Your most succesful battle tactics [Archive]

_Aetius_

12-17-2005, 14:36

I rarely achieved some tactical masterclass, I think partly because its not really possible or worthwhile to attempt complicated manouvres on MTW.

My favourite strategy though is with the Byzantines to push my Byzantine infantry in my centre forward to engage the enemy infantry, my Varangians on the wings then cut through the spearmen and lesser infantry on the enemy flanks and begin to encircle their centre. Then my cavalry Kataphraktoi etc rout the enemy cavalry and position themselves behind the enemy infantry preparing to charge them, my Byzantine infantry will probably be facing CMAA so will take heavy casualties and start to lose ground, which is what I want as it makes my Varangians job of on the flanks easier, by the time by Varangians cut through the wings they'll be slightly behind the frontline so can attack from the side.

Then I simply charge my cavalry into the enemy rear and rout the lot of them, its rare that I dont kill atleast 90% of the enemy army doing this, its abit of a shameless ripoff of Hannibals tactics at Cannae, using a weak centre to make an encirclement easier with my finest troops on the wings, but instead of being defensive i've turned it into an offensive strategy for MTW. If all goes wrong and my centre breaks I have a few Treb archer units armed/armoured to the teeth waiting to cover the infantry as it falls back.

Until the catholic factions overtake the Byzantines it works fine, once the catholic armies start getting seriously heavy infantry, cavalry and arbs then it becomes much more difficult. Just need to change my strategy then. Thats really the only established strategy I use on MTW, its often just easier to let

Weebeast

12-17-2005, 14:41

Mr White

12-17-2005, 15:16

its abit of a shameless ripoff of Hannibals tactics at Cannae, using a weak centre to make an encirclement easier with my finest troops on the wings, but instead of being defensive i've turned it into an offensive strategy for MTW.

Ah the double envelope tactic. I've considered it before, but I find it hard to willingly sacrifce my centre. Maby with some plain spears well in front and then let them retreat to my main line. While some units on the flanks advanced with the spears can then take on the enemy on on the side and from behind.

It's certainly worth a try

Ludens

12-17-2005, 17:17

Well, I'm not really that good on battle field itself. Too much clicking or controling for me. Anyway, to win a war one has to know when to be on offense or defense. Just take a look at enemy's troop combination and its size. In my previous campaign I still held on to most of my provinces cus I let my enemy come to me. It's obviously not a good move to advance and face enemy three times my size on hilly terrain.

I guess the most 'tactic' I'm familiar with is the "divide." I lure the heavy stuff out using anything fast and just charge the archers with my heavy cavalry. It's about timing.
I pretty much do the same. I am a mediocre general and prefer to attack only when I know I can win. However, my best victories where usually when I had fast missile troops while me enemy has little or nothing to counter them. Horse archers are very effective against slow moving Catholics or Byzantines, and simple Kerns can take Huscarles apart if they are not supported by archers or cavalry.

antisocialmunky

12-17-2005, 19:12

Just the simple flanking is usually enough to kill the cathies.

Come Together

12-18-2005, 03:57

One of the battles I take the most pride in(and coincidently the only battle that I happened to save the replay in) was as early turks vs the egyptians. My army consisted 75% of horse archers, the rest being camels and generals. Well, the battle didn't go as well as planned, as they played it out aggresivlely, which is devestating considering the number of camels they had. When the battle started to look victory-less, I right-clicked all my units, and routed them to the other side of the map. They sent a unit or two of spearmen and one of camels to chase me, being rather unsuccesful. When I was able to rally my units, I basically shot the army up to pieces, as they continually added one unit of soldiers to be shot up. I charged most my units, did a large amount of kill before i routed(due to very low morale of a general routing), and had to rely on reinforcments to finish them off. I've used this early falling back tactic quite a few times afterwards with a horse archer army.

Microwavegerbil

12-18-2005, 06:14

One of my most impressive victories was as the Welsh on VI. The Saxons invaded with a full stack, including cavalry and about 5 or 6 huscarles. I had 3 celtic warriors, 3 archers, and four catapults. My celtic warriors pullled in over 300 kills each, with the archers all nabbing about 100, and the catapults with low, but morale damaging kills. It wasn't really from any tactical genious, just excellent mountainous terrain.

Ironside

12-18-2005, 10:32

One more odd one is when fighting in the desert in a late campaign. My troops got 0 armour upgrades, so they are usually considerbly weaker than the enemy. So I simply lose the first wave and regroup with the reinforcements. That move has shattered the enemy because they chase routers all over the place and it will make them tired, very tired. The next waves will be tired too, so no problem to win after that.

Another one with cav heavy armies is to "swamp" a unit. You use atleast 3 cav units and move to the flanks with 2 of them while the last one remains on the front. Then the frontal one will charge to provoke a countercharge. When the countercharge comes the other cav will hit the flanks and the first cav will stop and retreat a bit. If the swamped unit won't rout by the first hits, then when that unit will turn to fight the flankers, the unengaged cav will hit them in the newly formed flank. The swamped unit will stop exist within 5 secs usually.

But usually the normal tactics with a line and attemts to flank on the sides is used (although sometimes all cav is used on one flank), although I commonly get a sandwich. I flank one unit, he flanks my flankers and I flank that unit. Usually win with that, but my unit hit in the flank/back takes heavy casualities.

Ciaran

12-18-2005, 12:11

Mr White

12-18-2005, 14:25

I use the 'pressure pot' tactic a lot when facing a big army. Most of the time, the AI will use its best units in the first wave. The second wave (if they come in waves and not unit per unit, than it's even easier) will have a moral penalty because of the death or capture of their generaland and will rout fast sometimes even before contact.

With an opponent with a lot of good units I'll set my defences up (like many others I won't attack if I'm not sure I can win) on the edge of the map and let my enemies tire while marching to my line.
Sometimes when I use my light cav for disrupting their line, I hold up almost every unit exept for the general and one or two units. In that case I can win the fight before it truly began.

littlebktruck

12-19-2005, 08:12

Spears and archers in the center, swords and polearms on the flanks, cavalry behind those, my standard catholic army formation, tried and proven more often than I care to count. It works wonderful for both offence and defense.

I tend to use a formation like that too, but I tend to have problems with getting my units matched up poorly (militia sergeants or swordsmen charge my spears, cavalry charge my swords). I tend to win by mass.

Matty

12-19-2005, 08:29

Take your time - depending on the morale of the general you can rout an entire army by routing one key unit. Identify a key unit (such as harscules) on the opponents front line and bring up your archers to target it. Bringing a key unit like this down from 60 to 20 men will take a lot of arrows, but when they start legging it, the rest is likely to follow.

In defence, just head for the hills. Concentrate skirmishing missile troops in 2 -3 rows and aim for the general. Cavalry on the flanks, spears or swords on hold formation/position in the centre. Give the centre time to get the enemy engaged and allow your retreating missile troops to pepper them. Don't engage the cavalry unless your troops start to buckle because they'll be flattened by friendly fire. When the rout starts, don't forget to take the archers off fire at will (especially if you send a mounted general into the rout - its annoying if one of your archers puts an arrow in the back of his head at the point of victory)....

King Kurt

12-19-2005, 11:42

In defence - stand on a hill - any hill
Always attempt to distract when you are outnumbered - use a weak unit to pull 3 or 4 away, then defeat the rest before they come back.
When all else fails try to kill the enemy general
Cheap javs - eg kerns - behind you infantry really hammer armoured troops
Do these and you should sweep all before you:san_grin:

matteus the inbred

12-19-2005, 11:50

all good stuff guys! cos of the lack of AI sophistication the infantry line + cavalry flanking works almost every time if your troops are good enough and numerous enough...i think the real test of your skill and micromanaging ability comes when you are heavily outnumbered and/or have fairly poor troops. i had a crusade remnant which defended Antioch 3 times in a row against odds of 3 or 4:1, every unit was down to less than 30 guys by the last fight. my eye for terrain had to be really sharp, and every charge timed perfectly, especially my knight units. i was much more proud of that than any number of 960 men v 960 men battles. am still getting the hang of horse archers, but i beat an Italian force of about 1300 with four units of them and some knights, suffering only ten casualties.
but enough about me! i also recently received a terrible shock for my arrogance when Byzantines used four units of Kats to perfectly flank my Hungarians...Game. Over.

to be fair, this is all a rather smug 'what i did', not a helpful 'how i did it'...there's better tacticians out there than me, check the Unit Guide by Frogbeastegg too, i've never seen a better or more helpful post...
i have experimented with 'historical' set-ups like the typical English one at Crecy etc...archer wedges with billmen in between, but it doesn't really work cos the archers lose firepower and can't fight effectively enough. better to have the billmen flanking in wedges (and then spreading into line) with spears moving through the archers to hold the charge.

Ciaran

12-19-2005, 14:33

I tend to use a formation like that too, but I tend to have problems with getting my units matched up poorly (militia sergeants or swordsmen charge my spears, cavalry charge my swords). I tend to win by mass.

The trick, if there´s any, is forming the front line of spears and polearms, the swordshave to stay behind those to prevent them from being beaten by cav. The spears in the center are the shield of te army, they are meant to take hits. As long as you use feudal sergeants or better, they should hold long enough for the polearm and sword units to attack the flanks of the opponent. Swords are good for killing about anything that´s not mounted or armor piercing. The polearms should be reserved for heavily armoured or mounted opponents. The cavalry can then race out to cut down archers or charge the engaged enemy units in the back.
Militia sergeants I find to be difficult enemies - they are armour-piercing and kill swords faster than the swords can kill them, due to their pretty good armour. In the early era militia sergeants are especially dangerous - or very useful, depending on whether you or the enemy has them, because the best way I know for dealing with them, or any other polearms, is shooting them. However, their armour is sufficient to protect them from archers, only crossbows inflicht enough casualties on them to be truly effective. Charging Feudal Knights or mounted sergeants into the back of an otherwise engaged Militia sergeants unit works too, but you must retreat the cavalry immediantly after the charge, or the Militia sergeants turn around and inflict severe damage onto your cavalry.

matteus the inbred

12-19-2005, 15:07

In the early era militia sergeants are especially dangerous - or very useful, depending on whether you or the enemy has them,

how about using beefed-up unarmoured swordsmen? eg Arabs or other Islamic foot types, mercs of some kind...high valour urban militia? these could possibly tie them down while you shoot the hell out of them. AUM militia has great staying power for this kind of thing.

Vladimir

12-19-2005, 15:31

Cheese, and plenty of it. Feta, munster and the famous limburger. Try to engage the enemy at maximum range with your mounted missiles (hopefully x-bows for the increased defense). Use a scorpion like tactic of threatening their flanks and center while remaining safe yourself. If you're on relatively flat land the enemy tends to sit there (with their backs turned! :san_shocked: !) and die. I keep casualties low by maintaining an indirect heavy army and a balanced formation. I don’t build specialized armies, just a standard flexible one. I think I’d get my arse kicked in MP. Always maintain a good defensive position, try to only reduce units to 50%, kill the general, and flank flank flank. If the enemy attacks tease their units out in front to allow for better flanking opportunities. Being indirect and cav heavy I also like to isolate units. I'll take down a unit of spears with light cav if I can isolate them. I've gotten quite good at low casualty victories but it's always a click fest. I do enjoy the Saxon steam roller on occasions where my trigger finger is tired.

matteus the inbred

12-19-2005, 17:08

if it's getting click heavy, pause a lot and issue orders before restarting the carnage. i can't believe i don't do this all the time.

Vladimir, by the sounds of it, i wouldn't like to fight you! you appear to have the significant advantage of knowing what you're doing...

The Darkhorn

12-19-2005, 17:54

While playing the English once, I found myself outclassed by a crapload of RKs (and other stuff) by an unexpected (have since learned) invasion by Aroagon. I forget which province I was in, but it did have one hill in my setup zone. Buggered b/c it wasn't "against" my edge of the field, I decided to try an unorthodox tactic better used in the Napoloenic age. I had 2 small cavalry units, several missile units, a few spears and lots of crap infantry.

.....(drum roll please)....."Form square!" hollered my general. Since I couldn't back up against my side of the field on a hill. I made what really probably should be described as more of an octagon rather than a square on the one hill. I slaughtered them. The missle troops in the center shot the fool out of troops in the valleys, while each time the cavalry tried any part of the line, the cavalry (in the center) and/or units from the other side not being attacked (which due to good interior lines did not have to come from BFE to get there) flanked the melee and destoryed it or caused it to withdraw. Enemy infantry which tried the line had all missile fire concentrated on them and where broken up before contact. In the final wave, a bayonet charge....oops, wrong era...melee charge down the slope at the enemy routed them.

In this way, I defeated a force outnumbering me by more than two to one, while also being outclassed as half the force where elite RKs. I have it saved somewhere. Not my favorite battle, but one of those of which I am most proud....and really the only tactics I would call unorthodox....I naturally have a pretty good eye for terrain and formation in general, ESPECIALLY on defense....I've only lost 3 defensive battles that I can recall out of about 400. When attacking...I...shall we say...have to pay closer attention to what I'm doing!

matteus the inbred

12-19-2005, 18:02

that's pretty good! i like to use approximate square(ish) formations, but nowhere near as Napoleonic as that. i find it hard to fit everyone in the right places and get the countercharges out.
maybe try it with Catholic handgunners and a few serpentines at the corners next time!
defending is easy, attacking is harder...manoeuvring the AI off its hill wherever possible is good, it usually reacts by attacking (which loses the benefit of its position) or tamely running off elsewhere...i'm starting to love horse archers for this kind of thing. shoot up one flank of the position, standard 'lure' stuff, backed up by nasty heavier horse units to run people over. ghazis really come into their own with this kind of tactic, as they're fast enough and 'killy' enough to deal with anything anti-cav that comes out.

X Clan

12-19-2005, 20:43

I once maneuvered a unit of Horse Archers up hill and behind my opponent. He withdrew from battle without a single shot or life lost. :san_laugh:

Vladimir

12-19-2005, 21:35

One thing which I've been too lazy to do recently is to learn how the enemy decides to attack in those situations where terrain isn’t quite to my advantage (i.e. Venice). Obviously the AI prefers a flank and the slightest slope and my best way to counter this is to tease the line (loosing a lot of mounted x-bows in the process). Has anyone experimented with this? I know some things like that it prefers to attack if it has an offensive (cav heavy) army.

mfberg

12-19-2005, 22:31

My axemen were hidden in the forests ahead and to the right flank of my line of crossbows, and spears backed by polish retainers. his 2 RKs and a knight templer walked right into the ambush and were slaughtered in the axemen's charge. The polish retainers gave chase, and followed the routing knights through his archery line and then into his spearline, luckily the spears routed just as my cavalry reached them. My axemen killed 87 of 120 cavalry and lost 3. My retainers lost 4 men, and killed or captured most of the rest of his 12 remaining units. None of my crossbows even had time to fire.

mfberg

X Clan

12-19-2005, 23:32

If I’m on the attack with intel that tells me that the enemy will be forced into a defensive posture (non-cav heavy) then I attack with lots of long range archers covered by regular foot archers, with a strong spear unit or two behind them and couple of fast horse archery units flanking the infantry and one behind (Also for chasing down routers).

Pelt them at long range with those Abs. I ignore their archers (except their Abs) and target the meat (Cavs/HR and any infantry above Spears) If an enemy unit comes out, let the Abs skirmish out of the way while a couple of regular archery units and the flanking Horse Archers pelt them with hundreds of arrows during the chase. The attacking unit usually stops and turns away after several die, especially the foot soldiers. If not (Heavy Cavs/Knights)...and by the time the Long Range Archers have past through the ranks of the spears and the regular foot archers, a few feet ahead, are skirmishing from the chase, I charge a depleted enemy with my heavy infantry.

Since that unit is in a fight and now being pelted by several archery units, the fight doesn’t last long.

This type of fight takes a lot of time. But at usually less than 10% causality ratio to the enemy, it’s worth it.

By the time all my archery units or out of ammo. The enemy is so depleted that the few heavy infantry a do bring into a melee are just doing an easy mop up work before the rout. If fact, the enemy have often routed just by seeing a couple hundred heavy infantry units advance of them.

…and I think that my cheap Horse Archery units, though pretty pathetic during high and late with their ineffective bows, rake up the most kill because of routs.

Matty

12-20-2005, 10:34

if it's getting click heavy, pause a lot and issue orders before restarting the carnage.

What! The pause button is for pussies. Take your routing like a man.

matteus the inbred

12-20-2005, 11:07

What! The pause button is for pussies. Take your routing like a man.

heheh, it's more so i can go make a cup of tea, honest!
playing a Hungarian campaign at the moment, sometimes horse archers require more micro-management than i get through in the 3 second window i have available...

antisocialmunky

12-20-2005, 13:23

I can usually do two groups of HA fine, each being on the opposite flanks of the enemy line. It's only ordering them to run away that you really have to watch out for.

matteus the inbred

12-20-2005, 13:31

i think it's safe to say i need more practice!! or just better HA...i mean, bog-standard ones are rubbish. same tactics apply though. i've simultaneously managed six at once, but one of them got caught and turned into dog-food.

The Darkhorn

12-20-2005, 16:14

Actually, the pause button is more realistic I think, especially when using high maintenance units (by which I mean must keep a close eye on them for them to behave according to how they're trained and most useful - such as HA). Two reasons I believe this and don't feel like a wuss when pausing. First off, I am playing a game on a computer. In reality, if I was a general, I might merely look this way and that to see different parts of the battlefield and give orders. Whereas on a computer, I've got to move the camera all over the place in a large battle, unrealistically wasting time, though you could make the arguement that can simlulate the time it takes to send orders. True, but orders for the most part in medieval warfare were issued before a battle in the form of the battle plan....this brings me to the 2nd reason. There are enough intagibles in a battle already to make it realistic. In reality, sometimes troops didn't follow their orders right. Well, they screw up movement enough anyway. Sometimes maybe the route wasn't the best one, or they get tangled with 2 men from an enemy unit and all fight there instead of marching to some far off point you want them to. They charge impetuously. Archery units (I hate this one and it happens a lot) while set on hold postion/hold formation/ fire at will still sometimes (often) let the enemy walk right up on them without firing a shot.....etc. Not using the pause button is making everything depend on me, which is unrealistic....it is like assuming that indiviual unit commanders have absolutely no initiative and no knowledge of the overall battle plan. Fact: to use HA effectively, they must be on HF/HP/FAW. However, often that means they will need to be micromanaged to maximize effectiveness and make sure they don't get charged by a bunch of turtles, which will happen if you don't tell them to move. Why assume that the unit commander is an embicile who won't move when he should, just because you're off dealing with something else?

matteus the inbred

12-20-2005, 16:16

Darkhorn, i thank you for that mighty rebuttal of those who treat the pause function with scorn and derision.
:bow:

The Darkhorn

12-20-2005, 16:25

Darkhorn, i thank you for that mighty rebuttal of those who treat the pause function with scorn and derision.
:bow:

Happy to be of service old boy, though I had to go edit a bunch of grammatical errors b/c I was typing in a frenzy! :director:

matteus the inbred

12-20-2005, 17:04

back to battle tactics (but still micromanaging), i find i am getting a lot of practice at managing units of spears when fighting very large armies of all sorts of stuff under adverse conditions, especially in the later stages of defensive battles where i am heavily outnumbered and out of arrows.

do people find that attempting to stick well-timed charges into ranged units is more effective, or do you prefer to stand there and get shot, moving units into loose formation when necessary? (the AI's usual response when lacked ranged units)
for example, last night i defended Egypt from 2,200 Eggies with about 900 Almohads, mainly Nubian spears, some archers, ghulams. the enemy brought mainly archers and light cav once i'd seen off their first wave of spears and stuff, and i sat there and got shot (having withdrawn the archers and exhausted the ghulams)...eventually they committed and were seen off, even outnumbered and shot-up spears were too good for camels and light cav, but it cost me a lot of men and a LOT of micro-managing, single unit charges and tense stuff. obviously there's no trees to hide in in the desert, but would anyone have done it different (using the same mix of troops)?

postscriptum: anyone quoting General Tacticus (from the Discworld novels) at me, along the lines of Do Not Allow This To Happen, will be mysteriously abducted by flying monkeys on their way home and never seen again.

X Clan

12-20-2005, 19:04

...for example, last night i defended Egypt from 2,200 Eggies with about 900 Almohads, mainly Nubian spears, some archers, ghulams. the enemy brought mainly archers and light cav once i'd seen off their first wave of spears and stuff, and i sat there and got shot (having withdrawn the archers and exhausted the ghulams)...eventually they committed and were seen off, even outnumbered and shot-up spears were too good for camels and light cav, but it cost me a lot of men and a LOT of micro-managing, single unit charges and tense stuff. obviously there's no trees to hide in in the desert, but would anyone have done it different (using the same mix of troops)?

Sacrifice a unit to the Archers. So you loss a few or so (depending on various factors and tactics used while shot at). The enemy Archers leave once the arrows are gone.

Once heavily out numbered (though I wasn’t when I invaded – computer cheats and reinforces after my move…often) and not enough range units to deal with the threat, I sent a heavily armored yet obsolete and depleted simple spear unit within shot of 5 units of enemy foot archers.

Dispersed and moving around without actually threatening their line, I lost over half of that down sized unit that was routed and recalled once during the pelting engagement. It was an old mercenary unit that was scheduled for disbandment anyway. The enemy withdrew all 300 of their archers; about 10% of their defending force.

I hate allowing my enemy use of withdrawing units to annoy me in future battles. I sent 5 horse units 1Cav/4HR the long way around the enemy to far behind but parallel to his flanks.

Once the 5 enemy Archery units were well on their way but far from their main line, I slaughtered them. Then left the HR in the enemy’s far rear to attack any reinforcing ranged units or to pelt, delay and distract his other high valued reinforcements, whilst my own foot archers were decimating selected high value units in his main line.

I know that doesn’t answer totally to your question since defending and attacking have different processes. If the enemy was attacking instead of defending, I would have lost that providence. But I still think you can still close the odds by getting the enemy to withdraw hundreds of troops when you’ve only sacrificed a few.

But in your case, I’ve never just stood there and let archer units pelt my front line especially while their attacking force just stood by and waited to melee. I’d just close the range and attack their line forcing their archers to skirmish. Once they reset, they’d start firing again, but they’d be hitting their own also….means less hits on me, especially less so from just standing and just taking all of it.

ajaxfetish

12-21-2005, 01:16

Next time keep some Saharan Cav stacked away well down your reinforcements list. They not much use in a melee but they're cheap, incredibly fast, and take a whole lot to wear out. Perfect for long drawn out desert battles, especially when the enemy has lots of archers. Never suffer the indignity of weathering interminable storms of arrows as the Almohads again!

Ajax

HighLord z0b

12-21-2005, 02:18

Firstly, I totally prefer to defend. Which means when attacking I will try and throw at least twice their number of units (and better units) into a province. This usually means they will retreat to the castle or another province, often they will try to relieve the seige the next turn but then I'm defending and I don't mind being outnumbered.

As far as battlefield tactics go, I usually go with the spear units in the centre, swords and axes/militia on the flanks, archers and xbows behind the centre and cavalry behind the flanks. However I've found that the AI like to charge your flanks with RK, which means I now keep one unit of spears at each flank to prevent this. It often means making the centre thinner but that can lead to the double envelopment sometimes as well.
Another tactic I've seen a friend use well is to have spears in front and then swords in wedges behind them. If you click and drag several units of spears into a line they will leave gaps in between the units and it is through these that the swords charge, unless it's a cav heavy army this can be a very strong tactic. However against sword heavy armies (like Byz infantry) or large amounts of RK it can be a bit weak.
Personally I can't get enough Militia Sargents and Swiss Halbadiers as they can be used well against most kinds of troops, I tend to put them near the flanks so they can wrap around the enemy or charge straight for the general's unit.

My army usually consists of at least one HA or light cav unit as both a scout and to either harass the general with arrows (for HA) or charge their archers from the flank/behind (with light cav).

The most critical thing in any battle is timing, use every means available to lower the enemies morale (missiles, out flanking, catapults, killing the general etc.), wait for the units to start wavering and then charge with your best units. It is very tempting to charge earlier (and CKs may just charge anyway) but by waiting till they start to waver or route then you will make sure the entire army routes and maximise your killing while minimising the damage done to your better units, you can always make more cheap infantry. Obviously try and charge into their flanks or rear.

I can't say how many times I have one by simply standing their with my infantry on hold position and use all of my archers to target the generals unit. Eventually he will die or run away causing a massive loss of morale.

Mr White

12-21-2005, 12:31

[QUOTE=HighLord z0b]
The most critical thing in any battle is timing, use every means available to lower the enemies morale (missiles, out flanking, catapults, killing the general etc.), wait for the units to start wavering and then charge with your best units. It is very tempting to charge earlier (and CKs may just charge anyway) but by waiting till they start to waver or route then you will make sure the entire army routes and maximise your killing while minimising the damage done to your better units, you can always make more cheap infantry. Obviously try and charge into their flanks or rear.
QUOTE]

I always have a hard time waiting for that perfectr moment. Until now I have always played catholics, so a premature charge wasn't such a disaster as my knights, MAA and polearms were able to hold on and win even when they were counterattacked.

I have started a Turk early campaign just to teach myself to be carefull with my units and wait for the right moment to act.

Vladimir

12-21-2005, 14:10

I especially hate loosing troops to missile fire so I've developed a few strategies to deal with them. When I'm defending the AI eventually leaves its missile troops exposed allowing my light cav to kill them. Remember there is also a morale penalty if a large part of your army is destroyed so every death is important. When attacking (on fairly flat terrain) I harass the enemy archers with my mounted archers; when the enemy commits I move and harass the other flank. They may have interior lines but I have speed and mobility. If the enemy has too many archers and easily counters this tactic I take my heavy units straight up the middle as the more archers they have the less infantry/cavalry they have, and flank with my mounted x-bows. Quite often though I can just use my cheesy tactics as I described earlier.

antisocialmunky

12-21-2005, 14:28

back to battle tactics (but still micromanaging), i find i am getting a lot of practice at managing units of spears when fighting very large armies of all sorts of stuff under adverse conditions, especially in the later stages of defensive battles where i am heavily outnumbered and out of arrows.

do people find that attempting to stick well-timed charges into ranged units is more effective, or do you prefer to stand there and get shot, moving units into loose formation when necessary? (the AI's usual response when lacked ranged units)

Well, it depends on what type of units you're using. If you're using archers with shields like Trebizond or Pavises, then you should decoy your archers and start a missile dueal or start plinking thier heavy armour. If you have Pavises, you have to use them as decoys and missile duel anyways. If you have Longbows, you'll have range advantage against ordinary bows but will get cut apart by arbs. When using L-bows, you need sacrificial units infront that can take missile fire well (P. Arbs are good). With L-Bows you should advance until you're in range of their good troops OR, you can instead wait until they advance and just cut them apart unit by unit with concentrated fire by targeting atleast two L-bows at one unit. In SP, I use two groups of two L-bows to four groups of two depending on the army.

Vladimir

12-22-2005, 14:47

One of the things I did with the Armenians is to take Wales, and use my PAs to screen my longbows as you said. It works very well.

matteus the inbred

12-23-2005, 18:02

When I'm defending the AI eventually leaves its missile troops exposed allowing my light cav to kill them.

further to this, i've taken on a new Turkish career and after exterminating the Egyptians i took on the Byz, who'd been spamming Trebizond Archers. perfect time to try the new tactics, says I. Lo and behold, i sent repeated attacks by armies consisting of 4-6 units of Turcoman horse, 3-4 units of Armenian Heavy Cav, plus some good backup spears, and by using 'lure and charge' tactics combining the cavalry, repeatedly wiped out large numbers of Trebs and caused terrible casualties on the defenders, even beating Byzantines firmly entrenched on hills, in woods and possessed of much better quality troops than me. even had the satisfaction of seeing 8-star Prince John quit the field (and therefore retire to a castle where he lasted two years and wasn't ransomed back...)with his Kat bodyguard cos the rest of his army was dead!
thanks for all tips guys, it really works, light and medium cav co-operation is the key to pre-Janissary Turks and it's lovely to behold. the Byz have lost Lesser Armenia and Anatolia, they're also fighting Poland and the rest of their Asia Minor armies are peasants and rubbish.

sbroadbent

12-23-2005, 21:23

In battles I use the normal tactics regarding to terrain, units in my army and that of my opponent. The usual flanking, luring units away from the main force, disrupting their formation and the occasional ambush. All this with mixed success.

My question is as follows: Did you once ( or more) pulled off an amazing victory with some fancy manouvring? When and how did you display some ingenious tactics?

Share it with the rest of the community so we can learn and worship.

Here is one of my favorite battles, where Royal Knights saved my forces from what could've been a defeat. Cavalry against a non-spear army does wonders.

After playing the Danes and Sicilians a couple times, I decided to try for a more mainstream mainland type of faction. For both the Danes and Sicilians I played the merchant role and for conquest purposes claimed trading trophies such as Constantinople, Venice, and even Antioch. I decided to play a different style of campaign, requiring me to build up an empire that was located in one part of the world, rather than having small heavily defended outposts. I chose the English, and through a series of battles, I had pushed the majority of French troops up into Champagne. This was much more than I could handle, so I attempted to solidify my position. I established a primary legion, and left minimal forces in Flanders (one unit of peasants) so that I could have my primary forces concentrated ready to strike. The French, seeing an opportunity sent a small contingent into Flanders which consisted of a couple units of archers and Royal Knights (including the French King). The next turn I landed 3 units of Royal Knights and 3 of archers out of my main force. This along with my hundred peasants should've been enough to handle that small french force. Little did I realize but the French sent in more troops the next year, and I was suddenly faced on the light end of a 2-to-1 odds.

Knowing that if I withdrew, I would be abandoning Flanders which the French would retake, I choose to forge ahead and see what damage I could do.

Here is the lineup

English
3x60 Archers
3x20 Royal Knights
1x100 Peasants

French
5x60 Archers
3x20 Royal Knights
2x100 Peasants
1x60 Urban Militia.

I was heavily outnumbered, but the french's weakness turned out to be their troops selection and the lack of any spear units. I realized if I traded missile fire, they would come out on top, and then I'd be in a worse position than I was. Therefore I spread out my Royal Knights sent ahead my archers to start firing off arrows, and marched my unit of peasants into a fodder deathmarch. I had one set of Royal Knights at the very beginning go after a balista crew but it put them into position for the next phase of the attack. At a moment I deemed right, I charged my Royal Knights into three sections of their lines. I knew that the archers would fall back to the impending charge, therefore tying them up and preventing them from firing. The peasants kept the Knights and Militia busy long enough for my Royals to rout some of the archers and peasants. My own archers came within range, and started raining their special form of death. The French armies were in chaos, and they began to rout. It was by no means a devastating Victory, but a Victory none the less as I was outnumbered 2-1 and I posted these battle results.

Men Killed: 298
Men Taken: 137
Men Lost: 237
Men Remaining: 104

Mr White

12-24-2005, 11:48

sbroadbent

12-25-2005, 08:24

Nice battle sbraodbent. Pin the dangerous units while taking out the support troops and afterwards inflicting mayhem with your own support troops.
How long did those peasants hold? Did they have high valour or did you take out those archers that fast?

As I recall I didn't pay much attention to the peasants, though they held long enough to tie up the Urban Militia, and enable the royal Knights to disrupt the major portion of the French army (I believe I sent one after peasants, while the other two went after archers). I unfortunately don't have the replay to verify how long the peasants did last, but they eventually routed (if they had valor or morale bonuses I wasn't aware of them), but my own archers eventually caused the french a fair number of losses.

Peasants and undefended archers don't tend to stand up well to a cavalry charge, particularly when it hits hard.

Scurvy

01-02-2006, 12:20

have you ever tried using horsearchers? I find them the most useful troop-type in the game, they can shoot lightly armoured units without getting shot themselves, kill light units and hold up heavier units in combat, tie out enemy cav and then kill them, kill enemy skirmishes, the list is endless (i use them without pause button as i play multiplayer only, but im sure pause button could make them even more effective), they are also cheap to make. I think they work best in 4's, and try to get them behind enemy as early as possible.

gaijinalways

01-02-2006, 16:39

Good ideas guys. Often with MTW, you must always adjust your tactics to what you think or can see the enemy has versus what you know you have.

One of my most interesting battles was one of the historical battles (I forget if it was in a campaign or a stand alone), but I do remember it was one where the enemy was set up in some trees at the start. I tried several times to win, but I was trying to come slowly into the woods after a shoot out. Instead, I finally tried a quick rush with my cavalry units into the woods with soldiers coming slowly behind them. Took some casualites, but routed the enemy men in the woods, including killing many of the archers which helped me later in routing the rest of the enemy's units.

Odin

01-02-2006, 19:08

I play with no time limit for battles, so that allows me the benefit of taking as much time as possible to peace meal battles. My most succesful tactic is that I try and use missle units fully. Again, this is a bi product of no time limit battles, but if I bring 3 archer units to the fight I let them empty thier quivers before a frontal assault.

If the AI and I are eqaully matched (or I am outmatched) numerically or quality I will simply use hit and runs and delays (mounted missle units here if I have them). Basically I dont fully engage the enemy in a major melee unless I am confident I can win it.

I am not expert in generalship, as I have been defeated by the AI in battle before. As a result of these (admittadly few :2thumbsup: ) humiliations I exhaust the enemy with missle units, with feinting units to increase thier fatique, with picking off stray units, and with flanking.

Is all this required to defeat the AI? Probably not, but I have had some spectacular defeats in my years playing MTW, most of which came from arrogance and not using units properly.

In short, my most successful tactic is maximizing missle units before melee.

Scurvy

01-02-2006, 19:22

hmm, to really test out tactics try MP multiplayer as the play is (usually) better than AI, and so is more challenging and satisfying to contend with, also i find missile units very good, especially longbows and horse archers :)

Roark

01-04-2006, 01:24

Psiloi

01-07-2006, 22:02

Usually resist with the infantry in the centre and attack with the cavalry by the flanks, but there are other tactics.

The usual use of the spears is in the centre, but when i play factions with good spears i don't put their in the middle, but in the flanks for prevent a cavalry attack by there. In the middle i put to the swordsmen, and in a second line the rear of the general with heavy cavalry and three halberdiers. By the flanks with the spears must be the other cavalry, heavy and middle (or light).

The question is: a quick attack of the enemy cavalry to the flank can be repulse, and if they try a raid charge against the middle the swordsmen can be helped quickly by the flank or by the rear. If the enemy infantry (swords or polearms) will attack by the flank is not a problem because they are slow and i can send reinforcement, the real danger is a charge of the cavalry by the flank.

In the attack, the spears can fight as in the defense, a wall against the cavalry (usually in the flank) and my cavalry attacking when the enemy cavalry is fighting with the spearmen.

One

So if i am the french for example, for High:

2 Feudal Sergeants
4 FMAA
1 Pavise Crossbows
3 Halberdiers
4 Knights
2 Mounted Sergeants

- ------------PC--------------
MS-------K--------K------MS
K--H----------H----------H--K
FS-FMAA-FMAA-FMAA-FMAA-FS

bye

Lanemerkel1

01-08-2006, 04:47

here we go:

Byzantine Infantry/Byzantine Lancers - "Anvil" Frontal Distraction
Byzantine Cavalry/Bulgarian Brigands - "Heat" Ranged Support
Kataphraktoi/Pronoiai Allagion - "Hammer" Rear Charge
Varangian Guard/Steppe Cavalry - "Clamp" Flanking Pincers
Enemy Army Units - "Sword" Metalwork in Question

there are some armies where I only use cavalry (moves faster, holds out longer, better charge etc.)

so in those cases:
Byzantine Lancers (Frontal Charging Bonuses)
Byzantine Cavalry (Ranged/Melee Attack Ability)
Pronoiai Allagion (more mobile than Kataphraktoi)
Steppe Cavalry (Flanking Attack Router Pursuit)

Alexios

01-14-2006, 01:18

Ok, this is probably an old & basic strategy, but I thought I would throw it in anyway.

9 times out of 10, I have found it most effective to use lots spearmen and missile units (usually foot archers with 1 or 2 mounted units). And no matter what, I almost always like to go into battle being the underdog. I could be wrong, but it appears to me that one of the first things the AI does before battle ensues is to "measure you up." That is, it tries to determine who has the upperhand based on size of army and mix of units. If the AI feels it has the advantage, it will attack first - regardless of whether you're the invader or the defender. Of course, I always prefer the AI to come to me, that way I can use the terrain to my advantage instead of his. This is why I prefer to go into battle "under-manned."

So if I can get the AI to come to me, my objective is to take out as many of his men as possible before he reaches my position. So the first thing I'll do is charge downfield with my mounted archers (if I've included any in my stack) and start firing on his army. While I'm doing that, I'll start forming a spearwall (preferable a half-hexagon) on the nearest hill. I will then position each of my archer units in a two-line formation in front. As the enemy comes within range of the hill, I'll give my archers the command to fire. I have found that with 3 to 5 archer units in a 2-lined formation, if you get them timed just right, you can get a constant rain of arrows falling in on the enemy.

When his units start getting too close to my archers, I'll start pulling them back behind the spearwall, one unit at a time. I'll then get them lined up quickly behind the spearwall and start firing again. By this time, the AI has lost lots of men, and some of his units have either routed or are beginning to. And when the AI charges the flank of my spearwall with one of his cav units, I will charge his flank with one of mine (usually my general's).

This is the basic approach I use in fighting most battles. I have found that it will win most battles for me, or at least severly reduce the enemy numbers. I've used it quite a bit, except when I'm up against the Golden Horde. But I have used other strategies against them, most of which have been mentioned here at the Org.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

01-15-2006, 20:22

I usually play English, when fighting I try to tailor my tactics to my enemy.

For instance, armies with mainly heavy infantry and little cavalry I try to overwhelm with a hail of arrows from my longbows with light cav behind and a unit of spears and Irish or scots swords on each flank.

When fighting cavalry I tend to use spears and bills mixed about three units each in my main line with four units of Longbows behind and two of knights on each flank with my general and reserve knights in the centre.

When facing archer heavy armies I use large numbers of light infantry to charge home quickly while cav attack from the flanks. I always have cav on the flanks no matter what.

On the whole I use heavy infantry and archers, I'm typically English :)

As far as manuvering goes I'm a high risk kind of chap, I send my cav out wide at the start of the battle and approach with the intention of having my flanks wrapped, although not enough to actually get behind my line. The the cav hit the infantry in the rear. It's quite bloodless if you time it possibly as you usually get a chain rout.

Another tactic I use is to have my archers in the centre unprotected with two shieldwalls on the flanks, the AI usually falls for it.

Thats in open ground. I could go on for hours about bridges, woods, mountains, rivers etc.

Lanemerkel1

01-16-2006, 00:37

usually I batter my enemies with LR Seige Equipment (i.e. Culverins, Demi-Culverins, Catapults etc.) send in Ranged/Melee Cavalry (i.e. Byzantine Cavalry) charging in, and then I bring in the Infantry and rest of the cavalry (I.E. Arquebusiers, Byzantine Lancers, Varangian Guards, Byzantine Infantry, Trebizond Archers, Bulgarian Brigands, Steppe Cavalry, Kataphraktoi, Pronoiai Allagion, Lithuanian Cavalry, etc. etc.) en masse on a full scale pincer attack.

Bregil the Bowman

01-17-2006, 17:08

Standard Defence:

More often than not, I use the "paranoid half-hex" (spears in Early, or the best possible polearms in High and Late). The half-hex protects as many archers as I can field, with swordsmen/axes on the flanks and fast cavalry on the rear flanks. My heavy cavalry I keep in the rear, to be deployed only after the polearms have charged the enemy at close range, to find and exploit weaknesses or flanks.

I'm a big fan of the paranoid half-hex. Even when attacking, I tend to start out prepared to defend as a couple of times the AI has been known to deploy right at the edge of its zone and charge straight away - embarrassing if you are caught mid-manouvre.

I usually set out three lines of infantry - 3 x archers, 3/4 x polearms/spears and 3 x swordsmen, with cavalry to the rear or flanks. It's basic but effective. If the enemy attacks with cavalry or spears, the archers retreat behind the spears and the swords/cavalry attempt to flank. If the enemy attacks with swords, I charge my swords/cavalry through the gaps between the spear units.

Depending on the army, I like to have a few "exotics" to support this formation, especially HA-types when I can get them. I like to have 3/4 in my starting line up and 2/3 more as my first reinforcements. Even when defending I send them out boldly to soften up the approaching enemy. If the enemy first wave is broken, HAs are great for chasing routers and then scarpering when the second wave shows up. They can also get behind the lines to chase off artillerymen and the like.

Tactics have to be varied to terrain and army type, of course, and good use of hills can be crucial to winning a battle. Quite often I find the AI defends a wooded hill, using the trees to protect one flank. This can be used to advantage as the trees will also shield your own advancing troops. If you have some good quality swordsmen, this is their route behind the enemy flank, especially if the woods contain spears or cavalry defenders. Even lightly armoured swords like gallowglasses will have a field day in woods.

Lessons I have learnt: don't be to eager to pursue routers, especially in a desert; let your light horse charge around the battlefield (especially if you can replace them with reinforcements) but not your heavy horse; keep your core units, especially your general, in a cohesive group for as long as you can; don't commit your reserves when the enemy still has cavalry units not engaged who could flank you; try to match your reinforcements to the troops you expect to retreat first (e.g. archers, light horse); most of all, be patient as even in timed games you should have plenty of time to beat the enemy.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

01-18-2006, 11:30

You know I tend to use an inverted Half Hex when deffending, like Hannibal. It works well with Cav on the flanks.

gaijinalways

01-18-2006, 15:18

Alexios

01-18-2006, 18:44

usually I batter my enemies with LR Seige Equipment (i.e. Culverins, Demi-Culverins, Catapults etc.)
The use of siege weapons in MTW has always puzzled me. I have never been able to use them with much success in the open battlefield. I find their accuracy isn't very good, and therefore, inflict very little damage on enemy units. Also, depending on how the battle is going - either positive or negative - I find that my siege weapons will quickly become out of range or overrun, thereby severely limiting their time of usefulness. The only occasions where I think I will use them is when besieging a castle, which I will do only if the enemy is holding out for 5+ years.

Alexios

01-19-2006, 00:23

I like using the woods for a shield too, especially when you can run some cav units into the rear flanks or behind the AI units. I have also used the woods to entice AI cav troops in and then slaughter them with some emerging troops, though I must admit, the AI has done this a few times to me as well.
I use this approach quite often when fighting the Golden Horde. One thing I have found is that you can really take advantage of their over-aggressive nature while in battle. The tactic I usually use against them is to place my archers in front of some woods (preferably next to a hill), then position my infantry units in a U-shaped formation inside the woods, with my cav units positioned outside towards the rear. When the GH mounted units charge my archers, I will quickly retreat them into the woods. 95% of the time, the GH will go in after them. I allow them to get in as deep as possible, then envelope them with my infantrymen and run my cavs around the trees to attack them from the rear. This reduces them down quite quickly and really gets them running.

I remember using this tactic for almost a full hour, while having basically no reinforcements. I went into battle extremely outnumbered (I think it was about 3 or 4 to 1). The GH kept coming at me wave after wave, and I would cut them down everytime. I finally had to retreat, as my men were getting quite fatigued and were showing signs of routing. But it was a pleasant sight to click and go back to the campaign map and find the GH stacks had been significantly wittled down.

Of course, you don't always have the luxury of fighting the GH in a highly wooded area. But when you do, man you can really take advantage of it, especially if their army consist mainly of cavs, which they usually are.

Roark

01-19-2006, 00:47

The use of siege weapons in MTW has always puzzled me. I have never been able to use them with much success in the open battlefield. I find their accuracy isn't very good, and therefore, inflict very little damage on enemy units. Also, depending on how the battle is going - either positive or negative - I find that my siege weapons will quickly become out of range or overrun, thereby severely limiting their time of usefulness. The only occasions where I think I will use them is when besieging a castle, which I will do only if the enemy is holding out for 5+ years.

You need a couple of things before artillery can be useful on the battlefield:

- The ability to turn. Trebuchets, Mangonels, Bombards, and any other artillery which can't turn = utterly useless.

- Valour. This is the most important factor. Zero valour artillery against personnel is extremely inaccurate. The more valour you have, the better. A good general is obviously helpful in this regard.

- A nice hill. If you are elevated (and on defence), catapults, serpentines, and organ guns can be deadly against personnel.

In the end, though, the morale penalties are the reason I use artillery on the battlefield. My goal in every battle is to route the army as quickly as possible. Artillery are great for producing fear, which offsets their sometimes-tame kill rate.

You know I tend to use an inverted Half Hex when deffending, like Hannibal. It works well with Cav on the flanks.

Hell yeah. This one is great when you aren't severely outnumbered. It's like a great big deadly hug.