Printable View
Yes, I forgot I had added valor to peasants to make them more fun. In my other mods I either add the muster field, or just replace peasants with spearmen. My favorite peasant level unit is the woodsman, all that charge with armour piercing will chew up a heavy cav in the woods in no time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ironside
mfberg
Cheesy uses for Peasants:
Peasants are the fastest foot units. This speed advantage can, at times, be VERY advantageous.
Afraid of the AI's Cav out on the flank, just waiting to overrun YOUR flank; and/or some uber unit in an equally frightening position, want to negate it.
Simply, walk your Peasant(s) wide to the flank; then slowly advance, until that Cav and/or uber unit takes the bait and move to attack the Peanant unit(s). The low stats of the Peasant unit is like cheese to the mouse.
Once the move to attack is made, reverse the direction of the Peasant unit(s), aim them somewhere FAR away from the battle and set them to RUN. It's important to make this move the *instant* the AI makes its move, in order that there be a bit of a distance gap.
The Peasant unit will maintain the "gap" for quite some time against a Cav unit; and, NO foot unit no matter how *uber* will be able to catch them. It's also a neat trick, that once the Cav unit gets *near*, stop the Peanants, reverse their direction, put them on Wedge, Hold Formation and Hold Position, then attack the Cav.
This is a great tactic, when you can use two peasant units. Use one as the *pin* and the other to flank. The Peasants will be somewhat tired and the Cav will be, at least winded. Depending on the quality of the particularly Cav unit, you *could* score a victory or do some serious damage.
In any event, the tactic simply negates the threat of a the Cav flanking your position. This is particularly useful when you have little chance at defending against the AI flanking.
Even when/if the Cav catches and mows down the Peasants, it will be so far from the battle, as to be virtually useless. If it makes it back to the battle, before the battle breaks, then it will be so *Tired*, again, as to be virtually useless.
The same for any *uber* unit you manage to draw off.
Excellent idea! ~:cool: I'll give it a try.
Infinite-length sieges, even in a poxy fort-level castle? ~:cool:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ironside
In other words, you get "will not fall without a direct assault" message?
In such cases, does the AI ever take you to the battle map to resolve the siege? I know the Horde generally do this, even against a sizeable garrison. Impatient fellows, they are. Then they die in droves, trying to break in.
Is it any fun fighting with just one man against an assault or has it never actually come to that, in your campaigns?
@ToronagaSama,
I forget which but there was one English Civil War battle which went very much like that. Royalist Cavalry piled in, triggering a mass rout of one flank of the defenders but the Cav got so carried away with chasing mere rabble and prospect of booty from looting the supply train that they failed to play their part in tackling the more professional core of the Parliamentary forces. The unsupported Royalist infantry lines were then easy meat and they lost the battle.
It's a perfectly valid tactic, IMHO. Using them as arrow/cannon fodder is simply wasteful but baiting and drawing away enemy forces breaks up their overall formation, allowing them to be fought section by section, with numerical (or effectivness) advantage on your side.
As the rebels usually comes in full stacks, they normally assult. And loses up to 70-80% of thier army. ~DQuote:
Originally Posted by EatYerGreens
One man units aren't funny though, the'll always lose in the end, and they do rarely good. It's much funnier fighting with depleted units, as you do win from time to time. And you can hid one unit, just outside the backside of the inner wall. The comp never finds them and loses the battle because of that ~D (yes it's "cheating" ~;) ).
BTW a good way to provoke sieges from the is to sally, but only with the castle garrision. The comp will often attack the castle then. Beware that they won't always do that, and if that's the case you cannot retreat to the castle, but only to another province.
The are not the fastest foot units. They got average infantery speed (unmodded that is). But interesting strategy you've got, although not my style.Quote:
Peasants are the fastest foot units. This speed advantage can, at times, be VERY advantageous.
This was actually quite common incidents. Flanking threats by cav "disappeared" thanks to early looting and rout-chasing.Quote:
I forget which but there was one English Civil War battle which went very much like that. Royalist Cavalry piled in, triggering a mass rout of one flank of the defenders but the Cav got so carried away with chasing mere rabble and prospect of booty from looting the supply train that they failed to play their part in tackling the more professional core of the Parliamentary forces. The unsupported Royalist infantry lines were then easy meat and they lost the battle.
I usually keep a decent size garrison but I have had a depleted unit (the governor and his 22 spearman) stationed in a province when it was attacked, they retreated to the castle and had something like a 5-year period before the castle would fall (I saved them in 3 years). But I think the longer holding out period is better than the “must be assaulted” option because it gives them a choice. If they have to assault then they might as well do it now and then I don’t have time to come to the rescue.
The cost of loosing the provinces income would probably make this idea not worth it but a castle upgrade, catapults or something, plus a small garrison might be worth the upkeep cost vs. a standard 100+ garrison in the long term.