Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: Unit sizes&deployment

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Member Member Woreczko's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    deep province in Masovia
    Posts
    121

    Default

    What are your favourite unit sizes and deployment (number of ranks, formation, etc.)

    Personally, after some modding I play (on huge unit sizes) with:
    Archers - 60 men, 3 ranks deep.
    Cavalry - 40 men, 2 ranks deep - mounted archers, elite units
    - 60 men, 3 ranks - ordinary melee cavalry
    - 80 men, 4 ranks - I plan to put some trash cavalry in here.
    Melee Infantry - 120 men, 6 ranks - most units
    - 200 men, 10 ranks - trash units, spearmen with 4+ supporting rank
    javelins- 80 men, 4 ranks.

    Btw: Anyone know, how does number of ranks affect unit performance (other than spearmen rank bonus) in game mechanics (if there are any special effects)?

    Edit: fixed bolding for 'javelins' - Gregoshi




  2. #2
    Senior Member Senior Member katank's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Cambridge, MA, USA
    Posts
    3,739

    Default

    archers get accuracy penalty for 3 ranks+ so I usually keep em in 2.

    pikers get more supporting ranks than spear and need about 6 ranks to be fully effective IIRC.

    longer front also allows the unit to wrap around the enemy's flanks.

    ie. the enemy spears in 4 rans mean 25 men front while your MAA in 2 ranks have 30 men, which means the extra few guys can wrap around and disrupt the spear formation, making them break faster.

    I almost always use swords in 2 and cav in 1 rank.

    put them in wedge, maneuver, then slam into a flank and hit close to unfurl the gorgeous length which almost invaribaly fully envelops the suckers.

  3. #3
    Member Member Woreczko's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    deep province in Masovia
    Posts
    121

    Default

    Yes, that is a good argument, that longer front, less ranks, allows you to wrap around enemies flanks. However I find such deployment somewhat clumsy on a battlefield and, I guess, units in 1 or 2 ranks may easily get disordered. Anyway, I never played MP, and unit guide supports your opinion... I`ll have to try these overstreched units.

  4. #4
    Senior Member Senior Member katank's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Cambridge, MA, USA
    Posts
    3,739

    Default

    well, I always maneuver in wedge.

    wedge allows flanking cav/swords to turn on a dime and also hit harder in the charge.

    switching to close then gives wrap effect.

    optimal is punching clean through the enemy on the charge with wedge and then subsequent wrap around flanks which spells instant rout for most enemy units.

  5. #5
    Member Member Ragss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Edmonton, AB, Canada
    Posts
    210

    Default

    usually 2.5 rows for archers, 4.5 for spears, the rest is subjective...
    To win without risk is to have victory without glory.

  6. #6
    Member Member Drake's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    95

    Default

    Infantry units like Janissary Heavy Infantry or Chivalric Men-At-Arms gain from having deep ranks as it gives a small morale boost. By having deeper ranks the ones at the front have less chance to flee in terror so kinda get pushed on the enemy. Deeper ranks therefore equal braver troops, though to be fair the ones at the front don't really have a choice.

    Chivalric Man-At-Arms #1 (Percy) - Why am I going first?

    Chivalric Man-At-Arms #2 (Crawford) - Cause you've got a sword at your back now chargeeeeee

  7. #7
    Senior Member Senior Member katank's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Cambridge, MA, USA
    Posts
    3,739

    Default

    well, that's only for a eating a cav charge.

    I rarely let my swords get charged by cav.

    I prefer the normal formation of rank 2 and change for swords.

    if the cav is charging, I would sometimes make a wedge and counter charge then switch to close to flank the cav.

    this is crazy but it occasionally works.

    I think hold hold does a lot more than deep ranks.

    you can use swords as spears for pinning if using hold hold

  8. #8
    Arrogant Ashigaru Moderator Ludens's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    9,063
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] (Drake @ May 26 2004,14:19)]Infantry units like Janissary Heavy Infantry or Chivalric Men-At-Arms gain from having deep ranks as it gives a small morale boost. By having deeper ranks the ones at the front have less chance to flee in terror so kinda get pushed on the enemy. Deeper ranks therefore equal braver troops, though to be fair the ones at the front don't really have a choice.
    Unit morale is calculated on unit-basis and not on soldier-basis, so the front ranks will keep fighting as long as overall morale is OK. Because of this I don't see any special virtue in your tactic.

    A wide front means a better charge, more chance of wrapping around an enemy formation and simply more swords in the fight. You only want deep formations if your formation stands a chance of being scattered, like by a cavalry charge.
    There is another bonus to a deep formation: in a deep formation only the front rank fights, so the unit tires less. The effects of fatigue are calculated too on unit basis, so it means that the men in front will keep fighting even though they should be exhausted (while the men in the back get tired while just standing there and doing nothing). And the reduced fatigue also makes the fatigue penalty for morale less.

    But whether the effect is enough to compensate for the reduced combat ability of the unit (less men are effectively fighting) ?
    Looking for a good read? Visit the Library!

  9. #9
    Senior Member Senior Member katank's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Cambridge, MA, USA
    Posts
    3,739

    Default

    I still like very long formations as the disruption if you can wrap around the flanks is invaluable and while have staying power if you can beat them outright?

  10. #10
    Member Member Woreczko's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    deep province in Masovia
    Posts
    121

    Default

    Well, at least from historical point of view and regarding infantry, deeper formation allowed you to concentrate more strength in one place. The visual effect was that the side, which deployed deeper (to a reasonable extend of course) could simply push back their enemies, disrupt their formation in the process and force them to retreat.

  11. #11
    Senior Member Senior Member katank's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Cambridge, MA, USA
    Posts
    3,739

    Default

    game mechanics seem to make longer wrapping lines better though as the few men wrapped around get flank attack and also disrupt the formation even better.

    wedge and then wrap results in a mauled enemy formation and frequently routs them close to instantly.

  12. #12
    Member Member Woreczko's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    deep province in Masovia
    Posts
    121

    Default

    Yes, I`ve checked that, you are right.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO