Does anyone else use Bretonnian questing knights as frontline tank units?

[Night]

I actually thought this was how everyone used them until only recently when I discovered there seems to be a lot of variety in how people deploy these units.

For me I use them as my immediate frontline as soon as possible.
Sure they lack shields but they have good defense stat in comparison to peasents (even higher than battle pilgrims).

Given that they are not shock cav I pretty much immediately figured they are a great backbone for lords who have completed their questing vow (or louen himself).




I have literally left these dudes in melee versus halbards and they still hold their own while I cycle my knights of the realm/ grail knights.

[Saint]

I mean eventually everybody should have an all cav army as Bretonnia

[Sn3z]

They have a higher tier transition(grail guardians) but no low tier which is the problem(although I think you can get rid of Errants for them and still us them on the flanks). It's unwise to come away from using infantry in late game with bretonnia.

[Night]

Originally posted by Sn3z:

They have a higher tier transition(grail guardians) but no low tier which is the problem(although I think you can get rid of Errants for them and still us them on the flanks). It's unwise to come away from using infantry in late game with bretonnia.

Questing knights perform fine as mid tier frontline units.
Why is it unwise to go completely to cav for bretonnia late game?

In fact it seems vastly superior. Their infantry is less than desirable but their cav are almost all incredible, even their cavalry defense stats are amazing.


Every time I play bretonnia I go for full cavalry armies 100% of the time and I've never had a single problem with chaos or any other faction.


Halbards? No problem, rear charge with grails or land some hypogryphs on em,
spear? My questing knights can destroy most spear and if i've upgraded to grail forget about it.


Basically how it ends up balancing for me whenever i play bretonnia is sure they might field some anti-large but unless they field the absolute best anti-large they can they generally won't stand up to my cav.


even then i tend to focus my rear charges on the anti cav units and just pummel the crap out of them.


Breatonnia charges are so strong that I've yet to find a faction in campaign that can deal with it.

[Wh♂♂par]

*Laughs in Hysh*

[Sn3z]

Originally posted by Night:

Originally posted by Sn3z:

They have a higher tier transition(grail guardians) but no low tier which is the problem(although I think you can get rid of Errants for them and still us them on the flanks). It's unwise to come away from using infantry in late game with bretonnia.

Questing knights perform fine as mid tier frontline units.
Why is it unwise to go completely to cav for bretonnia late game?

In fact it seems vastly superior. Their infantry is less than desirable but their cav are almost all incredible, even their cavalry defense stats are amazing.


Every time I play bretonnia I go for full cavalry armies 100% of the time and I've never had a single problem with chaos or any other faction.


Halbards? No problem, rear charge with grails or land some hypogryphs on em,
spear? My questing knights can destroy most spear and if i've upgraded to grail forget about it.


Basically how it ends up balancing for me whenever i play bretonnia is sure they might field some anti-large but unless they field the absolute best anti-large they can they generally won't stand up to my cav.


even then i tend to focus my rear charges on the anti cav units and just pummel the crap out of them.


Breatonnia charges are so strong that I've yet to find a faction in campaign that can deal with it.

Because your early game armies are infantry and they have late game transition's there's always a cling to infantry because how difficult it is to get access to cavarly variants, a shift into all cavalry then makes no sense. If your looking for something concrete.

Cavalry armies don't transition remotely well enough to be consider an actual thing. You can muster these armies mid/late game is doesn't make it right, your just ignoring the tiers. You will also need to stack a-lot of buffs.

Bretonnian infantry is much akin to empire its not exaclty stellar, but the two factions mitigate that problem in completely diiferent ways they firstly both get aggressive, Empire uses its cavalry and artillery, bretonnia uses it cavalry and flyers. Questing knights don't replace infantry that much is certain because of the tier banding. If your looking for a where they should be in theory I lean more to flanks.

[cb4n28]

I use a Steam Tank as a frontline tank

[Sn3z]

Originally posted by cb4n28:

I use a Steam Tank as a frontline tank

[Night]

Originally posted by Sn3z:

Originally posted by Night:

Questing knights perform fine as mid tier frontline units.
Why is it unwise to go completely to cav for bretonnia late game?

In fact it seems vastly superior. Their infantry is less than desirable but their cav are almost all incredible, even their cavalry defense stats are amazing.


Every time I play bretonnia I go for full cavalry armies 100% of the time and I've never had a single problem with chaos or any other faction.


Halbards? No problem, rear charge with grails or land some hypogryphs on em,
spear? My questing knights can destroy most spear and if i've upgraded to grail forget about it.


Basically how it ends up balancing for me whenever i play bretonnia is sure they might field some anti-large but unless they field the absolute best anti-large they can they generally won't stand up to my cav.


even then i tend to focus my rear charges on the anti cav units and just pummel the crap out of them.


Breatonnia charges are so strong that I've yet to find a faction in campaign that can deal with it.

Because your early game armies are infantry and they have late game transition's there's always a cling to infantry because how difficult it is to get access to cavarly variants, a shift into all cavalry then makes no sense. If your looking for something concrete.

Cavalry armies don't transition remotely well enough to be consider an actual thing. You can muster these armies mid/late game is doesn't make it right, your just ignoring the tiers. You will also need to stack a-lot of buffs.

Bretonnian infantry is much akin to empire its not exaclty stellar, but the two factions mitigate that problem in completely diiferent ways they firstly both get aggressive, Empire uses its cavalry and artillery, bretonnia uses it cavalry and flyers. Questing knights don't replace infantry that much is certain because of the tier banding. If your looking for a where they should be in theory I lean more to flanks.

i'm quite a bit confused by this. What do you mean transition remotely well enough?
Questing knights have a higher defensive stat than any bretonnian infantry in the game.

Stats wise there is virtually no reason to use their infantry at all. Even when you want to counter anti-large the bretonnian cavalry is so amazing it usually wins those fights unless literally every unit in the opposing army is anti large.


Your very early game armies have infantry in them but you transition out of infantry required armies as soon as you unlock questing knights and their vow.


It's also incredibly easy as bretonnia to get access to cavalry variants..

Tier banding? These are a lot of terms I'm unfamiliar with but what I DO know is I usually unlock questing knights as bretonnia by like turn 30 or sometimes earlier. From then on I use them as frontline units.


Why would I waste my time sticking infantry in the front who have definitively worse defense stats (the best bretonnian infantry doesn't have a defense stat higher than questing knights and certainly doesn't even begin to approach grail) when I could just stick these guys in front?


additionally I just want to note that I stack zero buffs.
Their cav is just powerful and I'm at a loss when I try to think of reasons an all cav army is somehow lacking for bretonnia.


If I want a unit for a rear charge knights of the realm are vastly superior for that purpose until grail knights.

[Sn3z]

Originally posted by Night:

Originally posted by Sn3z:

Because your early game armies are infantry and they have late game transition's there's always a cling to infantry because how difficult it is to get access to cavarly variants, a shift into all cavalry then makes no sense. If your looking for something concrete.

Cavalry armies don't transition remotely well enough to be consider an actual thing. You can muster these armies mid/late game is doesn't make it right, your just ignoring the tiers. You will also need to stack a-lot of buffs.

Bretonnian infantry is much akin to empire its not exaclty stellar, but the two factions mitigate that problem in completely diiferent ways they firstly both get aggressive, Empire uses its cavalry and artillery, bretonnia uses it cavalry and flyers. Questing knights don't replace infantry that much is certain because of the tier banding. If your looking for a where they should be in theory I lean more to flanks.

i'm quite a bit confused by this. What do you mean transition remotely well enough?
Questing knights have a higher defensive stat than any bretonnian infantry in the game.

Stats wise there is virtually no reason to use their infantry at all. Even when you want to counter anti-large the bretonnian cavalry is so amazing it usually wins those fights unless literally every unit in the opposing army is anti large.


Your very early game armies have infantry in them but you transition out of infantry required armies as soon as you unlock questing knights and their vow.


It's also incredibly easy as bretonnia to get access to cavalry variants..

Tier banding? These are a lot of terms I'm unfamiliar with but what I DO know is I usually unlock questing knights as bretonnia by like turn 30 or sometimes earlier. From then on I use them as frontline units.


Why would I waste my time sticking infantry in the front who have definitively worse defense stats (the best bretonnian infantry doesn't have a defense stat higher than questing knights and certainly doesn't even begin to approach grail) when I could just stick these guys in front?

Clarity with the tiers? Cost efficent stacks? Are reasons to stick on infantry, plus and I going to hate saying this your balancing out your army, so it can adapt to situations like seiges. What about still using missile units and trebuchets they don't have any syngery with cavalry based armies. I really do not like how Bretonnia plays on campaign, but a good bretonnia army compostiion would have 1/4 cavalry, 1/4 flyers and the rest infantry/missile/agents.

Tier banding=Every army in this game has T1-T3 army that's built from the groundup, pretty much all encompassing the units within those tiers with exceptions, advanced tiers just improve certain area's within it, so in theory you never leave infantry.

[Saint]

Who needs missile or artillery when you can just have more cav? If you absolutely need them, Grail or questing can easily guard them.

[Sins]

Its best to ignore Sn3z on army composition stuff. He has some really bizarre ideas regarding how you should make an army that involves some weird obsession about "tiers" and arcane logic regarding what units to use in what amounts.

Really once you're late game and got the cash you can safely drop infantry entirely, even in sieges you're probably better off just bashing down the gate with heroes/grail guardians and going through that way than fighting on the walls. Its a real pain that doesn't play to Bretonnia's strengths, but its better than losing half your army on the walls. If you really must contend the walls, better to use fliers than any amount of infantry.

[Sn3z]

Originally posted by Chaotic Submissive Succubus:

Its best to ignore Sn3z on army composition stuff. He has some really bizarre ideas regarding how you should make an army that involves some weird obsession about "tiers" and arcane logic regarding what units to use in what amounts.

Really once you're late game and got the cash you can safely drop infantry entirely, even in sieges you're probably better off just bashing down the gate with heroes/grail guardians and going through that way than fighting on the walls. Its a real pain that doesn't play to Bretonnia's strengths, but its better than losing half your army on the walls. If you really must contend the walls, better to use fliers than any amount of infantry.

Oh why because I'am suggesting that there's basic and advanced units, strengths and weaknesses can be derived from the tiers? You can control your budget far better then pulling army compositions out of your ass?

[Saint]

The Bretonnian weakness is infantry. The Bretonnian strength is cavalry. Tiers and cost doesn't matter when you can field a dozen doom stacks of their best units.

If you want to cripple yourself late game by using arbitrary army builds, by all means, do so.

You seem to really care about people using what you deem the best.

[Sn3z]

Originally posted by Saint:

The Bretonnian weakness is infantry. The Bretonnian strength is cavalry. Tiers and cost doesn't matter when you can field a dozen doom stacks of their best units.

If you want to cripple yourself late game by using arbitrary army builds, by all means, do so.

You seem to really care about people using what you deem the best.

Its not arbitrary its using the tiers, and using infantry is fine where is this notion from that's it not exaclty just in the mid-late quantitys get reduced? 1/4 cavalry(4) 1/4(5) flyers is frankly enough to make a very strong Bretonnian army.

He also said do people use this unit on frontline, I said the unit is problematic because is has no lower tier transition, so the application is strange is it frontline or flanking, to me its a flanking unit.

[Saint]

Originally posted by Sn3z:

Originally posted by Saint:

The Bretonnian weakness is infantry. The Bretonnian strength is cavalry. Tiers and cost doesn't matter when you can field a dozen doom stacks of their best units.

If you want to cripple yourself late game by using arbitrary army builds, by all means, do so.

You seem to really care about people using what you deem the best.

Its not arbitrary its using the tiers, and using infantry is fine where is this notion from that's it not exaclty just in the mid-late quantitys get reduced? 1/4 cavalry(4) 1/4(5) flyers is frankly enough to make a very strong Bretonnian army.

No, it's arbitrary to force unnecessary army compositions. Yeah, you can make a strong balanced Bretonnian army. You can make a stronger one using all cav.