Longbowmen or Pavise Arbalesters?

[eadeater]

In my opinion, there are two ranged units competing to be the best, the longbowmen and pavise arbalesters. I use both extensively as they have their uses in different types of battle and armies and opponents and so on, but can't decide which is better on the whole.

[katank]

I typically go for longbows due to faster firing rate and hence greater morale penalty inflicted upon enemy for faster losses.

also, they can arc their fire and thus can work on flat terrain behind spear walls without shooting your guys in the back.

They also have 3 attack with AP which means they are good flankers and in fact superior to FMAA due to AP if flanking.

they are attack rather than defense.

Pav arbs are very defense oriented. they will not kill as fast but wouldn't die as fast.

they can even be attacked by cav and not lose that much men.

they are extremely slow though.

overall, longbows are better but PAs do have their uses.

[HicRic]

The only problem with LBs is the quick firing rate means they'll be out of ammo in a jiffy (although they can then work as good flankers as Katank said). PA work better for longer, more drawn-out battles and take very few casulties from missile fire. I enjoy a combination of the two-PA's for their ongoing contribution throughout a battle, and LBs to quickly mow down a unit when I need it.

You could even consider sending LBs around the back of the enemy line when they've engaged you, pelting a valueable unit in the back with many AP arrows, and then charging into the rear of the enemy. That's one creamed army.

I personally just enjoy using LBs more, just because they're...cool!

[Daveybaby]

If i'm defending then using both can be very beneficial. Quite often the key to winning/losing a defensive battle is to break the enemies initial assault - if you can get them to retreat once then 90% of the time youve already won, regardless of how many reinforcements they have (at least thats the case vs the AI - MP would be another matter entirely).

So what i do is have some pav arbs (2-3 units), plus at least 3 units of longbows. The pav arbs are there for long term ranged ability (plus soak up enemy arrows), while the longbows are there to try to inflict as much damage as possible on specific units (e.g. enemy generals, charging cav) in as short a space a time as possible in order to break the back of the unit and neutralise its attack.

Once the LB's are out of ammo i either rotate them out for more (if its one of those '4 waves of enemy reinforcements' jobs) or keep them ready to counterattack (good speed + melee capability - not something you can say of pav arbs!).

I think one of the reasons this works so well is that youre combining the sudden massive trauma of having a volley of arbs fire into a target, plus you get the constant morale penalty of being constantly fired on by the LBs (something which, IIRC, doesnt happen from Arb fire, due to the long reload).

So, if this is true, normal archers might also work well in this role - its just that LBs give you the AP and the extra range to actually inflict some damage, whereas usually by the time youre fielding pav arbs, normal bows are pretty ineffective due to enemy armour.

[mfberg]

Longbows, definitely. They get +1 from Wales, and +1 from the Master level building. I will use Pavise arbs if I plan on a ranged duel, then its Pavise arbs in front of Longbows.

mfberg

[katank]

put the pav arbs in spots such as closer to the front where they might be hit by enemy missile or have greater probability of getting charged.

for example, in bridge defense, the two missiles right next to my plugs are usually pav arbs.

this is where my missiles usually take the most fire from enemy missiles and even if the plug breaks, the enemy cav wouldn't play that much havoc with my missiles in terms of casualtie, giving time for flankers and reinforcements to hit.

longbows can function as that.

it's funny how pav arbs can act as a pinning unit in times of desperation and the longbows can function as the flanking crusher.

massed longbows and billmen are a killer combo, particularly with master bow from wales and master spear from mercia.

[eadeater]

I see what you are saying about the sheer killing power a few units of longbows provide, and yes, if you have 4 or 5 of them in defence on a hill, you are almost bound to win (provided you've got soem infantry and cavalry as well ) as you'll obliterate the enemy general and his unit in a half dozen volleys, but with 4 or 5 pavise arbalesters, you could do the same, and they have the added plus that they can keep on doing it because they don't run out of ammo that quickly.

[Si GeeNa]

I suppose if your comparison is to determine their effectiveness as a straight-off archers to archers duel. These 2 tend to come up tops...

But the field is dynamic and i tend to find that HA's versatility makes them more useful in the battle.

The Nash Equilibrium to the Archer Game is that LongBowmen wins.

[sir_schwick]

I prefer bow troops to pavise-crossbow types due to speed. I usually go missle light and depend on archers to redeploy. Regualr crossbows are thus useful for flanking missle attacks, but not pavise. Often I use Halbediers for absorbing missles, or peasants before then(finally a use for them).

As for skirmisher type archers, learning to use them more effectively.

[Nowake]

If available, I combine the two, but if it was to choose, the PA are much, much efficient.

[Papewaio]

I rarely bother with any missile troops except in defense. I may bring one missile unit to make an all melee enemy move off a defensive position.

If I am an all melee army (Danes) I look at each of the archer units as just more kills for cavalry.

Mind you playing the Turks its HA dominated armies I play. Two totally different styles and it keeps things fresh.

[Duke of Gloucester]

It's interesting that some people see LB rate of fire as a potential disadvantange. I find if I micromanage the LB in terms of selecting targets, switching off fire-at-will and "waiting until you can see the whites of their eyes" means that LB can conserve ammo and be very effective. In fact I find them so effective that haven't found the need to build Pav Arbs. Concentrating LB fire on the enemey's best units and watching them drop like flies it SO cool, as well as being a top tactic.

Mfbergs point is worth considering too. If you are teched up enough to build Pav Arbs you could get LB's with +1 valour. Combine this with the extra mobility of LB's and I think they are winners.