Best flankers vs spears? Knights or CMAA?

[econ21]

In my games against the AI, I typically form a frontline with spearwall with missiles behind. I wait for an opportune time when the enemy is engaged with my front and then execute enveloping flank charges. I suspect this general approach is very common. I am just wondering what do people think are the better units for such flanking? Knights or infantry shock type troops, let's say FMAA?

I'm guessing knights are better against most stuff except spears. But with spear, I just don't know. I've heard it said that spears negate cavalry's charge bonus but is this always or just when fighting frontally? Do spears crumple when attacked from the flank by cavalry just like swords? Or are they more resilient? Even if the negate charge bonus only works frontally, I guess the spearmen may turn to face the flankers fairly quickly. What are people's experiences?

Without the charge bonus, I guess CMAA (attack 3) are better than knights (attack 5, but outweighed by the +4 to defence and +1 to attack that the spears get as an anti-cav bonus). Even with the charge bonus, the CMAA may be better.

What do people think? I am sure MPers will have a better feel for this than I do. (I know Gallowglasses and some other special units may be better flankers than CMAA but CMAA are the more mainstream units to make comparisons with).

I suspect CMAA may have the edge in the game, although intuition suggests knights would be more effective in reality. I would guess knights were often better dismounted - sort of like CMAA - when facing a strong spear line frontally but were better mounted when flanking them.

Thanks for any advice.

[desdichado]

Simon,

I have only played SP - usually expert but my experience is that infantry shock troops are better than mounted anything when attacking flank of spearmen. Against non-spear units mounted knights are better for many reasons - high charge bonus, no anti-cav bonus, high morale penalties.

However, unless the spear unit is taking heavy losses and is close to breaking a cav charge has generally been unsuccesful for me.

My preferred tactic is for my maa to flank spearmen and my knights to charge whatever AI has left in rear ie. archers, xbows etc or to fend off enemy cav charges to protect my own flanks.

Basically agree with everything you have said. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[NateEngle]

I find that as time goes on I'm building less and less spearmen and more polearms, but your basic model is pretty much what I do - somebody holds the front rank against a rush by the enemy so that my missile troops have time to empty their quivers and scurry off the board to make room for replacements.

When I have CMAA, as a general rule I'll typically deploy them as a reserve line immediately behind the spear/polearms, thus making it quick/convenient for them to step forward if my line is approached by opposing infantry (as per recommendation by Vegetius). Because of this the CMAA really aren't positioned ideally for flanking moves, and so that role is left mostly to cavalry.

Note that I say "cavalry" here because it's very rare that I have real knights to throw out on the wings. Far more often what I'm deploying there are basic light cav - hobilars, jinettes, steppe cav, or mounted sergeants, and as a rule I try to avoid engaging them against spear troops at all. The more important role I look for from the flankers is instead something to ride down (or drive away) enemy missile troops, but I have had cases where I've charged the flank of a spear formation and done it with good effect.

That having been said, I think it's important to only do this in cases where the enemy spearmen are already engaged (and therefore not at liberty to change facing against my horses). Spearmen seem to get their rank bonus against foes directly in front of them, but not at all on the sides.

So typically my battle plan flows as follows: spears in front, swords behind that, archers behind that, and cav on the wings. When enemies approach, if they're cav I leave my spears forward, and if they're infantry I push forward the MAA. I find that CMAA are actually very effective even going head-on against spears, and usually I won't need to hit the spears from the flank at all - just slice and dice with my swordsmen. Once the enemies start running away then I'll send in the cav to ride down stragglers.

[Kraxis]

The chargebonus is only negated from the front of spears...

You can see this by charging the rear of a spearunit... You will see plenty of soldiers be rolled over, often causing a rout. Being charged in the rear by cavalry is the worst situation you can be in as infantry in Morale issues.

[econ21]

Thanks for the replies, folks.

Kraxis confirms what I suspected about facing and the negate cavalry charge bonus.

I may try NatEngle's advice - I think I rely too much on spears. My tactic is to meet enemy spears with my own spears, in order to buy time for my flankers. But charging frontally with swords previously screened from cav by spears sounds better. I think I under-invest in swords.

So to sum up the rock-scissors-paper system, the best match ups in terms of meleeing are (target defender vs best attacker):

Spears - swords

Knights - spears at front, polearms or knights at flanks?

Archers - horse

Swords - knights

[Kristaps]

Btw, trying to eliminate high quality sword units with knigts might be a costly choice... High quality sword units have decent defense and good attack so they are likely to take quite a few knigts down before routing...

[Kongamato]

I have my own little rule of flanking.

"To kick a unit's @$$, you must kick it in the @$$"

This reflects my attitude on flanking. Just about any unit can defeat a unit engaged in battle at the front if it attacks from behind. Frankly, whatever you've got will do the job.

However, you want to know the optimal unit for the job. The best units for this are mounted. For flanking, you will want either light melee cav or medium/heavy cavalry. Do not try to use Kataphractoi or Gothic Knights. They would do the job very well, but are too slow. With light cav, you can very quickly manoeuvre your way around into the back of the troops, routing them quickly. Heavy cavalry can do the same at a slower pace, but their charge will rip through the troops, causing less to survive.

You should keep in mind that the wave of routers will come back at your cavalry, putting them in danger. If you are facing strong Halberdiers or SAPs, you might want to use infantry instead to prevent cavalry losses.

[econ21]

More interesting points. I haven't tried charging swords much so I don't know how it would work out (knights are too scarce for me to use in frontal attacks except in emergencies to cover my flanks in counter-charging enemy cav). I can't think of what else would be more powerful against swords, but agree I haven't considered issues of cost.

One further question - anyone know if polearm units get the "negate cavalry charge bonus" that spears have? I know from the txt files that they do get some anti-cav bonuses, but the negate cavalry thing is a big one that I suspect is hard-written in the exe. I'm assuming it goes to spear and pike only.

[ToranagaSama]

I take a similar but, slightly different approach.

Typically, I use Spears exclusively for anti-cav/archer protection. 1 to 1 ratio. 2 to 3 units of archer, 2 to 3 units of Spears. Spears are in front on Wegdge and Hold Position. The purpose is tie up any Cav seeking to attack my archers. These units form the "middle" of my formation.

I use 1 to 2 units FMAA on both sides of the middle Spear/Archer combo. Rather than have a sinlge left/right line. I "step" stagger the FMAA (slightly) to the rear. This makes it easier to flank and envelope an attacking unit (suck em in). Though, the main purpose for the FMAA is not as flankers, but to "meet" and "hold" against any charge by foot units.

I use, preferable, Vikings or Sargents or Peasants as "Flankers". Speed is the most important factor in a flanking maneuver. These units are the fastest, so are preferable. Faster is better for flanking.

These units are placed at the flank and slightly to the rear.

I use Knights for one of two purposes. To take the battle to the enemy Archers. Knights' speed and toughness make them unique for this duty. Their speed allows them to charge through weak spots in the AI's defense to either destroy archers or to disrupt archer fire; and Knights are easily pulled back to "safety", but if they get in a tough spot they can fight their way out.

The second use for Knights is as the "ultimate" protection of my flanks. Any charging attack by the AI's Knights that make it around my flanks can be met decisively by my own Knights. The Knights will "stand and hold" while I bring a unit of Vikings of FMAA to envolope.

Once the battle is in hand, I'll use the Knights to flank any remaining stubborn AI units; then as chasers.

So, in answer to your question, Vikings FMAA/CHMAA are too slow, plus Vikings have a better "charge" bonus (I've discovered from reviewing the stats. Previously, I just noticed they worked better http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif .)

I use my Knights judiciously, as they are costly and usually their units contain my Govenors.

[Kraxis]

Quote[/b] (ToranagaSama @ Feb. 28 2003,15:09)]So, in answer to your question, Vikings FMAA/CHMAA are too slow, plus Vikings have a better "charge" bonus (I've discovered from reviewing the stats. Previously, I just noticed they worked better http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif .)
Ehmmm...
This the stats for the Vikings: CHARGE_BONUS( 3 ), MELEE_BONUS( 3 ), DEFENCE_BONUS( 0 ), ARMOUR_LEVEL( 2 ), HONOUR_LEVEL( 4 )
This is the stats for FMAA: CHARGE_BONUS( 3 ), MELEE_BONUS( 3 ), DEFENCE_BONUS( 2 ), ARMOUR_LEVEL( 3 ), HONOUR_LEVEL( 2 )

This means the Vikings have the same chargebonus as the FMAA, but they have AP that makes it better.
And all three units are equally fast running at speed 10 and charging at speed 11.

[Sainika]

Every unit with "irresistible charge" is very good in flanking operations. I like charge on a rear by gallowglasses or ghazi infantry or abyssinian guard.
Infanrty is more preferable than cavalry because in initial charge infanry which size is bigger than cavalry one can kill more enemy soldiers forcing tham to rout immediately after outflanking. In my battles sometimes I do not even have to engage my soldiers in a fight: it is enough to do such a maneuvre and enemy sees it and routs.

[Michael the Great]

Quote[/b] (Kraxis @ Feb. 28 2003,15:27)]This means the Vikings have the same chargebonus as the FMAA, but they have AP that makes it better.
And all three units are equally fast running at speed 10 and charging at speed 11.
Yes,but FMAA beat Vikings head-on.

[Michael the Great]

Quote[/b] (Michael the Great @ Mar. 01 2003,12:34)]
Quote[/b] (Kraxis @ Feb. 28 2003,15:27)]This means the Vikings have the same chargebonus as the FMAA, but they have AP that makes it better.
And all three units are equally fast running at speed 10 and charging at speed 11.
Yes,but FMAA beat Vikings head-on.
Do you mean that a higher attack(which teh AP gives vs armored units) has an effect on thy charge??

[Kraxis]

Quote[/b] (Michael the Great @ Mar. 01 2003,12:37)][quote=Michael the Great,Mar. 01 2003,12:34Yes,but FMAA beat Vikings head-on.
Do you mean that a higher attack(which teh AP gives vs armored units) has an effect on thy charge??[/QUOTE]
Quoting ourselves are we? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/tongue.gif

Well, the AP doesn't really make the chargebonus better, but it does make the charge better as it is the bonus added on top of the attack value. So directly compared the Vikings will have a better charge than the FMAA 7 to 6 (when fighting each other).

The reason the FMAA defeat the Vikings is that they have a better defense, a much better one I might add. In fact I believe the Vikings are overpriced compared to the other units of this class (AUM, FMAA and Gallows).

[Michael the Great]

Yees I was quoting myself,looking at this stupid avatar I've got http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/rolleyes.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
Kraxis,I was asking,a unit with a high attack value AND a high charge(gallowglass) has a better charge compared to a unit with only a high charge but not a good attack(spear-units)?
So,a unit with high melee is better when charging?
Thx

[cugel]

One advantage from charging into the flank/rear with cavalry is that you can more easily disengage, pull back and charge again to get the charge bonus (so long as the other unit is engaged from the front it can't really respond). You will see the AI do this sometimes. Infantry are too slow to use this tactic effectively. Just keep up. It immediately imparts a big morale loss to the enemy unit. If they don't break after the first charge, they often will after the 2nd.

[econ21]

Yes, Cugel, I really like the AI knights post patch. Pre-patch, they would throw themselves on impenetrable shields so, say, 6 groups of Danish royal knights could be handled by 3 lots of spears. Post-patch, the are more lethal (apparently a tweaked push back factor) and also do the charge-withdraw-recharge routine you describe. Now those groups of Danish royal knights can be trouble to handle and AI heavy cavalry is probably their most dangerous unit, as it should be.

[Kraxis]

Quote[/b] (Michael the Great @ Mar. 02 2003,12:01)]Kraxis,I was asking,a unit with a high attack value AND a high charge(gallowglass) has a better charge compared to a unit with only a high charge but not a good attack(spear-units)?
So,a unit with high melee is better when charging?
Thx
Well since the charge is only a bonus added to the attackvalue I can safely say that units with good attack are much better at charging than weak attackers with equally good charges.

So Gallows beat Muwahids hands down in charges. Templars beat Peasants hands down at charging (both have a charge of 4).