Multiple bridge battle defeat

**_Tristan_** · 08-13-2009, 11:19

Bridge battles should mostly be fought if you're defending...

If you are on the offensive like it seems here, they are much harder as you have to either lure the enemy to your side or cross and bring the fight to their side.

The best way to defend in a bridge battle is to create a "pocket" where the AI can disgorge its troops but cannot deploy effectively.

This is done by placing your infantry (spears or swords) in a U-shape around the base of the bridge on your side.
Placing your archers on both sides of that U so that they can shoot on the massed enemy on the bridge.

Keeping your cav at the back to reinforce any breach in the U

**Vladimir** · 08-13-2009, 16:13

True. The pocket formation is the most effective for bridge battles. Try to arrange your troops where you can sneak a small unit behind the enemy once the bulk of their forces leave the bridge. Flanking is still an important part of bridge battles.

**desdichado** · 08-14-2009, 01:29

Thanks for the replies guys - I was actually on the defensive when the besiged force sallied forth.

Akka - you are correct. I started a new campaign and in a few siege battles I threw all my men into the breach. Was interesting as I could actually watch the ebb and flow as the enemies initial charge was slowed, stopped and then reversed as I brought more men into the fray.

I think your point about the extra movement is also valid as the cav on both sides seem to be moving quite oddly in these big all in brawls. Still not sure what to make of them as they are hardly tactically interesting but actually quite fun to watch now I know to throw everybody into the mix. Although I did have time to pull some men from one flank to the other to shore up a hole that was forming which was a pleasing result.

Coming from MTW I held my troops in reserve and used them to plug gaps when the line got thinned. That’s what was getting me killed in M2TW.

I still think bridge battles are a bit silly but again I think I am better off to let the enemy spill out off the bridge and trap them as per suggestions above – this should negate their “push” effect I hope.

Thanks for the advice - I've started a new campaign but I may go back to an earlier save in the previous campaign to try a what if scenario.

Cheers

**gardibolt** · 08-14-2009, 19:32

With the passive AI, attacking on a bridge is pretty simple. You just put crossbowmen in the middle of the bridge and annihilate the AI's troops on the far end, as they sit there and take it. Eventually you cut them down small enough that by the time you run out of arrows and bolts, even a small infantry or cavalry can rout them.

**FactionHeir** · 08-14-2009, 20:47

What the other posters said. In a bridge battle in RTW/M2TW, never just place your units right at the bridge exit as that will get them killed within seconds, regardless if against infantry or cavalry.

Let the enemy spill out a bit, in fact, creating a large and wide pocket rather than a narrow one around the bridge exit is an even better idea as the enemy exhausts very quickly in a large mass all running like headless chicken towards you. This also lets you plug holes more effectively and give you the advantage of using your archers to a greater effect without causing too many FF casualties. In fact, letting the enemy spill out lets you double flank them with your cavalry to devastating effect on enemy morale.

As usual, don't forget flaming arrows.

Just as an aside, back when I played MTW I noticed that if you have a unit somewhere, it cannot be pushed away at all without being annihilated. This has since been changed with RTW and thus M2TW (which builds on RTW's engine) in that pushing is very much possible but will have a detrimental effect on your individual unit cohesion and stamina. Also, units at the front end of the push will often die even without attack anims simply due to the huge mass of it all - think of suffocating.

**Ashen** · 08-28-2009, 14:54

Don't forget that Cavalry get an initial charge bonus. After that, if they're stuck in stand up combat, they're not likely to move forwards in any sense unless they're up against peasants or (some) archers. Personally I like getting a few cheap hard hitting but expandable units accross first - Pilgrims for example, as Sicily I managed to get a crusade declared against Venice - to soften them up first, put their formation out a bit, then come in behind with swords/dismounted knights for the final push.

Seige weapons would also be your friend here I think.