Tactics Style

[bretwalda]

What kind of tactics suits you? And which is the best faction for you style?

Is this the horse archer archer, soak with arrows? Or the swordmen rush? Maybe heavy cavalry? Play on lots of low tech units? Or do it with hardcore troops? Let's see the styles...

[bretwalda]

My style oddly seem to be my "national" style I am Hungarian and my favourite tactics is relying heavily on horse archers and other missile troops. These are versatile especially at the beginning of the game (early) and can cause losses without taking any themselves. They remain useful later as well, as battle starters: they shoot their arrows and withdraw: the damage is done :)

[Don Corleone]

Apparently, I'm a little too up the gut for my own good. I think everyone has heard of Stonewall Jackson, a Confederate American general, famous for feints, bluffs, and elaborate flanking maneuvers. There was another general in the confederate army, by the name of John Bell Hood. Jackson said of Hood "He can perform any maneuver you could ask for, so long as you only ask for a head on charge".

That was why I started this Turk campaign to begin with, to learn some of the finer points of tactics. Old habits die hard I guess, trying to use my Turcoman as heavy cavalry, in the woods no less! (I did know better than that, I just couldn't think of a way to get them out).

[bretwalda]

There are cases, where the head on charge is the best idea :) E.g. if the enemy is archer heavy and is on a hill, but no heavy cavalry, the best thing you can do is an infantry charge...

[el_slapper]

There are cases, where the head on charge is the best idea :) E.g. if the enemy is archer heavy and is on a hill, but no heavy cavalry, the best thing you can do is an infantry charge...

Infantry charge is a cool initial setup. Balanced & efficient. Of course, against special enemies as horse archers, it is not that efficient. But I stick to it, keeping cav only for last times of a battle. I've lost too much cav by charging too early.

[bretwalda]

I would not rely on one type of tactics: there is an efficient counter - force for every army setup. As you pointed out horse archers would do well against a swordmen and slow cavalry army... But would be useless against e.g. steppe cavalry or against spearmen + archer (on a hill)

[Kommodus]

My favorite tactic, which I find most enjoyable, would have to be the Turkish cavalry-heavy approach, relying on the mobility of horse archers and other cavalry to get the job done. Of course, the army needs a core of infantry, including some good hybrid archers and solid spearmen, but the real punch comes from horse archers, which harass and isolate enemy units, and heavy cavalry, which delivers decisive blows to the flanks and rear. The Turkish army is my favorite one in the game.

However, I recently found a very nice tactic for Catholic armies, which has proven very effective and fun to use. The core of the army is polearm troops, particularly halberdiers and their variations. This core is augmented by the best cavalry available and enough arbalesters to win a missile duel. After maneuvering for position, the attack commences with an infantry advance, with cavalry to flank and take out enemy missile troops. Halberdiers have low morale, but as long as you keep them from being isolated or flanked, they can beat just about anything in a head-on fight and take very few casualties in the process, including elite heavy cavalry, which would otherwise be a problem. The only weakness this type of army has is fighting in the desert. Other than that, it can take on any army you throw at it, even the pesky Mongols.

[Ironside]

My usual tactic is the classical shoot them up with arraws, frontal clash with flanking while using hardcore troops, but I do like the cav only armies with some heavy horse archers (if I got them), a well-preformed attack here is devastating, hitting the enemy from the back and both flanks and then attack from the new back made by the enemy to counter the flanking charges.
Total destruction.

Weak horse archers are annoying for me though, I don't like hitting the half-strength enemy's back twice and lose. And I can't resist it.

[HopAlongBunny]

I enjoy playing with an HA army. The micro-management can get tedious but the results are usually well worth it. Early Turkish armies tend to be all cav for me; not much in the opening bits of a campaign that can't be handled.

PoN has a great cav roster as well. Druzhina, HA's and Boyers are a very nice mix Once you add some Heavy Steppe I think they are just overwhelming.

[CherryDanish]

I used to spend heavy cav like it was monopoly money. As a catholic faction it's easy to do because later in the game you simply outclass your opponents. Now I try a combination of tactics based entirely off of the strengths of the available troops of the faction I am playing. For instance, when playing the Byz, head on is the way to go. Kataphractoi are murderous head on and their only real weakness is against mobile missile troops. VGs can shred any force, but if you can't catch em, you can't kill em.

With the Turks, until you get JHI, you need to dance around your opponents and you don't charge until your foe is about to break or is actually fleeing. As for Futuwa, keep em in the treelines and reign death on your opponents. If they have horse or spear and send them after you, withdraw into the woods and make your stand there. If they send sword or axe infantry, skirmish with bows. I use some interesting indirect tactics when playing lighter forces like the Turks.

I like the English though. As a faction, you get one of the most lethal combinations of troops in the same year, still fairly early in the game. It is the only faction I have played so far that I can field an entire force without any cavalry and still win consistantly. That said, combining them with steepe light cav is a lethal combo as the fast cav is fantastic for chasing down withdrawing/routing enemies. Enemies can't stand off and kill your troops with missile fire as your longbowmen simply outclass any other missile troops and if the enemy closes, they will suffer from missile fire before they reach your formidable billmen wall. When they run, you chase em off with the light cav. Hobilars and Mounted Sergants are OK, but not as fast as the boys from the steepes.

[ichi]

Each faction is best suited for a style - like Cherry says use the Byz as a giant hammer - keep them together and roll over the enemy - but with the Turks you should use those Janis and Futs and Ottomans and Turcos to shoot and shoot and shoot.

My pref has always been to use FMAA and CMAA as infantry (or VG as the Byz), a few heavy cav, and cav archers (I prefer Szekely but Faris, Boyars, Byz Cav and Steppe Heavies do fine too).

Use the fast cav to disrupt the enemy missile units, then close in and shoot with my archers, pavs, cav archers. When the enemy gets tired of that and tries to react send in the men-at-arms en masse, flank with the cav, and away we go.

The idea is to never simply use the units like they are expendable. I try to treat those little electric images like they real - they are my people and I don't want to ever just throw their lives away needlessly. By killing from a distance before engaging I get good morale upgrades and lose fewer men.



ichi

[Sensei Warrior]

tee hee hee muwahh ahhhahhahah. TACTICS

ah-hem sorry about that, I lost control for a bit.

I vary my tactics to suit who I am playing, as what was mostly stated above. Along with Ichi's response of trying to use them as if they are real not just a bunch of pixelated bits.

I like feignts and draws. Flanking and jockeying for position. My armies even if made up of just infantry and spears is very mobile. Wedging and isolation tactics are fun too. I like trying new stuff. The crazy stuff is usually what gives the stunning blow.

I like using province and national specific units like Swabian Swords, Billmen, and Genoese Sailors. If I can I'll field an army with lots of irregulars just to mix it up. I like the High-Period and Late-Period units the most. With the exception of the above I find the Early units tedious and boring, though they have there purpose.

I remember Crusading across N. Africa using armies made up of mostly Gallowglasses, Welsh Longbowmen, Clansmen, Hobilars, and a smattering of Viking units. That was some of the best battles I ever had.

[Sensei Warrior]

Oh I almost forgot. Be careful about the crazy stuff it either really works or bombs terribly.

[derF]

Flexibility and Potency are my keywords for battletactics.

At the moment i have about 8 full Byzantine armies with a few reinforcements on 3 frontiers. Each one (as is the Roman way) is standardised:

50% Varangian Guard. (From Constantinople, Greece, Rum, Crete, Nicea...)
30% Light, Medium, Heavy Cavilry. (From Constantinople or Greece).
20% Missile soldiers. (From Bulgaria or Trebizond).

I fight precise, calculated battles.

*************************

The Varangian Guardsmen can kill spear, sword and horse with no problems. Some people say they cost alot. I can support them no problem because i emphasise strongly on economic growth.

Cavilry i have equal amounts of Cataphracts (Heavy), Pronoiai Allagion (Medium), and Byzantine Lancers (Light). The lighter the cavilry, the more flanking it does. The heavier the caviltry, the more it fights.

Missile soldiers. I accept only the best. Usually 1 unit of Pavise Arbalestiers and 1 unit of Trebizond archers in the early game or 1 unit of Bulgarian Brigands later.

*************************

Pick a front, deploy the armies, push through all at once. Hold, reinforce, build. Push again...

*************************

Deal with desert provinces by hiring muslim mercenaries. Deal with the mongols with Pavise missile troops.

There, thats my Byzantine tactic.

[Saracen_Warrior]

Once im in later part of game and have lots of surplus money I dont know what to do with, I like to hire mercs. Since they're not my countrymen I dont feel bad about sending them to their deaths. Ill usually hire a merc army, tac on a 3 star general(who will withdraw, i dont send my own men to bloddy deaths) and send them in to attack the enmy. I dont use any tactics, just tell evey unit to attack something. Hopefully, even if i suffer heavy losses, i also inflicted them. Then the next turn ill send in my real army. In this battle ill actually play.

oh and does anyone know of a good use, for abyssinian guards. They seem like ghazi, but cruddier and less useful, and more expensive. I have a hard time using hashishan, has anyone ever actually killed a genereal with these guys.

[derF]

I meddle not with the muslim scumbags.

[_Aetius_]

When thinking about tactics copy the best tactitions alexander the greats tactic of using infantry to keep the enemy infantry in place whilst using heavy cavalry to flank and hit from the side or behind.

Its simple and effective.

[Boris of Bohemia]

In the early era I pump out mostly militia sargeants for frontal assaults, with any fast cavalry available, to chase down the archers and attack rear. I have mostly given up on spear types.

However, I recently found a very nice tactic for Catholic armies, which has proven very effective and fun to use. The core of the army is polearm troops, particularly halberdiers and their variations. This core is augmented by the best cavalry available and enough arbalesters to win a missile duel. After maneuvering for position, the attack commences with an infantry advance, with cavalry to flank and take out enemy missile troops. Halberdiers have low morale, but as long as you keep them from being isolated or flanked, they can beat just about anything in a head-on fight and take very few casualties in the process, including elite heavy cavalry, which would otherwise be a problem. The only weakness this type of army has is fighting in the desert. Other than that, it can take on any army you throw at it, even the pesky Mongols.

Once the high era comes, halberds+arbs are the shit. I place the halberds in a line close behind the arbs. It works this way: if they don't want to engage halberds, they get shot up by arbs. If they attack the arbs, the halberds charge and I have never seen them lose a frontal engagement with any reasonable commander.

[HopAlongBunny]

oh and does anyone know of a good use, for abyssinian guards. They seem like ghazi, but cruddier and less useful, and more expensive. I have a hard time using hashishan, has anyone ever actually killed a genereal with these guys.

If there is a use for them it has escaped me as well; ghazi seem a better option for all circumstances. Hasishan require micro-management I think. If you want them to hide turn "fire-at-will" off. Can't say I've ever killed a general with one, but they can make a mess of a royal knight unit

[CherryDanish]

Hasishin are a remarkably amazing unit. I use them sparingly, but starting in an open field and hiding with fire at will OFF, they can snipe out key units, then duck into a grove of woods and take on the chasers. I do not build these guys in volume, but used in flanking and striking the rear of units, suprise sniping hig value units, used sparingly they are effective. I sent a unit of Huscarles to frontal engage 2 units of MHC and then a unit of hasishin in the mongol rear in melee, all inside the woods and the destruction was supreme. 21 of 80 mongols escaped and I lost 1 Hasishin and maybe 3 Huscarles.

That said, in open fields, all alone, they are going to get mulched by just about anyone. One more item, they are a 12 man unit with an insane attack value, so they will build valour very fast. For me, getting 3 valour for one of these units in a single fight isn't terribly uncommon. I have never seen one of them rout.

[Saracen_Warrior]

I guess if was hopped up on brownies i wouldnt care if i died either and probably wouldnt run. Except they probbaly smoked hashish back then, instead of baking it.

[Kommodus]

Once the high era comes, halberds+arbs are the shit. I place the halberds in a line close behind the arbs. It works this way: if they don't want to engage halberds, they get shot up by arbs. If they attack the arbs, the halberds charge and I have never seen them lose a frontal engagement with any reasonable commander.

I agree. Halberdiers may have low charge and attack ratings, but their armor and defense ratings are so high that they will take very few losses while they methodically chew through whatever they're fighting. Their armor-piercing bonus also means that they will actually inflict significant losses quite quickly on most of their enemies, since they usually end up facing armored troops. Their low morale is not really that much of a problem, since as already stated, they easily win most fights without taking many losses, so the only serious blow to their morale will be if they are flanked, isolated, or surrounded.

Of course, they would have trouble against a mostly-elite army (for example, an army made up of mostly VG or JHI). Those elite troops could surely destroy halberdiers, with their ultra-high combat stats and indomitable morale. But any army would have trouble against such a foe, and you never face armies like that against the AI. Halberdiers are also inexpensive and not that hard to come by, making them an excellent core for an army in a single-player campaign.

As for Catholic variations on the halberd theme, Swiss halberdiers and billmen are, of course, fantastic units. However, it seems to me that Swiss halberdiers take more casualties in most fights. They kill a little bit quicker, and can fight better in difficult conditions, but they seem to be a little worse for wear at the end of most battles. The armor and defense of ordinary halberdiers help them receive charges better and survive better in the ensuing melee. As for billmen, I loved them when I played my English campaign. They were real battle-winners multiple times.

Curiously, I've never had great success with swordsmen as army cores. They lack the armor-piercing bonus of polearm troops, and are terribly weak against cavalry. Their greatest strength seems to be killing enemy spearmen and lesser-quality troops; however, this limits their usefulness, and they tend to take quite a few losses in most fights. That's why I've come to prefer polearms to both swords and spears - they are the best all-around troops, and they are truly weak against nothing. They are the only troops that break out of the rock-paper-scissors mold.

[mfberg]

The swordsmen are for killing spears. If the enemy puts his spear wall up in front with flanking cav and bows behind I send out a cav unit to draw spears forward, and then pull it back. The spears will face my cav unit (usually HA) and I will walk my swords right up to the flank of the spears and carve my way through. In engaments where the enemy is moving all his units up at once my swords are right behind my archers, ready to reinforce any spear unit in trouble or rout an enemy that looks weak.

My current favorite Hungarian army is a front of spear/armoured spear, a line of archers, and a line of mtd crossbows with 2 HA/Szekely on the flanks and HA/Szek as my reinforcements. I will use avar nobles, but like to keep them for the killing blow against the Byz Kat units.

mfberg

[_Aetius_]

Yeah halberdiers are pretty good but the poor morale stat is just to much, theproblem is they lack staying power and often run if a strong charge hits them, whereas some units wont run if say 15 out of the 60 men die from a charge halberdiers will quickly give up and flee.

Swiss halb's havent got great defence but theyll cut through cavalry even faster and the charge is davastating, not sure if they are better than billmen its hard to say both the same but slightly different ways to use them well. Also maybe not as important but still swiss halbs are faster than regular ones sometimes regular halbs are painfully slow.

I use swordsmen as the centre depending on the enemy and what kind of swordsmen i can train, swabian swordsmen are brilliant but if the enemy has cavalry heavy armies i use swordsmen on the wings and spearmen in the centre.

The army I use for the byzantines is 6 byzantine infantry, 2 units of varangians, 2 units of allagions, 2 units of kataphraktoi, 2 units of pikemen, 2 units of trebizond archers.

Its four byzantine infantry in a line in the centre, the 2 units of trebizonds behind them in the centre, one unit of varnagians on either side of the archers, the 1 pikemen unit on either side of the byzantine infantry, 2 units of byz infantry on the deep flanks as reserves and the kataphraktoi and allagions on the wings.

Thatll beat most enemy armies, it may not be very anti cavalry heavy but the amount of heavy cavalry in that army is more than enough to defeat enemy heavy cavalry.

[Boris of Bohemia]

Yeah halberdiers are pretty good but the poor morale stat is just to much, theproblem is they lack staying power and often run if a strong charge hits them, whereas some units wont run if say 15 out of the 60 men die from a charge halberdiers will quickly give up and flee.

Always mystified by this kind of comment. I countercharge all the time with halberds, straight into Mongol heavies and high royals, I just love it when cavalry charges my halberds. Makes my day.

[derF]

Always mystified by this kind of comment. I countercharge all the time with halberds, straight into Mongol heavies and high royals, I just love it when cavalry charges my halberds. Makes my day.

Yes they hack up mounted troop easily. But they do have low(ish) moral. So in the instance of being victim to a flank or something, they will waver.

As they have done in a few instances with me.

[Hold Steady]

Halberds are in fact militia kinda-guys, except the swiss. Billmen, don't know, but I think it's in fact still peasant class, though (as many other English unit types were) probably very well trained and led. Not that it matters really, but in the game it is represented by morale stats. The Halberd bearing units (except the swiss) bear, IIRC, low morale stats. Of course, Halberds and pikemen became (even more than crossbowmen, longbowmen and firearms) the scourge of Knights, being lower class and low trained, so plentifull in supply.
However, as much as you blow the horn of praise about them halberds here, as much as I believe that is the most independent and versatile unit in the field, I believe a well executed attack at these troops by high quality swordsmen, combined if possible with heavy cav and preluded by firearms fire (or other armour piercing things) will break them in any way. CMAA, VG, CFK or even heavy Carls will make short work of them, preferrably in wedge, because when the attack is executed probably, the low morale of the defender will be their doom.

But if you hadn't noticed, my favorite tactic involves anything with swords and axes, accompanied with Heavy or Medium Cav. I Like all aspects and units of this game, especially the mix, but any decend attack has heavy cav and swords, else no fun!

[_Aetius_]

Always mystified by this kind of comment. I countercharge all the time with halberds, straight into Mongol heavies and high royals, I just love it when cavalry charges my halberds. Makes my day.

There are lots of units that can charge into mongol heavies and cause damage but only a few have as poor a morale stat as halberdiers, billmen have decent morale and wont waver as easily if flanked there lack of armour is made up for by there speed and morale.

Besides i think halberdiers are better used on infantry its to dangerous sending them against cavalry alot of the time, id rather have them hacking into feudal men at arms and lower class troops than them doing the job of chivalric sergeants or feudal sergeants etc.

[Procrustes]

There are lots of units that can charge into mongol heavies and cause damage but only a few have as poor a morale stat as halberdiers, billmen have decent morale and wont waver as easily if flanked there lack of armour is made up for by there speed and morale.

Besides i think halberdiers are better used on infantry its to dangerous sending them against cavalry alot of the time, id rather have them hacking into feudal men at arms and lower class troops than them doing the job of chivalric sergeants or feudal sergeants etc.

Funny, my thoughts were completely the opposite - but everyone has their own style and I’m playing on ‘feel’ rather than by the numbers. I find that halbs are deadly to any kind of cav, and do a good job on infantry, too - very versatile. They are well enough armored so that they take fewer casualties than most other troops and they can chew through anything else that is armored or mounted. Yup, the moral is lower, but that can be surmpounted a bit with by decent general and some upgrades like churches. Besides, you can make just about anything route when it's flanked. I've always thought that head-on halbs do a better job on cav than spears, and a far, far better job on infantry than spears, and you don't have to keep them in formation. I'll generally mix some spears behind or next to my halbs so that they can hold the line if the halbs start to waver. The biggest drawback to me is that halbs are slow (but so are spears.)

Yup, billmen are better - but they are basically buff halbs and are only available to the English.

As far as tactics, it's not always the best way to win but I enjoy using axes and polearms. Even cheap militia sgts and urban militia are fun for me - though you really have to watch for routes. I love Vikings when I can get them - best part about playing as the Danes. Versatile - good against infantry or cav, good armor piercing. Very cheap - which is a good thing since they often take fearsome casualties. I love how sturdy they are - they'll wade into the fight and won't route until there are just a few men left. Even then they almost always rally and you can send them back.

Best,

P.

[Kommodus]

In theory, the low morale of halberdiers should be a problem. It's true that if they lost 15 men to a heavy cavalry charge, they would most likely rout, whereas other polearm units would hold firm. However, due to their incredibly high armor and defense ratings, they're more likely to take no more than two or three casualties when charged by cavalry, and their morale will therefore hold firm. They will also take very few casualties in the ensuing melee and easily win the fight, even though it'll take them a while to do it. This is what makes them so effective against cavalry.

It's true that they will lose to a combined-arms approach involving elite armor-piercing infantry, morale-reducing gunpowder weapons, and cavalry that successfully flanks them. But what homogeneous force wouldn't lose when up against such a foe? As has been pointed out, anything will rout when flanked. Remember that a halberdier-based army also relies on a combined-arms approach, and should include some good heavy cavalry and missile weapons of its own. The trick is to get the matchups you want - that is, the halberdiers take out enemy cavalry, while your own cavalry smashes the enemy swordsmen and axemen.

Between billmen and Swiss halberdiers, it seems to me that billmen generally have slightly better combat stats, but Swiss halberdiers have better morale. My preference is for the billmen. If anyone is worried about low morale for billmen or halberdiers, the solution is simple - don't get flanked. The same goes for any unit. No unit is designed to stand on its own, and infantry does much better when it has adequate cavalry support on its flanks.

The reason I've come to like polearm units is that their all-around performance in head-on fights is the best I've ever seen. The only units that out-perform them are true elites, like VG, JHI, CFK, etc - and those can out-perform anything. Every other unit (swords, spears, axes) has a serious weakness that can be exploited in a head-on engagement. As long as I give my polearms a head-on fight (which I can), they'll stick it out to the end, and they'll win.