View Full Version : Spearmen
I just can't get into these guys. I find their lack of offense a real pain. Sure they can be useful for protecting archers/artillery, but all they really do is provide a low morale meat wall that slowly dies. Most of the time I'd rather have an offensive Sword or Axe unit instead of a spear so that at least they could deal some damage back or kill the attacker.
I know they are good against cavalry, but it seems to me that even then they still eventually lose, or the Cav. just breaks off and moves around them. They are weak when out of position, so can't respond to changes on the battlefield.
I'm sure I'm missing something here. About the only time I seem to use them effectiely is to hold a bridge or castle gate. What am i missing?
true, their offense sucks. however, the other alternatives are no better.
if you ignore spears and have a front line of swordsmen, several cavalry charges to your line will cause massive casualties. therefore, the all sword approach is not (IMO) really feasible.
pikemen (except Swiss Armoured Pikemen) are similar to spearmen except they have less armour and so die quicker. best to ignore these unless you have no choice or are bored and going to win anyway.
the only real viable alternative is to have polearms and swords. this is highly effective. polearms are infinitely better than spears in many regards. however, they do have their downfalls.
firstly, they only come in 60 men per units cf 100. so you're losing 40 men per unit. assuming you might have 4-6 spear units in your chosen first 16 units, thats 200 men down.
secondly, polearms are best used at charging. this is fine if you're on the offense. however for defence, it can mean that your front line disappears into this mess of units all over the shop. the flanks and rear of your polearms units are now highly vulnerable to a charge. spears on the other hand are best at standing, so although you run the risk of being flanked by the enemy moving their forces around your whole army, if you can successfully remaneuver your troops, you present a coherent front line.
personally, i always have about 4 spears, 2 pole arms and anywhere from 2-4 swords (depending on how much cavalry or archers i want). polearms can then be moved around to counter any flanking moves (most likely by cavalry which are prime targets for your polearms)
just a few of my thoughts anyway. btw, i only use chivalric spearmen. all others (except maybe Gothic if you get them) are rubbish. feudal seargents are just peasants with pointy sticks - completely useless.
Unit's of Chivalric Sergeants or Saracen Infantry make superb defenders against cavalry heavy armies of the Mongols. Position them on a hill with lines of arbalests and archers behind and the enemy will never get near your missile units. It is still a good idea to deploy polearms as flankers. Halberdiers in particular can concentrate on killing if they have spears to take the brunt of a charge. You can bring the halbs in on the flanks of the cavalry once the charge has been absorbed. Personally I find that in defensive battles my Spears last the longest and gain the most valour. I usually have to reinforce my other units and bring on fresh cavalry or archers with full quivers rather than replace my spear units.
The trick with spears is to form a solid wall and leave them on hold position and hold formation. Don't expect them to kill, as they're there to hold. Bring in flanking units in their support and protect the flanks of the end units at all costs. I sometimes place one end of my formation near a wood so that any cavalry trying to sneak around that way have to pass through the trees. It is a good idea to have some Halberdiers, Militia Sergeants, Ghazis or Woodsmen hiding there.
Spears are boring, but they give you a solid base and will usually hold the line for a decent amount of time. Vanilla spearmen are kinda worthless, generally you want the better spear units available to your faction.
The trick with spears is to form a solid wall and leave them on hold position and hold formation. Don't expect them to kill, as they're there to hold.This is key, you want your spear units in nice tidy blocks. During combat, if you look at a unit closely you will see the front sprites moving around in combat animations, while those in the back just sit there. With spear units, if the formations are clean, the first 2(3?) rows will fight (4 for pikes, I think), and they get other bonuses as well.
Generally what I try to do is to tie up the enemy cavalry and other high power units with my spears, give them some sword support, and bring around my cav and heavy hitters on the flanks. The spears bog down his attack, and pin the units until my flankers can hit them in the side or rear. Not a very exciting job, but one that needs doing.
The weakness of spear units compared to swords/axes/halberd is criticized. However, they cited historic dearth of spearmen in medieval time: until the Swiss used it again, spear was not the weapon of choice during the time frame. Had they made spearmen more powerful, the 100-men (in medium unit size) spear units would beat sword units, and everybody will choose to use spears. That would be a historical aberation.
They could make spearmen more interesting, but MTW engine lacks the means to do so. In STW and subsequent games based on STW battle engine, they introduced ways that made spearmen way of fighting different than swordmen units.
Annie
They could have just made them a 60 man unit instead of 100 but a bit stronger. Or give them slightly better attack/defense without over powering them. Or give thema better vs Cavalry bonus etc.
The Greeks, who first developed Phalanx fighting, used spears over swords as their primary attacking weapon.
I don't understand what the big deal is.
Spearmen die very slowly against cavalry they have pinned, which is exactly their purpose.
Anyone who thinks spearmen are boring hasn't explored the joys of a good Muslim army. Muwahids are mobile, offensive and enable a good general to stymie cavalry charges ahead of his formation, leaving breathing room for flankers or a big rush elsewhere on the field.
Perhaps that's the problem. I've only played a s Catholic factions, so perhaps thats why I don't like spears.
I do find them extremely difficult to use though. Lets say you have a centre of spears with swords/axes on the wings and cavalry behind. My army of swords/axes and cavalry approached head on. As I get close, I can either send in my best spear killers (ensuring a favourable match up for me and the demise of the spears) and keep the rest of my forces back to hit units that attempt ot flank, OR I can just avoid them and move all of my forces to concentrate on one of your flanks. If your spears break formation torealign themselves, I can just chage to attack them and probably flank them as one flank will be exposed, not to mention that they will be out of formation.
They also generally have low morale so are prone to routing.
I did recently find one unit of Spears that I actually really like the look of. Almughavars. 6 charge, 3 attack, 0 defense, 2 armour and a huge 8 Morale. With the rank bonus, they become respectable combat infantry that excell against cavalry, though they are only a 60 man unit instead of the regular 100. they will eb vulerable to archers, but you can't have everything I guess.
They are also Javelin throwers, so they will get off at least one volley or armour piercing projectiles at close range against approaching forces before closing for combat. their low armour makes them great for dessert fighting too. Even against archers, they can run up to skirmishing range and throw thier Jav without the archers running I think, so they can probably trade off against them ok, especially if they go scattered.
Tratorix
11-23-2007, 02:52
The point of spears is simply to absorb cavalry charges and pin units so you can flanki them. They really aren't supposed to do much damage in melee.
Sorry to disappoint you, by the way, but the only way to get Almughavars in the vanilla game is as mercenaries, and they are pretty rare(i've never actually seen a unit of them in the mercenary pool.
I've got the Gold edition with VI - should they be available as standard tropps in that?
Back to using spears well. The biggest problem I have with them is that you rely on your opponent coming to you and working th way you want them to. Lets say you have a strong centre of good spears - Chiv. sergeants say.
What do you do if I decide not to cavalry charge them? instead I form up my Arbalesters and start snipering them. Unless you move them away the archers will slaughter them. Or I could send my swords in against them. because they are fixed in place they will always have the worst possible match up. If they hold in place, they are vulnerable to archers, if they move to engage units they lose formation.
I really need to see them used well to get a better idea because I'm sure I'm missing something vital. So far the only times I've used them effectively is to hold a bridge or castle gate. If you can force an opponent to engage them in a restrictive way liken this, then they are valuable, but thats about the only time I've used them well.
how do you get around their lack of manuverability? Are they any good on attack as a shield for other units to advance behind?
I will echo Roark and Brave Sir Robin. Spears are there just to save your other units from getting slaughtered by enemy cavalry. Their role will never be glamorous - they are just there to hold the enemy cavalry in place while somebody else flanks and destroys. Theirs not to win the day, theirs just to hold and pray....
As for potentially getting shot up by enemy archers, well that's why you have your own missile units - to keep the enemy missiles at bay.
Bregil the Bowman
11-26-2007, 01:35
In some ways the distinction between spears and swords is artificial rather than reflecting real historical armies. It adds that "stone, scissors, paper" aspect to tactical play.
As a rule spearmen are troops who really on the cohesiveness of the unit rather than their own fighting ability to survive. They are less flexible, possibly less brave, but better equipped to withstand the impact of a charge. Swordsmen are more apt to "get among" the enemy, and less likely to hold formation.
Accepted wisdom seems to be that the spears should hold the centre, but I quite like having swords at the centre. If a cavalry charge hits you there it is quite easy to fold in troops from either side to swamp the cavalry. With spears on the flanks they may suffer in terms of morale, but you can back them up with cavalry or fast moving swords (clansmen, gallowglasses) to counter this.
For defensive battles you need either spears or polearms, without a doubt. I have never had much joy with urban militia or militia sergeants, and they are smaller sized units, so unless/until something solid like billmen or Swiss Halberds comes into being, I always try to have at least three spears in a stack.
Rus spears, Italian Light Infantry and armoured spearmen are pretty handy in the early game. Never tried Saracens in numbers but I imagine they are similar.
I will echo Roark and Brave Sir Robin. Spears are there just to save your other units from getting slaughtered by enemy cavalry. Their role will never be glamorous - they are just there to hold the enemy cavalry in place while somebody else flanks and destroys. Theirs not to win the day, theirs just to hold and pray....
As for potentially getting shot up by enemy archers, well that's why you have your own missile units - to keep the enemy missiles at bay.
Yep, I get that they are a good cavalry foil, the problem is that it's up to the other player whether or not to send their cavalry at them. You could just send your cavalry off after another, better target. To actually be used in their intended fashion (countering cavalry) you have to rely on your opponent attacking you in the way you'd like them to.
As for the archery thing, here's the rub: Your archers are behind the spears (typically thats what the spears would be defending), so the archers targeting your Spears are beyond your archers range (unless you are defending a hill perhaps and your spears are close to the archer line).
Now, you can move your spears back behind the archers, so both sides can volley at each other, but but when your spears turn around and march away you're inviting a Cavalry/Infantry charge at their exposed backs while they get reorganised.
Likewise, you could leave the Spears in place and try and move your own archers forward. This'll be pretty disorganised and probably take a while as they'll have to make their way through your spear line, and as soon as they start moving, the opposing player can send his infantry in at the charge without fear of your missiles. By the time the archers have formed up, they'll be running back away from the charging infantry.
The only time I've had much trouble with Spears is when the enemy has used them to attack my engaged cavalry that is harrassing their archers say. Invariably, I can just break off the attack, retreating my cavalry back a way and leading the spears to my infantry. If they won't follow I bring the infantry to them and them move the cavalry to go after the archers again. Once I engage them with infantry the isolated spears are in trouble.
If you have a good hill site to defend and/or artillery support so you can outdistance enemy archers I can see some value in Spears. Otherwsie I'm not sure you you can get the enemy to attack them with cavalry.
Don't get me wrong here, I'm not doubting you guys when you say they are useful, I'm just struggling to understand how to use them really effectively.
There are some decent looking spears like the Italian Light Infantry and Almughavars. Muwahid Footsoldiers look good as well, as do Rus Spearmen.
I just really went off Spears when I tried to use them against the Golden Horde's cavalry heavy armies and found I was much better off with axe and sword units instead. The Horde just rode it's heavy cav around the spears to form up on my flanks, while it's horse archers and foot archers turned them into pin cushions. my own archers were useless as they were trapped out of range behind the spears, which I was affraid to move for fear of inviting a mass charge into their moving ranks.
I ended up raping the Horde badly in consectutive battles, but spears proved unnecessary to do so. I was much better off drawing their heavy cav into the trees and engaging them with swords than trying to engage them with spears on flat land.
Wow, sorry for the novel! Kinda turned into a rant which wasn't my intent!
Spears were weakened too much in the MTW v1.1 patch, and their combat stats are excessively defensive. They manifest all the problems enumerated in the previous post. Perhaps single player campaign provides a few situations where they have some usefullness, but they are completely useless in multiplayer.
Ironside
11-26-2007, 19:33
Yep, I get that they are a good cavalry foil, the problem is that it's up to the other player whether or not to send their cavalry at them. You could just send your cavalry off after another, better target. To actually be used in their intended fashion (countering cavalry) you have to
rely on your opponent attacking you in the way you'd like them to.
Their extended intended purpose is to hold the line, to anything that charges them. Placed right they can hold up to 3 units for a loong time, even when losing badly. The cav bonus is just there to make this pupose even more clear vs cav.
As for the archery thing, here's the rub: Your archers are behind the spears (typically thats what the spears would be defending), so the archers targeting your Spears are beyond your archers range (unless you are defending a hill perhaps and your spears are close to the archer line).
If that's a problem the you keep your arbs or archers in front of your spears from the start.
Now, you can move your spears back behind the archers, so both sides can volley at each other, but but when your spears turn around and march away you're inviting a Cavalry/Infantry charge at their exposed backs while they get reorganised.
Called "how to catch horse archers and jinettes when low on archers :laugh4:. Only recommended with some morale upgrades though
Likewise, you could leave the Spears in place and try and move your own archers forward. This'll be pretty disorganised and probably take a while as they'll have to make their way through your spear line, and as soon as they start moving, the opposing player can send his infantry in at the charge without fear of your missiles. By the time the archers have formed up, they'll be running back away from the charging infantry.
As mentioned above, your archers are already in place. If the enemy harasses with cav, then the'll have to run forth and back through a hail of arrows, usually not healthy. If you charge with infantry, then you're pushed to do a melee engagement, and considering that you were threatening with overpowering archery...
The only time I've had much trouble with Spears is when the enemy has used them to attack my engaged cavalry that is harrassing their archers say. Invariably, I can just break off the attack, retreating my cavalry back a way and leading the spears to my infantry. If they won't follow I bring the infantry to them and them move the cavalry to go after the archers again. Once I engage them with infantry the isolated spears are in trouble.
Phoney attacks or retreats are treated the same way as with other inf. Either push on with the whole line or hold the line. Holes in thwe line are always bad and unsupported units are always in trouble.
If you have a good hill site to defend and/or artillery support so you can outdistance enemy archers I can see some value in Spears. Otherwsie I'm not sure you you can get the enemy to attack them with cavalry.
Don't get me wrong here, I'm not doubting you guys when you say they are useful, I'm just struggling to understand how to use them really effectively.
There are some decent looking spears like the Italian Light Infantry and Almughavars. Muwahid Footsoldiers look good as well, as do Rus Spearmen.
Italian infantry and Rus spearmen are roughly equal to CS (=aka heavy defensive inf), how to use Muwahid were mentioned earlier. Almughavars are funny though (modded them to see them more often). One volley and then a charge, that can be nasty enough to really do damage.
I just really went off Spears when I tried to use them against the Golden Horde's cavalry heavy armies and found I was much better off with axe and sword units instead. The Horde just rode it's heavy cav around the spears to form up on my flanks, while it's horse archers and foot archers turned them into pin cushions. my own archers were useless as they were trapped out of range behind the spears, which I was affraid to move for fear of inviting a mass charge into their moving ranks.
Silver armoured CS hurt by archery (you should have them at this point)? :inquisitive: They're only about the most resistant units to archery fire in the game. They die more from boredom than actual fire. Arbs hurts harder, but them hitting spears are about the most ineffective unit they can hit (arrow resistant large units, hitting the flanks does make a difference though). The longer range of arbs makes then quick work of the horse archers. For the flanking, you'll need a more flexible line, something that atleast in theory could form a circle during duress (shouldn't normally be needed though), or map edge abuse.
On a general note, spears needs morale upgrades to make them decent and does everything slow, even dying and that's thier advantage. Avoid getting them hitted in the back, but a flank hit should stilll take a long time to go through, even if they loose. They are there to keep the enemy bust, so that your freed units can move on the flanks.
Bregil the Bowman
11-26-2007, 23:31
Beautifully expressed , Ironside. Using spears well in conjunction with other troops is the key. That's the art of Total War.
In MP it may be different - high valour swords may be better value - but the MP and campaign games are quite different really.
In some ways the distinction between spears and swords is artificial rather than reflecting real historical armies. It adds that "stone, scissors, paper" aspect to tactical play.
Right, but it isn't implemented properly. The sword should be more expensive than the spear that it beats, but this isn't the case. For example, the 250 florin CMAA beats the 400 florin Orderfoot, and the 175 florin FMAA beats the 300 florin chiv sergeant. The costs are essentially reversed from what they should be.
I did actually get some good use with them yesterday, defending a hill with them.
The enemy obligingly sent his Halb's and cavalry into my Chiv. Sergeants centre, ignoring my Sword infantry and cavalry on the flanks. The infantry swarmed in from the sides and slaughtered the Halb's, forcing the cavalry general to flee. Meanwhile my cavalry butchered his archers and missile troops and the mass rout was on almost immediately. The result was a comlete butchery of his forces. Over 700 killed/captured to my 30 odd lost.
That was a complete whitewash, and yes, the spears did hold the centre well, but I'm reasonably sure a couple of units of CMAA would have done just as well or very close. I guess I'll just have to try them some more and see. By all accounts though Catholic spearmen before Chiv. Sergeants are a bit of a waste of time except as garrisons.
The enemy obligingly sent his Halb's and cavalry into my Chiv. Sergeants centre, ignoring my Sword infantry and cavalry on the flanks. The infantry swarmed in from the sides and slaughtered the Halb's, forcing the cavalry general to flee. Meanwhile my cavalry butchered his archers and missile troops and the mass rout was on almost immediately. The result was a comlete butchery of his forces. Over 700 killed/captured to my 30 odd lost.
The AI sees your chiv sergeants as the weakest point and matches its stronger halbardiers against them. The chiv sergeants hold a long time because the halbardier is a highly defensive unit vs low armored infantry and therefore has a very slow kill rate.
That was a complete whitewash, and yes, the spears did hold the centre well, but I'm reasonably sure a couple of units of CMAA would have done just as well or very close.
That's true, but then the AI would not have matched up its halbardiers against the CMAA which it sees is the stronger unit. Of course valor, weapon and armor upgrades and the general's command stars can change which is the stronger unit.
Ironside
11-27-2007, 16:28
That was a complete whitewash, and yes, the spears did hold the centre well, but I'm reasonably sure a couple of units of CMAA would have done just as well or very close. I guess I'll just have to try them some more and see. By all accounts though Catholic spearmen before Chiv. Sergeants are a bit of a waste of time except as garrisons.
After early yes. In early they'll work a bit as mentioned above, but weaker of course.
You'll probably need them if the enemy shows up with a general with many snall nice flags though. Anything else get routed by the charge.
Feudal sergeants are the spears in my desert corps though, but I don't expect them to win until after the first wave...
Wouldn't you know it, I'm now having real trouble with a turkish army. In theory they out number me 2-1, but my units should be much strounger. I have a starting army of mainly Swiss Halbardiers and Billmen (about 10 in total all at least val 1 naturaly) backed with 4 longbows, a Mounted Sergeants, my 8* generals unit of 5 Feudal Knights and a Chivalric Men at Arms.
Most of my units have some armour upgrades, as do the enemy Turks. I have a little flexibility in my line up as my reserves include a couple more vanilla archers, 2 crossbows and a couple of 25-30 man light cavalry units.
The turks are lead by a 9* general and seem composed of 2-3 armenian Heavy cav., a Gullam bodyguards (princes unit but not general) 3-4 saracen Infantry, turkoman foot, turkoman horse and a Futuaa.
I seem to get caned by the Saracen Infantry whenever I engage them. I have to use 2 or 3 units to mob one of them to actually beat it and most of the time I'm not even fighting up hill.
My Billmen and Swiss Halb's just don't seem to be able to cut it one on one against the Saracens, much to my surprise, nor do they break unless almost completely dead anyway.
This is one of the toughest battles I've fought in a long time, and it should in theory be pretty easy. Their spears are giving me real trouble, while their low defense Futuwaa's seem to keep dishing out the damage without dying.
I'm sure I can win this, but I've never encountered Spears that fight this well. I know that stats wise they are the same as Chiv. Sergeants, but they seem to fight harder and take more to kill than any spears I've fought so far.
seireikhaan
12-14-2007, 00:30
Well, the trick I've found in dealing with Saracen infantry is to crack their morale. You need to try getting them distanced from their jedi general, so as to lessen the morale bonus given to the Saracens. Either get the general sidetracked elsewhere on the battlefields somehow, or else draw the saracens away from him. The problem I'm seeing is that you simply don't have enough longbows. Swiss halberds/Bills, though fine units, should be a PART of the army, not the base of it. I would cut their numbers down to about 6 or so, and replace them with, ideally, two more units of longbows, and the other two with gallowglasses. I would also replace the mounted seargeant and the chivalric men at arms with two more gallowglasses. Why? Simply put, gallowglasses can cut right through even the stoutest defenses. Plus, their incredible charge combined with high powered killing, and you'd be suprised how quickly saracens can be routed. If you hit saracens with gallowglass charges after they've gone through hails of longbow fire, their very frail morale can crack quite easily. And if you can hit their flank with the gallowglases, then that's all the better, as galloglasses practically melt units that they hit in the rear. Also, frankly, chasing down the enemy isn't a huge priority for me when it comes to really, really important battles, as I usually focus more on just making sure I stay in good formation and being able to slowly march the enemy off the field with repeated routs.
Also, one more thing. Does the enemy general have several morale boosting virtues? That might account for potential difficulty in causing a route.
Senatus Populusque Romanus
12-14-2007, 22:19
it depends on the situation mate.
I mean, if you have good general, your spearmen won't rout.
Or if you can, u can also use them as flanking units.
seireikhaan
12-14-2007, 23:28
Spears are not best used for flanking. Sure, they CAN do it, but there are many more units that do it much better than them. Plus, you're wasting their best attribute, which is holding lines, and exposing them potentially to being flanked themselves if the situation disolves a bit. Plus, the utter size of the unit is somewhat cumbersome to manuever to the rear of an opponent.
Plus, in this situation, which he was asking for, the enemy general was actually slightly better, so that kinda nullfies his general.
The Greeks, who first developed Phalanx fighting, used spears over swords as their primary attacking weapon.
Then its usage was gradually abandonned when the Roman chose the short swords. In the arm-race, weapons became favorite, then obsolete, as technology, metalurgy, tactical and strategical theories change over time.
Look at cavalry, its use has changed over time too. We must look at the time period. What worked for the Greeks in Alexander the Great time didn't work for them against Romans. Same as what happened to the Persians: it worked for them for quite a long time, became a vast empire. Their cavalry/archery and light infantry combination conquered nations. Only to see everything crumbled at the hand of the said Greeks.
Annie
Spears are not best used for flanking. Sure, they CAN do it, but there are many more units that do it much better than them. Plus, you're wasting their best attribute, which is holding lines, and exposing them potentially to being flanked themselves if the situation disolves a bit. Plus, the utter size of the unit is somewhat cumbersome to manuever to the rear of an opponent.
Correct. With very few exceptions, spearmen should almost always be in the center of your formation, never on the flanks. I personally like to back them up with a couple units of medium/heavy infantry (such as FMAA or CMAA), so as to counter any sword/polearm infantry the enemy may throw at my spearmen.
Remember if you do decide to use spears in flank attack, take them out of held formation to improve their attack and charge.
I read in another thread that Spears get a +1/rank charge bonus? If so, they'd have a massive charge on them and could be used as effective shock troops. Spread 4 deep, witha base Charge of 5, they'd end up charging with greater impact than CMAA's, then after the inital chage falling back into their stable "die slowly" style.
I did crack the enemy army in the end, though it was much harder than I expected it would be. The Crossbowmen did it for me in the end. With an altitude advantage, they were able to outdistance the enemy Turk Horse and foot archers, and their slow but strong rate of fire meant they still had missiles left long after the longbows had run out.
Lack of fast cavalry hurt me in this battle. I had no real way of chasing down the Turk horse. Likewise, lack of dedicated swords was a problem. A couple more units of CMAA would have helped a lot I think.
That said, the Halb's did a great job as all round infantry and were particularyly devastating against the Camel units. I had a unit of 40 nearly exhausted swiss Halb's engage a fresh Camel unit sand they had outed it in about 30 seconds.
they key was hammering the Saracens with missile fire before engaging, and then mobbing them. Once I got my archers in place they ripped into the Saracen infantry, giving my infantry the edge they needed.
Tratorix
12-16-2007, 23:01
I read in another thread that Spears get a +1/rank charge bonus? If so, they'd have a massive charge on them and could be used as effective shock troops. Spread 4 deep, witha base Charge of 5, they'd end up charging with greater impact than CMAA's, then after the inital chage falling back into their stable "die slowly" style.
The problem is spears fall out of formation as they charge. Their rank bonus isn't really applicable in a charge.
Peasant Phill
12-17-2007, 11:34
Besides spears can only get a +3 bonus as only the 3 front ranks can fight. pikes get max +5 bonus.
I'm sure I can win this, but I've never encountered Spears that fight this well. I know that stats wise they are the same as Chiv. Sergeants, but they seem to fight harder and take more to kill than any spears I've fought so far.
The 9* general makes all the units in his army 4x stronger in melee, and that's why those spears are so strong. The general's rank does not improve resistance to missiles.
By the same token my own 8* General should have boosted my Swiss Halb's and Billmen by the same amount, bringing the difference back to nil. also, the Generals * rating does give a morale bonus doesnt it? Both to units nearby and to the army as a whole?
I of the Storm
12-17-2007, 22:27
Wasn't that 1 valour point for every 2 command stars?
Yes, but the Valor given by Command doesn't increase unit morale, only their attack and defense. There is a static Moale improvement based on the general's Command rating as well as a bonus increase for being near the General.
From Predaturds useful info thread:
+1 Morale for being within 50 meters of your General (for every command point the General has)
+1 Morale if further than 50 meters from your General (for every TWO command points the General has)
So a 6* general would give +3 morale to all his troops, and another +6 Morale to any troops within 50m.
predaturd
12-17-2007, 23:12
omg im being acknowledged for something on the internet for once :)
the morale bonuses dont stack though so its only +6 in 50m range the way you put it makes it sound like its an extra +6 to the +3
and are you sure the valour bonuses from generals commands dont effect morale?
That's what I've read in other threads, but I could be wrong. I'd really like to know for sure but don't know how I could find out.
Your thread's really helpful, great to know how big the morale advantage is for being uphill, or the penalty for being flanked etc.
predaturd
12-17-2007, 23:46
yeah thought id share it even though i got most of that in 2 hours browsing all the total war forums
really helps me plan my conquests when im trying to build my economy up on trade :)
also i had my computer cleared out of junk and needed a place to store it :)
i find it funny how not having to tell units what to attack gives them more morale
if you wanna continue this take it to the thread itself i hate going off topic
remember to make spearmen in provinces with churches and monastrys it tends to makle them resist cavalry for another 10 seconds or so if they have another 4 morale and make them quite good for stalling for long periods of time against other infantry
oph and you can check morale mid battle with F1 do the same battle with the same unit using quickload before the battle with and without a general :)
+1 Morale for being within 50 meters of your General (for every command point the General has)
+1 Morale if further than 50 meters from your General (for every TWO command points the General has)
Yes the MTW Strategy Guide does say that command stars give a morale boost. I forgot about that, and I've edited my post. However, I've never actually measured that effect, and there is no evidence of it in the F1 display. In the F1 display, units get +2 morale for every valor point that is intrinsic to the unit itself, and valor points added to units by the command stars of a general do not increase the morale of those units. Possibly this effect is present on the battlefield. I've never tried to measure it.
By the same token my own 8* General should have boosted my Swiss Halb's and Billmen by the same amount, bringing the difference back to nil.
That's right. I checked the stats of Saracen infantry, billmen and swiss halbs. With their rank bonus, the spears are equal in melee with billmen or swiss halbs. The armor piecing quality of the billmen and swiss halbs would give them +1 which I've included in the rating.
Combat points (attack + defense + armor piercing):
billmen 7
swiss halbs 7
saracen infantry 7
Without the rank bonus (no men backing the man who is fighting) the scaracens loose 3 points, and with only one man backing the first man 2 points are lost.
Thats really interesting, I though the Armour Piercing bonus was a flat Armour of target - 1 / 2 (so you'd get a +1 atk bonus against a 3 armour target). I didn't realise that they needed to have at least 5 armour before it comes into play. Good to know.
Also, does the units Shield bonus count towards their armour? The Saracens have a large shield which gives them another 2 armour which would bring them up to 5.
I had the formula incorrect.
Armor Piercing Bonus = (target armor - 1)/2 rounded down to the nearest integer.
The contribution of the shield and horse to armor are removed for this calculation.
I found a post (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=23939&page=2) by longjohn2 from Oct-06-2002 in which he states how armor upgrades work:
--------------
"It's been discussed quite a bit already, and is explained in the strat guide.
Armour = defense against missiles
Defense factor = defense in melee.
The defense factor already includes the effect of armour, troop training, weapon type, and mode of fighting. When you get an armour upgrade, this would obviously contribute to both defense in melee and against shooting, so it increases both stats.
To answer you questions.
1) When you press F1 the effects of any armour upgrades are included in both the defense and armour stats.
2) Yes. In this case the armour factor serves as a handy indicator of how much of a unit's defense factor is due to armour, and thus how much bonus the armour piercing weapon would get.
3)This is not so. If a unit had less armour, it would have less defense. Units always benefit from having more armour, even against armour piercing weapons. It's just that against ap weapons extra armour gives less benefit.
4)A defense factor of 0 or less does not mean a unit has no inherent defense. The absolute value of the numbers are of no importance, only the difference between the attacker's attack, and the defender's defence."
---------------
Armour = defense against missiles
Defense factor = defense in melee.
I confess I myself had quite forgotten that bit -- I'd always wondered what exactly the difference was between a unit's armour and actual defense stat. Many thanks for finding and digging that up for us, Puzz. :bow:
Here is the definitive post (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=9903) by longjohn2 on armor piercing. Apparently, MTW was originally designed by longjohn with AP = (armor - 2)/2 which is the formula in the Official MTW Strategy Guide. However, he changed it to AP = (armor - 3)/2 for the MTW v1.0 release, but later re-evaluated the playbalance of armor piercing units and changed it to AP = (armor - 1)/2 in the MTW v1.1 patch. Also, the armor contributed by the horse was included in the calculation in the v1.0 release, but later removed in the v1.1 patch.
-----------------------
Longjohn2 Sep-19-2002
"Puzz is correct, theoretically units should get a bonus of +1 against units of foot of 4 armour, and against horse units of 5 armour. Sadly I found a bug today, so that you will only start getting bonuses against foot units of 5 armour.
For calculating armour piercing bonuses, shields don't count, but horse armour does (as it isn't counted separately ).
I've changed this for the patch, so that bonuses will start against foot with 3 armour ( chainmail ) or cavalry with 4 armour ( some of cavalry's armour factor is due to the horse which is soft and squishy).
I reduced the effectiveness of the armour piercing bonus late in the project, as I noticed that all the units Activision complained about as being too powerful had axes or halbards, but in retrospect that was a bad move.
Armour piercing works differently with missiles. Each missile type has an armour penetration rating. The target's armour is multiplied by this, before deciding whether a kill is scored.
The factor for bows is 1, and for longbows it's 0.5, so when hit by a longbow, units count half as much armour as they actually have ( can't remember if this includes shields too ). These stats will be in separate file in the patch."
-------------------------
Innocentius
01-23-2008, 18:24
Reviving the thread.
Contrary to what most have written here, I find spearmen to be completely worthless. Sure, Feudal Sergeants and Armoured Spearmen have their use in the Early era, when the archers can fire above their heads even on flat ground, and your FMAA or other sword-wielding infantry covers the flanks, but in the end, it's those few sword units who does all the killing. The spearmen just stand there and hardly inflict any casualties - even when defending a bridge spear units perform ok at best.
Spearmen are simply cloggers for the Early era, IMO. The can take cavalry charges and charges from other spear units, but not very much else. For this reason, spearmen are completely worthless for attacking, which always causes me to play more defensively in the Early era unless I have Mounted Crossbowmen or HA-units.
Thus I find Chivalric Sergeants to be an excellent way to waste your money, and sometimes even disband the CS units you start with in some High and Late games. There's nothing they can do that polerarm units, and Halberdiers especially, can't do 5x better. Polearms can countercharge when the enemy is only a few steps away, are better against cavalry, have better stats in general and are awesome for pretty much anything. If you are fighting on flat ground (and aren't playing as the English or some Muslim faction with good archers) you can just places your Crossbows or Arbalesters up front and rely on the polearm-units behind them to charge forth and deal with just about anything that the enemy is stupid enough to charge away at your Arbs.
An ideal army to me is 100% spearmen-free, and contains a minimum of four polearm units backed up with an equal amount of Arbalesters, and then a few units to cover the flanks (preferably more polearms, ideally Chivalric Foot Knights). 2 Chivalric Knights, 2 Chivalric Foot Knights, 6 Halberdiers and 6 Arbalesters is basically a perfect army for any western European country that can't field mounted ranged units, Longbowmen, Gothic Knights or another form of polearm units.
macsen rufus
01-23-2008, 19:01
There's nothing they can do that polerarm units, and Halberdiers especially, can't do 5x better.
I think you've over-extended your argument here :bow: They (spears etc) will stand their ground in the face of firearms - unlike halberdiers, who will wet themselves if anyone so much as invites them to a fireworks party :laugh4:
As far as your "ideal army" goes, I can't disagree too much, except I wouldn't have six units of vanilla halberdiers, but make every effort to take Switzerland ASAP and get the Swiss variety instead (assuming I'm not playing England, which is of course bills and longbows FTW :2thumbsup: ) I much prefer Swiss halberdiers - for a start they have guts, they are fast - which is the other side of the lightly-armoured coin, and they can do all the damage that regular halberdiers can do.
i generally agree with innocentius except when as a catholic you are fighting in the desert. taking halberds or dismount CN is tantamount to insanity. left with nothing but spearmen.
The best thing about spears is the larger unit size. IncludingSpears over Halb's in your main army allows you to have a wider solid line on either defense or attack, and therefore makes it easier to get your swords into a flanking position.
There is a side benefit to the larger size of Spear units as well: There is a global morale bonus for outnumbering your opponent. Boosting your numbers by including spears means that you pack more men, and therefore get the bonus.
From Predaturd's thread: https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=96346
+4 Morale for outnumbering enemy troops
+4 Morale to nearby units if there is a 3:1 advantage in local superiority
You will only get the local superiority bonus at the edge where your forces will outneumber the enemy, but morale always helps.
In a reversal of my earlier feelings I have found some value in spearmen, though I do agree that in general Halbardiers are better troops. I really only use them on defense, but with weapon upgrades they can be Serviceable troops.
I'm playing as Scotland on Expert at the moment and I find the Scottish Spearmen to be a useful addition, providing a screen behind which my flanking tropps can hide. They have base stats of 1 Atk, 2 Def, 3 Arm, 3 Morale and a large shield I think. This means that when in formation they end up as 3 ATK, 4 Def + armour bounsues, which puts them on terms with FMAA, but with an anti cavalry edge.
Best used for defending a ridge or other high ground, though useful other times as well.
That said, I still don't rate Spears up with Halbardiers in general. Halb's fight better in general, slaughter cavalry, function well in forests, resist missiles better and are easier to manouver.
The scots don't get Halbs though, so I have to make do with the Spears.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.