Board Thread:Roleplay Ideas/@comment-26295802-20160222014740/@comment-26237442-20160222220331

Aramirtheranger wrote: Maltalidenta Kwuitidherali wrote:

Edacnik wrote:

Maltalidenta Kwuitidherali wrote:

Edacnik wrote: Your troops might be good, but you'd definitely lack numbers, and even with good troops, Kataprakts are the kings of Calvary. Medium shock cavalry like Cataphracts are very much not the best. Swan Knights in their plate armour are much more heavily armed, and the best counter for light cavalry is heavy cavalry. The actual word I got "Kataprakt" from is Cataphract with literally means "completely enclosed" or "heavily armoured," so saying they are "medium shock Calvary" would be incorrect. Now, with middle earth aspects, these men are even better.

A: Easterlings. Closely related to the Wainriders of Khand. As so, they are very naturally skilled.

B: Numbers. Easterlings are of great numbers.

C: Tower shields. Not only do East Empire Kataprakts have plate armour, but they have tower shields which gives them one advantage.

D: Resourceful. Easterlings were rich and had lots of supplies to equip all these men.

E: If this isn't already enough, Cho Ku Nus. While these repeating crossbows are inaccurate, they can turn charges away quite well with sheer numbers of bolts. Traditionally, Cataphracts wear lamellar armour. It does not compare with plate armour. And these are eastern, so not as good as the Persian Cataphracts they're based off. Not to mention the lack of resources required. It means completely enclosed yes, but it very much doesn't mean heavily armoured. They wore lamellar armour - not plate by any means.

A: As are Dol Amroth, but more so.

B: So? Dol Amroth's superior armour, weapons, and training, supersede this.

C: They don't have plate armour, and large shields are far too massive to carry on horseback. These are eastern, and plate armour didn't come until a whole lot later. Their armour is lamellar, just like the Avari for the most part.

D: They weren't rich, and nor did they have a whole lot of resources. Not poor, but not rich.

E: But are useless in the rain or wind, not to mention the tiny range. I think you're both stubborn idiots when it comes to admitting that your factions DO have weaknesses,  sometimes very severe ones. Every type of armor, every weapon, every soldier, has its pros and cons.

we've already finished with this discussion and I think Ed already knows the many downfalls of both Cho ko nus and Cataphracts (if you knock a cataphract off his horse the weight of all that armour will make it very awkward it's also hard to slow down, turn do anything without infrantry, archer and light cavalry support)