Free Warrior -- West African group

+60% / +75% / +90% / +105% / +120% Light Infantry Offensive
+10% Light Infantry Defensive
+10% Light Infantry Morale

Gusar -- South Slavic group

+10% / 17.5% / 25% / 32.5% / 40% Heavy Cavalry Defensive
+10% Heavy Cavalry Morale
+20% Light Cavalry Offensive
+20% / +27.5% / 35% / 42.5% / 50% Light Cavalry Defensive

Goedendag Militia -- Dutch

+30% / +37.5% / 45% / 52.5% / 60% Pikemen Offensive
+20% Pikemen Defensive
+10% Pikemen Morale
+20% / +27.5% / 35% / 42.5% / 50% Light Infantry Offensive
+20% Light Infantry Defensive
+10% Light Infantry Morale

Jaguar Warrior -- Nahua

+20% Heavy Infantry Offensive
+10% / +25% / +40% / +55% / +70% Heavy Infantry Morale
+40% Light Infantry Offensive
+20% Light Infantry Morale

Bar Kochba Guards -- Israelite

+20% Heavy Infantry Defensive
+10% / +25% / +40% / +55% / +70% Heavy Infantry Morale

Steel Bow Infantry -- Indo-Aryan group and Dravidian group

+10% Archers Offensive
+30% Archers Defensive
+15% / +20% / +25% / +30% War Elephants Offensive
+0% / +10% / +20% / +30% War Elephants Defensive

Nubian Archers -- Nubian

+20% Archers Offensive
+20% / +35% / +50% / +65% / +80% Archers Defensive

Frankish Heavy Infantry -- Frankish

+20% / +35% / +50% / +65% / +80% Heavy Infantry Offensive
+10% Heavy Infantry Defensive
+10% Heavy Infantry Morale

Lombard Heavy Infantry -- Lombard

+10% / +25% / +40% / +55% / +70% Heavy Infantry Offensive
+10% Heavy Infantry Morale

Suebi Longspearman -- Suebi

+30% Light Infantry Defensive
+20% / +27.5% / 35% / 42.5% / 50% Light Infantry Morale
+30% Pikemen Defensive
+20% / +27.5% / 35% / 42.5% / 50% Pikemen Morale

Pictish Raiders -- Pictish ("because one day, lads, you will all be Schiltron")

+30% Light Infantry Offense
+10% Light Infantry Defense
+20% / +35% / +50% / +65% / +80% Light Infantry Morale
+10% Archer Offense
+10% Archer Morale

 

[Peter Kirby]

Concerning "generic" retinues and cultural buildings:

I've verified in-game (through the tooltip anyway) that the "generic" retinues will receive the benefit of the cultural building in the capital holding.

This is mostly irrelevant though... usually the bonus is not in the right place to matter (Suebi, Aztec) or the "pure" retinue will simply be better.

But it is worth looking at the Dutch case: they have a light infantry / pikemen retinue that buffs the light infantry and pikemen (300 Light Infantry, 100 Pikemen). It's worth asking whether it could be better to use the generic retinue with pikemen and archers (50 Archers, 250 Pikemen). Even then, the Light Infantry are a lot cheaper than the archers, don't mess up the tactics, and are buffed by the Dutch cultural building, so it's hard to say without doing the numbers.

It's also worth looking at the Byzantines... the Light Cavalry is simply superior to the Horse Archer (and Heavy Cavalry for that matter, on a retinue cap basis), and the Horse Archer drags down the Cataphract. Not only that but the Light Cavalry has better synergy with the Heavy Cavalry (with Heroic Countercharge and Embolon--which is the Byzantine commander's tactic!). I would not be surprised at all to find that a Byzantine commander in charge of a generic cavalry retinue will handily outclass a Frankish (or any other) commander in charge of a Cataphract retinue (especially since that comparison has already been done in the original spreadsheet). And the gap grows, in favor of the generic retinue, if Heroic Countercharge were a tactic in the mix (dependent on the commander's traits). The Byzantines have easy access to the Byzantine commanders (the best for generic cavalry retinues), and their cultural building buffs the heavy cavalry.

In short, if you aren't replacing your cataphracts with generic defense retinues (which is likely optimal), or with a mix of generic defense and some shock or light skirmish in order to be lazy and have better pursuit (and still be better than cataphracts), then you're replacing them with generic cavalry retinues... still better than cataphracts. Unless of course you've conquered the map already and retinue cap doesn't matter anymore, while attrition is mildly annoying ... then, naturally, cataphracts will do the job.

This, then, unofficially becomes the "unique" unit for the Byzantines (along with their preferred tactics in melee):

Cavalry -- Byzantine group (200 Light Cavalry, 50 Heavy Cavalry)

+0% / 7.5% / 15% / 22.5% / 30% Heavy Cavalry Offensive
+20% Light Cavalry Offensive
+20% Light Cavalry Defensive

Embolon Charge Formation -- Byzantine commanders (fires just as often as "Awesome Charge")

Heavy Cavalry Offensive +240%
Light Cavalry Offensive +180% (... etc.)

Heroic Countercharge -- Aggressive leader, Brave leader, or Cavalry leader (Martial 14+ preferred, to fire 3x as often as "Awesome Charge" and "Embolon")

Heavy Cavalry Offensive +360%
Light Cavalry Offensive +360% (... etc.)

It also gets "Raid" in melee (not bad), "Awesome Charge" in melee (meh), and "Harass" in Skirmish (much better than the Horse Archer's "Swarm").

 

[IoannesBarbarus]

For that matter, what would be the best generic retinue when supply is the concern and not retinue cap? Straight cavalry? Are there any real standout cultural retinues in that respect besides Cataphracts?

 

[Peter Kirby]

For that matter, what would be the best generic retinue when supply is the concern and not retinue cap? Straight cavalry? Are there any real standout cultural retinues in that respect besides Cataphracts?

It's a good question. I'll include both tables with the update (which uses a more-accurate method).

With the original numbers, column "J" answered that question. It calculates the sqrt( Attack * Defense ) for a single unit (fractional pseudo-"unit" if it's mixed), proportionally by skirmish/melee phase. It just gets divided by the retinue cap cost of that single unit to get the final value, so it's the next-to-last step.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1GUmYlDxNaIEi-OcdKm4c7AywsLr2m6fsvcusWQfORf0/

Druzhina -- 14.195
Schiltron, Scottish commander -- 16.899
Knights, Frankish (etc.) commander -- 13.32
Cataphracts, Frankish (etc.) commander -- 12.97
Generic Defence, Scottish commander -- 13.396
Generic Defence, Italian commander -- 12.767
Generic Defence, Non-Forest -- 10.891
Camel Cavalry -- 11.009
Generic Cavalry, Byzantine commander, Heroic countercharge, Tengri -- 11.085

If supply / attrition / per-unit strength is the concern, cataphracts are respectable by that measurement... but many units that are cap-cost-effective also are. It's not really a tradeoff that anyone is forced to make, although (yes) it will be tempting for a sprawling Byzantine Empire.

 

[Peter Kirby]

Really, though, if supply is the concern, the solution is to create two (or more) retinue-cap-optimal armies out of your retinues instead of using the other units.

 

[Eslin]

Why are cataphracts bad? How more OP can you get than super-knights?

I don't understand the question, probably because I've been too immersed in the figures. Why would they be good? They're a split retinue (always, always bad), they only get a 30% bonus from cultural buildings compared to the usual 60% and the retinue combat bonus (on 9/13 of the troops, HA get nothing though they're useless anyway so it doesn't matter) is 10% offense, 10% defense and 20% useless morale.

They're a split unit, they spend nearly a third of their budget on useless horse archers and their bonuses suck. Not sure how they're super knights - if you want some of those (for a very specific definition of 'knight') go east and be an overpowered nomad or go south and get camel cavalry.

Because Cataphrancs are actually good in skirmish (HA) and melee (HC). They were the best retinue until retinue cost increases.

I hate the idea that your answer might be true. I don't know what changed, but if there was a rework at some point why the hell did they not rework the composition and bonuses so everything was about equal? Why leave them with an atrocious 900/400 split between units that work terribly together and really mediocre bonuses?

 

[Peter Kirby]

My impression (and it's only that) is that players said that Cataphracts are awesome, and then they got nerfed. Then players said that Archers are awesome, and then they got nerfed. If this is a pattern, I would guess that Pikemen are next on the chopping block.

My miscalculation may actually have saved camel cavalry from being nerfed for a while.

(That's my way of saying that camel cavalry are a lot better than the original spreadsheet gave them credit for... still working on it...)

 

[Korashy]

My impression (and it's only that) is that players said that Cataphracts are awesome, and then they got nerfed. Then players said that Archers are awesome, and then they got nerfed. If this is a pattern, I would guess that Pikemen are next on the chopping block.

My miscalculation may actually have saved camel cavalry from being nerfed for a while.

(That's my way of saying that camel cavalry are a lot better than the original spreadsheet gave them credit for... still working on it...)

Retinues were strong to begin with, then with the levy nerf along time ago they became incredible (as they weren't affected by the size ratio). During that time cataphracts ruled supreme because both Horse Archers and heavy cavalry had (have) incredible synergy, inflicting high damage in skirmish, strong "shock" in melee and then completely cleaned house during pursuit. (Basically you inflicted heavy casualties in both skirmish and melee breaking enemy morale quickly, followed by a stackwipe in pursuit). The knight retinues were also decent, but having light cav instead of the horse archers made them greatly inferior to catas. Pure HA were also incredible (which was why the mongol hordes were such a nightmare)

Then comes the (first) retinue nerf, which increased retinue cap cost drastically, which heavily hit the catas (combat values weren't adjusted but the men and money ratio became horrible). Now Archers became king because their ratio was extremely good, coupled with Massive Longbow volley which basically allowed you to wipe almost everything in skirmish (though in multiplayer there were ways to beat them). Archers also were the best at siege assaulting because light skirmish was the most important damage value for it (coupled with fact that defender vs attacker size is also part of the calculation).

Now light infantry and archers got nerfed to the ground and pikemen/heavy infantry/camels are king (after having their values adjusted (you used to be able to get 3 LI for 1 HC which ended up having more dmg and health than the single HC making them better). Pike had been strong previously, but shines this patch.

A thing to note is that even after the first retinue nerf Cata's were still good for BYZ because they could still afford them, but more importantly they allowed you to concentrate a lot of power into a relatively small stack, which greatly helped with fighting the abbasid in their low supply desert provinces.

Lastly, if there ever is a pure elephant retinue with a good unit/cost ratio they will become incredible. Elephants are mostly just bad because they are tied in with archers which don't have any synergies with their tactis, and you dont get that many elephants for the cost.

 

[Eslin]

Retinues were strong to begin with, then with the levy nerf along time ago they became incredible (as they weren't affected by the size ratio). During that time cataphracts ruled supreme because both Horse Archers and heavy cavalry had (have) incredible synergy, inflicting high damage in skirmish, strong "shock" in melee and then completely cleaned house during pursuit. (Basically you inflicted heavy casualties in both skirmish and melee breaking enemy morale quickly, followed by a stackwipe in pursuit).

Very informative, except for this bit. There is, for the most part, no such thing as unit synergy. A unit of all HA or a unit of all HC would have been much better, I say would have been because HAs suck at everything now.

 

[Secret Master]

I really don't understand how it came to pass that in an expansion called Horse Lords, the horse archers were made a lousy retinue.

Was this done to balance out the fact that nomads have nice retinues compared to comparably sized feudal realms?

 

[Eslin]

No, because nomads still have access to pure light cavalry, camel cavalry and heavy cavalry hordes which easily beat, destroy and utterly annihilate feudal levies respectively.

Paradox's attitude to balancing really is utterly random, don't question what doesn't have logic in the first place.

 

[Korashy]

Very informative, except for this bit. There is, for the most part, no such thing as unit synergy. A unit of all HA or a unit of all HC would have been much better, I say would have been because HAs suck at everything now.

I disagree. Cata's were so tough because of the HA which was probably by itself the strongest unit. Once they did their job, the HC could mob up the melee. Even if you run a pure HA, you would eventually end up in melee against say HC (on melee triggering tactic) and get wrecked. If you run pure HC (which didn't exist), there is a good chance you lose to perpetual skirmish. Out of all unit combinations I think they worked best together because they were each king in their respective phase. There is no synergy in terms of providing bonuses to each other. But since cata's were strong in both phases the tactic multipliers they are eligible for (in respect to their phases) more than made up for the 30% each individual unit loses in power in their respective phase due to the cultural building split.

No, because nomads still have access to pure light cavalry, camel cavalry and heavy cavalry hordes which easily beat, destroy and utterly annihilate feudal levies respectively.

Paradox's attitude to balancing really is utterly random, don't question what doesn't have logic in the first place.

Nomad hordes are essentially retinues. You can't ever compare regular levies to retinues. Not only do they get substantial combat bonuses that levies don't get, you can also not optimize levies to exploit a specific tactic(s). It's all about the 300-400% amplification.

 

[Dracko81]

@Secret Master I might suggest they are only bad because you don't know how to use them.

I just marched 9k HA into a 15k Abbassid stack, sure I lost 4k men in the battle, but I won and then counter attacked and took Persia off them. Lets not even discuss the bonuses you get from nomad holdings.

They are as capable as any other retinue.