PDA

View Full Version : "How to Use Horse Archers" in Rome: Total War



Doug-Thompson
10-20-2004, 21:49
Ludens' How to use horse archers (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=33313) for Medieval: Total War is still required reading for anybody interested in this type of unit. However, there are some very significant improvements in R:TW and especially in "Barbarian Invasions."

First, the "Barbarian Invasion" expansion fixes the issues that were caused — unintentionally, apparently — by the 1.2 patch, which messed up HA so that they did not fire while moving in skirmish mode. Those who don't have the expansion kit are strongly advised to use Qwerty's most excellent fix. (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=43090)

1. Skirmish mode works now.

2. Horse archers now fire on the move. Foot archers don't.

The effects of that are enormous. Foot archers are still one of the best counters to horse archers, but they're not nearly as good as they were in MTW, especially if the AI is handling the foot archers and a human is controlling the horse archers.

Obviously, a moving target is much harder to hit than one standing still. Therefore, the effect of firing on the move is even greater when the HA uses Cantabrian circle.

Missile battles, though, are not the HA's best use, not by a long shot.

Rain arrows upon an advancing melee infantry unit. The unit will probably keep moving and its supporting foot archers will keep moving to stay close. HA can shoot an entire phalanx to pieces before the foot archers ever get a chance to stop and fire.

Horse archers can also follow or chase units and keep firing. This shooting in the back is incredibly deadly.

3. On the strategy map, an all cavalry army with a mix of melee and HA cav can wrought havoc. They can attack several armies in one turn and are very difficult to catch. If an opposing army has any slow infantry at all, the cavalry unit can choose when and where it wants to fight.

4. The Barbarian Invasion expansion vastly increased the effectiveness of shields and armor for protecting units (in R:TW and in BI) from archer fire, but only for units that are FACING the archer fire. Units are still very vulnerable from the side or from behind. This is greatly to the advantage of HA, since they can easily and safely get to the side or behind compared to foot archers.

5. The horde HA of Barbarian Invasions now come in the same "horde" formation as peasants. This is actually a very nice feature. The horde formation has no "corners" to get caught by melee units.


[edited p.s] This is a summary of the thread's most important points to date:

1. Put HA into big square formations if they don't come in "horde" formations. This makes the unit easier to move about. HA fire in all directions and don't suffer as much from friendly fire because there is less unit overlap.

2. Beware the map's edge.

3. Try to envelop your enemy. The HA units don't have to be in contact with each other. There's no need for a "continuous front" here. Gaps between "squares" are covered by fire.

4. Move and shoot for the enemy's "weapon" side. The hand that carries the weapon has no shield.

5. Use Cantabrian circle carefully. Circling HA tire out quickly and can suffer if caught in melee. However, the tactic does reduce casualties in a pure missile fight.

Tamur
10-20-2004, 22:23
Nice summary of the differences. The new skirmish is really amazing to watch, 'tis true.

One thing I would add is that there are now other units that can be considered Horse Archers -- British Light Chariots being my favourite. They have buckets full of arrows in those chariots, and can keep firing for probably triple the time that standard HAs can.

Colovion
10-20-2004, 22:44
I find that the HA skirmish mode is still a little bit hectic with the Cantabrian Circle - as it probably should be. Basically the rule of thumb is to not use the Cantabrian Circle when the infantry/cav gets close enough to charge your HA. This is because the Circle will continue running around and will eventually find themselves running headlong into the front of the enemy and the circle doesn't back up as a unit fast enough because the whole spiral is both moving towards and away from the enemy formation. Once the enemy overtakes the crux where your HAs usually turn around and start going the other way you'll find yourself with a lot of dead horses. I switch off the Cantabrian circle once the enemy closes in - this keeps them at a distance well enough to reduce the causalties.

Orvis Tertia
10-21-2004, 00:38
Just wondering: What are the advantages of the Cantabrian Circle. I've used it a few times, but I've always wondered if my HAs would do better damage in regular formation.

Doug-Thompson
10-21-2004, 00:40
Thanks, Tamur, and you're right. Some discussion on chariot tactics is needed. Do you use them the same way as HA? Does skirmish work with them? Are they as fast?

I haven't had experience with chariots except in fighting Egyptian ones. Those chariots seem to be rather easily spooked by camels and go out of control. Of course, that's not a problem in Britain and north Europe. They also seem a bit slower than cavalry, but perhaps they're just tired when my melee cav catches them.

=====

Colovion, your post shows yet another disadvantage of the circle. I'm not a cantabrian circle fan, to be honest. Movement of any kind seems to be just as effective in dodging arrows as the circle, but that's just my impression. Parthian HA and (I assume) others can fire backwards, forwards and sideways.


=======

edited p.s.

I'm not sure there is any, Orvis Tertia.

Multiplayers tend to learn lessons quicker, and the hard way. I've read where some of the swear on, or at, the circle as a very effective anti-missile tactic. I'd still like to see some sort of test on that. I tried to do one in a custom game, but for some reason the HA's wouldn't circle. I need to try it again.

Doug-Thompson
10-21-2004, 00:53
I don't think many early infantry types are armored nearly so well in Rome: Total War as they were in Medieval:Total War, especially when taking fire from the sides or back.

Ancient shields work well, but it sure does seem that even a good infantry formation melts when they start taking fire from the side or behind, even faster than they did in M:TW.

Of course, HA can get to the side or behind much easier than foot archers.

LordKhaine
10-21-2004, 01:08
When using multiple units of HA I don't use cantabrian circle. It just gets messy and people end up too close to the enemy. Plus you can get a lot of FF happening. On the other hand, if you're using a single unit and they're under missle fire, the cantabrian circle can be very very useful.

Friendly fire is often the largest problem with HA's. I often lost more men to FF than the enemy! Since HA's seem to love firing whenever they can, it's kind of unavoidable to a degree. But always make SURE you disable fire at will before you send any infantry/cavalry into a melee within range. Horse archers will gladly fire at an enemy unit, even if it consists of 2 people running away while in the middle of your own troops. And to make matters worse they'll keep shooting at the area for a few seconds after all the enemy are slain! The other day I had two eastern infantry units pretty much destroyed like this in a matter of seconds. So be sure to take them off fire at will mode at these times!

One thing to remember with HA's is also that (unlike in MTW), you can pretty much leave them alone and they'll keep themselves out of trouble. You don't have to baby walk them all the time like in previous games.

andrewt
10-21-2004, 01:09
My problem with the Cantabrian cirlce is that it takes too much space. Considering the friendly fire problems in RTW, the circle makes your HAs more likely to overlap each other and start annihilating each other.

Doug-Thompson
10-21-2004, 02:06
RE: LordKhaine's comments.

I had everybody use the circle in one battle, just to see what would happen.

It was a fiasco.

If all the cavalry is circling, the AI foot archers decide not to switch fire and never have to move. One target is just as difficult at the other, so they might as well keep shooting at the same target. The fire is less effective than if the HA were standing still, but more effective than it would be if the archers had to keep on the move and switch targets all the time.

In addition to the problems LordKhaine described, it's been my experience that Horse Archers do not stop firing even when you turn off "fire at will" and order them to halt. I strongly suspect that when you order them to move, the "halt" order is cancelled. In effect, the new order to move allows them to fire again, too

==========

re: andrewt


My problem with the Cantabrian cirlce is that it takes too much space. Considering the friendly fire problems in RTW, the circle makes your HAs more likely to overlap each other and start annihilating each other.

I wonder if collisions are a problem, too. Also, overlapping HA units make for a more dense field of targets.

Doug-Thompson
10-21-2004, 02:19
Has anyone experimented with a long, thin column rather than a wide, shallow line?

Such a formation could run past an infantry unit and "rake" it on the way by firing on the move, then continue past the unit and get behind.

Ptah
10-21-2004, 10:43
In addition to the problems LordKhaine described, it's been my experience that Horse Archers do not stop firing even when you turn off "fire at will" and order them to halt. I strongly suspect that when you order them to move, the "halt" order is cancelled. In effect, the new order to move allows them to fire again, too

The horse archers will respond exactly to the command you have issued. They cease fire with a halt command, if, the "fire at will" status command was initially turned off. Thus, you must always first turn off "fire at will", and then issue a halt order, to stop them from firing on the move.

Also, issuing a status command within a group may not be what it seems. Always check and see if the individual unit is being properly issued in its orders. If multiple groups of horse archers are selected when one turns on/off the "fire at will mode", some of them may not respond properly.

troymclure
10-21-2004, 10:51
noone here uses Cant Circle? wow i use it almost exclusively, even if they're aren't missile troops in the other army. I don't know it seems quite effective and i just like the way the battle map looks when i have 8 HA units harassing the enemy all running in spinning circles of death.

Doug-Thompson
10-26-2004, 07:09
Had a really interesting, running fight with some Greek Cavalry tonight.

The Greeks were running toward some Horse Archers of mine. I sent some Persian Cavalry to intercept and charge them. Then, before contact, the Greeks started taking serious losses.

The two units were running on almost parallel courses -- and the Persian cav were shooting into the Greeks on the run. They were at pretty close range and, apparently, the side of a horse is a big target even when moving.

I cancelled the order to charge and simply ran alongside, shooting all the way. The Greeks went from 52 men and horses to 25 before they stopped, obviously shaken. THEN I charged with the Persians. The Greeks never stood a chance.

The_Emperor
10-26-2004, 16:06
Parthians do have the ability to shoot behind them (the parthian shot).

I was surprised to see this in action when I faced down a unit of Parthian Horse Archers in the desert. Thinking in MTW terms I decided to send some cav to chase them down... (Arab Merc Cav) The Horse Archers then turned and ran away, so I continued the chase. Then I saw those Parthians twist around in the saddle and let off a volley of arrows into my chasing cavalry.

Pretty soon I broke off pursuit fearing they would wear me down too much and then got some foot archers in on the action.

it was very nice to see. (chariot archers also shoot behind them nicely)

frogbeastegg
10-26-2004, 16:27
Multiplayers tend to learn lessons quicker, and the hard way. I've read where some of the swear on, or at, the circle as a very effective anti-missile tactic. I'd still like to see some sort of test on that. I tried to do one in a custom game, but for some reason the HA's wouldn't circle. I need to try it again.
[FF]Louis-Ste-Simurgh and I tried cav archers against normal infantry archers a few days before we started our phalanx tests. Circle does make a huge difference; it tires the horses out faster but makes them very hard to hit indeed. I don't recall the exact numbers, but the difference was both significant and unmistakeable.

Circle is one of the reasons cav archers now beat foot archers, rather than losing to them a la MTW and STW. The infantry can't hit them and the cav can rip them apart at leisure.

It also appears that infantry archers may not get a bonus when shooting at cav; in all our tests with the two types of Roman infantry archer against vanilla and specialised Scythian horse archers the infantry lost. The more advanced infantry archers (archer auxilia?) did have a slightly longer range than the cavalry; it gave them one extra volley before the cav started shooting back. The vanilla Roman archers had the same range as all the assorted cavalry archers, IIRC … certainly the same range as most of them.

So, based on our tests, and my in-game experience which prompted them, cavalry archers are no longer countered by infantry archers. In fact there does not seem to be a natural counter to them. Even light cavalry tend to get shot up quite badly while closing to melee due to the cavalry archer's ability to move and shoot, and the Parthian shot ability.

Louis de la Ferte Ste Colombe
10-26-2004, 16:46
Frogbeastegg got it mainly right. We try with 10 regular archer, 10 auxiliaries, 10 HA, and 10 noble HA.

Even very light armour Horse Archer can defeat Chosen foot Archer, with the circle additional protection (actually... even without it...). Horse Archer won missile duel in ALL configurations.

I think part of the problem is the foot archer targeting. It looked like the foot archers were targeting left of my horse archer. A bit like if they were targeting ahead of the horse, but did not get that the horse is NOT going to move in a straight line.

Range of Chosen Archer; 170, of normal Foot Archer; 120, of all Horse Archer; 120.

Personally, I don't think there is any good solution against horse archer... Beside engaging ennemy infantry line (if there is any to engage...) as fast as possible, or getting an awful lot of armour, as in REALLY a lot. And pray that the HA will target cheap unit.

Light cavalry pursuit is difficult, as Horse Archers faction also often have good cavalry (making pursuit hasardous)... Not to mention getting shot at while pursuing. So pursuing is much like giving a nice good convenient target.

Louis,

Doug-Thompson
10-26-2004, 16:56
Parthians do have the ability to shoot behind them (the parthian shot).

And if there's any significant drop-off in accuracy or lethality, I haven't noticed it.

Horse archers at a gallop but near their target seem to do better than the same unit standing still and at a modest distance.

As you and frogbeastegg attest, light cav is not nearly the threat it used to be, either. Not only are they vulnerable to missiles, which are now everywhere, their morale is pitiful. A few losses from arrows and they're shaken. One charge from Persian cavalry or your own mercenary light cavalry and they rout.

One of my favorite moves is to have the pursued HA flee toward some friendly cataphacts or camels.

frogbeastegg
10-26-2004, 17:05
We try with 10 regular archer, 10 auxiliaries, 10 HA, and 10 noble HA.
Yes, that's the unit allotment. Thanks for compensating for my dodgy memory.


I think part of the problem is the foot archer targeting. It looked like the foot archers were targeting left of my horse archer. A bit like if they were targeting ahead of the horse, but did not get that the horse is NOT going to move in a straight line.
This was the other interesting point we found in our tests; I didn't mention it before because I didn't get to see it personally. I was suffering from terrible lag during the last half of the tests and it was impossible to tell what was happening with the animation. If there is an issue with infantry archers not quite aiming correctly it would make a good part of an explanation as to why they get killed each and every time now. This could stand more investigation.

Doug-Thompson
10-26-2004, 17:18
Foot archers "leading" targets that aren't moving? That would be a find.

However, wouldn't that mean that things like HA circling would make foot archers more effective instead of less?

Anybody want to propose a test, or series of tests? I'm game.

frogbeastegg
10-26-2004, 17:30
Tests ... hmm. I would take a unit of foot archers and a unit of cav. I would see how many casualties the inf caused while both units were stationary. Say an average of 10 volleys. I would then get some fresh in and cav, and try the same thing again. Kills are totted up and averaged.

Next up is 2 more units of fresh inf and cav. This time the cav walk towards the inf while the inf fire. Again 10 volleys, then repeat with fresh units. Kills are totted up and averaged.

Next up same idea again, except this time the cav run forwards. Repeat twice, 10 volleys, average kills etc.

Then with the next set of fresh units I would have the cavalry run from left to right in front of the archers in medium range. 10 volleys. Repeat twice, average kills.

Finally I would get two more lots of fresh units and get the cav to run away while under fire. It would be vital to make sure the inf didn't open fire until the cav started moving away. 10 volleys, repeat twice, average kills.

Note: in all of these tests the cav are not shooting themselves; infantry deaths will affect the number of arrows being fired and screw up the results. Circle is not used at all.

This would have to be MP; not only is the fine control needed but also the AI tends to do stupid things which ruin tests.

That should give decent results.

That's what I'd do, but based on my experience last time I'd lag badly less than halfway into this. Louis had no troubles with lag before, but I ended up down to one screen every two seconds with half my controls not working. I'd also have to get someone else to do the maths unless you wanted it dyslexified.


EDIT again: I'd also be interesting in some decent tests to see if archers, slings and javelins are more accurate close up or at maximum range. I have seen it suggested that archers do best at the end of their range this time.

Doug-Thompson
10-26-2004, 17:37
This would have to be MP; not only is the fine control needed but also the AI tends to do stupid things which ruin tests.



Well, that knocks me out. ~:mecry: I have an older machine and a phone line.

It's a very important topic, though. If foot archers can't hit a horse any better than a horse archer hits them, that's an enormous change from all the other TW games.

Louis de la Ferte Ste Colombe
10-26-2004, 19:56
Foot archers "leading" targets that aren't moving? That would be a find.


Sorry, I was not clear enough.

In a sense Canta circle are not moving... But in another sense, if one archer target one specific circling horse archer, and assume that he is going to ride straight, all arrows are going to go array. Because Horse Archer are not going straight. by circling around, I wonder if Horse Archer are not fooling foot archer targetting ability.
I don't know how targetting work. does it target the unit leader? The unit in general? Are all archer targetting a specific target? I got no clue.
But I was surprised to see all the arrows landing left of my circling unit.
Does that depend on the rotation sense of the canta circle?

The obvious result was that Horse Archer hits Foot Archer far better than Foot Archer hits Horse Archer.
Foot Archer do better if Horse Archer are not circling... But they still lose.

And yes it's a very significant change from previous TW.

Louis,

PS; test is doable... next week.

Lord Ovaat
10-26-2004, 20:40
Having used bows for many years, I'll offer first-hand experience that hitting moving targets is quite difficult. Because of the slow speed of the arrow, and the high trajectory, lead required is nigh impossible to calculate, particularly since targets seldom move directly away, or to the side, but rather at an angle. That said, trying to hit ANYTHING while the shooter is moving is laughable. Horse archers generally fired on the move at mass targets or individuals at close range. And at that they can be leathal. But the damage I've seen in RTW from horse and chariot archers while at a full gallop is absurd. It just ain't that easy. 'Twould be nice to find some happy medium for a change. Volley firing with arrows, then later with firearms, increased the possibility of hits, most notably on masses of troops. Chariot archers in this game, while running around inside a city wall, will still tear my troops up. Really? On the move? Shooting over a wall? I'm just glad this is a game. I guess it is a lot more fun and better to give, rather than receive.

frogbeastegg
10-26-2004, 21:10
PS; test is doable... next week.
I'm busy this week too, but next week should be doable for a few hours. I'll add it on to my (getting long) list of things to test with a smurf.

Louis de la Ferte Ste Colombe
10-26-2004, 21:31
I'm busy this week too, but next week should be doable for a few hours. I'll add it on to my (getting long) list of things to test with a smurf.

~:eek:

Errr.... how long is that list?

Can I enroll smurf associate? Does it have to be a test with a smurf? Are we sure test with a smurf are relevant when it comes to games with human?

:help:

Louis,

PS; for missile you want to test the range issue? We also need to check the rank thing.

frogbeastegg
10-26-2004, 22:00
Off the top of my head:
-missile accuracy at close, medium and long range to see if there really is an accuracy difference as in previous games.
-the cav/inf archer test above
-do formations still 'wrap' around smaller enemy formations? Probably, but does this have the same devastating effect as in MTW?
-slings, arrows and javs - which is best against armour? At what point does a target get so much armour each missile becomes worthless?
-Guard mode when taking charge: useless or was that other test where guard mode made things worse a fluke?
-When facing cavalry with troops like Roman legionaries is it better to hold position or to counter charge? This is assuming there are no pilums to throw.
-Do multiple ranks have an affect on missile accuracy? Can you really get away with 10 ranks as I suspect from my SP experience?

I'm probably missing a few. You know me, the ever curious froggy :gring: I'm always endlessly curious about how things work; half of this probably isn't even needed, certainly not for SP and maybe not for MP. The last one kind of answered itself when I had archers 8 ranks deep and firing without any problems at all. Anyway if I work through this list I will only get more questions; that’s how frogs work.

Smurf associates and smurf substitutes are fine, as are frog substitutes. All together our assorted phalanx tests took over two and a half hours spread out over a week, and that's only in-battle time. I really can’t do that kind of thing very often, and I don’t expect you can either.

Doug-Thompson
10-27-2004, 00:11
-Do multiple ranks have an affect on missile accuracy? Can you really get away with 10 ranks as I suspect from my SP experience?
... The last one kind of answered itself when I had archers 8 ranks deep and firing without any problems at all.

Exactly; If you have the slightest overlap in too different units, there always seem to be some friendly fire problems. However, if you have one unit that is very, very deep, there do not seem to be such problems. :dizzy2:

If any of this is true, "densepack" would reduce the chance of unit-to-unit overlap -- which would reduce friendly fire casualties.


:dizzy2: :dizzy2:

Dark_Magician
10-27-2004, 07:43
Cantabrian circle is not for archers, it is for javeliners

Locklear
10-27-2004, 08:54
This is all very interesting. I am concerned about the missing "horses are a big target" factor.

One thing I have noticed pertains to leading and range. When archers shoot at targets at the limit of their range, sometimes it seems that even when the target is moving AWAY from them very quickly, the arrows still manage to hit. This would suggest that archers are capable of shooting beyond their maximum range, if leading. This might even be evidence of what some others have described as a "homing" effect. Anyone else notice this?

I would also suggest setting up HA in circle and halting them in a circle. I theorize that foot archers will shoot into the "center of mass" of the unit, missing the horses on the outside; although I haven't tested this myself, I notice that archers tend to shoot at the center of a unit, and outer units quickly shift closer to the center, creating a "shrinking" effect.

Anyway thanks for your efforts froggy.

Oleander Ardens
10-27-2004, 15:00
Hm I did some testing with Slinger vs Archers, I will try to found the sheet with the results somewhere...

I don't know anymore what exactly contained the projectile_desc. but if my memory doesn't trick me it seems that there was a explicit armor_piercing stat.

Anyway it seemed that good Slingers are better suited for masses of lighter armored targets while good Archers are better to decimate heavily armored enemies. I tried BS and Chosen Archers against LevyPikemen and SSP with upgraded armor...

Shields seemed also more important than in MTW, as equally well armored Agema Phalangites (Royal Pikemen) had far less casualities per volley as I can recall

Perhaps the sheet with the results will turn up...

Cheers
OA

Doug-Thompson
10-27-2004, 16:00
Re: Densepack and friendly fire.

My first attempt to create massive friendly fire casualties by piling dense squares of cavalry archers on top of each other was a dismal failure.

Eight Parthian HA were put into "squares," which were then put into a very dense, overlapping mass. I then assigned them all to attack one of three Greek hoplite units, then let autopilot take over. I used three hoplites because I didn't want the little experiment to end too quickly.

The HA lost 17 out of 433, all from friendly fire. Three of those healed up after the battle. Those 17 represent 3.9 percent of the HA engaged.

Most of the casualties were in the first few volleys. Squares "scatter" much more quickly than long lines of HA. A little movement during skirmishing and two squares will completely break contact, eliminating the overlap and the friendly fire problem. As discussed, it appears that "friendly fire" comes from having different units in each other's way, not from having one unit in a deep formation.

I have absolutely no idea whether any of this applies to foot archers, slingers or javelinmen.

===========

The vast improvements in skirmishing, compared to M:TW, also seem to favor squares for HA.

Skirmishing and all HA movement was very dependent on the unit leader in M:TW. For instance, if a unit skirmished away from another unit, the moving unit would "wait" until the leader/flagbearer got out in front and the rest of the unit would then follow behind him.

Now, skirmishing HA seem to move whenever an enemy is getting close to any member of the unit anywhere, and they all move at once.

I suspect, but can't prove, that skirmishing in M:TW was triggered by the distance of the target unit (unit leader?) from the skirmishing group's leader, and that the trigger in R:TW is the distance of ANY unit from ANY member of the skirmishing group.



One of the advantages of having a long, thin line of HA in M:TW was that it allowed the leader to get out in "front" of a thin formation by turning around and moving a very short distance. Then the whole formation would do a quick about-face and skirmish away. However, the ends of a drawn-out formation were quite vulnerable. This is not a problem any more. The HA will skirmish as a body in R:TW. If the leader is in the middle of a a dense mass and can't work his way to the front quickly, there's still no problem.

Beyond that, HA now seem to fire equally well in all directions. At least with Parthians, facing doesn't seem to matter any more.

Unless "squares" are much more vulnerable to foot archers, I can't think of a good reason not to put HA units in squares with a little distance between each unit. Even if "densepack" does make them more vulnerable to foot archers, you can hit cantabrian circle.

Orda Khan
10-27-2004, 21:22
HA will fire quite readily in all directions and are a force to be reckoned with ( at last )
The use of cantabrian circle makes the HA less vulnerable to archer fire ( about time to ) for too long I've had to watch my HA stand about as easy targets.
Loosing on the move ( traditional tactics at last ) finally my HA do what they are supposed to do

Now the bad news.......
Order them to melee... Why do they still loose on the move?
Why does one guy at the back shoot his mate in front? ( Same unit )
......And yes they still get themselves tied up and trapped, they skirmish better but they can still come unstuck.

Please note.......I have tested exclusively and they do not all obey commands. Turning off fire at will will not necessarily stop them loosing on the move.
As for their accuracy, no modern archer can claim to have any idea about this aspect. There are many Roman reports about the amazing accuracy of Hunnic HA ... 'never miss their mark' The modern archer is no comparison for how many modern archers are faced with a screaming horde that intends to stove their heads in? There was none of the ritual we observe with modern archers because it could quite easily cost them their lives. Modern archers also do their shooting as a hobby, the HA of the steppe did it as a matter of daily existance and were therefore more than adept.

And yes I am an archer

.....Orda

alpaca
10-27-2004, 23:53
Well I have fought quite a bit with Armenia on VH/VH now and I have to admit, I almost exclusively use Cataphract Archers with which I usually get at least 10 times more enemies down than my own units.
Not only do they have overwhelming abilities (9 melee +3 charge, 10 missile, 18! armour and 4 defense skill) but they are also Horse Archers!
I use 7-10 of these in an army along with 3 or 4 "normal" Cataphracts (10+16 melee/12 melee in close combat) whose sole aim it is to kill any charging cavalry or wreak havoc on shaken infantry units. Cataphract Archers in a single line on loose formation can kill about anything you let them shoot at (including light cavalry which is usually broken before it reaches the line) and the only drawback is their speed (a bit less than normal cav speed I think).

Anyways, FF with regular HA is not such a great concern (I don't use the circle, though, cos the rate of fire is worse if they get stuck in each other :P) as long as you don't charge into the enemy units.

I'd like to do some testing with horse archers, too. So if someone is interested (online) just send me a PM or contact me via eMail.

Doug-Thompson
10-28-2004, 06:13
The firepower of square "blocks" of HA concentrated around a target has to be seen to be believed.

"Blocks" of HA are much, much easier to move around than the long lines of M:TW. Triple the number of men and their firepower can be concentrated in the same amount of "front." Also, they are MUCH easier to maneuver and "swarm" enemy units with them. Since HA now fire in all directions, facing takes care of itself.

Oleander Ardens is on to something about how the infantry's shields are pretty good, but that most R:TW troops are much more vulnerable, armor-wise, than what we're used to in M:TW. This compounds the deadliness of HA. These horse units are much easier to move about and much less of a hassle to use than their M:TW counterparts. They can get to the side and behind infantry much more readily, especially if the infantry is locked in a phalanx.




Now the bad news.......
Order them to melee... Why do they still loose on the move?

I'm guessing again, but I think the HA override an ordered melee attack when their ranged attack is more powerful. Vanilla HA have a very poor melee attack, even with a charge bonus.

Still, Orda Khan, I'm with you: I want my units to do what I order them to do. Sometimes, I want them to melee even if it is weaker. For instance, I don't want to let a few guys in a routing unit -- including the general -- get away while my guys are drawing and aiming.



Please note.......I have tested exclusively and they do not all obey commands. Turning off fire at will will not necessarily stop them loosing on the move.

That irritates me more than anything: Losing a cataphract, for instance, because the units nearby will not stop firing at an enemy unit that's already routing and that my cataphracts are finishing off.

Again, I want them to do what I ordered them to do -- although that didn't always happen in real life, either.

frogbeastegg
10-28-2004, 09:38
This is all getting highly interesting.

Dark_Magician, some horse archer units (all?) can use circle, as can some (all?) mounted javelin units. It's their special skill.

Oleander Ardens, now that really is fascinating. I would have expected slingers to do better against armour than arrows. Your finding on shields matches my own experience. If you can find the sheet with the results I'm interested in seeing it.

Doug-Thompson, I think we can say that there is no real penalty, except the occasional FF incident, when using missiles in dense formations. The old accuracy penalty for deep formations is gone. Also in the old games the back ranks simply wouldn't shoot; they would begin the animation but never actually shoot. This is a significant change indeed.

It also appears that the old crowding penalty is either gone, toned down or altered. Stacking units on top of each other before was a really bad idea, but now it seems fine. I remember someone saying in one of my phalanx topics that it is a devestating tactic to deploy many phalanx units on top of each other.

Orda Khan, that's another big alteration from past games. One the one hand it makes HA more deadly as they charge, on the other if you wanted them to shoot you would tell them to.

alpaca, that does it - I have to play with those Cataphract Archers! They sound like plenty of fun :gring:

I can't do any test games this week, but if someone else takes you up on your offer I am very interested in the results.

Oleander Ardens
10-28-2004, 15:17
Froggie I have yet to find that little sheet, well you know, a students room ~:handball:

Today I have some spare time before going out, so I will experimant a little. It seems best to use huge size, large and very high armor/ very low armor units..


BTW I too believed that Slingers should be better against armored enemies, but the results told otherwise, in anyway I will make today a large amount of trails and post them hopefully tomorrow..

And yes Cata Archers are my Nr.1 unit. Incredible good unit, only Elephants and maybe Catas can defeat them...

Cheers
OA

Doug-Thompson
10-28-2004, 17:15
The advantage of slingers over archers appears to be that slingers are much better skirmishers.

Just for fun, I put a band of slingers against a unit of Egyptian desert axemen. Again, I just ordered the initial attack before leaving the whole thing on autopilot.

Slingers were able to get away and destroy the axemen all on their own. They didn't lose a man while the axemen were reduced to 20 men left out of 82 and routed. Archers in another test got caught and killed before doing much damage.

===========

Last night, I just happened to have one unit of Parthian HA get attacked by one unit of regular foot archers from the Seleucids. The Cantabrian circle performed as advertised -- no losses at all until 2 or 3 were killed by while melee-attacking the remaining routers after the circle had been turned off.

I swear, the archers were trying to melee attack at one point, at least. :dizzy2:

========

Fought a series of battle last night using HA/Persian squares, cataphracts and a few mercenary cavalry.

None lasted more than 15 minutes. All were clear victories at least, and most involved large numbers of enemy Desert Calvalry and chariots. Several involved a lot of enemy foot archers.

HA squares make it much easier to co-ordinate with melee cav. No more having to work through a long line of HA when you want to charge.

The combination of cataphracts and Persian horse archers is deadly. Sounds like the mounted cataphract is a combination of the two -- the boyar of R:TW.

Cataphracts make mincemeat of any cavalry fast enough to charge HA. Let the enemy cavalry charge, shot at all the way by HA using the Parthian shot, and hit them from the side with cataphracts. The nearby HA stop fleeing and pour in fire on the enemy cavalry, which won't cause too many losses to the well-armored cataphracts.

If the enemy is a tough, armored unit that still has fight left in them -- which is very rare -- select the cataphracts and alt-attack. I read in another thread that cats change from lance to the mace, which has an anti-armor bonus. I will have to set up a custom battle and watch before I can claim to have seen this with my own eyes.

In the pursuit phase, I kept cataphracts close to some enemy spear units that hadn't routed yet and were trying to withdraw. The spears had to form up, turn around and point their spears toward the cataphracts to avoid being charged in the rear. This allowed the nearby HA surround the spears and pour in arrow fire. When the units routed, the cats charged.

Orda Khan
10-30-2004, 22:46
My post was a bit blunt I must admit, but it is because this issue is so annoying. Even weak HA can hack routing units, the ones you don't want to escape and they are conveniently fast. It is possible to run them to an area close to the routers and let them loose their arrows as they run and finish off the stragglers from a close up situation. I lost so many doing this I could not believe it, I could actually watch them falling as they galloped. So I thought melee may be a better option by preventing this but they would still fire!!!
This is not to say HA do not kill enemy too, they are much better at this now I must admit. I just find it annoying that I sometimes have to send them off in the opposite direction to make sure they don't go killing some of my stronger units.

In a square as opposed to long lines is far more manoevreable and aesthetically pleasing IMO but the guys at the back should use a bit of common sense and not shoot their mates in the front

....Orda

Doug-Thompson
10-31-2004, 17:34
Hmmm. We haven't mentioned unit size.

I don't suffer many same-unit friendly fire casualties, but use large size. Is this a problem in huge size?

===========

Having a unit pursuing routers, only to get shot up by friendly horse archers after you've turned off fire-at-will and pressed the halt button in the HA, is, well, annoying.

Like Orda Khan, I've found that running HA alongside a routing unit works even better than direct chasing. For one thing, you can have "siderunners" on each side without risking friendly fire.

HA are fast but Persian Cavalry is fast enough, have a better missile attack and a much better melee option.

Paul Peru
11-01-2004, 10:08
HA are really good now. I'm quite early and Armenian, just got my first Cat archer, have used HA exclusively until now, excepting my initial units + a few emergency merc hirings...
As reported, HA can mostly be left to skirmish on their own in RTW - even when confronting several enemy units. Cantabrating gets a bit hairy in crowded situations, and "the thin red line" breaks skirmishing every time.
I can also testify that they seem to be a bit "bowstring happy" and independent-minded.
-They will fire 2 volleys at whomever they choose before switching to the designated target
-They may still fire when told to stop and fire at will is disabled
-FF is a thundering nuisance (but is worse with jav units IMO)

Melee is strictly for taking down routers, but they're great for that purpose. I once had to charge 2 units of HA into some cataphract butts to try to save my general (he died) and they actually killed a few. (pyrrhic victory) (What nearly lost me that battle was that my own "#¤@£$ cats couldn't even take out a unit of slingers. Admittedly, they carged head on, but were all alive on impact. For some strange reason, the slingers lost 15 men. My cats had lost 30 by the time I got them out of there. Never seen anything like it, maybe the Parthian general had some magic VnVs) Apart from that episode and 2 times I auto-resolved battles that looked easy and got narrowly defeated, I'm amazed at the amount of behind I have kicked. I went after the Seleucids at once, but have only taken Assyria from them because I soon got other challenges. Parthia attacked, and they are the only ones I've lost battles against. They have cats, and those pesky HA ~;) Luckily Pontus held off until I had almost gotten control on the eastern front, but had they ever got huge stacks of men!

My finest victory was when I ran into a Pontic captain and his 1150 men. My general was leading 2 depleted veteran HA units north from Assyria for retraining. 81 men all in all. The Pontiacs felt quite secure when attacking on their turn. Of course they had crappy units. 5 PHC(capt), 14 PLC, 80 peltasts, 80 archers, and the rest was Eastern Infantry - the crappiest there is!! Didn't think it'd work, thought I'd take out about 100 before I retreated. Got the capt on the run while picking off the archers (had higher ground). Capt. got away, but without cav or archers, they were walking ducks. Spent my ammo, then charged one unit at a time with my general, and had my HA ride them down when they broke. 650 dead enemies, got the rest on the next turn :charge:

Looking forward to using cat archers. PHC is great as well, by the way. Cantabrian circle looks cool and works in many situations.

Doug-Thompson
11-02-2004, 22:26
As reported, HA can mostly be left to skirmish on their own in RTW - even when confronting several enemy units.

... I can also testify that they seem to be a bit "bowstring happy" and independent-minded.

Here's a surprize -- Skirmish mode works much better when you surround the enemy units. Often, the AI just doesn't know which way to go. Even if it does attack resolutely, it's taking heavy losses from fire from the side and rear. This makes it just about impossible to get cornered by infantry.

Surrounding, or "envelopment" in the proper military term, also cures the friendly fire problem.

Therefore, a weak HA unit that's galloping as fast as it can around the enemy and to the rear will have a lot more positive effect on the battle than one that's steadily pouring arrows into the front -- and at infantry shields -- at fairly close range.

Last night, I had a weak unit of HA galloping toward the rear. The enemy general's cavalry went after it. The HA withdrew. The enemy general went back to some more critical sector of the front, but the to-and-fro tired them out.

A tired HA unit can still shoot effectively. A tired melee cav unit is dead meat.

Then there's the morale effect of surrounding the other guy. Apparently, having a cavalry unit directly behind them makes infantry really nervous. In fact, I'm having battle after battle where the other side simply tries to leave when I start moving around them.


My finest victory was when I ran into a Pontic captain and his 1150 men. My general was leading 2 depleted veteran HA units north from Assyria for retraining. 81 men all in all. The Pontiacs felt quite secure when attacking on their turn. Of course they had crappy units. 5 PHC(capt), 14 PLC, 80 peltasts, 80 archers, and the rest was Eastern Infantry - the crappiest there is!! Didn't think it'd work, thought I'd take out about 100 before I retreated. Got the capt on the run while picking off the archers (had higher ground). Capt. got away, but without cav or archers, they were walking ducks. Spent my ammo, then charged one unit at a time with my general, and had my HA ride them down when they broke. 650 dead enemies, got the rest on the next turn.

Now there's an excellent example of using a melee unit in cooperation with HA. I've often moved melee cav behind a phalanx and just left them there to make the spears nervous, then poured in fire. When the unit routs, charge.

Silver Rusher
11-02-2004, 22:32
Hehe... I'm practically horse-archers only. In battles they are my favourite unit class, honestly. Never survive without 'em.

Doug-Thompson
11-03-2004, 01:29
Hehe... I'm practically horse-archers only. In battles they are my favourite unit class, honestly. Never survive without 'em.


Incredible as it seems, HA/Persian Cav, a mercenary phalanx and other foot mercenaries cooperated very well in a battle last night. Granted, it was against the AI.

It was a weird situation. I had some Parthian HA/PC and decided to press on in an invasion against Pontus. If the enemy attacked, the Parthians could always withdraw.

The province they invaded, however, had a mercenary phalanx available, some mercenary peltasts, three Thracian mercenaries -- and one unit of those "supercharged Thracians" that are so good. Can't remember the name. Starts with a "B".

I was very pleased at how well the phalanx discouraged the Pontic cavalry, the mercenaries slaughtered the anti-cavalry spear units and the horse archers killed everything. I think the phalanx lost two men. The best mercenaries lost about 20, I believe, but killed 263. I don't think I even used the Thracians.

Paul Peru
11-03-2004, 10:46
HA may be "too good", but I honestly think they should be good. Maybe there should be more of a difference between the factions. Some cultures were very horsey and bowie, others less so. ~;)
Getting the kind of range and accuracy we see in RTW would require HA-ing to be a lifelong lifestyle thingy, as it was for some peoples.

Phalanxes being easy meat for HA is quite intuitively correct, so the AI would need to adapt, composing armies differently when facing a HA-based adversary. Lately (in my campaign) Seleucids have gotten themselves some elephants, which helps. In one battle I lost a whole HA unit, which got trapped against the red line while left to skirmish on it's own while I was busy taking out the phalanxes. They've used the same elephant unit in many battles now, and I've killed a total of 1 pachyderm(!) They rout quite easily once the rest of the army is gone, though. Pontus has started using chariots, which has caused a few casualties. It will be interesting to see what happens when they bring along chariot archers.

I would feel quite rotten to exploit HA superiority to the extent that I do, but
-as stated, I think it's natural that I do well from a rock/paper/scissors pov.
-hey, my homelandz are pourr, and my peeple are fue. They must rely on their skillz as archererz and horsererz
-waging 3-way war with my Armenia the only enemy for both Parthia and Pontus makes for a suitable challenge anyhow.
-my empire gets a level of consistent quality management both on and off the battlefield rarely witnessed in real life ~;)

The sarmatian mercenaries suck, btw. My cat archers seem to do better in melee. historically a handful of sarmatians could take on thousands of angry saxons, and last for ages in melees as well :charge:

R'as al Ghul
11-03-2004, 11:44
Well, you guys have done some thorough research on HA.
I want to add what I found out in my Parthian campaign on VH/VH. Currently I'm fighting against Seleucia, Pontus and Egypt. Armenia is wiped out.
First of all I agree that HA are finally what we ever wanted them to be. Really dangerous. They shoot while walking and while running. They use the parthian shot and the cantabrian circle and finally they know how to skirmish, which is most astonishing. ~:eek: ~;)
On skirmishing:
Ok, there are occassions where they get caught. This is due to the fact that the maps are to small if you fight very large armies. If the Ai charges your unit of HA with something fast like Militia Cav, they will finally end up at the map edge and your HA has to go into melee mode. Vanilla HA suck at melee and they'll probably loose a lot before they can escape. In this scenario your general is usually very far away which makes ordering so much more difficult. Your only chance is to take them off skirmish mode and order them to a safe place before continuing shooting. Another possibility is to deal with the problem before it appears.
On friendly fire:
My experience is that it mostly appears when two or more units of HA are shooting and moving through other units at the same time. HA which stand behind each other or even overlap but don't move, cause very little FF if at all. It helps to have a chirurgeon in the retinue.
On envelopment:
I think that the reason why envelopment is such a good tactic with HA is not only due to the morale penalty which the AI units get for having an enemy unit to their rear, it has also to do with the shields of the infantry. Shields only seem to protect against arrow-fire from the front (which makes sense to me). So, if the enemy phalanx or whatever is facing your HA it will take lesser casualties than when fired at from behind or the flank. If you zoom in on an enemy unit with shields, you notice that at the moment of the first impact of an arrow-volley they raise their shields and cry "We're under attack". The subsequent volleys won't kill as many as the first did, because they have their shields up. If you cease your fire or focus to another unit they will drop their shields again and will become more vulnerable again. If you shoot them in the back there're obviously no shields at all. This causes more casualties, more morale penalties and causes the AI to change facing or position, making the situation even worse for him. Continous volleys in the back routs most units very fast.
On cantabrian circle:
My experience is that when you face a shoot out against foot-archers, you have to switch to CC to 1. avoid casualties by enemy fire and 2. maximize your own fire. I've no proof for this but it appears that the fire from a CC is much more devastating than a normal volley. It may have to do with the reaction of the foot-archers. Usually they run away so that I can shoot their backs. Almost as if they were afraid of that particular formation.
On melee-mode:
I could frequently observe that HA charge with their secondary weapons even if they have arrows left. It occurs when the unit they shot at is breaking or even routing. If the HA are near enough they will charge at will. If you want to make them charge by your command, take them off fire-at-will, use alt-attack and pray. If you play on VH it's not really recommended since your vanilla HA suck big time at melee-stats. For this purpose I bought some very expensive Sarmatians which I'm very dissapointed with. They only work on wavering or routing units. This has to do with the insane bonus of +7 attack for the AI when playing on VH. My cataphracts lost to Eastern Infantry. 'nuff said. :furious3:

Random observations:
You can't kill elephants with arrows but you can make them run amok very fast. Concentrate arrow fire from all sides for a few volleys and the AI won't get them under control again. The same is true for chariots. But I prefer to kill them with Bedouin Warriors charged in the rear while the chariots run amok. Getting rid of the chariots gives me more space to manouver.
Eastern-Generals are not so suicide happy as their western counterparts. This has most probably to do with the skirmish mode that applies to the Jav-Cav. Modding the western Generals to Jav-Cav might be a last resort if CA can't fix them.

:bow:
R'as

Doug-Thompson
11-03-2004, 17:28
On friendly fire:
My experience is that it mostly appears when two or more units of HA are shooting and moving through other units at the same time. HA which stand behind each other or even overlap but don't move, cause very little FF if at all. It helps to have a chirurgeon in the retinue.

Excellent observation. Important, too. This needs a test to verify it.


shields of the infantry. ... If you zoom in on an enemy unit with shields, you notice that at the moment of the first impact of an arrow-volley they raise their shields and cry "We're under attack". The subsequent volleys won't kill as many as the first did, because they have their shields up. If you cease your fire or focus to another unit they will drop their shields again and will become more vulnerable again.

Now that's some good close-up scrutiny. While computer animations sometimes don't reflect what's going on in casualty calculations, I'd bet that observation is correct. Another good test subject.



On cantabrian circle:
... I've no proof for this but it appears that the fire from a CC is much more devastating than a normal volley. It may have to do with the reaction of the foot-archers. Usually they run away so that I can shoot their backs. Almost as if they were afraid of that particular formation.

~:eek:



You can't kill elephants with arrows but you can make them run amok very fast. Concentrate arrow fire from all sides (emphasis added) for a few volleys and the AI won't get them under control again. The same is true for chariots.

Again, I have no tests or proof, but plenty of experience with fighting AI chariots. They do get bewildered when they start taking fire from multiple directions, much worse than infantry units. It's almost as if they are coded to avoid taking any flanking and rear fire and go nuts if they can't. Once they are running amok, a good charge by just about any decent melee cav will wipe them out. Chariots need to be finished off. They are too dangerous to just leave out there, running around with their arms flailing. I once had an HA unit that was never touched by "sane" chariots who lost 12 men after the chariots were driven crazy.


Eastern-Generals are not so suicide happy as their western counterparts. This has most probably to do with the skirmish mode that applies to the Jav-Cav. Modding the western Generals to Jav-Cav might be a last resort if CA can't fix them.

Interesting.

R'as al Ghul
11-04-2004, 10:27
This thread should be stickied.
Anyway, I have a huge problem. The Nemesis of my HA is the map-edge.
Ever fought against a full stack of Eastern Infantry with a dozen units of HA? It's proven very hard to keep the HA under my control.
I usually try to flank such an army on both sides to envelop as soon as possible. Since the AI has more troops, he will chase every single HA unit of mine with one of his EastInf. Eastern Infantry is of course crap but it's fast and the AI makes a sport of pushing my HA to the map edge. When my wings go around his flanks he dispatches as many units of EastInf as I have in my wings. The rest/ main body marches towards my main body.
So from his center map position he chases my HA to the map-edges, dividing my army into three. This wouldn't be a problem if my units wouldn't stop to follow my orders at a certain point.
If they are to close to the edge they will refuse any given order, wether f@w or skirmish-mode is on or off. Eventually they'll have no more space to retreat and pressed against the invisible map-edge-wall will have to fight hand-to-hand against the spears. They may win but they'll lose about half their unit.
In reality the Infantry would never ever be able to catch them, that makes it even more frustrating. But even worse is the fact that sometimes the units can pass the red line. If you order them to charge a routing unit in the last possible moment, they will fight them even beyond the red line, without routing, and return once they have finished them.
In my current Parthian campaign I've to battle Pontus, Seleucia and Egypt every turn. They keep invading with large stacks. My tactic so far has been to fight them in the desert with HA-only armies and the odd mercenary unit thrown in. Since the enemy stacks get bigger (over 12 units) I'm at the end of manouverability. What can I do? :help:

R'as

Tamur
11-04-2004, 17:05
This thread should be stickied.
Agreed, lots of very good info.

Doug-Thompson
11-04-2004, 23:44
The Nemesis of my HA is the map-edge.

Truer words were never spoken.


In my current Parthian campaign I've to battle Pontus, Seleucia and Egypt every turn. They keep invading with large stacks. My tactic so far has been to fight them in the desert with HA-only armies and the odd mercenary unit thrown in. Since the enemy stacks get bigger (over 12 units) I'm at the end of manouverability. What can I do? :help:


It may be too late. Your surrounding enemies may be too strong. Or it may be a problem that can only be cured on the strategic map.

Fight them, kill as many of them as you can, then withdraw. Swallow the defeat.

Normally, this would get your whole army killed. However, if you attack them (or are attacked by them) early enough in your movement and have plenty of movement points left, you can successfully withdraw.

Frankly, I've only done this when forced to, and fortunately haven't done it often. However, I have done it.

The key point on army survival seems to be whether an army has enough movement left to "break free" after a battle. In other words, the army that withdraws will get away IF it can still move farther than the pursuing army. Withdrawing units before they rout and leave the battlefield themselves also seems to help.

Since you're all HA and the enemy is full of infantry, there's a big "gap" here. It's dangerous, but quite usable.

Also, if you whittle down the infantry, they will think twice about attacking you again even if they can reach you. The odds have changed. For instance, I attacked a much bigger stack of Seleucids, but they were all phalanx units. The HA killed 872 Seleucids without loss, but ran out of arrows.Therefore, I had to withdraw. I suffered a "Close Defeat," but what was left of the Seleucid stack ran back toward Antioch the next turn.

==========

Another nice trick is raiding. The AI doesn't like enemy troops running around their territories. You don't need many units to cause real damage to the economy. Land units can blockade ports, for instance, just by going into them. Just like a ship, only you're on the land. Leave the next turn, or withdraw when attacked.

Once, I besieged the city of Sidon with four mercenary Arab cavalry -- Not four units, four cavalry. It took the AI a turn or two to figure out what was going on.

Chances are the AI will chase some raiders around, allowing you to whip them piecemeal. Also, you'll gather some really nice intelligence, and may find an unexpected opportunity.

Satyr
11-05-2004, 02:11
I am currently playing as Armenia and I am facing some of the same issues. I have quit bringing anything other than cav to the battlefield. That's right! Almost all horse archers and a few melee cav to go in for the kill. If you keep tabs on your HA and spread them out so that they are being chased in ALL directions, it is usually easy enough to circle back into the middle of the map and not get cornered. But you have to take control before they get anywhere near the edge. I am winning almost all of these battles against superior forces and taking few losses. Just take your time and constantly monitor the battlefield for problems. This does, of course, assume that you are not adverse to using the Pause Key. :charge:

R'as al Ghul
11-05-2004, 11:58
Well, the pause key is my friend since I played the Turks in MTW and I have no problem admitting it. I'm still playing without any speed-mods.
Yesterday I fought to big battles.
1. 20 units of Pontic Eastern-Infantry. It was a siege sally. I had about 12 units. General, HA and PersianCav and one unit of 10 camels. I stacked all HA at my left gate. At the beginning of the battle I quickly marched them to the outside corner of the wall, the enemys left flank. I tried to concentrate my fire on single units that approached mine and went to melee with several units once they broke. Things went very well without much running around the map. In the end I killed 2200 out of 2400. The after battle screen said about 100 had survived but the whole stack disappeared from the strategic map.
2. An egyptian stack of 20 units plus 5 units reinforcement were attacked in open desert. Luckily I started on a hill. I kept my forces together in a dense formation on the hill. I figured that since the Ai had superiour forces he would come for me. And so it did. Attacking my flank with 2 Desert Cav. Concentrated fire and succesive melee reduced them to about two dozen routing individuals out of 160. Next wave was Chariots which was also repelled in the same style. Problem: His main line of Nil-spearmen had come very near in the mean time and the red line was in my back. I had to split my forces and skirmish away. Until now I had barely moved while his units had to march through the heat and up the hill. They were very tired and in the moment they were flanked they broke easily. A minor annoyance was the fact that the routed DesertCav was substituted by more Chariots. Battle went very chaotic in the meantime. All of my units were in serious danger of being pressed against the edge. Strangely, those units that I tried to micro didn't do very well and lost about 50% of their strength. Other units in similar situations, which I hadn't the time to deal with, had more success and lost only about 5 men. Two units didn't lose a single man at all!! Some units that i already counted as lost, finished about 40-50 spearmen in melee and routed them on the mapedge!!
I have to say that all of the units had at least 2 copper chevrons and the general was 8-10*, but I was really astonished how well they do when left alone. It seems to be better sometimes to just let them do their business without interfering.

R'as

Doug-Thompson
11-08-2004, 02:36
I just had 180 or so cavalry just fight more than 2,000 cavalry, archers and chosen warrior infantry. My group included 108 HA.

No, I didn't win :embarassed: but I sure had fun killing more than 180 enemy, mainly good cavalry. I ran and ran until the enemy cavalry had to separate from their infantry to try and catch me, then doubled-back on the cavalry, then kept shooting until out of arrows.

Paul Peru
11-08-2004, 10:05
In my current Parthian campaign I've to battle Pontus, Seleucia and Egypt every turn. They keep invading with large stacks. My tactic so far has been to fight them in the desert with HA-only armies and the odd mercenary unit thrown in. Since the enemy stacks get bigger (over 12 units) I'm at the end of manouverability. What can I do? :help:
R'as

Well, what I've done in my current Armenian campaign is sealing off Pontus by placing 4 or 5 forts in strategic locations. Their stacks show up at one fort after the other, then go like "oh, a fort... I think there's a Sarmatian on a horse in there... let's go try that other place we ran into a fort again". I'm such a near-cheat. But I don't cheat. Quite. Sometimes I go fight them, if Egypt and SE have been busy elsewhere for a turn or two. Egypt keeps having rebellions, and they and SE are at war as well. And sometimes I buy a Pontic general, though I think they're getting less eager to get bought now.
For EI-stacks, I find routing them early to be quite easy and safe. It takes some heavier cav, of course. I have cat archers, which is a lovely all-in-one solution, but a unit of cataphracts or two or a general works. Charge them from behind, and they're goners. Huge stacks of EI makes me feel like Obelix. "Fresh Romans!!"
:charge:
All those things with wheels and those other with trunks, though...
I've gotten so used to not taking losses, and now I've actually got to send my men to the afterlife some. I agree with other observations: arrows don't kill elephants, but make them run. Chariots running amok are really dangerous.

Anyway, I'm not so sure my campaign is winnable. The Egyptian armies are getting really tough, now. I think I'll have to take some of their cities ASAP. They often leave them poorly defended, and when they return to siege later on, I can sally. Sallying with HA is great, but of course that's another near-cheat. ~;) More times than one have I been out to kill a few enemies and spend my daily ammo allowances, just to end up standing there laughing as the broken enemy army retreats. "Doh, those HA shoot at us, let's get'em. Doh, those towers shoot at us, let's go back out of range. Doh, now the HA are shooting us in the back. :|"

therother
11-08-2004, 20:44
This thread should be stickied.It's been given the next best thing: it's been indexed (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=39371)! Keep up the good work!

Doug-Thompson
11-08-2004, 21:11
There's no doubt about it: When the odds are even or in favor of the human player, the AI starts retreating as soom as HA start surrounding them.

I've had too many battles now where the other side turned around and started heading for the map edge as soon as a couple of HA got in behind the main body.

Combat difficulty changes the odds -- in theory. An AI phalanx unit that has a melee combat multiplier because of a tactical setting of "very hard" will still die like a dog to HA. However, it will not turn around and withdraw as quickly because the "odds" are supposedly better.

I assume the AI will start getting fidgety when they get surrounded, whatever the units doing the surrounding. However, HA can do this surrounding with less risk. It's much harder for enemy units to "punch their way out of the bag" against skirmishing HA. Very fast vanilla HA are good for getting around the enemy army, too. Not even most cavalry can catch them. Also, leaving big gaps between HA units doesn't seem to matter. The AI still gets scared.

==========

Elephants on the strategic map move just as far in one turn as cataphracts or Persian Cavalry.

This means the Parthians can conquer and cross the vast Russian steppes very quickly, because an HA/Persian Cavalry + Cataphract + Elephant army can move while elephants have no trouble knocking down the reinforced gates of barbarian factions and killling any infantry they find inside.

This became apparent after Dacia made the serious mistake of attacking me while I was supposedly pre-occupied in killing the Brutii.

======

Tactically, elephants don't have a skirmish setting. However, they're extremely effective as cavalry archers. This allows you to engage and destroy units -- such as flaming pigs, I presume -- from a distance.

I have yet to enjoy the challenge of engaging live bacon. However, I have encountered foot archers who fire flaming arrows and various light troops, trying to sting my elephants into frenzy.

I hit ALT+Right click to select the elephants missile attack, and sometimes move away from the unit that's trying to engage me. One of my favorite game moments yet came while luring a bunch of skirmishers in one direction and then having Persian Cavalry charge them from behind, routing them.

L'Impresario
11-09-2004, 02:24
On cantabrian circle:
My experience is that when you face a shoot out against foot-archers, you have to switch to CC to 1. avoid casualties by enemy fire and 2. maximize your own fire. I've no proof for this but it appears that the fire from a CC is much more devastating than a normal volley. It may have to do with the reaction of the foot-archers. Usually they run away so that I can shoot their backs. Almost as if they were afraid of that particular formation.


Haven't seen this mentioned so far in this thread, but the morale penalty is actually continuous when a unit is being under fire from HA in CC. You'll easily notice (if you are the victim in this case ~D ) that the "under fire" icon of that unit is lingering much more time,and esp. when it has no particular armour or shield. I 'm not sure though if this amounts to archers retreating, as it cannot be certified (at least in my eyes), that the AI handles a particular unit according to the amount of mrl penalties it recieves (among other factors) -or at least I haven't seen often the AI trying to save a lone cavalry unit, "shaken", under fire and trying to catch a much faster enemy. Maybe sometimes it brings that unit closer to the main formation but it surely reacts slowly to heavy enemy fire and unfavourable situations.

Alexander the Pretty Good
11-09-2004, 03:01
Any tips for using horse archers against other horse archers?

I'm currently the Armenians (Rome Total Realism MOD 3.2, Hard battles and Medium campaign) and have just started. Thanks to taking both that rebel city and the first Parthian city to the south, not to mention dedicated fiscal plaaning, my economy is out of the tank (for now). A little while after taking their city, I spotted some Parthian varmints encrouching on my newly acquired territory. Taking 1 unit Cats, 1 Sarmartians (who aren't all that hot, in my book), a general and 4 horse archers, I faced:

[4]Horse archers
[2]Generals
[2]Slingers
[2]Eastern Infantry (known as sparabara in the realism mod ~;) )

And I got beat. My HAs traded fire and casualities for a while, and I decided enough was enough, and I attacked with my Sarmartians, who quickly routed. I also threw in my Cats, who eventually fought to the death. And I realized, in this battle, that Horse Archers Can't Flank. At least not vanilla ones. I lost everyone except for the general (barely) and two HAs. Fortunately, after that fiasco, the enemy withdew the cavalry contingent and laid siege with a handful of infantry. I managed to speed some reinforment HAs to break the seige (very satisfying ~:cool: ).

But I may be fighting HAs for a while (Sarmartia looms to the north). Any ideas? I suspect that the cantabrian circle should be used.

Very useful thread, by the way. ~:cheers:

Doug-Thompson
11-09-2004, 04:54
Anybody tried putting foot archers on guard mode?

Alexander the Pretty Good's question made me wonder. HA outgun foot archers because HA fire on the move. Foot archers can't.

ANY movement by foot archers, however slight, causes them to stop firing. Often, foot archers will move and then move again before they have a chance to draw, aim and fire.

So, putting foot archers in guard mode should keep them shooting.

If you're on defense, you can just stand on a hillside and dare the HA to come to you. If you have to attack -- well, perhaps you could "leapfrog" if you had enough foot archers. Just leave half on guard mode while moving the other half. Just be sure to keep your melee infantry close by so your archers don't get charged.

Also, I've often wondered how light siege weapons like scorpions do against HA.

==============


L'Impresario

I wonder what the morale penalty would be if something was circling and was behind the enemy at the same time. Possibly pretty severe.

The Hun
11-09-2004, 17:55
Cantabrian circle is the obvious way to attack foot archers since no longer are you a standing target. Also foot archers are now under constant fire because there are not now volleys. Cantabrian circle or 2 or 3 units against 1 is the way to attack AI HA. Map edges are overcome by selecting engage at will and ordering HA to a point where they can once again use skirmish.
My armies are all Scythian HA and Scythian Noble HA and they destroy anything they meet so far. Any strong unit can be killed by concentrated fire.

Doug Thompson... you mention leap frog....you mean 2 or 3 lines volley advance, volley advance? To do this I would use guard for all or some will skirmish. Guard is old hold position order. This will be effective of course and my counter would be to concentrate on one or both flanks.

BTW...I never use archers on skirmish, only hold. It means micro management but I guess I want them to fire rather than run about

Alexander... Sarmatians are very good,but they do not like to get isolated. Did you manage to split the infantry from the cav in that battle? It is what I would attempt or try to lure the generals to their death

R'as al Ghul
11-09-2004, 21:33
Problem: Horsearchers refuse orders when on skirmish mode, this gets dangerous when they skirmish near the map-edge. In battles with full stacks the chances are high that fast enemy units such as Desert Cav manage to catch your Horsearchers and fight them h2h or even that your whole army gets split into single units, each pursued to the edge. If you try to manouver your HA out of this situation the skirmish engine interferes and it's impossible to simply ride around the enemy although there might be enough space.
Solution: Take your HA off skirmish and on guard mode. Leave F@w on. Manually manouver them around the enemy unit towards the map centre. Preferrably with double click. Once they are in a safe position with the enemy between them and the map-edge, turn skirmish back on and guard mode off.

It's basically the same as "hold position" was in M:TW, order the unit to guard a terrain. I tried this in my last battles and could always get my HA out of situations where they would have otherwised been lost.
:charge:

R'as

Doug-Thompson
11-09-2004, 23:05
Take your HA off skirmish and on guard mode. Leave F@w on. Manually manouver them around the enemy unit towards the map centre. Preferrably with double click. Once they are in a safe position with the enemy between them and the map-edge, turn skirmish back on and guard mode off.


Sounds sensible enough.

The Hun:

Yeah, one or two units keep firing while another advances.

R'as al Ghul
11-10-2004, 11:43
Elephants on the strategic map move just as far in one turn as cataphracts or Persian Cavalry.
This means the Parthians can conquer and cross the vast Russian steppes very quickly

Hmm, is that true? I thought that I saw that the cataphracts cannot move as far as HA. I think HA can move a slight bit further?? Not sure.
BTW, after your experience, what's the best use for Cats? My first ever build unit evaporated on contact with Egyptian War-Chariots.


Map edges are overcome by selecting engage at will and ordering HA to a point where they can once again use skirmish.
BTW...I never use archers on skirmish, only hold. It means micro management but I guess I want them to fire rather than run about

I just read this after the post I made above. I wasn't aware that you're already hinting at my solution for the red line.

~:cheers:

R'as

Doug-Thompson
11-10-2004, 17:18
R'as al Ghul

Nothing moves farther on the strategic map as pure vanilla HA. Persian cavalry do not move as far, though. I believe Persian cavalry have the same movement allowance as cataphracts, but will double-check.

========

Cataphract-HA tactics deserve a whole thread to themselves.

One of my favorite tricks comes when some enemy cavalry unit is chasing some Persian Cav. The cataphracts charge the flank or rear of the pursuing unit.

If a long chase is involved or if the enemy unit might get away, I'll turn the Persian Cavalry around and charge.

Although this sounds looks like suicide for the Persian Cav, they won't vaporize on contact like regular HA. They will -- briefly -- hold even tough units in melee. This is especially true if they are in a dense square rather than a drawn-out line. Even Egyptian war chariots have to take a little time to chew up a dense square of Persian Cav.

The cataphracts can then catch up quickly and crash into the stationary enemy's now-disorganized ranks, which are facing the Persian Cavalry. The result is usually total destruction.

I'd trade a unit of Persian Cav for a dead Egyptian family member any day.

I've done the same thing many times with mercenary Bedouin camels and cataphracts on Egyptian war chariots, and the result are always devastating to the chariots. The morale penalty from camels combined with being charged by cataphracts from the side and rear break them, and chariots often run amok when broken.

Most of the time, though, cataphracts wait for something vulnerable while HA arrows do the killing. If something's chasing the HA, have the cats charge into the side of it. If the chasing unit breaks off and you can't catch it, halt and let it go. Another chance will come up soon enough.

Another favorite is to chase retreating infantry units with cataphracts, but stop short of contact. The infantry will stop and face their greatest threat -- the cataphracts -- while you surround the infantry with HA and kill them all.

Doug-Thompson
11-10-2004, 19:34
Shortened version of a post in the Parthian guide:

I'll put one or two HA on each end of a long line. I'll put Persian Cavalry on the inside of those. Then I'll put the remaining HA in the middle. Those HA in the center are backed up lines of melee cavalry. If there's more melee cavalry to spare, I'll put some units behind the Persian cavalry.

The missile cavalry are spread out as far as possible, put in squares with space between them. If I can give the missile cavalry a height advantage by using a shorter line, I will.

The battle starts: The HA on the ends race to get past and behind the enemy. The rest of the front line engages with missiles while the melee cav hangs close, but behind the fighting.

If the enemy charges the middle, they are surrounded by missile cav and facing my best melee cav. If he charges the Persian cavalry, he risks getting flank-charged by the melee cav in the middle. If he attacks the very ends, he can't catch the HA and risks getting flank-charged by the Persian cavalry and any extra melee cav.

The goal is to put the enemy in a "bag" of missile cavalry, all of whom are firing missiles. This is possible even when the Parthians are heavily outnumbered because the HA don't have to maintain a continuous line. Instead, they have some squares that are as far apart as they can be while still supporting their neighbors, shooting all the time.

The Hun
11-10-2004, 23:18
I guess we were posting at same time eh R'as? ~;)

It comes down to fact that map edges should not exist, orders should be obeyed however it is not the case so we have to intervene. By selecting engage at will the HA are freed of their skirmish action and now will obey commands.

Using this principle I was able to defeat armies 3 times larger than mine and I had only 700 HA, some 4 units of Nobles the rest Scythian HA. It is like hit and run, attack and retreat. When enemy targets some of your units, turn others on to them, all the while pulling enemy out of formation. If you have some units like Sarmatian mercenaries in reserve, isolated units can be easily despatched

R'as al Ghul
11-11-2004, 10:52
It comes down to fact that map edges should not exist, orders should be obeyed however it is not the case so we have to intervene. By selecting engage at will the HA are freed of their skirmish action and now will obey commands.
Right, map edges shouldn't exist or maps should be bigger (twice the size).
I'm a bit irritated about your mentioning of the "engage at will" command.
I only have fire-at-will, skirmish, CantCircle and guard mode. I guess we are talking about the same thing and you just use M:TW expressions? I'm still talking koku sometimes, so that's okay with me. Otherwise, please enlighten me.
Concerning the tactics it seems that we all have, more or less, developed the same envelopment-style. Doug elaborated it perfectly in the above post. I almost do the same but am always short on melee cav. And I also tend to race my wing around their right flank because infantry shields only protect to the front and left.

; stat_pri_armour Details of the man's defences
; shield factor (only used for attacks from the front of left)

So, while moving around his right flank (left from your view) you will a) be able to kill more infantry if they stay put or b) disrupt his line because his flank reacts to the threat.
As Doug already said, even on VH and with a decent general, the AI will flee the map when surrounded. This happens especially early in battle, when his army is rather small (10 units) and you encircle him rather quickly.
Pontus lost about 5.000 troops to this tactic in the last few turns and is still bringing mostly Eastern Infantry. :charge:

R'as

Doug-Thompson
11-11-2004, 16:32
And I also tend to race my wing around their right flank because infantry shields only protect to the front and left.

So, while moving around his right flank (left from your view) you will a) be able to kill more infantry if they stay put or b) disrupt his line because his flank reacts to the threat.

Well, that's a fine point that I completely overlooked. :dunce:

I have noticed that the enemy attack on my right almost always gets farther than the enemy on the left. In hindsight, I'm sure this is the "curling" effect from the advancing troops trying to keep their vulnerable side covered.

Early, low-tech troops depend on the shield. For instance, The Egyptian Nile Spearman has a total defense of 13. Of that, 5 is his shield, or 38 percent.

Selucids
Militia Hoplites -- 5/8, or 62.5%
Levy Pikemen -- 40%
Phalanx Pikemen -- 15%
Peltasts -- 50%
Militia Cavalry -- 57%

Egyptians
Nubian Spears -- 62.5%
Nile Spears -- 38%
Desert Axemen -- 11%
Slingers -- 50%
Skirmishers -- 50%
Nubian Cav -- 36%
Desert Cav -- 36%
Egyptian Chariots -- 33%
Egyptian General Chariots -- 33%
Egyptian Chariot Archers -- No Shield.

Armenia
Hillmen -- 50%
Eastern Infantry -- 50%


Parthian HA and Persian cav don't have a shield, which makes sense because you'd need both hands free to shoot in any direction, using either the right or left hand.

Also, how much difference does shield type make? For instance, Egyptian Desert Axemen have a small shield but its metal.

Satyr
11-11-2004, 20:35
I try NOT to encirle the enemy. After all, I don't want them fleeing the field, I want to kill them all. Otherwise I pretty much use the same tactics as everyone else except that I take only a few melee cav into battle. If I get charged by heavy cav I can usually arrange to have 3 or so HA hit them at the same time. If my melee cav can get there too then all the better. The first unit in usually takes some losses but the melee cav goes down quickly to the rest. When that engagement is over I still have HA to resume spraying death onto the enemy. It is not uncommon to kill 600+ and only lose 10-30 units.

I have found that it is critical to bring a general along for moral support. Otherwise my HA seem to rout too easily while being chased by melee cav, particularly if it is the other side's general. Like Doug said, if you can engage a chasing melee cav from two sides you can often avoid being chased into the corner of the map.

I started a new campaign as the Carthaginians last night and couldn't remember how to fight without an all HA army. If was kind of a private embarrasing moment when I got onto the battlefield and went 'Uh Oh!'. :embarassed:

Doug-Thompson
11-12-2004, 04:28
I try NOT to encirle the enemy. After all, I don't want them fleeing the field, I want to kill them all.

But they die so much more quickly when routed. ~D

Seriously, this raises the valid point that winning with HA isn't too hard, but absolutely killing everything takes some effort.

When a unit breaks and routs in a regular melee fight, pursuit is automatic. Combat never stops. That's not true with missile cav.

An HA unit is ordered to fire at a specific enemy unit. The enemy routs. The HA keeps firing as the enemy unit gets away and does not really start following until the enemy is almost out of range. At least now the HA can fire on the move.

Worse, an HA unit is moved into the spot on the battlefield where there are fleeing targets. The HA keeps firing -- as long as something is in range. The HA just sits there when the targets are gone until you micro-manage.

There's always the option of using melee units to pursue -- and taking losses from friendly fire. Also, that's not much of an option when you're chasing cavalry.

I like envelopment because enemy units have to flee toward some unit, somewhere. It also means that some units don't have to be microed, giving more time for the ones who are left. I like to rush all the HA into the escape route when the general rout begins and pursue with melee cav. The CA shoot at the fleeing enemy all during the chase, then help block the escape.

If everything works, fleeing units have to run a gauntlet.

Also, I like to kill as many foot archers as possible during the rout. I'll send melee cav to kill those and send HA to shoot at routing spearmen.

===========

The logical end of all this envelopment talk (for single play) is to split the army during the strategic phase and surround a unit, then attack with the stack that has your melee cav and general.

I haven't done that much because I like control. Still, I'm going to experiment and use Persian Cav as my "encirclers." They seem to come in more of a "square" and don't need to be deployed by hand so much.

Sinner
11-12-2004, 10:45
Also, how much difference does shield type make? For instance, Egyptian Desert Axemen have a small shield but its metal.

The flesh/leather/metal values in the stat_pri_armour and stat_sec_armour fields are only to tell the engine what sound to play when the unit is attacked, hence why you get metallic clinks when firing arrows at Armoured Hoplites for example.


Still, I'm going to experiment and use Persian Cav as my "encirclers." They seem to come in more of a "square" and don't need to be deployed by hand so much.

The reason for the 'squarer' Persian Cavalry formations is that they are organised with only half the distance between columns compared to the Horse Archers.

Persian Cavalry - 1.5m between columns...
formation 1.5, 4, 3, 6, 4, square

Horse Archers - 3m between columns...
formation 3, 4, 6, 6, 4, square

The first two numbers are the close formation distance between columns and then between ranks, the next two numbers are the loose formation distances, then the number of ranks, then the standard formation type, horde or square. A unit can also have an extra formation type such as phalanx, testudo or wedge.

Since you prefer deep formations for your horse archers why not mod the stats, increasing the number of ranks. It'll save you a lot of time in setup for each battle without really otherwise effecting the game.

Doug-Thompson
11-12-2004, 17:02
The flesh/leather/metal values in the stat_pri_armour and stat_sec_armour fields are only to tell the engine what sound to play when the unit is attacked, hence why you get metallic clinks when firing arrows at Armoured Hoplites for example.

Thanks, Sinner, although I'm obviously disappointed that the answer wasn't some closely guarded tactical secret.


The reason for the 'squarer' Persian Cavalry formations is that they are organised with only half the distance between columns compared to the Horse Archers. (etc.)

Now that's nice to know. So, in close formation, a regular formation of PerCav is 19.5 by 16, while HA are 39 by 16. (Large unit size.)

[Edited correction: PerCav should have been 21 by 16, HA 42 by 16. A "square" HA would be 9 wide, six deep.]



Since you prefer deep formations for your horse archers why not mod the stats, increasing the number of ranks. It'll save you a lot of time in setup for each battle without really otherwise effecting the game.

Sounds logical.

=========

On a related note, the limited number of foot archers that outrange HA all have a limited amount of ammo: 30 arrows instead of 40.

Granted, a Chosen Archer Warband doesn't need 40 shots to do real hurt, but I thought this little fact was worth noting.

The foot archers that outrange HA are: Chosen Archer Warbands (Dacia, Scythia, Germainia); Cretan Archers (Merc); Pharoh's Bowmen (Egypt); Forester's Warband (Gauls) and Archer Auxilia (Rome)

The Hun
11-12-2004, 17:55
By Engage I mean turn off Skirmish...I would not suggest Guard mode for HA.

Doug-Thompson
11-13-2004, 20:15
And I also tend to race my wing around their right flank because infantry shields only protect to the front and left.

How does shooting at the shieldless side effect movement?

This vulnerability can do more than cause more casualties. I strongly suspect that it can be used to "steer" or "herd" units. They will turn -- even break off a charge against another unit -- to turn their shields toward incoming fire. Not just infantry units, either.

Even against another human, you should be able to greatly increase his "pointing and clicking" burden if he keeps having to issue orders to override the self-defense programming.

Parthian missile cav don't have this tendency because they have no shield.

Doug-Thompson
11-16-2004, 20:40
Summarized the core lessons of this thread so far and edited them into the topic posting. The ones I picked are:

1. Put HA into big square formations. They are easier to move about, fire in all directions and don't suffer as much from friendly fire because there is less unit overlap.

2. Beware the map's edge.

3. Try to envelop your enemy. The HA units don't have to be in contact with each other. There's no need for a "continuous front" here. Gaps between "squares" are covered by fire.

4. Move and shoot for the enemy's "unshielded" side.

5. Use Cantabrian circle carefully. Circling HA tire out quickly and can suffer if caught in melee. However, the tactic does reduce casualties in a pure missile fight.

=========

For every rule, there are exceptions. For instance, suppose a unit of HA has to get in a missile fight with a chosen archer warband, which outranges HA.

I suspect -- but haven't proven -- that it would be better to have a long, thin line while the HA are closing the range. CAW has a big range advantage over HA. I suspect a long, thin, fast-moving formation would be harder to hit at long range. Once the HA were well within range, they could go into Cantabrian circle.

R'as al Ghul
11-17-2004, 13:21
How does shooting at the shieldless side effect movement?
This vulnerability can do more than cause more casualties. I strongly suspect that it can be used to "steer" or "herd" units. They will turn -- even break off a charge against another unit -- to turn their shields toward incoming fire. Not just infantry units, either.

Hi Doug, I had written a long post but have lost it during the reply. :wall:
Anyway, I second your herding theory. If done right you can flock them in the middle of the map. You need to completely surround them and micro the targets. Everytime a sheep threatens to break out, shoot it in the right flank to make it change it's course. During this procedure you will also shoot it in the back, thereby inflicting even more penalties. My experience is that once they leave the proximity of their own units, they break and rout very fast.
Against the Egyptians or anybody else who brings fast Cav, you have to deal with the CAv first before you start the herding.
Being shot at from the front is fine by the AI. It doesn't really care. It's expected to happen during a battle. No need to panic. But as soon as the right flank or even the back is attacked, it will adjust its line and soon after that will panic. I fought a battle yesterday against a 1500 stack Egyptians, a 600 stack Seleucids + a 200 stack Seleucids with about 5-600 men on my side. HA, General, 2 BedouinWarr and 1 Cat. Only about 50 of each stack survived the herding. ~D
Quite usefull if you only want to fight them once.

R'as

Doug-Thompson
11-17-2004, 16:22
Anyway, I second your herding theory. If done right you can flock them in the middle of the map. ... My experience is that once they leave the proximity of their own units, they break and rout very fast.
... [A]s soon as the right flank or even the back is attacked, it will adjust its line and soon after that will panic.

Yes, it's fascinating how you can herd units into the middle of the map AND destroy their cohesion at the same time.

They are crowded together in simple terms of space, but all broken up in terms of facing, whose flank is threatened and an overall fear of being surrounded. Each unit feels more and more isolated even though they may be piled on top of each other. The result is a tighter mass that's much more unstable morale-wise than a more spread-out formation that is in good order.

Put simply, they go from being an army to a mob. Even high-valor units are vulnerable to confusion and disorder, although they do resist panic for longer.

While this pattern may work best against the AI, the AI's habits and tendencies are something that a human player has to fight with when he's trying to control his units.

We've talk about putting an enemy army inside a bag of HA, but every once in a while we need to "tighten" the bag by using HA to move in and around to threaten open flanks from a closer range. They may have to skirmish away when the enemy pushes back, but then the bag can be tightened elsewhere. Keep up the scare, so to speak.


I had written a long post but have lost it during the reply. :wall:

Don't you just love that? Like working on word processors before they invented autosave.

The Hun
11-17-2004, 17:47
You guys should give Total Realism mod a try. HA are in 'horde formation' so you have no options. This part I do not like but with the adjustments they have made to the game, HA armies really do have to work hard to achieve victory. I had an army of Greeks attack me and they had the usual armoured pikes and hoplites, I had only HA and ran out of arrows as I reduced their numbers. Last time I faced a huge phalanx on vanilla game I shot them to bits and only a handful got away, this time they were reduced but still dangerous now I was out of arrows. I used mock charge and feigned retreat to isolate units and of course, to get them exhausted and then hit quickly from rear and flanks. The enemy general showed his worth......Nothing!! but it was a very hard fought battle requiring much manoeuvre and concentration.

Doug-Thompson
11-17-2004, 21:18
You guys should give Total Realism mod a try.

Yeah, but I'm not done obsessing over the vanilla game yet. ~;)

Seriously, after all this exploration of how to use HA, there's the whole other side to look at -- how do you fight them?

==========

The shieldless-side vulnerability factor is a much bigger issue in R:TW than in M:TW, I believe, because HA now fire on the move.

In M:TW, you'd run for the shieldless side -- if you could do that without getting one end of your line caught in melee. The enemy unit would keep moving. Your HA would stop and start firing. The target would change facing. You'd have to stop firing and start moving again. And so forth and so forth. Most often, you were better off just keeping your distance and moving another unit into the flank and rear.

In R:TW -- You run for the shieldless side. Your never stop firing, and the arrows start hitting the vulnerable side as soon as you get any edge at all. The target starts changing facing. You run more, and cut closer. You're running faster than it can change facing and the fire is continuous. Also, you're better able to concentrate fire from different units because your HA aren't strung out in long, thin formations that are very vulnerable to melee.

Remember how spear units would reform after each man dropped in M:TW? No time for that now.

Next thing you know, the target has taken heavy losses, is spinning like a drunken dancer and losing it's pattern while showing its very vulnerable backside to another one of your units.

It sure looks to me like phalanx formation makes this vulnerability worse. I know that spear units don't change facing as fast when they are in phalanx mode when I'm controlling them.

Doug-Thompson
11-17-2004, 21:25
On a simpler note:

When fighing HA with foot archers, turn skirmish mode off.

As noted, HA have the advantage when foot archers are moving. Since foot archers aren't fast enough to skirmish away from HA anyway, skirmish mode does the ground-pounders more harm than good. It interrupts their firing every time HA get close.

Yeah, the HA can charge, but vanilla HA are terrible in melee. Many decent ranged units can beat them man-to-man. Even with Persian Cav, etc., the archers might be able to survive long enough to get reinforced.

=======

The world's turned upside down. Now foot archers require more micro than HA.

I suspect the changes in R:TW are meant to address problems with HA in multi-player, where game lag was reportedly a constant headache to people who tried to micro these units.

Oleander Ardens
11-18-2004, 12:50
It has been a long , long time since my last reply here - finally some time for EB and the .org now


About the indiviual formations:

As Dough and R'as have rightly observed that it has become very easy to use now HA stacks to do the simple fact that you can turn a HA unit into a very compact size. As there is no more rankpenality, massive quadratic blocks are the way to go when very heavy in HA or footarchers.

Vanilla HA and the Scythian Noblewomen require more space by default, but the problem is greatly reduced with the block system. I personally hardly ever turn them into loose formation, as indiviudal archers are very often easy prey for multiplie cavaly charges.

The three male EliteHorseArchers are very densely packed, making their overall required space small indeed. These guys do in consequence profit much more from the loose formation, especially as they are far better to win missile duels, having more armor.


HA vs. Archers

As the footarchers are now a fare less powerful counter you arn't usually pressed to defeat them if there are only a few. Things change when there are elite archers in great quantity around, but this is seldomly the case.
In this occasions the "classical" cav. tactic works fine. Thanks to your speed you can concentrate your force in one point, braking resistence there with the combination of the charges of two-three cav. units. The HA factions all have a good lancer to do this job very well, the Parthians can even use Elephants.


How to counter enemy HA?

Well, as we all found out they are one of the most hated enemies on the battlefield, especially with factions lacking in elite archers and good cavalry. And on VH/VH HA are surly overpowerd compared to other units, as they have a ranged attack and are actually hard to defeat with light cav.
When you combine this with the climate bonus, things can turn very ugly when using light cav. This is the lesson I learned after having been soundly beaten by Scythia in a winterbattle playing the Macs. Two LL each were unable to defeat a lonly HA.

So I would tend in VH/VH to use archers in quadratic blocks and in loose formation (fire at will/stand ground/skirmish off), protected by spears with big shields and some cav. Keep close togheter and boost the morale with the general. You need patience and try to avoid routing at all costs; If it starts once you will ver likely loose the whole army.

Make good use of the terrain and hope for the best.


Cheers
OA

Doug-Thompson
11-18-2004, 18:56
It has been a long , long time since my last reply here - finally some time for EB and the .org now

Good to hear from you, OA.


About the indiviual formations:


The three male EliteHorseArchers are very densely packed, making their overall required space small indeed. These guys do in consequence profit much more from the loose formation, especially as they are far better to win missile duels, having more armor.

Hmm. Will have to try putting PerCav on loose ...



How to counter enemy HA?

Well, as we all found out they are one of the most hated enemies on the battlefield, especially with factions lacking in elite archers and good cavalry. And on VH/VH HA are surely overpowerd compared to other units, as they have a ranged attack and are actually hard to defeat with light cav.

I tend to agree here, too, but won't fully go over to that view until more countermeasures have been tried.

Frankly, I can't think of a good countermeasure to HA on VH, except that HA on VH are controlled by the AI. There are weaknesses in the AI to exploit, such as pinchers and map edges, but not in the unit.


When you combine this with the climate bonus, things can turn very ugly when using light cav. This is the lesson I learned after having been soundly beaten by Scythia in a winterbattle playing the Macs. Two LL each were unable to defeat a lonely HA.

Saw your description of that on another thread. Ouch.

Doug-Thompson
11-21-2004, 04:49
Looks like the big questions have been addressed. Hopefully, there will be some definitive test results someday but those will deserve a thread of their own. The remaining tactical questions I can think of probably need threads of their own, too.

1. What are the best countermeasures for HA, and what should HA do to counter-counter them? I really think top-notch foot archers like Chosen Archer Warbands can put up a good fight if the proper tactics are worked out, including co-ordination with other units.

2. Are the techniques worked out on this thread good for chariots, too? What about javelin-armed cavalry, like Numidians?

=======

Also, in the finer points-category, HA units will start firing at a target from a distance if you order a melee charge. Persian cav, for instance, will fire from a distance before charging with swords.

This means that if you order Persian Cav to melee with some fleeing cavalry, for instance, they will start firing and keep firing into the fleeing unit's backside until they catch up or the routers get away. It's a nice way to have Persian Cav pursue a unit without having to micromanage.

m4rt14n
11-27-2004, 06:11
Anyone ever use Cat Camels in conjunction with PH or HA ? They seem very much unused, being in the highest tech level and all.

Doug-Thompson
11-29-2004, 16:40
Anyone ever use Cat Camels in conjunction with PH or HA ? They seem very much unused, being in the highest tech level and all.

Unfortunately, I haven't had the chance. :embarassed:

The stats are great, but I only play campaigns. By the time I can get them, the game is practically over.

R'as al Ghul
12-03-2004, 16:26
Looks like the big questions have been addressed. 1. What are the best countermeasures for HA, and what should HA do to counter-counter them? I really think top-notch foot archers like Chosen Archer Warbands can put up a good fight if the proper tactics are worked out, including co-ordination with other units.

2. Are the techniques worked out on this thread good for chariots, too? What about javelin-armed cavalry, like Numidians?


I agree this case seems to be closed.
1. When I encounter enemy HA at the beginning of a Hard or VeryHard campaign, I try to pull them into melee with 2 or more of my own HA. The problem is the +4 or +7 attack bonus in these levels. The Ai knows that and will charge your HA with his own. In a 1vs1 melee you can only loose. If you happen to have some camels around or even better melee Cav you can easily rout them. If I face armies with several HA I try to seperate them from the main army to deal with them one by one. Cantabrian circle helps to minimize casualties in a shoot out.
Foot archers have two weaknesses. 1. They can't shoot on the run. 2. weak melee. They need to be protected and put on hold position.

2. No, chariots are a different category and I can't tell how to use them most effectivly. Jav-Cav on the other hand works pretty much like HA. There's one thing to consider however, their ammo is spent very fast. I don't have any stats at hand but even if they have the same amount of projectiles as HA do, they run out of Javs very fast. Tactically this means that you have to consider on which units you use them. Where are they needed most? You can't just let them run around shooting at random targets like HA. Jav-Cav needs more foreward planning. I would even recommend to switch f@w off.

R'as

Doug-Thompson
12-06-2004, 16:50
Jav-Cav on the other hand works pretty much like HA. There's one thing to consider however, their ammo is spent very fast. I don't have any stats at hand but even if they have the same amount of projectiles as HA do, they run out of Javs very fast. Tactically this means that you have to consider on which units you use them. Where are they needed most? You can't just let them run around shooting at random targets like HA. Jav-Cav needs more foreward planning. I would even recommend to switch f@w off.

Basic JavCav have only six shots, but have much better melee than vanilla HA.

I haven't played with JavCav much. I don't like Greek City or Seleucid campaigns. However, this brand of missile cavalry seem to be more "disruptors" than "destroyers."

Greek militia cavalry can whittle a large 120-man militia pikeman unit down to about 99 men if they're left alone. They're also reasonably resistant to archers when the JavCav are using cantabrian circle.

So I'd consider using them like ultra-skirmishers. Turn fire at will off, as you suggested, put them in a circle and send them to attack good infantry. If the enemy archers fire back, they will have to halt (disrupting the formation of an attacker) and will waste a lot of arrows. Also, the JavCav can charge the archers if they get a chance. If the JCs are charged by decent melee cav, have them run away. This distracts the enemy cavalry and tires them out.

Keep your own infantry back until the JavCav have caused their casualties and disruption, and worked their way around the sides. Once the main infantry lines have clashed, charge enemy archers and the rear of enemy melee infantry.

JavCav really shine once the rout begins. They're fast and have decent enough melee to wipe out routers.

Disruption, not destruction: The old motto of M:TW HA.

Also, there appears to be no reason to put JavCav in a square. They lack the range. A long, thin line is better for melee but makes them harder to maneuver than HA.

=============

Edited P.S. Some rather detailed micro tips are in this thread (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=40622)

Kanamori
12-21-2004, 17:26
Sorry if this was discussed somewhere and I didn't see it, but does the accuracy or kills increase w/ a thinner line, as in MTW: VI? Also, If I want to kill all or most of the army, I tend to make armies of heavy inf, a few heavy cavs, and light cavs to chase down the enemy and flank to cause the initial rout. I've found armies tending to have lots of cav do very well in getting all or most of the enemy troops.

Doug-Thompson
12-23-2004, 06:57
Sorry if this was discussed somewhere and I didn't see it, but does the accuracy or kills increase w/ a thinner line, as in MTW: VI?

I don't think that ever got a thorough test. However, the gain in accuracy would have to be pretty massive to offset the other advantages of a square formation: Less friendly fire problems, much easier to handle, no need to change facing, concentrated fire in any direction. I haven't noticed any such increase in accuracy.

However, it does seen that thin lines are harder to hit. Foor archers seem to have a hard time getting any kills on a long, thin line of HA -- or any other fast unit -- that is running directly toward or away from them. I can't prove that, though.

MAt
03-17-2005, 00:54
hey guys good thread.

I'm a bit suprised that more people aren't running into issues with scythed chariots... must be just me then. They consistently make mincemeat of my horse archers - either by chasing them into a corner of a map, or if on a city map into the city walls, and their high armour makes them pretty much invincible.

Of course there are plenty of ways round this (easiest is foot archers + flaming arrows) but it requires a fair amount of micro-management steering HA's away from trouble and stopping them from getting too scattered I find.

No one else had this problem?

Elephant
07-31-2005, 23:35
This maybe a stupid question, but whenever the term HA Squares are brought up, does it mean that you are making each unit "deeper"? Or multiple HA units forming a double/triple line as a collective?

Sorry to have to ask this, I am a newbie. :embarassed:

There is something that I do know and could recommend, however: using Cantabrian Circle can gain you experience faster than in regular formation.

This is something that occurred to me in a siege battle at a Scythian campaign (VH/H). My horse archers sallied out to shoot the German spear warbands, and knowing that they will have a hard time coming near me, I messed around and make them all do the circle.

I tripled the speed, and after 5-10 minutes of game time, I noticed all of my HAs getting a chevron, with their status reading Tired, but unharmed.

In the next battles, I tried this again as I fought some Rebel armies. And it seemed that the HAs each gained another chevron at the end of the battle. Further retrials with the same HA army shows me that they gain one chevron per 2 battles using the circle.

In conclusion: Tired to Exhausted HAs (perhaps all units?) are more likely to gain experience if they kill something than they would when Fresh to Winded.

Maybe someone can test it out in order to prove/disprove my findings?

Creeper525
08-22-2005, 16:31
think part of the problem is the foot archer targeting. It looked like the foot archers were targeting left of my horse archer. A bit like if they were targeting ahead of the horse, but did not get that the horse is NOT going to move in a straight line.




this should be put into the bug thread I think

also, I wich CA would maybe make the map boardars round, instead of square (wich creates corners)

though I know, a map edge is just as good as a map corner for getting your cav archers killed, but bigger maps would be great, everybody wants them anyway, not just to save Cav archers

just as big as the historical battle maps like carrahae, would be good enough, that have the extra 16 tiles, instead of the campaign battle size wich only includes 9 tiles

Doug-Thompson
08-26-2005, 01:55
Sorry for the much-belated reply, elephant. I've been away from the forum for a long time. Too long.

Re: HA squares. It refers to one unit put into a very deep formation.



There is something that I do know and could recommend, however: using Cantabrian Circle can gain you experience faster than in regular formation.

This is something that occurred to me in a siege battle at a Scythian campaign (VH/H). My horse archers sallied out to shoot the German spear warbands, and knowing that they will have a hard time coming near me, I messed around and make them all do the circle.

I tripled the speed, and after 5-10 minutes of game time, I noticed all of my HAs getting a chevron, with their status reading Tired, but unharmed.

In the next battles, I tried this again as I fought some Rebel armies. And it seemed that the HAs each gained another chevron at the end of the battle. Further retrials with the same HA army shows me that they gain one chevron per 2 battles using the circle.

In conclusion: Tired to Exhausted HAs (perhaps all units?) are more likely to gain experience if they kill something than they would when Fresh to Winded.

Maybe someone can test it out in order to prove/disprove my findings?

Now that would be a significant find. I'll look for that, but I'm going to wait until the expansion comes out at the end of next month.

According to FAQ postings by the developers, Parthians will get the Parthian shot while other faction's HA will have to use Cantabrian circle. Although the message wasn't detailed, it appears that Parthians will be better at skirmishing away than other factions, which will have to go into Cantabrian circle to get a similar effect.

If so, that would be a very good balance. Parthian HA are extremely good, but they are showed into a corner strategically. One of their first enemies is Egypt, a powerhouse. The developers also promised improvements to the AI, which will make the Parthian situation even tougher. They need that HA advantage. However, other factions would simply sweep if that ability carried over into, for instance, the Huns. Forcing them to use Cantabrian circle would balance things.

Doug-Thompson
08-26-2005, 01:59
Creeper525:

No doubt, the map is small for a lot of things, but especially for cavalry archers.

Doug-Thompson
09-06-2005, 16:25
Impatient for Barbarian Invasion horse archers, I played around with Parthia some more.

IF you turn skirmish mode on first and IF you turn on Cantabrian circle first and THEN target a specific unit, skirmish will work sort of like it should. The HA don't start firing at the nearest unit but they will move away from it and keep firing at the unit you targeted.

Doug-Thompson
09-28-2005, 02:53
The process of updating this for the "Barbarian Invasion" expansion kit has begun.

According to very early reports, BI:

Fixes the "Skirmish won't work" bug introduced by the 1.2 patch.
Reduces the effectiveness of archery overall.
Reduces the effect of cavalry charges.
Not all HA can use Cantabrian circle, only the light varieties.

I'll update this post some, but the topic will probably need a new thread in the colliseum, too.

Kraxis
09-30-2005, 18:44
Add that not all horse archers can use the circle. Only the light ones.

Doug-Thompson
10-03-2005, 15:42
Add that not all horse archers can use the circle. Only the light ones.

Done.

Kraxis
10-03-2005, 15:59
Horse archers seem to be much more attentive towards the skirmish.
They will react much more sensible towards enemies advancing on them (unlike infantry with skirmish). And if you send them towards a position inside the skirmish circle (too close to the enemy) they will run back and forth. In itself not very great but it actually makes them harder to hit.

Elephant
10-06-2005, 04:28
I don't know if this is the topic to post in about this problem I have, but it just seems that Scythian Noble Archers are more prone to getting killed by arrows than the basic Scythian Horse Archers!

In one of my battles, those damn Archer Warbands were able to take out 2-3 of my Noble Archers almost every round they fired, and my guys were doing the Cantabrian Circle!

Maybe the basic Scythian HAs' "Fast Moving" ability makes them harder to be hit by missile units?~:confused:

Doug-Thompson
10-06-2005, 21:00
I don't know if this is the topic to post in about this problem I have, but it just seems that Scythian Noble Archers are more prone to getting killed by arrows than the basic Scythian Horse Archers!

Whoa. That's not good. Surely the Noble archers have better armor.

Are the regular HA running and the nobles just walking? Speed makes a difference.

Elephant
10-07-2005, 04:32
Whoa. That's not good. Surely the Noble archers have better armor.

Are the regular HA running and the nobles just walking? Speed makes a difference.

I always run the last few lengths to quickly get in range to attack the enemy archers whenever HAs are involved.

I also use Loose Formation with my Cantabrian Circle, so that they run in more spread out circles.

890719k
03-12-2006, 11:54
:help:

Does anyone have any solution against HA?
It is very hard to force it to melee as it runs faster than any of my unit.

Knight Templar
03-12-2006, 12:16
Welcome to the Org :balloon2:

To answer your question:
1. Use foot archers. There are more men in foot archer unit then in HA unit, plus, foot archers fire more accurate.
2. Try to circle them with one unit attacking from the front and the other from the back (although it's difficult as HA react very sensible towards enemies advancing on them)

890719k
03-12-2006, 12:22
Thx:2thumbsup:

But isn't it stated in this post that foot archers can no longer beat horse archers in RTW?

Diurpaneus
03-12-2006, 20:08
Light Cavalry and Foot Archers are the best units against HA. I preffer Light Cavalry (I always have one unit of light cavalry in my army)

Knight Templar
03-12-2006, 20:13
Thx

But isn't it stated in this post that foot archers can no longer beat horse archers in RTW?

In my Parthian campaign, where 75% of my armies are HA, I mostly dislike fighting against 5 or more archer units armies (of course, not too much; my HA are stronger in mellee) although this guide improved my HA tactics a lot



The effects of that are enormous. Foot archers are still one of the best counters to horse archers, but they're not nearly as good as they were in MTW, especially if the AI is handling the foot archers and a human is controlling the horse archers.

Helgi
04-17-2006, 14:15
In my Parthian campaign, where 75% of my armies are HA, I mostly dislike fighting against 5 or more archer units armies (of course, not too much; my HA are stronger in mellee) although this guide improved my HA tactics a lot

For me, I prefer putting my horse archers, when I can get my hands on them, all on one flank, my right. backed up with either 1-2 hvy inf. or 1-2 Hvy or Lt. Cav. Then I focus my attack on 1 or 2 enemy units to help smash the enemy's left with what else I have one my right.

Pontifex Rex
04-27-2006, 04:03
Hmmm,...I think my tactics with a Horse Archer army are somewhat different from most of the posts I've read. I use a "ride-by" strafing attack or defence which looks something like this (15-16 units).


_______{Enemy here}________




_________A A
_________A A
_________A A
_________A A
_________A A
_________A A
_________A A
_________A A


The army will ride from right to left (enemies left to right) at an oblique angle across the enemy's front until the entire formation rides past the enemy flank (skirmish mode off). The attacks will hit the the centre-righ to right hand wing of the enemy army with a torent of arrows. As the enemy army wheeels to face your new position you dash a ways out of range of any missile troops and redress the ranks as best you can. Once the lads have a had a good 30 second rest, they will charge again,...repeating the oblique attack.

The enemy army will eventually become disorganized and you can start spliting your formation into two wings (or perhaps three if needs be) and start picking the enemy apart. Likewise, once the enemy formation is disorganized, you can form the army into two lines as the enemy formations advances piecemeal, slowly falling back but wrecking havoc as you do.

If the enemy has cavalry your first "ride-by" will probably draw them out, so be ready with the skirmish button. Take out the enemy cavalry first and then the infantry. You may lose a dozen, maybe two dozen horses but, some will "heal" their wounds. As units weaken you can reorg and send remnants back for rebuilding or bring up replacements to distribute among the veteran units. Works quite well.

I just defeated a full 20 unit Macedon army plus 12 units reinforcing with 13 Horse Archers, 1 General, 3 Sarmatian Mercs and 3 Phalanx Mercs.

Cheers

OhLawd
04-08-2008, 00:24
Things to consider when fighting cavalry:
- Horse archers using cantabrian circle will tire out after a few minutes. Then, chase them down with fresh cavalry (ALWAYS keep a fresh cavalry unit handy!).
- You can also chase down horse archers by having some cav units chase them and others walk towards them (though staying towards the middle of the map), then alternating the roles. Have them in loose formation.
- Archers used to counter horse archers should be using loose formation, hold position, fire at will, no skirmish mode. For close range, fire works better. If they are charged by a cavalry unit, don't move them but have a spear unit charge the cavalry instead. Fire may be a good idea if they're using the circle. Concentrate all your fire on one unit.
- Any cavalry engaged by both a spear and cavalry unit will have the choice of either running while being mowed down by the cavalry or staying to fight the spearmen.
- Ballistae and to a lesser extent onagers can also be used against horse archers, but require a special effort to protect them against cavalry. Elite archers are downright nasty against horse archers, go to the center of the map and hire some Cretan and Rhodian mercenaries.
- Archers on top of a hill are at a large advantage in both range and firepower. Archery is almost useless in a forest though javelins have the advantage. You can also try to lure horse archers into ambushes.
- An all-horse archer force faces the weakness that their units can be corraled by cavalry one by one. This is why you don't want them in loose formation. Have two teams of light cavalry encircle them this way. Try to get their general.
- Don't plan on destroying the all-cavalry army, just stand your ground and try to get a good casualty ratio. Eventually the horse archers will run out of ammo and it'll be over.

RLucid
04-08-2008, 00:40
The weakness of skirmishing forces, is they tend to waste huge amounts of energy dashing back & forth, or cantabrian circle. Careful use of multiple Cavalry units, can take turns to tire, enemy horse. Then attack with fresh horse, when they're isolated.

I've had some success using Echelon formations. It does take some patience though and timing. I'll often have to rely on spearmen infantry to cover 1 flank and concentrate all my cavalry on the other.

[_]

.....[_]

...........[_]

The point is the 1st unit attracts attention of missile cavalry, it can either charge directly (if enemy cavalry are passive), or maneuver past and round, or it can wheel off and draw a unit onto it. Quite likely to be in loose formation, and moving fast and hard to hit. 2nd or 3rd can close up, if it has a charging opportunity.

The 2nd & 3rd units have similar flexibility. If AI charges unit 2 with a horse unit, then the others can quickly return back and tilt odds massively in favour. If the missile AI unit attacks each in turn, then it gets tired running about.

Very often you can catch a unit cold from flank, then secondary charge in rear. Once routing the freshest unit can chase it off the map, whilst the other regroup and rest.

Ideally you can lure the missile units, within range of Light Infantry Missiles with superior firepower and protected by spearmen. Then catch them as they retreat from behind, as the "bait" turns.

OhLawd
04-11-2008, 01:08
I did some custom battles trying different configurations against an all horse archer army. Every nation has at least one solution to the problem. I also notice another weakness of missile units in general - just firing arrows will make them Winded in a few minutes, making them an easy chase for a fresh cav unit.

3 slinger, 2 spear, 1 light cav vs. 6 horse archer
The horse archers more or less faced off against my slingers, I had to run the slingers up to the horses every once in a while due to the range difference (being on a hill helps). After a few minutes about half of the slingers and the horse archers were gone, then I overran the tired horse archers with the cav unit. This probably represents an ideal force balance (may want 2 cav though). Everyone was in loose formation the entire time.
Casualties: 1.5 slinger, .5 spear vs. 5 horse archer

2 armored elephant vs. 6 horse archer
This seems to be a uniquely Carthaginian solution. The horse archers were only able to kill one elephant, I eventually "lost" the battle because the elephants went mad.
Casualties: 1/6 elephant, 3 horse archer

4 semiauto ballista, 2 spear vs. 6 horse archer
It was fun to watch them shoot at the horses. Ballistas can't do much against loosely formed targets, but they were comparable to archers. I exited when both sides were out of ammo.
Casualties: 1 semiauto ballista, .5 spear vs. 3 horse archer

1 light cav, 5 war dogs vs. 6 horse archer
It's not too practical because the handlers can be killed so easily.
Casualties: .5 light cav, 3 war dogs vs. 1.5 horse archer

2 chosen archer, 1 spear vs. 6 horse archer
elite archers are the ideal opponent to use against cavalry. Just make sure you're using fire arrows because it conserves ammo and causes double damage against horse archers, despite the slow reload. I "lost" the battle, but only because I went at a disadvantage to prove how effective elite archers are.
Casualties: 1.5 chosen archer, .5 spear, 4.5 horse archer

Overall you can in fact fight horse archers with RTW vanilla, but the purchase and upkeep costs of horse units should be increased by 25-50% (at least in the case of light units) because the upkeep is roughly the same per unit as archers. This is not accurate because horses have to eat and drink (especially in the desert), must be trained to a similar extent humans are, and must be replaced regularly because of their shorter lifespan.

Seamus Fermanagh
04-15-2008, 05:16
Excellent post! Be careful, however, because if you show continued aptitude for painstaking effort and methodical research, you will be captured by the EB development team and we will never hear from you again. :cheesy:

Praetor Rick
04-17-2008, 05:24
Overall you can in fact fight horse archers with RTW vanilla, but the purchase and upkeep costs of horse units should be increased by 25-50% (at least in the case of light units) because the upkeep is roughly the same per unit as archers. This is not accurate because horses have to eat and drink (especially in the desert), must be trained to a similar extent humans are, and must be replaced regularly because of their shorter lifespan.

The real problem with Horse Archers is that they come much earlier than most of the counters. Armored Elephants? Repeating Ballistas? Um, yeah, tier 5 units aren't really viable answers to tier 2 (tier 1 for Scythia) units in the campaign. Even tier 3 regular archers will leave you at a meaningful disadvantage if you have to face off against horse archers early in the game.

The other problem with Horse Archers is that they are annoying to face far out of proportion to their effectiveness. You go into battle against Parthia or Scythia as a non-HA faction, and there's not really any fun to be had there. You spend the entire battle trying to actually get to do something to the stupid things, and "win" by surviving until they run out of ammo after they inflict serious damage to your army. Or, if you're clever, you "win" by maybe pinning a couple of units to the map boundary so you can slaughter them, at which point they rout and instantly escape because they're at the map boundary, and even if they don't, they still run fast enough to get to wherever they're retreating to with minimal casualties. It is rarely, if ever, possible to crush a HA army with superior tactics - drive them off, maybe, crush, hardly ever.

Doug-Thompson
05-21-2008, 22:51
The real problem with Horse Archers is that they come much earlier than most of the counters. (emphasis added). Armored Elephants? Repeating Ballistas? Um, yeah, tier 5 units aren't really viable answers to tier 2 (tier 1 for Scythia) units in the campaign. Even tier 3 regular archers will leave you at a meaningful disadvantage if you have to face off against horse archers early in the game.

The other problem with Horse Archers is that they are annoying to face far out of proportion to their effectiveness. You go into battle against Parthia or Scythia as a non-HA faction, and there's not really any fun to be had there. You spend the entire battle trying to actually get to do something to the stupid things, and "win" by surviving until they run out of ammo after they inflict serious damage to your army. Or, if you're clever, you "win" by maybe pinning a couple of units to the map boundary so you can slaughter them, at which point they rout and instantly escape because they're at the map boundary, and even if they don't, they still run fast enough to get to wherever they're retreating to with minimal casualties. It is rarely, if ever, possible to crush a HA army with superior tactics - drive them off, maybe, crush, hardly ever.


That's all very true. I'm an HA fan, obviously, but understand other player's dislike: HA are frustrating to fight.

It's surprising and pleasing to see this old thread still kicking.

eliterun
05-22-2008, 23:17
one thing i've noticed with horse archers...

was sieging a pontic city, they sallied out, and when my HA were chased to the edge of the map i took them off skirmish ordered them to a more central location, and then put them back on skirmish + told them to fire @ the unit chasing them...and they ran right into the unit that was chasing them when I put them back on skirmish!

anyone else notice that if you give them commands to fire at a specific unit, skirmish mode doesn't work quite right?

Darkvicer98
05-23-2008, 17:10
Yes i've noticed when using too many Numidian Cavalry. I ordered them to fire on the Roman General and at the time they were up and down so a few of my units ran straight into his unit. Luckily i took few casualties and ordered them to retreat before continuing to open fire. Still i won the battle.

Ralblecyasync
09-18-2009, 18:54
HELP..
Rtw Dont install they say:an earlier version of rome total war is detected - please uninstall before installing Rome total war - goldedition.
hell? plz help me.

MajorFreak
05-22-2011, 00:33
My problem with the Cantabrian cirlce is that it takes too much space. Considering the friendly fire problems in RTW, the circle makes your HAs more likely to overlap each other and start annihilating each other.*scratches head* you know, the only use for cantabrian is when you're on a flat plain type terrain...that's when i find the HA able to mob and not inflict blue on blue. It's when you try this on uneven group that you get friendly fire casualties.

Oleander Ardens
08-18-2011, 15:33
Looking for the wisdom of old days, to fight in new distant lands.

The gist of it is still valid for newer CA games.

OA

seleucus1nicator
08-18-2011, 20:32
i hate to fight horse archers, especially that of scythia.

SidGreen
04-12-2012, 16:35
I can never get horse archers to work for me, but when fighting them I always get 3:1 casualties :(

ollandosss
08-04-2013, 22:51
Still, Orda Khan, I'm with you: I want my units to do what I order them to do. Sometimes, I want them to melee even if it is weaker. For instance, I don't want to let a few guys in a routing unit -- including the general -- get away while my guys are drawing and aiming.

That irritates me more than anything: Losing a cataphract, for instance, because the units nearby will not stop firing at an enemy unit that's already routing and that my cataphracts are finishing off.

Again, I want them to do what I ordered them to do -- although that didn't always happen in real life, either.

double clicking for a charge doesn't work on horse archers. But when you hold Alt and click once for attack, they will storm down on any unit and destroy it with their daggers! (supposing the unit consists of archers/peasants or moths.
I too was very frustrated by not being able to chase down routing units in the beginning. But that Alt key is magic :)

Vincent Butler
05-20-2014, 01:52
I frankly don't find horse archers very effective against heavy infantry, such as Legionary/Praetorian/Urban cohort, Royal Pikemen, Armoured Hoplites, etc. This might be because I have not used them much, but watching my brother with standard horse archers against Militia Hoplites, from the front they were only moderately effective. Coming from behind works for any missile unit, even slingers. Hmm...cavalry slingers...slingers, especially Rhodian/Balearic, decimate chariots, by the way.

ReluctantSamurai
05-24-2014, 19:43
Could it be that you're playing the wrong Horse Archer faction?:quiet:

The Armenian Cataphract Archers decimate all those heavy infantry and more. My cavalry generals leave one "historic" marker after another on the sands of Libya and Cyrenecia against the hapless Romans with all their fancy Cohorts (played on VH/H).

Slingers? Bah...a bunch of useless stone-chuckers~D

Myth
05-24-2014, 21:02
Could it be that you're playing the wrong Horse Archer faction?:quiet:

The Armenian Cataphract Archers decimate all those heavy infantry and more. My cavalry generals leave one "historic" marker after another on the sands of Libya and Cyrenecia against the hapless Romans with all their fancy Cohorts (played on VH/H).

Slingers? Bah...a bunch of useless stone-chuckers~D
If Rome had proper hotseat mode i'd love trying to get the brutii to Marian reforms via an early Carthage conquest and try to contend Egypt and Syria vs you via Pretorian armies.

ReluctantSamurai
05-24-2014, 22:02
Bring it.

Romans>>>:hanged:

[maybe in the fall or this winter...my schedule through the summer isn't leaving me with much time to sleep let alone play video games:no:]

Vincent Butler
06-23-2014, 21:10
Never tried Armenia, my brother likes the Cataphract Archers, though they require different tactics, for example, horse archers relied on speed for survival, not necessary with the Cataphract Archers. They are not good for running down routers either. In RTW, slingers weren't that good, except against non-armoured targets. Balearic/Rhodian slingers did better, but still useless against armour. They decimate Spanish units, though. Slingers seem to be a lot better in EB. The cav slingers was a joke, in case someone thinks I am serious. Cav archers would be much better.

ReluctantSamurai
07-01-2014, 19:27
Never tried Armenia

You should. They are both fun and challenging, and for all those folks who've been bedeviled by the Egyptian Chariot Archers, this is payback time~D I wrote a very detailed guide to Armenia (it's on pg 5 of the Armenia guide) and if you ever decide to play them, I highly recommend you read it. Covers everything from unit roster, to temples, to strategy. I think you'd enjoy it:shrug:


They are not good for running down routers either.

In melee, no they are not. But........keep 'em in the fire-at-will stance and they shoot those cowards in the back while chasing them:bounce: That's one reason why Chariot Archers rarely get off the battlefield with even a single soldier alive. And besides, I already pointed out THE best unit in the game for chasing routers---Arab Cavalry. In the desert, they will catch anything including routing cavalry units. And you, as Armenia, can recruit them as mercs in two different provinces, one of which has them with an experience chevron to start.:2thumbsup: My standard cataphract army has at least two units of them, and sometimes four. Not much ever gets off the battlefield with those guys around.


The cav slingers was a joke, in case someone thinks I am serious.

Yep~;)

Vincent Butler
07-02-2014, 18:31
So chariots do not destroy the Cataphract Archers like they do normal cav? That is why I believe heavy infantry is the best way to beat Egypt. Counter to archers is cav. Chariots own cav. Counter to chariots is infantry or elephants. Their archers attack the heavy infantry and elephants, trying to make them go amok, though I believe you mentioned that the Armoured Elephants don't run amok very easily. Chariots are not very good, at least not with the AI, if you know how to fight them. Again, I have seen that slingers decimate chariots as well, though the factions I usually play as cannot train them.

And they beat down the cities, and on every good piece of land cast every man his stone, and filled it; and they stopped all the wells of water, and felled all the good trees: only in Kirharaseth left they the stones thereof; howbeit the slingers went about it, and smote it. 2 Kings 3:25 KJV

ReluctantSamurai
07-02-2014, 22:49
So chariots do not destroy the Cataphract Archers like they do normal cav?

If you are referring to melee combat, no they do not. The Cats are the most heavily armored cavalry in the game, and they take less losses in melee, accordingly. Does this mean I throw my Cats at them recklessly? Most decidedly not. Chariot Archers want an archery duel. If you move a cavalry unit, or any other unit for that matter, towards them, they retreat in skirmish mode. Chariot Archers always lose the archery duel with Cataphract Archers. If I have a pressing need for my CA's somewhere else on the battlefield, I will order them into melee but only after the chariot unit's numbers have been whittled down to 1/2 or less. Otherwise, I keep them in fire-at-will while giving chase and more often than not, the chariot unit is destroyed before I have to make the decision to go over to melee.


That is why I believe heavy infantry is the best way to beat Egypt.

:no:

Spoken like someone who doesn't play a horse archer faction. If you wish to beat Egypt with heavy infantry....well good luck with that. Chariot Archers will skirmish to death any infantry unit, or javelin unit that tries to engage them. I know....I've tried it.


Counter to chariots is heavy infantry.

If you are referring to the scythed version, then yes. Once you stop a scythed chariot's mobility, whether by spears or massed sword units, they become dead meat. But......
......the counter to Chariot Archers is....archery. Armenia is very well suited to this because their best archer unit is mounted. The fact that that mounted unit is a cataphract, makes the job a cake-walk. So what do you do if you play a faction that doesn't get Cataphract Archers? As a Roman faction, Archer Auxillia works just fine. As a Greek faction, merc Cretan's work just as well. Never contested Egypt with Germania or Gaul, but I'm quite certain Germania's Chosen Archer, or Gaul's Forester Warband will shred CA's as well or better than AA or Cretan's.

Always deploy the archers to the flanks instead of behind your center units. That's where the CA's come at you (except for perhaps the general's unit) and that's where you "greet" them. As a Roman faction, all of my leftover Principes go to the Middle East after Uncle Marius makes his appearance, and they get deployed in front of the Archer Auxillia to keep the CA's at a distance. If you don't provide a screen, the AI sees this and sends the CA's into melee to rout your unprotected archers. The Principes provide an added benefit with pila volleys if the CA's get too close.

Let me know how well your heavy infantry approach works:pray:

BroskiDerpman
07-02-2014, 23:02
Egypt and Britannia's chariots wreck anything that isn't a unit with phalanx enabled, or at least cause a huge annoyance

To counter them use combined:

Javelin cavalry

Phalanx units

Elite slingers (the Balearic slingers are best versus chariots)


If versus the scythed chariots just use any archer with flaming arrows to amok them.

ReluctantSamurai
07-02-2014, 23:46
Egypt and Britannia's chariots wreck anything that isn't a unit with phalanx enabled

Are we talking about the same game here~:confused:

Britannia's donkey carts get absolutely demolished by either Germania's Chosen Archer, or Gaul's Forester Warband~:smoking: And either of those archer units have good enough melee stats to go at it hand-to-hand if need be..........


To counter them use combined: Javelin cavalry Phalanx units

When I first started playing the Seleucids, I used this very approach. Militia Cavalry are cheap, and they die by the hundreds because Chariot Archers get a "Parthian Shot". You lose maybe 20-30% of your cavalry unit just giving chase. And don't ever go over to melee unless you are desperate, as your Militia Cav units more than likely get wiped out. It's doable if you go for attrition tactics...Militia Cavalry are cheap (less than 300 denarii, IIRC) and can be produced in one turn. Chariot Archers are much more expensive (haven't played Egypt in so long I've forgotten their actual cost) and take two turns to produce. But this whole approach is tedious and very boring (chasing chariots around the battlefield after you've routed the main army is frustrating, to say the least, as you watch your cavs numbers whittled down by the Parthian Shot) , which is why I was led to try other ways.

Phalanx are totally worthless unless you use them as a screen for your archers.


Elite slingers (the Balearic slingers are best versus chariots)

In RTW, slingers will get cut to pieces because the chariot archers outrange them, and you have to place them in front of your screen or end up shooting your own men in the back. And btw, at higher difficulty settings, you will never get a unit of chariot archers to rout using flame arrows because the AI gets a substantial morale bonus that cannot be overcome by a tactic that might work at lesser settings.

And a detail point here...fighting the scythed version is entirely different than fighting the archer version. And in my experience, an AI-controlled Egypt makes many, many more Chariot Archers than the Scythed Chariot. So yes, stopping the scythed version requires heavy infantry (unless you are playing as Armenia~;)), but stopping the chariot archer requires..........................................archery.

Trust me guys, I've got as much experience fighting the Chariot Archer as anyone who still posts here...and my recommendation is to use archers with an infantry screen in front and deploy them to the flanks. Works every time.

Just curious guys....how would you go about stopping this?

http://i990.photobucket.com/albums/af24/aussiebirdman/Armenia03.jpg
http://i990.photobucket.com/albums/af24/aussiebirdman/Armenia04.jpg
http://i990.photobucket.com/albums/af24/aussiebirdman/Armenia05.jpg

All three of these stacks were lined up against me, plus another off-screen that I should have scrolled out further to get it into the screenie.

There's five Chariot Archers sitting in Jerusalem, there's four more in the partial stack, and seven in the full stack. The off-screen stack had four more, making a total of 20 Chariot Archers in the four stacks facing my lone cataphract army. All four attacked my army, in succession, on the same turn. That's nearly 6000 against my 1046 (VH/H settings). The AI did some unit shuffling between stacks because the first army to hit me was the faction leader's there in Jerusalem and it had 10 of the twenty chariot archers in it.

The result:

http://i990.photobucket.com/albums/af24/aussiebirdman/Armenia07.jpg

Over 4000 Egyptian casualties including all 20 Chariot Archers.

Still think heavy infantry is the best way to defeat Egypt?

BroskiDerpman
07-03-2014, 04:23
Are we talking about the same game here~:confused:

Britannia's donkey carts get absolutely demolished by either Germania's Chosen Archer, or Gaul's Forester Warband~:smoking: And either of those archer units have good enough melee stats to go at it hand-to-hand if need be..........



When I first started playing the Seleucids, I used this very approach. Militia Cavalry are cheap, and they die by the hundreds because Chariot Archers get a "Parthian Shot". You lose maybe 20-30% of your cavalry unit just giving chase. And don't ever go over to melee unless you are desperate, as your Militia Cav units more than likely get wiped out. It's doable if you go for attrition tactics...Militia Cavalry are cheap (less than 300 denarii, IIRC) and can be produced in one turn. Chariot Archers are much more expensive (haven't played Egypt in so long I've forgotten their actual cost) and take two turns to produce. But this whole approach is tedious and very boring (chasing chariots around the battlefield after you've routed the main army is frustrating, to say the least, as you watch your cavs numbers whittled down by the Parthian Shot) , which is why I was led to try other ways.

Phalanx are totally worthless unless you use them as a screen for your archers.



In RTW, slingers will get cut to pieces because the chariot archers outrange them, and you have to place them in front of your screen or end up shooting your own men in the back. And btw, at higher difficulty settings, you will never get a unit of chariot archers to rout using flame arrows because the AI gets a substantial morale bonus that cannot be overcome by a tactic that might work at lesser settings.

And a detail point here...fighting the scythed version is entirely different than fighting the archer version. And in my experience, an AI-controlled Egypt makes many, many more Chariot Archers than the Scythed Chariot. So yes, stopping the scythed version requires heavy infantry (unless you are playing as Armenia~;)), but stopping the chariot archer requires..........................................archery.

Trust me guys, I've got as much experience fighting the Chariot Archer as anyone who still posts here...and my recommendation is to use archers with an infantry screen in front and deploy them to the flanks. Works every time.

Just curious guys....how would you go about stopping this?

http://i990.photobucket.com/albums/af24/aussiebirdman/Armenia03.jpg
http://i990.photobucket.com/albums/af24/aussiebirdman/Armenia04.jpg
http://i990.photobucket.com/albums/af24/aussiebirdman/Armenia05.jpg

All three of these stacks were lined up against me, plus another off-screen that I should have scrolled out further to get it into the screenie.

There's five Chariot Archers sitting in Jerusalem, there's four more in the partial stack, and seven in the full stack. The off-screen stack had four more, making a total of 20 Chariot Archers in the four stacks facing my lone cataphract army. All four attacked my army, in succession, on the same turn. That's nearly 6000 against my 1046 (VH/H settings). The AI did some unit shuffling between stacks because the first army to hit me was the faction leader's there in Jerusalem and it had 10 of the twenty chariot archers in it.

The result:

http://i990.photobucket.com/albums/af24/aussiebirdman/Armenia07.jpg

Over 4000 Egyptian casualties including all 20 Chariot Archers.

Still think heavy infantry is the best way to defeat Egypt?

Hmmm I guess it's just me speaking from Rome's vanilla multiplayer. That's why you don't get it probably. Chariots under human player will really wreck you up. That's why people use combined jav cav, slinger fire, and pikes. Chariots get wrecked by pikes. They can't attack a box of pikes and Balearics. Balearics are better versus Egyptian chariots then archers. You use phalanx as meatshield for your missiles and use them in loose formation with phalanx enabled to counter any chariot attempts to get close. The javelin cavalry keep provoking chariots into range of Balearics and there is no way for enemy to attack as you got better infantry.

So generally the deployment looks like missiles screened by loose formation pikes and with javelin cav with support.

For single player many things will work as it's the ai we're speaking about. I never bothered to play vanilla campaign but just went for mods. But versus chariots if you don't have them don't play into their advantage of open field. It may be the ai but it can still do some damage. I would just pike box with lots of missiles, that's a hard counter and the ai is especially dumb so it will attack or you can fool it into doing so.

But even in Singleplayer I just hopped onto a vanilla campaign and I have done the same thing, I screen archers with pikes and have javelin cav in support. Horse archers are even better but many factions don't have them.

So reluctant samurai I think you've misread my post. My previous post described the usage of a missile heavy formation screened by pikes and javelin cavalry.

Also chariots do wreck non pike infantry, even on larger unit size they're still very good anti non pike infantry.

As for the rest I am not going to debate on that as each campaign is different and players like playing their own ways and mess around with the ai in different ways. Then point is Im not even trying to argue against you, I am giving suggestion to a tried and true method of countering chariot swarming whether it be multiplayer under 15k cwb or Singleplayer.

Have a good day. ;)

ReluctantSamurai
07-03-2014, 05:42
Hmmm I guess it's just me speaking from Rome's vanilla multiplayer. That's why you don't get it probably. Chariots under human player will really wreck you up.

I get it. If I were playing against your suggested set-up, I'd counter with light cavalry to chase off your cavalry skirmishers while my chariot archers dice up your slingers due to a range advantage. I'd never let my chariots get tangled up with your infantry screen, and I don't see that you can do anything about it. Slingers are a direct line-of-fire missile unit, so in rough terrain, or where other obstacles are present, they can't shoot effectively. I would suspect that if RTW's multi-player is anything like Shogun, then the "Ironing Board" map is what you play on, no?~;)


Balearics are better versus Egyptian chariots then archers.

If you are playing vanilla RTW as you say, then this is not the case, because using vanilla stats, chariot archers out-range even the Balearians. But foot archers have a slight range advantage on the chariots, and don't have to move in front of the infantry screen to shoot. Our two systems are not that different, other than I dispense with the javelin cavalry as unnecessary and use archers instead of slingers for the reasons I've mentioned.


Horse archers are even better but many factions don't have them.

I made suggestions on how to do it with non-horse archer factions:shrug:


I am giving suggestion to a tried and true method of countering chariot swarming whether it be multiplayer under 15k cwb or Singleplayer

Vincent hasn't actually stated whether he's playing single or multi-player, but I am assuming it's single player. If it's tried and true for you, and you have fun with it, that's the whole point of playing the game....to have fun. I just know that a simple infantry screen of pike or javelin-types like Roman infantry in front of archers works well and I can't see even a human player defeating that unless they send something in to break up the screen.

Vincent Butler
07-03-2014, 07:10
Now maybe I just play on too easy a difficulty. The disadvantage of slingers is that they can't shoot over your guys, but if you order them to attack the chariots they can shoot them from inside the chariot archer's range, before the Chariot Archers skirmish mode kicks in. When I play, I see just as many Egyptian Chariots as Chariot Archers. As to the Britons, I can wipe out AI-controlled chariots with Gallic Warband, you just have to keep an eye on it. Again, maybe that is just the difficulty level. Realistically, and in the game, it seems, those scythes on the wheels of the chariots would not dismember soldiers, so a "Gladiator" arena scene with the guy getting cut in two is not very realistic. Yes, I play single player, we only have one Rome disk and can't seem to find the no CD patch, or at least get it to work. In my experience, heavy infantry, especially Roman infantry in Testudo, including ELC, can withstand the barrage of Chariot Archer's arrows. And can the EB Roman infantry form Testudo?
The chariots of God are twenty thousand, even thousands of angels: the Lord is among them, as in Sinai, in the holy place. Psalm 68:17 KJV

ReluctantSamurai
07-03-2014, 18:50
The disadvantage of slingers is that they can't shoot over your guys, but if you order them to attack the chariots they can shoot them from inside the chariot archer's range, before the Chariot Archers skirmish mode kicks in.

I've been stressing the disadvantages of slingers in this situation. In rugged terrain or where there are obstacles on the field, they become very restricted in their fire. Archers don't suffer from this in similar situations. I've been on lots of Middle East maps that have a bluff that can only be accessed from the sides or rear. Slingers will only be able to fire at a unit some distance from the edge, and the chariots then move under your range and shoot your unit to pieces. I, personally, don't like the micro-management required to move slingers back and forth around a screen, and while they are moving and for a brief period after, to reorganize ranks, they are not shooting. I'd much rather keep continuous fire on a chariot unit with my archers tucked safely behind the infantry, especially when first engaging them as you have to cut through their hit points before you can actually start to kill them.


Now maybe I just play on too easy a difficulty.

I'm not busting you for playing on easy. You are obviously still learning all the ins and outs of the game. Pretty near everyone, myself included, played on easy while learning the game. You'll know when it's time to crank it up....every campaign becomes boringly easy. And as Broski has pointed out, whatever works for you, whatever style you prefer, is the way you should play. There are no rights or wrongs, in this. Should be obvious that I'm a cavalry man....have been since I first started playing Shogun I. So naturally I'm drawn to the horse-archer factions, and they are my favorite. Doesn't mean I don't know how to play phalanx-oriented factions, or javelin factions like the Romans.

I don't play EB, so I can't answer the testudo question. I can't imagine why they wouldn't...testudo is a uniquely Roman formation, and most devs don't usually remove such things from a faction:shrug:

In any case, I'll get off my soap-box and simply encourage you to try everything until you discover what you like best.

Vincent Butler
07-03-2014, 20:11
Oh, I have been playing Rome for a while, though still figuring out EB. I just like to increase my odds of winning. Heavy infantry is just how I roll, my brother prefers heavy cavalry. Just different preferences, both have strengths and weaknesses. I use cav to augment my infantry, he uses infantry to augment his cav. I agree about the slingers needing micromanagement, I hate skirmish mode. Then again, that is my problem with cav archers, using them to their full potential requires a lot of micromanagement. Slingers are effective in EB, especially from walls or higher ground. The not being able to fire over troops just requires some change in strategy.

Among all this people there were seven hundred chosen men lefthanded; every one could sling stones at an hair breadth, and not miss. Judges 20:16 KJV

ReluctantSamurai
07-03-2014, 20:41
Then again, that is my problem with cav archers, using them to their full potential requires a lot of micromanagement.

I'll let you in on a little secret:quiet:....I don't micro-manage my Cataphract Archers:creep:

In fact, during deployment, I remove the skirmish mode~;) They have heavy enough stats to go toe-to-toe with just about any unit, and if there are no targets to shoot at that won't cause friendly-fire, I just turn them loose to support the heavy Cats in melee combat.

Against the Egyptians, I just assign one or two archers to each chariot unit and then move my attention elsewhere. By the time I come back to see how they are doing, most of the chariots are dead or routing~D

One still has to micro-manage the vanilla horse-archers at the start of an Armenian campaign, but as soon as I get a city to 6k population (I explain how to do this quickly in my Guide to Armenia), I start cranking out Cataphract Archers and within 20 years (both the cat units require two turns to raise so it takes some time to get 19 of them together in one place) I usually have enough to assemble my first all cataphract army. I still utilize foot soldiers for my siege and assault teams...heavy spears or Armenian Legionnaires backed by Cretan Archers, and several cataphracts to provide support. After that, it's all downhill to the Pyramids~:cool:

Vincent Butler
07-05-2014, 09:22
That makes sense. So would you have them out in front of your lines fighting as regular cav archers, or behind your lines as archers, then use them as heavy cav? Seems to me that that is the logical way to use them, instead as just using them to wear down the enemy by constant barrage.