Pavs Target

[Arkell]

Say my army has a unit of pavs arbs (formed into 2 rank deep) and the enemy has 1 unit of pav arbs (also 2 rank deep) and 1 unit of infantry directly behind the pavs, and im attacking. I march my pavs so that they are in the range to shoot both of the enemy units, then i stop and just set to fire at will. Question is, is my pavs gonna shoot their pav only? (as it being the nearest to my pavs? Or some of my men will shoot the infantry as well? (like they just shoot whichever they like) How they choose their target as both in range if i dont command it to shoot any particular enemy units?

Thanks :book:

[Martok]

My experience is that pretty much all missile units will fire first at the enemy that's closest to them, unless you specifically order them to attack another unit.

[ichi]

Great question.

I ran tests in custom battles to check this out.

First, I placed a variety of units (Gothic Knights, Pavs, FMAA, OFS, Feudal Knights, Mounted Sargs, Chiv Foot) in range of a single enemy vaor 4 pav arb.

The enemy pav spent a lot of time shooting at my pavs, but it also varied its target, shooting at each unit of mine. It seemed to focus more on my gen and on higher quality units.
I repeated this several times and each test came out the same. After exposing 6 units to a pav each unit lost some men, my pavs, gen, and elite troops taking the most losses.

Distance did not seem to be factor, unless I moved a unit very close to the enemy pavs. I also moved two cav units within range simultaneously and the enemy pavs went for the Gothics not the Feudals.

Second I gave the AI a variety of units (peasants, CMAA, Mounted Sargs, Halbs, archers, Hospitaliers, Chiv Knights - but no pavs) and placed 3 of my pavs behind a line of inf.

My pavs also seemed to vary their target, again focusing on the archers, gen, and higher quality troops, but when the AI finally decided to rush my pavs switched to the unit that was closest to attacking them.

These tests confirm what I've seem in SP and MP games. Pavs, left on their own to fire-at-will, will vary their target to shoot any unit within range, but using some formula that focuses fire on gens, other missile troops, and elites.

ichi :bow:

Maybe a CA/dev type, or perhaps one of the Mizus know the truth here.

[antisocialmunky]

Here's another question:

Instead of targeting another pav and dueling, is equally or more effective to aim for something behind the pav. Will the pavs just kill the enemy pavs or will they do relavant damage to the unit behind it rather than just the pavs?

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Depends on how close that unit is to the pav. If its right behind it it will get hit with any over shoots. Also a bug to watch out for is that x bows and arbs will shoot through hills. The obvious choice of hiding on a reverse slope instead of being good is in reality death. Its best to use your range units to kill melee units but you must first suppress the enemies range units first. The main exception to this is Long bows that can hit inf and cav without having to get to close.

[Arkell]

Ok, thanks people for the replies, now i definitely knoww i dont have to control those pavs. Especially during the second wave of attack in multiplayer. Just leave them alone. Ichi thanks for doing the tests.. back to :book:

[ichi]

I leave a gap of about 6-10 men between my pavs in order to reduce the amount of damage from wayward shots.

ichi :bow:

[EatYerGreens]

Although most of us associate archery skill with precision hitting against a target, it's my opinion that battlefield archery is a slightly different kettle of fish.

For a start, the target does not move around and the range is a known quantity. The archer only needs to know how hard to pull and what elevation to use, making allowances for wind drift etc. They also have the luxury of maybe a minute or show to gauge all the factors and make the shot.

On the battlefield, you have to gauge distance and elevation differences completely by eye and you have to be able to do this very quickly, especially when the target is on the move and closing in. Similarly, there is no luxury of time to weigh up the shot, it's a case of making a 'best guess' and firing a volley, in time with the other archers in the unit.

So, at best, battlefield archers are an 'area target' weapon, not a precision weapon. Shots will straddle a target to left and right, fore and aft. I picture a roughly oval shape over the top of the centre of mass of the target. Loose formation minimises casualties in a way which helps to prove just how imprecise they are.

I haven't had opportunity to test this for some time but I recall a fort siege where I used a Peasant unit as arrow fodder but, in an attempt to save men, I stretched them into a long, single rank AND set them on loose formation. I then marched them to within range of the auto-arrows and noticed that their loss rate was less than normal. Another thing for you to try, Ichi.

It's a very spread-out target, the extreme ends of the line may even be out of range until losses make them march inwards towards the flag-bearer. Also, being only one rank deep, more arrows overshoot or drop short. The idea behind this is that they draw fire from the walls while I set my own archers just behind them and fire over the walls at targets inside (or, since getting VI, shoot fire arrows at the stockade itself).

Crossbows and Arbs may be a different story though. Bolts fly faster and I presume they are heavier than arrows. The extra inertia this combination gives them makes them less prone to wind drift. The flatter trajectory requires less skill in gauging the elevation to use and they can thus be fired at an individual with precision. Such as picking off an enemy general, say. For this reason, it's just as well that they have a slower rate of fire.


P.S. The server went down for about an hour when I tried to post this the first time. Glad I had enough time to cut'n'paste what I'd written into Notepad before I arrived at the error page!

[antisocialmunky]

Yes, military archery is more about putting as many arrows in the air as possible in a killzone to wittle the enemy down like supressive artillery fire rather than accuracy.