Bridge Battles

I know everyone says bridge battles are the easiest on the defending side, and the hardest on the offense, but I think I may be fighting them badly then, because I often still have quite high casualties on bridge battles. What should I do? I feel like archers aren't much help, because they'll hit as many of my men on the bridge as the enemy. I send my units onto the bridge when the enemy's almost over, resulting in inital success, but then i get tied up in the middle, and morale falls fast. The only good tactic I've found is to send a good cav unit over the second bridge (if there is one) and attack from behind, but even this will leave my cav unit almost dead, because routing units deal out a LOT of casulaties for some reason, if they're routing through your unit. Any suggestions? I'm a little confused as to the real role of archers in general...I fire at the enemy as they approach, but only deal out a few casualties, and once I engage in melee, I'm hesitant to use archers because I'll hit my own units. How should I use archers once the melee starts (assuming they're not good melee'ers like Futuuwa)?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [b

Quote[/b] ]I know everyone says bridge battles are the easiest on the defending side, and the hardest on the offense, but I think I may be fighting them badly then, because I often still have quite high casualties on bridge battles.

---

You can not fight a single bridge battle bad, its not possible. You are choosing the wrong units.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [b

Quote[/b] ]I feel like archers aren't much help, because they'll hit as many of my men on the bridge as the enemy.

---

In bridge battles, always use horse archers. They have longer range (if your archers are not longbowmen). If you can (and fighting a single bridge battle) get a siege unit like catapult. When you engage in on-bridge fight, order your horse archer to fire rear units (foot archers of the enemy; as your range will be greater)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [b

Quote[/b] ] I send my units onto the bridge when the enemy's almost over, resulting in inital success, but then i get tied up in the middle, and morale falls fast.

---

As I can understand you need some more experience on individual characteristics of units. If you send a lesser melee unit against a powerful unit, of course they will defeat you. If you send better troops, you will succeed. As a rule of thumb, good bridge warriors have to be armored, shielded and have to have good defence. For example Swiss Armored Pikemen are invincible on the bridge or a good spear-class unit will succeed as well. If I dont have any of the high-tech spearme, I use Vikings. Usually they are not reliable, but can hold the bridge very well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [b

Quote[/b] ]The only good tactic I've found is to send a good cav unit over the second bridge (if there is one) and attack from behind, but even this will leave my cav unit almost dead, because routing units deal out a LOT of casulaties for some reason, if they're routing through your unit.

---

What type of cavalry are you sending???? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...cons/dizzy.gif If a ROUTING unit KILLS the PURSUER, then you are sending sheeps to lions. Cavalry charge from the second bridge is the decisive tactic of course. It must succeed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [b

Quote[/b] ]I'm a little confused as to the real role of archers in general...I fire at the enemy as they approach, but only deal out a few casualties, and once I engage in melee, I'm hesitant to use archers because I'll hit my own units.

---

Remember what the King of England said in the Braveheart? "But I'll kill enemy units as well" http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...cons/wacko.gif

Just joking he is a bad example. Archer damage is low in the game, particularly because most units are armored and shielded, thus can block arrows. That is why your archers hit less. As I said, use horse archers and dont fire on the units on the bridge but the ones behind them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [b

Quote[/b] ]How should I use archers once the melee starts (assuming they're not good melee'ers like Futuuwa)?

---

Dont be offended but I think you are a bit new to the game. Your archers have to be protected by melee units. Dont engage archers into melee combat (you shouldnot attack straight on, even if they are futuwwas ot nizaris). INstead use horse archers so that your HAs pepper the enemy and withdraw when enemy comes near, thus will never engage in melee combat.

OK Homework: Remember which units you used in the battle? Open a cutom battle and choose one unit for you and one for the cpu. Attack head on to see what they can do on 1 to 1. Like this test every possible unit with each other with a different combination each time. This way you will learn roughly what can unit A do to unit H.

Thanks so much for the bridge help, but I'm still confused about some things. I'm not all that new to the game really, and I'm not doing terribly at all this, I just don't understand why i'm doing well at times; the stats don't add up. For example on a bridge, why would it be better to have high defense than high attack? If you have high attack (assume as high as the defense would be on a high defense unit), you kill units faster, so they don't kill you as much. With high defense, enemies can't kill you very quickly, so you have time to kill more of them. THey're essentially the same, except when you have to deal with charge values, which aren't important here, am i right? And with archers, of course I'm not just sending them into the fray, I fight melee with my melee units, I just mean, what do I do with them when the rest of my army is meleeing his army? They're just loose units, who can do little damage and will hurt my own people also...Right now all I can do is occasionally use good meleeers like Futuwwa to flank or rear attack low morale units and cause a rout. And lastly, the issue with routing units hurting my horsemen, I don't mean that I'm purusing them...I attack them in the rear, and they start running, right THROUGH my horsemen, off of the bridge, and when that happens my horsemen start to die. Try it, really. you'll see that routing units, if they run through a strong unit, do a lot of damage (though of course they get decimated too, but of course they do, because they're the ones routing). I've had high royal knights lose two units to a band of routing peasants, because I stupidly left them in the path of the routing unit. So, any more help would be appreciated http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...cons/smile.gif

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [b

Quote[/b] ]always use horse archers. They have longer range (if your archers are not longbowmen).

---

Huh??? All horse archers are listed as shortbow, all archers except longbowmen are also listed as shortbow, all archers except lbows have the exact same range. Check projectilestats.txt in the main MTW folder if you need to verify.

I use crossbows and arbalests for bridge battles. Both xbows do better against armour and are more accurate than regular sbows (crossbow 70%, arbs 75%, shortbow 60%). Spread them out a bit to the left and right of the bridge at a slight angle so they have a clear shot.

Since yer talking about Futuuwas I assume yer playing Turks. Send in Saracen Infantry to do your bridge fighting. Make sure the province you build them in has at least a mosque and some armour upgrades. Ribats give additional +2 morale and recommended. Higher morale and the troops hold out longer despite taking casualties.

Two to four artillery (catapults, demi-cannons) are very good. Sometimes the AI just lines his troops up behind the bridge and you can bowl them down by the dozen.

I'm assuming the command of both your general and the AI's are comparable in these bridge battles. If they AI has a 2+ star advantage, that is definitely going to cause you problems.

edit: I've seen routers rough up horseman who are directly to their rear. I think it has to do with the "charge-thru" bug where units seem to rack up more kills when they charge thru versus targeting a unit for attack.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [b

Quote[/b] ]For example on a bridge, why would it be better to have high defense than high attack? If you have high attack (assume as high as the defense would be on a high defense unit), you kill units faster, so they don't kill you as much. With high defense, enemies can't kill you very quickly, so you have time to kill more of them. THey're essentially the same, except when you have to deal with charge values, which aren't important here, am i right?

---

Good attack (without good defence) is not good on the bridge because usually cpu sends all his melee troops to the bridge. If you dont have good defence, after a while your good attack troops will fatigue and without good defence theyll die. It is better not to be killed than kill for bridge situations. That is why you are doing good in the beginning and fail after a while. Good charge+good attack will fail you IF the unit is bad at defence. I would prefer low charge+low attack and good defence because good defence units will succeed over the poor defence+strong charge....on bridge. And dont order attack to good defence units. They should stop on the bridge with "keep formation".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [b

Quote[/b] ]And with archers, of course I'm not just sending them into the fray, I fight melee with my melee units, I just mean, what do I do with them when the rest of my army is meleeing his army? They're just loose units, who can do little damage and will hurt my own people also...

---

Exactly. So use horse archers. If you have more melee troops you can fire right into everyone just like King of England did LOL http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...cons/joker.gif .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [b

Quote[/b] ]Right now all I can do is occasionally use good meleeers like Futuwwa to flank or rear attack low morale units and cause a rout

---

Imagine how quicker you can do that with a horse archer http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...cons/wacko.gif

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [b

Quote[/b] ]I attack them in the rear, and they start running, right THROUGH my horsemen, off of the bridge, and when that happens my horsemen start to die.I've had high royal knights lose two units to a band of routing peasants, because I stupidly left them in the path of the routing unit.

---

Whoa, peasants killing RKs? Then do this: instead of stopping, do not attack, but run you knights through the routing units, just like they do to you. And dont do this head on; run through their flank horizontally through the formation. You will see peasants going 100...59...17..0 This is the best way to capture routing units.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [b

Quote[/b] ]Huh??? All horse archers are listed as shortbow, all archers except longbowmen are also listed as shortbow, all archers except lbows have the exact same range. Check projectilestats.txt in the main MTW folder if you need to verify.

---

Yep but they are firing on a horse. My bowyers and arbalests got pretty spanked up by horse archers. while my missile units drink tea, enemy horse archers reach them from the other side. and sadly HA s are more accurate than foot missile troops. Nowadays I dont test a second time but always use horse archers and each time they prove me right. Perhaps the stats work like: (projectile range + horse)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [b

Quote[/b] ]Yep but they are firing on a horse. My bowyers and arbalests got pretty spanked up by horse archers. while my missile units drink tea, enemy horse archers reach them from the other side. and sadly HA s are more accurate than foot missile troops. Nowadays I dont test a second time but always use horse archers and each time they prove me right. Perhaps the stats work like: (projectile range + horse)

---

I gotta try the tea yer drinking. If HA's are outshooting your foot missile troops something is definitely wrong. Foot archers/xbows always do better against HAs. If HAs do get any additional range from being on a horse, it is quite minimal. As for accuracy, read projectilestats.txt, it's what the game runs from. Remeber too that many of the bridge maps have slight rises near the waters edge. If you happen to be on the side of the bridge with the lower slope, you will be at a range disadvantage. I play as Turks around 75% of the time, and I've never seen either my own or AI's HAs have any range advantage. And foot missile troops always own HAs, horses are just bigger targets and drop like flies unless they are the heavily armored variety.

For bridge battles in defence:
You want:
Lots (like 6+) of archers/crossbows/arbalesters/artillery (arbs are best http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...ns/biggrin.gif )
A few (~3 min) units with high defence. (eg saracen inf/chiv sergeants/chiv foot knights) Large unit size is also a handy factor (hence chiv foot knights is risky)
A couple of good cavalry units (depending on how big the enemy is, huge enemy = missile units are preferable)

Setup:
Place one high defence infantry unit right in front of the bridge on hold position (& where appropriate, hold formation).
Place missile units on either side of the bridge (& if you have enough, behind the bridge defender), put them as close to the water as possible, with 2 rows deep, on hold position & fire at will.
Artillery needs to be clumped together & held back far enough that the bridge is within minimum range.
Place your remaining infantry close to the bridge (for quick backup as needed) but still out of the way of the missiles.

Technique:
Remember that the enemy has to get to your side or you win.
Don't go rushing onto the bridge, wait for them to come to you.
Its really hard for the enemy to get past a unit of chiv sergeants on hold position at a bridgehead. This unit is here not to kill many enemy but to keep the enemy on the bridge to be killed by missiles.
Have your missile units selected & mass fire them at units as they get onto the bridge. On the bridge they are more compacted together so its easier to get kills (especially when there are multiple units on the bridge http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...ns/biggrin.gif ).
Rather than sticking to the front unit all the way across, generally once it is past the half way point (having recieved a couple of barrages it will be numerically & morale weak. If you have many arbs they may not even get that far http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...ns/biggrin.gif ), you will want to re-target the missiles to a new unit coming onto the bridge.
When the first unit hits your defender, just leave it & concentrate on blasting his fresh units.
Keep an eye on the bridgehead of course & send reinforcements if necessary.
Your bridgehead unit will probably start to melee onto the bridge & this is OK because it means he is winning but move up a spare infantry unit to the bridge head as soon as the bridgehead is clear.
As soon as the first couple of units retreat, pull your unit back to replace the unit you moved up.
This can be quite difficult to get right & you may well take losses from new units charging your returning unit (in this case, let your unit fight again, better to let them fight than get torn up while retreating).
You really want to avoid letting your units get onto the other side of the bridge.
When there is a really big rout, you may want to do a cavalry charge while you re-sort your bridgehead, but you always take the risk/likelyhood of having your cavalry cut off & slaughtered by the next wave.
Basically just keep on rotating the bridgehead defenders (letting them rest up) as the opportunity arises & keep shooting the thickest density of enemy on the bridge with your missiles.
Eventually they will mass rout away & you'll win http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...cons/smile.gif
It gets a bit tricky if you run out of missiles, but as long as your infantry is tough enough, you should still win through.

That last post brings up even more questions http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...s/rolleyes.gif
OK, so, how does hold formation affect melee? I know the tutorial suggests it's good for spear units, but don't spear units get their rank bonuses even if they are a little out of formation? Like when you have them charge? So what's the point then? Does it help a unit tire slower? And doesn't hold position encourage an enemy unit to recover its morale since it's not being pursued? And in general, do high defense units benefit from hold formation, and/or fare better when tired than high attack units? Sorry for all these questions, I just feel a need to understand exactly how it all works http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...cons/smile.gif

As far as I understand it, "hold formation" lowers attack and strengthens defense. A group of spearmen that is holding formation won't kill much but it won't get killed easily either. And that's exactly what you want when you're defending in a bridge battle: let your spear units hold the bridgehead with little casualties, while your arrow units are blasting away the enemy. Do *not* send your men over the bridge period, except cavalry when the enemy is routing bigtime and you want to take out their most dangerous units.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [b

Quote[/b] ]And in general, do high defense units benefit from hold formation, and/or fare better when tired than high attack units?

---

Yes, since spearmen don't kill very well in the first place. They should be used for keeping the enemy in place and out of the way of your missile units, while your attack units (ie men at arms, cavalry) should be used to flank them. In a defending bridge battle there's no need for that as usually the arrows are enough to rout the enemy. I agree again with arsse here: use arbalesters and crossbowmen instead of (horse) archers. The drawback of arbs/crossbows is that they take more time but with, say, a unit of Chivalris Sergeants holding the bridgehead without problems, time is no issue as the enemy is stuck on the bridge and you've got all the time in the world to slaughter them. High-power arb/crosbow-volleys are the way to go then. And like the others say: let your spears handle the closest units, and focus your fire on the units further back so you won't be hitting your own guys.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [b

Quote[/b] ]
I attack them in the rear, and they start running, right THROUGH my horsemen, off of the bridge, and when that happens my horsemen start to die.I've had high royal knights lose two units to a band of routing peasants, because I stupidly left them in the path of the routing unit.


Whoa, peasants killing RKs? Then do this: instead of stopping, do not attack, but run you knights through the routing units, just like they do to you. And dont do this head on; run through their flank horizontally through the formation. You will see peasants going 100...59...17..0 This is the best way to capture routing units.

---

From experience, when units rout, they enjoy the "Charge Bonus". Thus any unit that stands in their way will get severely mauled. The best way to capture the routing units would be to either go at 'em at their flank or from their rear. Head-on will reduce your men, even Royal Knights...

I've tried the bridgehead method (meet the enemy immediately after he gets off the bridge) but haven't had much success with this. The bridgehead always seems to get enlarged as the enemy pours units across. This leads to fewer targets for my xbows and renders my artillery ineffective.

I prefer to meet the enemy about halfway across. As that defender gets chewed up, i send another unit into the melee and this usually allows me to safely withdraw the depleted unit.
Cons: your men are subject to more enemy missiles fire. Pros: your missiles have better field of fire for duration of the battle, not just units crossing.

Also, if you don't have arbs (only as merc for turks) then your crossbows are going to be outranged by enemy arbs. Set your crossbows in loose formation, 3-deep. All 3 ranks can fire in loose, and you gain +1 armour as your men gain more room to dodge arrows/bolts, so at least you lower the attrition on your crossbows.

Hold formation: +2 defense, -2 attack

According to strat guide there is a +5 to hit if the target has insufficient space to fight (like gate and bridge battles)

Spearmen should almost always be in hold formation. They only gain their rank bonuses in this mode. If in engage at will they will not work to support each other (i.e. no rank bonuses). Over a long combat the formation has a tendency to become disordered and the effects of the rank bonus are reduced (if you don't see 2nd and 3rd rank spears going through combat animation, you aren't getting supporting rank bonus). The exception to spears in hold formation is in the woods since they lose rank bonus anyway, best to have them on engage at will, but spears really aren't meant for the woods, just like cav.

Like what arrrse says, use the bridge head technique to get the battle over with a lot faster. The safer method is of course to fight a battle on the bridge but this does not really give you, the defender, as much of a significant advantage as the one arrrse suggests.

Consider this, a bridge-head technique involves letting 1 or may be 2 of the attacker's units to face up to at least 3-4 of your defending units. It requires careful placement of troops and this can be done prior to commencment of battle.

Secondly, as the attacker seeks to enlarge his bridgehead ( which would be rather difficult if you had done the above well), he would keep pourong men onto the bridge, aiming to ruck and maul his line across. This is when your missile units get clear line of fire onto the mass of men on the bridge. If all were to concentrate their fire, the units will break. Thereafter, the cav will do the task of pursuit.

I think that the Bridgehead Technique is more efficient in concluding the battle. It is also more technical as it requires comprehensive knowledge of your units' performance and placement.

Fighting on the bridge itself merely concedes the real advantage of defense. Both sides will be on equal footing and all that remains is who brought the best combo of men.

OT but relevant...

There was a River Battle in Ancient China. The Attacking army was across the river, in preparations to cross. The Defending General was urged by his subordinates to launch an assault on the enemy lines, ie to cross the river himself; He declined.

Next, the Attacker had the head of his troops in the water. Again his subordinates urged him to strike now as the enemy would be bogged down in the river. Again he declined.

However, as the Attacker came out of the river, the subordinates took the opportunity to impress upon the Defending General that now was the time to strike. Again, he declined.

As the Attacker arrayed his men on the Defending side of the river. The Defending General launched a full assault on the Attacker. This ultimately led to a rout on the Attacker side.

The moral...

When the Attacker is not yet across, it is foolish to cross over and attack him.

When the Attacker is crossing, attacking him merely forces him back. It does not undo him.

When the Attacker is just across, with half his troops on one side and the other in the river, this is the best time to strike.

I also suggest letting the attacker get over to your side before crushing them.

Watch how the men pour off the bridge. They're clumped together on the bridge, and as they leave, they spread out. That's when you want to hit them - they're not in formation, the unit isn't fully assembled, and if two or more units are charging across at the same time, everything is badly mixed up.

The moment you see a situation like that, don't hit the enemy head on. Use a spear unit to stop the enemy from advancing, and then another two units to maul their flanks. Now, no matter how many men the enemy sends across you will ALWAYS hit them in their flanks. There's just not enough time for the enemy to even gather their units in formation, let alone wriggle out of your box.

The first few enemy units may rout, which means they'll get tangled with the advancing units behind, which slows the advance even more... which gives your archers good targets.

Rowan...

I like to create an arc around the bridge, out of enemy range so their archers must cross over to do me harm. When they send their horse/foot over, they can't do so in great numbers and all my archers get a lot of shots. When they exit the bridge they usually go into loose formation while waiting for their entire unit to cross. More shots. Then they have to advance to my lines, which are in bow range but not particularly close. More shots. It's a rare unit that doesn't take 30-50% losses before I send my units to meet them.

They'll keep trying to cross more units and my archers can target those while my fighters take on those already crossed. Since my units are in an arc, I can often get flank attacks as well as frontal. Once one enemy starts to flee, they're all so close that their morale is badly affected. It generally starts a mass retreat.

At that point, I recall my troops to their original line, and wait to do it again with whatever they send over. Eventually, they'll send their general unit. Try hard to surround this one and kill/capture the general. That pretty much decides the battle for you. Then, when they rout, THAT"S when I send my cavalry in pursuit, to keep them running. If they get reinforced, I just recall my cav to my side of the bridge and wait their crossing for more of the same.

I also wrote a bit in the mongol thread on dealing with their large armies in a bridge battle. Some of that might be of interest to you.

http://www.totalwar.org/cgi-bin....5;st=25

Olé. What is important is Arbs positionning. I've read 4 different, who all seem effective.

Vee(mine) :

========================||============================
\ /
\ /
\ /
\/

Circle(aforementioned) : same as Vee, just a half-circle instead. More elegant, but more difficult to set up.

Line :
========================||============================



------------

good only with good ground troops on the side, nearby the river. Very efficient, but risky, and needs perfect execution.

greeting column :

========================||============================
| |
| |
| |
| |

pro : exterminates whoever exits the bridge.
cons : friendly fire risk, not much attrition on the bridge.

I agree with arrrse, don't let them off the bridge. Arbs on the riverbank flanking a spear unit in 'Hold Position' mode. Works every time, with huge casualties on the enemy side. I place the spear unit right to the edge of the bridge so the enemy can't get off. I've tried creating a 'killing ground' with three units, but the enemy started spilling out of it and harrassing the arbs, so I gave that up.

The arc suggested by ShaiHulud is my most common bridge defence. The first time I saw it mentioned was a post by Solypsist...might still be around, pretty pictures an everything http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...cons/smile.gif Check ToC or maybe do a search. Lemme see if I can give the gist of it.

x a a x
v v v
a x x a
a x x a
_


a=archer
v=spear
x=melee (swords militia halbs...etc)

Let enemy cross, all the while peppering them with archers. As soon as they get across, sandwich them with melee units or let them engage the spears, then crunch them. Once melee is about to be joined, redirect archers to new unit.

This places your troops back from river a lil; may save some losses to missle fire. Easier to keep your guys off the bridge http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...cons/smile.gif I hope thats reasonably clear http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...ns/biggrin.gif

Just to say, I forgot to add in my schemes, have several footmen just behind your arbs, and make them charge as soon as the enemy pops from the bridge. The enemy is weakened, tired, and unorganized, so that's usuall a slaughter. Then bring your men back, so that your arbs have again a clear LOS. Rinse & repeat.

Of course, you don't need that if you have archers, or if there is such a slope that your arbs can shoot over your men's heads. In both cases, having troops before shooters is good.

GAH

Vanya sez...

1. Put chiv sergeant on hold/hold at mouth of bridge. Practically nobody will get through, as most of its attrition will come from enemy fire anyways. Rotate units in and out of plug duty as needed. (So make sure you have several. Halbardiers are also ok here, but them be best set to attack the closet pig, which means they slowly push the enemy back across the bridge.

2. If have 2nd bridge, send cav raid across it once enemy is engaged. Sweep behind enemy and attack from other end of bridge Result: total liquidation of enemy manpower Of course, youz have to wait until you sap enough strength from the foe so he doesn't try to intercept your raiding party.

Works for Vanya... could work for youz... or maybe it already does...

GAH

This is probably repeating what everyone already said but....


Have at least 2 units of Spear-Type stuff. The heavier the better. Put them both OFF the bridge and diaganolly facing the bridge landing. When the enemy reaches the grass on your side of the bridge CHARGE him with BOTH of those spear units. The sandwich attack will smash his bridgehed and you'll probably kill most of his unit. When you're pushing him back pull ONE unit of spears back and have the other group keep fighting on the bridge.

Now, all the while this is happening you have Missile Units to the left and right of the bridge and another Missile unit facing the bridge directly behind your spears. Have all of these guys shoot the hell out of the enemy that is crossing. If you have Arbs or Xbows make them be on the sides and put Archers behind. Your missile troops will slaughter the enemy in droves and you will hit your own men. But, for every man of yours you kill with an arrow you will probably kill 10 of theirs, so don't worry about it.

Also, only have one unit on the bridge preferably. There is a MINUS combat modifier for troops being squeezed together too close with other friendly's (mostly only happens in Castle gates and bridges). So let the Ai pile his men together. They fight less effectively, they are big juicy arrow targets (almost every arrow will hit a man - its practically impossible to miss) and as well as being close together a HUGE chain rout often happens. So have fun on those bridges.

If there are two bridges, instead of sending JUST cav (if you have the time) send a couple foot melee units across. Hopefully you can have your Cavalry slaughter and chase around their archers while your other foot units try to Push onto the bridge from the enemy side. This way the enemy is TRAPPED. When they start to rout (and they will quite fast) you will kill EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM thats on the bridge. Its beautiful to see. I got 4,600 kills against the French, wiping out their entire Royal Family this way with an army made up of only

one unit Chivalric Footknights (my prince)
one unit Chivalric Knights (my King)
2 Units Feudal Sergeants
1 unit Spearmen
2 units Urban Militia.
3 units Archers.

When you stop the enemy in melee have a line of crossbowmen or arbs on each side of the bridge as close as possible. Splat. You will take out 10+ heavily armoured enemy with each salvo at the very least.

Wow. OK thanks guys, I think I'm starting to get it now. But although I definitely understand archer use on bridge battles now, how about in regular battles? I know this is sort of remedial, but I just can't find much use for them once the battle lines meet and it's all melee... Is there a way to avoid friendly fire for the most part and still kill lots of the enemy? Should I move my archers to a different position? Should I start them out far ahead of my army, and gradually draw them back (especially with mounted archers i guess)? As it stands I have no problem going entirely without archers into battle.

GAH

I think Vanya got it right, and Storyteller hit and important point.

I set my heaviest spears at the mouth of the bridge. I let the enemy off just a little bit, so I can surround them
SSSSSS
__EESSS
SSSSS

GAH

I think Vanya got it right, and Storyteller hit an important point.

I set my heaviest spears at the mouth of the bridge. I let the enemy off just a little bit, so I can surround them. The enemy is not in formation and you have them flanked and outnumbered at the point of conflict.

Use the archers/x-bows despite the friendly fire, it reduces morale.

It is important to rotate fresh troops into the battle and replace tired guys - don't just send em in and keep em fightin until they rout. Mix a professional unit- a sword type in your defence.

Once the archers are out of ammo, rank them 4 deep and move them close to the battle (may help with the outnumbered modifier). If necessary use them in short burst charging into the melee - back them out almost instantly. Do the same with any cav.

In open field battles, use the archers on the advancing troops. It seems necessary to have some archers (or xbows or arbs or whatever), then pull back behind your melee troops. When out of ammo, put the archers in wedge and use them to either flank the enemy or attack the enemy archers.

An alternative is to use the archers to block a flank attempt by the enemy - this is usually suicide for the archers but may buy you some time.

BTW, any foot archer will beat cav archer in even battle - horses are big targets

ichiRW

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [b

Quote[/b] (Rowan11088 @ Sep. 29 2003,18:01)]Wow. OK thanks guys, I think I'm starting to get it now. But although I definitely understand archer use on bridge battles now, how about in regular battles? I know this is sort of remedial, but I just can't find much use for them once the battle lines meet and it's all melee... Is there a way to avoid friendly fire for the most part and still kill lots of the enemy? Should I move my archers to a different position? Should I start them out far ahead of my army, and gradually draw them back (especially with mounted archers i guess)? As it stands I have no problem going entirely without archers into battle.

---

Out in the field, on Defense its simple.

Just put your archers behind your men and preferably on a higher elevation. They'll fire over your guys.

On attack, its a lot more difficult to use archers. They're useful, but they certainly won't do as well on defense. If the enemy has very few archers and you're attacking, a good strategy is just to get close to his lines, set up a line of melee troops, and start pelting him with arrows. If you have way more archers than he does he's gonna have to charge you or his men will die faster than yours. When he rushes you then you send your troops into his.

When the battle is joined, have your archers fire at enemy units that aren't mixed in with yours yet. If you have Crossbows or Arbalests, try to run them around to the enemy's flank or rear and fire directly at his troops. They won't hit your men. Archer arrows arc, crossbow and arbalest bolts fly pretty much straight.


With mounted archers:

On defense: Start them out wayyyyy ahead of your lines. Harass his troops the whole time he approaches you. Avoid getting in shootouts with enemy missile troops b/c you will lose. Try to keep them behind enemy lines. If the enemy sends his missile troops after you, have your horse archers lure them away from his main force and then attack them hand to hand. Usually you will crush them.

When the big battle starts send your horse archers in the rear to go chop up the enemy archers and siege weapons etc. They can also fire to good effect into the enemy's rear.



But the thing to keep in mind is not to worry too much about hitting your own men. Your archers usually hit the enemy more than they hit your guys so it all works out for the most part. Even when you're killing more of your own men than the enemy's it can still be good to fire.

For example, pin an enemy expensive unit in place (like his King) with peasants. The peasants will keep him occupied while your archers all unload on him. More arrows will hit peasants than knights but hey, you got 5 times more peasants than he has knights.


I hope this all helped.

Personally, I almost never use Xbow and Arbalest troops because I don't like how they take forever to reload and can't shoot past your own men. Good arrow troops always help me out better.

With Xbows and Arbalests you usually need to put them in front of your lines or on the flanks and have them retreat when the enemy gets too close.

Thanks a ton Hamburglar, that's exactly what i needed. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...cons/smile.gif
I'm out of questions for now then http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/eek.gif
Thx for helping out a clueless demi-n00b.

Rowan....

A valuable point to remember is that arrows show no deference to valor. A 6 valor enemy unit may well chop an opposing unit to bits in hand-to-hand, but, when arrows fly, it's only armor that counts. Once the battle lines are met, count flags and pick your targets for your archers. Zero in on his most dangerous. Units taking losses from arrows suffer additional morale loss, too. Your last arrow might be the one that cause them to rout.

^
|
Hadn't thought of counting flags to find targets http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...icons/idea.gif
I generally just pick the nastiest unit (an entirely subjective choice) that is in range.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [b

Quote[/b] ]From experience, when units rout, they enjoy the "Charge Bonus"

---

Hmmm I guess that must be right.
Certainly something like that.
This can be seen in many combats where one side is surrounded by a superior army.
Fighting around the perimeter the defenders will lose through attrition at the least.
So to avoid certain death (& thus no fear of dying in the attempt), a concentrated attack on one small section of the encirclement will often break through.
The router is desperate to get away so they get a bonus to help them do it.

We have two different versions of the bridge defence being put forward here:
Allow a bridgehead then envelop -'bridgehead'
Deny a bridgehead outright -'blocker'

I prefer the 'blocker'.
I've lost too many men on long bridge battles with the bridgehead.

Relative downsides of Bridgehead:[*]Needs at least 3 units in combat simultaneously[*]Your flankers become vulnerable to flanking by enemy reinforcement (unless you did it perfectly with just the right amount of v)[*]Possibility of strong bridgehead & not being able to force them back.[*]Lose the 'tight space' disadvantage for the enemy[*]Forces missile units further away from the bridge[*]Difficult to sustain for long battles[/list]
Relative upsides to Blocker:[*]Virtually impossible to get past a 5-6 deep Chiv Sergeants unit right up against the bridge[*]Missile units can be placed closer to the bridge so get better density of fire on the bridge[*]No problems with reinforcements[*]Blocker unit has more blades to bear since enemy has perimeter only as wide as the bridge & suffers from 'tight space'[*]Only one unit in melee at a time allowing easier unit rotation/lower attrition (especially useful for the long battles)[/list]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [b

Quote[/b] ]how does hold formation affect melee?

---

As has been said previously, all spears should be on hold formation almost all the time.
Given that, hold Position is more important here as that adds more to the defence bonus (& takes away more attack, but the point is the higher defence) = more ability to hold back the enemy.
Spears should be on hold position most of the time too btw.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [b

Quote[/b] ]doesn't hold position encourage an enemy unit to recover its morale since it's not being pursued?

---

Not chasing across the bridge after routing enemy does indeed allow them to reform & attack again, but (on a bridge battle) I prefer to fend off 5-6 increasingly feeble attacks (the later ones may not even get within bow shot before routing) from one unit before it finally routs (some even get obliterated by massed arb fire http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...ns/biggrin.gif )over sending a unit or two across to chase & then loosing them to enemy reinforcements before I can retreat them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [b

Quote[/b] ]With Xbows and Arbalests you usually need to put them in front of your lines or on the flanks and have them retreat when the enemy gets too close.

---

I have no such trouble. I use mine in two rows deep sitting behind spears & still get plenty of kills.
On the flat its best to increase the spacing between the units to allow room for the flatter arc to clear the units in front.

Well I've learnt from this thread too http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...cons/smile.gif

Benefits of Bridgehead:

When you charge the enemy unit with 3 of yours at the same time from 3 angles he often breaks and routs right then. Then you chase him onto the bridge with one of your units and form the Blocker Strategy. Its basically just a really easy way to kill the first enemy unit or two that crosses.

You don't really need to keep your archers back anyway. If I have 3 Archers, I put one to the left, one to the right, and one on the hill directly behind the bridge. Your own units don't really force them out at all.

X= Enemy unit as it hits the bridge head
Sp-Spears
M-Melee
Ar-Archers

-------------| |---------------------
-------------| |---------------------
-------------| |---------------------
-------------| |---------------------
ArM X MAr
(SP)
AR
See: The archers pound the hell out of the enemy unit as hes running across the bridge and the moment he gets onto the grass the Spear rushes him from the front and the melee units (swordsman, militia, clansmen, ghazis, whatever) Slams him from both sides. Sometimes there are two enemy units smushed up on the bridgehead. Typically the enemy will rout within seconds and then you have your spears chase him and your Melee units (they can be spears even if you want) pull back. I have the Archers set farther back if the enemy has more missile troops than me.

I can't get them to line up completely right in the picture but you get the idea.

for me, defending a bridge depends on the number of bridges to be defended.

two bridges; i adopt an ordinary defencive layout, as you would on a normal battlefield, i just make sure that it is as far away from the bridges as possible and in the highest position i can get to.

the enemy will cross, but by the time they reach me they are going to be real tired climbing to my lines.

the enemy will also be broken up to a degree, allowing me to just focus everything on them.

lastly, if i have reserves the withdrawing units don`t have far to go and reinforcement will arrive at my lines pronto. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...icons/cool.gif

one bridge; i always use the Blocker, it requires less maintenance and i get to focus all my archers on the units stuck on the bridge, just keep feeding spearmen into the fray on the bridge to keep them pinned.

accept the casulties from friendly fire, it goes with the job.

don`t underestimate having a couple of catapults when defending, don`t fire them at the bridge fire at the units to the rear to lower morale and disrupt their formations. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...ns/biggrin.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...icons/wave.gif

If they have two bridges, often the enemy AI is too stupid to cross both of them. Mass all your men at one bridge and they will attack only that bridge 90% of the time. If you put guys at the other bridge they will go over there to mee them often so watch out.

Best way is to fight them on the one bridge and when the battle is heavy and fierce then send your Cavalry and fast infantry across the other bridge to slam into the rear.

Ok for an example of how to defend a bridge from attack... check out this replay.

Bridge Defence Replay

That should teach you the basics of how to effectively whoop ass on a bridge http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...ns/biggrin.gif

I have a specific question on the Historical Battle of Stamford Bridge. The one where the English force marched north, and are tired out from the start and have to defend against 3 armies of vikings.

HOW? I have tried and tried the bridge defenses mentioned here and either I run out of time and lose, get creamed and lose, or MAYBE rout them all but because they killed so many of my men I lose on valor points.

Any tips for me other than what's been given so far?
Thanks.

Actually I very much use archers in the "longshanks role", the enemy tends to have no problems with it why should I. I'm usually sending the arrows in to hand to hand as there are the tighter formation making them that bit easier and as they are too busy fighting hand to hand they struggle to defend themselves properly. Of course, by targeting the troops towards the rear of the melee as you will quite often find, with the exception of the enemies archers will all be clambering onto the bridge.

Well aimed salvos on the rear units will cause causalties on them and simultaneously take out troops from several units at once. Great at whittling down the bogged up enemy.

Defender should be able to destroy the bridge with culverins.

Never overlook the effectiveness of 1 or more Organ Guns on a bridge defence. The routs can be spectacular http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...ns/biggrin.gif

Ouchhhhhh... YESSSS Hahahahahahahaha http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...ns/biggrin.gif

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [b

Quote[/b] (Vanya @ Sep. 29 2003,10:12)]GAH

Vanya sez...

1. Put chiv sergeant on hold/hold at mouth of bridge. Practically nobody will get through, as most of its attrition will come from enemy fire anyways. Rotate units in and out of plug duty as needed. (So make sure you have several. Halbardiers are also ok here, but them be best set to attack the closet pig, which means they slowly push the enemy back across the bridge.

2. If have 2nd bridge, send cav raid across it once enemy is engaged. Sweep behind enemy and attack from other end of bridge Result: total liquidation of enemy manpower Of course, youz have to wait until you sap enough strength from the foe so he doesn't try to intercept your raiding party.

Works for Vanya... could work for youz... or maybe it already does...

GAH

---

Tremendous advice from Vanya...
Let them have the bridge, the bridge is a killing zone so let them be the ones who die. Plugging the end ( your end ) with one unit on hold/hold will hold the enemy for ages and your units will be mostly out of range. His however, are just targets for your ranged units. Have your h2h units ready to take over the holding job and send them in one at a time as required.

I used three Saracen infantry units this way...hehe unfortunately I had no cav and there was no second bridge but we held an army that outnumbered us 10 to 1....routed in the end but there were precious few left of the enemy

....Orda

How about offensive bridge battles? I usually try and lure the enemy across by sending out a sacrificial lamb like crossbows or HA's, hope the enemy charges, then hightail it back to my side with spears ready to charge onto the bridge (the enemy usually stops their charge and begins to withdraw before fully crossing). Have missile troops up against riverbank to enfilade bridge.

Hell, make your sacrificial lamb something cheaper than that. I prefer peasants. Let the enemy chase them and then have your archers shoot the hell out of the enemy. Rally the peasants and repeat.

ArchLight, I played Stamford Brige last night and went on the offensive. (I believe the English are the attacker). I began the assault with whatever troops were not exhausted and brought the others across as they got one or two bars. The Vikings didn't fight together and took awhile to get organized so I was able to beat each army in detail. I concentrated on routing each of the three generals and after that most of their army would break.

Not a whole lot left to fight the Normans though.

I should probably point out that I play on max unit size.

When using the bridgehead technique, I often found that the furthest third or so of archer units would be out of range of the bridge or would only be in range of the close half of the bridge.

By using the blocker strategy, I can get them all to fire at the far end of the bridge & thus get an extra full salvo or two in before they hit the blocker.

Arrse:

I modded the game for every unit to be doublesize (I wanted Royals to be twice as big too, not just 20 guys) and I never really have a problem with the archers in the bridgehead strategy.

Ah, so it is possible to go on the offensive and win with that one. Sounds tough to do though I'll try it. Thanks DojoRat.

put your archers on fire at will and they will fire at clear targets. Targets specific units and they will shoot regardless of the danger of friendly fire. so once melee is in full swing cancel all specific targets to minimise friendly fire. unless there is a unit that you really what to shred regardless of friendly targets.

When I attack a bridge I figure that the units most dangerous to me are the missiles, followed by the spears.

I usually attack with two stacks:
Army 1: Two Pike Units -- One to guard the bridge and one to guard the flanks if there is a second bridge. The rest an even mix of Pavise Arbs and Longbows. I first clear out the missiles by sending moving my longbows and P-arbs close in, as soon as a missile unit moves in range to fire I put all of my fire on it, and it falls back, repeat as needed. Then I can focus on the infantry. I move the P-Arbs up onto the bridge, and put the longbows on the banks. As an enemy unit moves in I hit it with all my missiles. It wears them down. I advance and retreat one missile unit across the bridge, with all the others on standby to fire. As soon as the enemy unit gets in range I hit it with everything that I have. I stop the retreating unit and let it fire into the enemy too. This chews up a lot of enemy units pretty badly. I try to group my missile units so they run out of ammo in little bunches, as soon as they do I send them off and bring on reinforcements. Eventually I have a full compliment of horse and infantry on the field. I break off the cav and ride it around to the second bridge and get it across, once it is across, or about to be engaged I send all the infantry across the first bridge. It works pretty well. Casualties are a little higher than I would like, but that's the danger of attacking a bridge province.