View Full Version : AI Horse archer tactics
It seems from what I've read that "Eastern" style Medieval armies, such as the Turks, Egyptians and Mongols, tended to rely heavily on archery and evasion in dealing with heavier armoured Western-style opponents such as the Crusaders. The tactic seemed to be showering the enemy with archery fire, trying to induce the knights to charge and get separated from the infantry, and only closing in for the kill when the enemy was disorganised, divided or exhausted. I can see a skillful human player doing this, luring out enemy units, exhausting them, surrounding them etc but doubt whether the AI can pull it off. Do other people agree?
I am wondering what tweaks could be made to help the AI with Eastern syle factions? I want to avoid giving them Western style heavy armour and indeed have not yet found a historical counterpart for the mailed Saracen infantry in the game (Saladdin's spearmen are described as poor unarmoured Syrian units that were very secondary to the horse and archers).
Here's what I've come up with:
(1) Increase the ammo limits. I've read Saracen horse archers went on campaign with 100 arrows; Mongols may have had up to 300 and there is mention of supply wagons for warriors to restock. This tweak might help a little, but if applied generally would also help the human foot archer and so not be sufficient.
(2) Increase horse archer unit size, say to 60 so that they are comparable to foot archers or even to 100. The Mongols suffer here from the 40 size limit on cav. You can only have 16 units on the map, so the Mongol horde looks small. There would be big balance issues here regarding what you do with the unit size of heavy cav that I have not thought through.
(3) Mod in the composite bow, so that the mounted longbow (really a composite bow) is improved. I am wondering about making it equivalent to the foot short bow. Giving Islamic foot archers (desert cav) a superior bow would also help. Western forces would then have to rely on the crossbow (or longbow if English) as they apparently did historically and have to consider making knights sally out rather than turtle.
These changes might not be sufficient but they might make Eastern style AI forces more dangerous. I remember in Shogun that the archer heavy faction (a dark blue one) was always very annoying to fight as the 100s of accurate archers you could face in Shogun would always cause significant casualties on you, even if you ultimately prevailed.
I think the AI uses the 'evasion' tactic pretty effectively already with horse archers. If you dont have something fast with with to catch them (like Steppe Cavalry or something) they are a right pain.
The only tweak I'd make is to have them always withdraw once out of ammo if there are reinforcements avalaible, and not waste their lives in a melee where they are slaughtered.
Quote[/b] ]
The only tweak I'd make is to have them always withdraw once out of ammo if there are reinforcements avalaible, and not waste their lives in a melee where they are slaughtered
Good point. We can't mod this, but maybe upping the ammo would be a possible work around?
Kristaps
03-13-2003, 17:58
Quote[/b] (Simon Appleton @ Mar. 13 2003,04:21)]It seems from what I've read that "Eastern" style Medieval armies, such as the Turks, Egyptians and Mongols, tended to rely heavily on archery and evasion in dealing with heavier armoured Western-style opponents such as the Crusaders. The tactic seemed to be showering the enemy with archery fire, trying to induce the knights to charge and get separated from the infantry, and only closing in for the kill when the enemy was disorganised, divided or exhausted. I can see a skillful human player doing this, luring out enemy units, exhausting them, surrounding them etc but doubt whether the AI can pull it off. Do other people agree?
I am wondering what tweaks could be made to help the AI with Eastern syle factions? I want to avoid giving them Western style heavy armour and indeed have not yet found a historical counterpart for the mailed Saracen infantry in the game (Saladdin's spearmen are described as poor unarmoured Syrian units that were very secondary to the horse and archers).
Here's what I've come up with:
(1) Increase the ammo limits. I've read Saracen horse archers went on campaign with 100 arrows; Mongols may have had up to 300 and there is mention of supply wagons for warriors to restock. This tweak might help a little, but if applied generally would also help the human foot archer and so not be sufficient.
(2) Increase horse archer unit size, say to 60 so that they are comparable to foot archers or even to 100. The Mongols suffer here from the 40 size limit on cav. You can only have 16 units on the map, so the Mongol horde looks small. There would be big balance issues here regarding what you do with the unit size of heavy cav that I have not thought through.
(3) Mod in the composite bow, so that the mounted longbow (really a composite bow) is improved. I am wondering about making it equivalent to the foot short bow. Giving Islamic foot archers (desert cav) a superior bow would also help. Western forces would then have to rely on the crossbow (or longbow if English) as they apparently did historically and have to consider making knights sally out rather than turtle.
These changes might not be sufficient but they might make Eastern style AI forces more dangerous. I remember in Shogun that the archer heavy faction (a dark blue one) was always very annoying to fight as the 100s of accurate archers you could face in Shogun would always cause significant casualties on you, even if you ultimately prevailed.
I'd say: up the ammo for the horse archers: that can be done on unit by unit basis in "crusaders_unit_prod11.txt" so there is no need to worry about making foot archers superio.
As to the mounted-longbow: I believe, the only difference with shortbow in "ProjectileStats.txt" is shorter range and decreased accuracy. As to composite bows: there is no record of such in "ProjectileStats.txt". All foot archer units supposed to use composite bows appear to be using shortbows: the same ones used by plain archers.
Elrich of Gaul
03-14-2003, 02:55
Aye..aye... up the ammo I say..
SA, I agree with all your suggested changes. Check out this web-site about Mongol tactics (a very interesting review of a book about the Mongol battles against the Mameluks: http://coursesa.matrix.msu.edu/~fisher....ss.html (http://coursesa.matrix.msu.edu/~fisher/hst372/readings/amitai-preiss.html) You'll note that each mongol warrior had several spare horses and plenty of refills for his quiver. Ammo for mongols probably should be nearly unlimited.
This quote sums it up:
"the Mongol army was a people's army, that is, all Mongol adult males were enlisted. . . . the Mongols were hesitant to engage in frontal attacks, preferring instead to depend on their archery and mobility. In order to maintain this mobility, each Mongol troop would lead a string of mounts, small steppe horses, when they set out on campaign. While on march, they could thus change mounts when necessary. During the battle itself, the Mongols would remount at frequent intervals, and thus so maintain their famed mobility. The small steppe horse, really a pony, would quickly tire, thus necessitating rapid changes of mounts. The tactics of the Mongols reflected their dependence on archery and mobility:
The Mongols ... sent unit after unit galloping at the enemy as fast as could be with each man shooting one heavy arrow from as close as possible; each unit would then turn away and out of the path and line of fire of the next unit, which could follow almost on its heels. Thus the enemy would be repeatedly pounded by the Mongols' best shots, delivered by a quick and confusing succession of attacking units, each concealing the next until the last moment. Each unit would charge, shoot, turn and gallop away, and then circle into position for another charge, in this way making several attacks... The attacking units would then give place to fresh forces and retire to rest, rearm, and remount. [Previously, Smith wrote that a Mongol horse-archer could not fire more than one effective shot, as he charged his opponent; this arrow was let loose at a distance of about 30 meters.]
The aim of such tactics, together with efforts at outflanking, was to wear down the enemy. If the Mongols faced cavalry, it was hoped that they could provoke a pursuit, with the Mongols shooting to the rear (the so-called Parthian shot) as they rode off. This would lead to the exhaustion of the opponents' horses. At some point, the Mongols, either on fresh horses or reinforced by additional troops, would turn against their pursuers, dealing them a crushing blow or harassing them as they withdrew. In general, the Mongols tried to avoid hand to-hand combat, because of their lack of personal arms and armor.
"
As for modding the composite bow, this has been discussed at lenght in the dungeon topic on projectile stats and I think it's a good idea. I have increased the ammo to 32 for mongol archers, but I think after reading this article that it probably ought to be 60 or something, to reflect the constant re-supply of mongol troops in the field.
Simon Appleton
the modding you're asking for will only take you 5-15 min.
first edit the crusaders_unit_prod11.txt file (back it up first)
first for the unit size, edit the 6th number after the unit's name. I would also change the cost and support cost, the first and second number after the name.
second the ammo limit. This would be more time consuming. Find the line that starts with hight(y),radius.... go on untill you see ammo(x) change that number to your liking
now exit and save.
moving on to improving the bow. you have to have the patch installed. Now edit ProjectileStats.txt
go to "mountedlongbow"
yoou can change the stats to your liking. (hint inorder to have a farther range you have to increase velocity as well) But as far as i can see i would only edit the accuracy, leathalty, and power.
hope this helps
I like the concept, and I understand what your trying to achieve but I’m just not convinced these suggestions, (albeit some good thought) are going to get the results we want. Some of it is simply because the way the game is designed. But also because we, strategists simulating the past, have allot of advantages over our ancestors at least in regards to the strategy itself.
The lure tactic can be defended against. Unlike many of the armies that faced the real Hordes of the East, we know enough to provide our armies with a counter to these kind of tactics our opponents may use.
I’m not going to argue about the real effectiveness of the Mongol Horse Archer, no sane man would. But I can’t accept we make them an uber unit without compensation. Many things that made them effective can’t be modeled in the M:TW. It was more than just the Horse Archer alone that made the Mongols as a force so effective.
If were going to give horse archers more ammo, or better accuracy, how will we complement our standing archers? As it stands now there is a balance. Mounted archers sacrifice accuracy for mobility. If you go one way or the other, we’re going to upset the balance. If this is the desired course than at the least, their initial and supports costs should be increased to match the advantage.
IMHO I would like horse archers to be able to fire on the move. I realize that’s not possible at this time, but hey…
"IMHO I would like horse archers to be able to fire on the move. I realize that’s not possible at this time, but hey… "
At least we can make reload possible on the move (just change "no" to "yes" in the unit_prod11.txt file).
As for vanilla archers, it is even more important in my view to up their ammo. The AI builds lots of these units. Unfortunately, they are underpowered compared to history. Their ammo is too limited as many have already pointed out. The intelligent player knows how to work around this limitation. You just bring many archers to the battle. When their ammo is expended, you simply withdraw them and bring on new archer units (this is chiefly a defensive tactic). However, the AI doesn't do this. It generally leaves it's depleted (and now useless) archer units on the battlefield This gives the player an unintended and unnecessary advantage. Giving the archers more ammo wouldn't affect the player that much but it would help the AI. I have modded the game to give all foot and horse archers (but not crossbowmen or arbalesters) 36 ammo instead of 28. It works quite well.
In my personal mod I changed the size of archers and horse archers. Archers are 80, Horse archers and units with swords and bows are 60.
Furthermore I slightly increased the speed of horse archers. This sometimes compensates the artificial stupidity in the "skirmish mode": when for example, the unit, before running away, looses time by aligning into formation (this makes me crazy when I use the horse archers!http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif.
Quote[/b] (Simon Appleton @ Mar. 13 2003,05:18)]Good point. We can't mod this, but maybe upping the ammo would be a possible work around?
No, that is not suitable. But we can actually force the horse archers out of combat, we can just make them afraid of any cavalry (besides themselves), all infantry and all the good archers (JI, Nizaris, Futuwwas ect ect), just like they are afraid of camels.
That way they should avoid combat with those units, but naturally that doesn't mean that they would withdraw.
Interesting idea, Kraxis. Does the "fear" option also imply a melee penalty, like that of horse vs camels? If it did, it might not be ideal. I suspect the Turcomans did close - perhaps following on behind the Ghulams and heavy cavalry - with the enemy after whittling them down and disordering them, so I am not sure the "fear" option is the one I want.
I'd like to know more about Islamic tactics in this period. I just read Nicolle's Osprey book on "Armies of Islam 7-11th centuries" and the early Arab tactics mentioned there were so similar to those I adopt in MTW - armoured infantry with large shields and long spears in the front, javelins and bows backing them up, cavalry to counter-attack. Frustratingly, the book stops as the MTW period begins. There was a movement to cavalry and horse-archer based tactics with the emergence of the Turcoman's (ie Turks?). My impression from various minatures army lists is that by the time of Saladdin, his army seems to have hardly any infantry worth a damn.
The Turcomans are the people that came from Turkmenistan (see the names fit each other), they in turn became the Turks, but only in name as the Turks look like the Greeks (at least to us Danes http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/rolleyes.gif ), while the Turkmenis look rather Asiatic.
I don't know if the fear means the units will have a penalty, but I do know they still fight (you can get knights to fight camels), just not with great enthusiasm.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.