Light Horse

[MaxDamage]

In a recent battle, I lined up my pike and shot to oppose the enemy light cavalry (me as the Swedes, them as the Russians). In the direct exchange of fire, my pike and shot were losing the overall exchange against an equal number of units of Tatars and Cossacks, even some Russian "traditional" cavalry.

Much depends on which Swedes you were using. If you were using the ones just prior to the Swedish entry into the TYW whose foot are Salvo but are not Superior and do not have Regimental Guns, they do indeed have very poor close range firepower relative to other pike and shot, and hence relative to mounted archers. This would not be typical of a pike and shot vs mounted matchup in the game.

(The lower close-range firepower for Salvo troops is to represent them keeping men loaded prior to a salvo and charge. Arguably it should not apply vs mounted troops. Something to consider for future updates. However, the point is that over the whole game, the advantage lies with the Pike and Shot in a shootout vs mounted troops).

Hmmm maybe dont fix it? I actually think it is a nice touch and gives more rock paper scissor options. You use your missile cav to go against the salvo foot for better effect. I e the unit will have its counter.

[rbodleyscott]

In a recent battle, I lined up my pike and shot to oppose the enemy light cavalry (me as the Swedes, them as the Russians). In the direct exchange of fire, my pike and shot were losing the overall exchange against an equal number of units of Tatars and Cossacks, even some Russian "traditional" cavalry.

Much depends on which Swedes you were using. If you were using the ones just prior to the Swedish entry into the TYW whose foot are Salvo but are not Superior and do not have Regimental Guns, they do indeed have very poor close range firepower relative to other pike and shot, and hence relative to mounted archers. This would not be typical of a pike and shot vs mounted matchup in the game.

(The lower close-range firepower for Salvo troops is to represent them keeping men loaded prior to a salvo and charge. Arguably it should not apply vs mounted troops. Something to consider for future updates. However, the point is that over the whole game, the advantage lies with the Pike and Shot in a shootout vs mounted troops).

Hmmm maybe dont fix it? I actually think it is a nice touch and gives more rock paper scissor options. You use your missile cav to go against the salvo foot for better effect. I e the unit will have its counter.

I tend to agree.

[Ladislav]

i came across a similar issue with my hungarian army (link to lonely thread @ http://www.slitherine.com/forum/viewtop ... 06#p650206) ,and yes charging light cavalry that will only evade is pointless (and historically accurate). I concentrate all available fire on a single light cavalry unit. once their cohesion drops (ideally to Fragmented) I charge. Use artillery and ligt infantry to soften the incoming units.

[KateMicucci]

No doubt horse archers were quite fearsome troops but they seem to have been eclipsed quite rapidly when firearms came into play. Look at the rapid demise of all the Khanates in the 1500's and the expansion of Moscow all the way to the Pacific with small groups of arquebus armed adventurers. The Tatar Khanate only lasted as it was a buffer state of both Moscovy and The ottomans. In the 1600's it is well documented that when firearm cavalry clashed with bow cavalry, the bows generally lost. That being said sometimes I wonder if those pesky carbine armed light horse can be a little too powerful in P&S

This is certainly the case with foot musketeers vs foot archers but I have seen few documented cases of firearm cavalry fighting bow cavalry. Do you have any specific examples?

It seems to me that using a firearm from horseback sacrifices some of its principal advantages. The firearm's range advantage over bowmen is negated by the inherent inaccuracy of shooting from horseback and the quick speed that cavalry can close. A significant part of the firearm's kinetic energy advantage is lost because horsemen used fun-sized rather than full-sized firearms. And of course a musketeer could take cover behind hedges or in a ditch and keep shooting while an archer could not without revealing himself, another advantage firearm cav didn't have.