Which is Best-Longbow or Arbalesters???

[The_678]

This is something I see debated here constantly and thinks it would be cool to see your opinions. For this I am not talking about the best for specific roles, like defending or attacking, but about the best OVERALL. And sorry for all you fans of the Muslim Hybrid archers, but that is a whole other poll. This is for Catholic's best. My vote goes for Longbowmen for their faster firing rate and range. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smokin.gif

[ShadesWolf]

Longbows everytime.

when they have run out of arrow just charge the enemey line and watch the enemey guys run away http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif

[Cebei]

Longbowmen are too scary. Is there any difference between pavise and normal arbalests apart from the pavise?

[Quokka]

Quote[/b] (ShadesWolf @ Sep. 23 2003,20:23)]Longbows everytime.

when they have run out of arrow just charge the enemey line and watch the enemey guys run away http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif
What he said. Superb troops.

[Sjakihata]

obviously, LB are not the best. You ever see someone who select 3-4 LB instead of pav. arbs. in late? I dont.

[Devastatin Dave]

I prefer the longbow men because of the rate of fire you recieve. Although the arrow from the longbow does not compare to the bolt of the arb, the distance and rate of fire is more damaging in my opinion. I use arbs when I go after factions that have been isolated and the only thing they produce is sons with their body guards.

[cutepuppy]

Pavise arbalests.
But I have to admit, that LB's fire faster and they can do more damage on the shorter term. Arbalests are more accurate, powerful and have a flatter trajectory, so they won't fire over approaching ennemies.
In bigger battles (more than let's say 25 ennemy units) I prefer arbs all the time.
The pavise shield protects from missiles.

[Snowhobbit]

Citera[/b] (Cebei @ Sep. 23 2003,18:56)]Longbowmen are too scary. Is there any difference between pavise and normal arbalests apart from the pavise?
The difference between pav and normal is firerate, i think and decreased mobility and increased defence.

[katar]

i definately prefer longbows.

like their range and the amount of damage they can do in a short space of time.

even their high rate of fire can be a bonus, they`re on the field, quickly deliver their death and destruction and once they have run out of arrows i can quickly bring in my reserve hvy cav and swordsmen for the killer blow and sweep up the routed enemy units.

guess it depends on your methods and the situation you find yourself in at the time. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wave.gif

[DemonArchangel]

It takes about 2-3 minutes for longbows to run out and about 20 for arbs. take your pick

[TheBrux]

I guess I am stating the obvious but, a mix of both is what I prefer.

However, if I was playing a faction that has access to neither, and both were avaialble at an Inn, and I could only afford one (in other words in exceptional circumstances), then I would choose the longbow over the arb.

Longbows are especially good for countering horse archers and other skirmishing troops, while arbs are best for attacking heavily armoured units.

[Scipio]

Odviously longbowmen Englands cultural contribution to the world.Note: Im not from England but my blode runs thick with english blood http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

[Shahed]

I think the question being asked is which missile unit is best ? The answer to that (gamewise) is Pavise Arbalester OR Turcoman Foot depending on which camp you belong to. (right Crand ? Puzz ?)

But if we talk about missile + melee then what about Janissary Infantry ? or Futtuwa ? or Nizaris (highest base attack in the game AND bows as well) ?

Out of the above 3 I prefer longbows.

[Hobot]

I definately gotta go with the pavise arbalest. Pavise troops slaughter mongols, and they are the only damn thing in the game that do so easily. This is relevant because IMHO mongols field the best armies among all the factions and are thus the only ones that are actually hard for me to fight tactically. Mongol's strength is heavy cav archers which can run circles around anyone's troops and are awesome archers to boot, however pavise arb's slaughter them like sheep...they also do an awesome number on any other armored troops.

Key element however for me is this: If the computer has a large heavily armored melee force he will charge in, therefore you won't get to fire many shots one way or another, so what this really means is that we are talking about ranged exchanges, where the arb's win out because of the defense that the pavise provides, thus giving them the ability to decimate enemy forces while taking very few casualties, longbowmen can't do that, they're very vulnerable to arrows. Besides pavise guys are really hard to kill in melee with mid range melee troops http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

All this is against the AI though, I've never played multiplayer where archery may be used differently...so there I gots nothing to say http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/idea.gif

[HopAlongBunny]

Null vote http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

Longbow on offence; can actually keep up to the combat.
Arbs/PavArbs on defence

Almost forgot. Longbows in desert_don't get tired as quick and devastating

[Rocket_Boy]

Lets just agree that longbows, arbalests and pav. arbs are all pretty sweet and which is better depends on the circumstances of the battle that you are fighting- ie. do you want crippling short term fire power or still pretty awesome long term firepower.

[Balamir]

Quote[/b] (DemonArchangel @ Sep. 23 2003,20:16)]It takes about 2-3 minutes for longbows to run out and about 20 for arbs. take your pick
remember that this means when lbs take 10 volleys at your infantry (not to mention lbs dont stand a chance against pav arbs on bow fight) your pav arbs may only had thrown 2-3 volleys. so if you fire quicjk shots at the enemy inf and then charge, the pav arbs wont be much of a use shooting so slowly will they? of course if lb are out of ammo and you dont charge you are doomed

[katar]

Quote[/b] ]Lets just agree that longbows, arbalests and pav. arbs are all pretty sweet and which is better depends on the circumstances of the battle that you are fighting- ie. do you want crippling short term fire power or still pretty awesome long term firepower.

that just about sums it up for me.

depends on what you need at the time; an alpha strike on the enemy followed by a heavy assault or a rolling barrage to grind them down over time.

it`s nice to have the choice. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wave.gif

[ShadesWolf]

OK guys to prove the point, just do a little test.

Select 10 Pavise units and 10 Longbows units.

Place them on a field facing each other, and start a battle.

when the longbows run out of arrows charge them into the Pavise units and see what the result will be.

[mystic brew]

That's not a test of which unit is better. That's a test of how they do against each other

If you are going to do a test, then fight the same battles with the same enemy and see how they do then...

Pavise Arblastiers are built for long range duelling. your test above plays to their strengths.

[Shahed]

I just did a quick test to add to this discussion. You can download the replay by clicking the link below:

Turcoman vs Longbows Test - Replay - (http://webplaza.pt.lu/shahid/downloads/mtwreplays/TurcomanvsLongbowTest.vrp)

I gave the Turcoman 1 extra valor ( http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/tongue.gif ) to even out the stats between the two. The Longbows killed 11 men, the Turcoman killed 53.

Anyway the hand to hand combat aside, from this replay it seems that Turcoman totally outperform Longbows in a missile duel.

[katar]

Quote[/b] ]I gave the Turcoman 1 extra valor ( ) to even out the stats between the two. The Longbows killed 11 men, the Turcoman killed 53.


don`t see the point in doing that at all, if you are loading the dice in turcoman favour.

the different units do what they do, just use each of them when the situation suits.

and make sure you win when you do use them. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif

[Hamburglar]

I never ever train crossbows or arbalesters or any sort.

They fire too slow and can't fire over my own men which in my opinion makes them horrible.

In Multiplayer games I never engage in a missile duel. Simply put, I don't even buy dedicated missile units. I prefer a lot of good melee troops. Those pavise arbalesters the enemy buys are a complete waste of money when he fires about 2 volleys before my men are clashing with his. He just payed a lot of florins for 4 heavily upgraded crappy melee troops.


As for single player game, I never use them either because I rarely ever have missile units. I only ever train foot missile units if I'm Muslims or if I'm English (longbows).

[Sjakihata]

Hamburglar, you do realise that penalties for units infront of missile units applies both to pav. arb. and LB?

You ever noticed your enemy moving his arbs behind his line while shooting at your troops while you attack? If this is the case you will get morale penalties for being underfire.

My standard 3 arbs. almost have around 70 kills meaning they get 10 extra http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[Shahed]

Umm Katar, what's the stats for Turcoman and Longbows.

I thought LBs have better stats so I gave the Turcos +1 valor. You can try it with equal valor if you like. The reults will be the same, Turcoman will kill more LBs in the archery duel, hence they'll win in H2H as well.

[Cebei]

What is the point of using foot missle units on attack? It is obvious that they will be outranged and outpowered by defender's missile units http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/idea.gif

[Hamburglar]

Akechi:


I know there are penalties for being under missile fire, but when the Arbs are behind their own lines they sure as hell can't kill that many people.

Plus, if you go with 16 inf/cav units, your enemy often doesn't have enough men to protect his arbs and I can get units around behind him and get the Arbs fighting Hand to Hand before the arbs can even shoot three or four times. Then they just become really expensive cannon fodder.

[mystic brew]

I say it again, testing these units against each other is futile.

test out the same scenario twice, once with 6 longbows, once with pavise crossbows. this is comparing like for like. Comparing how they go against each other is a false test.

[bighairyman]

LB are the best, with out it, england won't have been such a great power in the medieval ages. but their power alos goes with thier discline, tatics, and use of terrian.

[katar]

Quote[/b] ]I thought LBs have better stats so I gave the Turcos +1 valor. You can try it with equal valor if you like. The reults will be the same, Turcoman will kill more LBs in the archery duel, hence they'll win in H2H as well.

i have no idea on LB stats, wonder why you gave turcoman +1 valour.

the supposed purpose of all archer units is to destroy enemy units that are the greatest danger on the battlefield eg AUM, knights etc... not to engage in archery duels, which negate the purpose of having archers there in the first place.

most forms of missile duels are a waste of time (apart from deterring horse archers and javelinmen if they get close enough).

even in the nineteenth centuary the Duke of Wellington forbade artillery duels at Waterloo as they detracted from their main job, killing Napoleon`s infantry and cavalry. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wave.gif

[Shahed]

I do agree that achers should be used against enemy infantry or cavalry, and not against enemy missile units. However I did not do the Turcoman vs Longbow test to prove this (naturally).

Read the thread again mate, you will see why I pitched them against each other. Also you can see the stats at Clan Berserk's unit compare tool (http://shogun.cafe24.com/medieval/).

I'll try it again at valor 0 for both. I just saw the stats and actually LBs have much weaker stats than I thought.

Thanks for pointing that out. Cheers http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[Shahed]

Longbows vs Turcoman test 2 (http://webplaza.pt.lu/shahid/downloads/mtwreplays/LongbowsvsTurcomanTest2.vrp)

Did it again at equal valor, same result.


Cheers http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[katar]

Quote[/b] ]Read the thread again mate, you will see why I pitched them against each other.

read the thread again, i didn`t see why, enlighten me. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wave.gif

haven`t played Turks yet, busy having fun with HRE, will give them a try sometime in the future. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[katar]

well i tried out the following using VI + medmod 2.04 on flatland no trees, no extra armour, valour etc.. , no melees, just a missile duel:

Pav Arb versus LB = Pav win
Pav versus Turc = Pav win
LB versus Turc = LB win

i fought as attacker and defender in all cases, same results.

different horses for different courses.

just proves one thing to me, that archers firing at archers is very, very boring. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif

[LestaT]

Anyone ever mod so that i can have longbowmen regarding which faction i am ? (guess because those childhood robin hood stories and recently i read the book vagabond by b. cornwell)

[BDC]

I hate crossbows and arbalests. Useless generally. Only time they are useful is a line of them in front of your army and let them take a single volley at the approaching enemy. Then they get killed. At long range they just miss. Not to mention arbalests become exhausted after a couple of shots.

[MILITARYMAN]

Hello http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wave.gif
I think it depends on three things really.
1.The army you have:attacking/or defence.
2.Upgrades:Armour/Missile/Valour.
3.And most importantly:How they are used in combat and the role you wish them to play in your battle plan

[Lord Rom]

In the campaign game I always use longbows. In multi its pav arb's. when you are defending in multi and dont have the pav arb's the attaker can force you to attak and leave your good ground. Its true that when u attak its nice to have the extra melee troops instead but then again pav's are great at harassing those expensive heavy cav from long range. lately ive been buying a couple when i fight online.

[LadyAnn]

You forgot to rephrase the question in the form of Single Player campaign or Multiplayer only games? Is this V1.1 or V2.0 (Viking Invasion?) There are much changes so accurate answer couldn't be given.

Annie

[TheSilverKnight]

Longbowmen because:
1. They're British
2. They really kick ass at long range (Braveheart)
3. They're British http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[katar]

i always thought they were Welsh http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/tongue.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wave.gif

[TheSilverKnight]

British, Welsh, English, same thing They're all on the same island http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

[katar]

Quote[/b] ]British, Welsh, English, same thing

i`ll let you say that to the Welsh AND for that matter the Scots http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/tongue.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wave.gif

[Marshal Murat]

I pick Longbowmen Early and High, Late is when you bring out the handgunners. THe best combo is Billmen, LB, hobilars, and Highlanders. Use the Bills to defend against calvary and attack, LB are used to fight as general units, Highlanders to attack weak units, and hobilars as general routers, they kick @$$

[Maelstrom]

Personally I (tend to) go for straight arbs.

I find longbows little better that plain archers (as I recall from memory the projectile stats table suggests that they have little if any greater lethality and accuracy, though they do have AP and greater range), and way too expensive and vulnerable to waste in hand to hand.

The pav. units generally are just too slow - they make it difficult to advance or to adjust your formations mid battle.

My standard SP lineup is a row of 4 arbs in front of spears. If you can get these on a hill precious little will ever get close enough to engage, and the arbs will average 100+ kills per unit.

The ineffectiveness of the longbows in MTW has been one of my biggest disappointments...

[Parmenio]

In MTW, without the implementation of field defenses, and the stubborn perference of feudal lords to disdain tactics in favor of direct frontal attacks, professional archer armies simply don't have their historic effect. It's hard to say whether the statisical modelling of longbows in MTW is greatly off the mark otherwise.

Arbalests are something I'd previously been unaware of until MTW as distinct from crossbows, and historically longbow-crossbow duels were considered to favor the longbow's high rate of fire.

Admittedly in the game I often go with arbalests and pretend to myself that they're really longbows. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

[Alrowan]

sinan, that is a static ranged dual, you know as well as i do that a longbow outranges the turcoman, so it can fire retreat then fire again, staying out of range of the turcos.

[Doom Train]

Watch this replay and see pav arbs power:)

http://minigun.sitemynet.com/mongols_arrive_on_armenia.mrp

(R click + Save target as)

[Doom Train]

btw it is for MTW 1.1

[Marshal Murat]

The crossbowmen I despise due to the slow firing capability, and in the 100 years war, it was proved as such. The LB are faster, can fire quicker and have a longer range then the crossbowmen. The longbowmen are also cheaper (I think)

[Skidrowpunk]

I'm using Longbowmens men when I attack and Pavise Arbalesters when I defend. The Longbowmens range and rate of fire is better, but they are expensive as hell and vulnerable against missiles; that's where's the Pavise Arbalester comes in. Because of their large shields they can't be hit by an arrow and that's invaluable. They are damn slow which makes it hard to make a formation in the middle of a battle. I think that CA has made a real balance against these with both pros and cons.

And: The Pavises slaughter mongols http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[Loose Cannon]

ok ok ok... enough with opinion: its fact that truly matters, as logic dictates this.

NO defensive bonus is recieved by pavise arbalesters: their sheilds provide protection only from missile fire. The sheilds also slow down pavise arbalesters; rate of fire NOT affected.
the unit is logically intended to be deployed were mobility is not an issue and its units require sufficient protection: in a seige.

The dispute between which unit is greater and which is weaker and the methods used to settle this dispute are illogical and flawed: MTW is set up as a simulator inwhich to balance unit types out. Other questions to be asked are under what variables are these archer units to engage their foes? MTW is a mathematical simulator: these variables must be applied if one is to settle this dispute, and a diagnosis must be made. Ill stay basic and wont get technical:

Longbowmen can be deployed BY ONLY THE ENGLISH as early as the High Period. They were the first bow types which could shoot 300 yds and more. A drawback to the longbowmen, as of any archer, is it is affected by rain. I also might add longbowmens' arrows were tipped bodkin-style and thus were immensely effective in peircing a knight's armor. When comparing longbowmen and arbalesters, obviously longbowmen have a much accelerated rate of fire. In the battle of Crecy, the Longbow had been proven to have battlefield dominance o'er crossbows because of the English ability to deploy them more succesfully, unlike the French. MTW, however, has shown a general of whom deploys arbalesters effectively while on the defensive to have greater successes over a longbowmen deployment, mainly due to the arbalesters' tactical flexibility while on the field.

[Reconquistador]

yeah but longbow men look cooler http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/tongue.gif

[NovaBlazer]

Clever politics Split the ARB votes between Arbalesters and Pavise Arbalesters so it appears that Long Bows are the clear winners. =P

I would have to agree with some of the earlier posters. Not firing over the heads of an incoming enemy due to the flat firing trajectory makes the Arb's a much more deadly.

However - having both is really the best answer. =)

[dunnichen]

Because I use both types I get some experience of their performance. Because of my sleepy kind of playing in the end I often have to deal with huge nations with huge armies. So normally I have to fight huge battles (as defender). My thoughts come from this - take this in mind.

I'm playing VI 2.1 on Expert. Normally I use 6 units of Longbowmen and 3 to 4 units Pavise Arbalests (and some arquebusiers but that's another theme). 3 units of Lbm in the first wave together with one unit of PA. The AI normally has its best troops in the first waves. I use the Lbm to decimate the most dangerous units of the AI. When they are out of ammo the next 3 units of Lbm are put to field.

Because of the mass of the enemy units even my PA normally have to use all their bolts and run out of ammo towards the end of battle.

So as my units normally shoot every of their bolts and arrows I can state the following:


The kill rate of PA is clearly higher than that of Lbm. If there are for example 6000 enemies, normally I have kill rates for Lbm of about 100 per unit, for PA about 200 per unit.

But: only Lbm (if you concentrate shooting) are able to hit a unit so hard and fast that it will flee from the battlefield.


Take into account: I didn't like the performance of Lbm in the original MTW manner. So I changed something to have a performance which is nearer to the real one in history. I gave Lbm (exclusively) 100 men and 48 arrows (two sheafs). With the original values the kill rate for Lbm would even be less.

Take into account II: Because I like regional recruiting in my MTW, every nation can recruit Lbm, but only in Wales Wessex, Mercia and Northumbria. You see the problem? There is no iron in these provinces (although the AI can build metallsmiths the player cannot), so in later stages of the game your missile units are outclassed. I have solved the problem by creating the possibility of recruiting Lbm in Sweden (yes, the Swedish used the longbow intensively in the medieval&#33http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif. By some strange chance it's normally me who conquers Sweden - shame on me.
The kill rates are from troops with golden sword.


Something to add:
The range of Lbm-arrows and arbalest bolts is not different but the same (6000 = 120 metres - in MTW, in reality of course up to 300 metres).

You don't have to put your Arbalests or Crossbowmen in front of your main battle line. It's a bit strange, but they are able to hit the enemy even if there are troops of you directly in front of them. They hit own troops only if the troops are moving in the line of shoot (crossbows and bows don't fire)

By the way: in the original MTW arbalests and crossbow shoot at the same rate even if the readings suggest something different. You should change this in your projectile_stats. I let arbalests at 15 and gave crossbows a 12.


So: what is the better unit? None. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/dizzy.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/rolleyes.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/pissed.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/eek.gif
But if I would be allowed to have only one of the units I would choose the Arbalests because of the slower shooting rate which is useful in huge battles.
http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/idea.gif

[Sun Tzui]

Both units are good, dependant on the type of missile war you want to make.
For example I use them this way: If I'm up against a larger number of opponents, possibly with a very mobile enemy army and/or a predictably fast battle, I'll need fast stopping power, lots of arrows poured into enemy units in a short amount of time...for that purpose Longbowmen are it, no way around that; now if I'm facing a balanced or inferior number of foes and/or a possibly long battle, I'll need a missile unit that can stay operational on the field for a greater amount of time...for that purpose I use Arabalesters because i simultaneously benefit from a longer range and altough slow to reload, a longer amount of time shooting at the enemy.

By the way, I don't like Pavise arabalesters that much, they're too slow to move, so I avoid producing them, or just use them in defense, on top of hill's and close to the map edge cause they're just expensive cannon fodder...

[HawaiianHobbit]

Longbowmen,Pavise arabalesters take to long to reload.

[k1injuries]

Longbowmen shoot too fast for my taste. In engagements that have over 2000 troops each, my longbowmen become almost useless after the first wave of enemy troops. Don't get me wrong, I like the damage that longbowmen dish out, but the enemy reinforcements after the initial wave can waltz right up to my troops without having to suffer morale penalties from arrow fire.

I haven't used arbalesters nor pavise albalesters, yet. It sounds like they'll be able to keep the pressure on for all the enemy troops since their slow rate of fire makes the arrows last a loooooonggg time.

I still voted for longbowmen anyways though. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wacko.gif

[Court Jester]

The biggest shocker to me is how many of you must play with the English on a regular basis. I've played with them just once, despite the fact I am English (on the other hand, maybe that's why). So honestly I can't really remember the power of longbows.

That said, my biggest problem with the longbowmen (and regular archers) was, as many have stated above, is that they exhaust their arrows so quickly. I hate/love those defensive battles where you are 3 to 1 outnumbered and you realise you've just exhausted all your archer arrows on destroying the first wave of royal knights, and now you have to decide whether to ride the battle out, eating arrows from the attacker's second-wave missile units, or whether to come down off your hill and chase them around the battlefield with CMAA. Bloody irritating when that happens. With arbs, you know your ammo (if not your front line) will last through the third wave.

I recently got around this problem defending the bridge at Kiev (as HRE) by having about 16 archer-type units in the province prior to an attack by the Mongols; I was able to hold the bridge because I cycled archer reinforcements through the battlefield, always having around 4 units firing at any one time while the spearmen held the bridge.

[BDC]

Longbowmen are good in combat too though, especially in MedMod. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[DrHaphazard]

I play as the english all the time BECAUSE they have longbowmen. Maybe its just the way I set up my battles, but i find that the arbs have a problem finding a target since the enemy troops are right up against my own. It is rare that any enemy unit hangs back except for the archers, and in an archer on archer fight the longbowmen are much better.

In short i think the longbowmen are good at quickly whittling away at the enemy before they come into contact with my line of infantry. After the initial contact i have them shoot at enemy archers or just tell them to wait for the next wave. They normally have 1/3 to 1/2 of their arrows left after the first wave.

[avarin]

Longbowmen look better, but you have to wait until high to get them. For the really epic battles, PA are better, dont run out of arrows/bolts as fast, sorry I don't have anything more usefull to add to the post.

[PseRamesses]

I always use LB´s offensively and ARB´s defensively since LB superior firerate and good melee stats and the fact that ARB has a low trajectory so I back them up with good CAV to rush anyone brave enough to charge them.

[Hashishin]

When u ask who is the best then u should mind also the proze wich the units cost.

Longbows cost 350

Pavs 225

Arbs 300

What u get from what cost?
Arbs and Pavs can shoot a long time and Arbs have a longer range then Pavs. Arbs are of course better.

Longbows
Longbows have a huge range can shoot quicker then pavs and even can fight a bit (morale 4 and attack 3). That only for 350 florins.

The answer is of course clear. But Arbs and Pavs are played nearly everytime in MP and so they are for the price the most used shooters.

[thrashaholic]

I voted longbows for all the reasons listed by people above. They're just too good. Arleblasters (of both types) are only better in the quantity of ammo dept. Even so longbows are still better (IMHO of course http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif )

Later cremator,

Thrashaholic

[ichi]

One is not better than the other, they are different.

Use 2-4 pavs (either xbows or arbs) out in front of your infantry. Give them armor upgrades. Deploy them 2 ranks deep. Set them on hold position and hold formation. Protect them with cav. I keep them in close formation until they get down to about 35-40 men, then switch to loose until down to 15-20. Then, to boost their morale, I put 'em back in close form. When they get exhausted their rate of fire is pretty slow. They have a flat trajectory so keep your other guys from getting in front.

In MP this is standard, in SP it will cause the AI to rush you, or sit there and get shot up. When the enemy attacks pull your pavs back and redeploy them on the flanks or high ground in the rear. Try not to fight with em, but when armored they can be used as short-term blockers.

Use 2 LBs just behind your infantry, 3 ranks deep. Armor is useful but valor is better, and weapons upgrades also can be useful. When their infantry gets within range during a rush focus their fire on a weak/low morale unit (the morale penalty may cause a rout) or a high valor unit in order to kill more of the enemy's best guys. They have a higher trajectory so they will shoot over yuor guys, but still careful about friendly fire. When they run out of ammo put em in wedge and run em around the flanks to hit the enemey in the rear.

Never waste LBs on pavs. LBs are good for defending against cav archers, but are best used against melee troops.

ichi

[fruitfly]

All of this is SP-related...

I only reallly use pav arbs when defending because it takes so long to move them into position otherwise. If you can set up on a hill, having a line of spears in front of them doesn't harm you at all because the pav arbs are on higher ground and can shoot over the spearmens heads to get at the enemy. If I'm playing as the English I'll generally put a unit of longbowmen behind each unit of pav arbs as they can fire over their heads giving you a greater concentration of fire. Depending on what else is available, I'll have a third unit of archers behind the longbowmen ready to add fire as the enemy close on my lines.

By putting all the archer units on hold position and hold formation, you can select targets for them without the unit wheeling to face them and disrupting your defensive position so first of all the pav arbs soften up an enemy target, then the longbows start raining arrows onto them and by the time the third unit opens fire most enemy troops have decided they'd rather be elsewhere. Concentrating fire on units in the centre of the enemy army can cause a rout to spread outwards in both directions, which is pretty sweet when it happens, especially if my cav are sweeping round the flanks at the same time.

If I'm not playing as the English, I'll substitute the longbowmen for more arbs/pav arbs instead as their armour piercing ability generally compensates for their slow rate of fire.

In terms of which is the better unit, I think it depends whether you're attacking or defending and on the terrain. Longbowmen are always better in the desert and as far as I'm concerned always better when attacking due to their greater manouverability. The other way in which longbowmen are better is that with a master bowyer you can build them in Wales with a starting valour of 2, whereas pav arbs always have a starting valour of 0. Playing as the English, I'd almost always use both though.

[danielrech]

Both have advantages and disadvantages in my opinion...

One thing overlooked here, I am not 100% sure though, but I think longbows get accuracy penalty in bad weather... Arbalesters don't.

The armour piercing stat for arbalesters is better too. Their projectile is much more powerfull...

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Lbs have better range than turcos so you can shoot themand never be shot.As others have said it depends on what u are using them for.The lbs rate of fire is also a disadvantage as pavs will still have plenty of ammo,If u try to charge pavs with lbs i wouldnt just leave them there i would retreat behind my lines.If im english i take a combination of both.Also it is a waste i my opinion to waste lbs on pavs i am gonna move up and shoot your infantry with them

[Rivelin]

Longbows are by far the biggest disappointment in the game. (mentioned earlier I think). Even with Med Mod they are still very weak units (Med Mod mainly increases the range and ammo). The weakness is at it's greatest in the Multiplayer game where they are just not usable.

The problem is with the leathality in the projectile stats, it is is too low which means you kill very few enemies per volley. This is compounded by the defence value being too low for effective melee. It is only with high valour that LB can melee at all. I would only use LB in singleplayer and even then I have a sense of disappointment as my volley of 60 arrows leaves 1 or 2 men dead, whats the point of a high rate of fire if they can't even hit a barn door and can't kill when they do???? What are they firing???? Feathers??? Do the few men who die choke to death??? I'm begining to think that pointy metal projectiles dropping from the sky are only dangerous in exceptional circumstances.

Rant

Rant http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-furious3.gif

[Gawain of Orkeny]

I dont know how your lbs miss so many men .Lbs are the main reason so many people use the english.Ive seen them devastate a charge by knights.The problem is they run outa ammo to fast,Better tell you guys to take off those rubber tips on their arrows

[Rivelin]

They are not rubber tipped arrows, rubber is quite heavy and could hurt. My LB appear to have suckers on their arrows.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Hehe thats what I meant ,But really I dont no if you are playing MTW or VI but in VI everyone uses engish to get Lbs.

[kawligia]

I hardly ever use any missle units. I would only really use any of them in a defensive army which I don't use very often with my moving wall strategy.

BUT....I think I will include one or two missle units in attacking armies to force the general's unit and those other cavalry units to get out from back there and engage my extra spearmen guarding the flanks that take the place of all those missing missle units.

Now Jinettes and horse archers I like But still only have 2 or so in an army.

[afroide]

To be honest I find them both to be minorly effective (at least with the current version).

I played the game right after release and found that 4 units of longbowmen on the defensive with a height advantage would absolutely shred most enemy charges. In their current iteration, however, this doesn't seem to be the case. Arbalesters seem much the same to me as well, only slower than longbows (although with more ammo).

In either case, my preference lately is to use either some extra light cav for flanking moves, OR to load up on enough infantry to split the army and use a hammer/anvil type of tactic. The odd time I do try to use missile units, I never seem to get the 10-1 kill ratio that I can do with inf/heavy cav/light cav armies.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Are you guys palying the sp or mo version.In mp very few peep dont use range weapons.If you dont have them you have only 1 option rush.Again the main reason England is the favorite faction is LBs they ate very tought to counter.

[insolent1]

I play SP, so arbalesters are the ones for me. I don't use pasive arbalesters at all since I can train the normal ones at +1 valour & i prefer their mobility compared to pasive arbalesters & I don't care how many I loose in a battle as they are cheap & easily replaced. Longbows are good but I prefer arb's for 1 main reason...they last longer

[Gore]

I prefer pavise arbalests mixed with longbow or just archers.
Pavise protect archers from missles and they are missles
immune :)

[Count Fudgula]

I gotta say that I always go for Pavise Arbalests given a choice. I find them effective for much longer, so I like to think that the morale hit on the opposition can be spread around a good few units.

I also have a soft spot for Bulgarian Brigands and will happily buy up all that I can as mercs (haven't played as the either of the factions who can get them yet).

I'm not too keen on the Longbowmen. I think too many MP battles playing as the French against them led me to want to chop them up rather than employ them... history repeating maybe?

[MuseRulez]

I use longbows to kill off most off the unit, pin them with spears and let the LB's attack from the rear. The enemy routs in no time http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/bigthumb.gif

[Gawain of Orkeny]

One other advantage of LBs is that if you make them high valor such as 3 or 4 they are very effective dual pupose units and can be used very effectively a h2h units after their arrows are gone.You cannot do this with pavs.I dont play sp but in mp lbs are deadly althought it is a bit like comparing apples and oranges.True the are both range units but with very different uses.I always take both when I play english

[Sun Tzui]

How about Trebizond archers? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-inquisitive.gif

Just Played battle with the Bizantines last Night, 8000+ Golden Horde against +-7000 Bizantines, with 3,4 (or more) trebizond archers simultaneously pumping arrows into Mongol cavalry formations and mongol warrior units, really dealt quite a punch http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-stunned.gif , I ended up killing 3000 while losing 1500, 60% of enemy casualties was surely caused by my many Trebizond archer units... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-yes.gif

[Aelwyn]

Sure Longbows in SP, but simply charging your missle units into your opponents missles doesn't work so well in MP http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/tongue.gif And besides which, I dislike LB's because I like to use Cav Archers, and the two don't get along too well.

[Kampfen]

Well, I haven't been playing this game very long but I've played Shogun for three years and my take on battlefield strategy is this. When on defense, shoot whatever is effective and lasts longest. Use the toughest spearmen on the front line and back up with swordsmen in the hot spots. Try to position the missiliers on a hill behind them so they can shoot over the front line defender's heads and hold that line . Also, order the missiliers to stand ground and hold postion, then you can direct their fire to the hot spots without them repositioning themselves and winding up in the frontline with part of their battery in the hand-to-hand fighting. As soon as the enemy starts to rout, then run over them with the cavalry units in loose formation, not attcking them directly. Double click your charge past them for maximum effect, turn and run over some more that are routing.

On offence, try to move your missile first formation close enough to the enemy lines to pepper their missiliers, get close and then go loose formation. Wait for their front lines to charge and then hit their flanks with your cavalry (that you have been positioning east and west as you began your assault) while making a fast retreat drawing out their charge. Many times your cavalry movements will delay their charge and you can get in a lot more time with the long range stuff and thin out their front lines. If they do charge early, send up your spearmen in formation to a hold position just long enough to stop their charge while flanking them with your cavalry completly. Then as the cavalry hits them in their rear ends close in formation, all units engage at will. Mop up routers as always in loose formation.

In both cases I have had best results with Pavise anythings over the short lived Longbowmen.

And here's a kick in the head. Researchers have recently proved that the cast-iron Bodkin arrowheads couldn't possibly penetrate the French armor-of-the-day at the Battle of Agincourt Current theory of why the battle turned out the way it did is that the French forgot one of the cardinal rules and allowed their charging ranks to pile up on top of each other until somebody trips and like dominoes they all fell down in the sticky mud, laden with heavy armor and mostly died at dagger point. Makes sense to me that the English commanders would encourage the myth of their deadly longbows, knowing how truly lucky they were after seeing the results. Must have been more than one General that day that noticed how ineffective the arrows really were and that's why they decided to kill all the prisoners so no one could tell the real story of how the frogs all fell down and couldn't get up.

And while I'm thinking of frogs, I found a great deal on used French rifles. The prices are really low because they're used but I happen to know they've never been fired and only thrown down on the ground three times http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[Chaffers]

I saw a 'documentary' which came to those conclusions Kampfen. Utter rubbish in every way. The front rank or two may have had plate armour but the vast majority would have been wearing chainmail, which bodkins tend to slice straight through.

It was hilarious seeing some chap trying to equate Agincourt to a pop concert where everyone fell down. I'm pretty sure it was on somewhere around April the 1st too. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/tongue.gif

[Quessa]

Pavised Arbalesters are my favourite missile unit in M:TW, although if I happen to play with the English I prefer Longbowmen (while England begins to taste like wood thus I always plaid with them when I first started M:TW).

I'm currently struggling with the Italians, and after I managed to conquer Constantinople (poor Byzantines) I've always had those arbalesters in my armies. Today I faced a Muslim Jihad army with 2000+ men which was reinforced with aprox. 1000 men coming from the Bulgaria (yup, I was completely separated from my own realm with Greece, Bulgaria and Hungary invaded).
The battle started and I immediately set my four arbalester units in the front of my army so they had a clear line-of-fire to the Muslims (or the Turkish). Right after I was pleased with my formations, I proceeded to the battle itself. First thing I see is a gigantic boulder flying towards my army. After that they give me a few follies with their Desert Archers. I survive (who wouldn't). At this tide, it seemed there were no hope when the 1600 headed Muslim army reinforced by a 1200 men army marching from the left. The Jihad General sends his cavalry onwards, and my first guard (consisting of Urban Militia, I tend to use them as a delay) gets rumbled down by their charge.
Enemy cavalry comes in distance, at last. I show a green light to my impatious Arbalesters, who immediately unleash the Hell onto the Earth. Bolts come, whistling as they go, and perfectly hit into the mass of Turkish cavalry. The air fills with pain-screams and a lot of brown skinned men fall off their beasts. After two, well aimed, shots, the enemy spearhead routs their General dead. I send my medium infantry forth, and by a chain-reaction (or a happy coincidence) the whole Jihad army routs, catching the reinforcement army after them.

And voila Zero men of my army dead and the Turkish crawling back their homes torn and traumatic. Lovely, just lovely.

Who wouldn't love those arbalesters?

http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/cheers.gif

[Crimson Castle]

Quote[/b] (Rivelin @ Jan. 15 2004,17:32)]Longbows are by far the biggest disappointment in the game. (mentioned earlier I think). Even with Med Mod they are still very weak units (Med Mod mainly increases the range and ammo). The weakness is at it's greatest in the Multiplayer game where they are just not usable.
Rant http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-furious3.gif
In Single Player Mode - the longbowmen really kick ass. But when they are being used in Multiplayer - they unfortunately rate poorly compared to the Pav crossbowmen.

In all the games I played - using longbowmen + spearmen + swordmen combos - the enemy has always used the Pav crossbowmen to nullify my LB. The Pav crossbowmen simply never seem to run out of arrows. Whereas the LB run out of ammos pretty quick.

The only solution I can think of - is to ram your army into the enemy as soon as possible and then use your longbowmen to rain death and destruction on the heads of your enemy. In this case his Pavs are boxed in and can't shoot back.

But then you need to pray that he doesn't have a spare cavalry unit which can wheel around and chase your archers off the battlefield.

[Chaffers]

Pavise Arbs are great in MP and against the Mongols but naff in SP unless you happen to be defending, in which case a line of spears can soak up the arrows instead of the pavise. I tend to require more mobility from my armies, and like to send my misileers into melee (they are only peasants after all).

The cost of producing a unit is small compared to the upkeep costs so I don't see anypoint in mollycoddling them. Arbs are very useful in melee though Longbowmen are more so. Then again arbs generally still have ammo to take out the second wave, which is less likely on huge units. In a large battle you still need both, though I think Lbs edge it over arbs, and easily over pavise Arbs which are only good in a missile duel. In a long battle I'd want 3 or 4 Longbows and 1 or 2 arbs.

Quite frankly the arbs should be hitting the enemy armour anyway rather than enemy archers and wanking behind their shields, only really useful against the Mongols and a liability on offence. If you want the +3 then just add proper armour. I really can't understand why they appear so popular in SP when normal arbs can be produced at 1 valour once the pavise is avilable. Added to all the above they appear to be exhausted before they even empty their quivers.

[gaijinalways]

Whether movement is needed later needed is important. Paive anything will move much slower as they have to drag the shield with them and this limits their meele capability as well.

AS to killing power, crossbows or arbalesters are better as they have more pentration than longbows, though longbows do beat plain archers.