What Are the Optimal Ranks for Units?

[OMGLAZERS]

I'd like everyone to contribute and discuss what are the optimal ranks for what types of units in what situations in this version of TW.

In the past, archers used to be NEEDED in two ranks. Then, with the loss of the sight penalty, bigger groups were possible? Is that still true?

Whats everyone opinion on spearmen? It used to be that longer was good due to wrap about, but now with the cohesion problems it looks like that's no longer the case.

So lets all discuss this because I think everyone's campaigns can go a lot better if we all discuss whats the best way to get your units lined up.

[Foz]

Archers are discussed and tested in this thread (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=75402). Particularly, post #21 (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1355866&postcount=21) in the thread is my findings from configuring some British Retinue Longbows in various formations and letting them fire on incoming HRE Armoured Sergeants.

Long story short, though, they killed a measly 4% more of the incoming unit when in a 2 line configuration, but no better in standard form than in 4-column form, though standard is considerably wider. I'm forced to conclude the formation has no appreciable impact on archer fire, and the slight better performance of 2-line vs. the others is due to an anomaly.

It may however have defensive or tactical implications:

- Archers in a very narrow formation can better fire into breaches and doors in enemy walls, as more of them have line of sight directly at an enemy unit visible through the hole. This allows them to choose a low trajectory instead of firing up and over the walls, and gets them more kills as a result.

- Obviously changing their front alters how they will interact with other units in melee combat. Any comments on the effects of formations on this would be most welcome.

- I'm sure there's more I just can't think of.

[Whacker]

My observations from experience and reading. It seems that for now, ranks do not really matter or make much of a difference at all for archery-based units. Gunpowder units most definitely benefit from 2 rank formation, increasing it will drastically lower their kills and kill rates. In general deeper ranks of spears should work better against cav, but there are enough "broken" units as of right now that cav pretty much mows down anything spear-based except braced pikes head on. Cav works best in wide to box type formation to maximize the impact in a charge.

Cheers:balloon2:

[OMGLAZERS]

Has anyone discussed spear or sword ranks? Or calvalry?

[RussianWinter]

I think that when a cavalry charge hits, there is a "kill zone" around the charging unit. By narrowing the front (presuming that was where the charge hit) the unit only exposes say, 10 troops to the charge proximity and not 50. So, they fare better, but not because of any specific "rank modifier bonus."

As to what happens after the charge, I'm lost.

[sapi]

For units facing cavalry/defending a city, put spears in schiltrom and other units in a very deep formation (try to position the spears on top of the other ones as their formation will take the brunt of the charge). This is especially important in siege battles, where you can fire down on the mass of enemy troops.

[IPoseTheQuestionYouReturnTheAnswer]

I deploy my Janissary Heavy Infantry in ranks of 5, I assume this would work with sword infantry too. In MTW I used to do 4, but in M2 5 ranks seems reasonable with the improved cavalry. This way, enough Janissaries always survive to fight or defeat the cavalry, or at the very least hold them there long enough for my own heavy cavalry to flank.

Musketeers and archers I deploy in ranks of three. I believe that was the MTW optimum deployment too, so I just carried it over. This is very weak for melee, so if you're using horse archers, make sure to form them in thicker ranks (I usually do 4) before charging.

Cavalry I deploy in ranks of 4. 3 makes the line too thin, and it's easy to break with infantry. 4 ensures that there is enough momentum to break the line but still enough horses to keep fighting if the first rank is killed. This also makes it easier to break them off and recharge, since less of them are exposed and thus less will die when they turn their backs to reform. With 5 ranks, not enough men are fighting and thus it turns into a meat grinder where one rank is killed, the next advances, that is killed, etc.

[PaulTa]

For maximum firepower, I deploy muskets and crossbows in ranks of two. This allows the crossbows to fire at their targets more accurately, given their flat trajectory, and allows muskets to reload and fire at a greater rate.

Cavalry and infantry are almost entirely situational. If I'm on the plains with a mostly straight line of enemy infantry, I'll deploy my charging cavalry in a 2 deep formation. This guarantees that my cavalry will do the most damage possible with their charge. If I need to navigate cavalry around, or charge a specific unit, then a more norrow formation is generally recommended.

Infantry are dependant on their use. If the infantry unit is a bunch of spears about to absorb a cavalry charge, then I'd want them in a deep formation (usually a square). If I'm using melee infantry that I want to do the most damage possible with, then a wide formation. Same as cavalry, a smaller formation is used when I need the infantry to serve a specific function (such as navigating past a unit of spears and flanking an enemy unit).