Re-balancing the horse unit to increase survivability

[irrevenant]

Anecdotal evidence, but I leveled a horseman in a recent game by using him as a finisher against wounded units to reduce counter-attack damage taken by my front line. It required being careful not to expose him to attack by many units by covering him with spearmen. Also, charging horsemen get a lot of bonus damage from leadership. I keep them alive by only exposing them to a minimum of enemy units at a time, and by usually only charging with them when they can kill their target in one hit.

Yup. The problem seems to be that the OP is thinking of Horsemen as something like Swordsmen when tactically they should be thought of more as a hybrid of a scout and a mage - they're tactical units, not frontline ones.

[Blarumyrran]

i think horsemen should gain Stoning Gaze.

[peet]

A lot of good points have been made in defense of the horseman as-is. And while I agree overall, one thing that charging units are missing is the feel of medieval cavalry.

Until the rediscovery of the pike in the fourteenth century, cavalry was supreme in medieval warfare. They really were the 'tanks' of the age, and the only real defense against them were either fortifications or more cavalry. Foot units caught in the open, whether archers or swordsmen, would have no chance.

In Wesnoth terms, such units ought to be your "first wave," the guys you send in to break up the enemy lines. Other units would then move in to capitalize on the resulting disarray.

Instead, the horseman is exactly the opposite. He is the guy you hold back until it is "safe." And yes, he can finish off enemy units wonderfully if used right. But he is actually fairly easy to kill and the consequences of a miss at a critical point are devastating to the horseman.

So I can sympathize with islandraider that the horsemen don't "feel" right.

The problem is that if the horseman were to be as powerful as their medieval equivalents, they would have to be MUCH more expensive. If the horseman cost 45 gold to draft then you could build it to have this feel.

While this would be realistic, because it normally took the wealth an entire villiage to support a single knight (whereas the same village could potentially field dozens of yeomen and levies), nevertheless it could definitely be a problem if one side in a head-to-head matchup was able to buy units that were worth 45 gold.

You really should think of the horseman as a "squire," a young knight-in-training. He does not yet have the heavier armour and weapons of a full-fledged knight and as such you can't just throw them against the enemy.

Peet

[TheArchitect]

The problem is that if the horseman were to be as powerful as their medieval equivalents, they would have to be MUCH more expensive. If the horseman cost 45 gold to draft then you could build it to have this feel.

I agree wholeheartedly that a horseman with these changes would be an unfair advantage for whoever is using it. It would need to be handicapped to make the game fair. However, increased cost isn't the only way of doing this. A horseman with these changes would be like a skeleton without arcane or impact weaknesses: an overpowered killing machine. Drakes also have a weakness because without it, they too would be overpowered

Horsemen could be given a similar weakness to pierce (-70%?) that would not only re-balance them, but also make them more realistic.

Until the rediscovery of the pike in the fourteenth century, cavalry was supreme in medieval warfare. They really were the 'tanks' of the age, and the only real defense against them were either fortifications or more cavalry. Foot units caught in the open, whether archers or swordsmen, would have no chance.

Like peet pointed out, the pike was extremely effective for countering cavalry charges. There are plenty of pikes and spearmen in wesnoth; why can't they be adopted to serve the same anti-cavalry purpose they were meant for in real life?

[anakayub]

They aren't?

[Velensk]

Pikes and spears already do a great job of stoping horsemen charges, just try doing horsemen against spearmen or clashers or guardsmen and see what happens. It gets even worse once they become pikemen and get resistnance to the horsemans attack in addition to huge damage and firststrike.

[TheArchitect]

I know they already have weaknesses to pierce . I am just saying that that weakness could be increased to compensate for the proposed improvements. I assume everyone agrees that without some kind of handicap, the modified horseman would be insanely overpowered...

[anakayub]

And how do other factions compensate? There's nothing addressing the ability to prevent horsemen attacks against them as well, etc. Effect of charge + super duper pierce weakness? Isn't that much overpowered, when currently spearman already rule against horsemen?

Frankly, the current unit is powerful enough to not require changes to anything. The reason for changes should be because the unit is broken (overpowered/underpowered in regards to its cost, dynamics within faction, and dynamics against opponents etc). No one has proven how the unit currently is unusable/too powerful, negating any need for change. Everything is about how it's used in real life, when WINR.

[TheArchitect]

The current unit may not be broken, but that doesn't mean it can't be improved. Are you suggesting that we should only change what is broken (I can't think of anything that is broken in mainline; can you?) and assume everything else is perfect? If thats the case, I don't see the point of the "ideas" forum.

Also, WINR only applies when an attempt to make wesnoth real takes away from the enjoyment of gameplay. In my opinion, this change would not only make it more real, but also improve gameplay. However, this whole thing is based on opinion. You either think the change would make the game better or you don't. I guess there isn't anything else to argue.

[turin]

If thats the case, I don't see the point of the "ideas" forum.

Garbage collection?

[Trau]

The current unit may not be broken, but that doesn't mean it can't be improved.

I had a long, informative post about this that I just accidentally deleted, so...

In short, don't fix what ain't broke.

[TrashMan]

Horsemen generally have a lot of HP. They can often survive being sorounded by several weak melee enemies. So far they seem good to me, you just have to pay attention how and when you use them.

[Wintermute]

If thats the case, I don't see the point of the "ideas" forum.

Garbage collection?

Sometimes I wonder: is it worth reading post after post of near-insanity? What is it about the forums that keeps me reading? And then I remember: turin cracks me up.

[Strom]

Just one more idea...
Maybe give horseman non-charge attack to kill the really low hp spearmen or sth simillar without being annihilated if bad roll will occur. It could somehow increase the usefulness of horse.

[irrevenant]

Frankly, the current unit is powerful enough to not require changes to anything. The reason for changes should be because the unit is broken (overpowered/underpowered in regards to its cost, dynamics within faction, and dynamics against opponents etc). No one has proven how the unit currently is unusable/too powerful, negating any need for change. Everything is about how it's used in real life, when WINR.

I agree with the general principle.

However, one exception to that principle is when a unit is sufficiently unrealistic as to be misleading. There's a reason that Wesnoth has Elves that live in the woods and use bows, and Dwarves who are slow and tough - it matches new players' expectations.

Whether that applies here, I don't know.

Certainly, horsemen were historically supreme on the battlefield, but then historically they didn't have to face the likes of Drakes, Undead and Elves. Their changed role on the battlefield may reflect that.