infantry and cavalry

Actually there is a good reason to not give mounts to every unit.  If you're training units purely for extra city garrison (cannon fodder troops) you don't need to give them mounts.  You may end up disbanding them anyway so why waste resources on them?

Imho, people are still stuck in the mindset of "build only the best imaginable unit with every buff and the best equipment and all the traits". There is so much room in this game to build weaker units, to take out world resources or (as MarvinKosh said) cannon fodder. Even a few units of spearmen can be deadly to enemy swordsmen and champions (no counter-attack and defense penetration).

My point is, if you are only building a couple of units every game then of course they should all be mounted. If you are spamming units you'll quickly run out of the resource.

I have to agree with the OP.  Why bother to build infantry when mounted troops are always better and cost the same in production and resources and maintenance, except for adding a horse or warg?  I seem to only need 1 stables providing 1 horse per turn to supply my needs throughout the game so horses are not a limitation in any of my games so far.  Once I have horses / wargs I never build combat units that are not mounted, it is a waste of the other resources invested in the troops since there is no extra cost apart from adding the horse or warg.

I know the game is a fantasy game but historically in the ancient and medieval periods a cavalryman and his horse cost 2 or 3 times as much as an equivalent infantryman in western armies.  This game would have a deeper military / economic strategy if mounted units costs 2x the production and hence maintenance since that is based on production costs. 

This increase in production and maintenance would also be a small advantage to the AI which seems to build mostly infantry into the late game even when it has horses / wargs for trade.  They also don't mount their champions on horses even though that makes them much more effective strategically and tactically and they have oodles of spare gold and can afford horses.

JJ

There's no reason to build infantry. The reason for this unrealistic state of affairs is simple - the game assumes that every horse coming out of a stable is a warhorse, which is ridiculous, and that maintaining a cavalry horse it is about as cheap as maintaining a pair of boots.

If I were trying to fix this, I would have three different types of horses:

1. Untrained horse -2 initiative, + 1 move, -25% to dodge, +10 to carried weight

Fresh from the stable, requires a little production (bridle, saddle, stirrups), adds +1 gold (per soldier) to wages

2. Trained horse (same as existing horse)

Significant additional production cost (represents the training it required), adds +2 gold (per soldier) to wages

3. Warhorse (same as existing warhorse)

Even higher additional production cost (more training) adds +4 gold (per soldier) to wages

Good point. 

Horses other than war horses should not appear in battles at all, since a common horse will just panic and throw off his rider after first loud "bang" nearby or after sustaining the slightest wound. Training a true warhorse was an expensive and lengthy process, and it had to be armored for battle too. That's why medieval battlefields saw masses of levied infantry, but few mounted and armored knights. The cost of making and maintaining of armor, arms and the horse was so great that only landed nobility could afford them.

Well, it does seem odd that horses have no additional costs in terms of upkeep. Makes sense to me that they should have a downside. 'Course, I also thought it was odd I couldn't outfit my pioneers with horses in the design screen so they could get to new city sites faster.

I'm fine with the idea that my ranches are only contributing combat-quality beasts though- why not have a ranch/den generate a gildar bonus to represent selling those that didn't make the cut (or fur coats in the case of the wargs)?

Why not add a special anti-Calvary bonus to spear units on foot though? Wouldn't that make sense, given historical tactics to counter horses in warfare? And if Stardock wants to go down that path, restricting mounted units to shortbows only would seem logical, no?

people all have a mindset of making the best unit and if you have the resources then why not? you can quickly run out of iron/crystal in doing so obviously however my point is that of the mount. As I said there is no distinction between cavalry and infantry apart from the bonuses the mount gives and as others posted there isn't any other use for a mount other than to be a warmount. So for conquest games you tend to just build X cavalry and you win. any unit with the same equipment and training and buffs would lose against its mounted equivalent so it is obvious that if you have the mounts you mount your unit. The game would have more depth if there is a distinction between the two.

My suggestions for Infantry/Cavalry distinctions would be as follows: 

• Increased support costs for horse/warg mounted units (reflecting the costs of feeding and taking care of horses/wargs.) After all, horses and wargs need food too.
• Spears should get combat bonuses vs mounted units (this would make spears more useful.)
• Accuracy penalty for Mounted/Mage archer units unless they get some sort of mounted warfare promotion. In fact, any unit mounted on a horse should have some combat penalties for accuracy etc. unless they get a mounted warrior promotion (reflecting the training necessary to fight from horseback effectively; similar promos for warg riding.)

Agree on #1 - I could go with Tuidjy's approach although i might simplify it to 2 types initially.   Cheaper version with negatives for pure movement bonus, more expensive version with current bonuses as a "warhorse".

Strongly agree on #2 - infantry vs mounted should be treated differently, this would be an easy application of this as long as there is a parameter for 'mounted' vs 'on foot' or something.

Note sure on #3 - right now Accuracy seems kind of broken to me - I think range should affect it.  Until that happens I'm not sure we should implement additional parameters until the base feature is fleshed out.   Subjective though, I could see a "mounted warrior" promotion as a required trait for any cavalry.   The benefits from the horse/warg are relatively significant as is and already cover at least 1 trait "+20 str" for horses "+2 initiative" for warg (and some dodge bonuses too).

So, a unit gets +moves and +traits for a very reasonable rate.   I do the same, why WOULDN'T you use horses if you had them.

Frequently my late game armies are a melee champion to tank (high def and/or dodge), a spellcaster champion with a bow and as many archers or staff users as I can fit.  All mounted with tireless march for 5 movement. 

Definitely give Cavalry a weakness to spears.

In real life, infantry has several immense advantages over cavalry, mostly logistical. The ability to field many more troops in the same space, only having to feed and fit 150 pound humans instead of 1000+ pound beasts, etc.

The cost for production and maintenance just needs to be dramatically higher for cavalry.

Heh, wasn't fast enough have to edit this a bit.

In reference to changing the traits available to mounted units.  This would take making a subclass unit similar to a henchman.  This is possible to do it will just take some coding, make that a lot of coding and it will also make integration with other mods more difficult depending on the extent of the code change.  Look at the militia armor mod Parrotmath made to get an idea of the work involved for this type of change.

For the penalties it would be very easy to add negative bonuses to units such as a Accuracy and Magic Strength penalty to give a penalty to anyone riding them.  Also something to consider is that weight capacity should not really be affected by a mount as technically a persons gear should be able to be worn without a mount if the mount dies but the mount does add protection in the way of its body; this effectively means lose the weight but add hit points.  This also works well with the spear concept of revenge damage versus cavalry.  I am incorporating this change in my armor mod but it is only possible with Heavenfall's additional tags to which I am very grateful to his inputs and contributions that help us all.

The only warhorse currently in the game is available through traits.  So should there be a regular horse for movement only, then a lesser warhorse, and then a greater warhorse that is only available through a trait?  Of course you could also add in the other mounts that are already in game as well from that point but then it might get a bit silly.  Ashwake dragon mount anyone?

I thought this was the reward for the 2 dragon eyes quest, and was sorely disappointed to find that all you get is a silly Ashwake Dragon in your army.

Its in the code for mounts so its possible to add it.  Not saying it would be a good idea but think of a final tech for mounts that requires Dance of the Dragons as a prereq as well.  Might be worth doing, I think Heavenfall did something like this in his mod.

Another horse variation might be something patterned after the mongols: in addition to the horse armor and training, each unit gets five horses (giving a strategic map movement bonus).

I am the same and I'm sure majority of the players do this if not all. and thats why end game tends to get bland.

I do have one question regarding mounted units; do they have saddles and stirrups? The character graphics I have seen does not show them. This is important because Stirrups in particular had a huge impact on warfare because it gave the riders a much more stable platform to fight. Maybe have saddles/stirrups as a tech and or equipment?

Also I do agree that horse should have a large labor cost and a high Gildar wage costs.

Also maybe have a chance for a rider to get unhorsed?

I will have to see what I can work out for mounted units for cost wise.  Graphic wise I am very limited in mod regards to what is already in game and barely at that.  Still I agree that there should be a tertiary mounted horse unit.  The problem with this is that you also have to consider wargs and where do they fit in as both empire and kingdoms can use either so wargs need to fit somewhere in the equation.

so something like te following for progression wise:

Riding Horse ==> Light Warhorse ==> Wargs ==> Heavy Warhorse ==> Random awarded mounts.

Riding horses                 = +1 to movement and +10 to hit points 

Light Warhorse               = +2 to movement and +15 to hit points

Warg                             = +1 to movement, +2 to speed, +20 hit points

Heavy Warhorse             = +2 to movement, +1 to speed, +25 to hit points

and so on......

These are totally arbitrary numbers.

Also should riding a horse increase your dodge or not?

The additional hit points represent the ability of the mount to shield a unit but should they also have dodge or not or should it be reduced from where it currently is?

Oh this is also considering that mounted units will take additional damage from spear wielding units.

I am not so sure... the high movement things seem essential -- wiping the map with 2 move armies would require a lot of them.  The powerful champion thing seems essential.  Fighting a multi-front war is a good recipe for disaster.

But, after that?

I'm sold. So anyone have a mod out for this yet?

My subjective opinion is slightly different but along the same path.  If you're adding hit points, I don't think you should get the dodge too.  In melee reduces short range mobility (i.e. dodge)., and in ranged you're a bigger target.   Since you can't get unhorsed as someone else mentioned, you might actually get hit MORE.

Riding horses                 = +4 to movement and +0 to hit points and -5 dodge

                                    = 120 gold to purchase, +1 gold/turn upkeep, (per unit), 2 turns of production

Light Warhorse               = +4 to movement and +10 to hit points +3 to attack and +1 speed and -5 dodge

                                    = 200 gold to purchase, +3 gold/turn upkeep (per unit), 4 turns of production, special building required

Warg                             = +2 to movement, +2 to speed, +15 hit points and -0 to dodge (thinking wargs are agile, i.e. +2 speed)

                                    = 175 gold to purchase, +2 gold/turn upkeep (per unit), 3 turns of production

Heavy Warhorse             = +3 to movement, +1 to speed, +30 to hit points, +5 to attack and -10 dodge

                                    = 300 gold to purchase, +5 gold/turn upkeep (per unit), 5 turns of production, special building required (maybe limit to 4 troops in a unit?)

For all mounted:

Special trait required - "mounted training"

Create new weapons - Light lance and Heavy Lance - only useable by troops with "mounted training" and a warhorse.  Light for light, Heavy for heavy.   Heavy piercing damage, 2h, (either knockback or # of tiles traveled = multiplier/addition on damage)

Limited weapon list - No daggers, longbows - possibly other limitations.

If a 4 troop of heavy warhorses cost +5 turns of production, a special building and 20!!! gold per turn, is it worth it?  Heavy lance could go with a mulitiplier - with the idea that a troop of heavy knights knocks out an enemy on first turn. 

I think personally I would usually go with pure mobility - riding horse and light warhorse.  Not sure if that kills the whole idea then

Add another category of armor (barding). to further boost defense at the cost of movement (-1)

Add spear additional bonus against mounted unless user is mounted

No pikes for the mounted.

The required mount training can't be implemented at this time as the only prereqs that work with gear at all is a level requirement which is only for hero gear.  The gold cost would only be hero purchases make sense cost wise and I like the idea of adding hit points and reducing dodge instead of increasing it.  The hit points I listed were so that when you include the pony mount that is a quest reward it still has a hit point bonus of +5.

For as far as barding goes it would make an interesting accessory that could only be used by mounted units and adds additional armor and I like the idea.  You could even do different tiers of barding based upon cost or horse type.  

I have a thread that goes over the problems associated with creating a mini class such as mounted units.  The basic problem is we can design them but the AI will likely not be able to use them effectively.

Great ideas all around now if we can get some support to make them happen, and be used by the AI as well.