So can ck be used in the desert effectively or am I wasting them?
Printable View
So can ck be used in the desert effectively or am I wasting them?
They are good for one charge, but then get spent. Their quality is such that even exhausted they are not too bad, but still it seems a waste. My SP desert battles were often my beleaguered outnumbered forces (e.g. crusades) defending against hordes of Muslims. In such a situation, light cavalry that could frequently chase routers was much more useful than knights.
To be honest, I never used knights much in MTW so I might not be the best person to answer this.
Best to use them on "defense" and get close to the enemy before the battle begins. Don't give their lighter troops space to maneuver and hit them when you're at full strength right away (kill their general and DON’T chase the routers). Try not to use them on the offensive because the usual amount of maneuvering required before combat will make them much less effective.
I'd not suggest you to use any heavily armoured unit (especially CK) in desert. Armoured targets get tired very quick in desert, and their low fatigue decreases their attack, defence and morale. Exhausted units are usually useless. Best units for fighting in desert would be lightly armoured units like Bedouins, Nizaris, Ghazis, Galowgassles, Feudal Sergeants and so...
For example, check this battle
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showp...2&postcount=13
and Marquis de Said's explanation (2nd paragraph, for the desert with the sand storm)
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showp...2&postcount=15
As long as they are not expected to fight more than one wave of reinforcements they should be ok. You'd probably want to use something like Steppe Cavalry or Jinetes in a drawn out fight though.
Ideally, you should replace knights with something else like Jinettes, Horse Archers are particularly good due to the low armour ratings of desert units. I personally prefered Cathedral morale boosted Gallowglasses instead of knights.
Personally, I'd leave the CK's at home. If you wear them out, which you will do if you use them very much at all, then they become vulnerable in this arena to some of the muslim anti-horse/anti-tanker units. And who want to loose their CKs to a bunch of peasants on Camels.
I'd load up on missles or some light cav instead. Or maybe peasants. I like crusading with peasants. It does them good to get off the plow and get some sun, you know.
The only way I've really effectively used armored horse in the desert is for one devasting charge when I have reinforcements. After that charge they are withdrawn and replaced with lighter cavalry like Steppe Cavalry. They are the best medium cavalry in the game and HA cannot deal with them.
I do use heavy knights on desert just for a kick. It's not "Outremer" if there's no heavy knights guarding the area. They do tire pretty quick but they fight pretty good. I don't use them on offense very often though. That's the job of my turcopoles, hobilars and mounted sergeants.
There's several decent options other than heavy cav; I use cav with armor 4 or less, sometimes I use Feudals (armor 5) which work well for that first charge.
Get merc camels, Faris, Jinettes, Hobilars, Turcopoles, Byz Cav, Ghulams, Szeks, Steppes, Alans, all good in the dez.
ichi:bow:
When I go to the desert I bring alot of Knights. I love them and use them very liberally. Even with fatigue I find I can route most desert dwelling units. I do keep some lighter units for chasing routers.
Just yesterday I realized how bad armor fares in the desert, all my heavily armored units dropped with exhaustion simply standing around. It almost cost me victory, reinforcemts were even worse of, they were crawling (or would have been, were there an animation for that) by the time they reached the rally point.
I did some experimenting while playing the Byz in my last campaign. I made sure that none of the units I chose had more than four total armor. IOW, nothing upgraded past 4 either. This is what it was:
(+# - means how many armor upgrades to get to 4; blank means vanilla already at 4)
2 Byz Cavalry
2 Byz Lancers (+1)
2 Steppe Cavalry (+1)
2 Spearmen (+3)
2 Byz Infantry (+1)
1 VG
1 Arb (+1)
2 Pav. Arb. (+1)
2 Tebizond Archers (+2)
Basically, I had to specialize two provinces for each unit type...one in Europe with full upgrades, one in Anatolia or Mid. East with limited upgrade. As such, I used Brigands for archers in Europe and Trebs for archers in the desert.
So, each unit in the army above has exactly 4 armor. Here's my question or probably series of questions. Is it my imagination, or did this army still have some fatigue trouble in the desert? I could swear I "felt" they tired quicker than an army in Europe (this was all subjective mind you. Even in Europe troops standing around for a long time are no longer completely fresh). So, what is the standard here. There are two ways I figure the armor/desert/exhaustion factor, which I hereby dub ADE (i.e. "...however, monkeyslayer127, in my experience ADE really effects this unit. I don't take them into the desert in my armies..."), could work.
A) 5 armor is the magic number. 5 = ADE. 4 = normal
B) 5 armor is not a magic number...just the number at which it gets really critical and really counterproductive. 2 = not much ADE. 4 = some ADE. 5 = okay lads, it's @#$%& hot. 8 = mummies in 5 minutes.
If A applies, then my problem was imaginary. If B applies, I would really like to tweak it next time. I might still use the VG at 4 armor, but I could take vanilla HA with (+1) instead of the Byz Cavalry and lower armor upgrades on everything else by one, making the overall armor 3 rather than 4 with VG exception. Another relevant factor is that if A applies and one finds oneself in a situation having or just desiring to use a unit with 5 or more armor, then the more the better. IOW, if 5 is the magic number, then may as well have 10 (get gold shields). But, if B applies, less armor is still better if taking heavies.
So, which is it?
I think the actual stat for effective armour in the desert is 3 for infantry and 4 for cavalry. This means they will still tire a little faster than say they would in kinder climates but the armour bonus outweighs this disadvantage. Any higher and the negatives start outweighing the positves by a large amount.
Of course it's always the less armour the better in the desert for fatigue purposes.
PS - Note this means Janissary Heavy Infantry with no Armour upgrades can be used effectively in the desert. ~:cool:
Yeah, that's pretty disturbing. My RK general hot "exhausted" by just sitting on top of a hill while watching the battle in is tin can. :knight:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ciaran
That's some good work Darkhorn. Definitely B, 5 is no magic number. One can use armor 5 units in a pinch in the dez, but you have to treat them gently and they still get tired too quick.
Try this: go into Custom Battles and make a nice flat summer desert scenario. Give the AI a single unit of elite infantry. Give yourself lots of money.
Now choose 16 cav of various types, give them a wide variety of armor (try taking the Byz or Huns, take some Horse Archers, Sargents, Heavy Cav, Heavy Cav with armor).
Now have them do wind sprints. Line 'em up and run them a certain distance, then turn around and run back to the start. Keep doing this and watch their fatigue levels. Wait between sprints to view recovery.
Then do the same thing with infantry.
Quite revealing.
ichi:bow:
I find a heavily armored horsemen too much of a burden in the desert but if you happen to have them there then unmount them if you can. The advantage of having a horse is being able to run them around and the heavy armor cuts this really short. However, heavily armored troops are still effective if you can get the enemy to engage in melee.
I had at first followed the game guide's suggestion and sent my old Urban Militiamen into the desert who did quite well. Later, I sent in some extra CMAA who shredded to pieces anyone within sword reach... I did of course make sure not to chase anyone with them though. I found all in all that desert combat was not that difficult because outside of the exhaustion you mostly faced lightly armored horses and infantry.
Heavily armoured troops can be invaluable for earlier parts of a crusade, say for example you are the English and you launch a crusade to take Edessa or Syria, you are going to have to travel through Asia Minor which isnt especially damaging to heavily armoured troops.
You can use your CK or Templars etc perfectly easily in Asia Minor, the Byzantine heavy cavalry copes fine in that part of the world and to leave heavily armoured troops behind would seriously handicap your crusade. As you get to the latter stages of a crusade and you enter desert terrain then you can simply remove heavily armoured cavalry from your first wave and replace them with Mounted Sergeants for example.
I think it is always worthwhile to bring heavily armoured troops with you just in case you need them, once you get into desert terrain though they can be destroyed by camels suprisingly easily.
And early in the game when there are fewer ports on the map. Once the trade routes start getting developed then those long overland marches stop happening. Only the computer can have a direct route back and forth thru your provences vacuming up your prized units. My crusades always have a nearly direct path to the nearest port, and that's why I rarely bother. Why pay for a crusade and only get a few fanatics if I have to add an army anyway, when I can do it for free? Yeah there are some boosts to your kings stats, but I usually don't feel they are worth the cost in florins. The money spent on a crusade can buy a whole lot of new buildings or upgrades. :builder:Quote:
Heavily armoured troops can be invaluable for earlier parts of a crusade
Just my $.02 as I know a lot of people love to crusade. :disguise:
i admit i find them frustrating and time consuming things that always go wrong when you least need them to. depends if you like GA or conquest mode though, as some factions (French, HRE) get a lot of their points from crusading.
I agree with you but for another reason, the cost of a crusade isnt that much so that doesnt really bother me, the problem is what if it fails?Quote:
Originally Posted by Eternal Champion
If you launch a crusade and it fails then your kings influence can plummet along with the loyalty of princes and generals, I can remember half a dozen occasions where civil wars have erupted due to a failed crusade. So instead of the cost of florins I think carefully because what it may cost the future of my empire if the crusade fails.
Alot of players fall into the trap of assuming they can just march into enemy territory and do what they want, it has to be remembered that losing a province that was captured via a crusade is almost as destructive as a crusade being crushed in battle. Provinces captured by a crusade (any province) cause a real loyalty penalty if they are lost to an enemy, so alot of thought and preparation shoudl be taken before launching a crusade, firstly can the crusade succeed, and secondly can the territory be held.
You know, it hasn't been mentioned yet, but you really have to look out of camels with those knights.
Camels are bad news for knights in the heat. It is far better to take them out with arrows or spears.
I tend to avoid using knights in th desert. Instead I use mounted sergeants a lot as Poland. Mainly my armies are infantry heavy in the desert.
Quote:
Originally Posted by antisocialmunky
Actually, I had mentioned it. "And who wants to loose their CKs to a bunch of peasants on camels."
Oh yeah, but it was worth brining it up again. Camels sodomize shiny knights. Though, if you can send another horse unit crashing into the reaer of one, then they rout really quickly.
That can be said for a lot of units. But it does point out how effective camels can be. In this scenario it takes two mounted units to deal with one very cheap unit, I'll take that all day long. As an extra bonus the camels are mauling one unit, possibly expensive knights, before routing. The unseen benefit is even though the camels will rout, they caused a possible overload somewhere else on the battlefield due to the 2 on 1.Quote:
Though, if you can send another horse unit crashing into the reaer of one, then they rout really quickly.
I merely point this out for those remaining camel disbelievers. ~:joker:
Camels do chain rout though. Don't forget that. Two-Three units of knights is what it usually takes for me to deal with all the camels in an AI army.
I only take heavy knights into the desert to role-play - couple of crusaders is nice, but they suffer. My desert armies are mercs, archers, cheap infantry and light cav. I even throw in a couple of peasants for effect. The best anti-camel unit is plain archers - those things are really fragile.
When playing a catholic faction (hopefully with a good trade income/economy) I find the best army for the desert is to bribe one of your enemies armies and bulk it out with some cheap light infantry and archers. I only use RK or CK if they are good generals or if I'm defending, when I will wait till I can charge once to route their troops and then tell them to withdraw from battle.