"How to Use Horse Archers" in Rome: Total War

[Doug-Thompson]

Take your HA off skirmish and on guard mode. Leave F@w on. Manually manouver them around the enemy unit towards the map centre. Preferrably with double click. Once they are in a safe position with the enemy between them and the map-edge, turn skirmish back on and guard mode off.

Sounds sensible enough.

The Hun:

Yeah, one or two units keep firing while another advances.

[R'as al Ghul]

Elephants on the strategic map move just as far in one turn as cataphracts or Persian Cavalry.
This means the Parthians can conquer and cross the vast Russian steppes very quickly

Hmm, is that true? I thought that I saw that the cataphracts cannot move as far as HA. I think HA can move a slight bit further?? Not sure.
BTW, after your experience, what's the best use for Cats? My first ever build unit evaporated on contact with Egyptian War-Chariots.

Map edges are overcome by selecting engage at will and ordering HA to a point where they can once again use skirmish.
BTW...I never use archers on skirmish, only hold. It means micro management but I guess I want them to fire rather than run about

I just read this after the post I made above. I wasn't aware that you're already hinting at my solution for the red line.



R'as

[Doug-Thompson]

R'as al Ghul

Nothing moves farther on the strategic map as pure vanilla HA. Persian cavalry do not move as far, though. I believe Persian cavalry have the same movement allowance as cataphracts, but will double-check.

========

Cataphract-HA tactics deserve a whole thread to themselves.

One of my favorite tricks comes when some enemy cavalry unit is chasing some Persian Cav. The cataphracts charge the flank or rear of the pursuing unit.

If a long chase is involved or if the enemy unit might get away, I'll turn the Persian Cavalry around and charge.

Although this sounds looks like suicide for the Persian Cav, they won't vaporize on contact like regular HA. They will -- briefly -- hold even tough units in melee. This is especially true if they are in a dense square rather than a drawn-out line. Even Egyptian war chariots have to take a little time to chew up a dense square of Persian Cav.

The cataphracts can then catch up quickly and crash into the stationary enemy's now-disorganized ranks, which are facing the Persian Cavalry. The result is usually total destruction.

I'd trade a unit of Persian Cav for a dead Egyptian family member any day.

I've done the same thing many times with mercenary Bedouin camels and cataphracts on Egyptian war chariots, and the result are always devastating to the chariots. The morale penalty from camels combined with being charged by cataphracts from the side and rear break them, and chariots often run amok when broken.

Most of the time, though, cataphracts wait for something vulnerable while HA arrows do the killing. If something's chasing the HA, have the cats charge into the side of it. If the chasing unit breaks off and you can't catch it, halt and let it go. Another chance will come up soon enough.

Another favorite is to chase retreating infantry units with cataphracts, but stop short of contact. The infantry will stop and face their greatest threat -- the cataphracts -- while you surround the infantry with HA and kill them all.

[Doug-Thompson]

Shortened version of a post in the Parthian guide:

I'll put one or two HA on each end of a long line. I'll put Persian Cavalry on the inside of those. Then I'll put the remaining HA in the middle. Those HA in the center are backed up lines of melee cavalry. If there's more melee cavalry to spare, I'll put some units behind the Persian cavalry.

The missile cavalry are spread out as far as possible, put in squares with space between them. If I can give the missile cavalry a height advantage by using a shorter line, I will.

The battle starts: The HA on the ends race to get past and behind the enemy. The rest of the front line engages with missiles while the melee cav hangs close, but behind the fighting.

If the enemy charges the middle, they are surrounded by missile cav and facing my best melee cav. If he charges the Persian cavalry, he risks getting flank-charged by the melee cav in the middle. If he attacks the very ends, he can't catch the HA and risks getting flank-charged by the Persian cavalry and any extra melee cav.

The goal is to put the enemy in a "bag" of missile cavalry, all of whom are firing missiles. This is possible even when the Parthians are heavily outnumbered because the HA don't have to maintain a continuous line. Instead, they have some squares that are as far apart as they can be while still supporting their neighbors, shooting all the time.

[The Hun]

I guess we were posting at same time eh R'as?

It comes down to fact that map edges should not exist, orders should be obeyed however it is not the case so we have to intervene. By selecting engage at will the HA are freed of their skirmish action and now will obey commands.

Using this principle I was able to defeat armies 3 times larger than mine and I had only 700 HA, some 4 units of Nobles the rest Scythian HA. It is like hit and run, attack and retreat. When enemy targets some of your units, turn others on to them, all the while pulling enemy out of formation. If you have some units like Sarmatian mercenaries in reserve, isolated units can be easily despatched

[R'as al Ghul]

It comes down to fact that map edges should not exist, orders should be obeyed however it is not the case so we have to intervene. By selecting engage at will the HA are freed of their skirmish action and now will obey commands.

Right, map edges shouldn't exist or maps should be bigger (twice the size).
I'm a bit irritated about your mentioning of the "engage at will" command.
I only have fire-at-will, skirmish, CantCircle and guard mode. I guess we are talking about the same thing and you just use M:TW expressions? I'm still talking koku sometimes, so that's okay with me. Otherwise, please enlighten me.
Concerning the tactics it seems that we all have, more or less, developed the same envelopment-style. Doug elaborated it perfectly in the above post. I almost do the same but am always short on melee cav. And I also tend to race my wing around their right flank because infantry shields only protect to the front and left.

; stat_pri_armour Details of the man's defences
; shield factor (only used for attacks from the front of left)

So, while moving around his right flank (left from your view) you will a) be able to kill more infantry if they stay put or b) disrupt his line because his flank reacts to the threat.
As Doug already said, even on VH and with a decent general, the AI will flee the map when surrounded. This happens especially early in battle, when his army is rather small (10 units) and you encircle him rather quickly.
Pontus lost about 5.000 troops to this tactic in the last few turns and is still bringing mostly Eastern Infantry.

R'as

[Doug-Thompson]

And I also tend to race my wing around their right flank because infantry shields only protect to the front and left.

So, while moving around his right flank (left from your view) you will a) be able to kill more infantry if they stay put or b) disrupt his line because his flank reacts to the threat.

Well, that's a fine point that I completely overlooked.

I have noticed that the enemy attack on my right almost always gets farther than the enemy on the left. In hindsight, I'm sure this is the "curling" effect from the advancing troops trying to keep their vulnerable side covered.

Early, low-tech troops depend on the shield. For instance, The Egyptian Nile Spearman has a total defense of 13. Of that, 5 is his shield, or 38 percent.

Selucids
Militia Hoplites -- 5/8, or 62.5%
Levy Pikemen -- 40%
Phalanx Pikemen -- 15%
Peltasts -- 50%
Militia Cavalry -- 57%

Egyptians
Nubian Spears -- 62.5%
Nile Spears -- 38%
Desert Axemen -- 11%
Slingers -- 50%
Skirmishers -- 50%
Nubian Cav -- 36%
Desert Cav -- 36%
Egyptian Chariots -- 33%
Egyptian General Chariots -- 33%
Egyptian Chariot Archers -- No Shield.

Armenia
Hillmen -- 50%
Eastern Infantry -- 50%


Parthian HA and Persian cav don't have a shield, which makes sense because you'd need both hands free to shoot in any direction, using either the right or left hand.

Also, how much difference does shield type make? For instance, Egyptian Desert Axemen have a small shield but its metal.

[Satyr]

I try NOT to encirle the enemy. After all, I don't want them fleeing the field, I want to kill them all. Otherwise I pretty much use the same tactics as everyone else except that I take only a few melee cav into battle. If I get charged by heavy cav I can usually arrange to have 3 or so HA hit them at the same time. If my melee cav can get there too then all the better. The first unit in usually takes some losses but the melee cav goes down quickly to the rest. When that engagement is over I still have HA to resume spraying death onto the enemy. It is not uncommon to kill 600+ and only lose 10-30 units.

I have found that it is critical to bring a general along for moral support. Otherwise my HA seem to rout too easily while being chased by melee cav, particularly if it is the other side's general. Like Doug said, if you can engage a chasing melee cav from two sides you can often avoid being chased into the corner of the map.

I started a new campaign as the Carthaginians last night and couldn't remember how to fight without an all HA army. If was kind of a private embarrasing moment when I got onto the battlefield and went 'Uh Oh!'.

[Doug-Thompson]

I try NOT to encirle the enemy. After all, I don't want them fleeing the field, I want to kill them all.

But they die so much more quickly when routed.

Seriously, this raises the valid point that winning with HA isn't too hard, but absolutely killing everything takes some effort.

When a unit breaks and routs in a regular melee fight, pursuit is automatic. Combat never stops. That's not true with missile cav.

An HA unit is ordered to fire at a specific enemy unit. The enemy routs. The HA keeps firing as the enemy unit gets away and does not really start following until the enemy is almost out of range. At least now the HA can fire on the move.

Worse, an HA unit is moved into the spot on the battlefield where there are fleeing targets. The HA keeps firing -- as long as something is in range. The HA just sits there when the targets are gone until you micro-manage.

There's always the option of using melee units to pursue -- and taking losses from friendly fire. Also, that's not much of an option when you're chasing cavalry.

I like envelopment because enemy units have to flee toward some unit, somewhere. It also means that some units don't have to be microed, giving more time for the ones who are left. I like to rush all the HA into the escape route when the general rout begins and pursue with melee cav. The CA shoot at the fleeing enemy all during the chase, then help block the escape.

If everything works, fleeing units have to run a gauntlet.

Also, I like to kill as many foot archers as possible during the rout. I'll send melee cav to kill those and send HA to shoot at routing spearmen.

===========

The logical end of all this envelopment talk (for single play) is to split the army during the strategic phase and surround a unit, then attack with the stack that has your melee cav and general.

I haven't done that much because I like control. Still, I'm going to experiment and use Persian Cav as my "encirclers." They seem to come in more of a "square" and don't need to be deployed by hand so much.

[Sinner]

Also, how much difference does shield type make? For instance, Egyptian Desert Axemen have a small shield but its metal.

The flesh/leather/metal values in the stat_pri_armour and stat_sec_armour fields are only to tell the engine what sound to play when the unit is attacked, hence why you get metallic clinks when firing arrows at Armoured Hoplites for example.

Still, I'm going to experiment and use Persian Cav as my "encirclers." They seem to come in more of a "square" and don't need to be deployed by hand so much.

The reason for the 'squarer' Persian Cavalry formations is that they are organised with only half the distance between columns compared to the Horse Archers.

Persian Cavalry - 1.5m between columns...
formation 1.5, 4, 3, 6, 4, square

Horse Archers - 3m between columns...
formation 3, 4, 6, 6, 4, square

The first two numbers are the close formation distance between columns and then between ranks, the next two numbers are the loose formation distances, then the number of ranks, then the standard formation type, horde or square. A unit can also have an extra formation type such as phalanx, testudo or wedge.

Since you prefer deep formations for your horse archers why not mod the stats, increasing the number of ranks. It'll save you a lot of time in setup for each battle without really otherwise effecting the game.

[Doug-Thompson]

The flesh/leather/metal values in the stat_pri_armour and stat_sec_armour fields are only to tell the engine what sound to play when the unit is attacked, hence why you get metallic clinks when firing arrows at Armoured Hoplites for example.

Thanks, Sinner, although I'm obviously disappointed that the answer wasn't some closely guarded tactical secret.

The reason for the 'squarer' Persian Cavalry formations is that they are organised with only half the distance between columns compared to the Horse Archers.

(etc.)

Now that's nice to know. So, in close formation, a regular formation of PerCav is 19.5 by 16, while HA are 39 by 16. (Large unit size.)

[Edited correction: PerCav should have been 21 by 16, HA 42 by 16. A "square" HA would be 9 wide, six deep.]

Since you prefer deep formations for your horse archers why not mod the stats, increasing the number of ranks. It'll save you a lot of time in setup for each battle without really otherwise effecting the game.

Sounds logical.

=========

On a related note, the limited number of foot archers that outrange HA all have a limited amount of ammo: 30 arrows instead of 40.

Granted, a Chosen Archer Warband doesn't need 40 shots to do real hurt, but I thought this little fact was worth noting.

The foot archers that outrange HA are: Chosen Archer Warbands (Dacia, Scythia, Germainia); Cretan Archers (Merc); Pharoh's Bowmen (Egypt); Forester's Warband (Gauls) and Archer Auxilia (Rome)

[The Hun]

By Engage I mean turn off Skirmish...I would not suggest Guard mode for HA.

[Doug-Thompson]

And I also tend to race my wing around their right flank because infantry shields only protect to the front and left.

How does shooting at the shieldless side effect movement?

This vulnerability can do more than cause more casualties. I strongly suspect that it can be used to "steer" or "herd" units. They will turn -- even break off a charge against another unit -- to turn their shields toward incoming fire. Not just infantry units, either.

Even against another human, you should be able to greatly increase his "pointing and clicking" burden if he keeps having to issue orders to override the self-defense programming.

Parthian missile cav don't have this tendency because they have no shield.

[Doug-Thompson]

Summarized the core lessons of this thread so far and edited them into the topic posting. The ones I picked are:

1. Put HA into big square formations. They are easier to move about, fire in all directions and don't suffer as much from friendly fire because there is less unit overlap.

2. Beware the map's edge.

3. Try to envelop your enemy. The HA units don't have to be in contact with each other. There's no need for a "continuous front" here. Gaps between "squares" are covered by fire.

4. Move and shoot for the enemy's "unshielded" side.

5. Use Cantabrian circle carefully. Circling HA tire out quickly and can suffer if caught in melee. However, the tactic does reduce casualties in a pure missile fight.

=========

For every rule, there are exceptions. For instance, suppose a unit of HA has to get in a missile fight with a chosen archer warband, which outranges HA.

I suspect -- but haven't proven -- that it would be better to have a long, thin line while the HA are closing the range. CAW has a big range advantage over HA. I suspect a long, thin, fast-moving formation would be harder to hit at long range. Once the HA were well within range, they could go into Cantabrian circle.

[R'as al Ghul]

How does shooting at the shieldless side effect movement?
This vulnerability can do more than cause more casualties. I strongly suspect that it can be used to "steer" or "herd" units. They will turn -- even break off a charge against another unit -- to turn their shields toward incoming fire. Not just infantry units, either.

Hi Doug, I had written a long post but have lost it during the reply.
Anyway, I second your herding theory. If done right you can flock them in the middle of the map. You need to completely surround them and micro the targets. Everytime a sheep threatens to break out, shoot it in the right flank to make it change it's course. During this procedure you will also shoot it in the back, thereby inflicting even more penalties. My experience is that once they leave the proximity of their own units, they break and rout very fast.
Against the Egyptians or anybody else who brings fast Cav, you have to deal with the CAv first before you start the herding.
Being shot at from the front is fine by the AI. It doesn't really care. It's expected to happen during a battle. No need to panic. But as soon as the right flank or even the back is attacked, it will adjust its line and soon after that will panic. I fought a battle yesterday against a 1500 stack Egyptians, a 600 stack Seleucids + a 200 stack Seleucids with about 5-600 men on my side. HA, General, 2 BedouinWarr and 1 Cat. Only about 50 of each stack survived the herding.
Quite usefull if you only want to fight them once.

R'as

[Doug-Thompson]

Anyway, I second your herding theory. If done right you can flock them in the middle of the map. ... My experience is that once they leave the proximity of their own units, they break and rout very fast.
... [A]s soon as the right flank or even the back is attacked, it will adjust its line and soon after that will panic.

Yes, it's fascinating how you can herd units into the middle of the map AND destroy their cohesion at the same time.

They are crowded together in simple terms of space, but all broken up in terms of facing, whose flank is threatened and an overall fear of being surrounded. Each unit feels more and more isolated even though they may be piled on top of each other. The result is a tighter mass that's much more unstable morale-wise than a more spread-out formation that is in good order.

Put simply, they go from being an army to a mob. Even high-valor units are vulnerable to confusion and disorder, although they do resist panic for longer.

While this pattern may work best against the AI, the AI's habits and tendencies are something that a human player has to fight with when he's trying to control his units.

We've talk about putting an enemy army inside a bag of HA, but every once in a while we need to "tighten" the bag by using HA to move in and around to threaten open flanks from a closer range. They may have to skirmish away when the enemy pushes back, but then the bag can be tightened elsewhere. Keep up the scare, so to speak.

I had written a long post but have lost it during the reply.

Don't you just love that? Like working on word processors before they invented autosave.

[The Hun]

You guys should give Total Realism mod a try. HA are in 'horde formation' so you have no options. This part I do not like but with the adjustments they have made to the game, HA armies really do have to work hard to achieve victory. I had an army of Greeks attack me and they had the usual armoured pikes and hoplites, I had only HA and ran out of arrows as I reduced their numbers. Last time I faced a huge phalanx on vanilla game I shot them to bits and only a handful got away, this time they were reduced but still dangerous now I was out of arrows. I used mock charge and feigned retreat to isolate units and of course, to get them exhausted and then hit quickly from rear and flanks. The enemy general showed his worth......Nothing!! but it was a very hard fought battle requiring much manoeuvre and concentration.

[Doug-Thompson]

You guys should give Total Realism mod a try.

Yeah, but I'm not done obsessing over the vanilla game yet.

Seriously, after all this exploration of how to use HA, there's the whole other side to look at -- how do you fight them?

==========

The shieldless-side vulnerability factor is a much bigger issue in R:TW than in M:TW, I believe, because HA now fire on the move.

In M:TW, you'd run for the shieldless side -- if you could do that without getting one end of your line caught in melee. The enemy unit would keep moving. Your HA would stop and start firing. The target would change facing. You'd have to stop firing and start moving again. And so forth and so forth. Most often, you were better off just keeping your distance and moving another unit into the flank and rear.

In R:TW -- You run for the shieldless side. Your never stop firing, and the arrows start hitting the vulnerable side as soon as you get any edge at all. The target starts changing facing. You run more, and cut closer. You're running faster than it can change facing and the fire is continuous. Also, you're better able to concentrate fire from different units because your HA aren't strung out in long, thin formations that are very vulnerable to melee.

Remember how spear units would reform after each man dropped in M:TW? No time for that now.

Next thing you know, the target has taken heavy losses, is spinning like a drunken dancer and losing it's pattern while showing its very vulnerable backside to another one of your units.

It sure looks to me like phalanx formation makes this vulnerability worse. I know that spear units don't change facing as fast when they are in phalanx mode when I'm controlling them.

[Doug-Thompson]

On a simpler note:

When fighing HA with foot archers, turn skirmish mode off.

As noted, HA have the advantage when foot archers are moving. Since foot archers aren't fast enough to skirmish away from HA anyway, skirmish mode does the ground-pounders more harm than good. It interrupts their firing every time HA get close.

Yeah, the HA can charge, but vanilla HA are terrible in melee. Many decent ranged units can beat them man-to-man. Even with Persian Cav, etc., the archers might be able to survive long enough to get reinforced.

=======

The world's turned upside down. Now foot archers require more micro than HA.

I suspect the changes in R:TW are meant to address problems with HA in multi-player, where game lag was reportedly a constant headache to people who tried to micro these units.

[Oleander Ardens]

It has been a long , long time since my last reply here - finally some time for EB and the .org now


About the indiviual formations:

As Dough and R'as have rightly observed that it has become very easy to use now HA stacks to do the simple fact that you can turn a HA unit into a very compact size. As there is no more rankpenality, massive quadratic blocks are the way to go when very heavy in HA or footarchers.

Vanilla HA and the Scythian Noblewomen require more space by default, but the problem is greatly reduced with the block system. I personally hardly ever turn them into loose formation, as indiviudal archers are very often easy prey for multiplie cavaly charges.

The three male EliteHorseArchers are very densely packed, making their overall required space small indeed. These guys do in consequence profit much more from the loose formation, especially as they are far better to win missile duels, having more armor.


HA vs. Archers

As the footarchers are now a fare less powerful counter you arn't usually pressed to defeat them if there are only a few. Things change when there are elite archers in great quantity around, but this is seldomly the case.
In this occasions the "classical" cav. tactic works fine. Thanks to your speed you can concentrate your force in one point, braking resistence there with the combination of the charges of two-three cav. units. The HA factions all have a good lancer to do this job very well, the Parthians can even use Elephants.


How to counter enemy HA?

Well, as we all found out they are one of the most hated enemies on the battlefield, especially with factions lacking in elite archers and good cavalry. And on VH/VH HA are surly overpowerd compared to other units, as they have a ranged attack and are actually hard to defeat with light cav.
When you combine this with the climate bonus, things can turn very ugly when using light cav. This is the lesson I learned after having been soundly beaten by Scythia in a winterbattle playing the Macs. Two LL each were unable to defeat a lonly HA.

So I would tend in VH/VH to use archers in quadratic blocks and in loose formation (fire at will/stand ground/skirmish off), protected by spears with big shields and some cav. Keep close togheter and boost the morale with the general. You need patience and try to avoid routing at all costs; If it starts once you will ver likely loose the whole army.

Make good use of the terrain and hope for the best.


Cheers
OA

[Doug-Thompson]

It has been a long , long time since my last reply here - finally some time for EB and the .org now

Good to hear from you, OA.


About the indiviual formations:

The three male EliteHorseArchers are very densely packed, making their overall required space small indeed. These guys do in consequence profit much more from the loose formation, especially as they are far better to win missile duels, having more armor.

Hmm. Will have to try putting PerCav on loose ...

How to counter enemy HA?

Well, as we all found out they are one of the most hated enemies on the battlefield, especially with factions lacking in elite archers and good cavalry. And on VH/VH HA are surely overpowerd compared to other units, as they have a ranged attack and are actually hard to defeat with light cav.

I tend to agree here, too, but won't fully go over to that view until more countermeasures have been tried.

Frankly, I can't think of a good countermeasure to HA on VH, except that HA on VH are controlled by the AI. There are weaknesses in the AI to exploit, such as pinchers and map edges, but not in the unit.

When you combine this with the climate bonus, things can turn very ugly when using light cav. This is the lesson I learned after having been soundly beaten by Scythia in a winterbattle playing the Macs. Two LL each were unable to defeat a lonely HA.

Saw your description of that on another thread. Ouch.

[Doug-Thompson]

Looks like the big questions have been addressed. Hopefully, there will be some definitive test results someday but those will deserve a thread of their own. The remaining tactical questions I can think of probably need threads of their own, too.

1. What are the best countermeasures for HA, and what should HA do to counter-counter them? I really think top-notch foot archers like Chosen Archer Warbands can put up a good fight if the proper tactics are worked out, including co-ordination with other units.

2. Are the techniques worked out on this thread good for chariots, too? What about javelin-armed cavalry, like Numidians?

=======

Also, in the finer points-category, HA units will start firing at a target from a distance if you order a melee charge. Persian cav, for instance, will fire from a distance before charging with swords.

This means that if you order Persian Cav to melee with some fleeing cavalry, for instance, they will start firing and keep firing into the fleeing unit's backside until they catch up or the routers get away. It's a nice way to have Persian Cav pursue a unit without having to micromanage.

[m4rt14n]

Anyone ever use Cat Camels in conjunction with PH or HA ? They seem very much unused, being in the highest tech level and all.

[Doug-Thompson]

Anyone ever use Cat Camels in conjunction with PH or HA ? They seem very much unused, being in the highest tech level and all.

Unfortunately, I haven't had the chance.

The stats are great, but I only play campaigns. By the time I can get them, the game is practically over.

[R'as al Ghul]

Looks like the big questions have been addressed. 1. What are the best countermeasures for HA, and what should HA do to counter-counter them? I really think top-notch foot archers like Chosen Archer Warbands can put up a good fight if the proper tactics are worked out, including co-ordination with other units.

2. Are the techniques worked out on this thread good for chariots, too? What about javelin-armed cavalry, like Numidians?

I agree this case seems to be closed.
1. When I encounter enemy HA at the beginning of a Hard or VeryHard campaign, I try to pull them into melee with 2 or more of my own HA. The problem is the +4 or +7 attack bonus in these levels. The Ai knows that and will charge your HA with his own. In a 1vs1 melee you can only loose. If you happen to have some camels around or even better melee Cav you can easily rout them. If I face armies with several HA I try to seperate them from the main army to deal with them one by one. Cantabrian circle helps to minimize casualties in a shoot out.
Foot archers have two weaknesses. 1. They can't shoot on the run. 2. weak melee. They need to be protected and put on hold position.

2. No, chariots are a different category and I can't tell how to use them most effectivly. Jav-Cav on the other hand works pretty much like HA. There's one thing to consider however, their ammo is spent very fast. I don't have any stats at hand but even if they have the same amount of projectiles as HA do, they run out of Javs very fast. Tactically this means that you have to consider on which units you use them. Where are they needed most? You can't just let them run around shooting at random targets like HA. Jav-Cav needs more foreward planning. I would even recommend to switch f@w off.

R'as

[Doug-Thompson]

Jav-Cav on the other hand works pretty much like HA. There's one thing to consider however, their ammo is spent very fast. I don't have any stats at hand but even if they have the same amount of projectiles as HA do, they run out of Javs very fast. Tactically this means that you have to consider on which units you use them. Where are they needed most? You can't just let them run around shooting at random targets like HA. Jav-Cav needs more foreward planning. I would even recommend to switch f@w off.

Basic JavCav have only six shots, but have much better melee than vanilla HA.

I haven't played with JavCav much. I don't like Greek City or Seleucid campaigns. However, this brand of missile cavalry seem to be more "disruptors" than "destroyers."

Greek militia cavalry can whittle a large 120-man militia pikeman unit down to about 99 men if they're left alone. They're also reasonably resistant to archers when the JavCav are using cantabrian circle.

So I'd consider using them like ultra-skirmishers. Turn fire at will off, as you suggested, put them in a circle and send them to attack good infantry. If the enemy archers fire back, they will have to halt (disrupting the formation of an attacker) and will waste a lot of arrows. Also, the JavCav can charge the archers if they get a chance. If the JCs are charged by decent melee cav, have them run away. This distracts the enemy cavalry and tires them out.

Keep your own infantry back until the JavCav have caused their casualties and disruption, and worked their way around the sides. Once the main infantry lines have clashed, charge enemy archers and the rear of enemy melee infantry.

JavCav really shine once the rout begins. They're fast and have decent enough melee to wipe out routers.

Disruption, not destruction: The old motto of M:TW HA.

Also, there appears to be no reason to put JavCav in a square. They lack the range. A long, thin line is better for melee but makes them harder to maneuver than HA.

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

Edited P.S. Some rather detailed micro tips are in this thread

[Kanamori]

Sorry if this was discussed somewhere and I didn't see it, but does the accuracy or kills increase w/ a thinner line, as in MTW: VI? Also, If I want to kill all or most of the army, I tend to make armies of heavy inf, a few heavy cavs, and light cavs to chase down the enemy and flank to cause the initial rout. I've found armies tending to have lots of cav do very well in getting all or most of the enemy troops.

[Doug-Thompson]

Sorry if this was discussed somewhere and I didn't see it, but does the accuracy or kills increase w/ a thinner line, as in MTW: VI?

I don't think that ever got a thorough test. However, the gain in accuracy would have to be pretty massive to offset the other advantages of a square formation: Less friendly fire problems, much easier to handle, no need to change facing, concentrated fire in any direction. I haven't noticed any such increase in accuracy.

However, it does seen that thin lines are harder to hit. Foor archers seem to have a hard time getting any kills on a long, thin line of HA -- or any other fast unit -- that is running directly toward or away from them. I can't prove that, though.

[MAt]

hey guys good thread.

I'm a bit suprised that more people aren't running into issues with scythed chariots... must be just me then. They consistently make mincemeat of my horse archers - either by chasing them into a corner of a map, or if on a city map into the city walls, and their high armour makes them pretty much invincible.

Of course there are plenty of ways round this (easiest is foot archers + flaming arrows) but it requires a fair amount of micro-management steering HA's away from trouble and stopping them from getting too scattered I find.

No one else had this problem?

[Elephant]

This maybe a stupid question, but whenever the term HA Squares are brought up, does it mean that you are making each unit "deeper"? Or multiple HA units forming a double/triple line as a collective?

Sorry to have to ask this, I am a newbie.

There is something that I do know and could recommend, however: using Cantabrian Circle can gain you experience faster than in regular formation.

This is something that occurred to me in a siege battle at a Scythian campaign (VH/H). My horse archers sallied out to shoot the German spear warbands, and knowing that they will have a hard time coming near me, I messed around and make them all do the circle.

I tripled the speed, and after 5-10 minutes of game time, I noticed all of my HAs getting a chevron, with their status reading Tired, but unharmed.

In the next battles, I tried this again as I fought some Rebel armies. And it seemed that the HAs each gained another chevron at the end of the battle. Further retrials with the same HA army shows me that they gain one chevron per 2 battles using the circle.

In conclusion: Tired to Exhausted HAs (perhaps all units?) are more likely to gain experience if they kill something than they would when Fresh to Winded.

Maybe someone can test it out in order to prove/disprove my findings?