Hey Tosa, u dont mind if i call u Tosa do u? I feel we've gotten close ;) Wen u edit my posts can u leave in the good parts, cause my sarcasm is killer, and u r ruining it ;)
Hey Tosa, u dont mind if i call u Tosa do u? I feel we've gotten close ;) Wen u edit my posts can u leave in the good parts, cause my sarcasm is killer, and u r ruining it ;)
Who's we and close to what?Originally Posted by `-Silent-FireBlade
Ja mata
TosaInu
Me and u, im sure u can feel the electric between us 2 ;) And with valentines day comin up i expect summit good ;)
I understand, thank you for the explanation. I'm afraid we don't have a forum for that, this one certainly isn't it.Originally Posted by `-Silent-FireBlade
Ja mata
TosaInu
i have theorized that stakes could be planted in random patterns ones flank pointing at 45 degrees towars that flank. in esssence it would be a mine field then you can use spearmen to hold this area. it is possible to get horses through there but the enemy would not be able to do it in a massed formation he would have to spend time negotiating the area and you could then use your cav to launch a rapid attack against part of his army when he is in this area. if he tries to rush out to save his army he risk running his cav into the stakes.
just an idea of how stakes could work but havnt tested it. also ca should allow deployment to hide where somone places stakes since an opponent can see where the stakes are being planted before battle starts giving him a clue to where your army is placed.
however this could be worked to your advantage by decieving him to point to area where he sees the stakes the majority of your army could be in a different position to catch him off balance when the battle starts.
interesting idea about a stake minefield, but as far as using somestakes to throw off the enemy during deployment that might not work so well. #1 enemy may not be paying attention (I know I dont, I'm too busy getting beers and talking on vent)... #2 you will be sacrificing your stake archers if he falls for the trap, and probably even if he doesn't fall from the trap (since they'll be too far away from your main force to save).
But I like the minefield idea... you could really cause some havoc with stakes set at random angles. Only hope you dont have to go through that area with cav yourself!
Hunter_Bachus
Just a soxy opinion. I find it very hard to believe a stake box will ever win vs. an average player in a competetion. To prefrom a good box have to have at least 8 arch which with the price of english archers good enough to plant stakes your looking at just under hlaf your money leaves you some spears and heavy inf to put in your box. Mabey some cav though i dont see the point if you are sitting. my question is how is this army going to fair agianst some xbows + mounted xbows? it will get destroyed. You ruin mobility by geting in a box. honestly im just gonna take my arch or xbows and shoot the hell out of your inf. YOuve lost a couple hundred before you eliminate my arch/xbows. Then youve got 6-8 and 4-6 inf left to deal with and what youve got is half strenght inf and archers. Good luck with that.
Stakes are on the other hand not useless you can win an arch war and force an attack and win but you cant camp in a box you must use them to protect you flansk and use them to funel enemy cav exactly where you want. I have also seen countless people run there own cav into their stakes. You have to pay attention to use them.
Stake box=bad in almost every circumstance. Also good luck with it vs timurds. Eles erase stakes from the map.
Last edited by RtkBedivere; 02-06-2007 at 06:03.
I never played rome online much, nearly all of my time on tw is mtw1, so I don't know the naswer to this. What is the difference between fire arrows and standard arrows? Is one of them "better" or more accurate?.
This has probably been asked before, if so
Abdul.
|C|GOS| Mole
Camelot GOS Clan @ camelotgos.co.nr
Regular arrows are more acurate, fire arrows you would use to scare the enemy like when you have your archer drawn back while engaging.
hidden pitholes or caltrops would be better for the game i think. but if stakes you should not be able to see a persons stakes deploying before battle. i think stakes would be served better as a tool of deception. no one is going to purposely drive their cav at full steam into stakes.
LOL talking behind my back eh??Originally Posted by sabutai
Let me make this clear... AGAIN! Because you didn't get it the first time in the Maji forums, or in the RTW lobby. Bliz asked me if I wanted to kick you out for your little stunt, I told him I would go easy on you and make you apologize with no other consequence than that. You instead chose to get all high and mighty, you got rid of your tags, I gave you a LAST CHANCE to have forgotten the whole mess, of course you were a dick about it and were banished from the forums and anything to do with Maji.
Furthermore, WE NEVER HAD A 1v1 LMFAO! I never took Egypt against you, and I certainly never lost. Grant it, I had a few bad games that day, in fact the worst games I've ever played in my history of playing RTW.
To this date I have NEVER encountered any player more disrespectful and deceitful as you, in fact there is no player the Maji have ever banished from our forums other than you.
Though you were unbanished, and the 'defiling' of your account undone, (you pissed alot of people off, not just me) after I had tried to leave you on good terms, you go and post crap like this...
Well... anyway, I hope I don't see you out there, people such as you are a waste of bandwidth on the total war servers.
I played against one guy who adopted a tactic like the English did for the Battle of Agincourt, stakes with gaps covered by spearmen, etc.
I was playing as Hungary too, and had all cavalry, but I could exploit the gaps, he ended up winning though, when I didn't have enough cavalry to kill the very few units of archers he had left.
It was a great fight, and didn't feel like a cheesy tactic like completely surrounding your army in stakes.
This army is not working into rules games. Only into no rules (so into "weak players games").
Normal army is breaking england because it uses its own crossbowmen to force england to loose ammo.
England loose 100% ammo when other nation has 50% of men and 50% of ammo (pavs). Then its easy - you are firing into big infantry army groupped into small area (90% accuracy).
John Thomas Gross - liar who want put on Poles responsibility for impassivity of American Jews during holocaust
An octagon of Pikemen with Archers inside works too.
Bookmarks