Effectiveness of steppe battle tactics

So I think it is really a misunderstood not used lance cariing method.

 

I agree some of the major factors to consider are:

 

- steppe mobility with majority or all cavalry

 

- warrior spirit retained by steppe cultures sometimes more so than sedentary civilizations

 

- percentage of steppe civilizations people bearing arms allowing a small population to fight a much larger one

 

Also studying history one sees that often the steppe cultures would fight most of their battles in terrain favorable to their tactics;  plains that favor cavalry. 

 

To respond to calvo's question:

 

Usually the steppe cavalry was of superior quality compared to the sedentary cavalry.  Also, infantry is at an enormous disadvantage on the open plains when facing cavalry.  Often the steppe forces would be better trained due to their way of life.  Normally, the sedentary forces would not know how to fight in a combined arms fashion.  (using cavalry and infantry effectively, co-ordination between the two)  When the sedentary forces leaders were able to effectively integrate their infantry and cavalry their chances of victory went up by a very large amount.  Often times sedentary forces would use the same tactics one would use in mountains or hilly terrain, not adapting their tactics to fit the terrain they were fighting on.  On the steppes cavalry ruled unless "caught" by the infantry. 

 

I'm sure there are other examples, but Alexander's battle against the scythians is a perfect example of how to beat steppe nomads.