Feudal Sergents Better Than Chivalric Sergeants??

[aX1s]

Right now my army has a mix of Feudal and Chivalric Sergeants (+ Chiv Men at arms & ranged & cavalry of course but at least 5 battalion of sergearnts in each army) as my main force but 80% of the time the feudal sergeants hold while the chivs route...so iam wondering is thier +3 Defend worth such low morale???

and i have more confidence that the feudals will do the job than in the chivs that ive altoghter stopped building Chivs....but i worried will the Feudal sergeants hold up against high units as well as they do against middle units or should i start building chivs for the future???

[This message has been edited by aX1s (edited 10-18-2002).]

[Hakonarson]

Feudals have better morale (2 vs 0), melee (0 vs -1), honour (2 vs 0) than the Chivs, and of course they cost a little less.

Chivs have better defence (3 vs -1) and armour (3 vs 1).

Given that defence and armour ar relatively easy to build up with upgrades IMO the Feudals are a slightly better bet if you prefer attacking, while Chivs are better if you prefer defending.

Of course both troop types are historical nonsense anyway........

[pdoan8]

Chiv Sergeant have 0 morale while Feu Sergeant have 2.

If there is no morale boost, Chiv Serg will likely route in the situation which Feu Serg can hold.

If you have morale boosting buildings and good general to command the army (and boost the morale), you may want to go with Chiv Serg because they have better armour and defense and they generally do well if they have some morale to start with. Once they have 3-4 valours, you wouldn't have to worry about their performance.

[Gringoleader]

They are not so much nonsense as an attempt to explain the progression of infantry from the feudal era to the chivalric era.

[Dorkus]

In principle, chivs are way better than feudals -- they have +4 defense and +2 armor.

The reason feudals hold up better is the bugged valor bonus. Feudals are currently getting +2 valor (+2 atk, +2 def, +4 morale) for free; chivs are not http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/frown.gif

[Hakonarson]

Quote Originally posted by Gringoleader:
They are not so much nonsense as an attempt to explain the progression of infantry from the feudal era to the chivalric era.[/QUOTE]

What feudal era and Chivalric era?

And where?

and what progression??

In many places some classes of infantry got WORSE over time as they were replaced by others - eg English spearmen were replaced by archers, and the remaining spearmen during the intermediate period were neglected in terms of training and equipment, rarely called out and were deemed to be ineffective.

Eventually England lost the ability to field spearmen at all.

But under MTW they'd never lose the ability, and indeed spearmen would get better thanks to the upgrades in armour that also help the archers.

Sergeants were a very rare designation for troops outside the military orders, and of course teh MO's were neitehr "feudal" nor "chivalric" - both of which mean almost the same thing anyway - both imply the obligation of service to a higher authority in the scheme of nobility, and that's about it!!

[Gringoleader]

I suppose it also provides a good excuse to change the battlefield graphics too. =]

[Hakonarson]

ha ha - yeah - mind you that stoopid shield on the Chiv Sgt is the main reason I rarely buy them - it's so damned ugly and daft looking!! http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/frown.gif

What's the story with the valour bug Dorkus mentioned?? It look like yo're saying the Fuedals get valour bonuses for their initial valour, but that valour bonuses are only supposed to apply to extra valour earned the hard way??

That could certainly explain a bit about the performance of hte Feudals and why I prefer them to the Chivs!! Mind you if hte Feudals lose it then I'm gonna have to rethink and mabe field more of those fashion victim Chivs!! lol

[andrewt]

Right now spearmaker gives +1 valor while spearmekers' workshop gives +2. Guild and master give nothing.

[FacelessClock]

Just a question of what you want.

Feudals, espically with higher valour, have a very high attack (for spears) at a low price.

Chivs are basically order foot with less moral and (i think) attack.

What do ya need? Defense or offense?

[aX1s]

This valour bug is interesting....so if its gettin fixed in the patch how will this affect feudal sergearnts???

I basically use all spear infantry as my "meatshield" (sorry warcraft lingo there)
so that my cavalry and my Swords men can flank them while my ranged reigns hails of arrows on the blasphemous (oops got carried away, playing the damn elmoheads and thier AUMs right now)...

So i find that chivs when there down to around 80 men they route even if were winning the battle and sometimes becasue of the chivs routing( and taking most ranged units with them in the chaos) its been really really close, whereas my trusty feudals stand to the last 20-30 men and if their valour is high enough to thier last man.

I use them for both defense and offense...and hey i thought the chivs actually look cool LOL

[Sainika]

Best way to success - to have a mix army with chivalric sergeants and feudal ones. But if you're playing Italians - forget about feud and chiv. srgnts and train only italian infantry. It is an excellent attacking and defending troops and with a high-stars general they rock.
Even as mercs they fight well and even better than many of ordinary units.

[Dorkus]

Here's how valor is currently working, for both militia and spear buildings:

Building 1 (spearmaker, town watch) +1 valor to first level units (urban militia, nubian spearman, spearman)

Building 2 (sm workshop, town guard) +2 valor to first and second level units (militia sergeants, AUM, feudal sergeants, sar inf, ALONG WITH urban militia, nub spearmen, etc.)

Building 3 (Town militia, sm guild) no valor bonuses to ANY units, including lower level units. So building 3 penalizes your lower level units significantly.

Your best bet for a lot of factions is to stop at building 2 -- DEFINITELY for islamic factions. But even for christian factions, +2 valor feudal sergeants are arguably superior to chiv sergs. They have lower def and lose to zero val chiv sergs in a head-on fight, but they have better offense and better morale. And of course they cost less too.

I never have any money problems in the game, and I rarely allow my spearmen to reach their morale breaking point, so I tend to go with chiv sergs.

[This message has been edited by Dorkus (edited 10-18-2002).]

[Kraxis]

That is true... At the moment Feudals are better, but the patch will correct this.

If you pitch V0 Chivs Sergeants against V0 Feudals the Chivs will win. Why?
Simply because of their better defence, and better defence makes sure that the moralepenalty for losses comes later and thus makes up for the worse Morale.
They don't fare as well against flankers but normally spears don't fare that well against flankers.

The main problem is more with Feudal MAA vs Chiv MAA, V1 Feudals are better than V0 Chivs, but cheaper and the Feudals will get that V1 at the same point as the Chivs comes online when the patch is released.
This is because the Feudals has the full benefit of their shield (giving +2 to def and armour) while the Chivs have a 0.5 modifier to their shield (so that it only gives +1 to each).

------------------
BTW, Danish Crusades are true to history.

You may not care about war, but war cares about you!

[This message has been edited by Kraxis (edited 10-18-2002).]

[anymapkoku]

Oh man I can't believe I'm reading this. You're going to take all the good units and make them better. Chiv Sergeants are infinitely better than feudals.
On a side note cmaa aren't as great as fmaa but still worth getting.

[insolent1]

I gave up using chiv's once I seen how effective the feudals are they totally outclass teh chiv's & now I just use the feudal sergeants they are the only good unit you can get before castle