PDA

View Full Version : advantage in troops



Jasperthaman
02-05-2008, 12:58 PM
i read that it is now so:

infantry strong vs cavalry
cavalry strong vs shooters
shooters strong vs infantry

I think this is not right. If you ask me it would be.

infantry strong vs shooters
cavalry strong vs infantry (becouse they overwalk them)
shooters strong vs cavalry (horses don't really have much defence against arrows I think.

I think this is more logical.

Kartabon
02-05-2008, 01:40 PM
Infantry, just imagine some pikeman. Result? Cavalry taken out.

It's ok as it's made http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

frbbls
02-05-2008, 04:08 PM
Well its dificult to tackle this;

Infantry > Cavalry, the pikemen versus normal cavalry scenario BUT Cavalry > Infantry if it were simple footmen. Maybe if a spearwielding unit would get bonusses to attack to cavalry.

Jasperthaman
02-06-2008, 08:47 AM
Originally posted by frbbls:
Well its dificult to tackle this;

Infantry > Cavalry, the pikemen versus normal cavalry scenario BUT Cavalry > Infantry if it were simple footmen. Maybe if a spearwielding unit would get bonusses to attack to cavalry.

this is what I mean and there aren't any spearmen in HOMM V as far as I know.

glenn.makin
02-15-2008, 08:59 AM
In terms of military history, cavalry used against infantry, shooters versus infantry and to a lesser extent cavalry, infantry vs infantry (and if smashing through to back lines) shooters.

Shooters normally being back up infantry if needed, but weak against specialised infantry.

Jaspertheman's point is also accurate: pikemen standing against cavalry charges.

QuiS.T.
08-25-2008, 03:57 PM
i have to agree with Jasperthaman. only spier-wielding infantry are used against cavalry and since there are no pikemen in HoMM, infantry units shouldn't have any bonus against mounted troops or large units like griffons (i understand griffons and such count as cavalry). moreover, a cavalry charge is one of the best ways of breaking an enemy (normal) infantry line.

thus in my opinion it should be the other way around:
cavalry - bonus against infantry
infantry - bonus against shooters (of course cavalrymen are just as good against archers, if not even better due do their speed, but each unit type should have a bonus only when fighting against one of the other 2 types. that said a group of armored squires or a few fast-moving blade dancers have a better chance of closing in on a pack of assassins then most units out there.)
archers - bonus against cavalry (since this also includes most of the flyers and all of the large units like titans and cyclopes, archers should indeed have bonus against 'cavalry'. from the many demons in existence, only a succubus could deal damage to an angel while said angel is flying high above the battlefield; a group of small, fast-moving gremlins have a better chance of success against a cyclops than a few golems, who would undoubtedly be smashed to bits after getting to close; and even against actual cavalry, archers are preferable sometimes: when facing a pack of charging paladins, having a group of hunters kill them before they reach your lines is the best option you have.)

and think about it this way: more than half of all the units in HoMM are 'infantry' and most of the high level creatures are 'large' (thus classified as cavalry). if, besides having large numbers of them and being able to recruit them from the beginning, 'infantry' units also have a bonus against 'cavalry', high level creatures would loose much of their importance. you could divert the resources needed to recruit anything above level 4 into raising huge armies of low-level, much stronger units.

this is the most important part of the combat system, as well as being a major focus point of your overall game strategy (how you balance your troops), and if left unchanged it could ruin the entire game.

vizier.mv
08-25-2008, 09:29 PM
I think the relationships between shooters and infantry and cavalry are premised on speed.

Shooters are weakly defended and can be reached quickly by charging cavalry. Once the cavalry have closed the distance the shooters are at a great disadvantage, and so on the whole are weak against cavalry. Infantry, on the other hand, are slow, so shooters have more time to harm them before the infantry can get close enough to melee the shooters. Hence, infantry weak against shooters on the whole.

This is just as it is in the regular HOMM games. Slow moving infantry get shot at a couple of times before they reach the shooters. Cavalry on the other hand can usually get to the shooters within one turn.

As for infantry vs. cavalry, I think arguments can be made equally either way. So all things being equal, Ubi just picked one over the other. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

MrTapkomet
11-30-2008, 08:56 AM
Bun it is funny watching as fast moving infantry as cerbers?who reach archers very fast,die fast because of arrows=).And of course archers don't stand a chance against heavy-shielded Squiers.
P.S. Correct me if my English is bad because I'm from Ukraine=)

BeastMage
11-30-2008, 10:06 AM
I think that main problem is that all units are categorized into 3 types: archers, cavalry, infantry. So they were forced to close triangle somehow. Because if cavalry also get bonus to infantry, they would simply be the best and no need to recruit any other type.
In general cavalry have bonus against archers because of it speed no matter of armor type. and heavy cav have huge bonus. Heavy armored infantry like swords also have bonus against archers but lesser then cavalry.
Cavalry was also great against all infantry except organized infantry with spears. And spears because lack of armor and huge spear ussually without large or any shild were killed easy with archers. Also swords were better then spears in battle. and heavily armored swords killed archers but with bigger losses then cavalry.
But until army is organized in only 3 group types, it must be like they did it.
But i think that lvl + damage+ attack+ defense + hitpoints and any other characteristic will decide winner and wont simply be few cavalrymen kill 1000 shooters. Normally that battle system needs to be simplified in web-based game.
There is a game called imperia online where battle system including archers, swordsmen, spears and cavalry is done very good considering units strength and weakneses from real life.

Vindicator1992
12-04-2008, 09:19 AM
yes archers against horses=archers win,but in some
situation horses can come to archers and that cause archers to rout so....
there is no spear wielding in HOMMV as i saw http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
and take squire against marksman=big shield=defense from the arrows=archers dead!!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

VII-KingTiger
02-02-2009, 05:19 PM
well, i know this thread is kinda old, but i find this disscusion most interesting, so i'll just revive it.

first of all, in homm 3 & 4 haven (aka castle/life) had pikemen, but appart from them no other race had spear-infantry i think.

if this wasn't a fantasy-scenario, it would probably be a lot easier to categorize the troops or if it wasn't fixed on allready existing troop-types, but i guess to add some more, basic trooptypes is not an option.


what interests me is, will f.e. the titan be both, shooter and infantry (or cavalry)? in every heroespart he could throw his bolts, but also crush an enemy unit in close combat without penalty when required. it would be a great dissapointment if this unit became a shooter-only-type.

@Vomdocator1992:
Archers don't usually win against cavalry. cavalry is a fast moving target, thus harder to hit and pretty demoralizing if charging towards you. on an open field and without spearmen for protection the archers would be run over in no time.
heavily shielded and armoured infanty would also have a good chance to survive arrow-barrages, although they will definately be slowed down in movement. less protected infantry would on the other hand sustain heavy casualties (if they charge, they might reach the enemy lines faster, but then would allready be tired and disorganized. if they move at normal marchingspeed, they reach the enemy with full stamina and better organized, but with fewer numbers). but i doubt even the heaviest shield and armour of human-sized soldiers would protect against a lightningbolt from a titan or the huge boulder thrown from a cyclopse.
anyway, even the non-bg homm-parts were simplified in that matter and i liked them nonetheless. so i guess, one shouldn't expect a too complex fighting system here and it doesn't really matter, as long its still fun to play and not like in all the other standard-bgs, where superior numbers are always victorius.