Help wanted on how to use cavalry

[gamercb]

I am trying to improve my game but I am struggling to find a way to use my cavalry without them being forced to evade and either be hit in th rear or driven from the table. Can anyone help with this? I had the situation in a league battle where my noble cavalry where facing Armoured Cavalry across a valley. I had hoped that my cavalry might have held given that they would be uphill if charged but once again they evaded, which then allowed his units trying to outflank me to catch me in the rear. See the screen shot for the result. I did have one unit that held.

Screen_00000003.jpg (971.01 KiB) Viewed 3209 times

I have also been in the position of moving Superior Armoured cavalry to try and drive off my opponents cavalry, only for them to be charged, evade and then get caught in the rear with the drop in cohesion before combat. The third situation is that the cavalry evades but ends up just infront of the pursuer. If I turn to face, he charges again and I evade again until he either catches me or drives me off the table. Given my luck in getting them back, they are basically lost for the rest of the battle.

If this has been covered before, apologies but I could not find a thread on this.

[kronenblatt]

This is not spot on what you asked for regarding evasion but at least covers use of cavalry:

viewtopic.php?f=477&t=99667

And another one:

viewtopic.php?f=477&t=98645&start=60

Hopefully somewhat useful.

[SimonLancaster]

In the pic I just see your cavalry outnumbered by 7 to 4 on the flank. Not sure if other cavalry is off the screen. In this type of situation you just need to hold out and do your damage on the other side. Try to keep your cav alive as long as possible, bring some inf over to block some pathways, and use light cav to harry the enemy.

The enemy has an advantage and he wants to use it. You need to deny him this opportunity in any way possible.

Of course, in situations where there is an even balance between forces you can be aggressive.

[ahuyton]

In my recent set of games, I also observed some strange incidents with cavalry,
- a superior armoured horse archer unit evading a lighter Indian cavalry (with spear), and as gamercb experienced, getting caught in the rear and fragmenting. A sad end to an expensive unit.
- cavalry that charge foot, disrupt them and then fall back - on the following turn they seem to have good odds (20%+) of winning both the impact and melee combat. Perhaps this is not a helpful example as I cannot remember the details.

Any thoughts or advice very welcome.

[Karvon]

As I mentioned in my post in another thread referenced above, in my experience, horse archers nearly always attempt to evade, regardless of the melee odds. Thus, armored superior horse archers are one of the worst buys in the game IMHO. They do have their uses, but you can usually do the same thing for far cheaper. I normally avoid using lists that require/rely on them.

Your mileage, of course, may vary

[sIg3b]

Armored doesn´t help much, likely, because they evade, anyway. Superior is good, though, because they shoot better.

Wearing enemy cavalry down from a distance, then charging them when they are fragmented, is nice.

[sIg3b]

AfaIk, Lancers, Cataphracts and Elephants never evade. Everything else that has four legs, always consider they may feel like evading. Cavalry combat is very fluid. Expect the unexpected.

[Karvon]

Armor helps a bit vs shooting, but won't make a big difference if you're facing massive amounts of fire.

[Nosy_Rat]

When deciding whether to evade cavalry takes into account not only the unit charging it right now, but also enemy enemy units that can possibly charge them this turn if they stand and fight. So if there's a threat of flank attack, infantry charge or any other significant threat, like elephats, cavalry is most likely to evade even if the charge itself is not very dangerous.

[Karvon]

Yeah, the whole AI evasion is a bit of a mystery and I'm sure there's a random element as well since sometimes in virtually identical situations a unit will stand in one and evade in the other. It's one reason why I don't really like using light spear cavalry unless I don't have any other options as they are the most unpredictable of the lot.

[NikiforosFokas]

Just stop here to say that I miss the do not evade option of the FoG1

[deeter]

Me too! I remember how good it was when we successfully pushed for its inclusion. Also, units that evaded off the map had no option to return, effectively removing them from the battle. We also got the option to select the battlefield from multiple maps.

Deeter

[sIg3b]

Just stop here to say that I miss the do not evade option of the FoG1

Did FoG1 also have an "always evade" option? I´d like that even better.

[kronenblatt]

Just stop here to say that I miss the do not evade option of the FoG1

Did FoG1 also have an "always evade" option? I´d like that even better.

[deeter]

Yes FOG I had three settings: always evade, never evade and potluck.

Deeter

[stockwellpete]

Me too! I remember how good it was when we successfully pushed for its inclusion. Also, units that evaded off the map had no option to return, effectively removing them from the battle. We also got the option to select the battlefield from multiple maps.

Deeter

Yes - and there was a good system for deciding who chose the map to do with which army had the best generals and the greater mobility. There are a number of features in FOG1 that have not made it to FOG2 and some of them would enhance the game further, the most obvious one being "anarchy" charges, but also things like choosing how many generals you would have.

[kronenblatt]

Me too! I remember how good it was when we successfully pushed for its inclusion. Also, units that evaded off the map had no option to return, effectively removing them from the battle. We also got the option to select the battlefield from multiple maps.

Deeter

Yes - and there was a good system for deciding who chose the map to do with which army had the best generals and the greater mobility. There are a number of features in FOG1 that have not made it to FOG2 and some of them would enhance the game further, the most obvious one being "anarchy" charges, but also things like choosing how many generals you would have.

If "anarchy charges" were optional, then sure, but if built into the rules, no thanks. But being able to select the actual map from a wide range of visible choices, and to choose the number of generals sounds cool.

[deeter]

Anarchy charges were not optional and quite infuriating. I don't miss them. It was far too easy to bait shock units out of position with a cheap skirmisher. It was nice to be able to choose how many generals to purchase and what quality. However, they were stuck with the unit they were purchased with and didn't confer free facing or have assigned commands. So some progress, some backstepping. The biggest change though was the move to squares. Didn't like it initially and still not convinced it's an improvement. Limited ammo, however, is a huge improvement making all-skirmisher armies unimportant. As this is a thread about cavalry, the pursuit mechanic is a huge change to the system and probably decisive.

Deeter

[stockwellpete]

Anarchy charges were not optional and quite infuriating. I don't miss them. It was far too easy to bait shock units out of position with a cheap skirmisher.

Yes, it was poorly implemented in FOG1. There are better ways of doing it though and it means that light spear/lance cavalry would primarily be used for their charge ability rather than ahistorical uses such as trying to hold defensive lines with them or the abominable "ZOC-locking" of the better infantry units.

[NikiforosFokas]

Anarchy charges were not optional and quite infuriating. I don't miss them.
Deeter

But think about it. It was one of the main reasons that the camping attitude did not create any problem back then. Also, it was realistic (historical speaking)..Omg, i miss so much FoG1...