Swords vs Axes

**Prince Cobra** · 05-15-2011, 06:49

Gah! Missile cavalry! Love them. This thread will make me search for the replay of the battle with the French Crusade. The opening was peppering a unit of knights with a Byz cavalry and provoking it to attack me. Let's write the plot!

**Gilrandir** · 05-15-2011, 09:52

Speaking of swords, no one mentioned futuwwas. I understand that they fall into two categories (archers as well), but the Unit guide praises them as the best-in-melee archers. As for me, I have never used them as melee infantry because I never had a chance to (all three of my Turkish campaigns met a premature demise because of the absence of heirs (I suspect a particular dislike of the AI to this faction). Anyway, what catholic units can futuwwas be compared to in terms of melee performance?

**gollum** · 05-15-2011, 10:04

Futtuwas have high attack and very low defence - like Ghazis without the ap bonus, as well as bows of course. Any such unit is best used in flankings, because in a straight melee they will die fast. A flanking denies the opponent much of the opportunity to fight back and hence tehy are best used as such. however, their charge and morale being also very good makes them pretty good for reserves in order to lead countercharges and plug gaps in the line while they fire all teh while as the main melee rages on.

In general hybrid units (melee/missiles) take a little bit more cautiousness and intelligence in deploying them in the field for best effect. If they are used strickly as missiles or strictly as melee units they are wasted. Need to combine tehir capabilities to get the best out of them.

**Gilrandir** · 05-15-2011, 15:40

One more combined unit is Ottoman infantry, but unlike futuwas they wield axes. Does it make them a solid axe unit?

**gollum** · 05-15-2011, 16:39

Not really - they have very low attack (+1 iirc). They also lack the good morale of the Futuwas/Nizaris/Janissary Infs.

(edit: they also have 0 defence and 0 iirc morale)

**Karl08** · 06-07-2011, 03:36

Originally Posted by Gilrandir

Second of all, that is all true when you counter one spear unit with one sword unit in an open field. But battles are not like that. Units usually don't get so separated from the bulk of the army to let you encompass their front line of flank them with your one sword unit.

But you were the one who lamented the uselessness of swordsmen because one of them couldn't defeat one of the other. As it happens, one unit of swordsmen can absolutely destroy one unit of spears, but now that you are talking about armies, the same holds true: sure, one unit of swords is not going to last long against two or more units of anything, but that is true of just about any unit. Support your swords, just like you would support your axes. Feudal men-at-arms are very good units when they are first available, and chivalric men-at-arms are deadly. I like them better than Byzantine infantry, actually.

**Gilrandir** · 06-09-2011, 18:05

You seem to have come to this thread when the discussion has petered out with the result (which I now make explicit) that I have been persuaded to lay aside my bias (if not bigotry) against swords and give them one more chance. As much explicit I would like to be about the passage you quote. I meant that in an intertwined mass of a meleeing units you try to keep the shieldwall with you spears/polearms and hit your enemy in the rear with other units. In this respect cavalry is second to none because of its speed. So flanking and rear-smacking is most effactive with horses. Swords are slower being on foot so making them go all the way around the melee and to the rear of your enemy is not efficient since on expert the battle may well be over before they ever manage to complete their manoeuver. The conclusion: flanking with swords is a rare thing to complete, so I usually fill the breaches in defence lines with them letting the cavs encircle the enemy. And in sealing the gaps axes are superior. If you don't agree, have a look at the stats for best swords and best axes:
Chivalric men at arms.
Charge 3 Attack 4 Defence 3 Armour 4 Speed 6, 10, 11 Morale 4 Cost 250 Support cost 52
Varangian guard.
Charge 4 Attack 4 Defence 5 Armour 4 Speed 6, 10, 11 Morale 6 Cost 500 Support cost 75
Saxon huscarles
Charge 4 Attack 4 Defence 4 Armour 3 Speed 6, 10, 11 Morale 6 Cost 425 Support cost 75
Joms Vikings
Charge 6 Attack 5 Defence5 Armour 3 Speed 6, 10, 11 Morale 8 Cost 725 Support cost 10
Viking landsmenn (used before you can get hold of huscarles)
Charge 3 Attack 3 Defence 1 Armour 3 Speed 6, 10, 11 Morale 4 Cost 200 Support cost 52

The swords beat the axes only in financial aspect, but I prefer to pay for the unit a higher price because, well, it pays (forgive my pun).

**Prince Cobra** · 06-13-2011, 20:15

The swords beat the axes only in financial aspect, but I prefer to pay for the unit a higher price because, well, it pays (forgive my pun).

Chivalric men at arms beat the other four with their longevity (once high period comes). The Saxon/viking disappear in High, the varangians follow a similar fate in Late. Viking and Saxon axes are also limited to some provinces, which further puts them at disadvantage.

**Gilrandir** · 06-14-2011, 17:06

That is all true, but when I'm still able to produce axes I tend to train heaps of them to last for quite a time (actually, in my last Danish campaign I never ran out of huscarles until 1453!!!), and use them sparingly, preferably as an emergency unit. Moreover, in high and late I'm usually in possession of Switzerland, so I start pumping out Swiss halbs, which I use instead of axes against spears (plus against cavalry, of course). And I hire billmen whenver I come across them for the same purpose.

**oz_wwjd** · 09-28-2011, 12:34

This is a bit off-topic,but there was a bug with my MTW vanilla until I patched it that enabled me to build Swiss Amoured Pikemen in Crete and the islands,which I always found perfectly acceptable. Ever faced an army of both Varagarian Guard and Swiss Pikemen,backed up by a 9star general and plenty of archers? I found it hilarous in battle..

**RRMike** · 09-28-2011, 19:10

I don't really get the hate for halbs. I use tons of them in Europe as soon as high hits. All my halb producing provinces, usually any with iron, get church, monestary and reliquary. My halberds will fight until they have single digits remaining (usually after leaving a trail of several destroyed enemy units behind) unless I let them get surrounded.

I play with the timer off and rest them prior to engaging when I am attacking and have to march across the map. They don't go south of Constantinople or into Iberia usually but for everything north of that they simply dominate every unit they face. Huscarles or Swabians are the only units I would try to keep them away from.

I will use 8 of them with 4 arbs/pavise arbs and 2 swords and 2 mounted sarges. The halbs simply walk at/through the enemy and the swords and cav protect them from flanking attacks while the arbs kill any dangerous AP units then start killing enemy AP missile units. The cav are there simply to chase routers off the field and prevent them from re-forming.

**Gilrandir** · 09-29-2011, 13:46

Originally Posted by RRMike

Huscarles or Swabians are the only units I would try to keep them away from.

You forgot to mention Varangian guard here. Still, vanilla halbs get tired soon (if you have to march them across the whole map) so I get the best of them in defensive battles.

**Vladimir** · 09-30-2011, 17:12

Originally Posted by RRMike

I don't really get the hate for halbs. I use tons of them in Europe as soon as high hits. All my halb producing provinces, usually any with iron, get church, monestary and reliquary. My halberds will fight until they have single digits remaining (usually after leaving a trail of several destroyed enemy units behind) unless I let them get surrounded.

I play with the timer off and rest them prior to engaging when I am attacking and have to march across the map. They don't go south of Constantinople or into Iberia usually but for everything north of that they simply dominate every unit they face. Huscarles or Swabians are the only units I would try to keep them away from.

I will use 8 of them with 4 arbs/pavise arbs and 2 swords and 2 mounted sarges. The halbs simply walk at/through the enemy and the swords and cav protect them from flanking attacks while the arbs kill any dangerous AP units then start killing enemy AP missile units. The cav are there simply to chase routers off the field and prevent them from re-forming.

Agreed. It's been a while but in XL I would use them if I couldn't produce enough pikes. Their only flaw is low unit numbers. I think they're brilliant for gate defense.

I had one unit fight isolated, in a patch of woods, against dozens of Mongols (was my fault and couldn't rescue them) and they fought until they were under 10% strength.