Hunters All Their Lives: A Missile Cavalry Guide

[Doug-Thompson]

https://img187.imageshack.us/img187/7761/kutrigur1aw6.th.jpg

This is the most complete guide I can make to the missile cavalry units in MTW2 and on how to use them. It is not, however, an attempt to be the last word. The goal here is to answer questions for the beginner while encouraging new ideas. I hope it also refreshes the memories and stokes the imaginations of experienced players.

The Video
A picture is worth a thousand words, they say. That must make a video worth millions. This video (http://www.sendspace.com/file/9rys7j), highly recommended shows exactly what I'm trying to describe. Note the lack of use of auto-skirmish, allowing close-range and very deadly fire delivered from optimum angles. This is a pro at work.

A note on the thread's title: "Hunters all their lives" is a phrase from "Age of Empires: Age of Kings." The last frame in the narration of the Mongol campaign begins, "Hunters all their lives, old wolves ..."

THE UNIT GUIDE (Click for jump)
THE TACTICS GUIDE(ditto)

Research and summaries of units by other forum members are welcome. Corrections and elaborations are welcome also.

THE UNIT GUIDE

(References to "MXB" mean "Mounted Crossbowmen." See the last unit guide entry.)

England, Scotland and the Aztecs have no non-mercenary missile cavalry. Denmark, Milan, the Papal States, Sicily and Venice have none except the MXB, which arrives in the High Era.

AMMO

The base figures from R'as al Ghul unit guides are:

Javelin Cavalry - 8
Crossbow Cavalry - 30
Bow Cavalry - 25
Gun Cavalry - 20
Elephant Rocket - 36

THE FACTIONS

BYZANTINE EMPIRE
EGYPT
FRANCE
HOLY ROMAN EMPIRE
HUNGARY
MONGOLS
MOORS
POLAND
PORTUGAL (see SPAIN)
RUSSIA
SPAIN
TIMURIDS
TURKS
MXB ONLY: Denmark, Milan, Papal States, Sicily, Venice
MECENARIES

MORALE STATS


BYZANTINE EMPIRE by Quillan

Units, availability: Skythikons, Byzantine Cavalry, Vardariotai, all Early

SKYTHIKON

Skythikon is the Byzantine term for the steppe horse archers. Wearing little armor, armed with a composite bow and a small sword, they are capable of melee when necessary but are best kept out of it. They are excellent archers, and very good at running down routing units or charging into the flank or rear of already engaged units. The unit is fast.

Skythikon stats: (Melee-missile attack/defense/charge bonus) 06-06/3/02. Can have one armor upgrade

Special abilities: Circle

Cost/upkeep: 380/175

Buildings Needed: Castle only. Can be built at a Motte & Bailey, but the stable line of buildings increases both the size of the recruitment pool and the replenishment rate. Max size is 9 units at King's Stable.

BYZANTINE CAVALRY

These are the staple cavalry type of the army. Wearing mail or brigandine armor, and armed with a sword and composite bow, Byzantine cavalry are capable of both melee and missile combat. Slower moving than the other horse archers but better defended, they are more than capable of holding their own against almost any other light cavalry unit out there.

Byzantine Cavalry stats: (Melee-missile attack/defense/charge bonus) 07-06/12/02. Can have two armor upgrades.

Special ability: Circle

Cost/Upkeep 530/175

Buildings Needed: Castle only. Can be built starting at Wooden Castle level, but again pool size and replenishment rate are both increased by the stables building. Max size is 9 units at King's Stable.

VARDARIOTAI

Vardariotai are something of a mystery and a surprise. For people familiar with the Byzantine military, the iconic units that defined them were the Varangian Guard and the cataphracts. That's why it is surprising that the Vardariotai are the single most expensive land unit in the Byzantine order of battle, and only the Lanternas ships are more expensive of all of their units.

Vardariotai are elite steppe archers, descended from Magyars who settled in the Vardar river valley. They are well equipped and extremely well trained. With exceedingly high stats, Vardariotai can outshoot most any other horse archer in the game, outfight most any other horse archer in the game, and even potentially win melee engagements against the best knights Europe has to offer. The unit is fast, has good morale and good stamina. It has the highest morale factor of any missile cavalry unit and is the only missile cavalry unit to reach the "highly disciplined" level. They are also one of the four highly trained missile cavalry units available. What all that means is: They don't rout until things are absolultely hopeless.

Vardariotai stats: (Melee-missile attack/defense/charge bonus) 10-09/17/04. Can have one armor upgrade.

Special abilities: Circle

Cost/upkeep 800/250

Buildings needed. Castle only. Can be built starting at the castle level. Unlike the previous two, stables do NOT increase either the recruitment pool or the replenishment rate. Max unit size is 3 at Citadel.

(TOP)

EGYPT

Units, availability: Desert Cavalry- Early; Mamluk archers- Early

DESERT CAVALRY

Basically Jinetes with no armor, Desert Cavalry has a slightly weaker melee attack, the same charge bonus and the same javelin attack with anti-armor bonus as its Spanish cousin. However, it has a much weaker defense. Still, it's a very useful unit, particularly against heavily armored crusaders in the desert. Desert Cavalry -- surprize! -- have a desert bonus while armored units broil in the sun. Desert Cavalry is also fast and has very good stamina, which means it can run and run and run.

Desert Cavalry stats: (Melee attack-Missile Attack/Defense/Charge bonus) 08-08/08/03. (For comparison, a Jinete's stats are 09-08/15/03)

Special ability: Circle
Cost/Upkeep: 540/150
Buildings needed: Wooden Castle + Stable

MAMLUK ARCHERS

An excellent all-round cavalry archer and dual-purpose medium cavalry unit. It will remind RTW Parthian players of Persian Cavalry. This is a missile unit that can defend itself against most light and medium cavalry types, seize charge opportunities in the flanks and rear, help trap generals and can even hold knights if help arrives quickly. In melee, they fight with maces which are good against armor, a little tidbit not mentioned in the stat summary. Good stamina and good morale. One of the "four horsemen" missile cavalry who are highly trained, along with the Byz Vardariotai, French Mounted Archer and Mongol Heavy Archer.

Mamluk archer stats: (Melee attack-Missile Attack/Defense/Charge bonus) 08-08/15/04

Special ability: Circle
Cost/Upkeep: 900/210
Buildings needed: Wooden Castle, or a City with a Tier 2 racetrack

(TOP)

FRANCE

Units, availability: French Mounted Archer- High

FRENCH MOUNTED ARCHER

France has an excellent mounted archer, but must wait for the High period and a Military Academy to get it.

The FMA is a longbowman on a horse. Interestingly, the English don’t get this unit. Let’s also gloss over the practical problems with firing a six-foot long bow from a galloping horse.

The longbow anti-armor bonus applies, making this unit better against hard targets than the typical horse archer. Unlike anti-armor javelins, however, the FMA has bountiful ammunition. Unlike the mounted crossbowman, the longbow has a high base attack value.

Therefore, the FMA is a uniquely deadly combination of anti-armor capability plus enough ammo and base attack value to shoot up massed soft targets. The unit also has good morale and good stamina, although it’s not as fast as some other horsearchers. Finally, the FMA has respectable melee stats, quite close to a jinete. This is one of the four highly trained missile cavalry units.

French Mounted Archer stats: (Melee-missile attack/defense/charge bonus) 09-07/14/04. Anti-armor bonus for missile fire. For comparison, a Jinete’s stats are 09-08/15/03.

Special ability: Circle

Cost/upkeep: 1,030/210

Buildings Needed: Military Academy

(TOP)

HOLY ROMAN EMPIRE
Units available, and era: MXB- High; Reiters- Late

REITERS

Reiters appear in the late era, and have the most powerful missile attack of any cavalry. They also have good armor and good morale plus decent defense and melee. Their gunpowder attack has an anti-armor bonus and imposes a morale penalty on the target, too.

However, their rate of fire is slow. They suffer the same weather penalties as any gunpowder unit. They have the shortest range of fire of any missile cavalry unit. Even javelins outrange them. They move more slowly than most other missile cav. This is offset somewhat by good stamina: They run more slowly, but can run more before getting tired. Like most missile cavalry, they lack a shield. This puts this heavy, not-exactly-quick unit at some disadvantage in melee.

Reiters aren't the light, wasp-like swarm unit most horse archer players are familiar with. They are also one of the few missle cavalry types who don't have "skirmish on" as a default setting. They can skirmish, however, and circle. This circling and their armor make them hard for regular archers to kill. Reiters are not hit-and-run units so much as hit-and-stay.

Tactically, I have little practical experience with these troops. They would probably make a good mobile reserve, able to go where some well-armored unit was causing trouble and blast it. Pavise crossbowmen's shields would also be less help against these Reiters than usual. A thread on their tactics is here (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=84969)

Reiter stats:(Melee-Missile Attack/Defense/Charge bonus)
11-20(!)/13/05. (For comparison purposes, a Feudal knight's stats are: 10/16/06. An arquebusier's missile attack is 14)

Special ability: Circle

Cost/Upkeep: 920/250

Buildings Required: Royal Armory (City or Castle)

(TOP)

HUNGARY

Units, availability: Magyar Cavalry- Early; Hungarian Nobles- Early

MAGYAR CAVALRY

A good if unspectacular HA unit similar to the Turkoman. Still, it's a very good unit by Early Era standards that's much better than entry-level HA like Kazaks or Turkish Horse Archers. They are fast but have no extra stamina or morale.

Magyar Cavalry stats: (Melee attack-Missile Attack/Defense/Charge bonus) 06-06/07/02. For comparison, Turkoman stats are: 07-06/08/02

Special ability: Circle

Cost/Upkeep: 400/175

Buildings Required: Castle (Motte and Bailey)

HUNGARIAN NOBLES

The European Mamluk Archer, and then some. An outstanding unit, especially by Early Era standards. Usable for both missile fire and melee. Good stamina and good morale but not as fast as weaker HA. Note that the initial cost is far less than the Mamluk but upkeep is just as high.

Hungarian Noble stats: (Melee attack-Missile Attack/Defense/Charge bonus) 09-08/16/04. For comparison, Mamluk Archer stats are: 08-08/15/04
Special Ability: Circle
Cost/Upkeep: 750/210
Buildings Needed: Wooden Castle

(TOP)

MONGOLS

Units, availability: Mongol Horse Archer- Early; Mongol Heavy Archer, Early

MONGOL HORSE ARCHER

A good HA but not much of a melee unit. Better than the very lightest HA at melee, though. For instance, their defense is twice that of the very weak Kazak or entry-level Turk, and they have good morale. They are vulnerable to missiles. They also have very good stamina and are fast. This unit and the Mongol Heavy Archer below are the only disciplined missile cavalry units besides the Byzantine Vardariotai, which is highly disciplined.

Mongol Horse Archer stats: (Melee-Missile Attack/Defense/Charge Bonus) 08-08/06/04
Special Ability: Circle
Cost/Upkeep: 590/na
Buildings Needed: NA

MONGOL HEAVY ARCHER

An excellent dual-purpose cavalry unit. The stats are identical to the Mamluk Archer but this unit has better stamina. Good morale, and has discipline, which is something no non-Mongol missile cavalry has except the highly disciplined Byzantine Vardariotai.

Mongol Heavy Archer stats: (Melee-Missile Attack/Defense/Charge Bonus) 08-08/15/04
Special Ability: Circle
Cost/Upkeep: 900/NA
Buildings Needed: NA

(TOP)

MOORS

Units, availability: Desert Cavalry- Early; Grandine Jinete- Early; Grandine Crossbow Cavalry- Late; Camel Gunners- Late

DESERT CAVALRY
See this entry under “Egypt”

GRANDINE JINETE
Very similar to the Spanish Jinete, but with a slightly lower attack and two points less defense. Fast and with good stamina.

Grandine Jinete stats: (Melee-Missile Attack/Defense/Charge bonus): 08-08/13/03. Javelins hava an anti-armor bonus. For comparison, a Spanish Jinete is 09-08/15/03
Special ability: Circle
Cost/Upkeep: 670/175
Buildings needed: Large City+Sultan's Racetrack, or Castle (Fortress)

GRANDINE CROSSBOW CAVALRY
These show up one era later than other Mounted Crossbow units and are quite similar. However, the missile base attack is considerably better and has the same anti-armor bonus of other MXBs. A better charge bonus and slightly higher melee attack than other MXBs is offset a bit by a slightly lower defense. This is an interesting unit but one that seems overshadowed by this faction’s Camel Gunner. (See below.)

Grandine Crossbow Cavalry stats: (Melee attack-Missile Attack/Defense/Charge bonus) 08-07/09/03 For comparison, a MXB’s stats are: 07-05/10/02
Special ability: Circle
Cost/Upkeep: 580/175
Buildings needed: Citadel + Marksman range

CAMEL GUNNERS
These units outrange longbowmen. A very long range unit, this unit has 50 percent more range than a bow-armed cavalry unit. It outranges any missile infantry except for various musketeers and can fire on the move. Camel gunners will rarely stop firing if you leave “fire at will” on. Something is almost always in this unit’s range. As Musashi once described, “I keep fire at will off, move them to flank, and then open fire. Doesn't matter how well armored the enemy is when you're behind them. And their range is a major asset when using them this way, because it's hard to defend against flanking when the enemy can do it from so far away.”

That said, getting in close if possible and delivering a volley would be devastating also. This unit’s missile attack is twice that of a normal cavalry archer unit and has an anti-armor bonus, but has a slow rate of fire. That’s another reason to go for volley fire.

To no one’s surprise, the unit has a desert bonus. They scare horses and are vulnerable to missiles — assuming that the horses ever get close enough and the missiles get in range. They have good morale and very good stamina. Leave them on “run” all the time and you shouldn’t face too many consequences, especially since they don’t have to run very far to get in range.

This unit has drawn a lot of attention from Musashi, who wrote on another thread:


My trick is actually to deploy half on one "wing" of my formation, and half on the other, and then send them to both enemy flanks, making it impossible for the enemy to turn to face one without setting themselves up to take fire from the rear. Then I march the rest of my formation to close range directly from the front. This gives me a three sided envelopment, and my camel gunners are in position to demoralize, devastate (Seriously, those muskets are EVIL) run down routers, and also if the enemy skirmishers attempt to pull back behind the front lines my camels can sweep in and annihilate them in melee, leaving the enemy with no ranged support, and even better, my gunners right on top of them at the rear, able to deliver volley fire and rear charges .

That may sound like conventional missile cavalry stuff, but it's not. The very long range of the camel gunners — as Musashi has pointed out before — makes this kind of three-pronged attack easier to accomplish. Also, the very long range of the guns create particularly deadly crossfire. It hasn't been noted enough that it is perfectly possible for an archer to miss it's target unit but hit something else. Many HA have a short range with firing arc like a rainbow. The arrow or javelin lands on or near the target unless range is close. Camel gunners have long range and relatively flat trajectories, as far as I can tell. This can create enfilade fire at its finest, IMO.

Camel Gunner stats: (Melee-Missile Attack/Defense/Charge bonus) 08-16/06/04
Special ability: None
Cost/Upkeep: 1,180/300
Buildings needed: Castle (Citadel)+Caravansary

(TOP)

POLAND
Units, availability: Lithuanian Cavalry- Early; Strzelcy- Early; Polish Nobles- Early

LITHUANIAN CAVALRY

Combines a good missile attack with decent melee attack and defense. This is a very good unit, particularly by Early Era standards. Not the fastest pony in the barn but it does have good stamina. Morale is normal, making this decent double-duty cavalry, an HA with a melee option. Significantly, this unit's range is noticeably less than normal: 100 spaces compared to the regular 120 for bow-armed cavalry.

Lithuanian Cavalry stats: (Melee attack-Missile Attack/Defense/Charge bonus) 09-06/11/03 (For comparison, Byzantine Cavalry are 07-06/12/02)

Special ability: Circle
Cost/Upkeep: 500/175
Buildings Needed: ?

STRZELCY

A Mounted Crossbowman with a distinctive name and two notable advantages -- it's available in the Early Era and has very low building requirements. Strzelcy have a slightly higher defense and are slightly slower than MXBs. Also, note that much of that improved defense is in a shield. The unit's fast enough to make it useful against German or Danish infantry, especially those Viking types who suffer greatly when you get behind their shield. Cheaper to get than a Jinete and costs the same to maintain. All in all, not a great unit but a very useful and cheap supplement to the very powerful Polish Noble: Makes for an effective and affordable cavalry force in the campaign game.

Strzelcy stats: (Melee attack-Missile Attack/Defense/Charge bonus) 07-05/12/02 Anti-armor bonus for missile fire. (For comparison, MXBs are 07-05/10/02 with the same bonus.)

Special ability: Circle
Cost/Upkeep: 510/150
Buildings needed: Castle (Motte and Bailey)

POLISH NOBLES

A superb all-around, javelin-armed cavalry unit. They have good attack, good defense and good morale, making them fit units to pin an enemy: An anvil in melee or a hammer with javelins. Meaner and tougher than Russian Boyars Sons, these units also make good battlefield assassins, swarming upon a general or high-value knight unit even if they have to fight their way there, then pouring on the javelins. Finally, if you ever need to kill an elephant, a few of these units will do the job from a distance, with enough defense to withstand missile fire better.

Polish Nobles stats:(Melee attack-Missile Attack/Defense/Charge bonus) 11-10/17/04 Anti-armor bonus for javelins. (For comparison, Boyar Sons are 09-08/14/03 with the same bonus.)

Special ability: Circle
Cost/Upkeep: 800/210
Buildings needed: Wooden Castle

(TOP)

PORTUGAL

See Spain: Same units, same availability. (Spain is listed in deference to it's seniority in the MTW game series. It was a faction in MTW1 whereas Portugal was not.)

(TOP)

RUSSIA

Units, availability: Kazaks- Early; Boyar Sons- Early; Dvor Cavalry- High; Cossack Cavalry- Late

KAZAKS

Entry level HA. Stats are identical to Turkish Horse Archers and the unit is just as fragile if caught in melee. They're fast but have normal stamina, therefore they get tired faster than some other HA. They're vulnerable to missiles too.

Kazak stats: (Melee attack-Missile Attack/Defense/Charge bonus) 06-06/03/02

Special ability: Circle
Cost/Upkeep: 380/150
Buildings needed: Castle (Motte and Bailey)

BOYAR SONS

The Polish Noble's kid brother: This javelin-armed unit would look a lot more impressive if it didn't suffer slightly in comparison to the Noble. This is a very good all-round cavalry unit that gives a fine account of itself in melee and has a ranged attack with an anti-armor bonus that's dangerous to any unit, including elephants. Not fast, but has good stamina.

Boyar Sons stats: (Melee attack-Missile Attack/Defense/Charge bonus) 09-08/14/03. Javelins have an anti-armor bonus. For comparison, a Polish Noble's stats are: 11-10/17/04 with the same anti-armor bonus.

Special ability: Circle
Cost/Upkeep: 610/210
Buildings needed: Wooden Castle

DVOR CAVALRY

The Russian Vardariotai, with a slightly higher attack and slightly lower defense. Not cheap, either. Not as fast as some HA but has little need to run from anything, and with good morale and good stamina. This is the type of unit that can demolish one unit with flanking fire while it's riding around to destroy another unit with a charge in the back. No anti-armor bonus, but who needs one when you have a base missile attack of 10, the rate of fire of a HA and a quiver full of ammo instead of javelins?

Dvor Cavalry stats: (Melee attack-Missile Attack/Defense/Charge bonus) 11-10/16/04. For comparison, a Byzantine Vardariotai stats are: 10-09/17/04.

Special ability: Circle
Cost/Upkeep: 800/250
Buildings needed: Citadel + Earl's stable

COSSACK CAVALRY

Not quite as good as a Mamluk Archer or Mongol Heavy Archer in melee despite a better attack because of a significantly weaker defense, but still a fine HA with a respectable melee and good morale. It is also fast and has very good stamina.

Cossack cavalry stats: (Melee attack-Missile Attack/Defense/Charge bonus) 09-08/11/04. For comparison, a Mongol Heavy Archer stats are: 08-08/15/04

Special ability: Circle
Cost/Upkeep: 700/150
Buildings needed: Citadel + Earl's stables

(TOP)

SPAIN

Units, availability: Jinete, Early; MXB, High

JINETE
The original javelin-armed cavalry unit and an old favorite from MTW1 returns, greatly improved.

Jinetes have an anti-armor bonus, good melee for a non-knight unit, are fast and have good stamina. This combination made then valuable even in MTW1, when their range was shorter and they couldn’t fire on the move.

Jinete ability to move quickly to missile attack some high-value armored unit endears them to many players. They can also charge into melee against soft targets, or against hard targets weakened by javelins. They are very good chasers of routed in the game too, taking prisoners by the bushel basket. On a more exotic note, they make excellent camel and elephant killers because they can attack the scary beasts from a distance, circling to minimize the effect of counter-fire.

Jinete stats: (Melee-missile attack/defense/charge bonus) 09-08/15/03. Anti-armor bonus for missiles.

Special ability: Circle
Cost/upkeep: 520/175

Buildings Needed: Can be recruited at any castle regardless of size, recruitment pool is enhanced by the stable line of buildings, and can also be recruited in cities that have built a Plaza del Toro.

(TOP)

TIMURIDS

Units, Availability: Turkish Horse Archer- NA; Turkomans- NA; Mongol- Heavy Archer-NA; Elephant- High; Elephant Artillery- High

TURKISH HORSE ARCHERS
See Turks: Units are identical, down to the name.

TURKOMANS
See Turks: ditto

MONGOL HEAVY ARCHERS
See Mongols: ditto

ELEPHANTS

Besides being a monstrous melee unit, elephants with arquebuses are very powerful missile units, perfectly able to wipe out an armored infantry unit and still have more than half its ammo left. It doesn't skirmish so using them as missile cavalry does require a little micro. They are perfectly capable of walking or running away from a chasing infantry unit and pelting it with fire the whole way. Not only will this kill most of the infantry unit, but knocked down infantry will have to catch up to the rest of their comrades, straggling them all over the place. Then the elephants can turn around, charge and stomp them before the unit reforms.

Regular elephants can also walk right up behind an engaged unit of yours and fire down on whomever is attacking it in melee.

In melee, charging elephants would be an effective unit even without their special attack. Notably, they have a bonus vs. cavalry and frighten nearby enemy units. This is nice. The camel, for instance, frightens horses -- including your horses if the units get mixed up. Elephants have good stamina. Rather sensibly, they can't hide. They move as far as regular cavalry on the strategy map.

Here's the catch: Elephants can run amok. When they do, they'll trample nearby friends and foe.

The skill of driving elephants crazy has become something of a craft with whole threads dedicated to it. Beware missiles most in that regard, including garrison fire in sieges. Elephants running amok are a big threat to anybody nearby, and the men on the elephant's backs stop firing. Worse, I've never seen an elephant unit recover during a battle. As far as I can tell, they're immune from rallying cries from the general and so forth. Their special ability is suicide: The riders kill the beasts.

Elephant stats: (Melee attack-Missile Attack/Defense/Charge bonus) 10-16/16 (With six hit points instead of one)/09

Special ability: Instant death
Cost/Upkeep: 2,090/NA
Buildings needed: NA

ELEPHANT ARTILLERY

This is mobile siege artillery, fully capable of taking down a castle wall from long range. They can also destroy gates and towers. They can't target buildings, but misses from shooting at fortifications does damage buildings. Range has little if any effect on accuracy when shooting at fortifications, too.

Moving as fast as cavalry on the strategy map, this makes them a mobile siege unit particularly suited to crossing vast areas to subdue settlements. Russia and North Africa are good examples.

These units have all the effects of regular elephants: Scare nearby enemies, etc. They also have very long range. They can also run amok.

On an open battleground, this "self-propelled artillery" has factors to remember: They have to face what they are shooting at; They don't shoot on the move; They appear to have a minimum range, and they can't skirmish. They also aren't particularly accurate, but their shot does have a nice effect when they hit. It's immediately lethel to some while throwing others in the air. The thrown people can recover but unit cohesion is compromised.

With those limitations in mind, elephant artillery are still quite deadly, particularly when a large number of units are in a constricted space such as a river crossing. Look for dense packs of enemy units and fire into. Range is phenomenal: 350 spaces. This compares to 160 for a longbow.

On a side note, being a driver of one of these units with the cannon's muzzle right over your head must be a fun job. This is the closest thing to a fantasy unit in the game, but there is some historical precedent for it.

If the enemy army has siege weapons, there's a little quirk worth remembering. You can't target the catapult or whatever directly with your elephant cannon, but you can target the crew. There is a good chance that one of your shots will hit the weapon, which will fall to pieces quite nicely if it’s a catapult. Trebuchets take 20 percent damage per hit.

Elephant artillery stats: (Melee attack-Missile Attack/Defense/Charge bonus) 10-28/16 (with six hit points instead of one)/09.

Special ability: Circle
Cost/Upkeep: 2,750/NA
Buildings needed: NA

(TOP)

TURKS

Units, Availability; Turkish Horse Archer- Early; Turkomans- Early; Sipahis- Early

TURKISH HORSE ARCHER

An entry-level HA with a decent missile attack and a very short lifespan in melee. It's vulnerable to missiles but is fast and has good stamina.

Turkish Horse Archer stats: (Melee attack-Missile Attack/Defense/Charge bonus) 06-06/03/02

Special ability: Circle
Cost/Upkeep: 420/150
Buildings needed: Wooden Castle+Stable

TURKOMANS

Desert Cavalry with bows instead of javelins and weaker melee attack and charge. This unit is not quite dual-purpose. It's defense is certainly better than light, entry-level HA but not enough where it can really mix it up with purpose-built melee cav or Mamluk Archers. Put it this way: they can certainly whip a lightweight HA unit if they get the chance, can chase routers like the devil and could pull off an ugly surprize attack into the rear of a unit that's already shaken. Don't get in a fair fight, however.

Turkoman stats: (Melee attack-Missile Attack/Defense/Charge bonus) 07-06/08/02 (For comparison, Desert Cavalry stats are: 08-08/08/03)

Special ability: Circle
Cost/Upkeep: 510/150
Buildings needed: Castle (Motte and Bailey) or City+Race Track

SIPAHIS

The core of Turkish missile cavalry, this unit has better melee than a Mamluk Archer and an equal charge once you add up the melee and charge bonus figures. This is a good strong unit that unfortunately has regular morale and regular stamina. Be aware that against Mamluks, for instance, the Siphahis are more likely to be tired after running around in missile combat, which will worsen their morale disadvantage. This is a finer point, however. The bottom line is that Sipahis are a double threat, able to shoot from a distance and give good medium-cavalry melee performance.

Sipahis stats: (Melee attack-Missile Attack/Defense/Charge bonus) 09-08/15/03 (For comparison, Mamluk stats are: 08-08/15/04)

Special ability: Circle
Cost/Upkeep: 760/175
Buildings needed: Wooden Castle or Large City+Sultan's racetrack

(TOP)

MXB ONLY: Denmark, Milan, Papal States, Sicily, Venice

MOUNTED CROSSBOWMAN, or MXB

This is the most widespread type of missile cavalry, a High-era vanilla unit. It is the only type of non-mercenary missile cavalry available to Denmark or the Italian factions: Milan, the Papal States, Sicily and Venice. It is also available as an option to the Holy Roman Empire, Portugal and Spain.

The unit is fast, but it's stamina is normal. They can get tired, especially if left circling or in extremely hot climates.

The crossbow bolts get an anti-armor bonus, but the base attack is weak and the rate of fire is slow.

As I said in the Missile Cavalry tactics thread, this is one weird species of duck. It has more ammo than any other HA but a lower rate of fire. It has cheap recruiting costs for an HA — less than a Jinete's — but high building requirements. Any faction that builds the necessary Marksman's Range is not hurting for good foot-archery alternatives, either.

Melee is decent and defense is better than most horse archers. There's also a modest charge bonus. It takes so long for MXBs to run out of ammo, however, that there's little need to resort to melee, but melee may be the best option. They do make excellent chasers of routing units.

MXB stats:(Melee-Missile Attack/Defense/Charge bonus)

07-05/10/02

(For comparison purposes, a Holibar's stats are: 07/07/03. A foot crossbowman's missile attack is 9.)

Special ability: Circle

Cost/Upkeep: 470/175

Buildings Required: Castle, Marksman's Range

(TOP)

MECENARIES

MERC AKINJIS (Early)

The horse archer for factions that have no horse archers. Widely available (in Asia Minor. Will find more in other campaigns, I hope) Not prohibitively expensive, but you get what you pay for. Fast

Merc Akiinjis stats: (Melee-missile attack/Defense/Charge) 06-06/03/02

Special ability: circle

Cost/Upkeep: 620/150

MERC BEDOUIN CAMEL RIDERS

This is one relatively light HA unit that has nothing to fear from light melee cavalry. In melee, they scare horses. They also have a desert bounus. They are a tad slow but have very good stamina. Although "vulnerable to missiles" is not listed among their weaknesses, missiles are a good counter, particularly since this unit cannot circle.

Merc Bedouin Camel Rider stats: (Melee-missile attack/Defense/Charge)09-08/10/03

Special ability: None

Cost/Upkeep: 620/150

MERC CUMAN HORSE ARCHER -- See RUSSIA, Kazacks

MERC ELEPHANT ARTILLERY -- See TIMURIDS, Elephant Artillery

Cost/Upkeep: 2750/350

MERC TURKOMAN (Early)

Same as the Turish unit, only much more expensive. Fast with good stamina.

Merc Turkoman stats: (Melee-missile attack/Defense/Charge) 07-06/08/02

Special ability: Circle

Cost/upkeep: 740/180

(TOP)

MORALE STATS SUMMARY

MORALE = 3
Akinjis
Byzantine Cavalry
Cuman Horse Archers
Kazaks
Magyar Cavalry
Mounted Crossbowmen
Strzelcy
Skythikon
Turkish Horse Archers
Turkomans
Turkomans_Mercs
Turkopoles

MORALE = 5
Bedouin Camel Riders
Boyar Sons
Desert Cavalry
Granadine CB Cav
Granadine Jinetes
Jinetes
Lithuanian Cavalry
Sipahis

MORALE = 9
Camel Gunners
Cossack Cavalry
Dvor Cavalry
Elephant Artillery
Elephant Artillery Mercs
Elephant Rocketeer
French Mounted Archers
Hungarian Nobles
Mamluk Archers
Mongol Heavy Archers
Mongol Horse Archers
Polish Nobles
Reiters

MORALE=11
Vardariotai

(TOP)


THE TACTICS GUIDE

https://img295.imageshack.us/img295/7057/kutrigur2lp4.th.jpg

CONTENTS

I. INTRODUCTION: THIS MONSTER I’VE CREATED

1. FUNDAMENTALS
2. FUNDAMENTALS, QUICKLY DEFINED
3. UNDERVALUING INFANTRY WILL GET YOU KILLED: AVOIDING THE “ONE-UNIT ARMY” TRAP
4. HOME ON THE RANGE: STRATEGY MAP CONSIDERATIONS
5. TO HAVE AND HAVE NOT: WHICH FACTIONS HAVE DECENT, NON-MERCENARY MISSILE CAVALRY
6. WHAT SHOULD MY STACK LOOK LIKE?
7. DEPLOYMENT AND GROUPING: A QUICK OVERVIEW OF TWO CONTENTIOUS SUBJECTS
8. KILL THEM, NOT YOU: BASIC MISSILE CAVALRY TACTICS AND HANDLING
9. AUTO-SKIRMISH, FIRE-AT-WILL AND AMMO
10. GOING COMMANDO: SKIRMISHING WITHOUT AUTO-SKIRMISH
11. SHOOTING TO KILL, LOVINGLY DETAILED, AND ELEPHANT HUNTING
12. THE MELEE OPTION, AND WHY MISSILE CAVALRY ARE THE BEST PURSUERS
13. CIRCLING, FRIENDLY FIRE, SHIELD USE AND STRAGGLING
14. NOW THAT YOU KNOW OUR SECRETS: HOW TO FIGHT MISSILE CAVALRY
15. SOME DISCUSSION OF GUNPOWDER CAVALRY, INCLUDING ELEPHANTS, AND A WORD ABOUT MOUNTED CROSSBOWMEN

I. INTRODUCTION: THIS MONSTER I’VE CREATED

https://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m78/ShahedK/MTW2%20General/sig8.jpg

I don’t seriously expect anyone to read this thing through. The chapter numbers have jumps to make topics easier to find.

This beast isn’t all my fault. A couple of people requested that I put missile cavalry tips in one place for “one stop shopping.” I didn’t know much, so I expected to finish quickly.

However, missile cavalry units in MTW2 are almost indescribably more practical to use than those in MTW1. These units are also available in an almost bewildering variety compared to Rome: Total War.

Missile cavalry is no longer a micro-managed niche unit that only devotees really enjoy.

The result is that old hands at the unit type were more enthused than I’ve seen in years, although there are some who have serious disappointments based on solid history. At the same time, the topic is more open to fresh ideas and new enthusiasts than at any point during the Total War series.

Therefore, the discussion on these particular tactics have been some of the best discussion I’ve seen on this forum in a very long time. I think I’ve accounted for my bias on that, especially since some of the very best points were critical. I’d like to see some more rigorous testing going on. Most of the research has been in totally unexplored territory like how to trigger guild headquarters. I’d like to give particular thanks to Whacker, who has labored on my favorite topic.

I was taken aback when I realized how much of this ongoing discussion was news to me. This guide is the result of my decision to include any new ideas that appeared sound and experience-based to me.

As always, this thread is fair game: Criticism and correction are not only welcome but hoped for. No one can argue that I haven’t given people plenty to criticize, given the sheer size of this post.

Even if you don’t like the unit type, you’ll have to fight them. This is a game with two Eastern hordes, after all. Even factions without the type have plenty of opportunities to hire them during Crusades and such. For an English player, for instance, knowing how to use this unit and how to fight it could determine whether your Crusade succeeds.

Know your enemy -- and if you figure out a good anti-missile cavalry tactic, please post it. Everybody’s good ideas are welcome. You’ll even find a section on those countermeasures.

This thread keeps evolving from Org postings going back to MTW1, and those benefited from earlier efforts by Shogun players. The number of people whose ideas flowed, are flowing and will flow into this thread will never be reliably known. Therefore, we cannot adequately thank them but want to express deep appreciation. I’d like to extend special thanks to Orda Khan, whose artwork is posted above, and to Sinan, whose beautiful screenshots and sig pics I’ve shamelessly ripped off while he’s on his self-imposed MTW2 moratorium. Their artwork was chosen primarily for beauty, but also as a homage to the insights they’ve freely given. Also, this guide was all Oleander Ardens idea. It was more work than I ever thought it would be, but thanks, OA.


1. FUNDAMENTALS
https://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m78/ShahedK/MTW2%20General/sig1.jpg

1. Get to high ground.
2. Know the enemy’s weak spots. Exploit them.
3. Create cross fire.
4. You own the battlefield. The enemy's trespassing.
5. Attack morale at least as much as units.
6. Attack or neutralize the biggest threats first.
7. If enemies aren’t dying, get closer.

Sinan has a much simpler set of rules that, arguably, are better. They are certainly worth repeating:

1. Destroy the enemy's mobility.
2. Destroy the enemy's range.
3. Isolate, lure and destroy individual units.

(top)

2. FUNDAMENTALS, QUICKLY DEFINED
https://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m78/ShahedK/MTW2%20General/sig3.jpg

1. Get to high ground. That’s self-evident. If there’s a hill you can get to and fire from, get there first with the most men. If the enemy holds high ground, find the gentlest slope and go up it instead of riding directly at them. Missile cavalry are among the fastest units in the game. Use that.

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

2. Know the enemy’s weak spots. Exploit them. These spots are, in priority order:
a. From the back.
b. On the enemy’s “weapon hand,” his right flank. This matters less with units that have no shield, like peasants, but most units have shields.
c. The other side, “shield side.”
d. In front, from the “weapon” or right end. If you are in the enemy’s “2 o’clock” position, you get at least some of the raking effect.
e. In front, “shield” end.
f. Dead ahead.

(See enfilade fire in the “Shooting to Kill” section below)

Note that the ability of missile cavalry to get to those spots is its greatest advantage over missile infantry.

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

3. Create cross fire. Shields can only face one direction at a time. Even shieldless, unarmored units present a smaller target when facing you. This is particularly true of horses and camels. This level of detail is apparently present in the game. Give units more than one direction to face. You will find that horses and camels make particularly inviting targets from the side.

===========

4. You own the battlefield. The enemy's trespassing. Rush out and keep him in the middle and make him pay for any ground gained. Make him pay for any ground lost. Make the only part of the battlefield he controls the poor, low ground he's standing upon and make him pay rent in lives for that. Don’t get pinned. Battle map corners and sides are almost as big a threat as the enemy. Those borders are the anvil. The enemy is the hammer. Don’t get close to the anvil without a compelling reason, and keep a way of escape in mind. Also beware of getting one of your units surrounded and terrain obstacles like rivers or structures.
=============

5. Attack morale at least as much as units. Nothing helps win a battle like a dead enemy general. Javelin cavalry are the best general-killers available. Also, note that having your missile cavalry behind and flanking units create big morale penalties for your opposition. Use it. If your melee units can rout one unit, the rest may soon follow.

==========

6. Attack or neutralize the biggest threats first. A set of spear infantry that can't catch you and can be easily shot up later are not the biggest threat. Cavalry that might catch your units or enemy missile units that reach you are. Kill them as soon as you can, especially if you can goad them out and destroy them in detail with your melee cav and javelins. In Sinan's juicy expression: "An army without missile or cavalry against an all cavalry army is the best meat you can buy."

Foot archers are a threat, but they cannot fire on the move. Get them moving with treats of charges from melee cav or even your HA, if they have decent melee stats, then shoot them to bits.

"It is natural to target first fast missile cavalry, fast cavalry, and ranged units, but not all seem to do it," notes Oleander Ardens.

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

7. If enemies aren’t dying, get closer. Self-explanatory.

========

While we’re on fundamentals, here’s a point that can’t be emphasized enough:

EXPERIENCE
A target unit’s experience level makes absolutely no difference to its defense against missile fire. A 10-star general’s bodyguard unit with three gold chevrons is just as easy a target to a bunch of incoming javelins as the bodyguard of a zero-star lunatic who just turned 16.

However, the effectiveness of your missile fire does improve with unit experience.

On another point, missile cavalry do fire in all directions (with the exception of Elephant Artillery.) There is some penalty for firing directly behind, at least, but that’s not been fully studied and quantified as far as I know.

(top)

3. UNDERVALUING INFANTRY WILL GET YOU KILLED: AVOIDING THE “ONE-UNIT ARMY” TRAP

https://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m78/ShahedK/MTW2%20General/sig19.jpg

We horse archer nuts are routinely — and not without cause — accused of overemphasizing our favorite unit type.

As Sinan warned us all in one thread, the real fight is mental. You either want to cut off your enemy’s options or blind him to those options and dictate the fight. In effect, you want to order both side’s units around. The player who can do that will win, whether he’s commanding infantry, cavalry or a combination.

My rationale for this thread's emphasis boils down to this: Missile cavalry tactics simply don't come naturally to as many people as melee tactics. I don't know why. Once the mystery is removed from using missile cavalry, using them in combos — at least with other cavalry — seems to flow.

Some thoughts on melee/missile cavalry tactics will come in the deployment section of this thread. However, let me repeat that this is a rich field in which a lot of people have a lot of experience, but that’s still largely untouched in forum discussion.

The coordination of infantry and missile cavalry is even more neglected. Too easily, people become “cavalry” or “infantry” players. The fact is that a good unit of armored infantry attacking a unit that had its foot-archer support stripped away by an aggressive, effective use of cavalry archers in melee mode, then firing into the opposing melee unit’s back — that attacking infantry is the closest thing to an unstoppable unit in this game.

Another point: Infantry is better armored in MTW2 than it was in RTW. Horse archers who encircled a unit in RTW quickly wiped it out, because the shield was most of the armor for most infantry. That may still be true in the early rounds of MTW2 and against factions that can't afford well-armored infantry, but well-equipped infantry is much harder to kill.

(top)

4. HOME ON THE RANGE: STRATEGY MAP CONSIDERATIONS
https://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m78/ShahedK/arabia1.jpg

Cavalry moves farther on the strategy map than infantry. It’s a simple fact with obvious benefits — and some harder-to-see pitfalls.

Cavalry armies can attack more stacks in one turn. Since they start every battle “fully loaded” with missile ammo, they can fight multiple battles. They can advance deep into enemy territory and besiege a place with mercenary infantry or with spies. After all, if the spies don’t open a gate on the first turn of a siege, try again then next turn.

The biggest advantage, though, is the greater ability to put two or more stacks in the same place at less risk. You can have a couple of stacks of cavalry widely dispersed on one turn. The enemy with some infantry can’t get to any of them. Next turn, you converge and attack with everything you’ve got.

It is more difficult to destroy a cavalry-only army because they have more movement points. They can retreat farther, get to mountainous areas or river crossings that give them good terrain advantages, and can get out of an area as fast as they got in.

The vital pre-requisite for using such an army effectively is information. Spies in enemy territory and watchtowers in friendly territory are vital. Also, don’t ignore the most important function of cavalry in the history – reconnaissance.

Even for a faction with weak cavalry, a small cavalry force can drive the AI to distraction. For instance, putting a unit in a high-value trade harbor blockades the port. Stacks of infantry are not free to move about if you can bushwhack them.

One strategy-map technique all-cavalry armies can do better than others is "shoot and scoot," or "losing with style," to quote Rebellious Waffle. They engage a stack, withdraw, and attack again. Be advised, however, that you MUST HAVE SOME MOVEMENT ALLOWANCE LEFT to be able to withdraw after a battle at your own will. Also, you will "lose" the battle, even if you kill 1,000 enemies without loss, and the "defeat" could cost your general a trait decrease.

Then there's practice. Remember the point about experience improving missile performance but not target defense? Bandit killing is a rich source of experience for missile cavalry. Missile cavalry can engage scattered bands of rebels rather effectively. Experienced units can then join the main army.

Now, for some balance — all-cavalry armies are expensive to build and can eat up your treasury to maintain. They don’t hold bottlenecks like river crossings as well. A well-garrisoned town may not be able to drive an all-cavalry army off, but it can usually hold out until relief comes. If spies open the gates, archers on the walls and armored infantry on the ground can cause frightful losses.

Consider putting balanced forces in your cities or important regions and having all-cavalry field forces to supplement these, especially if you are fighting a multi-front war. The all-cavalry force can help win on one front, then quickly move to another.

(top)

5. TO HAVE AND HAVE NOT: WHICH FACTIONS HAVE DECENT, NON-MERCENARY MISSILE CAVALRY?
https://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m78/ShahedK/cgunners11.jpg

For detailed descriptions of the units within each faction, jump to the UNIT GUIDE

England, Scotland and the Aztecs have no non-mercenary missile cavalry.

Denmark, Milan, the Papal States, Sicily and Venice have none except the mounted crossbowman, which arrives in the High Era.

France has an excellent mounted longbowman, which doesn’t arrive until the High Era. The Holy Roman Empire, Portugal and Spain get the Mounted Crossbowman too, but have other options.

The Holy Roman Empire has the very impressive Reiter, which doesn’t arrive until the Late Era. Moors get the very powerful, long-ranged camel gunner late in the game and some units earlier than that. Portugal and Spain have the very good Jinete javelin cavalry unit from the onset.

The Byzantine Empire, Egypt, Hungary, Mongols, Poland, Russians, Turks and Timurids are top-notch missile cavalry factions.

(top)

6. WHAT SHOULD MY STACK LOOK LIKE?
https://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m78/ShahedK/MTW2%20General/sig9.jpg
There is no such thing as a perfect army in single-player, where battles range from huge affairs with multi-stack reinforcements to bandit killings. Multiplayer battles against humans also defy generalizations. Going up against a guy who loves elephants? Javelin cavalry are great, for reasons given below. Got another one who loves longbows? Something fast and hard to hit is in order, so it can close the range and circle.

When I go looking for trouble as Egyptians in single-player, I build stacks around a core that looks something like this: Four to six Mamluk archers; at least two javelin-armed Desert Cavalry; four good-quality melee cavalry, such as melee Mamluks, Arab cavalry or mercenary Armenian Cavalry, and a general.

Options for filling out the balance include: Light cavalry archers such as mercenary Turkomans until I can afford something better; More melee cavalry if I’m up against an Eastern horde; More javelin cavalry if I’m up against armored infantry; or infantry if I’m headed to take a city or want to defend a river crossing.

(top)

7. DEPLOYMENT AND GROUPING: A QUICK OVERVIEW OF TWO CONTENTIOUS SUBJECTS
https://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m78/ShahedK/MTW2%20General/sunset3.jpg

This section presumes that you’re deploying for a field battle, not a siege defense. It also deals with deploying the cavalry. This is not a comprehensive combined-arms guide.

HORSE ARCHERS: CAVALRY WITH BOWS

The simplest way to use a cavalry unit with bows is to put it into big squares in loose formation. This allows that unit to move easily while firing in any direction, and also reduces their vulnerability to missile fire.

Somebody better at computers than me can explain how to change a unit's default deployment depth. The deployment method I usually follow before a battle for horse archers is to group them all, put them in loose formation, put them in single line, then stretch them into a long, thin single line two ranks deep. Then I push the "-" key until the individual units are in squares. For a 40-man unit, notice that a “square” is four ranks deep and 10 files wide, since horses are long critters.

Notice the large gaps between units. This is no problem. Anything that marches through those gaps will be shot to mincemeat by crossfire. The gaps also help reduce friendly fire losses and are also handy avenues for your own counter-charging melee units. As a rule, skirmish and “fire at will” should be left on for horse archers. (Note: things are different for javelins. See below.) Also, I generally deploy on the highest ground available. If there’s obvious, dominant high ground outside my deployment area, I’ll get as close as possible and rush there when the battle opens.

I haven’t heard much dissent from using squares for horse archers, although it’s questioned from time to time. Some people whose opinion I respect don’t think loose formation is necessary, but my experience favors “hanging loose.” Also, other very good players put their cavalry on the flanks of conventional armies. Some even put all on them on the left end of their line so they will automatically be firing into the vulnerable “shield less” side of their opponents. I prefer the long line of separated squares so I can wrap it around the enemy and quickly develop crossfire.

JAV-CAV

Opinions on deployment of javelin cavalry vary much more. I like a front line of horse archers supported by javelins further back and grouped in the center. Javelin cavalry are the best general-unit assassins ever invented. The only thing better than a javelin cavalry unit for this work is a bunch of those units. Massing them in the center means I can send those fast units wherever needed. Other, experienced “Jinete Jockeys” divide them between flanks so they can quickly get around the ends and start skewering enemies in the back.

However you deploy, I recommend turning fire-at-will OFF during deployment. Otherwise, your jav-cav will throw all their pointy sticks at some peasant unit passing by. The fire on the move and only have eight shots. You could find yourself out of javelins when you reach the hard-armored, high-value target you were hoping for.

There’s also a difference of opinion on whether javelin cavalry should be put into squares. Many of these units make excellent dual-purpose cavalry with a very respectable melee capacity. Polish Nobles are the extreme example of this, but even Jinetes are respectable. Squares obviously are not as good for melee. Most of my experience is with Desert Cavalry, which are relatively weak in melee, so I use squares.

CAVALRY WITH GUNS

Gunpowder cavalry -- Reiters and Camel Gunners -- are extremely powerful units whose devotees daily plow new ground on tactics. The work on gunpowder tactics gets a special section below. It will include elephants, which are very effective missile cavalry that also happen to be a monstrous melee unit.

MELEE CAV

Deployment of the melee cavalry, IMO, depends on what type of missile cavalry you have. I like to deploy some melee cavalry behind each “wing” of horse archers if my archers are weak melee types like Turkomans. Even if you have better HA, this practice has advantages. If powerful enemy knights charge one wing, the melee cavalry from the other side can usually charge its rear.

Orda Khan, for example, creates several groups of about 2/3 missile cavalry and 1/3 melee together and uses them in the "constant rotation" method described in the basic tactics section below.

If my horse archers are good “double duty” types with decent melee, like Mamluk Archers, I like to put my melee cavalry in the center on the assumption that my good HA can pin the unit until a very powerful counter-charge arrives.

If I have a mix of good “double duty” HA and weak HA, I put the stronger HA on the wings of the front line with the weaker units in the center and a mass of melee cavalry in the center behind them for quick support.

“Router-chaser” light cavalry stay close to my general as a sort of light bodyguard and opportunist’s reserve.

GROUPING

Deployment is a wonderland of calm consensus compared to the debates on grouping.

Very roughly, people fall into two categories: Those who group by type and those who group by position — center, left, right, reserve, etc.

Frankly, my center, left, right and reserve keep getting hopelessly mixed. I enjoy what looks like chaos to most folks.

I like to keep groupings simple and according to type, but strongly advise against lumping all horse archers together. Those units tend to divide naturally into two groups that I call “fight” and “flight” types. For now, suffice it to say that some HA do quite well in melee and, therefore, have a good melee option. Others will melt if even if hit by routers. Grouping these deer and hounds makes it needlessly difficult to seize lucky, fleeting melee opportunities.

Very generally, I group units like this: 1. “Fight” horse archers. 2. “Flight” horse archers. 3. Javelins 4. Strong melee cav 5. Lighter “chaser” and flanking cavalry. 6. The general and some reserve, lighter cavalry or partial units.

(top)

8. KILL THEM, NOT YOU: BASIC MISSILE CAVALRY TACTICS AND HANDLING
https://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m78/ShahedK/M2TW%20HA/ha8.jpg

Using missile cavalry well requires an opportunistic outlook. Never, never, NEVER forget that formulas have only two very limited purposes. First, new missile cavalry players need someplace to start. Second, experienced players sometimes break old habits when shown alternatives, encouraging them to think up new ones. Beyond that, never forget that a player who always goes “by the book” becomes as predictable as the AI, even if he uses different “books” for different battles.

Just as important, never forget that the enemy’s morale is the real target. This morale principle is important in multiplayer too, where the best opponent cannot order around units on the verge of routing, especially if you get him flustered too.

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

The four basic styles of missile cavalry play that I know of are: bagging, grinding, flanking and blitzing. Another important technique, described by Orda Khan and called the "constant rotation" method, is described below too. I consider it an effective form of bagging that would be difficult for beginners.

BAGGING consists of surrounding the whole enemy army with missile cavalry and using your melee and some javelin units to stop break-out attempts. For instance, if you have six horse archers, you send the ones on each end of your line around the sides and to the rear of the enemy, have the next two take up positions on each flank of the enemy army and leave a couple in the front. You now have the enemy surrounded by widely spaced “squares” with crossfire. Your object is to round up the enemy, break any scattered or vulnerable parts with melee cavalry charges and keep drawing the bag tighter. You used to be able to scatter an army badly and charge units in detail in singleplayer, but that’s not as easy as it was in Rome: Total War.

GRINDING is simpler and effective though not as totally destructive. You cup your missile cavalry around one end of the line, something like this: C--. The converging fire from your units is very destructive and you chew your way down the line. Your melee and other units basically wait somewhere far enough away to watch and close enough to prevent your enemy from turning his line. Your “cup” of missile cavalry are walked around and closer to the ever-diminishing line until most of your firing units are behind or beside the target at close range. Almost every shot will hit.

There's an even simpler variation of this I'll call the "firing squad." Sometimes, you have an easy bandit-killing that you just want to get over with without taking any casualties. Put your missile cavalry in a column, in squares. March them right past your unfortunate victim, either on his shieldless side or even on the shielded side if there's a height advantage. This way, there is no friendly fire risk.

FLANKING is to use missile cavalry in a traditional cavalry role -- to charge around the either end, or both ends, of the enemy line and pin him against your main line. Your missile units and melee line work together directly to collapse his flanks, trapping whatever units are left. Done right, it leads to a crushing of the whole enemy army very quickly.

The advantages of missile cavalry for this type of work are that they can keep up some fire on the enemy while riding around the flank(s) instead of having that be “dead time” while they get in position; They have less chance of getting intercepted or stuck in unwanted melee because their range lets them attack from farther away, and they can quickly change targets with their missile fire. Good dual-purpose missile cavalry also have the option of charging. Although there is some resemblance between this technique and “bagging,” bagging is not as swiftly destructive and flanking yields fewer surviving routers to chase around.

BLITZING is missile cavalry warfare in its most extreme form. It requires use of the “waypoint” control method found in the “Going Commando” section below.

The best way I can describe this style is to compare it to aerial combat. Most pilots can’t resist twisting and turning into a dogfight. They want to stay with their target until it’s dead and didn’t kill it on the first pass. They get into the “furball” of a fight where they are in danger too, because they can’t keep up with all the threats while dogfighting themselves.

Other pilots, however, pick a good target, fly in, give their victim a well-aimed burst and fly out. They glance back from the outside and -- the sooner the better -- they find another good target and repeat.

“Blitzing” is like that, only you have eight to 10 units or small groups of missile cavalry, and melee groups to control.*

Only missile cavalry can do this sort of thing in MTW2. Melee units don’t make firing passes. Unless the enemy routs on contact, there’s a fight. Foot missile troops aren’t fast enough and don’t fire on the move.

Even in single-player, you’re setting up your next attack before the last one is finished. Multiplayers say that this technique can drive “by the book” opponents to distraction. Ideally played, your opponent never knows what’s coming and is appropriately apprehensive. They focus on what you’re going to do to them and lose sight of what they might do to you -- which means they’re beaten already.

*(Alternatively, it is possible to use the bag technique, for instance, and “blitz” with individual units as the opportunity arises.)

CONSTANT ROTATION

This is an excerpt from this more detailed thread. (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=78999)


Have your army divided into groups (number depends on army size) with a similar unit ratio (1/3 melee cav, 2/3 missile cav) per group. The enemy will tend to focus on your General but you offer no battle line as such and you can almost see the confusion among their ranks. When battle starts, each group is sent in an encircling manoeuvre and your General's group marches to a new location. Once your groups are nicely positioned you begin to rotate, keeping the enemy as your axis. This includes you General's group who is basically skirting the perimeter, any foray by the enemy can be cut down piecemeal by the units you have supporting your HA. Don't forget that your HA will provide a nice rear attack to any unit/s engaged by supporting melee cav. The constant movement helps to conserve arrows and should provide many weak spots that can be exploited as the enemy is drawn out of position.

The AI, in particular, focuses on your general. Keeping him in the rotation bewilders the enemy.



(top)

9. AUTO-SKIRMISH, FIRE-AT-WILL, AND AMMO

https://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m78/ShahedK/MTW2%20General/sig7.jpg

The secret to long life and health as a horse archer is to recognize when you're getting cornered and know how to either avoid it or get out of it. The borders of the battlefield map are your worst enemy. Stay away from them unless there’s a good reason to get close, like a nice height advantage with a clear escape route. Sometimes, you'll have to turn skirmish mode off to do that. If you don't, sometimes you'll click on the ground to get away but the HA will "skirmish" away from an approaching enemy unit, canceling your order.

Auto-skirmishing is vastly better than it was in MTW1, but that doesn’t mean you can just sit back and let it take over. It’s not auto-pilot. It’s cruise control. As just mentioned, sometimes you have to turn auto-skirmish off just to get where you want to go. Also, it is possible for an HA unit to get caught in the open if two different units are approaching it from different directions so that it can't skirmish away from both.

Another annoying fact is that a whole unit of missile troops — foot or horse — will stop firing if a few of its members blunder into melee. The whole unit goes into melee mode. You have to click a spot and run away or, in extreme cases, temporarily hit “withdraw” to get them away and firing again.

Routing units don’t trigger skirmish. Therefore, routers will run through a unit that is in its way and the blocking unit will not, repeat, not skirmish away. That crazed mob of routers will kill people who block their escape. Beware large clumps of panicked troops unless you are chasing and overtaking them.

Quillan pointed out one very nice improvement since RTW: You don’t have to turn skirmish off to charge any more. Just click alt-attack. In RTW, you had to turn skirmish off before they’d close with the enemy. As an added bonus, skirmish turns itself back on if you pull the unit out. However, this feature does not work in one case: if the unit you order into an attack is your general's unit. If your battle is lead by a captain who happens to be in a missile unit, skirmish stays on until you turn it off.

I used to leave the "run" button pushed once the enemy's in range. If you're going to skirmish away, skirmish quickly. However, that makes the problem of "straggling" worse. Running also lowers accuracy. Missile cavalry generally have very good stamina and also stop once they've skirmished away far enough, so tiring your units out is not generally a problem. It can happen, but fatigue is manageable with a little light checking.

Sometimes, units skirmish too far. A little micromanagement can pay big dividends by halting the skirmishing or walking the unit back to a closer range. One good habit is to keep an eye on your unit display. If you see the double-arrows indicating a unit is running, select it and take a look. If it's run far enough, click "toggle walk/run" (R) and slow those horsies down. Alternatively, you can click on the ground to make the unit turn — and walk — in the direction of the enemy's vulnerable side.

I'm a big fan of speed, but in the right direction. HA need to run where you want them Once they get there, they need to not run away unless you send them somewhere else.

Fire-at-will is a simpler affair. Although I’m inviting dispute by saying this, fire-at-will works rather well. The AI does a good job of picking up targets with a high hit percentage. This drives many people to vexation when they watch a bunch of their precious-few javelins flying into a peasant unit right beside the enemy general, but they shouldn’t blame the AI for playing the odds.

To get any missile unit to stop shooting, you must turn fire-at-will OFF, then hit HALT. Even then, it will take a few seconds.

To get a unit to fire at a target of your choosing, you have to have fire-at-will off, then target the unit you want. I don't believe that clicking "halt" then giving an attack order is necessary, but it doesn't hurt.

If you target a specific unit that is out of range and leave “skirmish” on, it is likely that your unit will keep skirmishing away from other enemy units and NEVER fire at the intended target. If you turn skirmish off, however, your unit could get engaged in melee, even slightly, and stay stuck there. Your unit will not, repeat, not break away and close with your intended target unless you give it a movement command. This is a major issue with javelin cavalry with their relatively short range. This is another reason you want to put enemy units in a “bag,” so you can charge in from any direction.

Ammo for horse archers isn’t as much of a concern as for javelins, but why waste shots? Even if horse archers carried 100 shots, why ping them against shields while riding around the front and flank? If the enemy’s not close when the battle starts, consider turning fire at will off until at least one unit in a group is in good position.

A QUICK NOTE ABOUT HOTKEYS

Learn them. That is all. Well, you might also want to reset a few so you can leave one hand on the keyboard and one on the mouse at all times. I changed "halt" to "Q", for instance.

(top)

10. GOING COMMANDO: SKIRMISHING WITHOUT AUTO-SKIRMISH
https://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m78/ShahedK/M2TW%20HA/ha4.jpg

Some veterans and other players who just have the skills don’t use auto-skirmish at all, using a waypoint method, excellent situational awareness and good, trained reflexes.

I do not recommend trying to learn the following technique "on the job." Go to custom battles and practice and, when you think you're ready, practice some more until it becomes a reflex. I'd also advise everybody to try and learn this, because it can be devestating when you pull it off. I routed a unit of peasants in two passes the first night I tried this and the first time I got lucky and got it right. Even if you never want to use this for every missile cav unit in your army, you should acquire the ability to use it with any given unit at any given time. Seizing opportunity is what maneuver is all about. Also, use close formation and not loose when you do this. It's makes a more compact, harder-to-intercept formation. There is no downside, since your troops are running and therefore have that protection against missile fire.

For those brave souls who want to try this, here’s Sinan’s little set of instructions:


In order to circle around the enemy:
1. Turn OFF fire at will.
2. Waypoint a path around the enemy as close as you can get to the enemy.
3. RUN.
4. Enable fire at will when very close (to maximize accuracy) OR when far (to maximize early under fire morale penalty and early enemy formation disruption)

If you want to make this even more complex and awesome to watch:
1. Turn OFF fire at will.
2. Waypoint a 2 waypoint path around the enemy as close as you can get to the enemy.
3. RUN.
4. At waypoint 1 (as close as possible), missile attack the enemy and click F (special ability).
5. Waypoint another 2 point path.
6. At waypoint 1, missile attack the enemy and click F.
7. Repeat as a above, indefinitely.

The 2nd waypoint is just in case you get intercepted at waypoint 1. Then you already have a waypoint ready in case you don't want to (circle) you can just carry on running.

The above is hard to do but it's incredibly beautiful to watch the archers shooting while constantly moving. Pay attention though because to pull this off you have to ALWAYS have skirmish off, and you have to be very alert. There's a lot of micromanagement involved. IMO skirmish doesn’t really work well, I mean even with experience 9 it seems some missile cavalry just can't see a charge coming even when it's staring them in the face on the tip of 40 large colorful tournament lances. I find I get better results by clicking myself, especially in extremely close quarters.

Be careful to watch your casualties against missile units, you have to make sure you are killing more than they are. I should say that I use (circle occasionally, but mostly I run across from side to side, from one flank to the other circling around the enemy army. If the opportunity presents itself I charge in.

HOW TO SET WAYPOINTS: I couldn't find this in either the manuel or in the key-mapping screen of the game. So here goes:

Hold down "Shift" when right-clicking for movement. You can set as many waypoints as you want, anywhere on the battle map that you want. The unit will go to them in the order you set them. In fact, you can set a waypoint and, while still holding "shift", order a melee or missile attack. Your unit will go to the waypoint first, then attack from that direction.

Unfortunately and inexplicably, this does not work for groups.

(top)

11. SHOOTING TO KILL, LOVINGLY DETAILED, AND ELEPHANT HUNTING
https://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m78/ShahedK/M2TW%20HA/ha7.jpg

ENFILADE
Enfilade fire's become one of those ingrained things everybody should know, but not everybody does. This is a very important concept, especially if you are interested in missile cavalry. One of the key advantages of missile cavalry is that they achieve enfilade much more easily than foot units. So here goes:

"Enfilade" a fancy name for shooting down the widest or longest part of the enemy formation. It's like "Crossing the T" for those of you familiar with naval combat with guns.

If you are directly in front of a unit of infantry and it's charging at you, you might think you have a nice, broad target. If you watch your battle closely however, you will clearly see most of your arrows flying right over the enemy's heads, especially if the target unit is running and even if the range is short. You will also notice many arrows sticking up in the ground in front, especially if your unit's accuracy is hurt by having to skirmish away.

By far, most misses — especially on stationary targets — are NOT, repeat, NOT wide to the right or left. They are overshoots and undershoots.

If you are "raking" the target down the wide side, your overshoots hit more men farther from the middle and the undershoots hit men closer too you. This is especially true if you have a height advantage. "Undershoots" still have a chance of hitting and "overshoots" can still land on an enemy instead of plowing into the hillside.

If a spear unit is four ranks deep and has 75 men, for instance, it's about 19 men wide. Get on the flank and shoot down the side of the unit. (You may need another unit to "pin" the target and keep it facing the same direction.)

It is perfectly possible for an archer to miss its target unit completely but hit some other nearby unit. Obviously, if you are firing down the enemy's line you stand a much better chance of killing something, either in the unit you are firing at or in the next unit in line.

Many horse archers, particularly javelin troops, have a short range and a firing arc like a rainbow. The arrow or javelin lands on or near the target unless range is close. One reason close-range fire is deadly is because the trajectory is closer to being flat, resulting in more enfilade.

Camel gunners have long range and relatively flat trajectories, as far as I can tell. This can create enfilade fire at its finest. Reiters and mounted crossbowmen are also "straight shooters" compared to HA.

Note that shooting from behind a unit attacks his most vulnerable spot and causes rather enormous morale penalties on the target unit. So don't pass up opportunities to shoot units in the back, despite the lower accuracy.

THE SOFT SPOT

Whenever possible, get behind or at least to the open, shieldless "weapon side" of an enemy unit. Arrow fire is MUCH more effective from an unprotected side. Getting a unit in a crossfire of two or more directions is particularly deadly. Even if you only have only one HA unit, keep riding around a target unit, which will have to turn to face you. This compromises their shield bonus while turning, while you keep maneuvering to their right side. You fire on the move, so this is more effective than just pouring direct fire into their shields (assuming they have shields. Against peasants and such, the finer points don't matter so much.)

SPECIAL TACTICS FOR JAVELINS

I prefer to wait until a high-value unit is pinned in melee, then throw javelins. There are too few javelins to waste on a fast-moving target. Jav-cav working in close cooperation with good melee cavalry is particularly deadly and versatile. All the height and flank advantages of regular missile combat apply. Also, javelins are not penalized for bad weather, which is a more important consideration than you might think. If it’s raining, your javelin troops represent a much higher portion of your combat strength than they did before.

Although it seems like a waste to throw javelins at targets that aren't armored, there are many exceptions. Throwing javelins to kill 10 or 12 infantrymen who are trying to kill your general is obviously a better investment than throwing an equal number and missing the few remaining members of a routed knight unit. As a rule, I turn “fire at will” on once my high-value target is devastated or dead. Jav-cav can effectively engage spear units from range, even cheap ones. So save the javelins for high value units, but don't get tunnel vision about it.

ELEPHANT HUNTING

There simply is no better unit for killing elephants, in my humble opinion, than javelin cavalry. Jannissary Infantry and artillery fans might disagree. My reply is that Javelin Cavalry are: Available from the beginning of the game and have minimal building requirements for factions who are blessed with them; Can fire on the move and are threrefore harder targets who are shooting all the time; Are faster than elephants; Move farther per turn on the strategy map and, to be blunt, are either well protected (like Boyar Sons) or aren't all that expensive (Like Desert Cavalry).

Remember the point earlier about horses and camels being more vulnerable from the side? The same with elephants, only much moreso. Don't wait for the elephants to get pinned in melee. Hunt them down now. You might have to wait for other troops to be whittled down, but keep your eye out for your first chance. Also, this is one clear case where circling can really help your jav-cav survive the elephants' counterfire. Elephants are too big to miss, even while circling.

(top)

12. THE MELEE OPTION, AND WHY MISSILE CAVALRY ARE THE BEST PURSUERS
https://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m78/ShahedK/MTW2%20General/sig16.jpg

Missile Cavalry tend to fall into two types: Fight or flight. Fast and frail units tend to be very, very hard to catch but die quickly in melee. Dual-purpose can hit and run or hit and stay. A Mamluk Archer is a better melee unit than Arab Cavalry, for instance. Reiters are knights that can shoot.

“Know your enemy, know yourself, and in a thousand battles you will never be in peril,” as Sun Tzu said. Knowing whether your missile cavalry unit can resort to melee is the kind of basic knowledge any good player has check out before the battle begins. All the information is available in the unit guide

To melee attack, hold down the “alt” button and click attack — or just run out of ammo and click attack.

You should form up into a close-order line first, if possible. Sometimes, it’s not, or not desirable. It’s better to trap an enemy general with a loose square of Sipahis than let him get away while you’re forming up.

Like everything else, these rules come with too many exceptions. For instance, there’s no good reason why many “flight” missile cavalry can’t chase routers or stop a general who’s trying to get away. Even if there are losses, those loses are sometimes worth it.

PURSUIT

HA make outstanding chasers for routed units. They were the best at it before the 1.02 patch of May, 2007 fixed the the bizarre behavior of other router chasers. Whole threads have been devoted to the wild gyrations pursuing units go into before the patch came out. The root cause of this floorshow was that the whole unit will engage one straggling router while the rest of them get away.

Obviously, if you have a pursuing unit with some range and ammo it will concentrate fire and kill more of those stragglers from a distance. This is true even if you hit alt-attack to melee with the fleeing unit. Your horse archers will fire all they time they are in range and closing if you leave fire-at-will on. Chances are good that “the last man out” will die from arrows before the units even arrive to circle around him in melee. I’ve even kept a very experienced Turkoman mercenary unit in reserve in some battles just to give myself a fast router-chaser with plenty of ammo.

Note, however, that if you give a fire command on a fleeing unit, your horse archers will get in range, then stop and keep firing. Your “pursuers” won’t fire again until the fleeing unit gets out of range. This means most of the routers will probably get away. It is much better to hit alt-attack and run, especially if the fleeing unit is cavalry.

Before the patch, chasing routers needed loose formation. This prevented the chasers from stopping and reforming. Since you are chasing with a ranged unit, they can concentrate fire without being physically near each other. It still helps, but not so much since the patch.

HA are generally quite fast. There are 20 fast cavalry units in this game, the very fastest units of all. Of those, 16 are missile cavalry. Obviously, being fast helps in a chase. So does good stamina, something most missile cavalry has.

If the routers are good melee units, though, expect to take some loses if you catch them with low-melee HA. The victims will resist capture and fight back.

Unfortunately, pursuing units turn their back to other units that are still firing on the routers. If you are not careful, this will lead to a painful number of friendly fire casualties. See the friendly fire section on how to avoid that.

One good trick is to hit alt-attack, leave fire-at-will on, but hit “halt” before the melee starts. Now you can put some good close-range fire right into the fleeing unit’s back and either walk or run behind them. Running right through them is an option too, but it doesn’t seem to work as well as it did in MTW1. Another trick is to have your chasers run or walk beside the target. This allows other units to keep firing.

(top)

13. CIRCLING, FRIENDLY FIRE, SHIELD USE AND STRAGGLING
https://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m78/ShahedK/arabia5.jpg

CIRCLING

Cantabrian circle goes clockwise for a reason. This way, the units’ shields (assuming there are any) are on the outside of the circle. The unit members closest to the enemy and taking fire always have their shields turned toward that fire. That, and the constant movement, make circling units less vulnerable to enemy missiles. An HA unit will defeat a foot archer unit of equal quality when the horses are circling, generally speaking.

The bad news is that maneuver tires your horses and reduces accuracy of your own fire. If the enemy is short on missile troops, deadlier fire from units that aren't circling will result in less wasted ammo and more kills, at the cost of a few more casualties. Better to kill all the enemy spears and lose a couple HA than lose a lot more men in melee to units that survived your missed arrows.

Some players report that circling units seem irresistible to AI melee units. Therefore, circlers make excellent bait.

Getting units to circle has been a problem. Sometimes, the AI decides it's better off standing still. If you strongly disagree — for instance, if your general is an HA unit that's under fire — then:
1. Turn OFF skirmish and fire at will.
2. Approach the target.
3. Hit “special ability” (F) and click the target.

Circling and auto-skirmish don’t work well together, but they do work. It just takes longer to stop circling and then skirmish away, as opposed to just skirmishing away. Also, it at least appears that units will stop circling as the enemy approaches if skirmish is left on. All this needs some more verification testing, however.

SHIELD USE

Turning your shield toward the enemy seems like a no-brainer, especially for missile cavalry with no armor. However, it’s not as simple as that. Remember, the side of a horse is a very big target compared to its front. What you gain in shield protection you can easily lose by presenting a bigger target.

There’s no simple rule of thumb other than this: Get in a good firing position first, then worry about shield protection if you have time. Most often the shield facing will work itself out. For instance, if you’re approaching an enemy missile unit from behind — the ideal firing position — and just a bit on his weapon side, your shield will be in the right place.

One warning: If you are in a running fight with another missile cavalry unit and both of you are headed in the same direction, the unit on the right will have shield protection and the other won’t.

Note how autoskirmish will turn your unit's backside to the enemy and leave it there, negating any shield benefit. How much you do about that depends greatly on how much micromanagement you’re willing to commit.

STRAGGLING
Another very nice effect of the 1.02 patch is that it has reduced straggling. In 1.01, I had one HA lag behind and get killed by a slow-moving pike unit while another from the same unit was out of range.

If you still suffer a problem from this, select the sloppy formation and quickly tap the "c" key twice. It orders the unit to close formation and then quickly orders it to disperse again. They'll move into place. If that doesn't work, hit "c" and wait for those stragglers to start moving. Then you can hit "c" again.

Sometimes, there’s just no other way to stop a couple of “hero” types from charging into melee and putting your whole missile unit into melee mode other than to halt.

FRIENDLY FIRE
Missile units don't seem to suffer friendly fire from archers that are behind them but in the same unit. Fire from a different unit, however, can be deadly. Also, your cooperating melee units can suffer more deaths and wounds from your own cavalry than from chasing a fleeing enemy.

To get a missile unit to stop shooting, you must turn fire-at-will OFF, then hit HALT. This is true of foot and horse units. Even then, it will take a few seconds. Notice that you have to do something similar to get any archer unit to target one specific unit when other, more vulnerable or closer targets are in range. You have to have fire-at-will off, then target the unit you want. I don't believe that clicking "halt" then giving an attack order is necessary, but it doesn't hurt.

If you have two units firing at the same enemy and they get too close, it is quite possible — and logical — for your archers to hit each other.

By far, most friendly fire loses that I’ve experienced happen when masses of units keep firing on a few survivors after the battle’s already won. Be patient, and have a sense of proportion.

Also keep in mind that creating crossfire has another key advantage besides greatly enhance kill rates: Units firing from two different directions don’t often get in each other’s way.

(top)

14. NOW THAT YOU KNOW OUR SECRETS: HOW TO FIGHT MISSILE CAVALRY
https://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m78/ShahedK/MTW2%20General/sig20.jpg

Originally Posted by ScrapTower
For the people who play factions with no missile cavalry and face cavalry heavy armies in MP:

1) Trying to chase down and pin missile cavalry with heavy or even light cavalry is futile unless the player with the missile cavalry makes a mistake.

2) Get at least one unit of missiles for each missile cavalry you think you are going to face. (If you face an army of mainly missile cavalry, no less then 8)

3) Keep your army with your missiles. You must kill a lot of their missile cavalry before you can go on the offensive.

4) Let him come to you. Stand still, turn fire at will off and let his missile cavalry start to circle and shoot at you.

5) Turn on flaming arrows and begin to focus fire his HA. One or two large flaming volleys will really take his HA unit down to ineffective levels.

6) If your opponent complains that you are not attacking, explain to him that to counter an HA heavy army with no HA of your own, this is your only option and take no shame in it.

======
(DT’s comments)

This is all excellent advice, but the last point deserves special mention.

Chasing a unit you can't catch -- particularly if it means leaving foot archers behind or moving your foot archers, which cannot fire on the move -- is playing the horse archer's game. Ignore taunts. The best comeback is to still be standing when the battle's over.

As a horse archer nut I can assure you that attacking is exactly what a horse archer jockey wants you to do. I'd go so far as to add that you should put your archers on "defend position" stance or turn skirmish off so they will keep firing.

Not all foot archers are weak skirmish units. They can't withstand a knight's charge, but they can effectively fight many weak-melee HA units, especially if spear or cavalry support is close by.

The only other thing I'd explicitly add is something already obvious to everybody, but we might as well say it: If you can deploy on high ground or get to some before the HA can get to you, do so.

=======

I consider javelin units to be a good anti-missile cavalry option. Units auto-skirmish out of melee range but not quite out of javelin range. A few volleys of javelins will devastate any cavalry unit.

=======

Those who want to read a blow-by-blow, with pictures, are advised to check out this thread (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=79195). It includes detailed, step-by-step instructions.

(top)

15. SOME DISCUSSION OF GUNPOWDER CAVALRY, INCLUDING ELEPHANTS, AND A WORD ABOUT MOUNTED CROSSBOWMEN

https://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m78/ShahedK/cgunners2.jpg

First off, gunpowder cavalry have the same trouble in rain and bad weather as any gunpowder unit. They have the same adverse effect on enemy morale, too.
Elephants of all types move as far as regular cavalry on the strategy map, making them a nice little mobile siege train.

MOORISH CAMEL GUNNERS
This unit has drawn a lot of attention and some serious devotees. Rarely does such an expensive unit get such a high level of agreement that the cost is worth it.

The guns have excellent range: As long as a musketeers and half-again as much as any bow-armed cavalry. This requires some serious ammo conservation. It gets 20 shots, and will fire continuously if you leave fire at will on because something is almost always in range.

As for use of this unit, the best I can do is quote Mushashi:


My trick is actually to deploy half on one "wing" of my formation, and half on the other, and then send them to both enemy flanks, making it impossible for the enemy to turn to face one without setting themselves up to take fire from the rear. Then I march the rest of my formation to close range directly from the front. This gives me a three sided envelopment, and my camel gunners are in position to demoralize, devastate (Seriously, those muskets are EVIL) run down routers, and also if the enemy skirmishers attempt to pull back behind the front lines my camels can sweep in and annihilate them in melee, leaving the enemy with no ranged support, and even better, my gunners right on top of them at the rear, able to deliver volley fire and rear charges.

That may sound like conventional missile cavalry stuff, but it's not. The very long range of the camel gunner makes this kind of three-pronged attack much easier for the attacker to do and harder for the defender to stop. Also, the very long range of the guns and their relatively flat trajectory create deadly crossfire.

REITERS (HOLY ROMAN EMPIRE)

This is a knight-like unit that can shoot, as I mentioned before. It is also the shortest-ranged missile cavalry unit, period, and one of the slowest. (Range is 45 spaces, compared to 55 for javelins.) Until after the patch, reiter tactics were a sadly neglected topic. Now there's a thread here (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=84969)

A chase where reiters are the pursuers won’t last long. The fleeing unit will get powerful pistol volleys in the back. It’s either going to escape quickly or die.

Charging reiters put a volley into their target while charging, which has a nice disruptive and morale effect. Even target unit members that are not killed are pushed back.

Reiters may be slow by HA standards, but they are certainly fast enough to deal death to infantry units. They are well protected against light missiles themselves. They are also the only missile cavalry unit that doesn’t have skirmish on as a default.

Reiters must be very wary of javelin cavalry, which appear to me to be this unit’s deadliest enemy. The reiters are not fast enough to get away and don’t fire fast enough to kill the jav-cav first. Another potential threat is the French Mounted Archer, which gets an anti-armor bonus.

ELEPHANTS
Elephants with arquebuses are very powerful missile units, perfectly able to wipe out an armored infantry unit and still have more than half its ammo left. It doesn't skirmish so using them as missile cavalry requires a little micro. They are perfectly capable of walking or running away from a chasing infantry unit and pelting it with fire the whole way. Not only will this kill most of the infantry unit, but knocked down infantry will have to catch up to the rest of their comrades, straggling them all over the place. Then the elephants can turn around, charge and stomp them before the unit reforms.

Now here’s the danger: Regular elephants that are not quickly committed to melee and stomping out enemies are vulnerable to the missile attacks that drive them mad. I’d say the general rule of thumb is: if your enemy doesn’t have enough missile units, use your elephants by getting them close enough to scare the enemy and cause those great morale effects, but use missile fire to keep any of your elephants from dieing in melee.

ARTILLERY ELEPHANTS
This "self-propelled artillery" must face what they are shooting at; They don't shoot on the move; They appear to have a minimum range, and they can't skirmish. They also aren't particularly accurate, but their shot does have a nice effect when they hit. It's immediately lethal to some while throwing others in the air. The thrown people can recover but unit cohesion is compromised.

With those limitations in mind, elephant artillery can be seriously deadly, particularly when a large number of units are in a constricted space such as a river crossing. Look for dense packs of enemy units and fire into it. Also, they are safer than regular elephants because you can deploy them away from immediate danger. Range is phenomenal: 350 spaces. This compares to 160 for a longbow.

If the enemy army has siege weapons, there's a little quirk worth remembering. You can't target the catapult or whatever directly with your elephant cannon, but you can target the crew. There is a good chance that one of your shots will hit the weapon, which will fall to pieces quite nicely if it’s a catapult. Trebuchets take 20 percent damage per hit.

Speaking of siege, elephant cannons can easily take down a castle wall with ammo to spare, and travel just as far on the strategy map as cavalry. They make a nice little mobile siege train if you can afford them.

ROCKET ELEPHANTS
I don’t have enough experience with this unit or against it to comment. I have encountered the beast, and it did seem more effective than regular elephants, but I have to stop there.

MOUNTED CROSSBOWMEN
The improvements of RTW catch up with the mounted crossbowman, making the unit much, much more effective than it was in MTW I. Unfortunately, it still has a long way to go.

The ability of this unit to fire on the move means that skirmishing is effective despite then agonizingly slow rate of fire. Also, the armor-piercing bonus of the crossbow is still in effect.

Mounted crossbowmen, or MXBs, a weird species of duck in a lot of ways. It has a slow rate of fire, but more ammo than any other missile cavalry unit except an elephant rocket unit, which fires off a lot of its ammo per volley. MXBs has armor-piercing ability, but isn’t better against armored targets than a regular archer with a higher base attack. It’s certainly no great shakes compared to javelins. It has a low cost compared to other missile cavalry — it's even cheaper to recruit than a Jinete — but requires an upper-tier building, the Marksman's Range.

This is a unit that kills slowly in its ranged attack. It's best used against armored infantry common in mid-to-late European battle. It can cause casualties and morale penalties. It was a fairly useable melee unit until the 1.2 patch fixed the shield bug. Now this shieldless unit is more vulnerable. My best guess on how to use these units is as an anti-archer unit. If some knight countercharge you, the MXBs can skirmish away and fire on the knights while doing it.

(top)

[Cesare diBorja]

In truth, Reiters were severe tough guys, for lack of a better statement. They were used up to and including the Thirty Years' War. I am looking for evidenceof othe 17th century units. To be sure, you canset your clocks back to 1648-1650.

[sapi]

In game, the byzantine vards are some of the best cavalry (let alone missile cavalry) in the game :D

[Doug-Thompson]

In game, the byzantine vards are some of the best cavalry (let alone missile cavalry) in the game :D



Research and summaries of other units by other forum members are welcome.

Wink Wink. Nudge Nudge.

[Darth Nihilus]

Doug, you've always been a huge missle cavalry fan haven't you. I remember you as a huge Mongol fan back on some old Aok, Aoc forums :2thumbsup:

[Quillan]

He was certainly a huge fan in RTW, and it was his post on how to use them properly that made me a huge fan. I wound up playing around with toxic hippos as the ERE in BI, and his instructions turned me from having 1 or 2 units that stayed out of the way until time to chase down fleeing generals to having 6-8 units per army and slaughtering the foe with them. I hit the ground running with them as Byzantium when this game came out, and have no cause to regret it. I just don't have the time to post the guide to the Byzantine missile cavalry now while I'm at work. I can do it later this evening.

[Doug-Thompson]

Added the French Mounted Archer, an excellent unit.

[Doug-Thompson]

Doug, you've always been a huge missle cavalry fan haven't you. I remember you as a huge Mongol fan back on some old Aok, Aoc forums :2thumbsup:


Yes, I'm obsessed. :2thumbsup:

Always glad to hear from an old AoK'er, too. That was a great fourm. Still is now that AOE III is out, I suppose.

Now Quillan shares my addiction. Looking forward to seeing your stuff on the Byz, Quillan. Hope you can find the time.

[Doug-Thompson]

Added information on the Spanish Jinete.

[Kraxis]

Keep it coming... This guide is nice.

[Quillan]

Byzantium has the full spectrum of missile cavalry available to it, from lightly armored steppe archers to elite armored horse archers that can compete with European knights in melee.

The Byzantine Empire

Units, availability: Skythikons, Byzantine Cavalry, Vardariotai, all Early

SKYTHIKON

Skythikon is the Byzantine term for the steppe horse archers. Wearing little armor, armed with a composite bow and a small sword, they are capable of melee when necessary but are best kept out of it. They are excellent archers, and very good at running down routing units or charging into the flank or rear of already engaged units.

Skythikon stats: (Melee-missile attack/defense/charge bonus) 06-06/3/02. Can have one armor upgrade

Special abilities: Cantabrian circle, fast moving

Cost/upkeep: 380/175

Buildings Needed: Castle only. Can be built at a Motte & Bailey, but the stable line of buildings increases both the size of the recruitment pool and the replenishment rate. Max size is 9 units at King's Stable.

Ammo: ?

BYZANTINE CAVALRY

These are the staple cavalry type of the army. Wearing mail or brigandine armor, and armed with a sword and composite bow, Byzantine cavalry are capable of both melee and missile combat. Slower moving than the other horse archers but better defended, they are more than capable of holding their own against almost any other light cavalry unit out there.

Byzantine Cavalry stats: (Melee-missile attack/defense/charge bonus) 07-06/12/02. Can have two armor upgrades.

Special ability: Cantabrian circle

Cost/Upkeep 530/175

Buildings Needed: Castle only. Can be built starting at Wooden Castle level, but again pool size and replenishment rate are both increased by the stables building. Max size is 9 units at King's Stable.

Ammo: ?

VARDARIOTAI

Vardariotai are something of a mystery and a surprise. For people familiar with the Byzantine military, the iconic units that defined them were the Varangian Guard and the cataphracts. That's why it is surprising that the Vardariotai are the single most expensive land unit in the Byzantine order of battle, and only the Lanternas ships are more expensive of all of their units.

Vardariotai are elite steppe archers, descended from Magyars who settled in the Vardar river valley. They are well equipped and extremely well trained. With exceedingly high stats, Vardariotai can outshoot most any other horse archer in the game, outfight most any other horse archer in the game, and even potentially win melee engagements against the best knights Europe has to offer.

Vardariotai stats: (Melee-missile attack/defense/charge bonus) 10-09/17/04. Can have one armor upgrade.

Special abilities: Cantabrian circle, fast moving, good morale, good stamina

Cost/upkeep 800/250

Buildings needed. Castle only. Can be built starting at the castle level. Unlike the previous two, stables do NOT increase either the recruitment pool or the replenishment rate. Max unit size is 3 at Citadel.

Ammo: ?

[Quillan]

Doug, Jinetes cost 520 to recruit, 175 to maintain, can be recruited at any castle regardless of size, recruitment pool is enhanced by the stable line of buildings, and can also be recruited in cities that have built a Plaza del Toro.

[Musashi]

I think I'm the only person who's even noticed the existence of Moorish Camel Gunners... They have a 16(!) ranged attack rating, and the long range missiles attribute which means these guys fire at musket range. You guys should try them out some time ;)

[Doug-Thompson]

Great work, Quillan. You'll see it in the main article quickly. :2thumbsup:


I think I'm the only person who's even noticed the existence of Moorish Camel Gunners... They have a 16(!) ranged attack rating, and the long range missiles attribute which means these guys fire at musket range. You guys should try them out some time ;)

Such enthusiam; Maybe you should write a unit summary? (Wink Wink. Nudge Nudge).

You'll be happy (I hope) to discover they have been noticed, including their great range. However, I have to say that the long range is almost a disadvantage. If the unit has any armor or shield, the fire is not effective, wasting ammunition. (I'm inviting a debate here, Musashi.) It seems better to me to turn "fire at will" off and wait for a good volley at a closer range.

[Shahed]

This is great sticky material! Good job !

[Kraxis]

A little mistake...

It is menioned that the Desert Cavalry has a slightly weaker melee than Jinetes, well both of them has a value of 8 according to the stats given here. So obviously something is not entirely right.

[Musashi]

You'll be happy (I hope) to discover they have been noticed, including their great range. However, I have to say that the long range is almost a disadvantage. If the unit has any armor or shield, the fire is not effective, wasting ammunition. (I'm inviting a debate here, Musashi.) It seems better to me to turn "fire at will" off and wait for a good volley at a closer range.
Well the way I've been using them, I keep fire at will off, move them to flank, and then open fire. Doesn't matter how well armored the enemy is when you're behind them. And their range is a major asset when using them this way, because it's hard to defend against flanking when the enemy can do it from so far away.

[Doug-Thompson]

A little mistake...

It is menioned that the Desert Cavalry has a slightly weaker melee than Jinetes, well both of them has a value of 8 according to the stats given here. So obviously something is not entirely right.

I stand corrected. Good catch. Jinetes have a melee attack of 9 in their own unit stats but 8 in the "for comparison" example in the section on Desert Cav.

[Doug-Thompson]

Well the way I've been using them, I keep fire at will off, move them to flank, and then open fire. Doesn't matter how well armored the enemy is when you're behind them. And their range is a major asset when using them this way, because it's hard to defend against flanking when the enemy can do it from so far away.

Point for Musashi, especially since camels aren't the fastest of units and are vulnerable to missle fire. This unit's range makes it harder to close with them and keeps them out of short-range threats like javelins and some arrows and such, which are deadly to camels.

[Doug-Thompson]

Added in the Poles.

[Shahed]

One thing... the Vtank or Vardariotai. I think that is probably one of the most capable cavalry. Not only can it use missiles with very good effect, it has very good melee capacity. Just wanted to state that this is a great unit.

[Kraxis]

Ok, have gone to Custom and picked up the costs of the units that lack it. Of course I couldn't find out the upkeep.

Desert Cavalry: 540 florins
Mamluke Archers: 900 florins
French Mounted Archers: 1030 florins (makign them the most expensive horse archers around, but then again they can almost match Reiters in melee)
Reiters: 920 florins
Lithuanian Cavalry: 500 florins (pretty cheap to me)
Strzelcy: 510 florins
Polish Nobles: 800 florins (also pretty cheap)
Mounted Crossbows: 470 florins

And I noticed that the Egyptian Beduin Archers, or what they are called, are missing.

[Doug-Thompson]

Thanks for the numbers, Kraxis. I thought that costs in the campaign and costs in custom would be the same, but wasn't absolutely sure.



... And I noticed that the Egyptian Beduin Archers, or what they are called, are missing.

I think those are mercenary units, but will check.

[Edited update: You are correct, Kraxis. They are an Egyptian unit. I'll add what info I have and will finish that entry tonight.]

[Kraxis]

Oh really? But if they are not then thos figures can't be relied upon.

[Quillan]

Mamluk archers are 900 in the campaign too, at least according to my spies reporting on enemy armies. They cost more to recruit than Vardariotai, have slightly worse stats, but are cheaper to maintain. In the campaign spy reports, they are 900/210 cost at full strength.

[Doug-Thompson]

Information on Turks and Mongols added. [Edited P.S.: And now the Moors too.]

[Orda Khan]

Am I the only one surprised and disappointed that Mongol horse archers are not the strongest in the game? Mongol heavy archers only better than Mameluk HA thanks to stamina? It all seems rather odd to me

.....Orda

[Doug-Thompson]

Am I the only one surprised and disappointed that Mongol horse archers are not the strongest in the game? Mongol heavy archers only better than Mameluk HA thanks to stamina? It all seems rather odd to me

.....Orda

I've been through a couple of campaigns and haven't faced the hordes yet. :embarassed: I assume the Mongol units show up loaded with experience.

[Quillan]

6 xp each. They are tougher than the stats indicate, as their morale is extremely high. I suspect that all those points of experience that don't add to attack and defense go directly to morale.

[Doug-Thompson]

Information on Russians added.

[Kraxis]

I must admit I had expected the Mongol Horse Archers to be the best light horse archers by far. Their heavier ones I'm not too surprised about as it truly seems that their strength lay in the lighter version. While factions such as the Russians and Byzantiens seems to have gone a couple steps in the heavier direction, with the Egyptians and Turks trailing slightly behind (at least that seems to be fitting with the game).

[Mr Frost]

Am I the only one surprised and disappointed that Mongol horse archers are not the strongest in the game? Mongol heavy archers only better than Mameluk HA thanks to stamina? It all seems rather odd to me

.....Orda
Don't forget , the Mamluks were professional soldiers the same as the Mongols , and were likewize trained from childhood . They were also the first to actually beat a full Mongol army in battle .
The Mamluks' horses were also larger and stronger if I'm not mistaken . They should be quite strong . I question the relatively low moral of Sipahis too {and want to see Sipahis of the Porte return ;p} .

Has the Mongols' relative weakness in desert and tropical conditions is properly implemented . It was a big factor in their failure to conquer Egypt , and India for that matter . Their steppe ponies being unable to take such weather and their performance suffering thereby .
Perhaps the C/A couldn't get it to work quite right so they chose to lower the Mongols horse archers stats to prevent them from making their faction overpowered ?

As Quillan states the XP bonus they start with might be the mechanic the C/A chose to fully represent the Mongols prowess ; moral is the most important virtue in a warrior after all .

[Orda Khan]

Don't forget , the Mamluks were professional soldiers the same as the Mongols , and were likewize trained from childhood . They were also the first to actually beat a full Mongol army in battle .
The Mamluks' horses were also larger and stronger if I'm not mistaken . They should be quite strong . I question the relatively low moral of Sipahis too {and want to see Sipahis of the Porte return ;p} .

Has the Mongols' relative weakness in desert and tropical conditions is properly implemented . It was a big factor in their failure to conquer Egypt , and India for that matter . Their steppe ponies being unable to take such weather and their performance suffering thereby .
Perhaps the C/A couldn't get it to work quite right so they chose to lower the Mongols horse archers stats to prevent them from making their faction overpowered ?

As Quillan states the XP bonus they start with might be the mechanic the C/A chose to fully represent the Mongols prowess ; moral is the most important virtue in a warrior after all .
Mr Frost, I don't forget. Those Mameluk professional soldiers you talk about were the result of Qipchaq prisoners sold to the Sultan as slaves by the Mongols.
I can assure you that they were most definitely NOT the first to defeat a Mongol army. The full Mongol army you talk about was merely a rear guard and consisted of mainly Georgian and Armenian auxiliaries; they were completely outnumbered (yet I am fully aware of Islamic claims that each army was relatively equal in size) and even considering this, the outcome hung desperately in the balance.
The Mongols had access to horses from many areas of the steppe and yet we are constantly reminded that they rode the ponies we see in Mongolia these days. Horses in central Asia such as the Akhal-Teke stand 15.2HH which is taller than the 14.2HH - 15HH of the Arab. The Bashkir of the Urals stands 14.2HH, so no there was no great difference in size.
There are many reasons behind the defeat at Ain Jalut and I don't want to go into them here, the subject has been debated at length, over and over in the Monastery, do a search for Mongols.

I am also well aware that Mongol armies are heavily upgraded but I question the stats none the less. As it stands, they rely on upgrades whereas historically their horse archers were second to none. Without those upgrades they are lesser units, stat wise.
It reminds me of RTW/BI where Alan mercenary HA had better stats than Hun HA. Here again history shows us otherwise.
It's all very well to script in command bonuses and upgrades but that won't cut it in MP, where such scripting does not exist

........Orda

[Doug-Thompson]

It's all very well to script in command bonuses and upgrades but that won't cut it in MP, where such scripting does not exist.

That's a legitimate problem I did not consider.

[Orda Khan]

Sorry Doug, I did not intend to take this off on a tangent and to be fair, CA has done a great job of reproducing the Mongol threat this time around. I would rather they achieved this with less influence from extremely talented Generals and more through better base units.
Let's look at the Szekely unit in MTW. If the Hungarians possessed such a strong unit why would they worry about Mongol horse archers?
In BI, the Alan unit had better stats than the Hun and it was cheaper. In MP this put the Huns at a considerable disadvantage, all their cav was matched, for less cost by other factions and these factions also had decent infantry units which the Huns lacked.
I had not checked the stats in M2TW and when I read this post and saw Mongol heavy archers with same stats as a Mameluk HA I could not believe they have done it again. But there you go eh?
Since when did Byzantium field such tremendous mounted archers? Throughout their history they enlisted the help of Huns, Avars, Pechenegs, all of whom had been driven from their homelands by stronger steppe armies.

Keep up the good work and wait for the arrival of Mediaeval Total Realism, when there will be some nice additions for the admirers of those who drew the bow on horseback

.....Orda

[Doug-Thompson]

Why are you apologizing? Stop that. Obviously, this guide is not intended to exclude multi-players. We've commented on something important without my even realizing it.

[Doug-Thompson]

FYI: I haven't forgotten this, but have been simply buried by a work project for the last week. Sorry for the delay.

[katank]

Better unit stats and what not is a great idea. As it stands, their power come from the 6 chevs and their uber generals. That feels kinda cheesy. They almost never rout and that makes for their strength.

Why not just make the units stronger than others but otherwise normal? Also, the trait "Khan's Conqueror" of +6 just feels cheesy. Mongols should be able to do well without resorting to such cheese.

Anyone else notice how amazingly weak Khan Genghis is? He's a fricking 1 star! I managed to crush his army and then chase him across the steppes capturing and ransoming him every turn. (lasted 4 turns until they refused).

[Orda Khan]

Why are you apologizing? Stop that. Obviously, this guide is not intended to exclude multi-players. We've commented on something important without my even realizing it.
With so many threads going 'off topic', I did not want to be the start of this guide deteriorating into a 'why aren't the Mongols the best' debate. I had not compared stats per HA and was genuinely shocked to see how poor the Mongol stats were. CA seem to have a fondness for Byzantium IMO and I would love to see their reason for handing them the best HA in the game. Vardariotae was a term applied to the transfer of population within Byzantium which could encompass far more than natural steppe (HA) dwellers.


Better unit stats and what not is a great idea. As it stands, their power come from the 6 chevs and their uber generals. That feels kinda cheesy. They almost never rout and that makes for their strength.

Why not just make the units stronger than others but otherwise normal? Also, the trait "Khan's Conqueror" of +6 just feels cheesy. Mongols should be able to do well without resorting to such cheese.

Anyone else notice how amazingly weak Khan Genghis is? He's a fricking 1 star! I managed to crush his army and then chase him across the steppes capturing and ransoming him every turn. (lasted 4 turns until they refused).
Precisely!!
The Mongols lack infantry and rely on their strength which is the HA, if this unit is downgraded they do not have any strength. A custom battle at 10k per army will highlight my point.
It was worse in BI for the Huns. Attila's armies were anything but all cavalry, by this time Hun armies resembled any other Germanic army with the addition of Hun HA (Huns being by far the minority in their European Empire) CA gave them a terrible infantry choice yet they gave almost every barbarian faction HA that were both cheaper and stronger and now they have done it again.
If all those Mongol armies were led by 2 or 3 star generals, they would pose no threat at all.
Add to this problem the return of 4 max same unit type (without incurring tax penalties) it is very hard to buy 20 units at 10k (and with cav based armies you are already disadvantaged because you have less men)
The dilema continues :dizzy2:

........Orda

[Quillan]

Historically, the Vardariotai were an Imperial Guard unit originally recruited from Magyars who settled in the Vardar river valley, so they should be good. However, they probably shouldn't be THAT good. I expect it came about as part of CA's faction balancing process, trying to make Byzantium be a capable cav-heavy military that was still able to function effectively in the late period when everyone else has gunpowder and Byzantium has none. Really, they and the Varangian Guard should only be recruitable from the capitol.

[Orda Khan]

recruited from Magyars who settled in the Vardar river valley, so they should be good. However, they probably shouldn't be THAT good.
Especially since the Magyars were driven before the Pechenegs who themselves were being pressed by the Uz and ultimately all succumbed to the Qipchaqs....and we all know what happened to them

.....Orda

[Doug-Thompson]

With so many threads going 'off topic', I did not want to be the start of this guide deteriorating into a 'why aren't the Mongols the best' debate.

I've no objections. Interesting topic.

[Kraxis]

Especially since the Magyars were driven before the Pechenegs who themselves were being pressed by the Uz and ultimately all succumbed to the Qipchaqs....and we all know what happened to them

.....Orda
To be hoest you can't use that as a baseline for strength.
Numbers and comand ability plays just as much in as martial ability, if not more.

You could easily have one group being a smaller significantly more elite group, and still ahve them pressed off their lands. Or little variations in combatstyle made them better/worse at tackling that exact opponent.

If I take you on your word you basically say that the initial Arab troops were better than the Sassanid and Byzantines troops combined. Of course they weren't, but they had some things going for them that evened the score, as did all these as well.

Besides, these were nomads, the attachment to the land is significantly less than we feel now, and way less than peasants back then felt. Chances are that at least some within each society simply didn't bother to defend and just picked up and left, perhaps believing it was about time to bother someone else anyway.

The point is that displaced nomads don't make for an easily linear list of strength.

But I do agree that the Mongol Horse Archers should be best. I do not agree that the Heavy version should as that was not the norm, nor did they fit the very mobile Mongolian tactics as well, while other cultures cultivated the heavy horse archers at the expense of the light ones. And Mongolian troops that looted better armour and such were just waht we would call 'upgraded' Horse Archers, and not really heavy. But again, the light horse archers should be the best there is, there can be little doubt in my mind at least.

[EDIT] Ok I'm willing to, in fact I want it, let the Mongol Heavies have the best missile ability. After all they came from the same background as the others, so why not? But I still contest them being the best heavy horse archers in all.

[andrewt]

I agree. The Mongols and later, the Timurids, won because they have highly disciplined armies and good strategies. The Mongols, in particular, should have powerful baseline missile cav, not ones inflated through 3 silver chevrons. In this game, they are more like a zerg. I'd prefer their light and heavy cavalry archers to be stronger, while removing the silver chevrons and reducing the huge zerg. For the sp game, the better generals is quite realistic so that should stay.

[Orda Khan]

The very fact that Mongol armies were so highly disciplined is my point. How can that be implemented into the game other than improving the stats? You will not always have a couple of upgrades to count on. I am fully aware that one single HA is not necessarily better than another just by virtue of his birth but we are talking about units and Mongols were highly disciplined, their current stats do not show that

.......Orda

[Doug-Thompson]

You can't quote Napoleon without sounding pompous, but "Boney" made a point that's relevant here.

French cavalry were bad riders but disciplined. Mamelukes were great riders and warriors but were undisciplined. If this quote I found on the Internet is a correct version of the one I vaguely remember, Napoleon figured it something like this: Two Mamelukes were a match for three Frenchmen, 100 Mamelukes were equal to 100 Frenchmen, 300 Frenchmen could beat 300 Mamelukes, and 1,000 Frenchmen invariably defeated 1,500 Mamelukes.

All this goes to Orda Khan's point: Mongols (including the steppe horseman tribes integrated into their army) were excellent riders AND had discipline -- ferocious discipline, the kind of discipline that even the French cavalry never had. No unit of 10 Frenchmen was ever executed because one of them retreated without orders.

So while I respect the point that the Mongols won their battles more with strategy and generalship than by tactics, I still have to agree that Mongol units were better units, even though man-per-man they were often less well equipped than their opponents.

Second, there is no way the AI, or just about any other AI, can be tweaked to make it better than a veteran human player. The strategy and generalship advantages cannot be reliably accounted for in the game, and especially not in multiplayer.

[dopp]

It may be a balance issue. People expect to see enormous army stacks when the HORDE shows up, whereas historically 'horde' is a military term that denotes a formation of horsemen, much like "regiment" or "corps" today. The Mongols had rather small elite armies, perhaps even outnumbered by the enemies they faced, but in the game they are made to conform to the "horde" stereotype and have waaay more armies than the whole of Europe combined, which of course they neither needed nor had the resources to field. Making them too good would unbalance the campaign game.

If however, the complaint is that Mongol Horse Archers are inferior to other horse archers, then maybe their stats should be brought more in line.

[Orda Khan]

It may be a balance issue. People expect to see enormous army stacks when the HORDE shows up, whereas historically 'horde' is a military term that denotes a formation of horsemen, much like "regiment" or "corps" today. The Mongols had rather small elite armies, perhaps even outnumbered by the enemies they faced, but in the game they are made to conform to the "horde" stereotype and have waaay more armies than the whole of Europe combined, which of course they neither needed nor had the resources to field. Making them too good would unbalance the campaign game.

If however, the complaint is that Mongol Horse Archers are inferior to other horse archers, then maybe their stats should be brought more in line.
Actually,the word horde derives from the Mongol term'Ordu', meaning camp.
You are correct in your summary, Mongol armies in the western campaign never resembled the huge numbers represented in the SP campaign. They divided and advanced on different fronts during the assault on Russia and the southern steppes and again (even more dramatically) during the invasion of Hungary. The right wing that Orda led into Poland was diversionary, yet it succeeded in destroying any opposing army it met, Sandomir, Cracow, Chmielnik and ultimately, Liegnitz. Mongol strategy was supreme but for this strategy to work relied on well disciplined troops, highly trained men who knew their roles. I would prefer to see this portrayed in M2TW by better unit stats rather than enormous armies with multiple upgrades. Without these upgrades I would expect to witness the highly one-sided battles that I have with previous TW games. More important is the balance issue and this becomes much more evident in MP where you simply purchase units from a roster and at 10k (the recommended standard) you will find it hard to purchase a full 20 units and none of these are upgraded.
Balance is a nightmare I know but it seems logical to me that a faction with poor infantry should be compensated and thus allowing some parity with better cavalry. With poor infantry and cavalry units that are matched or bettered by other factions, why would anyone choose that faction?
Yes it is possible to beat an opponent with tactical skill but when your opponent is equal in terms of skill it becomes far less likely

........Orda

[Oleander Ardens]

To come back to the unti guide

Is it just me or do the Moors have almost the perfect MC lineup to defeat the christian factions?

Desert Cavalry seems to be the fast, cheap and jav. cavalry
Grandine Jinete is a slightly weaker brother of the great Spanish one.
Grandine XBow is the best Xbow shooter among the MC
Camel Gunners are longranged armorkillers which scare the faster horses...

Cheers
OA

[Doug-Thompson]

To come back to the unti guide

Is it just me or do the Moors have almost the perfect MC lineup to defeat the christian factions?

Desert Cavalry seems to be the fast, cheap and jav. cavalry
Grandine Jinete is a slightly weaker brother of the great Spanish one.
Grandine XBow is the best Xbow shooter among the MC
Camel Gunners are longranged armorkillers which scare the faster horses...

Cheers
OA

Hadn't thought of that. That would be interesting, especially since colder climates don't hurt a long-ranged camel unit that much.

By the way, I'm also — finally — editing in some cost/upkeep figures. Also, Bedouin camel riders were a mercenary unit after all.

[Doug-Thompson]

Quoted some of Musashi's camel gunner tactics on the Moors, with some added comment by me about enfilade fire.

[Doug-Thompson]

Info on Timurids and their elephants are added.

[Shahed]

The Timids yeah ? Can't wait... oliphant steak ja just like in Afrika ?

Turks are missing a light cavalry with lance, have to use alans, pretty expensive in the early game.

Personally I don't think Camel Gunner have a slow rate of fire. I found it pretty overwhelming actually. I would'nt classify it as slow at all, but that's just how I felt when testing them out.

My Turk setup is also completely different, with Turcos being the main missile cavalry and Sipahi being the 2nd line to take on more hazardous and more prolonged engagements. Thing to note is that Turcos are fast moving wheras Sipahi are not. Turcos also have good stamina, Sipahi do not (from what I can tell anyway). This makes Turcos a far more versatile and valuable unit to all cavalry Turk armies, specially in early game. Bagging with Turcos, after sniping, yields excellent results. My typical army (which expects to be outnumbered and expects to meet high tech enemy) consists of 1 Bodyguard, 3 Kapilkulu, 4 Sipahi, 12 Turcomen. The heavy cav is in groups of two, (2 lancers + 2 Sipahi) * 2, 4*Turcomen center - attacking all along the enemy's front, 4* Turcomen right flankers, 4* Turcomen left flankers. The strong center attracts the enemy to the center and then disperses to the flanks, in the event of a general attack..

[Doug-Thompson]

Added some info on ammo, and changed the entry about elephant artillery.

[Doug-Thompson]

I thought I might finish this guide someday. Then R'as al Ghul comes out with units stats and has units I never even heard of.

Polish shooters? Mounted Longbowmen? Does anybody have any maintenance costs on these units, which I presume are mercenaries?

[katank]

Mounted longbowmen is a cheat unit. There is a similar unit called French Mounted Archers. They are available with an academy and have 7 armour-piercing missile attack. I don't know about Polish Shooters. I have a feeling those aren't in the game.

[Doug-Thompson]

Added information gleaned from R'as al Ghul's unit guide. New info is in color. This includes revisions on Mongol units, HRE Reiters, Moorish Camel Gunners, Elephant artillery, Polish-Lithuanian Cavalry, Byz Vardariotai, French Mounted Archers and Mamaluk Archers.

[dopp]

Think Mounted Longbowmen are supposed to dismount for battle, but since M2TW lacks that feature we get strange Western horse archers.

[R'as al Ghul]

I thought I might finish this guide someday. Then R'as al Ghul comes out with units stats and has units I never even heard of.


Sorry for the confusion. I took the names from the line "dictionary" which, as the unit file tells us, is "The tag used to look up the on screen name". I can't find the on_screen_names anywhere. While the dictionary line fits most of the time, Polish_Shooters etc. might actually have different in game/ on screen names.
Do you need the upkeep stats?

R'as

[katank]

Try making a couple of those units via the create_unit cheat and see their unit card etc. I'll bet a lot of em have the default Roman Peasant unit graphic.

[Doug-Thompson]

Sorry for the confusion. I took the names from the line "dictionary" which, as the unit file tells us, is "The tag used to look up the on screen name". I can't find the on_screen_names anywhere. While the dictionary line fits most of the time, Polish_Shooters etc. might actually have different in game/ on screen names.
Do you need the upkeep stats?

R'as

I should have put a smiley by that remark. I was "complaining" about the comprehensive wealth of data.

And if you can give me upkeep numbers, you'll be my hero. :jumping:

[R'as al Ghul]

I should have put a smiley by that remark. I was "complaining" about the comprehensive wealth of data.

And if you can give me upkeep numbers, you'll be my hero. :jumping:

Doug,
I wasn't taking any offense. I guess some of my posts come across as if I hadn't any humour at all. I'll try not sounding so dry in future. :wink:

Anyway, my main problem atm is that editing my guide is almost impossible. I've posted such extensive code (mainly the coloured columns formatting) that I can hear the database moaning when I only think about editing it. I'll upload my excel file soon, with added upkeep cost, before I touch the beast again.
Any other entries you must have?

R'as

[dopp]

Okay, did a quick scan through the building and unit files for those "mystery units". Turns out Polish Shooters are those mounted crossbowmen already mentioned in the guide; Strzelcy or something. Cost 510, upkeep 175. Buildable from a basic castle onwards.

Mounted Longbowmen are disabled; there exists no option to build them in the buildings file and they cannot be used in custom. DISmounted Longbowmen, on the other hand, are certainly available; they are otherwise known as Retinue Longbowmen. The mounted version is similar, except that the range has been shortened to 120.

Why the English Mounted Longbowmen are accurately portrayed (as mounted infantry rather than horse archers) but the French Mounted Archers are not (they have become horse archers) is a mystery.

[econ21]

This is an excellent guide - I'm moving it over to the Guides forum so that it does not get lost in the deluge of more ephemeral Citadel threads.

[Doug-Thompson]

Okay, did a quick scan through the building and unit files for those "mystery units". Turns out Polish Shooters are those mounted crossbowmen already mentioned in the guide; Strzelcy or something. Cost 510, upkeep 175. Buildable from a basic castle onwards.

Mounted Longbowmen are disabled; there exists no option to build them in the buildings file and they cannot be used in custom. DISmounted Longbowmen, on the other hand, are certainly available; they are otherwise known as Retinue Longbowmen. The mounted version is similar, except that the range has been shortened to 120.

Why the English Mounted Longbowmen are accurately portrayed (as mounted infantry rather than horse archers) but the French Mounted Archers are not (they have become horse archers) is a mystery.

Much thanks, dopp.

And thanks for being put in the guides section, too.

[dopp]

Ouch, mounted xbows are really bad. Let's compare a few crossbow types:

Normal crossbow: 9 attack, range 120, AP, normal bolt (Peasant Crossbows, Crossbow Militia, Crossbowmen)

Arbalest: 12 attack, range 160, AP, steel bolt (Pavise Crossbows, Muslim Crossbow Militia)

Elitle Arbalest: 14 attack, range 160, AP, steel bolt (Aventurier, Genoese Crossbow Militia)

Mounted Crossbow: 5 attack, range 120, AP, normal bolt (Mounted Xbows, Polish Shooters)

Now just one or two bow types:

'Short' Bow: 5 attack, range 120, arrow (Peasant Archers)

Cavalry Bow: 6 attack, range 120, arrow (Horse Archers, Turkoman)

Considering that mounted bowmen are equal or superior to their foot counterparts in attack rating, that's a huge gap in power between a mounted crossbow and the weakest of the foot crossbows (handled by militia, no less). Do they happen to fire faster or something to make up for this?

[Doug-Thompson]

Ouch, mounted xbows are really bad. ... Considering that mounted bowmen are equal or superior to their foot counterparts in attack rating, that's a huge gap in power between a mounted crossbow and the weakest of the foot crossbows (handled by militia, no less). Do they happen to fire faster or something to make up for this?

Not that I can tell. The do fire continuously, since they can fire on the move.

Still, I agree with you and katank: The armor-piercing feature simply does not offset the very low base attack. Even the ability to fire continuously is offset by the small unit size and the cost compared to foot crossbowman, which can stay still and keep firing if given elementary infantry protection.

You have to have a marksman's range to build MXBs, according to the tech tree provided in the game. Therefore, any faction that can build MXBs can recruit outstanding foot archers. The cost of MXBs is low compared to other horse archers — 470 compared to a Mamaluk's 900, for instance — but more than for a good foot archer. Even at the 470-florin price, it doesn't appear to be a good option compared to mercenary HA. You get what you pay for, HA-wise. Also, I'm not ready to declare MXBs to be comparatively cheap until I see the upkeep cost.

MXBs are medium-level melee cav that have an option to shoot, IMO.

[dopp]

I may be horribly wrong about this but I think mxbows were historically mounted infantry rather than true horse archers, just like the French 'Mounted Archers', so their crossbow attack should be no weaker than that of the foot soldiers. They should also all be on foot just like the Retinue Bowmen once the battle begins, or should not be allowed to fire on the move/form shooting circle because their horse is just for transportation rather than a fighting platform.

[Quillan]

I think they really did try horse crossbowmen back then, but with very limited success. The slow rate of fire, the contortionism necessary to reload one and the necessity of a weak crossbow all makes them suffer in comparison.

[Vladimir]

I may be horribly wrong about this but I think mxbows were historically mounted infantry rather than true horse archers, just like the French 'Mounted Archers', so their crossbow attack should be no weaker than that of the foot soldiers. They should also all be on foot just like the Retinue Bowmen once the battle begins, or should not be allowed to fire on the move/form shooting circle because their horse is just for transportation rather than a fighting platform.

Ouch? Weak attack? Missile attack equal to foot archers?

They're armor piercing mounted skirmishers that can launch successful flank and rear attacks once their ammo is exhausted AND are add mobile firepower to otherwise ham-handed European armies *whew*. To me it makes perfect sense that their missile attack isn't as strong that of foot units. Doesn't the description of one of the mounted X-bow units say that they have smaller weapons? They’re riding a horse for Christ's sake.

[Doug-Thompson]

It's official: R'as al Ghul is now my hero. He comes through with upkeep costs.

Also, thanks R'as and other members, I'm now confident we have all the faction's units accounted for including mercs.

[dopp]

Ouch? Weak attack? Missile attack equal to foot archers?

They're armor piercing mounted skirmishers that can launch successful flank and rear attacks once their ammo is exhausted AND are add mobile firepower to otherwise ham-handed European armies *whew*. To me it makes perfect sense that their missile attack isn't as strong that of foot units. Doesn't the description of one of the mounted X-bow units say that they have smaller weapons? They’re riding a horse for Christ's sake.

Right, and my point is that they are actually foot xbows that ride horses for mobility and dismount to shoot, rather than fight from the saddle, so their weapons should be every bit as powerful as the ones on foot. Consider French Mounted Archers, also for the most part foot archers that ride to battle on horses but dismount to fight. LONGBOWS on horseback? 7 attack and AP is no joke and only 1 point less than Retinues on foot, yet they move and fight as real horse archers.

[Quillan]

And I think that was my opposite point, Dopp. I don't think they are foot crossbows that dismount to fight; I think they are horse archers just equipped with crossbows instead of bows. I don't know how prevalent they were in that time period, but I'm pretty sure the European states did have some troops equipped in that fashion.

[dopp]

I believe they were predominantly mounted infantry, but I will not claim to be an expert on the subject, or demand that the game version matches history (which could prove to be very boring). Not that you can't shoot a crossbow from horseback effectively, but it takes more than just a bow to make a horse archer. Maybe some expert on mounted archery would know more.

The main issue here is that the mounted crossbow's attack power is so significantly lower than the infantry version that it makes them really weak, as this missile guide points out, whereas mounted bows are often more powerful than their foot versions. I'm playing around with increasing their attack power to something like 7 to 9, but that's modding territory. For the vanilla game, they would probably be best used as melee cavalry with an option to shoot, as Doug points out.

[Doug-Thompson]

Merged the unit guide with the tactics guide from the Citadel. Also extensively rewrote the "Basic Tactics" section.

[Vladimir]

I believe they were predominantly mounted infantry, but I will not claim to be an expert on the subject, or demand that the game version matches history (which could prove to be very boring). Not that you can't shoot a crossbow from horseback effectively, but it takes more than just a bow to make a horse archer. Maybe some expert on mounted archery would know more.

The main issue here is that the mounted crossbow's attack power is so significantly lower than the infantry version that it makes them really weak, as this missile guide points out, whereas mounted bows are often more powerful than their foot versions. I'm playing around with increasing their attack power to something like 7 to 9, but that's modding territory. For the vanilla game, they would probably be best used as melee cavalry with an option to shoot, as Doug points out.

Shouldn't most or all mounted missile units have a slight range advantage over their dismounted counterparts? Was "high in the saddle" an eastern or universal concept?

[Doug-Thompson]

Shouldn't most or all mounted missile units have a slight range advantage over their dismounted counterparts? Was "high in the saddle" an eastern or universal concept?

As logical as that sounds, it's a fact that even Steppe peoples carried two bows: One for horseback, one for long-range fire while standing themselves.

Horseback bows had to be short enough to be passed from hand to hand over the neck of a horse. In fact, Hun and Japanese bows for horseback archery are asymetrical: The bottom half of the bow is shorter than the top half. This is most pronounced in the Japanese bows.

This puts a physical limit on how far a bow can shoot.

In addition, suppose you had a very long bow on horseback. Let's suppose you pull it back all the way to your cheekbone, like an English Longbow. The drawstring is going to come into contact to your leg or the horse's side.

While it might be possible to fully draw a longbow while on the back of a horse, I'm not sure it would be possible to pull it that far back without aiming it into the air.

There are historical reports of horse archer firing arrows at prodigious distances. However, were they firing from their horses at those distances rather than dismounting? Better ask somebody who knows, like Orda.

=======

On the original crossbow question, I agree with Quillan that there were crossbows meant to be fired from horseback but can't seem to find where I've read about them. I remember that the article I read went into some detail about why the idea never worke well. Essentially, it was a lot of expense for what you got. You had to cock the things using some hook on your stirrup, or had to have an expensive turning crank. Crossbows required fine-grade steel and cast parts for the crank. They got so intricate and expensive that cheap cast iron tubes with powder and lead balls — guns — were actually cheaper.

[IvarrWolfsong]

First off, this is a great post! Thanks for pulling all this togethr and sharing it with the community.

I fell in love with dual duty missle cavalry after choosing Pontus as my first unlocked faction in RTW. The heavy jav cav could slaughter heavy units at a distance and melee weaker types with low losses. From there I moved to Sythia and then off to RTR and their bow weilding Cataphract Lancers.

As for M2TW, I have played the campaign as almost every missle cav faction. Here are a few of my observations (and they are mostly observations... no tests were done and the methodology is simply "I noticed this after playing waaaaaay too much" ):

-The best dual duty Horse Archers I have come across are Mamlukes Archers and Dvor Cavalry. The stats may indicate that there are much better HA in melee, but these 2 units have given me better performance hands down. I believe that they may have "effective vs armor" even though it isn't listed in their description.

-Vards are very nice. They have great ranged attacks and are fast moving while boasting nice defense. However, I have found they are kind of squishy when they mix it up. I would take a good deal of casualties even when facing greatly inferior units in melee. They also seem to route a bit quicker than my Sipahis, Dvor or Mamluke HAs.

-I have noticed that HA route a bit quicker than melee cav. A good quality melee cav unit that takes a lot of damage will stay together longer than a good quality HA taking similar damage.

-Skirmish mode is not as reliable as it was in RTW. Units like to let the enemy get very close before they begin to move away. Also, there is much more lag time as units start to move untill they are gallopping. In RTW, you went from 0 to 60 in .00001 secs, but in M2TW it is a bit more realistic.

-Camel Gunners like to kill their friends! Be very careful about straying into the line of fire! I learned this the hard way hehe. Also they are squishy and die if the wind changes directions. Of course, they have that incredible range so you can stay out of trouble if you keep your eye on them. They are definitly not fire and forget.

-Xbow Cav seem to get tired much more quickly than normal horse archers.

I use a different method to kill HA when fighting the AI. I have always liked Light Cav (napoleonic hussars make me giddy). <<TANGENT ALERT>>In RTW, I often got wierd looks in MP when I "wasted" a slot or two for Carthagian light cavalry. I recieved a lot of complements for using them well ... I could usually route most missles or siege long before the enemy could intercept me. They were also great for drawing off a unit or two of heavy cav on a wild goose chase. <<END TANGENT>>> Well I use em in M2TW to chase down missle cav. Alans are great and even Arab Cav can be used to drive off most HAs. When facing uber HAs, i sick a light cav unit on them followed by a heavy cav unit. The light cav tangles them up and the heavy cav stomps their guts out. Again, this is for fighting the AI, who doesn't use massed HA's or concentrate fire.

Regarding the Mongols, I would say that their missle rating, and endurance should be up'd... and possibly given a range boost. With that, I would reduce their melee prowess. They were not a hand to hand power.

[Doug-Thompson]

Thanks, IvarrWolfsong


The best dual duty Horse Archers I have come across are Mamlukes Archers and Dvor Cavalry. The stats may indicate that there are much better HA in melee, but these 2 units have given me better performance hands down. I believe that they may have "effective vs armor" even though it isn't listed in their description.

Haven't used Dvor Cavalry enough to tell, but Mameluks definitely have a mace and an anti-armor bonus. They're arguably better melee cavalry than Arab cavalary.


-Skirmish mode is not as reliable as it was in RTW. Units like to let the enemy get very close before they begin to move away. Also, there is much more lag time as units start to move untill they are gallopping. In RTW, you went from 0 to 60 in .00001 secs, but in M2TW it is a bit more realistic.

Add the straggler problem to that, too.

[Hun Sárkány]

I also thought of using HA armies like nothing else. For example it is not the battle won ratio what counts to final victory, but how many men you slaughter.

That is, I usually ride out from the fortress to meet the marching enemy on the fields before they reach walls. Let every single arrow fly, then retreat. All the way back to the castle. By the second battle, their men are down to 10% or less. It's useful I think. :2thumbsup:

I love HA too much. A totally other dimension than infantry. Even if I leave a castle to the Enemy because the cavalry cannot defend it, I retake it after I lay siege around it and the stupid enemy sallies. If not in the first round, then in the 2nd. Lost a few turn's income. Who cares? As long as my horses are fresh, I am king. :charge:

HA is such a mobile force which cannot be cornered, it gives you immense power, you can choose when to fight, when not.

Cavalry rules. (btw, it was only the scythians who could defeat Alexander the Great'a armies, no other force - not that it would have been too hard)

Sorry for this, I just had to come out with it. :beam:

[Doug-Thompson]

... For example it is not the battle won ratio what counts to final victory, but how many men you slaughter.

I'd already considered revising the "strategy map" section of the guide to reflect this. Now I'm sure I will.

I was "defeated" in battles with the Mongols and Timurids that constantly whittled them down while I could replace my losses. I remember one battle from RTW vividly. My Parthians shot every arrow they had. Dead Seleucid spearmen carpeted the battlefield. I could have charged their few remaining intact phalanxes with Persian Cavalry and defeated them, but saw no good reason to throw valuable, experienced cavalry away. I was "defeated," the computer told me. I laughed out loud.

[Hun Sárkány]

Exactly!

Although, what I said about final victory was refering to the campaign victory, not to how the game calculates battle victories. Perhaps you will win only the third arrow-pumping battle, but you will win in the end. And that is what counts. For us, players.

Withdrawing to gather more arrows looks like an effective strategy. Perhaps your general will not get that much stars, but then, he will be far from the place where your horse archers wreak havoc among enemy ranks. (slightly referring to that that the aura of the general will not help your units that much) However, after your cavalry gained tons of experience points - it is obvious that dead soldiers wont get any - later in the game, you will rule the region and you will not have to withdraw from won battles that often.

I don't know what your experiences are, but it did work by me.

[Phil]

Doug-Thompson

an excellent and enlightening read, thank you. i did, however, not find any mention of the russian cossack musketeer - plan on starting a campaign for them, so if anyone could post their range/ammo/some interesting uses and tactics that would be great :2thumbsup:

[Orda Khan]

Mounted longbows are historically accurate, the archers however, dismounted to use them and I would expect the mounted crossbows to do the same, using or trying to use a crossbow in true horse archer style would be totally impractical. Rate of fire and range would suffer even more than those on foot.

The Asiatic composite bows are generally short and the reason behind this has been explained by many historians precisely because they needed to be for use on horseback. This is only the opinion of these historians, most if not all of whom, have no experience of using a bow. The Asiatic bow was shorter due to lack of materials more than any other reason; there is limited supply of trees on the steppes. The wooden core, horn belly plates and sinew backing is attributed to the Scythians but it was a short bow, the Huns improved this by adding rigid siyahs to the end of the limbs. This produced a larger more powerful bow with a longer draw and the leverage applied by the siyahs greatly improved the physical mechanics of their bows. It is worth noting here that only the Huns (among the steppe nomads) used a markedly obvious asymmetrical design (a lot of the composites featured a slight difference) the rest, Avar, Magyar, Mongol etc used bows of symmetrical design.

The question of range regarding these weapons is a contentious issue, much like the longbow efficiency debate. There are countless reports of tests carried out but these mean very little to me and I do not consider they 'prove' a thing. Most historical accounts are exaggerated to say the least, army sizes especially, whereas modern tests are precisely that, modern and just a test. In my signature pic you can see my beautiful Hun bow from Kassai Lajos. It is 45lbs draw weight at my draw length and can easily shoot an arrow 150 metres, though I must admit I have never really tested its maximum distance. I would hazard a guess of around 180 - 200 metres and this is with my normal 100 grain field arrows not flight arrows.
Distance, therefore would be far less important than mobility (but far greater than M2TW horseback javelins whose range is a joke) and the way in which the bow was used. The Mameluks for example were less mobile and relied more on massed rapid fire before galloping to another target and so on.

The evolution of the composite design, according to historians, reached its zenith with the Turkish bow of the Ottomans which is another questionable statement. The quality of the bow rests with the bowyer and its ability with the archer, the design was not that considerably different.
Speaking from my own experience over the years of using Magyar, Mongol, Scythian, Turkish and Hun, the most user friendly is definitely the Hun because there is no noticeable handshock, making it more accurate (but this is only my opinion).
BTW, the Turkish is the only one that resembles a "C" shape when unstrung

......Orda

[Orda Khan]

Perhaps you will win only the third arrow-pumping battle, but you will win in the end.
Far better to lose a few battles and remain intact :yes:

.......Orda

[Hun Sárkány]

A very small addendum:

In the past, I marvelled and admired Megass Megass great hammer-and-anvil tactic. It is funny how easily any light cavalry will slip out of and avoid this grasp.

[Hun Sárkány]

It is "Megas Alexandros", you bloody Spell Check thingie! :furious3:

[Czar Alexsandr]

This guide... is an inspiration to all horse archer fanatics everywhere!

Lol. I got some really good ideas here. Both for my cav archers and against them. I never seem to be able to take them out as good as other things.

But excellent work! And with good pictures too! I'm sure this guide is one of the most valuable. A lot of people either hate horse archers or love em. So this guide is great for everyone. Awesome work! Everyone!

[Kekvit Irae]

I would like to take this time to mention that now that this thread is in the Guides forum, it will abide by the Guides rule. This means no more chatter, unless it is a new addition, an addendum, or a correction to the strategies presented. Questions or general chatter can be asked in the Comments & Suggestions thread stickied at the top of the M2TW thread list, or PMed to the person in question. From now one, I will be deleting anything that does not contribute to the general strategies on the first page.

[Doug-Thompson]

Finally added some more worthwhile building information. Also, I've developed more respect for the Polish Strzelcy. Its very low building requirements and cheap price make it a good fit with the Polish Noble, an expensive unit that you often receive as a reward in the campaign game for accomplishing missions. Together, they make a decent and almost affordable cavalry force for the Poles.

[Hun Sárkány]

A short remark on the arrangement of cavalry archer forces on the battlefield:

I found that extreme concentration of firepower is best.

This tactic (I allow myself to name it thus, but it is not one :beam: ) I developed against other horse-archer armies. What I did was to have all HA units in one general place, let them run in circles and have all of them fire at the very same enemy unit. After 300-400 arrows, there is nothing left of that unit, so I picked an other one. Then an other one... and so on.

This way, the enemy's mobile archers were killed off in the 1s minute of the battle, while I were suffering 10%-20%-30% casualties. (note that I usually deploy half as many units as the enemy) The enemy infantry and melee cavalry was the usual walk at the market after this "process".

It is very chaotic, very inefficient, but your army is far more easier to mobilize on the battlefield and battles are won quicker too. :2thumbsup: I like it.

[Doug-Thompson]

This "multiple circles" idea is interesting.

My first impression was that you'd be shot up by friendly fire. Then I realized that units fire while in the arc of the circle closest to the enemy. With a little spacing, there'd be little overlap.

This could be quite effective against Mongols and Timiruds. I'm anxious to try it out.

[Hun Sárkány]

I dont say I have no friendly fire. Yet, on the whole, it is still "economic" to do it... every war has casualties...

But, with a bit of planning, you can choose places where the firing arc will be higher, so you shoot upwards.

Anyway, the whole visual experience is worth trying it... 500 or more horsemen whirling and swirling around under heavy dustclouds... like a tornado. :beam: A very lethal tornado, and a storm of arrow hailing from within it.

[Shahed]

WOW ! this is awesome work Doug ! What a brilliant evolution of the initial version !

I am very honored that you've used some of my images and tips.
Thank you for the credit ! I Appreciate it, deeply.

Salute !

Multiple Circles: I think it would be cool to watch. "Treat your men as if they were your own children", maybe I take this a bit far for a video game and I hate losing men to friendly fire. So I'd be hesistant but I have no doubt it would work.

I did achieve the similar results, however, by using groups. For example using the left flankers (typically 4 units of Turcomans) or the right flankers (same) and concentrate their fire on one unit. It will have a good result as well.

In fact I would typically concentrate fire, always.

Battle is joined and the center group of 4 Sipahi is running across and shooting across from left to right of the enemy front line. The flanking groups (of 4 each) are shooting at the flanks of the enemy front line. I would focus 4-6 units from both groups to fire on the same enemy unit until it is significantly depleted. The pendulum movement of the Sipahi across the enemy's front would mean that 2 units would have to be switched from supporting the left flankers and then the right as the Sipahi moved out of range of support for one flanking group and then the other. Slightly complex to manage maybe.

If the enemy unit is depleted, I would then attempt a lure, by charging and engaging that unit and one or two others, allowing the enemy to send these units into retreat, which could result in a rout, or allowing the enemy to pursue. Which could result in an isolation of the depleted unit which would then present an opportunity to bag (surround and annihilate).

Salute !

[Doug-Thompson]

Those images are great, Sinan. Thanks for those and the kind compliments about the guide — especially since much of it consists of your images and ideas. The guide is a collaboration.

[Orda Khan]

I dont say I have no friendly fire. Yet, on the whole, it is still "economic" to do it... every war has casualties...

But, with a bit of planning, you can choose places where the firing arc will be higher, so you shoot upwards.

Anyway, the whole visual experience is worth trying it... 500 or more horsemen whirling and swirling around under heavy dustclouds... like a tornado. :beam: A very lethal tornado, and a storm of arrow hailing from within it.
Hun Sárkány has described a worthwhile tactic. Massing your HA to target individual units in this way decimates that unit so quickly (you don't need to completely wipe it out) it allows you to remove a threat almost instantly. This was a very useful method in STW and MTW, where HA are static but with mobile HA the battlefield effect is wonderful.
I used this tactic recently against a Turkish army that fielded loads of Janissary archers, JHI and Ottoman inf; I must have had about 12 or more HA units attacking the Turkish right flank. With CC selected, all units gradually became one huge tornado that ate its way along the Turkish line. A very effective tactic when faced with a lot of hybrid units

........Orda

[Russ Mitchell]

Having real problems pulling the tactical suggestion in the game. With two units selected, they don't want to waypoint.

Some beginner error I'm committing?

[Doug-Thompson]

Re: Waypoints.

I'm stumped. Having more than one unit should make no difference. I'll check on this the next time I'm home, but I won't be home until Friday at the earliest. :( I've waypointed multiple units before, however. Can somebody else help out here?

[Shahed]

Having real problems pulling the tactical suggestion in the game. With two units selected, they don't want to waypoint.

Some beginner error I'm committing?

For waypointing:

1. Select your group.
2. Hold shift and right click the waypoints on the battle map.


That's it. The units should now move to the next waypoint immediately after reaching the first etc. However, there is a minor delay for reforming in between waypoints.

[Russ Mitchell]

Yep, that's what I did... the single-unit "waypoint it, then click RUN!!!" method works pretty well (though I don't get what the cantabrian circle adds to the affair.. I didn't get run-shoot-run-circle-go over there-run-shoot or anything like that).

But with two groups selected, I got to see their positions, and no new movement. Maybe I wasn't being patient enough with unit reformation...

[Shahed]

CC is to make it harder to hit your HA with missile. It is also for playing "style" running, circling, shooting, running.... etc.

Perhaps they did'nt run and circle and shoot maybe because you did'nt activate CC at waypoint 1. You have to activate the special ability Cantabrian Circle once you are at your desired location. Perhaps you did'nt get movement in between waypoints, maybe because the unit was not reformed.

I don't know why you did'nt get the desired result, I'd advise to read the initial post on CC again. If you follow the steps, one by one, it should work.

Wish I could do a video of it, that would be much easier. Can't afford the time unfortunately. If you have any questions fire away.

[Russ Mitchell]

No problem. I'll try it again with multiples, and be careful to wait for reformation before picking the next one...

[Lorenzo_H]

A short remark on the arrangement of cavalry archer forces on the battlefield:

I found that extreme concentration of firepower is best.

This tactic (I allow myself to name it thus, but it is not one :beam: ) I developed against other horse-archer armies. What I did was to have all HA units in one general place, let them run in circles and have all of them fire at the very same enemy unit. After 300-400 arrows, there is nothing left of that unit, so I picked an other one. Then an other one... and so on.

This way, the enemy's mobile archers were killed off in the 1s minute of the battle, while I were suffering 10%-20%-30% casualties. (note that I usually deploy half as many units as the enemy) The enemy infantry and melee cavalry was the usual walk at the market after this "process".

It is very chaotic, very inefficient, but your army is far more easier to mobilize on the battlefield and battles are won quicker too. :2thumbsup: I like it.
This is how I use Jinettes, often against the enemy general's bodyguard - an excellent way to get rid of him.

[Orda Khan]

Waypointing should work. Look for the little red positional markers.
I've not experienced a problem with it but I do know that orders fail to reach all units in a group sometimes, though I've not seen this happen with HA

......Orda

[Doug-Thompson]

No problem. I'll try it again with multiples, and be careful to wait for reformation before picking the next one...


Did you turn skirmish off?

[Russ Mitchell]

Yup. I'm guessing that I wasn't patient enough while waiting for them to reform. I originally figured I could simply get them to keep moving through each waypoint, rather than doing the dippy "let's form into a square" deal at each waypoint...

[Boyar Karhunkynsi]

A 50/50 mix of Cossack Cavalry and Dvor Cavalry with about 4-6 units of Dsmtd. Boyar Sons is the most effective army I have used. I slaughtered everything the Byzantines had on the Balkan Peninsula, save Constantinople with this simple mix.
I know the Vardariotai gave me a lot of trouble, but rarely do the Byz AI use more than a couple of units of them. The Dvor Cav. are too slow to deal with them, so the Cossack Cav. comes into play. I find that with three units of Cossack Cavalry shooting the Vardars down, they quickly rout, or are destroyed. This can be happening while your Dvor Cav. is slaughtering the Byz Infantry, or Archers. The Boyar Sons will have little trouble dealing with anything left, especially as the Dvor Cav. can make very effective Heavy(ish)-Meduim melee cavalry.

Basically, Russian H/A's own all (except the Kazak...).

-Max

[TheJace]

Impress guide. But how do you best use HAs and infantry skirmishers togather. I'm interested because I am playing as the turks and they seem to have good examples of both types.

[Doug-Thompson]

Impress guide. But how do you best use HAs and infantry skirmishers togather. I'm interested because I am playing as the turks and they seem to have good examples of both types.

A fair question, but not one that's been thoroughly explored.

[Chaos Cornelius lucius]

Playing as Turks, a 'perfect' army type that I found very useful was

6-8 fast HA
3-4 turkish archers, or ottoman inf
3-4 saracens or Jan HI
Selection of heavy cav, or a couple of Alan mercenary cav if available.

I would split my HA equally and place them wide on the wings, my archers lined up in the centre with infantry close behind, and heavy cav in close support on the flanks. At the start of the battle i would send the HA around the flanks of the enemy dealing with any enemy HA or light cav in the process. This is usually fairly easy as with 3 or 4 HA in a group on each flank you usually outnumber the enemy light cav and can destroy it fairly easily. With my HA now behind or on the enemies flanks shooting at there rear I will start to bring up my main army to archer range. I find that concentrating arrow fire on units causes lots of casualties very quickly and means you can reduce the enemy army a lot faster than having one missile unit shooting at one enemy unit.
Whilst doing this I will be looking to pick off enemy units with my fast cav (usually missile units that have strayed a little to far away from the main body of the army), and charging enemy units in the rear with my HA if I get the chance. Whilst they only have a low charge rating, HA units are very effective when hitting an enemy unit in the back, and there fast speed means you can get the charge in and be away before the enemy cav can catch you. It takes a bit of practice and concentration, but if you can get several units of cavalry doing this at the same time on different flanks, you can take apart an enemy army with little cost to your own troops.(it's also quite comical watching the enemy cavalry rushing to and fro trying to intercept your charges:laugh4: )
When my troops have reduced the enemy army enough I will usually send in my heavy cav with a frontal charge and charge with my HA from the flanks and rear at the same time. This usually routs the enemy fairly quickly, and my HA and light cav have fun picking off all the routing units.
My infantry in this type of army is usually just used for insurance for if the enemy charges me, and as a holding line until I can get my cavalry round the flanks of the enemy.
As an aside, when concentrating you missile fire I find it is better to go for the enemies light troops as these will take casualties a lot faster than heavily armoured units, and with these light units reduced or out of the way it is a lot easier to concentrate your troops on the enemy heavy units.
Hope this helps.
Luc

[TheJace]

The key to getting the most out of missle troops is to fire as many shots as possible. So in this respect is it better to use them cautiously by moving them out of enemy fire (which decreases the number of volleys per minute but maintains a high number of shoots per volley)? Or is it better to use missle troops less cautiously by having them stay their ground even in enemy fire (which increases the number of volleys per minute, but more rapidly diminishes the number of shots per volley)?:book:

[Whacker]

A thought that occured to me while re-reading this great guide.

Videos. We need videos.

Replay files are great but they're always invalidated whenever the next game revision comes out. I'm talking real .avi videos. Doug's guide is outstanding but sometimes words can't do justice to the tactics he's describing, hell I'm having trouble envisioning and (properly) acting out the various methods. Sooo.... Can we get some of our more talented HA nutballs to whip up some tutorial videos? It doesn't have to be narrated or subcaptioned, just something we can look at. You'd have to use something like FRAPS to do the captures, or perhaps some other tool I'm not aware of that can do this. Anyone else think this is a good idea?

[Doug-Thompson]

Obviously, videos are an excellent idea. Sinan recommended that very thing, too. I wish I knew how to make them.

[Doug-Thompson]

Chaos Cornelius lucius:

Very nice description. We need more of that sort of thing, of combined arms tactics.

TheJace:

I prefer getting in there and shooting close. Obviously, you want to be on higher ground to maximize your fire while minimizing the effect of the other guy's, to concentrate and to keep foot archers moving if possible.

All in all, however, I prefer getting in close.

[Whacker]

Obviously, videos are an excellent idea. Sinan recommended that very thing, too. I wish I knew how to make them.

It's settled then. Some thoughts... FRAPS is the only tool I know of that has the ability to make avi videos like we're talking about. There's a free version but it's crippled, the full version is $37. Unless you have a desire for it, I kinda doubt you'll want to shell out for that Doug. You could get the free version and run it but I'd like to do this right the first time. If you DO decide to buy the full ver, I could easily walk you through setting it up and using it.

My other idea is to exchange replay files and I'll make the video, as I happen to own a full ver of FRAPS. I suggest we wait until v1.2 to do this, and we or whomever else does this needs to ensure that we're using the bone stock exact same version of the game, no mods or tweaks. This way the replays will work exactly as originally done.

If there are other free tools that work like FRAPS then someone should please point them out. If there are and they work I can walk you Doug or whomever else through setting them up.

The last thing I'd like to request in this, and please don't take this the wrong way folks, but personally I'd like to see only the very best of the best do this for us. These vids are going to be used as examples and in my view they should be as close to perfect as we can get them.

:bow:

[Doug-Thompson]

Just a bit of light editing after the patch: Straggling and sloppy formations are much less of a problem in v1.02. Also, other units now make better router chasers. Missile cavalry still retain some advantages as chasers, but their clear superiority there is not what it used to be. The need for open formation during chases is lessened, also.

[Shahed]

Thanks for the update Doug.

I've given the Egyptians a try as well, and actually I think they're awesome for all cavalry. Probably outclass the Turks with the Mamluks. I'm not 100% sure yet, but I saw they have sturdier cavalry in early game. However it's worthy to note that I use Turcoman heavy armies (which are light cavalry), so naturally when you take an Egyptian all cavalry army, and have a few Mamluks the difference in early (green units, no exp) melee is quite remarkable.

BTW I've got a nice image here (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1531396&postcount=42) that all missile cavalry fans might enjoy.

[Doug-Thompson]

Thanks for the update Doug.

I've given the Egyptians a try as well, and actually I think they're awesome for all cavalry. Probably outclass the Turks with the Mamluks. I'm not 100% sure yet, but I saw they have sturdier cavalry in early game. However it's worthy to note that I use Turcoman heavy armies (which are light cavalry), so naturally when you take an Egyptian all cavalry army, and have a few Mamluks the difference in early (green units, no exp) melee is quite remarkable.

BTW I've got a nice image here (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1531396&postcount=42) that all missile cavalry fans might enjoy.


Quite right. Mameluk archers are better melee cavalry than Arab Cavalry, except for the expense. Also, they are not as dependent on lining up a perfect charge because they are so strong in melee with that mace, which has an anti-armor bonus. Great all-around cavalry unit.

Re: The image link.

A thing of beauty is a joy forever.

[Gray Beard]

I have found that a useful way to use Skythikons, especially early in the game when the Byzantine troops are very poor is to pair them up with town militia.

I set the Skythikons out in front of the TM but just beyond the range of enimy archers and attract the attention of an infantry unit. I then beat a slow, orderly retreat letting the swordmen or spearmen come close to catching me. I then run behind the TM and setup as archers while the TM absorb the charge of the depleted unit. Before the TM route I run back around and attack from the flank.

This can work well for the Byzantines because their troops appear to cost much less to maintain so you can have just hordes of them

[Doug-Thompson]

I have found that a useful way to use Skythikons, especially early in the game when the Byzantine troops are very poor is to pair them up with town militia.

I set the Skythikons out in front of the TM but just beyond the range of enimy archers and attract the attention of an infantry unit. I then beat a slow, orderly retreat letting the swordmen or spearmen come close to catching me. I then run behind the TM and setup as archers while the TM absorb the charge of the depleted unit. Before the TM route I run back around and attack from the flank.

This can work well for the Byzantines because their troops appear to cost much less to maintain so you can have just hordes of them


I wish I had the figures to back this up, but horse archer fire is generally less accurate when firing backwards, while galloping away.

What you've described, Gray Beard, is a thoroughly sound tactic. That's just one factor I thought you ought to know. The advantages probably outweigh that one disadvantage.

========

Added a link to a thread on Reiter tactics and made some more comments on 1.02. Also, consider the impact of fixing the shield bug on the Polish Streczy.

[Gray Beard]

It works well for me because I have a numb hand from being run over by a drunk several years ago. Thus I need to see the keyboard when typing or working the controls because otherwise my left hand gets lost. This tactic slows the battle down because the spearmen don't move much. I also don't have to plan on the run provided that one of the paired HA & Spear units don't get overwhelmed by several enemy units. It can get quite scary to do this because it works best when you spread your army out encourage to the computer to spread it's army out. HA have problems against a disciplined army that with lots of foot archers and spearmen who refuse to charge.

On timed battles I can also occasionally get the entire opposition force to chase three or four groups of HA around the board until the time runs out. If I am defending a draw is sometimes enough because I have more forces coming.

Dart in shoot a volley of arrows run away until they stop chasing you and then repeat. You have be very conscious of the edge of the map but if you fighting an all infantry or army or one with slow cavalry you can normally not get trapped by having units come from different directions which will pull the opponent back and forth across the center of the board. This is difficult because most HA units have a low moral and you have to keep them from breaking

The object isn't to win but not to lose and to kill more of them than they kill of me. The AI doesn't seem to understand this concept.

[Doug-Thompson]

It works well for me because I have a numb hand from being run over by a drunk several years ago. Thus I need to see the keyboard when typing or working the controls because otherwise my left hand gets lost. This tactic slows the battle down because the spearmen don't move much. I also don't have to plan on the run provided that one of the paired HA & Spear units don't get overwhelmed by several enemy units. It can get quite scary to do this because it works best when you spread your army out encourage the computer to spread it's army out.

Gray Beard, the next time somebody complains to me that HA take too much micro, I'm going to quote this post. I continue to be amazed at how many people say that HA are too much of a hassle to manage.


On timed battles I can also occasionally get the entire opposition force to chase three or four groups of HA around the board until the time runs out. If I am defending a draw is sometimes enough because I have more forces coming.

Done the same thing myself many times, although I don't play timed battles much anymore. I just run around until I'm out of arrows, then withdraw.

I remember one game where the AI had Antioch and it was a cash cow. I wanted to know what kind of garrison it had, so I besieged the city -- with two under-strength HA units.

It took the AI a full turn to figure out how week the "besiegers" were. The garrrison sallied, and I got a complete view of their make up. I shot away all my arrows and left.


Dart in shot a volley of arrows run away until they stop chasing you and then repeat. You have be very conscious of the edge of the map but if you fighting an all infantry or army or one with slow cavalry you can normally not get trapped by having units come from different directions which will pull the opponent back and forth across the center of the board. This is difficult because most HA units have a low morale and you have to keep them from breaking.

Classic HA stuff, correctly applied.


The object isn't to win but not to lose and to kill more of them than they kill of me. The AI doesn't seem to understand this concept.

Exactly. I remember one battle in Rome: Total War where a huge Selucid army, mostly of phanlanxes, came at me. I was the Parthians. I killed Selucids until I literally ran out of arrows. Instead of charging the rest in melee and losing valuable Persian Cav, I simply withdrew. So techincally I "lost" the battle. I wiped out the remaining Selucids the next turn.

[Vladimir]

Someone remind me if northern Italians get mounted x-bows. I’m having a hell of a time on VH/VH and need to start using raids instead of siege defenses.

[Doug-Thompson]

Someone remind me if northern Italians get mounted x-bows. I’m having a hell of a time on VH/VH and need to start using raids instead of siege defenses.

Yes, in the high era but you need a marksman's range IIRC. Will check and send a PM.

[Tambarskjelve]

Wow, I just became aware of this guide, and promptly read it.
Thank you Doug-thompson, I take off all my hats and bow deep.

[Doug-Thompson]

Thanks, Tambarskjelve, but this really is a collection of the ideas of a lot of people on the forum. I did a lot more reading than writing on this guide.

After all:
Copy from one, it's plagiarism; copy from two, it's research

[Shahed]

HAHAHA HAHAHAHAH ! Good quote... LMAO.

[Vladimir]

Doug! You're a genius. It took 15 turns to get 4 units of Turcopolines but I got them. Two for the Dodge and two for the heir. I used them in a battle and they flow like water. You just to exercise exterme caution when using them because there are no replacements.

Now I just have to wait for everyone to attack. If you have missile superiority in the field the enemy will always attack letting you choose the terrain. That will make it a lot easier to use the horse archers. I just wish their range wasn't so short.

[Doug-Thompson]

@ Vladimir: I'm glad (and quite relieved) that it worked.

=======

@ everyone else

What Vladimir is referring to here is a strategy option for Venice that could be posted on the guide to that faction if it works.

Vladimir needed some HA support since everybody anywhere near north Italy kept attacking him on his VH/VH campaign with infantry-heavy armies. He asked by private message if any were available.

Well, Venice owns Crete. They could send a general by ship from there to the relatively remote, bandit-controlled provinces of southern Asia Minor and recruit some HA mercenaries there. Bringing them all the way back to Italy must have taken a while, but the spear militia armies of Europe are their food of choice. Got to be careful against those milita bowmen, though.

[Doug-Thompson]

Incredibly, I wrote this monstrous guide and never once mentioned shield use. I also got tired of seeing my four or five different spellings of "Mamluk" in this guide, so fixed that finally.

I rewrote Section 13 to include shields. To spare anybody from having to search through the guide again, here's the revised part for those interested.

13. CIRCLING, FRIENDLY FIRE, SHIELD USE AND STRAGGLING


CIRCLING

Cantabrian circle goes clockwise for a reason. This way, the units’ shields (assuming there are any) are on the outside of the circle. The unit members closest to the enemy and taking fire always have their shields turned toward that fire. That, and the constant movement, make circling units less vulnerable to enemy missiles. An HA unit will defeat a foot archer unit of equal quality when the horses are circling, generally speaking.

The bad news is that maneuver tires your horses and reduces the accuracy of your own fire. If the enemy is short on missile troops, deadlier fire from units that aren't circling will result in less wasted ammo and more kills, at the cost of a few more casualties. Better to kill all the enemy spears and lose a couple HA than lose a lot more men in melee to units that survived your missed arrows....

SHIELD USE

Turning your shield toward the enemy seems like a no-brainer, especially for missile cavalry with no armor. However, it’s not as simple as that. Remember, the side of a horse is a very big target compared to its front. What you gain in shield protection you can easily lose by presenting a bigger target.

There’s no simple rule of thumb other than this: Get in a good firing position first, then worry about shield protection if you have time. Most often the shield facing will work itself out. For instance, if you’re approaching an enemy missile unit from behind — the ideal firing position — and just a bit on his weapon side, your shield will be in the right place.

One warning: If you are in a running fight with another missile cavalry unit and both of you are headed in the same direction, the unit on the right will have shield protection (if they have shields) and the other won’t.

Note how autoskirmish will turn your unit's backside to the enemy and leave it there, negating any shield benefit. How much you do about that depends greatly on how much micromanagement you’re willing to commit.

[Gray Beard]

To turn this thread around a little bit.

I have defended against large numbers of HA using cheap spearmen and Trebizond archers.

Trebizond archers have a longer range with their bows, and better armor and melee stats. While not the equals of a top notch sword or spear unit the can easily overcome the poorly armored and low moral HA unit. If you put a cheap Town militia or Peasant unit between them and the HA's the computer will often times attack the the spear unit which waste arrows on weaker units instead of reducing the the truly dangerous units shooting at them. If the computer gets close enough to shoot at th Treibzond archers have the spears charge. Town Militias can stand toe to tow with many HA units, especially if the HA unit is depleted


Incidentally. I only normally control battles in the Custom Battle mode. In the Campaign game the the armies get too big for my numb hands to keep up with.

[Shahed]

I made some sigs for this guide, 2 of them edited by the legendary Crypel (TWC) they are not 100% ready yet.

In this one the red is blood, meant to emulate post/during battle conditions.
https://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m78/ShahedK/M2TW%20Signatures/Egypt_SigM1.jpg

https://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m78/ShahedK/M2TW%20Signatures/tempsig.jpg

https://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m78/ShahedK/M2TW%20Signatures/tempsig2.jpg

If you like the guide you could use the sigs...
What do you guys think ? If they are appreciated I'll resize and rehost.

[Doug-Thompson]

Beautiful work as usual, Sinan, but I still like the original sig picture you made. I've grown more fond of it daily.

[Shahed]

Great ! :D Glad you like that one.

Wait till you see some cinematic editor shots of those guys. Now those will be pretty. BTW I meant if others who read the guide and like it, they can use these sigs, if they want. the idea is to havesome standard signature image for the guide which anyone can pick up. I don't know if you've seen this before, it's a standard for most projects. For example if that cav video mentioned earlier was ever made I'd make a banner for it too (hehe!!).

Here's the original image for those signatures (my desktop!):

https://img376.imageshack.us/img376/4216/forsinanct5.jpg

[Doug-Thompson]

Gorgeous. Absolutely gorgeous.

[Goalie]

Very nice guide guys, I actually read all of it. Although I almost always play multiplayer, I was actually inspired to play single player just to use HA. Also, very nice picture you just posted Sinan, its now my background as well.

[Doug-Thompson]

Thanks, Goalie.

[Shahed]

Glad you like it goalie.

That image has raised the bar for image editing in the M2:TW world. I've helped create a monster. Now everyone who likes image editing wantys to create images like that. OTOH we should now see more Eastern cavalry pics from others... HEHE !

[McIwoo]

An exellent guide for my favorite units. :book:

Thx a bunch for the guide!

[Doug-Thompson]

You're quite welcome. Thanks for the kind words, McIwoo.

P.S. Added something to the section on chasing routers:

"HA are generally quite fast. There are 20 fast cavalry units in this game, the very fastest units of all. Of those, 16 are missile cavalry. Obviously, being fast helps in a chase. So does good stamina, something most missile cavalry has."

[Doug-Thompson]

Added a link to Sinan's video that demonstrates how this is supposed to be done.

Also noted that autoskirmish does not turn off when you order a melee attack if and only if the missile cavalry unit you order into the attack is your general's (commanding captain) unit. I think this is new to 1.2.

Finally, I owe an apology to a previous poster who couldn't get waypointing to work with groups. He was right, it doesn't work with groups. I should have known

[Shahed]

Oh, I'm not sure how long that video will be up. Might need to find it a permanent home. Sendspace has 14 days limit IIRC.
Also would the 1.20 Timurids vs Egypt replay be useful to include in the guide ?

[Doug-Thompson]

Oh, I'm not sure how long that video will be up. Might need to find it a permanent home. Sendspace has 14 days limit IIRC.
Also would the 1.20 Timurids vs Egypt replay be useful to include in the guide ?


I'll update it when it has a permanent home, or delete the reference if there's not one. I don't want you to go to any expense for this, Sinan.

Also, a 1.2, Timurids vs. Egypt would be great.

[Rebellious Waffle]

Hello, all! Just read this excellent guide while fishing for ideas to use in a Byzantine Empire campaign. (The last heirs of the Roman Empire, facing enemies on all sides, slowly becoming obsolete in the face of onrushing barbarian hordes, yet dreaming of a new birth for old glory... with horse archers! What can I say, I love 'em to death.)

Anyhoo, maybe I missed it the first time around, but I think there's an important part of how to use all-cavalry armies that could be added to this guide. It's more of a strategic thing, but it's brought me great success:


FLEEING THE FIELD
Or, the Wicked Art of Losing with Style

So many targets, so little time. Occasionally you'll run into an army that keeps on ticking, even after you shoot them full of holes and run out of arrows. When that happens, it turns into a melee fight -- and chances are the enemy has much better melee units than you do. Don't like the look of those spearmen? Not eager for a tangle with the Templars? Take a deep breath, relax, and run like a little girl.

Unlike when you use infantry armies, the withdraw button is your friend. There's no sense in letting a battle turn into the sort of fight your enemy understands; your missile cavalry are faster than pretty much everything on the field, so you can flee with negligible losses if you suffer them at all. Take them on again in the next turn, when you've got a new set of arrows burning a hole in your quiver. Even if you're pursued, your enemy is playing straight into your hands; you begin the next battle with new arrows. Since you minimized your own casualties, you essentially get to replay the last battle except with fewer enemies to kill on the second time around. If you paid attention to the advice Gray Beard has collated about cavalry tactics, the enemy should have a much-reduced compliment of missile units. Trash the survivors on the second time around and lay into the defenseless melee fighters.

An example of this principle at work: on H/H I had whittled Venice down to only Irakalion. This was a problem, because I hadn't laid any pressure on Crete during the whole campaign, and they'd managed to put two full-stack armies in the region. All but three groups of Skythikons, two Byzantine Cavalry and two Vardariotai were tied up fighting Turkey and Hungary, so I sent them out with a general and recruited mercenary horse archers on site at Irakalion. Their crossbowmen and peasant archers were a problem, meaning that during each engagement I lost about ten to twenty-five percent of my forces; the Venetians lost a like proportion, but that added up to more soldiers because their force was about four times larger. Over six turns or so, I kept sending in the horses and wreaking as much havoc as possible, reinforcing my cavalry group with new units by boat as the casualties mounted. After half a dozen turns the Venetians were down to thirty percent of their starting forces, almost none of whom were professional soldiers because they had no castles at which to retrain. My casualty rates dropped as they lost archers; theirs rose as the ratio of my force compliment to theirs approached parity. By the time I reinforced the assault force with two new Vardariotai on turn four, Venice was in a bind. Two turns later they had lost their general, their armies, and had nothing but a skeleton crew manning the walls of the city. Claiming the last bastion, even though I had started at a massive numerical disadvantage, became simple.

This seems like it should be fairly uncommon, because you don't always have turns to throw away harrying the foe. But you do, if your enemy is marching into your land and you want to make his life a misery before he lays siege. Why let him bring his full force compliment to bear if you can shave some of it off before the real fighting starts? Remember how the Russians beat Napoleon, and how Arminius beat Varrus. There's no sense in letting your opponent have an open battle if he does best under those conditions. Make him pay for every step. He'll miss those soldiers dearly when you counterattack.

[Shahed]

Welcome Waffle ! That's a good post !


I'll update it when it has a permanent home, or delete the reference if there's not one. I don't want you to go to any expense for this, Sinan.

Also, a 1.2, Timurids vs. Egypt would be great.

That's no problem mate. I already posted a replay here:
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=85870

That is the one I was referrring to, is it any use for the guide ?

[Doug-Thompson]

@ Rebellious Waffle

Actually, your plowing some new ground here. Guerilla tactics worked in Rome: Total War, but nobody had really confirmed it for MTW2.

So congratulations are in order. You've confirmed something important.

I'll expand the "Strategy Map Considerations" section to include some of this. Thanks.

[Rebellious Waffle]

A second part that got lost from the original post 'cos I took too long writing and my cookie was reset:


CAVALRY SIEGES
Or, They Want it When?

Horse archers are my favorite siege engines.

Send a few groups over to bother a heavily fortified enemy city. Doesn't even have to be a full-stack army with a general, just enough to do some damage without looking scary. Chances are that they'll laugh at your pathetic display and come marching out the gates to teach you a thing or two about how real men do a siege. As long as you were smart and didn't pick a city with lots of ranged units in the militia, it won't be long before they realize how much nicer it would have been to stay indoors.

Remember that you win a city by default if the garrison are all killed. In all-missile cavalry sieges, my experience is that this happens a lot. Pour arrows into the foe as he leaves the gates; when sallying, he's got the same problems you do when you enter the gates during a siege. It's pretty much impossible to overshoot or undershoot the mark, since the enemy soldiers are in one long, densely-packed line. Using the naval analogy from the guide, you've effectively crossed their T before the fight even started. As they deploy, melt into the surrounding hills to get them away from any nasty archer and ballista towers they might have on the city walls and treat the engagement like any other missile-cavalry fight.

Best-case scenario: you slaughter the opponent as they run for the safety of the walls, ravaging their garrison forces and possibly even taking the gates. Gates open for routing soldiers, and having your cavalry in amongst the stragglers gives you gate control just as if you'd taken the walls with a battering ram. From there you can pick apart the vastly reduced garrison force in house-to-house fighting, presuming they didn't all die in the initial sally. Defeating the enemy this way means you start the next turn with control of the city, just as if you'd blown the gates open with a trebuchet, except that your army moved into position with the speed of a cavalry force! Yay blitzkrieg!

Even if everything doesn't pan out perfectly, don't sweat it. Every casualty you inflict in the sally is a soldier they don't have during your assault on the walls. Just turn the conflict into a hit-and-run battle and run down the timer until the enemy gets bored and returns to the town square. Once that happens, pop open a soda and pull up your favorite book -- the battle timer doesn't call "draw" by itself, and can take a while even with time running at triple speed. No sense in making the fight into a melee engagement if you don't have to. If you need to flee the field and lift the siege, that's fine too; capturing the place was icing on the cake, not a do-or-die proposition. Your opponent can only retrain units so fast, and every retraining he does is a kick to the bankroll. Put the place back under siege next turn.

This strategy doesn't just work on border towns. One of my favorite techniques against the Turks with Byzantium is to run past their frontier cities and strike a juicy interior target, take it over, raze the buildings for cash and bug out before the enemy sends a large retaliatory force. When they take the (vastly reduced) city, bring back your cavalry contingent and lay siege again. Even if you don't massacre the retaliatory force you keep it pinned for a few turns while your main assault group mops up the frontier provinces. They likely pulled troops from the frontier to get at your cavalry, which makes your life that much easier when you conquer their now-vulnerable settlements. Plus, if you draw your cavalry back to the main force the enemy has to spend lots of money to rebuild the city you razed before you take it again. Savage the army, break the bank and steal the initiative at the same time!

[Shahed]

LOL I've been saying the very thing above about siegs for ages, but nobody gets it. I keep seeing posts about how inadequate an all cavalry army is in sieges (ridiculous as it sounds). I realise though that I never phrased it as eloquently as you. Thanks !

BRILLIANT.

BTW what I always do even with short posts, is copy paste into notepad as I go. Can save a lot of time.

[Rebellious Waffle]

Just did some experimenting with guerilla tactics in a H/H Russian campaign. Poland went down quickly, but I'd managed to leave Iasi undergarrisoned when the Hungarians sent a full-stack army to lay siege. Not coolness.

Hence the guerilla tactics. I sent my kazaks out to harry to foe, following a defensive version of what I said earlier about cavalry sieges. I lost about ten percent of my force, while the Hungarian general lost about a third. Meanwhile, I sent five units of kazaks and one unit of Boyar Sons to the Hungarian starting settlement just north of Sofia, catching two units of Feudal Knights that were on their way to reinforce the Hungarian force at Iasi. Following one of my personal guerilla doctrines (Thou Shalt Not use Troops with Mixed Firing Distances in a Hit and Run Attack) I sent in the kazaks first; inflicted fifty-five percent casualties, losing two men myself. Using the one unit of Boyar Sons next, I inflicted fifty percent casualties on the survivors and lost none. The end result: the Hungarians' compliment of Feudal Knights was cut to a quarter of its starting size in one turn, after which I re-united my stack and laid siege to the Hungarian town to tick off the garrison.

The general besieging Iasi broke off to deal with the rear-area raid, allowing me to retrain my garrison there and send reinforcements from Kiev and Vilinus. Dropping my own siege, I whittled down another Hungarian stack (Feudal Knights, Dismounted Feudal Knights, Spear Militia) to the Northwest.

Hungary put Iasi back under siege, and I made life inconvenient by sally-sniping and starting my siege again. The result was the same, except that their general's invasion force was down to less than half a stack, lots of expensive units were dead, Iasi's garrison was at full strength, and the silly buggers tried to sally on my siege, which meant their city garrison was down to half strength too. Result: Hungary's military power is emasculated, at next to no cost to myself.

Conclusion: guerilla tactics definitely work in Medieval 2. :duel:

[DeathBUA]

First post on here.....but I've lurked since R:TW, anyways, I've found guerilla tactics work quite well in M2:TW, actually I'm surprised some of you don't use them more often.

What I usually do is something modified from Rebellious Waffle, in that with the Turkish campaign I just finished on M/M I've use Sipahis or Turkomans to rush up to the enemy under cover of long range archers usually in the early game, Turkish Archers, then later Jannissary or Ottoman Archer/Infantry. With Jannissary HI to cover and maybe a naffatun or two to really break their morale

Harass the enemy with your horse archer, get them to chase, commit and get spread apart slowly retreating towards your infantry archers, at some point they'll be under fire from 2 different sources. You might lose a few HA's to friendly fire but thats ok. By the time your HA's reach your line of infantry the enemy will be tired, beaten down in number and probably have low morale, then I'd simply rush in with any and all infantry. 95% of the time worked like a charm with minimal losses on my side, usually 5-10%.

This can actually work in the late game as well with factions that don't necessarily have HA's. Use mounted X-bow men or anything mounted that shoots missles really, Jinetes, Reiters whatever.

Or if you are really feeling guerilla, just follow Waffle's lead.

[Rebellious Waffle]

'S like Old Ironsides used to say: "Never send your enemies home in defeat when you can send them home in a bucket."

[Doug-Thompson]

DeathBUA:

That was one of the few descriptions of integrated infantry/HA tactics I've seen yet.

[DeathBUA]

Doug-

Well its not that hard to use integrated tactics, I just hate feeling like I'm spamming one unit and that the majority of my army is that one unit. The Turks are MUCH more than HAs and JHI . Once you hit the higher level infantry with the turks, betweens Jannissary Archers, Ottoman Infantry, and Naffatuns, you can have some truly devastating armies without even the need for HAs even against some of the slower western european armies.

Especially concerning Naffatuns in conjunction with HAs...wow thats a deadly combo. But who would have thought of that? And the catch is even if the Naffatuns get engaged in melee that can take on most infantry , and if you start losing men quickly, just flank with the HAs and charge.

[Doug-Thompson]

True, it's not hard to use integrated tactics. It's just so few people seem to do it. That's probably just a wrong impression of mine. On the forum, it all sounds like "infantry players" and "cavalry players." There's a thread in the Citadel forum now where more integrated tactics players are speaking up. I'm glad.

I love Naffatuns too. I'm really missing them, and javelin troops, in my Hungarian campaign. Love those hussars and Hungarian Nobles, though.

[John_Longarrow]

“Down the tube”

This is a tactic that can work with archers, but works much better with mounted archers. You set up your missile troops in two parallel lines perpendicular to the enemy force. These should be spaced far enough apart that they won’t be hitting each other as they fire. You then move a high value unit, preferably a Generals Bodyguard unit, close enough to the enemy to get them to follow. You then lead them down “The tube” while your missile troops pour on the arrows.

I’ve found this to be very useful when fighting small force battles as I can often empty the quivers of my HA’s this way without taking casualties. I also have the option of charging the rear of troops trying to catch my general.

NOTE: If you can set up in woods first, this can be decisive. I’ve lead a force of 4 quality rebel units (including 1 Chivalric knights if I remember right) down a tube of 4 hidden horse archers towards my waiting Generals BG. I turned on all 4 units Fire at Will as I charged the Chivalric Knights with my General. It was an instant route.

Another general missile trick that works well for missile cav is the classic V. Form up your cav in two lines, one perpendicular to the other and use something to bait the enemy into the middle. If needed, move the outermost flanking troops in towards the enemy to get some lethal cross fire.

If the enemy keeps going forward and you can lead them through the bottom of the V, you spread out your archers at the bottom while the ones flanking at the top come in, once more forming the same V but facing the opposite direction.

Both of these tactical tricks point out something very important about using missile cav. You do not need and do not rely upon protecting the flanks of your formations. You also don’t view troop that are between yours as a problem but as an advantage. This is something that confuses many traditional “Infantry” type players. You do not have a center, right, and left. You simply have intersecting fields of fire that you are aiming. Your goal is to get as many enemy troops into your convergent fields of fire as possible, preferably shooting down the lengths of each formation.

Once you get your mind around this concept, Missile cav become much easier to use.

[Doug-Thompson]

Both of these tactical tricks point out something very important about using missile cav. You do not need and do not rely upon protecting the flanks of your formations. You also don’t view troop that are between yours as a problem but as an advantage. This is something that confuses many traditional “Infantry” type players. You do not have a center, right, and left. You simply have intersecting fields of fire that you are aiming. Your goal is to get as many enemy troops into your convergent fields of fire as possible, preferably shooting down the lengths of each formation.

Once you get your mind around this concept, Missile cav become much easier to use.

Well said.

[Doug-Thompson]

Added some stuff about fighting, withdrawing and fighting again on the strategy map. Here it is:


One strategy-map technique all-cavalry armies can do better than others is "shoot and scoot," or "losing with style," to quote Rebellious Waffle. They engage a stack, withdraw, and attack again. Be advised, however, that you MUST HAVE SOME MOVEMENT ALLOWANCE LEFT to be able to withdraw after a battle at your own will. Also, you will "lose" the battle, even if you kill 1,000 enemies without loss, and the "defeat" could cost your general a trait decrease.

Added a small bit on how to kill small, helpless bandits and other rouges without taking friendly fire:


There's an even simpler variation of (grinding) I'll call the "firing squad." Sometimes, you have an easy bandit-killing that you just want to get over with without taking any casualties. Put your missile cavalry in a column, in squares. March them right past your unfortunate victim, either on his shieldless side or even on the shielded side if there's a height advantage. This way, there is no friendly fire risk.

Finally, I revised the tactics section on Mounted Crossbowmen. This shieldless unit seems less useful after the 1.2 patch.

I'll put in something about the technique of "luring" your enemy into a shooting gallery of HA later.

[Guyus Germanicus]

Master Thompson,
Have been reading your guide and your comments. And much appreciate your insights into the game. There's much to learn. Many thanks,

Guyus

[Doug-Thompson]

You're quite welcome, Guyus. Glad you found it useful.

[Si GeeNa]

Great guide.

Was wondering if you have considered the intricacies of playing with General's Camera instead.

Missile Cav takes alot of micro-mgt which can only be possible under the Total War Cam. If you use General's Cam, you'll have some difficulty to pull your units exactly where they should go.

[Doug-Thompson]

Great guide.

Was wondering if you have considered the intricacies of playing with General's Camera instead.

Missile Cav takes alot of micro-mgt which can only be possible under the Total War Cam. If you use General's Cam, you'll have some difficulty to pull your units exactly where they should go.

A serious consideration, but I don't think it's impossible. For instance, I used to micro and hit the pause button a lot in MTW1. That lessened a lot once auto-skirmish started to work some in RTW. Now I line my guys up, click once behind the enemy formation and halt a couple of units that try to move through. The rest lap around the sides just fine.

Still, playing with gen-cam would be a challenge. You'd also have to risk your general more to see well enough to exercise control.

[Guyus Germanicus]

I have a problem that perhaps some M2TW veteran could provide some counsel on. And I apologize for the long screed, but I thought I needed to provide at least a limited description of how I'm playing the game.

I have been very frustrated in my game experience so far. I have always been short of cash regardless of which faction I've chosen to play. And, I've been suffering what I consider to be an inordinate number of casualities in my combats (usually when taking cities, but sometimes even in my open field combats.)

Mind you, this is not playing at the VH/VH level, I'm playing at the Easy level for both campaign and combat. I think part of my problem is that I'm still playing the game from an RTW perspective.

It appears to me that I may be taking the game pace much too slow and that I need to constantly 'move on' to the next city or castle just as soon as I conquer my latest settlement. At first I thought that I might be recruiting too many units for an army. For European armies, I try to have 1-2 archers, 2 cavalry of any type and a minimum of three infantry units with a general as a basic early game attack force. I feel this is a minimum size army that I need against rebel settlements of small or modest size.

With the Mamluks, :egypt: because the first couple of major rebel cities I encounter have huge occupying armies, I try to have 2 archer units, 3-4 infantry preferably saracens, 2 mumluk archers, 2 arab cav, and a general with 2 units of artillery, either ballistas or catapaults. I've learned to avoid fighting on the walls because M2TW gives the defenders an edge in combat on the walls. But I've noticed something else too. I can send top line infantry (Saracens) through the gates or a breach in the walls and the enemy's archers, and even peasants, are still whooping up on me big time. :wall:

Of course, units in M2TW move ponderously slow, even the cavalry, to the point that I'm thinking the choice of where one prepositions units is of utmost importance. Quick responding cavalry just doesn't exist, so if your infantry units are in trouble and your cavalry isn't REAL close, the infantry are bascially on their own. In fact, on several occasions I've found that I have to issue a command to a unit several times before it will respond. That's VERY frustrating. :smash:

I'm thinking that if I really want to reduce casualties in taking settlements I'm going to have to attack two or more sides of a city at once so that I can open breaches behind the main stream of defenders and attack them from front and rear at the same time. In RTW, I never had to do that. Am I really needing to go to all that trouble, or am I missing something? :dizzy2:

At best performance, I'm still suffering casualties 1 for every three or four defenders killed. But usually I'm suffering 1 for every two defenders. That means if the rebel garrison had 750 men, I'm suffering at least 250 casualties in my own army in some of my best combat performances. That's more than two full units of infantry attrited (written off) for just one battle. And sometimes I'm just breaking even. To me, that's very expensive, and it takes awhile to build an army back up after these mini-holocausts. I'm not used to suffering such high casualty rates. :no: Obviously any bottlenecks on the field of combat work to a defenders advantage. But still . . . :thumbsdown:

As for my cash problem, I have tried to practice rigorous economic development on both cities and castles to start out. First priority is dirt roads, followed by a religious building, then a port, then farms or grainery, then a military building. And of course, the next wall size for a city or castle always gets top priority before anything else. My key, however, is to get those farms/markets/ports built to get the cash flowing in. I also try to recruit any available merchants so they can get experience early. In spite of all my efforts, even on EASY mode, I'm always short of cash. I may have spikes where my account is temporarily high - say 10-15,000 florin. But then comes that next 6400 florin mosque that needs to be built ASAP. And two building projects later l'm back down to 1500 florin in my account wondering how I'm going to have money enough for that next settlement upgrade that's coming in 2 more turns. If you know what I mean? :help: When I look at the performance graphs for all factions, it appears that no one faction is ever making lots of money. Milan usually leads the pack in my games (I haven't taken them in a game yet.)

My guess is - I just can't take the military campaign at a slow pace. :whip: But after some of my pyrrhic victories, I have a lot of casualties to replace which I'm assuming is also one of my major expenses. And it's hard to move on to the next city when your army needs a major overhaul in replacements.

In any case, I'm starving for cash. Then I read these Guild posts from my compatriots about how they're rolling in dough, moving full stack armies around the board at VH/VH. And have two or three armies supporting each other. Good grief! If I have one army protecting a directional front for my faction, I'm lucky. I can't afford any more than that. And I usually having to throw together ad hoc an internal anti-insurgent force for the internal bandits.

I'm usually squeaking by with one or two spies on the map, maybe two diplomats, and trying to keep one priest or imam in a every city with just one imam/priest to create unrest at the point of my army's advance. So I didn't think I was over-recruiting religious units. I got burnt in one game, short on cash, playing the Moors, and there are two Cardinals standing outside my city, Cordoba, creating a huge social unrest situation for me. I couldn't move my army toward Lisbon because if they left town, the city would riot. So I feel I need the imams/priests 'in settlement' to keep some order, and the conversion levels up.

If I don't want my navy to get totally whacked by pirates, I had better build at minimum a four unit stack. If I have two of those for a navy, I feel fortunate.

Mind you, I've never been a very aggressive campaigner in Total War games. But I think that may really be working to my disadvantage in M2TW.

Anyway, I welcome any comments or questions from my fellow guilders.

[Doug-Thompson]

Whoa. That's some request there, Guyus Germanicus. You might want to break that into several questions and put in in the single-player forum.

[Guyus Germanicus]

:beam: You may have a point big guy.

I noticed when I was learning the ropes in Barbarian Invasion that the BI expansion game did not let you rest on your laurels. You had to move on to conquer the next settlement or your cash flow would trickle out within 3-4 turns.

My guess is that in M2TW the same rule applies. In RTW I could take a slower pace with the campaign. I know some of the veterans pride themselves in turtling their pace in RTW. But it certainly doesn't appear to be an option in M2TW.

I read in someone else's post just recently that CA has sharpened up the AI in M2TW. What I think I've noticed is that with every new game or expansion pack release, CA makes the AI a little more subtle or sharper. No doubt game developers learn from their experience just as we players do.

I shall continue my research. :holmes:

[Gray Beard]

Guyus Germanicus

Something that might help is to go tot the M2TW web site and look at the Faust unit guide. There are certain units that don't require you to pay upkeep if they garrison cities, castles or forts. I find some of them are strange for instance peasants require upkeep (Why?) while Militia Spearmen don't. I do find it frustrating that a competent ruler cannot seem to store up a pile a of treasure for use later. You can do it but you really have to work at it. And yes, you need to move fast at the beginning of this game or your financial position becomes untenable.

Here are some tips

Excuse me if you are already doing these things.

1. Garrison your cities and castle if possible with units that don't require upkeep cost if they are garrisoning a city or castle. This will free up a rather hefty sum of cash. However it gets somewhat problematic because they are always built in a town and so you'll have to move them to a castle.

2. Tax rate is as important as economic development. to have a high tax rate you have to have a loyal population and that means you need to build military buildings.Start by building a drill squares, then a church then governmental buildings, then roads, ports, grain exchanges and farms.

3. Family members who are good administrators and let you crank out the taxes can be more useful getting Antioch to pump out an extra 1000 gold a turn on a Very High tax level than they can in the field leading an army.

4. Cities make way more money than castles. I try to have about 1 castle for every 8 to 10 cities. That means you have place Castles carefully. In the most recent game I've been playing I control an empire made up of these 25 provinces: Ragusa, Zagrab, Durazo, Corinth, Sofia, Bran, Bucharest, Thesonloniki, Constantinople, Smyrna, Iconium, Trebizond, Cesaraea, Tbilisi, Yeveran, Mosul, Baghdad, Edessa, Alepo, Antioch, Acre, Adana, Nicosia, Rhodes, Iraqlion, Only Ragus, Sofia, Mosul and Caesaraea a are Castles. This a little more than the 8 to 10 cities per castle; however, I am getting ready clean the Egyptians clock and add Damascus, Jerusalem Gaza, Alexandria, and Cairo. This isn't big a problem as you might first think because the troops you build in Castles all require you to pay up keep so you use them as mobile armies. Move them where you need them.

Additionally, once cities reach a certain population I don't think you cannot change them back into a castle. So if they are taken by an enemy they can't be used to make high quality troops against you.

5. When moving an army in a campaign, if large numbers of the troops in that army can receive a free upkeep if garrisoning then build a fort at the end of each turn and abandon it when the next turn starts. 500 is about 20% of the upkeep cost of most 20 unit armies. If your army is made up almost entirely of free upkeep units (And you'd be surprised how often they can be) you can save a pile this way

6. look at your borders. try to develop your empire in such a way that you have more provinces than borders. For example: Durazo and Thessalon&#237;ki protect Corinth which makes Corinth a cash cow because it doesn't have a border with a land enemy. In my Byzantine Walk though I build an empire of (I think) 24 to 30 provinces defended by 5. That gives you lots of money for mobile armies

Hope this helps

[Guyus Germanicus]

Fascinating Graybeard!

You know, I think I've seen this guide before, but I never noticed the notations about garrison costs. Early in my M2TW experience I was garrisoning my safe settlements with peasants because they were cheap to recruit and, I thought, cheap to maintain. How wrong I was!

I downloaded a copy of Brandybarrel's Faust guide. I shall study it. :book:

Your ratio of castles to cities is interesting. I would not have thought to stretch it that much, but obviously some settlements are going to grow alot and it's best to have them as cities for their money-making potential. So your advice makes sense. I was aware of the profit-making differences.

Interesting scheme with the forts. Clever.

I have gotten into the habit of checking the administrative talents of my governors. I learned to do that in RTW. I've even had them station themselves just outside the city while the rest of the troops are garrisoned just to spare the city their bad governance. I tend to use them, then, as strickly conquerors and keep their time 'in garrison' to a minimum.

I've started to pick up the pace in my early game by taking open rebel cities as opportunistically as possible.

(I'm a bit of a spastic with this game. I start a game with a faction, take it 40 turns and then start another game with a different faction. I love the variety of units and scenarios.)

I'm a middle east history buff - have almost four bookcases on the middle east alone, maybe one bookcase covering the period of the crusades. I used to hate the middle ages when I was younger, now I'm abit captivated by the period. Have even read the Quran. Wish I could read arabic.)

Thanks, Graybeard, for the tips, especially about the Faust guide. That should prove to be very useful. :balloon2: :balloon2:

[Gray Beard]

Guyus Germanicus

Yes, I've read the Koran. I' ve also read most of the Hadiths. No I don't read Arabic. I read it in translation which many Muslims say is sinful because they don't believe either of those two works can be translated. This isn't a religious form so I won't say more other than I am not now, nor have ever been nor will ever be Muslim.

I find the Byzantines a fascinating nation because other than China and possibly Japan they were the only empire to make the transition from antiquity to a feudalistic society.

I think Byzantium actually goes farther back than the splitting of the Roman Empire. Indeed, a lot of historians will talk about how Rome conquered Greece militarily but then Greece conquered Rome culturally. In that since you can almost draw kind of a squiggly line from Phillip of Macedon or possibly Menelaus all the way to Palaiologos Dragases (Contantine XI) the last emperor.

One thing that bothers me about this game is the way that the game designers have slavishly followed the lies perpetuated by Edward Gibbon about the Byzantines being in decline. They were never culturally in decline. Byzantine culture was vibrant and intellectually rich until the very end. Indeed, there are historians like John Romer (http://amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_gw/104-1914326-0658364?initialSearch=1&url=search-alias%3Ddvd&field-keywords=Byzantium&Go.x=0&Go.y=0&Go=Go) who will argue that the Renaissance was started not by ancient philosophy regained from the Moors but by Italians hiring Byzantine tutors for their children. The disciples of Plethon (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12166a.htm)even set up an academy in (I think) Florence after the fall of Constantinople and collected a huge library of books and documents that they purchased from the Turks after the city was looted.

I don't think it was the Turks that caused their ultimate collapse but the 4th Crusade. Even though the Byzantines eventually took Constantinople back they lost 600 years worth of treasure and their sense of being an eternal kingdom for God's people on Earth for all time. From 1230 on they were simply doomed.

BTW I edited and expanded the previous post before this one

Sorry for the off topic post.
Byzantium Forever and Ever

[Guyus Germanicus]

Gray Beard,

I've got more comments, but I thought I would move them to the thread over on the Citadel subthread entitled:

Debate: How do you minimize casualties when assaulting?

. . . and try to restore the subject purity of this thread. :)

[Gray Beard]

Gray Beard,

I've got more comments, but I thought I would move them to the thread over on the Citadel subthread entitled:

Debate: How do you minimize casualties when assaulting?

. . . and try to restore the subject purity of this thread. :)

I don't worry about them. I just rebuild. I worry about winning

[DarthRevan]

Hi there first post for me in this forum(sorry if its going to be a long one)
First of all congrats for the very interesting guide you wrote(i came upon it just yesterday)
I need a little help and explanation of your guide.I play TW series since MTW1 and never used HA before.I am the regular guy who uses infantry the most and 4-5 units heavy cavalry - infantry pin the enemy down cavalry charge from the rear quite simple i think but effective for me.I thought HA were a waste of money because i couldnt get used to them at all and after trying them in custom battles and seeing a HA unit killing only 20-30 men i thought they totally suck so forget them.But since M2TW and Kingdoms especially and because my favourite faction is Byzantio which uses a lot of HA im interested in changing my style a bit and i want to learn how to use them because when i try its a total mess!
I cant use them without pressing the pause button a lot and moreover when i somehow manage to send them to surround the enemy i either forget them until the end of the battle(so they get killed after firing a few shots) or try to use them effectively and forget the rest of my army.I guess this has to do with micromanagement but the problem is that when i use Inf + Heavy Cav i have no problem at all it gets messy when add HA to that!:juggle2:
So can anyone give me any useful tips on how to start using them effectively since i have no experience at all?(i dont mean tactics-i analyze tactics below- but i mean should i use waypoints? auto skirmish on since the battle starts? and so on)
Finally i tried to use your tactics Doug (bagging grinding flanking- i didnt understand blitzing at all) but i had luck only with grinding!The other two never worked out as they should(i tried over 10 times each tactic).
bagging would end like this(that is a random position for the HA my point is they would end shooting from a very big distance to the enemy and they would never go where i wanted them to go):
HA
HA
HA

HA

enemy



HA HA


Also could anyone post some battle replays showing those tactics?Before i say enough with the HA they just aren't my type and i should forget that style i would like to try via the watch and practice method!
That's all for now:beam:

[Doug-Thompson]

Thanks for the kind words on the guide.

After reading your post, I'd say to keep using "grinding." It works. Use what works. Sooner than you think, you'll get used to using HA and moving them around will become automatic. Then you can try other things.

Beyond that, what you're mentioning here is a big problem. There's not been a whole lot posted about using HA with other units.




I cant use them without pressing the pause button a lot and moreover when i somehow manage to send them to surround the enemy i either forget them until the end of the battle(so they get killed after firing a few shots) or try to use them effectively and forget the rest of my army.

You'll have to use auto skrimish for a while, probably. Some players think it only encourages bad habits, but I think its OK and use it myself.

Group all your HA together. Look at that group once in a while, when you have time. If one of them isn't shooting, select it and find out why. If one of them is in melee, check it too. If it's been caught or trapped, order it around and get it out or have another unit engage and free it.

If you don't want to use an all-cavalry army, then use your HA as a group so you can mass enough to do some good. Massing fire is not a problem when you have 8-10 good HA. When you have, say 4 to 6 in combined-arms army, it's harder to "bag" and so forth. Might as well mass them and "grind."

[DarthRevan]

Well thank you very much you helped me understand the REAL problem!
I'm using combined armies: 4-5 HA max + inf + 4 HC so trying to use every group's full potential(HA/HC/INF) all at once is kind of hard.I tried the things you mentioned in the guide like grouping all HA together,putting them to loose formaton and so on but i had to turn auto skirmish off for the ones that would go in the rear because i didnt believe they would go where i had sent them.I'll try it again with auto skirmish on why not?Maybe it will be easier to practice all those tactics with an all Cav army.
Also is it possible to see any replays of yours using any of them?

[Gray Beard]

Darth Reven,

Warning this post is my opinion and might constitute a tactical hint. If you don't want to read it then roll past this post





You've been warned





You might also try simplifying your armies a bit. In a mixed army the HA's should be your killing unit. I can understand why you have a hard time to use them when combined with heavy cavalry. Melee cavalry takes a lot of attention in order to keep a cheap spear unit from coming up behind them and making them wish they'd not engaged the unit in front of them.

It is also really hard to mix melee cavalry and Horse archers because it effectively cuts your forces available in 1/2 because each are used so differently and kill in different ways that you are in danger of being overwhelmed (Note this is primarily a problem of a game that might not exist in the same way in a real battle) So, I try to tailor my armies one way or the other depending on what forces I have available.

Try an army compossed more like this

01 X General
08 X HA units
06 X Spear Units
03 X Elite foot archers ( example: Trebizond Arches)
02 X Heavy Infantry (Or more Spearmen)

Set the archers up behind a shield wall made of 4 of your spear units preferably on high ground. Have the other spear units arrayed to either side and slightly behind your main line

Put one unit of infantry either side to keep your flank from being turned

Put two groups of 4 HA units out to either side. Hide them over a crest or behind trees if possible.

The strength of this type of infantry formation combined with HA is that it doesn't move much and that gives you time to maneuver your HA's. It is also an army of cheap troops that is easy to build. But the main thing it does is to slow the battle down and simplify your tactical position.

Often time the AI will hesitate to come charging up a hill at a shield wall. Especially if the opposing army is made up of lots of medium cavalry. If the AI or your opponent does hesitate start hitting them with arrows from your foot archers, make them either run away or charge you. If they try to chase down the HA units then move the HA's away. Because you are on a hill you can often still hit them with your elite archers.

If the enemy does come up the hill they use the HA units to hit them from either side and behind.
When the enemy hits your shield wall then charge the remaining spears and infantry into the flank and run your HA units into the rear.

If they try to flank you then use your extra Spearmen to form a shield wall in that direction and then nail them up close and personal with your archers.

This also puts you in control of the battle. You want the enemy to do what you want not what they want.

This is the type of tactics that Hannibal used against the Romans in Italy except he used elephants instead of heavy infantry.

[DarthRevan]

Well Gray Beard although what you propose seems extreme at a first glance (6-8 spearmen - 2 units or no heavy infantry at all!!!) after careful consideration makes a lot of sense.I agree this way you have an army with minimum mobility which is very well protected and thus you can have your time with the HA.I'll give this one a try also although i might change some units.For instance i prefer to use a peasant wall in loose formation in front of archers instead of spearmen!This way you stop the enemy charge with the cheapest unit available and you can afford buying a heavier infantry like varangian guard to counter that charge and cut the enemy infantry to pieces.Besides varangians work well with a pinned cavalry.But obviously the most important part is that as you said heavy cavalry doesnt fit in this tactic if you want to use its full potential + the HA.
Thanks for the tip i'll give it a try:beam:

P.S. Gray Beard how come you like the Byzantines so much?Is it because of reading for them or something else?

[Jason X]

hi darth,
sinan posted up a HA battle replay (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=85870) that might help.

*edit* which i've only just noticed is linked to in doug's first post ~:doh:

[DarthRevan]

Well thanks Jason but i've already seen that awesome replay!
I was asking about replays showing each different tactic separately:2thumbsup:
Also i'm very interested in seeing the blitzing and going commando tactics in action specifically

[Doug-Thompson]

O.T. P.S. I think Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic (Episode One) is one of the finest games ever made.

"You are a very harsh master. I like you."

[Gray Beard]

Revan,

I think you'll find that spearmen are worth the cost. Peasants don't hold the line long enough. Plus both Byzantine Spear Militia and Byzantine Spearmen get a whopping bonus versus cavalry; something like a +6 or +8. That means they defend almost like pikemen. If you can get them two armor upgrades they become fairly decent troops, especially in hot climates.

[Fisherking]

Just a little note on a battle I just fought as Hungry vs. Spain. It was the aftermath of a crusade against Toulouse.

A Spanish army came from out of the dark and besieged the castle the turn after I took it. My forces were a bit chewed up but I had sent a pavais crossbow (46 men) 2 Nobles and a HA along with a Hussar (32 men) over to Bordeaux to lay siege. I had a general near by who drained the mercenary pool and the units under siege. Mostly spear and crossbow, a couple of guns and some more under strength HA units. My best odds were starting off with the little force I named and that is what I did.

Spain had a full boat of units. (20) A general, some of the nice Spanish knights, a treb, a ballista, about 4 units of hand gunners, a couple of the tough little javelin guys and a whole bunch of dismounted knights and swordsmen. The total force was like 1100+ men.

Well I lined up the HAs on wide dispersement on the right side of my line. The crossbowmen were also on wide spacing to avoid gun fire and artillery fire and the Hussars in back. My reinforcements should have been coming up his back side…but no reinforcements came…

Well here I was with less than 200 men facing a bit over a thousand but I had to do something until the rest of the men showed up…if they did…

I left the crossbowmen where they were on a slight rise and sent my 3 HAs to form a line on his left flank and get in some good shots. I sent the Hussars dashing off to my left to circle round and attack the artillery. The AI turned to face my HAs so I send them round the rear on a ridge. The Hussars charged in on the treb and took out most of them before I had to run. All of his hand gunners were now moving on my HAs and I heard the crack of gunfire. All I could do was charge the little buggers. I sent the Hussars to help but they were mostly on there own.

Something I have noticed is if you go through the enemy line they will often brake but you take extra losses when doing this. I had no choice in this instance and had to take the gamble, and it worked. All his gunners were now running for the hills with my guys chopping them down as they went. Now up comes his general and I sent the HAs after him and chopped him up in a hail of arrows.

The little crossbowmen were still plinking at his see-sawing front line. Something got to the one straight HA unit at this point and routed it…I never saw what happened but it took off and didn’t stop. I grouped the Hungarian Nobles with the Hussar and kept them circling looking for prey. A few of his units had had enough and routed when charging my crossbowmen, so I charged into the rear of some of his dismounted knights and they broke too. By now I was out of arrows with the Nobles so I closed their spacing and used them as regular cavalry. I broke up the rush against the crossbowmen and sent most of his units to route. I attacked what was unbroken until it was all over but the chase. He got 14 men off the field and refused the ransom….

When it was over I had silver and gold chevrons and lost 84 men to his 1100. Had I lost it would have cost me the garrison that never showed up.

The Cavalry over-run is modeled into the game…braking through those lines…When it works it is well worth the loss of a few extra men to rout the units involve but it dose take practice to be used to good effect. With Cavalry you are fighting against enemy morale as much as his troops. A few men can do wonders against so many more if luck and skill are with you.

[Zacchaeus]

The video appears to have an .rpy extention which, according to my research is a saved game file for some Grand Prix Racing game or some such. I assume that this isn't correct. Could you update the viseo or alternatively tell me how I might open it :)

PS Very good guide.

[Shahed]

The video appears to have an .rpy extention which, according to my research is a saved game file for some Grand Prix Racing game or some such. I assume that this isn't correct. Could you update the viseo or alternatively tell me how I might open it :)

PS Very good guide.

Welcome Aboard Zacchaeus ! .rpy is an extension that will play in M2: TW Battle Replays. Check the thread link posted above, if that file is still online it wll work.


BROKEN CRESCENT: TOTAL WAR IN THE MIDDLE EAST

I've recently been playing the Broken Crescent mod, and it is what Kingdoms should have been, in many ways. There are MANY types of cavalry. Cavalry heavy nations like the Khwarezm Shah, Seljuks are featured in depth. They have incredible units, it really is a great mod for all cavalry fans. The mod features the steppe from Samarkand to Urgench and beyond, cavalry country. There are many mercenary cavalry units to choose from. Overall I'm really enjoying my all cav experience in Broken Crescent. It's quite challenging as well, not the piece of cake M2: TW was (even on VH/VH).

I wanted to post an all cavalry formation for all cavalry players here, from Broken Crescent.

Royal Ayyubid All Cavalry Combined Arms Force

https://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m78/ShahedK/M2TW%20Army%20Compositions/AyyubidRoyalMamlukCombinedArmsCaval.jpg


1 Sultan's Guard
3 Royal Mamluk Cavalry
2 Royal Toassim Mamluk Cavalry
4 Kurdish Lancers
10 Qara Ghulam Cavalry

Setup is pretty simple. The Elite Mamluk Corp at center, with Toassims on the flanks, 2 groups of 3X Qara Ghulams forward center, 2 groups of 2X Qara Ghulams + 2 Kurdish Lancers on both flanks. Elite Corp is mobile and supports other corps wherever needed. Center corps purpose is to harass directly from the front and pull units towards the Elite Corps. The flank groups run behind the enemy and select most valuable enemy targets (general,cavalry, missile).

And ... a couple of screenshots:

From Ayyubid Campaign:
The Final Moments of a Marshall of Jerusalem.
https://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m78/ShahedK/MTW2%20General/CavalryCrescent.jpg

From Ayyubid Campaign:
Final Phase of the Last Battle vs The Kingdom of Jerusalem.
https://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m78/ShahedK/MTW2%20General/KoJLastStand.jpg

SALUTE !

[RollingWave]

awsome article.

it surprises me that a lot of people don't seem to understand how to uses these guys, the fundemental concept is very easy and in single player it is extremely easy to pull off (Thx pause button)

Camel gunners are hilarious though, because they simply do everything well, they're even very useful in seige assualt / defese, something most other HAs can't say (except the Jinet types of course) once a breach other just have them fire through it as the enemy swarms around. and run if they come near. the combination of them clogging together and relative close range with all the associated moral penalties in seiges is just hilarious. in retrofit mods a gunner guarding a gate with boiling oil is just hilarious. Grandine Xbow is actually a good unit, the only problem is that in the campaign you can usually get gunners faster than those guys lol!!! who needs crossbows when you have gunners ? ;)

In the Stainless steel mod the Cuman is also a very very nice faction for HA lovers to play, their basic cuman HA is pretty solid (long range missile) and more importantly can be build at both type of settements at very low level. they get a nice armored noble HA and then at the end they get the Cossak mounted muskets. hilarious. seiging is a bitch though (at least strait up assault.. ). and because your basically a mass HA army you can't really afford to get seiged too.

A few thought.

a. cavalry army seige: it works, but you have to wait for them to sally. obviously you could flip the coin and risk using a smaller cav army so the dumb AI will sally right away though. for a strait up assualt / defense horsemans are fairly useless in general. exceptions maybe the javlin types on defense. and the crazy camel gunners in both.

b. on mounted X-bows, my history readings suggest that the Chinese used crossbows for their chariot crews after the weapon beging showing up in the later half of the Zhou dynasty. obviously fireing from a platform on the chariot is a lot easier and make sense in so many ways. but as the chariots died out not too long after that. there have been records of mounted X-bows, though it seems to mostly suggest them dismounting to fight. it make sense espically in this early going, since this was probably before the horsemans even had stirrups.

I don't see any reference of mounted X-bows for later dynasties like the Song / Ming , considering that the X-bow was a huge and enduring weapon in China, if this was a feasable tactic surely they would have tried it more. accounts of Tang warriors seem to suggest that their x-bows wielding warriors road to war, but fought on foot (and they bring with them a special 2-handed saber that can be used as a makeshift stake.)

I'm guessing that the problem is that more effective versions of the crossbows require fullbody to load. thus making them impossible for use while riding. while the once you could load on horseback is simply less effective than composite bows. while one may argue that composite bows are harder to train. it's not like the guys riding a horse on battle would be some sort of levy rabble. they ARE trained for war anyway. i suppose that it might be possible for some european factions that doesn't have access to superior bows to use lighter versions of crossbows while riding though. it's theorically possible at least. but would have most likely been vastly inferior to most horse archers due to reload time and range. (not to meantion the horseman's skill)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

i'm a pretty lazy HA commander though, i usually just do a cross beween the grind and bag trick. seperating my HAs into two bodies and encircle the enemies to devastate them in crossfires, with a small backup of heavy and light cavs to deal with opposing cav charge or to finish off the enemy.

against the AI, the only thing that really bothers you would be mass seige obviously. since those rocks are indiscriminant and fairly random. it's hard to avoid at least some casualty.

[Doug-Thompson]

I should check back on this thread more often.

That was a great victory, Fisherking. Great story too. You're absolutely right about charging through, too. Risky but rewarding.

Sinan, old friend, those battles accounts and pictures were great.

Good points, RollingWave.

[Orda Khan]

Mounted crossbow....

http://198.170.108.27/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=589

Regardless, I doubt they were a match for normal HA

.....Orda

[cambovenzi]

some really interesting stuff in there.
i definitely need to learn how to better utilize missile cavs, and use them more often.

[tanker]

Really really excellent thread. Started a campaign as Rohan in the Third Age Total War mod and have had great success applying these tactics with Rohan's horsearchers. The funny thing is that the Rohan HA have pretty meager stats compared to most HA in the main game or mods like Broken Creasent, but since they are the only ones that can be fielded in sizable numbers, they OWN the battlefield. I guess the one-eyed man is king in the land of the blind. Anyway, the HA are a great 1-2 punch with melee cav. The HA "clear the path" by taking out the javlin-throwers, spear-wielders, and other baddies that can put a hurt on heavy cav from a distance, and the Riders of the Mark blow their horn, lower their lances, and clean up the rest. Great fun. But often, the HA can win small battles by themselves, even massively outnumbered. I look forward to playing a campaign with Byzantium or Poland in the main game when I get a chance. Thanks again for the great guide.

[Burebista24]

Nice thread! I always loved missle cavs..now i will know how to use them at full power :yes:

[Vlad Dracul]

This is a great thread indeed.
I remember Dougs posts from the Age of Empires' section of heavengames forum, he was a huge mongols fan back then and used to write very good posts also.
It's nice to see him usin' his great analysys skills to another medieval strategy game (too bad the actual strategic part of M II TW isn't as good as the tactical part, it would of been one of the greatest games ever made).