An Analysis of Janissary Infantry

**Louis de la Ferte Ste Colombe** · 06-30-2003, 21:36

Now I got to convert CBR, if possible before he release his mod

Louis the Simurgh,

**Puzz3D** · 07-01-2003, 02:09

I took that combat rating in Yas' compare tool to be an overall value rating of the unit. However, although it has a weighted rating for armor, it doesn't include any value for ranged weapons. So, a unit like JI is treated as though it has no ranged weapon in that rating figure. Also, dividing charge by 2 overweights that parameter. It's also very hard to put a numeric value on morale. Just the same, I think Yas' compare tool is excellent, and the combat rating does give you a rough idea of a unit's fighting ability.

There are two situations where armor affects a unit's ability to defeat another unit in hth. The first is when you intentionally shoot into a melee. More armor on your fighting unit will reduce its losses to friendly fire. The second is fatigue. Since armor increases fatigue under certain weather conditions and in desert terrain, it can reduce a unit's fighting ability relative to a less armored unit.

**Kongamato** · 07-01-2003, 04:35

I read that you guys might be having problems with your JHI or JI taking a frontal cavalry charge. Have you tried putting Hold Formation on for the duration of the charge? That added +2 defence could help you survive it. Just remember to turn HF off after the charge, you cant win with it kept on.

It might not save the day, but every little bit helps. It's my last-ditch swords-vs-cav move. It winds up working best in late-game situations where it can help my half-dead swordsmen stop the charges of depleted and tired HC units.

Just thought I'd drop in and say this.

**Brutal DLX** · 07-01-2003, 08:23

Louis, by strong cav I meant upgraded cav, not implying that Turkish cav is better than Catholic one (at same price level, of course). And get Speedball 2, dude.
It's just more...er.. brutal.

And Kanuni, what you said is true, I've played with your army a couple of times, but I still made some changes and made the cav stronger, I can't live with v0 alans or AHC, sorry. The basic strength of that setup is that the v0 JHI are so strong vs. enemy cavalry, it's amazing.
The other strength is of course the ability to shoot and fight hand to hand with the same units.
But as with all setups, if you use it too often it will get countered, and one way to dent it may be exploiting the weak cav.
I think it is becoming common knowledge that the Turkish faction has to be played agressively in order to maximise its efficiency, thus experienced players will prepare for that by ditching at least two pavs and becoming AP and cav heavy.
In the end, I like to keep my Turkish armies variable, thus I will continue to use saracens and ghazi at times, but you'll never know when.

By the way, do you use that setup also in the Late era? Same success?

**TosaInu** · 07-01-2003, 10:06

Originally Posted by [b

Quote[/b] ]Puzz
There are two situations where armor affects a unit's ability to defeat another unit in hth. The first is when you intentionally shoot into a melee. More armor on your fighting unit will reduce its losses to friendly fire. The second is fatigue. Since armor increases fatigue under certain weather conditions and in desert terrain, it can reduce a unit's fighting ability relative to a less armored unit.

A third is armorpiercing. When two fighting units have about equal hth stats, it pays to have no armor if the other has armorpiercing weapons.

**shingenmitch2** · 07-01-2003, 12:42

Yuuk, does fatigue grade-up with armor rating? Is it flat steps for "weight of armor" or is it a simple, higher defense rating -- higher fatigue?

**Louis de la Ferte Ste Colombe** · 07-01-2003, 13:43

Hi Mitch,

Higher armor, higher fatigue... Defense is somehow related to armor.

The only turn around that is increased valor; +1 valor adds to defense but not to armor.

Regarding AP in general, usually given the high correlation between armor and defense, it pays to have high armor, even if AP becomes a nuisance. A few units does not follow the correlation between armor and defense, but usually they have low armor and very low defense... So not a problem for AP.

Louis the Simurgh,

**shingenmitch2** · 07-01-2003, 14:25

...

**Louis de la Ferte Ste Colombe** · 07-01-2003, 14:31

I don't think it's pure linear. You definitly feel a step up for around 7/9, I would say.

Fatigue wise, and AFAIK, the difference between armor 3, and armor 5 is smaller than between armor 5 and armor 7. But that's my gut feeling more than real test.

I guess each armor rating has a kind of fatigue 'target' but this target is not set in a linear way.

Louis the Simurgh,

**Balamir** · 07-01-2003, 14:46

Oh my God 99 replies and still on topic

Sorry guys I lost it, what is it that you couldnt solve in 99 posts

**shingenmitch2** · 07-01-2003, 14:59

Talk to Seljuk, he started it

ah... even 100...

**Puzz3D** · 07-01-2003, 15:54

This is how I think it works:

The fatigue states: fresh, quite fresh, quite tired, very tired, exhausted and totally exhausted are steps. We don't know the width of those steps. Fatigue is a rate that causes a unit to pass through these different states when the fatigue gets to a transition point between steps. For each state there is a recovery rate. The lower the state the greater the recovery rate which establishes an equilibrium point. For dry conditions, that equilibrium point seems to be quite tired. In bad weather or in desert, the fatigue rate increases. The worse the weather the more the fatigue rate is increased. This causes units to pass down through the fatigue states quicker, and it makes the equilibrium point lower. Armor is included as a factor in increasing the fatigue rate in bad weather and desert which makes the equilibrium point lower and the fatigue faster for more heavily armored units.

**SpiderFromMars** · 07-02-2003, 01:39

..... which makes the desert a lovely playground for the unconventional soul

Of course ATTACKING a desertflat is preferrable....

**Brutal DLX** · 07-02-2003, 09:18

I see. We're finally off topic.

Good desert armies require unconventional unit choices, but I don't see why attacking would be preferrable.

**shingenmitch2** · 07-02-2003, 12:34

Not sure... but attacking in a desert might be preferable to attacking a desert. The sand doesn't take all that much damage and it really gets in the eyes...

**Louis de la Ferte Ste Colombe** · 07-02-2003, 13:40

I don't attack dessert straight away. I like to have dinner before.

Louis the Simurgh,

**LadyAnn** · 07-02-2003, 19:25

I still prefer defending my dessert though.

Annie

**Louis de la Ferte Ste Colombe** · 07-03-2003, 00:09

*Attack An dessert*

Louis the Simurgh,

**Tempiic** · 07-03-2003, 06:46

bah.... annie, simurgh... would you guys mind borrowing my account for a bit so i get to 500 posts too?

**Shahed** · 07-03-2003, 11:33

Well I love also all the high talk of JI in this thread. Indeed it is a versatile unit that can fill more than one role. Compared historically it basically sucks, there is no comparison with the JI in MTW, and historical accounts. The JI unit is weaker than CMAA in H2h at certain valor levels. Valor 4 JI should beat valor 3 CMAA, under normal circumstances. As far as the bow is concerned I don't think it's really any use unless you face an enemy who sits there and gettings rained on. In my MP tests valor 4 JI killed about 3 men of a CMAA with arrows before impact. IMO Janissaries in the game are split into 3 for gameplay reasons. JI is the standard swords infantry, JA are the dedicated archers which are really no better than the standard archer, JHI are the anti cav. It is an interesting attempt to recreate the Janissary Corps. Of course JI are good in the sense that you actually have a vanilla archer with some decent melee, but somehow a man trained for combat since age 8 or so should be a little better than a CMAA, or not ?

Anyway I love playing the Turks, from my historical research they are far from accurate but fun to play anyway.

What's the next topic ? Dessert ?