Tactics Style

[Ludens]

Re Abs: The upkeep cost didn't really figure, I had trade cranked up so high it was impossible to spend everything even with every province building and training permanently. I also use them differently to Ghazis, in that they tend to protect my line rather than go charging into the enemy. I don't really like suicide troops, they're my people, digital or not, and it's such a waste

Maybe because I don't see them as buffed up ghazis is why I like em more?

Exactly how do you use them? As pinning troops or as flankers? Because I don't see how they could function as pinning troops with their low defence stat and for flanking a unit of Ghazi will suffice as well. Or do you upgrade them?

Ghazis are good at dead-or-glory charges and at flanking, but not at pinning. As far as I can see, Abyssinian Guards can do dead-or-glory charges (but it is rather a waste of money) and can flank. However, they will kill slower than Ghazis, and killing power is the main requisite for flankers (for me at least).

Since Ghazis are religious fanatics, I have no compuction of sending them to their deaths. If someone is willing to die and their sacrifice will safe the lives of other people, then I think it worth the price. Sometimes, you have to be cruel in order to be kind.

[Kommodus]

Ludens: I think that what macsen rufus is saying is that he uses Abyssinian Guards similar to the way most of us use swordsmen - as front-line melee troops, whose purpose is to stand and engage in a head-on battle and kill effectively without running away or being destroyed too quickly.

How would they perform at this task? I'm really not sure, since I've never tried them. Their stats indicate a high attack and high morale, coupled with poor defense and armor. Thus, I'm sure they die quicker than you'd probably want. However, in my experience, sometimes a strength in one area can make up for a weakness in another. For example, halberdiers have such a low attack rating that you wouldn't expect them to do much damage. However, their armor and defense are so high that they will have plenty of time to rack up kills while their opponent tries unsuccessfully to penetrate their armor. It could be that in many situations, Abyssinian Guards will slaughter and rout their opponents so quickly that the Guards don't lose many men. Of course, this is all hypothetical, and it is certain that armor, weapon, and valour upgrades would significantly add to the Guards' survival ability.

So how would Guards differ from Ghazis in their usage and usefulness? Well, while Guards have a low defense rating, Ghazis have a MUCH lower defense rating, so even with plenty of upgrades, they will die very quickly in a head-on fight. They are also faster on their feet, which makes them a better flanker. As for holding a portion of a battle line, Guards will clearly be far better - both because of their better defense and because they are not the impetuous loose cannons that Ghazis are. Ghazis should be kept on the wings of an army, where they will be in a better position to flank, and be less tempted to go charging off on their own. Guards can stand and fight anywhere in a battle line, although as I've said, their low defense means they will not be the best for this task. Clearly, neither unit would be effective at pinning an enemy.

In the end, Guards are probably only worth having if you've got plenty of money. If you do, however, they would make a good addition to an army, since they can do things that Ghazis can't. If I were building a large, powerful Egyptian army, I would rather have a few Abyssinians in my "A" lineup to augment the Saracens, archers, and cavalry than only Ghazis. They would be better at surviving the initial battle and still being around when enemy reinforcements start marching onto the field.

[the tokai]

The problem with using abyssinians as front line troops is that front line troops are often the victim of cavalry charges and abyssians completely suck at receiving cavalry charges. Troops like abyssinian guards and ghazi's are most usefull as flankers and should be used as such. there are much better units for holding the line and you should be able to build those by the time you can build abyssinians.

As for my own tactics, i like battles in wich the melee lasts very short, or better yet, where the battle is solved without a melee. horse archers are great for such a tactic so they are my favourite kind of unit. Foot archers are also nice because they can also defeat units without getting into contact with them, but unlike the horse archers they need some support to survive.

Altough they can be effective, i'm not a big fan of the catholic heavy slugging army's. They work but they lack subtlety. A good general doesn't need heavy troops to win his battles.

[macsen rufus]

Nice analysis, Kommodus, similar thinking to my own. I found the big drawback to Egyptians is the lack of swords (except when you get to proper handgunners). I mostly used the abs as flankers, cover for missile troops, or occasionally poised behind/between Saras to open the latest delivery of Canned Crusader stuck on the end of their spears.... I also love them for taking apart pinned cavalry, but in nearly all uses they have to be the hammer of a hammer and anvil tactic.

And as I pointed out before, they also excell in woods for some reason, and can operate alone there. Personally, I find the -1 attack a good bargain for the +3 defence.

Now with the Turks, I use ghazis occasionally, but I see them more as weak Otto's who've forgotten their bows, really ;)

[Serpent]

Militia sergs fall easily against good cavalry, but harbs dosent and I see them as mainly defensive units or attacking whit 6star general.

Problem is that they are really slow and they will get good deal archer fire before attacker can got his archers in range.....soon enough you can make them flee of battle arena and others will fallow.

[macsen rufus]

Now with the Turks, I use ghazis occasionally, but I see them more as weak Otto's who've forgotten their bows, really ;)

... and now I'm going to disagree with myself after the last battle I had (castle assault), because unexpected results forced me to F1 in utter dismay :lol: and I saw just how much more attack capacity the ghazis had than the ottos (V2 ghazi 6* att, v3 ottos 3* attack) Even so, I did have more ottos left after the melee... but I was not happy to have to send in my heir apparent (still mounted) into the castle to finish off what my infantry couldn't. As a rule, I usually don't let my general within missile range of a castle, due to that unexpected accuracy thing on your general's unit.....

Ho hum, well, it was a complacent assault, but I'm not replaying it now!

[Mithrandir]

Militia sergs fall easily against good cavalry, but harbs dosent and I see them as mainly defensive units or attacking whit 6star general.

Not at valour 3 and above...

[Saracen_Warrior]

Ghazi all the way. Varangian does everything ghazi does, but worse, excpet for holding a front line. But egypt has Saracen, who are much better ta that then varangian. Besides if you want to worry about holding the line, be a Christian and get some halberds. That hole, hold the line thing is obsolete for the Egyptian way of fighting.

If your an egyptian army you shouldnt be worrying about good front line troops. The best front line troop you get as Eggies is one of the first units you get. Saracen is what you need, use your brain to think of more important things, like whether or not to use lots of HA, or Hashishan. Hashishan rule, just dont make 16 untis of them.

[Ludens]

I found the big drawback to Egyptians is the lack of swords (except when you get to proper handgunners). I mostly used the abs as flankers, cover for missile troops, or occasionally poised behind/between Saras to open the latest delivery of Canned Crusader stuck on the end of their spears.... I also love them for taking apart pinned cavalry, but in nearly all uses they have to be the hammer of a hammer and anvil tactic.

I see, thanks for the explanation. When playing the Egyptians, I favour a more fluid style of battle, with lots of skirmishing and archery, preferably from horseback. I don't really need a special hammer unit, my royal Ghulams, aided by Mameluk horse archers and Faris, can take care of pinned enemy units. If necessary, Muwahids can do a very good job at flanking: they are fast, good morale, powerful charge and due to the rank bonus a good defence. You do need to have them at engage-at-will or else you will waste the charge, but they are very good light spearmen.

Ghazis and other hard hitters do not feature much in this kind of battle: when I engage the enemy should already be on the brink of routing.

[CherryDanish]

It's easy to critisise the Abyssinian units. They are expensive and difficult to justify. That said the unit is superb for dealing with almost any units once you get out of the desert and into the woods. Also they are excellent for taking on spearmen, halbs, and militia sergs in open field combat. That said, it's a lot of cost to take on relatively low cost units.

As stated elsewhere, I'm partial to specialised HA units like Faris, Boyers, SHC, Turkomen Horse, and Byz Cav, but for heaven's sakes, don't put them up against Western Catholic cav. I'm waiting on JHI to deal with the heavy western Cav units I'm facing in my Turkish campaign as I'm down to the final 4 right now and attacking in open field combat against heavy cav is rough. I try to engage my ghazi's on their cav in the woods, or use spear, missle and light cav to try and get them to charge my spear positions (with Turk infantry and Fatuwa behind the spears). It's a lot of work.

[_Aetius_]

My egyptian armies are cavalry heavy lots of mamluk HA units, ghulam cavalry mamluk cavalry etc, for infantry i tend to have saracens, muwahids and abyssinians i also tend to have significant numbers of italian and english mercenaries in my ranks to make up for some of egypts shortcomings and ive had alot of success this way.

Ive had little respect for horse archers especially light ones, but in my recent turkish campaign ive found that turcomans are spectacular HA's. No fewer than 4 victories against crusader armies are thanks to the turcomans, i stripped dozens of troops from the best of the crusader armies, not to mention the small units that all crusades have were swept up in melee charges and really the templar knights once the bane of my existance are now reduced by showers of arrows.

Ive now mastered horse archery and rarely lose more than a few HA's in a battle and once their finished i find swift charges from ghazis break up whatever infantry is left in the army and my hordes of cavalry can chase them down.

There was a close call once though when a german crusade and a spanish one arrived in Rum and would possibly have defeated me even after my HA's had caused there damage, but foolishing the german and spanish crusades fought each other and my army merely destroyed what survived.