Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

In Mk I, heavy cav dramatically changed the landscape of the game. Generally, a full unit was about the cost of a heavy jack and maybe a solo, but gave you 5 powerful models with a fair number of wounds and a huge threat range. Throw in the Piper, and they had Pathfinder too.

Is heavy cav still a 'must have' in Mk II? Specifically, Cygnar's storm lances. They're now pretty pricey points-wise, and I've read a few comments that their effectiveness has dropped. I have to admit, I haven't bought any of the Mk II stuff yet, so I just have the beta test version to evaluate now.

short answer: no, they are not must-haves. they are basically the same as you saw at the end of the field test.
storm lances are still some of the best cavalry in the game but mounted models in general took a hit and are very expensive. to put in perspective 5 of them cost the same as an ironclad plus a charger or 10 long gunners plus a stormsmith. furthermore, they have only 5 health each now which is less robust than some medium based infantry.
other cav models were taken down to similar levels and similar points.