Hunters All Their Lives: A Missile Cavalry Guide

[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, 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.

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.

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?

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. Obviously any bottlenecks on the field of combat work to a defenders advantage. But still . . .

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? 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. 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]

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.

[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 Thessaloníki 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.

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.

[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 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 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!
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

[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

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 that might help.

*edit* which i've only just noticed is linked to in doug's first post

[DarthRevan]

Well thanks Jason but i've already seen that awesome replay!
I was asking about replays showing each different tactic separately
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.