Next Update

[KiwiWarlord]

I see that there are changes afoot with some foot being able to charge mounted, great.

I was wondering if foot zocing mounted could be look at too?

I had a situation where my Cavaliers were facing the flank of an enemy mounted unit and were busy unsheathing their swords when a raw Scottish Pike & Shot Regiment came up adjacent to the right rear corner of my Cavaliers, thus zocing them.
My Cavaliers were allowed to move around the exposed flank of their target but not allowed to charge the enemy exposed flank as that was not the priority target.
The priority target was the pike & shot unit to the rear of the cavaliers ???!!!

This does seem absurd as the Pike & Shot can not charge the Cavaliers

[rbodleyscott]

This is working as intended.

It may seem absurd if thinking purely in terms of game mechanics and not of the reactions of real men in this situation.

The term "priority target" is shorthand for an enemy unit on which the unit's attention is focused, whether or not it can be charged immediately. In this case it means: the unit that the cavalrymen's attention is focused on because they are about to "pop a cap in their ass" at point blank range. Their minds are focused on moving out of range, not on charging another enemy unit.

Whatever their officers may wish them to do.

"Never give an order that won't be obeyed."

[fairfax]

I know there has already been a thread regarding Parliamentry cavalry. But I'm hoping "The team " show some love for the ordinary cavalry and the "Lobsters" Both seem very under par. I wouldn't have thought there would be so much difference between the "run of the mill" cavalry be it Royalist or Parliament. I certainly agree with Veteran Cavalry having the edge on the ordinary cavalry. But Parliamentry cavalry against Cavaliers seem to stand little chance of winning. Also why not give the Cavaliers carbines ? Then both would be equal............Anyway just my florins worth.

[rbodleyscott]

I know there has already been a thread regarding Parliamentry cavalry. But I'm hoping "The team " show some love for the ordinary cavalry and the "Lobsters" Both seem very under par. I wouldn't have thought there would be so much difference between the "run of the mill" cavalry be it Royalist or Parliament. I certainly agree with Veteran Cavalry having the edge on the ordinary cavalry. But Parliamentry cavalry against Cavaliers seem to stand little chance of winning. Also why not give the Cavaliers carbines ? Then both would be equal............Anyway just my florins worth.

They should not be equal. At the beginning of the war the Royalist cavalry used different tactics, charging to contact instead of attempting to shoot it out with carbines as the Parliamentarian cavalry tried to do. This generally resulted in the Parliamentarian cavalry being swept away, the problem being that the Royalist cavalry then often pursued them off the battlefield, leaving the issue of the battle to be decided by the infantry. As the war continued the Parliamentarian cavalry used more aggressive tactics, especially in the Eastern Association, narrowing the gap. This is reflected in the army lists.

Cavaliers are much more likely to continue pursuing than Parliamentarian horse, making them something of a one shot weapon.

Hazelrig's "Lobsters" performed very poorly at the Battle of Roundway Down. Later in the war, Hazelrig's regiment performed better, but by that time they were no longer equipped in 3/4 armour as "Lobsters" but were equipped the same as the rest of the Parliamentarian horse.

The current representation of Royalist and Parliamentarian horse is closely based on true historical differences, not in equipment, but in tactical doctrine, discipline and elan. The tactical interest in what are otherwise very similar armies is to play to the strengths of whichever side you are using.