Anyone used historical tactics in TW games?

[Patriarch of Constantinople]

I was wondering if you have ever used tactics of peoples like Alexander or Hannibal. I used Alexnaders break the line tactic he used at Gaugamela. This was with the Sassanids since cillibinarii and cataphracts are awesome cav. Im srry but i cant figure out how to convert tgas to jpegs. When i do ill try to get a pic in.

[allfathersgodi]

Of course the Shield-Wall is perfect for West European armies. In the Isle de France I used English 'longbow' defensive tactics to defeat a larger German force of Gothic Sergeants.

And then there was the fight I had in the Sinai against Saracens as the English when I used the 'fight on the move' tactics of Richard the Lionheart to defeat an attacking force of Saracens.

Not to mention an eerily similar reenactment of the Battle of Hastings where I drew the enemy army out piecemeal with infantry charges and then cut them off from the main body with my cav. Ended it will getting the enemy general killed with an arrow flight...

[matteus the inbred]

I have attempted to use Hannibal's tactics at Cannae on more than one occasion, but it never worked very well, cos the troops in MTW and RTW just can't quite manouevre well enough, and of course you can't order them to fight while moving backwards, so far as I know. One on occasion the Romans just cut straight through the middle of my line and everyone ran away.
Standard shieldwall and 'Hastings' type stuff works well enough, and Turkish armies are easy to use 'historically' once you have the hang of skirmishing.

I have also made the English archer wedges/Crecy/Agincourt style formation work once or twice, but took heavy casualties.

[cunobelinus]

You can use hannibals tatics well there worked for me in one of my carthage campaigns you just have to be quick to reverse the crescent shape other wise it just seems to collapse on its self and u lose the battle.

[matteus the inbred]

Yes, needs more practice I think, and better troops. And so many of these things rely on the opposition doing more or less what you want them to do!

[econ21]

I try to use Roman "manipular" (or checkerboard) tactics at least with realism mods like RTR and EB. It works very well against phalanx type armies, as its flexibility assists in defeating the phalanxes piecemeal. It is not so good against barbarian armies - a solid frontline is probably better. But I think I read a post on the RTR forums that historically it would lead to a solid frontline (rear elements would come up to fill gaps), so that's ok.

[matteus the inbred]

I try to use Roman "manipular" (or checkerboard) tactics at least with realism mods like RTR and EB. It works very well against phalanx type armies, as its flexibility assists in defeating the phalanxes piecemeal. It is not so good against barbarian armies - a solid frontline is probably better. But I think I read a post on the RTR forums that historically it would lead to a solid frontline (rear elements would come up to fill gaps), so that's ok.

I agree, from my limited use of this it seems to work well against some and not others. They used to fill in the gaps and if the front lines couldn't hold they would file back through the gaps in the principes and triarii and remake the front line again.
I've also used Epaminondas's classic refused flank with phalanxes, that works well even though the historical priniciple on which it was based (that each battleline would incline to the right as each man sought the protection of his neighbour's shield) doesn't apply.

In MTW the classic Swiss 'steamroller' tactic can work quite well; mass your pike phalanxes, skirmish with crossbows and leave the halberdiers on the flanks, and then just grind forward...as the Burgundians found out, it's very hard to stop!

[naut]

I often use the English "Longbow Tactic", especially with small professional armies against the French or HRE.

[The Stranger]

i ussually use the hammer and anvil tactic. i also use the tactic hannibal used at cannae. i also use the tactics displayed in my RTW tactics thread

[DukeofSerbia]

With some factions I use historical tactics. My standard tactics is spear infantry in centre, sword infantry on flanks behind spermen, archers are in second line and cavalry for flanking.

But, in MTW I use haevy cavalry for smashing everything (classic knight charge with catholic factions) except for units which have spear/pike/polearm (not like UM or MS).

In RTR when I played with Romans I trained only infantry plus mercs cavalry as was in history.

[Taurus]

I used to use the Roman "checkerboard" tactic quite a lot in RTW, worked very well too, especially against Phalanx factions and other Romans.

[Archayon]

When i play with English Longbows (MTW)
the AI, being the French, often uses
historical tactics with their royal cavalry :no:



charge them up that hill :inquisitive:

[Ludens]

Divinus Arma wrote a guide regarding historical tactics and how to use them in the R:TW. You can find it here (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=46099). Personally, I make up my tactics as I go along.

[The Spartan (Returns)]

I try to use Roman "manipular" (or checkerboard) tactics at least with realism mods like RTR and EB. It works very well against phalanx type armies, as its flexibility assists in defeating the phalanxes piecemeal. It is not so good against barbarian armies - a solid frontline is probably better. But I think I read a post on the RTR forums that historically it would lead to a solid frontline (rear elements would come up to fill gaps), so that's ok.
me too. evertime. this works very well with Darth Formations 13.0 btw.

[Andejar]

Awesome archer lives near me and we talk a lot. He has books and stuff that have those tactics in them and he uses them and he is really good

[Patriarch of Constantinople]

i ussually use the hammer and anvil tactic. i also use the tactic hannibal used at cannae. i also use the tactics displayed in my RTW tactics thread
How did you pull off a cannae? i only pulled off a Trasmiene and Gaugamela

[Garvanko]

Roman 'manipular' formation is very efficient, and pretty much unbeatable.

[Wardruid]

The British infantry square works well with all anti-cavalry infantry units against cavalry units
But it's best used in case you don't have any cavalry youself.
And I strongly recommend not using it if the enemy has artillery

[r johnson]

, I make up my tactics as I go along.

I do that too, though i think i will try some of these tactics :balloon2:

[Mooks]

Somebody should refer me to a website where it lists these battles. (ancient history battles)

[Shrike]

Somebody should refer me to a website where it lists these battles. (ancient history battles)

Well, it's not the best, but it gives enough information to work with:

These all have nifty battle maps to get an idea of how things happened, from which you can infer ways of applying it in TW. Wikipedia in general seems to have decent overviews of battles, with at least enough detail to be able to apply the concepts.

Battle_of_Cannae (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Cannae) (Hannibal)
Battle_of_Lake_Trasimene (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Lake_Trasimene) (Hannibal)
Battle_of_the_Trebia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Trebia) (Hannibal)
Battle_of_Agincourt (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Agincourt) (Hundred Years War)
Battle of Crecy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Cr%C3%A9cy) (Hundred Years War)
Battle_of_Poitiers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Poitiers_%281356%29) (Hundred Years War)
Battle_of_Hastings (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Hastings) (Norman Conquest)
Battle_of_Issus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Issus) (Alexander)
Battle_of_Gaugamela (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Gaugamela) (Alexander)

The site the link below is from has lots of nice descriptions of battles (Roman). I'm going to peruse it some more to see just how in depth it is but it looks good.
Battle of Illipa (http://www.roman-empire.net/army/ilipa.html) (Scipio)

This is a weird link from a site that deals in some other kind of Strategy game, I think Warhammer. But it gives a great description of some basic named strategies (such as "Refused Flank" or "Pincer"). If you can translate some of the unit types into MTW, STW, or RTW units, it can be useful.

Warhammer Formations (http://www.warmongerclub.com/articles/pdeflo_formations01.htm)

My cursory online research (inspired by this thread, incidentally) reinforced something that I'd heard before: Medieval battles are not _typically_ the places where tactics won the day. If you look at the battles in the crusades, they were typically won at the strategic level (someone does something stupid like march their army across the desert for 4 days, and gets bitchslapped by the well-fed, well-watered, well-rested opponent). If you want to see brilliant generals using tactics to win a battle of reasonably equivalent armies, then you have to look at Rome (and before) and Napoleon and after, because medieval battles were normally led by the rich, not the smart (Feudalism at work). That's not true in every case, but a general statement.

Furthermore, in some cases the disposition of troops was secondary to the /way/ they were used. The Normans defeated the English at Hastings by a prolonged series of feigned retreats, drawing the English out of their impregnable shield wall. There seems to me to be a difference between that, and using a Refused Flank to pound the weak side of the enemy's line.

Anyway - do with this what you will. I hope it's helpful! (Awesome thread, BTW!)

[Shrike]

More!
All Empires (http://www.allempires.com/article/index.php?q=articles_index)

Go through the ages, look for anything that mentions "battle" -

Very nice graphics, decent descriptions (particularly the ones on Alexander's campaigns). There're analysis as well as descriptions, so you can figure out what the underlying principle of the battle plan was, as well as what happened.

There's even some stuff on Mongol battles.

[Dominii]

The only historical tactic I use is to mercilessly pursue the routers and kill as many as possible. It's very difficult to use historical tactics like cannae as the units tend to rout if you order them to disengage from battle and then get pursued by the enemy unit.

I am looking forward to trying the same tactics from RTW:vanilla in RTR, or perhaps I'll need to create a whole new set of tactics

[econ21]

I am looking forward to trying the same tactics from RTW:vanilla in RTR or perhaps I'll need to create a whole new set of tactics.

My general impression is that because morale is higher, move/kill speeds slower and the human-AI difference in command stars not so great, tactics play more of a role in RTR. You have time to maneouvre, whereas in vanilla things are decided much more in the opening phase of the battle.

There's also a rebalancing of combat arms in RTR - I think missiles are somewhat weaker (although javelins are nasty) and cavalry is generally more fragile. These changes imply it is more important to go for the rear or unshielded flank of your targets when using both missiles and cavalry.

[JAKLE]

My preferred task is the good old zulu bull and horns tatic. I find that a RTW and a MTW army always go strait for the 'loin' without hesitation and hence alow the famous manoeuver to take place. The tactic will , sadly :manoeuver: , fail if an opposing army is a particulary large force and/or contains elephants and/or a large amount of seige artillery. The tactic works particulary well against the barbarian's and the particulary. On another note , does anyone just say :furious3: it and go in all guns blazing without a care for life atoll?
"Utinam barbari spatium proprium tuum invadant!" - May barbarians invade your personal space!

[JAKLE]

Sorry to re-post but it was catherige not paticulary . sorry