Crossbows vs. Arbalasters

[Knight of the Rose]

Dear all,

In the vanilla MTW:VI I never seem to progress from, both Crossbows and Arbalasters come into play at high. And I just never seem to use anything but the arbs. I know that you need a higher level building, but besides that the cost of arbs vs. cbws is pretty much the same.

Once, somewhere, I read that arbs was considered to only come online in late. That would definately make me use the cbws, but now they just seem a foolish invenstment.

Have I missed some points on crossbow usage? And are the arbs just overpowered?

/KotR

[Raz]

There was a debate on this before a while back... I don't think I was even registered then. But it ended with arbs not being powerful enough compared to crossbows. I think the difference in lethality (projectile_stats.txt) is only very slight in vanilla...

All I can remember is that the MedMod made missile troops much more balanced compared to vanilla's... and thanks for waking up these forums... they've had a bit of a nap recently.

[DaVega]

Well I use the xbows and the arbs next to each-other, and I can't find much differences between them! ;) So for me, it doesn't matter which one I use, as long as the unit is available to me in a particular province!

[CBR]

Arbalesters have slightly better accuracy, penetrate armour a bit better, 20% higher range and 25% higher lethality and does 50% more HP damage (meaning killing generals faster)while having the same reload rate as crossbows.

So they have some clear improvements over crossbows while not having any disadvantages except costing slightly more to buy but still having same upkeep.


CBR

[I of the Storm]

Sounds like a tricky decision then...

tbh, I didn't know they were that much better. I always thought their main advantage was their longer range.

[Vladimir]

Arbalesters have slightly better accuracy, penetrate armour a bit better, 20% higher range and 25% higher lethality and does 50% more HP damage (meaning killing generals faster)while having the same reload rate as crossbows.

So they have some clear improvements over crossbows while not having any disadvantages except costing slightly more to buy but still having same upkeep.


CBR

Exactly. How can you not use them? Do you want to be outranged by your enemy?

[OmarPacha]

Arbs are obviously the best choice either for range as for armour piercing rate and there aren't valuable differences in hiring and maintenance cost with crossbows.
The point is that to be able to train arbalesters from the start, we should remember to build a castle and a bowyer's guild before the High period comes and many of us might find not so convenient to allocate money for buidings that should be of no use for years. Much better is, in my advice too, training further units to strenghten weak (sea or land) positions.
No doubt that this kind of choice depends much from how many opposite factions we have at the moment and how difficult is the campaign we are playing, but mainly speaking, we approach High period by replacing archers with Xbows.
So, the real question is if the cost to replace crossbows with arbs (disband + train new unit) is worth the progress we make in terms of killing chances.
I say, maybe not; I find that in battle Xbows can easily shorten the distance from enemy lines and that in a frontal fight with arbs, the lesser rate of armour piercing should not make a great difference; but that's only my humble opinion.

[macsen rufus]

Quite agree with CBR - Arbs FTW

The only advantage Xbows have is lower tech requirements, to my mind. I generally try to have at least one bowyer's guild ready before High, but generally also have a handful of workshops too, at least to get Xbows out there in a pinch.

One final detail is the Arbs have a very slightly longer range than Pav Arbs - maybe a few yards, that's all - just enough to make a difference on a particularly wide river. I've had occasions where my pav arbs couldn't reach the enemy even when they were getting their feet wet, but moving plain arbs into the same position made them reachable.

[drone]

Arbalests have longer range (120 vs 100 meters), better accuracy (0.75 vs 0.7), better lethality (1.25 vs 1), more damage (power, 3 vs 2), and better armor penetration (0.3 multiplier vs 0.4).

I vaguely remember reading something about arbalests not being affected as much by rain (steel strings), but I don't see anything about that in the projectilestats.txt file. Not sure if this is true in the game.

One final detail is the Arbs have a very slightly longer range than Pav Arbs - maybe a few yards, that's all - just enough to make a difference on a particularly wide river. I've had occasions where my pav arbs couldn't reach the enemy even when they were getting their feet wet, but moving plain arbs into the same position made them reachable.

Not really sure why that would matter, they use the same weapon. Maybe it's the physical positioning of the men with the pavise that keeps the model back a little.