Confused, whats better - Arbalesters +1 valor or Pavise arbalesters?

Ok, I'm a little confused. I can train Arbalesters with +1 valor, or the Pavise unit with no valor upgrade. In the unit guide it states that missle units have better accuracy with higher valor, but I have also seen it stated that valor for these units only affects there melee stats. If the later is the case then I should go with the Pavise units.

So which is true my friends?

Depends on how you use them. If you tend towards stationary formations then the pavs provide the extra protection from enemy missiles; if you want to use the better mobility of plain arbs to try to get shots at the enemy melee troops then the extra valor helps when they get get into skirmish mode.

A little armor on the plain arbs makes them very similar to pavs. I wouldnt take pavs to the desert, so I always build some arbs for the heat.

IMO pavs are better, especially for defense.

Weapons upgrades only affect melee stats.

ichi :bow:

I'm curious as to how exactly one uses Pav arbs, as I tend to employ the more mobile version without the large plank of wood.

Do you just position them as part of your front line, and enemy units just kinda butt up against (and try to break through) your "Pav wall" whilst being flanked by your melee troops, or do you have them sitting behind your melee troops, same as other missile units?

I sit them on the front of my line but have them skirmish back when the enemy gets too close. The shield is if you are having an archer war. When that is the case, put them on loose formation and the Pav's will own.

I use pavs out front, which is the way they are used in MP. Usually 3 units, deployed two ranks deep, so they form a thin line out in front. I protect them against small charges by enemy cav with my cav, and when the main inf line attacks I pull my pavs behind and off to the side if possible.

In MP pavs are primarily used as anti-pav, and if one gets lucky and kills a few melee soldiers than that is just gravy.

It helps to upgrade pavs with armor, at high valor with some armor they can take a pretty good charge and still do OK, for a while.

One thing I forgot to add about arbs and archers, they can be fairly useful as flankers (they will give a flanked unit morale penalties) and as speed bumps. In MP when things are going badly and the enemy is threatening to flank, a group of pavs on Hold and 4-5 ranks deep can slow down a cav unit long enough to make a difference sometimes. But that's pretty desperate.

ichi :bow:

Thanks guys.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ichi

Weapons upgrades only affect melee stats.

---

So weapons upgrades are generallly not that worthwhile on missile troops? (Aside from the Longbowmen, of course! ~D )

I had been meaning to ask this for a while...

Then you've obviously not played the Turks, nearly all their infantry have a bow. A high valour turkish army is ridiculous.

So does the attack bonus given by additional valour also only work in melee?

Do you guys think valour for archers is worth the same as that for infantry? Or more? Or less?

I read here that valor is good for accuracy of archers, so valor is handy for ranged troops.

I also read that you only start to notice an improvement around valour 6. I find that a lot, so it is not so important as it is rare to come by.

If I'm wrong please correct me

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by antisocialmunky

Then you've obviously not played the Turks, nearly all their infantry have a bow. A high valour turkish army is ridiculous.

---

A high valor Turkish army is deadly. You get Janis, Futs, and Ottomans pumped up under a high command gen and they can shoot the enemy then fight them.

@Zild The attack bonus applies to melee, missile stats are figured differently. The morale bonus that valor gives is important for missile troops also, but if I had to choose I'd upgrade my cav and inf first. IMO armor is the first upgrade for my Catholic missiles, then valor/morale, then discipline, then weapons last. Muslim hybrids get it all.

ichi :bow:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr White

I read here that valor is good for accuracy of archers, so valor is handy for ranged troops.

---

valor is only handy for low-accuracy troops like naphta throwers or javelinmen. Accuracy for archers is only affected if you have more than 4 valor, and only by a slight margin.
Or at least, that's what I'm told.

Thank you, everyone. I main use my arbs out front, so I will use the Pavise version.

"In MP pavs are primarily used as anti-pav, and if one gets lucky and kills a few melee soldiers than that is just gravy."

grrrrr I hate that :evil:I just send a thin line of spearmen out to annoy them :sneaky: and use longbowmen (they have a higher kills per second than pavs) to shoot over their heads before the enemy finally manages to stop my archers. By which point he will realise he has spent 2000 florins on some useless armoured pavvies and my valour 2 chivalric knights are mowing their way through his vanilla halbs and maas :shocked2:.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ichi

I use pavs out front, which is the way they are used in MP. Usually 3 units, deployed two ranks deep, so they form a thin line out in front. I protect them against small charges by enemy cav with my cav, and when the main inf line attacks I pull my pavs behind and off to the side if possible.

In MP pavs are primarily used as anti-pav, and if one gets lucky and kills a few melee soldiers than that is just gravy.

It helps to upgrade pavs with armor, at high valor with some armor they can take a pretty good charge and still do OK, for a while.

One thing I forgot to add about arbs and archers, they can be fairly useful as flankers (they will give a flanked unit morale penalties) and as speed bumps. In MP when things are going badly and the enemy is threatening to flank, a group of pavs on Hold and 4-5 ranks deep can slow down a cav unit long enough to make a difference sometimes. But that's pretty desperate.

ichi :bow:

---

Love to hear those MP strategies......Thanks ~:cheers: .

Longbowmen are the final word in missile storm death. Nothing can put down more deadly fire as quickly, period.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by antisocialmunky

Longbowmen are the final word in missile storm death. Nothing can put down more deadly fire as quickly, period.

---

As much as I love Longbowmen, they always seem to lose vs. Pav Arbs in 1-on-1. Maybe Longbowmen are better at killing other units than Pavs? Those oversize shields the Pavs lug around seem to give them a defensive edge even in melee, which isn't exactly historically acurate...but probably lots easier to code.

What exactly are the requirements to get Pav Arbs? :thinking:

You need a bowyer 4, which means you need to upgrade all the way to citadel aswell. castle1, bowyer1, castle2, bowyer2, castle3, bowyer 3, castle4, bowyer4.

What's the point of using archers vs pavise arbalesters?? That's sort of like using light cavalry vs halberdiers in a forest.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Patron

"In MP pavs are primarily used as anti-pav, and if one gets lucky and kills a few melee soldiers than that is just gravy."

grrrrr I hate that :evil:I just send a thin line of spearmen out to annoy them :sneaky: and use longbowmen (they have a higher kills per second than pavs) to shoot over their heads before the enemy finally manages to stop my archers. By which point he will realise he has spent 2000 florins on some useless armoured pavvies and my valour 2 chivalric knights are mowing their way through his vanilla halbs and maas :shocked2:.

---

Are you saying that you use this online? 'cause if you send out a thin line of spears that's fairly easy to counter.

It can be interesting to try to counter when a player pushes LBs forward, but you have to decide whether to back up or rush, but you can't just sit there. In 3v3 or 4v4 team games you can only push so far forward before you run the risk of getting flanked.

Normally I push my pavs far forward and protect them with heavy cav, which I can keep out of range of LBs. As the LBs push forward, I just stay back out of their range while the pavs slowly wear them down.

In tight quarters any good push with missile troops can be very effective, LBs even more so.

Since most players use 3 pavs online, and pav arbs cost 300 florins, I'm a little confused about the 2000 florin figure.

Quote:

---

Love to hear those MP strategies......Thanks

---

Its amazing how what works online can also work quite well in SP mode.

ichi :bow:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geezer57

As much as I love Longbowmen, they always seem to lose vs. Pav Arbs in 1-on-1. Maybe Longbowmen are better at killing other units than Pavs? Those oversize shields the Pavs lug around seem to give them a defensive edge even in melee, which isn't exactly historically acurate...but probably lots easier to code.

---

Longbows are good at producing lots of kill over a short period of time but in overall kills the arbs are better and in a duel the pavs will win. Of course arbs wont be using all their ammo against a rushing enemy so longbows might better in such a situation.

Pavs does not give any bonuses in melee nor any penalty in desert but are of course slower than regular arbs.

One valor wont mean much for the accuracy. We have done tests that showed a difference of valor 4 meant very little. So it would better to think in how you use the missile troops as regualr arbs are faster than pavs while pavs are better if facing other missile troops.


CBR

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Patron

What's the point of using archers vs pavise arbalesters?? That's sort of like using light cavalry vs halberdiers in a forest.

---

There was a thread about "favorite missle troops" over in the ezboard forum, and the subject of Longbow vs. Pavs came up. Out of curiosity, I set up a 1-on-1 custom battle on a flat map, and ran it repeatedly. The Longbows would maybe inflict a tiny bit higher casualty rate than the Pavs until they ran out of arrows (Pavs still over half full for ammo), at which point I'd have them charge the Pavs. No sense just leaving them standing in the "steel rain". They'd take some losses while moving into melee range, then launch a minority melee attack against the Pavs - and lose, every time, over and over.

Does that prove that Pavs are better than Longbows? No. Is that something I'd do in a real battle (MP or campaign)? No. About the only thing it shows is that Longbows have a heck of a time beating Pavs in 1-on-1 custom battles.

I like both units, and often incorporate both of them into my campaign armies. With the Pavs out in front and the Longbows right behind, I get the best of both types. The Pavs provide missle cover (the AI likes to target your lead units) while inflicting a slow, steady, kill rate - the Longbows provide a high rate of plunging fire for a short time, and can either be relieved by reinforcements or act as flankers in a pinch after the main melee begins.

Well, it's best to sit L Bows behind some cheap expendable heavily armoured unit like Pavs.

Unless you're Turkish, any missile unit you employ is going to be part of a larger mixed group.

Longbows are perfect for going on the offensive, because they are much more mobile, they can sit right behind your front line without delivering friendly fire, and they have a couple of points of attack.

The fact that Arbs and Xbows don't shoot in an arc makes them harder to use in concert with infantry. Their opportunities to shoot are further reduced by this.