Cavalry... What do you think? (all discussion of cav here) [Archive]

Prince of the Poodles

10-12-2006, 08:14

Well Ive played the demo a few times and, at first, the cavalry struck me as being completely underpowered.

I shuddered at all those knights, supposedly the finest warriors of the era, getting decimated in both battles.

(Everything else seemed tentitively OK, after tweaking with the game a bit. I took those horrible green things off, and the banners, and that bloom glow effect, and it looks great!)

After some more in depth playing, I noticed that knights only fell in droves on those frontal charges they are scripted to perform. In Pavia I gave AI complete control of my men and it had an almost untouched unit of Zwie... (big sword people) marching through the woods and it was attacked from behind by some Gendahorses and completely beaten.

Also I have noticed that if a unit is already ingaged and the knights charge in frontally after another unit, they also dont have that mass death effect.

I am looking mostly at the mp aspect of the game, and I dont know what to make of the cav.

It could be seen as good as in RTW cav could charge head on and have no real penalties. However, it still makes me shudder to see 70% of the "finest warriors in medieval europe" die charging men with hammers and the rest flee immediatly.

What do you guys, especially the mp vets, think of the cavalry as its presented in the demo?

Silencer

10-12-2006, 08:28

Cavalry charger only work on enemies who are not prepared (rear attack) or already engaged in battle. (or on weak troops)
Heavy footknights for example, who are prepared will decimate a cavalery charge. but when these foot-knights are already engaged, they become mince meat for cav. charges.

I do think that heavy knights on heavy "armoured" horses should have a more deadly impact (charge). afterall, they have the speed, horse and a large lance.

DisruptorX

10-12-2006, 08:44

Keep in mind that Pavia is a renaissance battle, and all of the infantry are wearing heavy armour or carrying pikes, both ideal for fighting cavalry. I'm sure that if you charge light infantry with your heavy cav in the final version, you will destroy them.

econ21

10-12-2006, 09:22

It's hard to judge these things from the demo. You don't actually control much cavalry - two at Hastings and one at Pavia. But so far so good, IMO.

I like the fact that the AI knights make almost no impression charging frontally on braced pikes (Pavia) or dismounted chivalric foot knights (Agincourt). It fits my understanding of history. Charging knights do cause some casualties - esp. at Agincourt (more so, if the English were not so experienced). It may be over a little quickly, but this is a game and battles will last less than 40 minutes rather than a day.

From a gameplay point of view, even if cavalry is prima facie underpowered, I think it will still be extremely useful by virtue of its mobility - it can whip around a flank much faster than infantry and is also much better at running down archers, cannon etc. I play Rome Total Realism Platinum where cavalry seems to have similar power to M2TW but they are still like gold. (A cavalry charge to the rear of an engaged unit is the killer tactic).

AI knights seemed to do fine on the few occasions they did not commit a frontal charge on a prepared position - e.g. the rear charge at Agincourt. They trounce longbows and it is mutually assured destruction vs non-braced billmen.

I have not experimented much with my cavalry at Hastings, but the Pavia general is a monster (the 2 hit points helps a lot here). Very useful for finishing off the French king after he has floundered on the pikes; for taking out the Scots Guards; the cannon; the crossbows etc. A target-rich environment, as the USAAF might have said.

Ibn Munqidh

10-12-2006, 09:25

I agree, they seem to be underpowered. The scots guard at pavia are sword weilding infantry, and even they are a problem from the cavalry.

Tempiic

10-12-2006, 10:25

Really? I experienced easy walkovers against these scottish guard with my cav.

I am not sure if they are underpowered. Don't forget either that the dismounted chiv knights also are nicely upgraded. I mean 22 defence versus 15 attack +13 charge is not a huge difference either. It might be even so they are scripted to simply die on impact. ;) Because I never saw the rear cav attack launch itself over my receiving billmen and/or dismounted knights. Nor the other french cav after first cav wave.

On the other hand, these rear french cav can become very lethal if they refuse to charge into your billmen. Most often I end up loosing my 2 billmen units against them. I also have seen the french AI holding up my isolated general unit and then charging in repeatingly with his cav. That was ouch.

Bob the Insane

10-12-2006, 10:46

I agree, they seem to be underpowered. The scots guard at pavia are sword weilding infantry, and even they are a problem from the cavalry.

I did not find my general having any real issues with them, but if you mean the cavalry did not crush them in seconds I guess you are right...

I agree with the original poster in that while cavalry is actually effective and even the suicidal frontal charges can cause a reasonable number of deaths in the defending unit, it just does not look right somehow.

It is as if all the weight has been taken out of the cavalry. If an armoured warrior on horseback was to charge a prepared defensive line head on you would reasonable expected the mounted warrior to come off worse but the fact it has no noticeable impact on the defending unit looks a little odd. No more guys getting knocked through the air and push back even a little...

For the pike wall this is reasonable but for the foot knights with their warhammers you would think a charging knight could at least force a step backward, even if it is to avoid hurtling corpse...

I will reiterate though that when you look at the numbers the and effect on gameplay, they have that aspect down just right I think...

Prince of the Poodles

10-12-2006, 11:01

I will reiterate though that when you look at the numbers the and effect on gameplay, they have that aspect down just right I think...

And thats the most important part... :2thumbsup:

Thanks for your opinions so far!

doc_bean

10-12-2006, 11:36

It is as if all the weight has been taken out of the cavalry. If an armoured warrior on horseback was to charge a prepared defensive line head on you would reasonable expected the mounted warrior to come off worse but the fact it has no noticeable impact on the defending unit looks a little odd. No more guys getting knocked through the air and push back even a little...

Well, unless they are riding suicidal horses, it would be hard to ride full speed into a braced group of men.

I haven't played the demo yet though, so i don't know what it looks like :oops:

Watchman

10-12-2006, 11:40

Cavalry always kind of floundered when trying to attack close-order infantry that stubbornly held the ranks. Even if it was just a bunch of determined peasants with pointy sticks. By what I understand of it in such circumstances the horses just flat out refuse to run into what they perceive to be a solid obstacle and hit the brakes, which naturally enough saps the effect of the charge but good and tends to leave the horsemen milling around all vulnerable.

The horsies are apparently more willing to walk or canter into such obstacles though (presumably they think they won't be impacting hard enough to break their legs), which I understand is exactly why cataphract-style cavalry went to attack at such low velocities (at least against formed infantry) - that way they could push into the ranks by the virtue of sheer weight and survivability and hopefully eventually break up the enemy formation.

I've also read that around Late Middle Ages at least some Central European cavalry (the source referred to them as "German") adopted deep solid wedge formations, probably for the same end - trading speed and mobility for mass and staying power.

Temujin

10-12-2006, 11:54

I've also read that around Late Middle Ages at least some Central European cavalry (the source referred to them as "German") adopted deep solid wedge formations, probably for the same end - trading speed and mobility for mass and staying power.
I thought the reason for the deeper german formations was a lack of homogenous quality - putting the lesser men-at-arms at the back to prevent the enemy from exploiting their weakness? I seem to recall Maximillian thinking better of his Burgundian cavalry than others, and devising a formation with Burgundians in front and "other germans" in the rear. I also don't believe that it has been conclusively shown that those formations were "wedges" as opposed to simply deep formations of cavalry, but I could be wrong about all this; it's been a while since I touched those books.

Watchman

10-12-2006, 12:03

That would have been a standard practice. European chivalry normally formed up with the best armed (which usually also meant socially highest ranked) men at the front lines and assorted lesser-status and usually lighter-equipped cavalry (sergeants, squires, whatever) at the rear in support, but those were in successive long lines about two or three ranks deep AFAIK. Considerations other than grade of armament and tactical role could of course also weigh in.

At least the source I read it in seemed to suggest the German wedge was a fundamentally different tactical formation. That differently equipped men would be deployed into specific parts therein would not have been anything new - the old "blunt wedge" of Byzantine cataphracts had similarly had a very specific equipement distribution.

Louis de la Ferte Ste Colombe

10-12-2006, 15:41

Is it possible to avoid the mistake made in MTW 1.1? Can we ever learn?

Louis,

Cheetah

10-12-2006, 18:58

What do you mean?

ChewieTobbacca

10-12-2006, 19:47

I think the cavalry are fine.

Keep in mind the knights that charge in Agincourt and Pavia charge into dismounted knights (who are heavily armored and wield anti-armor polearm weapons) and pikes (mmm yummy horses). The results are not surprising.

However, if you watch when the knights charge into troops already fighting, and missile troops, they tend to not have a problem. In fact, in Pavia, my Zwei's fighting Gendarmes ended up in trouble also. Note also that despite being repulsed easily in teh first charge at Agincourt, the knights do tend to cause 10-30 dismounted knights taking the charge to die.

Cavalry have always been extremely costly to fight in a slug-it-out fight anyways. They should be used as flankers or troops meant to break a line of lower-morale troops. When used against troops with high-morale and good armor, they will likely be swarmed and fall.

Tempiic

10-12-2006, 19:48

He is referring to calling out for changes too soon and too early, so that we end up with an early patch that correct things that did not need much correction in the first place, while other more devastating problems are found later on.

Such as the spear issue at start of MTW that got solved but solved too much so that they end up sucking... while the charge bug did not go noticed initially and as a result took a very long time before that got solved.

Sofar I think Cav is fine. It is possible that the initial french cav wave was scripted to die fast, because the 2nd cav wave did not try to launch its knights over my units and the 3rd wave did not either (au contraire even). The Demo simply does not allow for much Cav experience, and I think we'll be more able to determine how effective cav actually is when we got the game ourselves.

spong

10-12-2006, 20:19

I think that most cavalry in the demo is fine but when the Gendarmes and French General charge together into the pikes they do too much damage IMO, I 'm not sure if the generals bodygaurd has the right amount of hit points or is a lil' overpowered, but I'm pretty sure they shouldn't make a difference to the pikes compared to the Gendarmes who get slaughtered. All I'm saying is that the general seems a bit too uber, if the Gendarmes get repelled then the bodygaurd should be repelled in a similar way but they stick in the combat alot longer, lose fewer men and cause more casualties, I think the Generals should perhaps have the same stats as Gendarmes. I got a bit fed up in Rome of Generals being used as a super-unit all the time.

Polemists

10-12-2006, 20:49

I don't think there underpowered personally. When I play the demo, at Pavia, and the general and his knights charge as above poster said. They usually do a fair amount of casualties even when my men are braced for the attack.

I still find Calvary highly useful, I don't have them in Agincourt and there's always one or two moments where my archers are quickly struck and my men can't get there as fast as I'd like. In Pavia as others have said the calvary unit (the whooping 40) one of the differences between victory and defeat. Even when my general gets to 8 men he still does amazingly well. This could be though because he usually has 3 gold valor at that stage :laugh4:

Ibn Munqidh

10-12-2006, 21:10

I really believe that horses in MTW2 should be even more powerful than Rome, for a couple of factors:

1. The stirrup, had appeared in Europe in the late 12th century, and made cavalry charges more dependable, as riders were less likely to fall off their horses.

2. Calculate the weight of the rider+ horse's weight+ riders plate armour+ horse's barding and armour, all that coupled with the horse's chargind speed, gives off ALOT of kinetic energy, equalling a car travelling at almost 40km/ph. Also, knights, being the elite cavalry of Europe, charged in organised ranks, these would have decimated entire units of infantry, unless they were armed with pikes. Put in mind that most horse armour of the era covered a horse's eyes, where's it could not see in front of it, which would not make it stop before a charge.

Cavalry as I see in the demo, are pretty much useless, their charge against any unit causes very little casualties, and they get bogged down in melee against the infantry right away, they do not ride through and penetrate infantry ranks, as they were supposed to do historically. Half the unit of knights folds up and die at the charge, and the other half get decimated by the infantry! Thats what I see in the demo.

I think that CA did a really botched job with the cavalry, I hope they fix it with the release.

Tempiic

10-12-2006, 21:27

This could be though because he usually has 3 gold valor at that stage :laugh4:

So valour gaining during battle is back again?

CBR

10-12-2006, 21:38

That was part of RTW/BI too so no surprise there Tempiic.

CBR

Tempiic

10-12-2006, 21:40

Yeah i know... Am not surprised. Just wanted to be sure.

Orb

10-12-2006, 21:47

I can't actually play the demo yet :(

But I really don't like the idea of weak cavalry, the Norman equites under the Guiscard and Bohemund were considered irresistable.

Tamur

10-12-2006, 22:05

I think the lack of frontal charge power is ok. Though the horses and man were fully armoured in both of these battles, they are hitting billmen (notoriously cutting up cavalry) and dismounted knights, who are at least as or more heavily armoured than their mounted counterparts.

Their apparent lack of power in frontal charges is easily made up for by side/flank power. They simply demolish units when they can get around the sides, or when they charge into an engaged unit. Also, these maps have a lot of area and varied terrain to cover, so cavalry will be especially important when trying to get a position secured early.

Censor

10-13-2006, 04:14

Also keep in mind that the English troops in the Battle of Agincourt are artificially buffed by the gold chevrons.

ByzantineKnight

10-13-2006, 05:01

In Pavia I got hit with Chivalric Knights in a frontal charge vs. my heavy Infantry and the infantry got decimated.

Bob the Insane

10-13-2006, 10:04

Messing around on the Agincourt battle last night I was moving my troops around when one one my foot knight units got hit from behind one of the initial cavalry charges. You know those charges that your knights normally cut to pieces...

Well in this instance my knights where on the move (running) and the cavalry charge hit the unit square in the back. There was no hitting a brickwall and dying effect this time, no the mounted knights cut straight through the unit in a bloody swath... Out of the unit, only 2 of my foot knights survived the charge!!!

Facing is obviously going to make a vast difference for cavalry this time...

Watchman

10-13-2006, 10:29

Which is as it should be. Even elite heavy cavalry tended to get stumped by a solid infantry block frontally, but even light cavalry could cause major damage if it could get into their flanks or rear. Moving troops charged in the rear were prone to getting cut down with virtual impunity - horses don't recognize a loose gaggle of moving people like that an obstacle and will quite happily trample them flat, I understand.

The main impact of a cavalry charge is always psychological. If it fails to unnerve the enemy enough that their formation begins to waver and lose solidity, the actual physical impact is going to lose a whole lot of its power as you'll pretty much have to walk the horses in the last couple of meters.

At which point it becomes more pushing and jostling than charging. Still, if what you're pushing with is a three-plus meter couched lance that gets pretty much the entire mass of the horse behind the tip, the other side has quite a bit to worry about anyway.

Hapless footsloggers for one reason or another in loose order can be ridden down almost without even slowing down much of the time though. It's really all about whether the infantry can form into and stay as a solid "presentable obstacle" to receive the charge or not - one on one the sheer speed, mass and energy of the horseman is obviously by far superior.

Tempiic

10-13-2006, 10:30

Messing around on Pavia, I lost my pikemen due to a frontal charge of french cav, as they smashed a part of the pikes and forced the pikes to wheel around.

Another battle, a single french cav unit managed to massacre one unit of zweihanders which got charged frontally and finished off the reinforcing unit of halberdiers (which charged from the rear) in melee. Also they bested my general unit in melee too. (two units of cav charging each other is fun to watch)

Azog 150

10-13-2006, 18:41

I thought the knights were pretty good. The first frontal charge at pavia resulted in heavy casualltys for them, but that is expected as they are hurtling themselvs at a wall of spears. But once the initaial casualtys they broke through the spear wall and i needed to bring in my halberds to help out my pikes.

There they diyed resoably quickly, but once again that is expected as they are stationary against a load of pikes. The King however could take one hell of a beating

Though without my general in pavia i would not have won, it was incredibly fun watching them completely mince the crossbow men and scots guard, and yes we got flying me.

Overall i like the new cavelry, not able to completely own a battle just by charging at every single unit, but still a force to be reckoned with.

Ibn Munqidh

10-13-2006, 18:50

The main impact of a cavalry charge is always psychological

Funny to say, that the only historian that says this is Dr.Nicole Smith. No other historian or specialist agrees with him, and it is one of the most critical catch phrases against him.

Imagine a car, speeding towards you, at 40 km/ph, sure it will unnerve you, but if you have the guts to stand still, it will crush you. Same with a knightly charge.

Satyr

10-13-2006, 22:20

Spino

10-13-2006, 22:27

Funny to say, that the only historian that says this is Dr.Nicole Smith. No other historian or specialist agrees with him, and it is one of the most critical catch phrases against him.

Imagine a car, speeding towards you, at 40 km/ph, sure it will unnerve you, but if you have the guts to stand still, it will crush you. Same with a knightly charge.

You make a good point but you also overlook the fact that horses are harder to dissuade from flinching than people. The psychological factors involved in a heavy cavalry charge were often instrumental to its success.

To prove a point when Sergei Bondarchuk was filming his Napoleonic epic 'Waterloo' he had at his disposal several thousand Russian soldiers which he used as extras during the battle scenes. These men were instructed in the basic drill and formations of the Napoleonic era. When it came time to film the scenes featuring Marshal Ney's infamous massed cavalry charge Bondarchuk had a helluva time getting it just right. The problem wasn't that the horsemen were breaking formation too early but the fact that many of the extras in those square formations would break ranks and run when the horsemen got too close! As you can imagine this probably led to the occassional chain rout where a few skittish extras set off an entire group. This is in spite of the fact that all of the extras were told the oncoming horsemen would veer away and ride around their square formations! The sight, sound and rumbling of hundreds of horses bearing riders wielding swords galloping towards your position is enough to make your primitive inner brain scream "Big mean loud fast things! Run!"

So while it is extremely difficult to train a horse to overcome its instincts which tell it to stop or veer away from an obstacle in its path it is also quite difficult to train human beings to hold their ground in the face of a massed cavalry charge and instill in them the belief that such a seemingly simple and feeble posture will prevent said cavalry from trampling them underfoot. This was probably quite difficult to do during the pre-gunpowder era when your average infantryman was armed with nothing more than a pointy stick and a wooden shield and the oncoming rider and mount could be covered from head to toe in armor and/or barding. The fact that said rider also wielded a mean looking lance of considerable length and had a nasty assortment of arm severing and head bashing weapons at his side didn't help matters either. Last but not least it is no easy thing to stand your ground against a man who is considered by society as a whole to be 'your better' in every capacity; rigid class structure being an unfortunate fact of life back then.

Orda Khan

10-13-2006, 22:52

I've not played the demo but what upgrades were in place? I agree with your point, cav should trample over archers

.....Orda

the_mango55

10-13-2006, 23:37

If it takes an entire battle for a Royal Guard company to take out a company of archers, how many cav are you really going to bring to the table? Seems like the cav should just sweep thru killing many on the charge but instead they get tied up in melee forever.

If you are talking about the Scot's Guard, they are one of the most elite archers in the game, and should be great at both archery and melee. And my cav still didn't have much trouble with them.

Care to tell us exactly where you are talking about?

Watchman

10-13-2006, 23:59

When close-combat infantry could stand up to a cavalry charge on open ground it was invariably through enough discipline, drill and espirit de corps - in short confidence - that they held their ground in the rank and file in the face of the very imposing sight of masses of large animals carrying armed men bearing down on them. If they did not, their formation rapidly lost cohesion and solidity and therefore its ability to intimidate the horses and just plain take the physical impact if necessary (a horse has no trouble knocking down one man, but scores of them braced for impact and supporting the ones before them ought to get a lot more difficult - heck, the first man doesn't even have the room to fall down; then again, if the horse is by that point skewered on a properly braced spear the point gets rather moot), and tended to get gutted.

This is why the knights were the kings of the battlefield in much of Europe for a while; most of the infantry around (which had markedly declined in quality since Carolingian times) just didn't measure up to the task. Where sufficiently solid infantry traditions were preserved however - such as in the urbanized northern Italy and the Low Countries - the cavalry was far less a dominant arm, and the "reinvention" of the necessary measures (more or less already culminating in the highly drilled Swiss communal pikemen, who were already able to go on the offense against any cavalry) pretty much yanked the carpet from under the more narcissistic delusions of the chivalry. Not that good shock cavalry had not remained an important battlefield asset even when dealing with solid heavy infantry, they just usually couldn't do all that much to the stubborn footsloggers frontally unless some particularly telling disparity in equipement was also involved.

As a side note assorted books give the very strong impression suitable "infantry backbone" was typically preserved in urban areas (where the local communal militiamen knew each other "off duty" too, shared a common local identity and regularly trained together) and regions where for one reason or another the old shieldwall infantry levy had remained valuable. Elsewhere for example the warlike Daylami mountain people, noted mercenaries in the Middle East since at least Late Antiquity, had their own characteristic and aggressive style of fighting as massed infantry which by descriptions reminds one of the tactics used by the various "barbarian" peoples of ancient times.

The bottom line is, cavalry can pretty much demolish unprepared, poorly motivated and/or scared infantry with often frightening ease. But when trying to frontally assault confident, stubborn and/or suitably braced heavy infantry they tend to at the very least be looking for a serious and drawn-out fight (sword-toting Late Roman soldiers were apparently usually able to put up a serious fight against the heaviest cataphracts the Sassanids could throw at them, unless first seriously weakened by archery) and not rarely flounder entirely, with potentially disastrous results. That latter one seemed to happen fairly often when Medieval European chivalry used to easily dispersed low-quality infantry suddenly met the rather higher-caliber sort cities in particular tended to spawn...

andrewt

10-14-2006, 00:30

I haven't played the demo yet but this sounds encouraging to me. The cavalry in RTW are way overpowered. MTW era cavalry should be stronger in comparison to RTW era cavalry but shouldn't be as strong as how RTW cavalry were depicted in game.

hoetje

10-14-2006, 09:33

Whats with the cavalry models? In pavia,I killed all the charging french cavalry,so you would expect them to lie dead on the field...Well,their horses did,but I saw the riders hanging in the air! It looked like they were still riding their horses!Anyone had this terrible experience too?

Azog 150

10-14-2006, 09:50

lol, yes, but mostly they are upside down, looks like they impaled on the wrong end of there own lance. :laugh4:

AlJabberwock

10-14-2006, 10:17

Seen it too, but it appears only temporarily if I move the camera away and then back, the image disappears.

In relation to the Cavalry question, I find no difficulty running over the Scots and no trouble versus the crossbowmen either unless they are charging towards my cavalry themselves ... Cavalry appears ok to me, although I agree about the "weight" appearing to be missing from the charge... Even if an attacking wave of cavalry might be decimated, the defending line should be pressed, even buckled under the pressure wave.

Al Jabberwock

Kenchi_Sulla

10-14-2006, 10:37

I haven't seen any strange things with cavalry so far. In prolonged melee vs a good infantry unit they should and will bite the dust (being outnumbered, and not able to hold formation - basicly fighting 2 or more soldiers at once). On the charge they are pretty powerfull so if you are able to use them as a battering ram you got the advantage. They have no trouble clearing archers since they can cut right through there formation. You can't expect them to win a fight against pikes or spears.

Armour was good in those days but the sheer force of a knight on horseback riding himself into a speer wall should impale him. The armour was designed more to protect them from low velocity thrusts and slashing attacks.

Loki

10-14-2006, 21:23

***NOTICE*** I understand that what we are now playing is a *demo* and based on older code, yadda yadda yadda. I get it. I also understand that the two historical battles we have to play are allegedly somewhat scripted. BUT.

I know theres been some talk about cavalry beeing taken down a notch or two, but does anyone else earnestly hope that the final product will be greatly different than the playable demo?

The first time I played thru Agincourt and the French heavy chivalry charged the center of the line, I saw them slam to a halt on the english line. I assumed that that part of the line had stakes as well. It was only later that I realized that there were no stakes at the center of the line of battle.

There is no way on Gods green earth that a heavy cavalry charge hitting *any* infantry unit (except perhaps deep ranks of armored pike) would stop like it hit a brick wall.

I fear if cavalry stays like this, the resultant battles/combat (although graphically beautiful to watch) will bear no resemblance to the reality of combat in the middle ages.

Jediknight73

10-14-2006, 23:03

well English units were almost maxed out in armour/weapon upgrade's, while the french hardly had any. that may be why?

Leftenant Moley

10-15-2006, 11:40

Is it just me or when cav charge through stakes from the back to front ie stakes pointing away for the cav they still end up dying? When i was attacked from behind on the battle of avincourt i ran my archers in front of the stakes(why?) but it seem all the cav died anyway.

Bob the Insane

10-15-2006, 15:00

Following are a series of images of Knights charging head first into archers on open ground (from the Agincourt battle of course). The whole series is over no more than 10 seconds and remember the longbowmen have 2 gold chevrons (probably explains way they do not rout)..

Warning, images...

The knights approach...

https://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y30/Bob_the_Insane/archer_bad_day1.jpg

The charge...

https://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y30/Bob_the_Insane/archer_bad_day2.jpg

The impact...

https://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y30/Bob_the_Insane/archer_bad_day3.jpg

Spilt second after impact...

https://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y30/Bob_the_Insane/archer_bad_day4a.jpg

Same moment, different angle...

https://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y30/Bob_the_Insane/archer_bad_day4b.jpg

A second later...

https://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y30/Bob_the_Insane/archer_bad_day5a.jpg

Again the same moment and a different angle...

https://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y30/Bob_the_Insane/archer_bad_day5b.jpg

Archers' death animations completing (it appears a unit is not counted a dead until the this point)...

https://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y30/Bob_the_Insane/archer_bad_day6.jpg

It's all over, no more than 10 seconds at the most...

https://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y30/Bob_the_Insane/archer_bad_day7.jpg

The point of this exercise to to demonstrate that the cavalry is not useless...