Is Heavy Cavalry ever useful in Europe after the first 100 years?

[Jarolleon]

this could work, so long as were looking at actual # of MAA, rather than number of separate groups, since you might have 2 groups of 500 or 1 group of 1000 (which can then be split into 2 500s after raising), so it would have to read either scenario as 1000 total

but then you run into the issue of late game likely just opting for pure economic and scrapping bonuses altogether, since relevant buildings in what few right-terrain provinces you personally hold would basically give a non-existent bonus to your thousands of retinues late game

The bonus in overall combat potential of your armies would remain the same (assuming this scales linearly with stats), so it would still be worth it in the late game. Also it would discourage single-unit stacking, which is the current way to cheese the counter mechanic, at the moment you can simply stack one unit type and buffs for said unit, and the penalty from being countered will be barely noticeable unless the enemy stacks nothing by the direct counter to your unit.

 

[Wethospu]

--
Also it would discourage single-unit stacking, which is the current way to cheese the counter mechanic, at the moment you can simply stack one unit type and buffs for said unit, and the penalty from being countered will be barely noticeable unless the enemy stacks nothing by the direct counter to your unit.

While the penalty gets lower it will affect more units so the overall effect is same. The only way to reduce effect of countering is to bring less units because of the cap.

 

[Paciaire]

Nalanda University in Pataliputra is identical to the one in Cairo, except swaps the Diplomacy bonus for Stewardship instead.





Hmm? The description currently reads:

"By having the crown provide weapons and armor to its soldiers, more peasants can 'volunteer' for the levy."

Thats pretty bad representation of levies... No wonder the levies are totally craps in CKIII...
Like in early roman republican armies, comunal levies were equiped according their own wealth, a complex system of mutualization could have existed, but long story short the poorest who couldn't buy stuff weren't the most numerous, middle class was often providing most of the troops with averagely armored militiamen with basic training. A dude with gambeson, shield, dagger, falchion, long spear, guisarm, chapels ou cerveliere To protect his head. Thats your typical levyman in western Europe.

Same with peasants, some were wealthy enough to dress like aforementionned urban militiaman. But urban militias are more identifiable in medieval primary sources.

 

[DorostheConquer]

Thats pretty bad representation of levies... No wonder the levies are totally craps in CKIII...
Like in early roman republican armies, comunal levies were equiped according their own wealth, a complex system of mutualization could have existed, but long story short the poorest who couldn't buy stuff weren't the most numerous, middle class was often providing most of the troops with averagely armored militiamen with basic training. A dude with gambeson, shield, dagger, falchion, long spear, guisarm, chapels ou cerveliere To protect his head. Thats your typical levyman in western Europe.

Same with peasants, some were wealthy enough to dress like aforementionned urban militiaman. But urban militias are more identifiable in medieval primary sources.

I don't think I follow your reasoning.

The in-game description was:

"By having the crown provide weapons and armor to its soldiers, more peasants can 'volunteer' for the levy."

That description, and the statements you make regarding levies, are not incompatible. In fact, it seems as though this description, far from being a bad representation of levies, might actually be a good representation of levies, combined with a somewhat anachronistic but nonetheless perfectly plausible explanation for how Royal Armories might facilitate larger levies.

Not everyone was suited for levy duty, as not everyone had access to the equipment necessary to be an "averagely armored militiaman". But state ownership of the means of destruction allows the State to distribute armaments to the economically disadvantaged; by socializing the cost of equipment, even the poorest peasant in a Royal Armory-supported county can potentially become an "averagely armored militiaman", ready to be drafted as agents of government coercion.

 

[Paciaire]

But state ownership of the means of destruction allows the State to distribute armaments to the economically disadvantaged; by socializing the cost of equipment, even the poorest peasant in a Royal Armory-supported county can potentially become an "averagely armored militiaman", ready to be drafted as agents of government coercion.

I get it but medieval comunal armies aren't Red Coats. Things didn't worked this way for urban militias, simple as that. Eventually some late medieval retinues were completly uniformized and equiped by a king(or princes or republics) but this applied to very small contingents of palace guards so thats the 0,01%.

My point is there were enough wealthy craftmen and small non-nobles landowners in order not to rely on random generic bumps.

 

[Myrten]

Building bonuses got totally changed, heavy cav should now be really good

 

[durbal]

Building bonuses got totally changed, heavy cav should now be really good

No they didn't.

They changed flat modifiers to percentage ones, apparently failing basic math and not realizing that +10% to 30 is +3. It makes no real difference.

 

[Xenrek]

No they didn't.

They changed flat modifiers to percentage ones, apparently failing basic math and not realizing that +10% to 30 is +3. It makes no real difference.

For holding buildings, yes. But before you had flat bonuses from holdings, and percentages from duchies.

(10+2)×1.30=16
But now its 10×(1+.2+.3)=15

Which isn't much assuming 1 holding bonus to a duchy; but it adds up.

The change gives a minor/moderate nerd, with the ability going forward to more easily fine-tune bonuses since it isnt reliant on raw numbers

 

[durbal]

For holding buildings, yes. But before you had flat bonuses from holdings, and percentages from duchies.

(10+2)×1.30=16
But now its 10×(1+.2+.3)=15

Which isn't much assuming 1 holding bonus to a duchy; but it adds up.

The change gives a minor/moderate nerd, with the ability going forward to more easily fine-tune bonuses since it isnt reliant on raw numbers

The problem with percentages from duchies was mostly the negative MAA cost modifier from duchy capital buildings. Paradox always messed up negative percentage modifiers (they did it in EU4 multiple times off the top of my head).

While I agree that using percentage modifiers is cleaner overall, the end effect doesn't fix MAA and their many issues and doesn't resolve building bonuses being OP. Also, heavy cav still suck.

 

[Myrten]

No they didn't.

They changed flat modifiers to percentage ones, apparently failing basic math and not realizing that +10% to 30 is +3. It makes no real difference.

Change from flat to percentage is a boost to heavy cav which already had high base stats.

Furthermore regimental grounds now also give bonuses to heavy cav and you can build them on floodplains and farmlands

 

[Myrten]

Also, heavy cav still suck.

Wrong:

10x regimental grounds give +180% damage and +100% toughness
3x Jousting Grounds give +135% damage and +135% Toughness

So Greek Cataphracts just with it would have:
120 x 315% = 378 damage
35 x 235% = 82 Toughness

That certainly doesn't classify as 'suck'

 

[durbal]

Change from flat to percentage is a boost to heavy cav which already had high base stats.

Furthermore regimental grounds now also give bonuses to heavy cav and you can build them on floodplains and farmlands

There wasn't any change in where they could be built. Farmlands are rare in Europe and floodplains don't exist anyway.

Regimental grounds are still also one of the worst buildings.

Elephants have even higher stats than heavy cav. By your logic they'd benefit more, but they don't because there are fewer of them in a unit so 'high base stats' doesn't matter.

 

[Myrten]

There wasn't any change in where they could be built. Farmlands are rare in Europe and floodplains don't exist anyway.

Regimental grounds are still also one of the worst buildings.

Elephants have even higher stats than heavy cav. By your logic they'd benefit more, but they don't because there are fewer of them in a unit so 'high base stats' doesn't matter.

I've calculated effectiveness of all regiments with base stats: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/threads/best-regiments-calculations.1436165/
Without any bonuses heavy cav regiments are one of the best

floodplains don't exist anyway.

What xD?

 

[durbal]

Wrong:

View attachment 655519

View attachment 655520

10x regimental grounds give +180% damage and +100% toughness
3x Jousting Grounds give +135% damage and +135% Toughness

So Greek Cataphracts just with it would have:
120 x 315% = 378 damage
35 x 235% = 82 Toughness

That certainly doesn't classify as 'suck'

Wow, MAA and building modifiers are OP. Who knew?

Compare those modifiers to other MAA types and then consider how easy it is to have 10 Regimental Grounds which are only buildable on farmlands and floodplains and then compare it to other types (especially light cavalry, even post-nerf) and see what I mean.

Also, heavy cavalry are not as effective at countering due to their lower stack size and their smaller stack size means they do/can absorb less damage no matter what the modifiers are.

Are they more viable? Yeah. Are they still very inferior? Yes.

At this point I guess it doesn't matter anyway though. I'd prefer Paradox remove all building bonuses (except for probably direct levy bonuses), stop tying MAA to characters (broken in so many ways, most of which is succession), and nerf the crap out of MAA.

 

[DorostheConquer]

I get it but medieval comunal armies aren't Red Coats. Things didn't worked this way for urban militias, simple as that. Eventually some late medieval retinues were completly uniformized and equiped by a king(or princes or republics) but this applied to very small contingents of palace guards so thats the 0,01%.

My point is there were enough wealthy craftmen and small non-nobles landowners in order not to rely on random generic bumps.

Sure. Like I said before, the bonus is anachronistic, but it's also plausible, and the building's description seems congruent with a good representation of what medieval levies were like.

 

[durbal]

What xD?
View attachment 655523

Amazing, when you quote only the last few words of a sentence it totally changes the meaning! Cool!

I said:

There wasn't any change in where they could be built. Farmlands are rare in Europe and floodplains don't exist anyway.

Now look at the title of the thread. Did you really believe I thought floodplains don't exist in the game at all, or are you just trying to win some unwinnable e-argument where you're ignoring basic math to do so?

 

[DorostheConquer]

Also, heavy cavalry are not as effective at countering due to their lower stack size and their smaller stack size means they do/can absorb less damage no matter what the modifiers are.

This is incorrect. Or at least, it was incorrect prior to this morning's patch - I don't know if the mechanics have changed, but as discussed earlier in the thread, tests on prior patches have shown that heavy cavalry countering values are compensated for their size.

In fact, the only thing the smaller unit size does is give heavy cavs advantages - small units sizes are easier on supply limits, and work better with the Combat Width mechanic.

 

[DorostheConquer]

Amazing, when you quote only the last few words of a sentence it totally changes the meaning! Cool!

Now look at the tit

Was that second part really called for...?!

 

[Myrten]

Compare those modifiers to other MAA types and then consider how easy it is to have 10 Regimental Grounds which are only buildable on farmlands and floodplains and then compare it to other types (especially light cavalry, even post-nerf) and see what I mean.

I'd build them in Egypt and Mesopotania and I can use my heavy cav everywhere.

Now let's compare heavy cav's main building primary county building 18/10 and duchy building 45/45 bonuses:

Light cav got 16/8 and 30/30
Heavy Infantry/Spearman got 18/10 and 15/45
Archers 18/8 and 45/15
Skirmishers 16/8 and 30/15

In fact even when I loaded my save from earlier patch with light-cav building build with camelries and hunting grounds my heavy cav now has better bonuses than light cav.

There are also some minor building bonuses but I don't think they'd change anything so Heavy Cav got best bonuses in the game even without elephantries

Also, heavy cavalry are not as effective at countering due to their lower stack size and their smaller stack size means they do/can absorb less damage no matter what the modifiers are.

Countering doesn't really matter in SP and smaller unit size is better due to combat width.

Are they more viable? Yeah. Are they still very inferior? Yes.

It's most likely best unit in the game now.

Amazing, when you quote only the last few words of a sentence it totally changes the meaning! Cool!

I thought you only related "in Europe" to farmlands, next time please write more clearly

Amazing, when you quote only the last few words of a sentence it totally changes the meaning! Cool!

I said:


Now look at the title of the thread. Did you really believe I thought floodplains don't exist in the game at all, or are you just trying to win some unwinnable e-argument where you're ignoring basic math to do so?

OP mentioned Byzantine Empire and Egypt is one of the first places you take when playing as Byzantines.

Furthermore France alone has 8 farmland baronies so you can absolutely do it in Europe

 

[durbal]

Countering doesn't really matter in SP and smaller unit size is better due to combat width.

Nothing matters in SP because the AI is totally ignorant of the MAA system and how broken aspects of it are.

Smaller unit size is largely irrelevant anyway with the way combat width works unless you'd creating an army of only heavy cavalry in which case...they'll get destroyed as soon as they run into some spears or aren't on plains.

Heavy cavalry are just not that good, and especially not at the premium they're at.