lacers are terrible

[Wuangaga]

I mean the word medium cav, uhlans, cossacks usw. get tagged as hand cav and normal cav iirc. The tag medium cav doesnt exist.

even cuirs and mahouts are hand cavs, but they arent like these ones. Maybe normal cav. Medium = normal looks like having same meanings. Whatever its your wish calling them according to your perfect opinion.

Thats not about opinions its about how they are described by they game. And the tags for every cavalry unit that can only do close damage are (counting in meteor hammers) are Hand Cavalry, Heavy Cavalry and Cavalry. While tags for goon-type units are Light Cavalry, Ranged Cavalry and Cavalry (Gunpowder Cavalry if it doesnt use a bow). And coyotes runners have the tags Hand Infantry and Light Infantry.

[PhalluS]

you have read my post exactly? i have wrote this corresponding.

Yeah I did it read it. You wrote that coyotes are light cavalry, ?which is wrong. Light cavalries are those which kill heavy cavalry(hand cavalry) and artillery (Dragoons, Ruyters) . Not like what you meant. What would you name for a skirmisher? ?Heavy Infantry? ?Nope. You could call eagle runners a light cavalry as they kill cavalry. Coyotes are medium.

sry, confounded

[Metis]

Note: this specific to TAD, 'nilla may be different

As far as the game code is concerned, there is only <'UnitType>'AbstractHeavyCavalry<'/UnitType>' and <'UnitType>'AbstractLightCavalry<'/UnitType>'.

Coyote Runners and Eagle Runner Knights are coded in special for all units that have a bonus toward cavalry. This special coding makes Coyote Runners somewhat like a Hussar and Eagle Runners Knights somewhat like a Dragoon' however, not exactly for all units, as we will see below.

For instance, a skirmisher has a 2x bonus toward light cavalry, and a 2x bonus toward ERKS, which make ERKs essentially light cavalry where a skirmisher is concerned.

type ='AbstractLightCavalry'>'2.000000<'/DamageBonus>'
<'DamageBonus type ='xpEagleKnight'>'2.000000<'/DamageBonus>'

Skirmishers have a 25% detriment towards all cavalry and also a 25% detriment versus Coyote Runners, which makes Coyote Runners the same as cavalry in their eyes.

<'DamageBonus type ='xpCoyoteMan'>'0.750000<'/DamageBonus>'
<'DamageBonus type ='AbstractCavalry'>'0.750000<'/DamageBonus>'

The heavy cavalry tag is used to give certain units a bonus or detriment against units specifically possessing this tag. For instance, a Cavalry Archer, Dragoon or War Wagon has a special 3x bonus versus heavy cavalry.

type ='AbstractHeavyCavalry'>'3.000000<'/DamageBonus>'

However, here is one instance where Coyote Runners do not quite equate to heavy cavalry. Dragoons are a bit better versus Coyote Runners than are Cavalry Archers and War Wagons lie somewhere in the middle.

Cavalry Archer
<'DamageBonus type ='AbstractCoyoteMan'>'1.750000<'/DamageBonus>'

War Wagon
type ='AbstractCoyoteMan'>'2.250000<'/DamageBonus>'

Dragoon
type ='AbstractCoyoteMan'>'2.750000<'/DamageBonus>'

For vernacular purposes, however, Papist is right, you can divide hand cavalry into low hitpoint cheap units (both in pop space and cost), like the Cossack and costly, tanky units, like the Cuirassier. Both the Cossack and Cuirassier, however, have the game's heavy cavalry tag.

[zoom]

I knew there was something weird about coyote runners..... That''s stupid that an infantry unit wouldn''t have an infantry tag.....

It''s not stupid at all. It would be stupid if they didn''t as they are light infantry simulating cavalry. It may be confusing if you come from a vanilla perspective, however.

[gibson]

I knew there was something weird about coyote runners..... Thats stupid that an infantry unit wouldnt have an infantry tag.....

Its not stupid at all. It would be stupid if they didnt as they are light infantry simulating cavalry. It may be confusing if you come from a vanilla perspective, however.

from a purely logical stand point it seems pretty stupid to me that a unit that is obviously infantry is not classified as such.....

[evilcheadar]

Lancers just ain't that great. That low base att is pitiful and do I not know if I'm playing vs Spain that ff lancers will be coming? Spain's not considered that great for a reason.

[Jaeger]

Lancers just ain''t that great. That low base att is pitiful and do I not know if I''m playing vs Spain that ff lancers will be coming? Spain''s not considered that great for a reason.

low base attack doesnt matter if you dont use them to fight huss or goons. They have more ranged hp than huss i think, don''t have to be upgraded, and do better vs skirm goon than huss do. Tho it is often more useful to ship 5 huss before 4 lancers just to catch raids.

[Metis]

For game purposes, the Aztec needed a melee and ranged cavalry unit. However, historically the Aztec had no cavalry because horses, for some reason, became extinct in the Western Hemisphere and were not yet domesticated when humans first migrated across Beringia to settle it. Therefore, special tags were used to give the Aztec a cavalry-like unit while maintaining as much historicity as possible.

Speaking of light infantry, in 'nilla this classification is completely different than it is in TAD.

TAD light infantry

<'Unit id ='324' name ='NatEagleWarrior'>'
<'Unit id ='744' name ='xpCoyoteMan'>'
<'Unit id ='942' name ='ypNatRattanShield'>'
<'Unit id ='944' name ='ypNatTigerClaw'>'

<'Unit id ='968' name ='ypNatMercRattanShield'>'
<'Unit id ='969' name ='ypNatMercTigerClaw'>'
<'Unit id ='1052' name ='ypMonkDisciple'>'

<'Unit id ='755' name ='xpEagleKnight'>'


Also, some campaign and cinematic units:

<'Unit id ='640' name ='IGCJaeger'>'
<'Unit id ='651' name ='IGCCrossbowman'>'

<'Unit id ='671' name ='IGCNativeVillager'>'

<'Unit id ='557' name ='SPCCherokeeArcher'>'

<'Unit id ='647' name ='SPCNativeBoy'>'

[yurashic]

For game purposes, the Aztec needed a melee and ranged cavalry unit. However, historically the Aztec had no cavalry because horses, for some reason, became extinct in the Western Hemisphere and were not yet domesticated when humans first migrated across Beringia to settle it. Therefore, special tags were used to give the Aztec a cavalry-like unit while?maintaining as much historicity as possible.

Speaking of light infantry, in ''nilla this classification is completely different than it is in TAD.

TAD light infantry




?








Also, some campaign and cinematic?units:

Disciples are also classified as light infantry that acts like cavalry.

[Metis]

<'Unit id =1052 name =ypMonkDisciple>'

Disciples are also classified as light infantry that acts like cavalry.

Included in the list but lets take a closer look at them.

<'UnitType>'AbstractCoyoteMan<'/UnitType>'

Chinese Disciples are actually Coyote Runners!

[momuuu]

Theres two relevant tags involved when it comes to coyotes.

Normal cav has the relevant tags hand cav and just cav. The cav is the one that gives HI bonus damage to cav, the hand cav gives ranged cav (goons, ruyters etc) a bonys to hand cav (hussars, uhlans etc). That way goons only deal extra damage to hand cav, and not also to themselves. Also, theres the ranged cav tag, that makes skirms do bonus damage vs ranged cav. And the hand cav tag makes skirms do less damage against hand cav.

Because aztec has two cav units (coyote, eagle runner), variants of these tags are needed. I think the Light infantry tag functions as the general cav tag, coyoteman as hand cav. There should be a tag for eagle runners (sth like eaglerunnerman?) that defines those as ranged cav.

[Metis]

Generally speaking, the developers of TWC just used the Eagle Runner Knight's unit ID when calculating bonuses.

For instance,

<'DamageBonus type ='xpEagleKnight'>'2.000000<'/DamageBonus>'
<'DamageBonus type ='AbstractCavalry'>'0.750000<'/DamageBonus>'
<'DamageBonus type ='AbstractCoyoteMan'>'0.750000<'/DamageBonus>'

As for the (relevant) tags the ERK unit has itself:

<'UnitType>'Ranged<'/UnitType>'
<'UnitType>'AbstractCavalryInfantry<'/UnitType>'
<'UnitType>'AbstractRangedInfantry<'/UnitType>'
<'UnitType>'AbstractArcher<'/UnitType>'
<'UnitType>'AbstractLightInfantry<'/UnitType>'

Note that they used the AbstractCoyoteMan tag and not the Coyote Runner's unit ID because, as I noted in a previous post, other units also use this tag.

[Papist]

Out of curiosity, do eagles get countered by melee anticav (rods, halbs, etc.) like ordinary anticav do.

[Metis]

They do via their light Infantry tag.

Halb

='AbstractLightInfantry'>1.500000

Rod

type ='AbstractLightInfantry'>2.250000

[momuuu]

Generally speaking, the developers of TWC just used the Eagle Runner Knight''s unit ID when calculating bonuses.

For instance,

<'DamageBonus type =''xpEagleKnight''>'2.000000<'/DamageBonus>'
<'DamageBonus type =''AbstractCavalry''>'0.750000<'/DamageBonus>'
<'DamageBonus type =''AbstractCoyoteMan''>'0.750000<'/DamageBonus>'

As for the (relevant) tags the ERK unit has itself:

<'UnitType>'Ranged<'/UnitType>'
<'UnitType>'AbstractCavalryInfantry<'/UnitType>'
<'UnitType>'AbstractRangedInfantry<'/UnitType>'
<'UnitType>'AbstractArcher<'/UnitType>'
<'UnitType>'AbstractLightInfantry<'/UnitType>'

Note that they used the AbstractCoyoteMan tag and not the Coyote Runner''s unit ID because, as I noted in a previous post, other units also use this tag.

Yes, the light infantry tag defines them as ''cav''. Metis, what is the first part of your post. Is that bonus damage from skirms? If that''s the case, they didn''t have to give Eagle knights a specific tag to be defined as ''ranged cav'' because they are the only unit that''s ranged cav without a horse? So they just use the unit itself to calculate the bonus?

Also, what does the tag ''AbstractCavalryInfantry'' do?

[Metis]

It seems that everything that's not a cannon has the AbstractCavalryInfantry tag. All I could find is that it's used to give grenadiers an area damage of 3 versus non-artillery units.

='AbstractCavalryInfantry'>1.000000
3.000000

[fei123456]

spain has musk in age 2, goon skirm 2 cannon in age 3, and lancers are strong. they have a tp in every game (iro otto may not build tp on some maps). lancers are strong. so why is it weak?

[Wuangaga]

spain has musk in age 2, goon skirm 2 cannon in age 3, and lancers are strong. they have a tp in every game (iro otto may not build tp on some maps). lancers are strong. so why is it weak?

They don''t have shipments providing ranged infantry/cavalry.

[chronique]

Ship sux so hard, mass goon = coutner all ship spain.

[Papist]

Their age 2 is nothing special, meaning they fall behind better civs like France and Brits fairly quickly. They have no ranged infantry shipments in any age (not counting mercs) meaning they are hard countered by anything musk or skirm based. And finally, they have no age 3 fast politician, which makes their FF slow and easy to interfere with.

[fei123456]

Ship sux so hard, mass goon = coutner all ship spain.

but we can send refrigeration royal mint etc

[evilcheadar]

I agree lancers can easily be taken out by dragoons or well microd musk units. Simply, the are just too inflexible.

[fei123456]

Their age 2 is nothing special, meaning they fall behind better civs like France and Brits fairly quickly. They have no ranged infantry shipments in any age (not counting mercs) meaning they are hard countered by anything musk or skirm based. And finally, they have no age 3 fast politician, which makes their FF slow and easy to interfere with.

they can send 5v 4v soon and have a better eco than french. and in late colo they even have mercenaries.

[Papist]

Their age 2 is nothing special, meaning they fall behind better civs like France and Brits fairly quickly. They have no ranged infantry shipments in any age (not counting mercs) meaning they are hard countered by anything musk or skirm based. And finally, they have no age 3 fast politician, which makes their FF slow and easy to interfere with.

they can send 5v 4v soon and have a better eco than french. and in late colo they even have mercenaries.

No France has a better eco since their vils are better. Those vill shipments may give Spain a boost, but Francw will catch up due to what is a de facto better veil train rate (1 vs 1.25).

I assume you meant to say late fortress. And there is zero chance of a good French player letting Spain last that long.

[howlingwolfpaw]

im 50/50 about mahouts. Sometimes they are really infuriating to use because they have bad movement path finding a .5 multiplier vs heavy inf on a 6-7 pop unit ( especially as india you don't have good units vs grenadiers) and cant squeeze through things and are terrible at siege because they get blocked upwith each other on walls. but..... since players try to mass target them you can tease the enemy and retreat them a little and have their inf walk into yours, and when they get in the battle they do lots of damage. and will kill batches of light inf faster than artillery will. once out of age 2 I wouldn't make sowars as they just train too slow for their effectiveness. and also takes some stress off your coin stockpiles from training lots of inf. of cource they are very expensive themselves. Honestly I would like to see them at 3-4 pop but nerfed to near gend stats and same with howdas being more like WW