Using Horse Archer's on MP

In my opinion horse archers are the best unit type in game, they are fun, fast, effective and cheap on florins.

I usually play with Hungarians and really enjoy using some Szekely,

they achieve many things: 1) Kill things
2) Distact opposing player
3) Tire out enemy cavalry
4) Keep me concentrating
5) To flank and attack back
6) Irritate opposition

However i have found some setbacks with using them-

- longbows :) if put in the right place they destroy my Szekely, with pavs you can shoot then move back out of range but longs get a t leats 2 volleys in before you can react.

- Hard to keep them going, I keep losing the odd unit through being too slow to react to enemies movements

- They only work in fours- i find it impossible to keep track of more than 4 units, many many times iv been wishing i had one more unit of them but know id be useless with them

---> If anyone has any ideas on how to improve my use of them, or opinions about them pls say.

Quote:

---

In my opinion horse archers are the best unit type in game, they are fun, fast, effective and cheap on florins.

---

That's true, playing HA can be a blast, but also frustrating at times. They do have all these advantages but being cheap is quite relative. Depends ofcourse on how and where you use them. One could buy an alan v0 for less florins than a HA and get a better value for money. It's all about gamestyle.
One thing that RTW can boast over VI is the parthian shot, the lack of which somewhat reduces their effectiveness, but helps keep a certain balance in game.

Quote:

---

I usually play with Hungarians and really enjoy using some Szekely,

---

I think there should be a distinction between Szekely, Boyars, all other fast HA and medium speed HA. It's quite obvious that Szekely are the best HA stat- and money-wise (considering that Boyars havea quite different role). But that may hinder you from engaging into a HA duel with the less expensive HA, thus neutralising their use till the last phases of the battle.

Quote:

---

they achieve many things: 1) Kill things
2) Distact opposing player
3) Tire out enemy cavalry
4) Keep me concentrating
5) To flank and attack back
6) Irritate opposition

---

Indeed, and I must stress the value of #4 , which is a paramount factor during an mp game. Sometimes tho you can get too absorbed with HA "activities" and neglect the fact that, unless you have an army with a cav majority, the game won't be decided until the enemy lines crash into each other. That's when micromanagement will definately decide whether any tactics will work - presuming that the pav battles and ensuing skirmishes didn't cause large amounts of attrition or relocation to a clearly advantageous position.

Quote:

---

- longbows :) if put in the right place they destroy my Szekely, with pavs you can shoot then move back out of range but longs get a t leats 2 volleys in before you can react.

---

HA will get the mobility advantage and the cost one. Every extra lb unit, if not handled properly during the engagement phase, won't be of much use. In contrast, HAs could flank quite more easily an engaged enemy and chase the routers. Also every extra longbow is one less cav unit that can chase away other fast cav that try to kill pavs/lbs. It's all a matter of numbers in the end.

And some kind of tip would be trying to get the lbs or the pavs near them to move around a bit, which could result either in a faster tiring rate, or try to make the oponent place them to the flanks of the army , where it's easier to attack them at an advantageous angle, mostly with fast and/or charge 6 cav, fk (when you are willign to take a few losses for the greater good ~;) ) or even with other fresh HA. A diagonal approach is usually the best, as it can place you at the missile units' optimal range for a very short time.

Many cav and lbs (or even archers at times) are almost always something that discourages HA users.

Quote:

---

- Hard to keep them going, I keep losing the odd unit through being too slow to react to enemies movements

---

That's a real problem that one faces when a last-second retreat is necessary, the weird, time-consuming turning maneuvres will make the chaser charge you at a most vulnerable moment -> auto rout -> waste of time trying to press the "rally" buttong-> may put in peril your other HA.

Quote:

---

- They only work in fours- i find it impossible to keep track of more than 4 units, many many times iv been wishing i had one more unit of them but know id be useless with them

---

A matter of practice this one, but when you don't play fully concetrated, you could ruin very easily all your chances of handling the HA properly.

Having multiple lines of HA helps a lot, with each "wave" successively retreating after a shot or two while the enemy charges. After a while, you could let the enemy (heavy) cav "touch" your HA last men in order to make him further chase the unit. Doing this requires that you gained a bit of distance, so you can revert for a sec or two at most to trotting, then speed up again, bringing the enemy closer to a point that he ll find hard to back off from. Then ambushes/surrounding etc can commence.

----
On another note, HA lose their effectiveness in most of the normal maps, due to them being too small. A 2v2 in small map, a 3v3 in a medium one, or a 4v4 in a non steppe large one with people havign more than 4 shooters are the equivalent of "bad HA map". When the opponent "hugs" corners and map edges, it's better to use either late into the game to cause some fuss(not without significant losses ofc), or for rear attacks/routers' chasing only.

For over a year now I've usually chosen the Huns for MP simply to get Szeks. They are not just my fav cav archer, they are my favorite unit.

Szeks start at morale 4 at V0, so I use them at V1 or V2. Compare V0 Szeks to V0 Feudal Knights

Szekely Charge 4, Att 3, Defense 1, Armor 3, Morale 4

Feudals Charge 8, Att 4, Defense 3, Armor 4, Morale 8

At V2 (723 florins) Szeks improve to

Charge 4, Att 5, Defense 3, Armor 3, Morale 8

which is very similar to V1 Feudals at 725 florins

IMO Szeks shouldn't try to trade arrows with Boyars (due to the Boyars higher armor) or Horse Archers (bad bargain to lose 20 Szeks in exchange for 20 HAs), but they do well in missile fights with other cav archers.

TBH, against the English and their LBs Szeks are best used as melee, they can really hurt the LBs in a fight, but should neve try to trade missiles with LBs. Like any unit, Szeks do best when the opportunity is there to exploit, and do poorly when the opponent has an effective counter

I disagree with the idea that they have to be used in fours. In early it might make sense to use four. This allows you to drain the enemy archers then shoot freely, but in High and Late one or two Szeks is sufficient.

Of course there is the harassing and flanking, but Szeks can also be very useful behind the inf line shooting the enemy inf or cav, then responding to defend against a flank or shooting through a gap in the line (using their speed, Szeks are fast)

Szeks can also help out in the cav skirmishing that goes on early in a pav war. Placing a Szek (on Hold Pos) behind the pavs and focusing fire on any cav trying to charge your pavs can rack up a lot of kills. If yuo send out a heavy cav and they engage enemy cav in the middle, Szeks are fast enough to get a flank and help speed the rout of the enemy cav.

Szeks are also great in 1v1 battles.

I use a Szek gen, and from one to three additional Szeks. The Szek gen adds an archer to my lineup; while the enemy gen (usually a Feudal) is sitting behind the line watching my gen is shooting fighters. Of course a Szek gen is at a disadvantage when he has to fight that Feudal.

In many battles my last option is to send my two Szeks together (one of which is my gen) either to defend a flank (set to Hold Form, 3 ranks deep) or to hit an enemy infantry or cav unit that has an exposed flank (on Engage-at-will), or through a gap. The secret is to hold back using them (this also allows them to shoot as long as possible) until the enemy unit I send them to attack is tired and somewhat depleted.

ichi :bow:

I've been known to set a HA type as gen specifically so that I can take my eye off his position and concentrate on other aspects of the battle.

I know I can do this with reasonable safety because
1) if any enemy unit approaches within his range , he will fire at it automatically and I don't even have to think about it.
2) If an enemy unit threatens to actually attack him and I haven't noticed this, he will use skirmish behaviour and run to safety anyway.

Okay, as general units go, as HA's he's likely to be one of the weakest units I have on the field but if he's caught up in an engagement of some kind that's likely to be because I've lost all my other men anyway. :embarassed:

I find it slightly pointless to make the gen an ultra-tough unit, because you're almost obligated to throw him into the main meleé action - it would be a waste of a unit not to do so. However tough FK or CK's are supposed to be, I find mine regularly die like flies and, once the general is a goner, which he inevitably will be if things were that already desperate, then you've really had it.

Actually, I suppose the point of making them FK, at a minimum, is to ensure the morale of his unit is high enough not to rout at the mere sight of some V4 infantry headed his way, as this would hit your whole army's morale hard. If Szeks only need V2 for Morale 8 and have missile ability then they'd make my ideal choice for a general. Thanks ichi-san. :bow:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ichi

I disagree with the idea that they have to be used in fours. In early it might make sense to use four. This allows you to drain the enemy archers then shoot freely, but in High and Late one or two Szeks is sufficient.

---

I find only using 2 in high makes them much less effective because a good opponent can effectively counter 2 units relatively easily. 4 also have the advantage of being able to seperate enmy units much more quickly and have the numbers to kill a decent cav unit if they become too seperate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EatYerGreens

I've been known to set a HA type as gen specifically so that I can take my eye off his position and concentrate on other aspects of the battle.

I know I can do this with reasonable safety because
1) if any enemy unit approaches within his range , he will fire at it automatically and I don't even have to think about it.
2) If an enemy unit threatens to actually attack him and I haven't noticed this, he will use skirmish behaviour and run to safety anyway.

Okay, as general units go, as HA's he's likely to be one of the weakest units I have on the field but if he's caught up in an engagement of some kind that's likely to be because I've lost all my other men anyway.

---

I prefer having 4 units of horse archers that i can use and find the general effectively wastes one unit- im also a fan of giving the general a decent unit and using him to flank when most units are commited (16 units vs 15 units is worth the risk)

i like v4 kerns for a gen. costs 400 bucks. :)

ha are fun, i like to use them to harrass foot troops before the melee insues. i'm not fast enough to be cav skirmishing, so i like my pav wall, and ha behind it to play defensive. then move up and shoot the foot as the pav war ends.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by t1master

so i like my pav wall, and ha behind it to play defensive. then move up and shoot the foot as the pav war ends.

---

I find it too late for them to be effecxtive by that stage, especially if you lose pav war, i also hate pavs and only ever take 1 unit

The biggest drawback to horse archers are the low morale as the best "non-Szeke" HA morale is two, most are 0 or less. This fact alone makes them rather fragile in MP where everything is about pumped up valor.

Szekes are really in a class of their own due to a "do it all" stat sheet. Tied with only a few units in the fastest cav class, missile class, and can hold their own in melee, with decent morale. And I'm sure folks have noticed Ichi, that you seem to almost exclusively use Hungary in MP. A lot of time when you play with the Hunter Clan you face what we call the "Hungarian Horde".

You get a lot of value with Szekes but at V2 their 725 Fl, but a V0 Feud Knight with W1 will give same stats across the board and 1 point better armor for 565 Fl. That's 156 FL to use on W1 on next FK or pumping up something else. Just another way of looking at things.

When facing teams using HA I'll play English (if in High) to counter with LB's. I then spend some cash savings on pumping them up to V1 or V2. At V2 they have Attack 5, Defense 1, Morale 8 with AP attack :evil:. I've surprised a few would be flankers thinking they saw an easy opening.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scurvy

. . . i also hate pavs and only ever take 1 unit

---

looking forward to squaring off against you mate, we can test this theory. There's a reason why most vets use 2-4 pavs, and that's because they have found that they are necessary to survive in VI.

Kerns rock, in the right hands.

If you take four Szeks you'll have the ability to shoot, provided you can get past the opponents pavs and archers, but you'll probably be facing six or seven heavy cav. Four Szeks really diminishes your ability to effectively deal with the opponents cav, but maybe we can test this theory also.

My experience is that an opponent either has HAs or LBs or he doesnt. If he doesnt have HAs or LBs, he really can't counter even one Szek if used properly. If he does have HAs or LBs, he can handle four just as easily as one.

But I really would like to test these ideas out on the field.

ichi :bow:

I've learned my lesson about pavs as Gawain's legendary kindness convinced me the error of my ways. My thinking was I'd cheat on pavs for some LB's without taking less infantry or cav. Even with two pavs and two LB's your at a disadvantage to the opponent with more pavs because LB's can't hold the line, fire to quickly, and then their just weak infantry leaving you vulnerable to Ichi's Szekes.

I enjoy playing against you and your M8's and you've played against me and my LB's. Even though my MP skill is improving I think you would need someone of greater skill then I to test any theories.

I've always enjoyed our games mate, you're quite tough. Gawain is the master of the LBs right now, he can present several difficult issues, especially in dez.

ichi :bow:

Any combination of LBs, pavs, HA, other archers can work. Depends on the circumstances and many other factors, just like any army configurations. One can refuse to give battle to the enemy pavs in many ways. You can always also attack as a team the opponent that has the pavs with the most losses/fatigue.
The maps play a big role in this issue as well. Defending a good position will require some pavs at least. Playing a 4v4 in a medium map doesn't really call for any purely missile units, as getting close to the enemy requires a few secs, the losses from missiles can't be that high to make up for the extra units. One can rush and win or lose, but his missile won't have played a primary role. Bringing pavs is just a convention
that helps teams to coordinate but lets other problems kick in (esp. for the attacker), like fatigue, esp. in steppes or relatively flat maps, where pav fights can last over 10 minutes.

Quote:

---

Even with two pavs and two LB's your at a disadvantage to the opponent with more pavs because LB's can't hold the line, fire to quickly, and then their just weak infantry leaving you vulnerable to Ichi's Szekes

---

Again, no great theories can be made without generalising, but it's useful seeing this in an other light. Theoretically when you are defending, your pavs will win over the enemy ones. If on "loose" formation, then they can reduce their attrition to minimim levels (maybe throw in an armour upgrade or two) and hold at bay more than an enemy pav each. If enough time lapses, you can be sure than most pavs will have reduced effectiveness. 2 LBs can allow concetrated and rapid firepower, something hard to do with pavs, and depending on your target, the enemy will use HA/other archers/reserve pavs(if he's brought at least 2 more than you) to either get the LBs killed fast, or find another weak side that now's left without fire cover from the LBs. But thats where having more melee units can help. Before the enemy reacts, and after you prepare a countercharge that will eventually lead to an all-out conflict, those lbs can get easily more than 10-15 kills each and then stay behind the line to shoot idle . Now, if the enemy has had more pavs and the extra HA (szekely included), it's very possible that you'll end up with an extra hard charging unit (as inf tends to be more expensive, though even v0-1 spears can help at times). Ofcourse it'll be up to micromanagement at this point, not to mention allied action.

And LBs can hold btw, just not head on;)
Naturally fresh pavs in square formation, or in 2-3 ranks but at a good defensive angle, in the back of the inf line can get those fk or even a ck bogged for some good time...provided no routers come their way and they are almost full in strength.

When I said "LB's can't hold the line" all I meant was take a spot or fill in on the pav line. If you don't fill your "frontage" you leave more opening to a flank attack. Part of the reason for the Pav line is to stretch your enemy and hinder their ability of massing troops and maybe more important, provide cover for yours. So even armored up LB's would take to many losses, fire to quickly, and do to little damage to your enemies pav's "on the line". Even if one attempts to refute my thinking you have the issue of cost. At V0 LB's cost 350 to a Pav's 225, a A1 the cost goes to 390, A2 it jumps to 446. You can buy nearly two Pav's for one LB A2, not a cost effective solution your money can be better spent. You'd be letting a good unit get shot up and killed by cheap but deadly junk, if used as a replacement for Pavs.

I'm not really advancing or refuting the theory of the Pav line as that is another completely separate topic. Nor am I saying that that LB's aren't deadly or useful as I already said I usually counter HA's with them and will use them to guard my flanks often. All I'm saying is LB's aren't a good replacement for Pav's in a Pav role, they have better and much more valuable uses.


No matter where your personal thinking on this issue might be, this is a good disussion.

Well, I didn't mention anything that is refuted by the above :)
It's quite self-explanatory, lbs are lbs and pavs are pavs. But now that you mention it, you can also find a different role for the LBs, and I'm sure you 've seen many people use it from time to time. That's 4 LBs and many cav to skirmish the pavs. Provided that you got more cav and you can accept some fk losses, you can force the enemy to attack, as you aim for the inf line, while your cav try getting the pavs. When the opponent sends cav after your own, you shoot the cav and bring additional to create a new round of chasing. In the short term, you 'll be able to inflict more cav damage and if you get in the process a good deal of pav kills, the urge for the enemy to get you can really make him plunge forward. Either that, or he's too bored and wants to get over with this ordeal (true after 5 consecutive games of intense skirmish heh).

Another army of the same philosophy often used with Turks is (prolly "was", as nowdays you see less players trying it) a 8+ hybrid army, with fast alans that go for the pavs , while the first (cheaper) line of archers shoots whatever inf lies close and the second gets the incoming cav. Later on you can start switching the lines one at a time, thus retreating in order but with a steady missile coverage, but the main objective is still getting the pavs with the cheap cav or making the enemy believe that by moving your whole army forward, you 'll attack.

I've been reading this thread with interest, and figured I might be allowed to comment. Have played multiplayer extensively, but never online (still sorting out router and firewall issues at the moment) - only on my LAN at home, etc. My friends and I have had many memorable 1 vs. 1, 2 vs. 1, and 2 vs. 2 battles, and we all love the game!

My analysis of this thread indicates some exasperation over the dominant role of pavise arbalesters, who are certainly not historically accurate in an open field battle. Heck, they were almost exclusively used in the M-TW time period for sieges only. And I've noticed the rise in use of the "Valor" type rules (like the ones posted here http://p219.ezboard.com/fclanwars354...opicID=4.topic ) aimed (at least in part) on bringing some balance back to the MP game.

So why not agree to simply ban the use of pavs, except when in a castle siege? It would certainly add more historical flavor, would eliminate the boring pav vs. pav duels, and would also eliminate all the concern over cav vs. pav feints, etc. If it's ahistorical, unbalanced, and not fun, why not get rid of it?

i used to hate pavs and the long pav wars, but now i look forward to them. there is a very intricate game that is played during the pav shoot out. the underrated pav, perhaps one of the best unit in the game for the cost... just be sure to keep em on hold/hold. ;)

imo, if you are using longbows to shoot missle troops you are wasting your florins.

i also have an opinion on the 'valor rules' and followed the thread and reasoning behind their adoption, however, after more than a few games of the v1/v2 max, i still see the cavs as the most powerful, now because the cavs are some of the only units to have a decent starting morale. in all the valor rules games i played last night, i didn't see one spear unit, just lotsa cavs and even swords... the v1 max also makes alot of the fun units, like kerns, useless. ;)

Someone had been talking but vacation made me take a break for the "equal valour for all " faction;)
I try to find some interesting army combinations but most units can be discarded for a good cav swarm. Ofcourse this happens partly to players not being used in using spears, and also that most swords are very cheap compared to spears, and thus you can use em to pin the spear units,allowing you to spend the extra money on cav.
But it's a better game than 10k vi in rps terms.

The valor rules as I understand them were to bring balance back into MP. Not all cav is strong only Knights, as it should be. There is a counter to "cavs as the most powerful" and that is the unit with the pointy sticks. At V2 FS have morale 6 and will put a hurting on any cav unit. In one game I brought two Order Foot and pulled back my line leaving the spears to cover the pull back. Just like clock work my opponent swooped two cav down to hit the "sitting ducks" and got mauled before retreating. Last night I brought two V2 FS into a 4v4 and they more then paid for themselves breaking several cav units each, sometimes in support, sometimes on their own. I think this was the idea.

With the CWC Tourney there have been many valor rules games and mostly early to boot as a lot of practice has been going on. I actually have been having a good time and like the extra dimension.

The problem i have with pavs is that they rarely achieve more than just shooting other pavs, if a whole team took no pavs then it wouldnt be a problem as a full charge would only give therm time for 2 volleys.

Longs are a really fun unit although im not the best woth them (they havnt got horses) however on mtw they were very good, i used to take 4 and shoot them all at 1 charging unit, this unit would be down to half strength b4 it reached me and break quikly in combat forcing chain rout- i havnt tried this yet on vi.

pavs can also be used as a screen to absorb a charge... hold/hold turns the pavs into a speed bump of sorts, the enemy's charge bonus is expended on the holding pavs, and you can counter and hit the charging troops, taking advantage of your full charge bonus.

then there's a few pav exploits ~;)

On the cwc rules subject, I didn't say that spears won't beat cav, hey that happens in 10k without rules as well. With the new set of rules you got the exact same situation. That means you'll buy mostly fk (v1 in early) and ck v0 , and you 'll spend the same amount of money on spears that you could use in 10k as well, with some notable exceptions. But the changes are that while in 10k you'd have the swords beat the spears(very easy thing for spears of less than 800-900 florins), now you 'll have the swords just keep the spears. The swords cost around 300-425 florins at v1, while spears are definately above the 500 florins mark in order to work decently. With the extra money you can invest to get more heavy cav to counter and win the enemy ones. Still it's a much better rps system than 10k sword/cav fest, which still has its charms at times tho heh
I think that it's easy to decide on a set of rules using lower money as it can show instantly some changes in gameplay, which are more a result of reduced morale than a well-thought rules set. In early it is even more so, due to lack of many additional troop types that appear later on, so you get more distinct roles.

All will depend ofcourse on in-game actions, no game can be won with mathematical exercises. I myself always try to bring at least 2 spears, and they perform their role quite nicely, if calmly handled and the map allows it.
/thread hijacking off

Quote:

---

All will depend ofcourse on in-game actions, no game can be won with mathematical exercises. I myself always try to bring at least 2 spears, and they perform their role quite nicely, if calmly handled and the map allows it.

---

i agree with that :) i think it turns out that cavs and swords are still gonna be the better units to have, especially when you factor in the ebb and flow of battle. faster, more coordinated units than spears will beat spears.

I find spears extremely hard to use on vi (on mtw there great) -swords are faster, kill ppl quicker and can still hold up a cav charge for quite a time. I'd be intrested to try some spears some time ~D

The difference in valor games is V1 max on all non spear, this means the best a FMAA can be is morale 4. Spear or anticav is V2 that means FS can be morale 6 making them more effective and their still cheaper then V3 FMAA you see in 10K games This has more of an effect on early games. In high or late a V1 CMAA is morale 6, but so is Billman at V2 if you want to spend the money which is nearly the same price as V3 FMAA in a 10K game.

Like L'Impresario said just gives a little better play as there are more viable options.

If your pavise shootouts are lasting to long, try a flatland or hillyland and the battles will be over quicker. Sleezy's are good on the steppe's cause pavise wars can turn into decisive wins. But vs v0 Chiv Knights at v2 they'll still lose. Low defense vs a high charge, knights will always win. Damn Sleezy's..

I find szkeleys vs chiv knights quite fun, i jut leg them back until the chivs stop chasing and then hit them in back when they turn round