Favorite missile unit

[Inuyasha12]

Okay first of all my favorite missile unit is the pavise crossbow. I've seen a unit of them take a hell of a lot of arrow fire and still keep going. They aren't bad infantry either and can defend well thanks to their shield. I always have at least 3 units of them in all my armies.
I love my 'pavies'.

I also like longbowmen(who doesn't), so when i play english i usually replace the pavise crossbow with them.
The horse archer is good, but im not a fan of it. Only when it can fight good too(like steppe heavy cavalry, and boyars) is when i get them.
Regular archers just annoy me, they are too weak and can barely do anything but shoot.If they can fight i also just ignore them, only when i can get them as mercs do i bother with them.
Arquebusiers,napta throwers and handgunners i've never used any of them and probably never will.
I like arbalesters, they just fire too slowly.
Alright people choose now

PS: i once created a unit called repeating crossbows
They were as fast to reload as archers and as powerfull as crossbows. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[Blodrast]

hashishins and naptha must be the most fun units to play around with.
that is, have a break from the eye-killing following of the battle and the continuous surveillance of the battlefield and the endless string of commands to your troops, and have some fun. after all, the game is supposed to be fun ;)
sure, winning is important, but, at least against the AI, most of the time your troops can hold their own pretty well in battle, esp. on defence, and you can have your own private fun micromanaging HorseArchers, or Hashishin, or your favourite Naptha squad.
Of course the most efficient for most practical purposes are pavise arbs, or longbows if your style is oriented more towards a melee-capable missile infantry.
But hey, blowing things up with your Naptha or assassinating the King/Prince with your Hashishin sure's a lot of fun

[ichi]

Quote[/b] ]I like arbalesters, they just fire too slowly.

As I understand it, both xbows and arbs require 15 animation cycles to reload - they are the same.

Longbows are great for their armor piercing and they can fight when their morale is up around 8.

Arquebusier can be great defensive troops, again when their valor is boosted and they get a little armor upgrade.

Any of the javelins are good against high armor enemies, placed behind a strong infantry they can really hurt.

The Muslim hybrids like Janissary Inf and Futuwwas are quite nice.

Naptha throwers can break the back of a low morale enemy when used correctly. Very fun to watch (maybe my pyromaniac/arsonist leanings help here).

Pavs (Xbows and Arbs) are good as anti-Pav, or if your enemy lets you stand and shoot his inf or cav.

My favorite missile units are the cav archers - probably Szekely are my favorite unit to use.

ichi

[Inuyasha12]

I really forgot to put javeliners, like bonnatchs,dart men..etec.
and horse javeliners, like spanish jinnetes.
sorry

[Sasaki Kojiro]

I've always like cavalry archers the best.

[octavian]

ichi, i think you are correct, it takes the same ammount of timie to reload an arbalest as a crossbow. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/bigthumb.gif

[IrishMike]

I have to say longbows all the way. They have save me in more battles than I wish to remember.

[Doug-Thompson]

1. Szekely
2. All other HA

[jones21]

longbows all the way they are good archers behind a spearwall and most the time they can hold there own against cav. not knight but mounted seargents etc.

[Despot of the English]

Longbows for me too.
I also like Futuwwas because of their versatility.

[Maeda Toshiie]

By pure missile abilities, pavise arbs are the best and a tad over-powered.

Longhows are good for attacks (and unlimited ammo), unless you use the mass arbs and creep forward tactic. Longbow's melee stats are rather plain, equal to trebs if you take away their armour piercing. They can only be used for flanking attacks (like futuwaas) and lack somewhat on their survivability.

Szekely are Faris with booster rockets or turcoman horse on steriods. Boyars are very good due their melee stats. Too bad those SoP are only 20 men. They should be changed to 40 men.

[Divine Wind]

Boringly i would have to say arbs. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-lost.gif

[ah_dut]

Maeda Toshiie SOP would be op at 40 men it makes the knights in keeping with their christian rivals

[Maeda Toshiie]

Maeda Toshiie SOP would be op at 40 men it makes the knights in keeping with their christian rivals

Not quite. Compare their stats with Boyars:

From FBE's guide:
Sipahi of the Porte
Charge 4 Attack 3 Defence 6 Armour 7 Speed 9, 20, 22 Morale 6 Cost 500 Support cost 105

Boyars
Charge 4 Attack 3 Defence 5 Armour 5 Speed 9, 20, 22 Morale 6 Cost 550 Support cost 105

They are very similar. Only difference is that SoP has +1 def, +2 armour, plus horse being armoured. To increase their numbers to 40, the cost would have to be increased to about 700.

Dont forget, they are only available at late. Also, their building requirements are vary high, of citadel level. At citadel, catholics can be churning out chiv knights.

SoP can never survive a h2h with Chiv knights. Especially when both are charging.

Chivalric knights.
Charge 8 Attack 5 Defence 5 Armour 7 Speed 9, 20, 22 Morale 8 Cost 675 Support cost 85

Lets face it. 20 men HAs are almost worthless in terms of firepower. They dont have the charge of other heavy cavs. They dont have the AP of Gothic Knights. They dont have the stats to grind down other units. What are they good for?

[ah_dut]

muslims aren't slugfest factions, the only slugfest muslim unit is the v2 AHC

[Maeda Toshiie]

40 men SoP would act like bow-armed Khawa cav, thats all. Since they have so heavy of armour, skirmishing can be a problem for them. Anyway the Medmod increased their numbers to 40. Gotta try and see if there are any balance problems.

Muslims cant exactly slug it out. However, they have sacren and AUMs to beef them up. I just feel that beefing up the SoP would nice.

[Spartiate]

Sherwood Foresters for the range and power of their longbows and ability to slaughter much larger units in one on one hand to hand fighting.I like their stealth as well for getting in behind enemy formations without being seen.

[Sarnaen]

As a primarily muslim faction player, I love both the fighting archers and horse archers. Combinations of these win my games. I can't vote for both, unfortunately. I tossed my bote to fighting archers because generally, they have a higher kill/death ratio, even though without the horse archers, they wouldn't last a minute on the field.

[katar]

out of the list shown, i would choose longbows, rapid firing and armour piercing, i find them great when used defensively and have used them quite often offensively (when adequately supported by cavalry and spearmen).

i have used both Szekely and Jinnetes in armies made up entierly of those units alone.

they can be micromanagement hell to use, but their ability to move fast and attack the enemy quickly from all sides is a real bonus in a hard fight and when they get to high valor status they can really decimate the enemy. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-2thumbsup.gif

[The Blind King of Bohemia]

Longbows for me, but horse archers are good, especially mamluk and mongol ones http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[PseRamesses]

Voted Longbows although I do find most of the suggested units in the poll to be usefull and even great depending on what faction and type of battle I´m playing. Longbows are my personal favs due to superior firing range, devestating piercing and decent melee stats.

[BigCheese]

Longbows Rule

[motorhead]

Quote[/b] ]my favorite missile unit is the pavise crossbow. ... They aren't bad infantry either and can defend well thanks to their shield.
- pavise shields are 3-armor/0-defense so they have no effect in melee combat. pav-xbows have the same melee ability as plain xbows, except they're slower

[Eastside Character]

Cavalry Archers of course, preferably some fast ones like GHHA or Szekely.

Regards,
EC

[Kali]

I voted fighting archers but think I'm now more inclined to go for Siphai of the port at least Once I've supersized them.

[sir_schwick]

I do not like most HA, they never seem to hit anything. My least favorite has to be Mounted Crossbow(not really an archer I know). Of course then there are Berber camels, lol.

I personally really like arcing fire units(archers and longbows) over crossbow units. Arcing fire lets me deliver firepower longer. Of course I haven't really played much past 1220 in SP Campaign(Crossbow only, no Arbalest).

My favorite, when I can remember to manage them, are Spanish Jinettes. They have decent melee, but the speed to hit the armored unit I want, once that unit is engaged with someone else. THey are perfect for tearing up Knights of any kind. I usually charge after the ammo's gone(if they haven't routed). Most of the time this charge causes a rout.

[katank]

If you don't use HAs, then you are missing out on a heck of a lot of tactical flexibility.

I love javs and hybrid archers but hands down I vote for naptha.

napthas are awesome due to ability of hit both high tech and low tech troops.

pin the target and let 'er rip.

a single volley from naptha to a spear can wipe out half the unit in the field and 3/4 on a bridge, usually meaning instant rout.

as for high armor units, naptha grenades don't care about armor. royal knights still bite the dust when a grenades hits them. it goes through all that fancy armor and don't give a damn how jedi you are.

[King Edward]

It wasnt untill i started playing Mp that i desoverd how good the Pav xbow is esp when given armour as i usually playd as the English in SP i always took longbows, now with the combo and a nice hill you can rout armies withoud drawing a sword

I never really god into Horse archers, they are fantastic in small battles but in larger ones i always end up concentraring on them and miss the 80 knights that have flanked my infantry

[RollingWave]

Well in MP terms probably pavised arbs (op...) in single player wise longbows hit hard long range and is a no brainer to use.... but horse archer used well can be A LOT better espically offensively.... long bows really aren't THAT much better than other bows when ur trying to attack someone in a well dugged formation but horse archer CAN devastate... espicall against catholic factions who have uncontrolled knights.....

I like teh fighting archers a lot too.... can be used very flexiablly combined with spears to make a really solid center line with no real weakness and decent firepower... giving you much easier time to flank....

naptha and javlin are weird things.... when used well they can easily turn impossible situations into a stunning win but more often they jsut die without doing anything or don't get to do much before the battle ends (or even worse... blow away ur king instead of their general http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-inquisitive.gif )i personally don't like naptha due to their SPEED.... too slow and too small a unit size to really get into position fast... which is REALLy needed WHEN YOU HAVE SUCH SHITTY RANGE. I like murabins a lot cause they aer fast AND they are quiet resistent to missiel fires. Jinnets are obvious THE best unit of this class because they are the fastest.

[Medieval Assassin]

Pavey-arbes, I like them, the make up the missle units in my armies I almost never use normal archers, unless I get them in a bribe, they dont fire _that_ slow as long as they have 2-4 bars... Plus am arbies reload time is 15, an archer is 4, I can kill 10-11 men each arbie shot, and 2-3 each archer shot. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-inquisitive.gif

[Inuyasha12]

Don't forget they have a longer range, even though they can't arch their shots Wich sucks http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-wall.gif

[katank]

not really, not arching shots actually result in more kills for me.

instead of volleys falling harmlessly behind the unit, these bolts zoom right through and rip up a few.

[Inuyasha12]

Unless you are trying to fire behind your own men, then i beleive they can't fire very effectively.

I have never really tried it, i always keep em up front or flank.

[Marquis of Roland]

Yea longbows are pretty damn good. Because I haven't gotten the viking patch or whatever yet, longbows fire faster (or are supposed to I heard) than regular archers, which would have made them pretty formidable by itself, but coupled with armor piercing and that killer range makes it arguably the best (plus they can sorta fight).

I once killed a general foolish enough to charge ahead of his line with just one volley from 2 units of longbows. Killed 2/3 of his RK and his army all put up white flags http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/ceasaryes.gif

No other AI missile unit can outduel the longbowmen. It is simply da bomb http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/medievalcheers.gif

[katank]

umm, I think if in range, turcoman foot can outduel anything.

anyhow, with arbs, I usually have them in front and then flank with them as in shoot into the flanks once the lines engaged.

it's quite effective.

if their units are all pinned, moving to the enemy rear and firing bolts into their back is even better.

patched, longbows don't fire faster than archers but only at the same rate. However, they are strong enough as it is.

[Marquis of Roland]

I don't have the patch, Katank http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-2thumbsup.gif but I will soon hehehe.

Actually, if this was historically accurate Mongol HA would have the longest range and AP. They outranged longbows by 100 yards.

I am going to try out those turcoman foot.

[katank]

they also have relatively good defence although their attack is trash.

[Ludens]

Quote[/b] (Marquis of Roland @ July 09 2004,05:57)]Actually, if this was historically accurate Mongol HA would have the longest range and AP. They outranged longbows by 100 yards.
The famous Mongol bow (which could have outranged the longbow) was not a horse bow. Mongols carried two bows: a horse bow and the longer 'Mongol' bow. At least, that's how I understood it.

[katank]

that's quite true.

to shoot those bows, they had to dismount to shoot.

I would have no complaint if you gave mongol warriors those bows though.

[z|co]

You've probably read it, but this is quite a good piece on the mongol bow

http://www.coldsiberia.org/monbow.htm

Also if we are going to be historically accurate then they should carry 60 arrows.

Also after looking at the stats for the other horse archers, mongol horse archers were not the best of the lighter variants. Szekely have a superior charge. Is this accurate, i thought the Golden Horde annihilated the hungarian forces. But even with lesser quality troops, physically speaking, the mongols were far superior tactically.

I am quite dissappointed at the AI for the mongols. I was in kharzar with my russians and i had lined up my forces between too small forests. They could have quite easily of have gone round the back of my line and caused all sorts of havoc. All they did was come straight up to me, get shot up by my arbs and boyars and run away. I guess there is a big difference playing people and the computer.

I used to play multiplayer quite abit and hardly anyone used HA due to the extreme micromanagement involved, but if you could somehow manage it then i think you could cause some people some serious headaches.

[katank]

that's true but getting them up to 8 morale is impossible and the skirmish AI will only get them killed so the microing is crazy.

also, usually ppl bring pavs to duel and those can destroy HAs with ease in dueling and likely in melee.

[Inuyasha12]

Then there should be a way to mod it so that the mongol warriors already have the range

[Marquis of Roland]

Quote[/b] (z|co @ July 09 2004,12:43)]Is this accurate, i thought the Golden Horde annihilated the hungarian forces. But even with lesser quality troops, physically speaking, the mongols were far superior tactically.
Yes, the mongols massacred the Hungarians because they outthought them. That doesn't mean their troops were lesser quality; probably the best tactically drilled cavalry ever. Just that they won't win a head-on brawl with a unit thats more tailored for it (they should be a little better in melee though I think).

Of course, if the mongols hadn't strategically drawn away the polish and german armies, they would've lost by just being vastly outnumbered (the hungarians by themselves considerably outnumbered the mongols and with heavier but slower units)

good link on the bow by the way http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-book2.gif

[LestaT]

Longbow Longbow Longbow Longbow

[Oleander Ardens]

I'm sorry that I my sound a bit pedantic on that issue, but archery is something which is very deer to, so ... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-blush.gif

Any good composite bow will easily heavily out-range the best longbow if both try to achieve maximum range.

A bow is a machine which transforms E(span) into E(kin). The transformed Energy is dispersed on arrow and the bow itself. Now as the Longbow needs much more material to be effective than the composite bow it's relationship of the bow-weight/arrow-weight is much worse than the one of the composite bow, especially if both use very light arrows to achieve the max range.

This explains also why with the heavier wararrows the longbow is relatively spoken much more effective than with light arrows, while the composite is more or less well suited for both;

Hope it helped

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

OA

[Ludens]

Thanks for the site, z|co.
You are right that HA in game are unimpressive. This is because both the combat engine and the AI are made to simulate close combat, not skirmishing. Result: HA can never wreak the devastion they did in history.

Oleander Ardens, very interesting information on archery. I remember someone claiming that Turkish composite bows had a much longer range than English longbowmen in battle. But then, the test was probably carried out with an ultra light arrow, and there is a difference between hitting your target and just hitting something at x feet distance.

But, since you seem to be knowledgable on the subject, can I ask you a question?
Which is tactically better, a longbow or a mongol bow, when both are used by experienced archers, and why is it better?

[Louis VI the Fat]

My favourite: Futuwwa's

On defense, that is. The main reason being that they deploy themselves in such neat, tightly ordered ranks. When spread two men deep, their line is still not much wider than a single unit of saracen.

I bring six, or even eight of them, and squeeze them together on a few square inches of high terrain. Behind just two saracens, leaving plenty of room in my army for flanking units.

They have the best archer to defensive line ratio, can take advantage of the smallest of hilltops and can hold their own in battle.

[G-Con Daniel]

Hey How comes you don't have the Janissarys they kick
http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/idea.gif

[Inuyasha12]

Well janissaries would be under fighting archers, they can both shoot and fight hand to hand. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[Oleander Ardens]

Well I`ll try to give a good head vs head comp., Ludens, hope I will justify the trust http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

Conditions: Both bows have a draw of 90 lbs, both are shoot by experienced archers who will get the best out of the respective bows


The advantages of the Mongolian bow:

- the complex constructions allows a optimized draw/force curve, somewhat similar to the (log) curve. This means that the Archer will pull since the first inches of the draw a rather heavy weight which will increase only slowly while drawing further back until reaching the 90 lbs

The draw/force curve of the Longbow is far more linear, resulting in a smaller area under the curve and iis therefor not near as efficient.

In poor words the Mongolian Bow will transform more energy into stored energy, resulting for more arrow-power for the same labour. I would set this advantage in efficency in around factor 1.5..

- the same complex construction will transform more stored energy into the kinetic energy of the arrow.

- the advantage of a lesser mass of the moving parts (bowstaff) were explained above.


All this facts will allow the archer with the Mongolian Bow to shoot any given arrow for the same labour (draw) with a higher kinetic energy, causing him to fly considerable faster and thus longer. Therefore the same arrow will be pierce armor better, penetrating deeper and be less affected by wind.

The faster speed will also result in a higher accuracy over medium-long distances.


The more compact size and lesser weight are too a plus for the Mongolian bow, as the possibilty to use lighter arrows even more efficently.


The advantages of the Longbow

- cheaper and easier to make

- more resistent in humid conditions


Hope it cleared things up http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wave.gif

Cheers

OA

[Inuyasha12]

The longbow is better in humid conditions?

I though the mongolian bow with its fish glue, bark, and sinew also performed well in the rain

What is the longbow made from that it makes it better in the rain?

[katar]

Quote[/b] ]What is the longbow made from that it makes it better in the rain?

composite bows were glued together with fish or horn based glues (these were water soluble), so rain or humidity would affect their structural strength.

longbows were made of one single piece of wood, rain and humidity would affect the wood and the string, but not as much as it would affect a compposite bow. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-smile.gif

[Inuyasha12]

But i read that the mongol bow was actually made so that it would resist rain, or at least its what i remember from that mongol bow link.

[Inuyasha12]

Quote[/b] ]As we understand, a composite bow by definition has several layers. We have mentioned the birch frame, and the layer of horn/bone. In addition to this, there is a layer of specially prepared birch bark whose purpose is to protect against penetration of moisture. In addition to this is a layer of sinew, which is taken from deer, moose or other game animals. The tendons of domestic animals may also be used, but Mongols feel that tendons from wild animals like deer, moose and mountain sheep are the strongest and best. Naturally, the bow has to be glued together. The preferred and traditional substance used for the impregnation of both leather as well as their bows is fish glue. As a matter of fact, fish glue has been proven through millennia to be highly capable of resisting moisture. Moreover, it is durable and lasts longer than modern epoxy resins, which are prone to molecular fatigue. Above all, fish glue is available in all the waters of Siberia where fish is living, among them the greatest of them all, Lake Bajkal.



From http://www.coldsiberia.org/monbow.htm

[Inuyasha12]

So what the deal man??

I gotta do some more research on this http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/handball.gif

[Oleander Ardens]

@Inuyasha: The Mongols,Turks and Chinese tried in all way to protect their bows, using birch barch or lacque to do so, and stored them im seperate bowcases. Nobody says that it will dissolve in no time, but adverse climate will over short or long affect them and seriously influence their performance.

Cheers

OA

[Ludens]

Thanks for your detailed reply, Oleander Ardens.

[Inuyasha12]

So wont the same happen to the longbow?

[katank]

not that much since longbow is a single piece of wood and not assembled from multiple pieces.

[Maeda Toshiie]

For the longbow, the water mainly wets the string (affecting its strength).

For the compound bow, not only the string gets wet, the layers in the bow gets melted, destroying the compound nature of the bow (from which the bow derives its strength for its size).

[Inuyasha12]

Ohhhh Okay

Now i get it

Thanks https://forums.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wave.gif

[lancer63]

Biz. cav., Szekely, mamluk archers and most eastern HAs.
Seems noone uses bulgarian brigands but me these days best foot archers there are. Since they're so hard to train I just hire them as mercs (there's plenty of them) and dismiss them when the fun is over. As good range as the vaunted LBs (which I rarely see as mercs on early period) and not bad H2H fighters.

[Seven.the.Hun]

warhorse archers rule https://forums.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-2thumbsup.gif

[katank]

@lancer, brigands have same range as any archer, they are just faster and have decent melee.

mercs are only available in eras in which they can be built so longbows never appear in early.

[Balin son of Fundin]

I like the longbowmen the best, however all the different ranged units have their advantages and disadvantages, that the right general can exploit.