Matrix Games Forums

Command gets Wargame of the Year EditionDeal of the Week: Pandora SeriesPandora: Eclipse of Nashira is now availableDistant Worlds Gets another updateHell is Approaching Deal of the Week Battle Academy Battle Academy 2 Out now!Legions of Steel ready for betaBattle Academy 2 gets trailers and Steam page!Deal of the Week Germany at War
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Horses?

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Advanced Tactics Series >> Horses? Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Horses? - 3/22/2013 2:37:06 PM   
Cheesehead64

 

Posts: 40
Joined: 3/13/2013
Status: offline
The newb here is starting a new game after updating to v2.14. The commander feature seems cool.

How do horses work?

I'm creating cavalry units which I assume don't need horses - horses actually seem to hinder movement in my experiments. Right?

I'm also creating horse drawn arty units - 4 horses for four arty. Can they tow more? Where in the game do I learn what horses and vehicles can carry?

Is there any bonus to adding horses to rifle units? How many horses do you need to carry how many units?
Post #: 1
RE: Horses? - 3/22/2013 3:45:01 PM   
Webizen


Posts: 1388
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: WV USA
Status: offline
Horses, as you have already noted, are used to transport stuff. I routinely use horses to transport (mobilize) infantry unit types, AT Guns, Infantry Guns, and Artillery (cannot transport heavy artillery). Horses don't add any combat bonuses but obviously allow transported units to move further. The ATG Strategy Guide discusses "Transport" (but not horses). I'd highly recommend you read if you haven't yet.

< Message edited by Webizen -- 3/22/2013 3:46:04 PM >


_____________________________

Tac2i

(in reply to Cheesehead64)
Post #: 2
RE: Horses? - 3/22/2013 3:52:36 PM   
Cheesehead64

 

Posts: 40
Joined: 3/13/2013
Status: offline
Yeah the ATG Strategy Guide is excellent and I should have thought to look there!

(in reply to Webizen)
Post #: 3
RE: Horses? - 3/22/2013 3:57:36 PM   
Madlok


Posts: 195
Joined: 9/13/2008
From: Upper Silesia, Poland
Status: offline
Click a unit. Go to General Stats. Look for Weight and Carry Cap.
Horse has Carry Cap 10.
Rifle has weight 1.
Artillery has weight 10.
So 1 horse can transport 1 Artillery or 10 Rifles. So this Artillery or Rifles  use horse's MoveType. This is good for Artillery, but for Rifles makes only a little difference.

Heavy Artillery has weight 20, but this doesn't mean you can use 2 horses. You must use truck or train (both have CarryCap 20).

Edit:
Rifle + horse is not cavalry. It is infantry on wagon dragging by horse (and yes, it is slower than real cavalry unit).

< Message edited by Madlok -- 3/22/2013 4:07:06 PM >


_____________________________

Mój blog o strategiach po polsku (not English) https://strategiusz.wordpress.com

(in reply to Cheesehead64)
Post #: 4
RE: Horses? - 3/22/2013 4:14:44 PM   
Cheesehead64

 

Posts: 40
Joined: 3/13/2013
Status: offline
Awesome. Thank you!

(in reply to Madlok)
Post #: 5
RE: Horses? - 3/22/2013 4:44:16 PM   
Josh

 

Posts: 2300
Joined: 5/9/2000
From: Leeuwarden, Netherlands
Status: offline
+1 to the above. Plus maybe that the best thing to give heavy Arty is amoured halftracks ofcourse, trucks are okay (fast) but don't give extra defense in case of say an artillery bombardment.
Also horses die horribly fast, as in real life, so the moment your unit gets an artillery bombardment its bound to loose a few horses, cripling its movement allowance. The best thing about horses is that they can live from the land, they don't guzzle up gas nor do they need Ore like tanks. Great for giving troops a cheap extra movement.
As to what Madlok says; rifle = 1 and a Art piece or AT gun = 10 .... so a unit consisting of 30 Inf plus 1 AT gun makes 40 = four horses. Easy peasy.

(in reply to Cheesehead64)
Post #: 6
RE: Horses? - 3/24/2013 11:43:48 PM   
Meanfcker


Posts: 306
Joined: 12/4/2011
Status: offline
Horses consume supplies, it is not much, but everything adds up in this game. Don't put them on units unless you actually need the mobility.
Try not to do anything for nothing, or put another way, try to have more than one good reason for everything that you do.

(in reply to Josh)
Post #: 7
RE: Horses? - 3/26/2013 12:24:30 AM   
barerabbit

 

Posts: 139
Joined: 11/9/2007
Status: offline
So, after you have found out what a THING weighs, and how many horses it will take to carry the THING, go back to the unit stats and look at the landscape stat tab. This will tell you how many action points it will cost for the THING to enter a giver terrain type. Then, COMPARE the THING to a horse. (There is a button on the unit stat screen for this) This will tell you how much faster the THING will move if you put it on a horse (or behind, I suppose) and weather it's worth the cost to horesorize (horesify?)the THING. And you are right, in some terrain horses may be slower that the THING. There is a lot of these interacting values in this game. If you need to know about something to predict how something else will mesh with it, the information is probably somewhere. The interface, however is not the best organized in the genre, so CLICKING on everything, READING and UNDERSTANDING what pops up, and REMEMBERING where you found it will pay off in your future moments high drama, crisis and final triumphs.
hope this was both entertaining, and helpful.

(in reply to Cheesehead64)
Post #: 8
RE: Horses? - 3/26/2013 7:45:39 PM   
all5n


Posts: 353
Joined: 12/19/2007
From: Republic of Texas
Status: offline
Actually, i think halftracks only provide defensive benefits to infantry(when a unit attacks an infantry unit paired with a halftrack, there is a 50% chance that the unit attacks the halftrack instead). So from that perspective, using halftracks to transport artillery doesn't make sense (i.e. its not going to protect your artillery from divebombers or other attacking units). It would, however, add a tracked method of transportation for your artillery that is more difficult to kill than using trucks or horses. So from that perspective it makes sense.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Josh

+1 to the above. Plus maybe that the best thing to give heavy Arty is amoured halftracks ofcourse, trucks are okay (fast) but don't give extra defense in case of say an artillery bombardment.
Also horses die horribly fast, as in real life, so the moment your unit gets an artillery bombardment its bound to loose a few horses, cripling its movement allowance. The best thing about horses is that they can live from the land, they don't guzzle up gas nor do they need Ore like tanks. Great for giving troops a cheap extra movement.
As to what Madlok says; rifle = 1 and a Art piece or AT gun = 10 .... so a unit consisting of 30 Inf plus 1 AT gun makes 40 = four horses. Easy peasy.


(in reply to Josh)
Post #: 9
RE: Horses? - 5/15/2013 1:51:31 AM   
Jenska


Posts: 27
Joined: 5/11/2013
From: Boston, Mass
Status: offline
While horses are a good way to speed up many things at a low cost (fuel, supply and prod points), the halftrack can be an awesome transport under the right conditions. Since HT's a are considered soft mobile, there are very few units that deal much damage to them compared to their hit points. IN the woods, HT's full of SMG are very potent units, as I recently found out (to my dismay).

(in reply to all5n)
Post #: 10
RE: Horses? - 5/15/2013 11:48:37 AM   
jday305


Posts: 119
Joined: 3/31/2013
From: Northeast Indiana
Status: offline
I agree with Jenska about the advantage of halftracks over horses but early in the game when resources are somewhat limited those halftracks can rapidly deplete oil reserves. I usually start off at the beginning of my games with horses for artillery units and then replace them with halftracks once my oil production per turn is high enough to cover a more mobile fighting force. Horses are cheap and use no resources once they are made so if you are playing a game where there is limited oil production they are the way to go. Just my thoughts.

_____________________________

RebelYell

"Those who don't know history are destined to repeat it."
“All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”
Edmund Burke

(in reply to Jenska)
Post #: 11
RE: Horses? - 5/15/2013 3:46:30 PM   
Jenska


Posts: 27
Joined: 5/11/2013
From: Boston, Mass
Status: offline
jday is absolutely right; horses are one of the most important units in an oil starved environment. In fact, I've generally had a horse and cavalry heavy organization until recently for just that reason. However, a recent heavily forested map with few roads educated me to the advantages of HT's even at the oil expense. My opponent all but ran out of oil, but by then he had made such a deep incursion, that I couldn't replace my losses.

Due to the high number of hit points in the HT it is very difficult to build an effective counter formation that can survive other units as well. Armor and Mortars seem to have higher attack than MG's and AT's against HT's, but only the MG does not suffer a terrain penalty, making it the most (cost)effective offensive unit against HT's. BUt then MG's usually aren't in a formation for offense.

Maybe after a few more experiments I start a thread on HT's (unless there's already one I haven't found)

< Message edited by Jenska -- 5/15/2013 3:52:45 PM >

(in reply to jday305)
Post #: 12
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Advanced Tactics Series >> Horses? Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.076