relative effectiveness of missiles

[Procrustes]

Hi Folks,

I had a "natural experiment" with MTW that I thought I'd share with you - I thought the results were intriguing.

I fought a defensive bridge battle against a combined Spanish/French force. (I was Novograd.) I had a mish-mash of troops defending, including one parvise arbelast, one merc longbow, one merc arquebus, and two vanilla archers. No extra valor except for the ones from my four-star general. I set up all the missile units so they had a nice clear shot at the bridge - the archers and arqu from the front and the PA and LB at 45 degree angles from the sides. Everyone was on hold position, hold formation, fire at will. I had some spears, vikings and UM foot soldiers down front and I had enough elevation that I wasn't shooting my own men in the back. (At least not too often, anyways.) After the battle, kills in the log were:

Parvise arbs: 128
Longbow: 80 and had to withdraw early for lack of ammo
Archer 1: 38
Archer 2: 47
Arquebus: 6

All the missile troops were firing at pretty much the same time, though the LB and PA had a little bit more range and would engage the enemy slightly before the others would. I was suprised to find the PA so much more deadly than the LB in this situation - I thought they would be more similar. Also, the PA still had plenty of ammo left when the battle was over. If I had to fight it over again I think I would take the LB's off of "fire at will".

What I was especially disappointed to find was small number of kills I got from the arqs. The weather was clear the entire battle, and they were firing away all along. This helps confirm my suspicions that they are pretty well useless most of the time. (Though a couple of times a volley from the arqs was enough to scare one of the crappier units off the bridge, even if it didn't hit anything.)

I know it's not enough to draw lots of conclusions from, but I found it interesting. Hope someone else will, too.

P.

[PittBull260]

wow thats some interesting info, and useful too, I always used longbowmen, they seem to kill a whole lot, but yea they do run outta ammo quick, guess I'll start makin pav. arbalesters from now on :)

[Roark]

I think I'm the only guy on the forum who doesn't use Pav arbs... I like my armies to be as mobile as possible.

[edyzmedieval]

I think I'm the only guy on the forum who doesn't use Pav arbs... I like my armies to be as mobile as possible.

I don't use them also

[antisocialmunky]

What about Naptha?

[CBR]

Yes arbalesters are the best killers. You dont need to buy the pavise version if you prefer mobility. Xbow/arb are also very cheap in upkeep.


CBR

[Eternal Champion]

Pavs are good on defense where mobility is not as much of an issue. The Pavs offer pretty good protection during an archery duel and this can offten make the difference.

Having said that I rarely use Pavs because I use one standard army for attack and defense. Pavs are very slow and I like mobility when on offense.

[Advo-san]

Do arbalesters have to be mobilizing fast? I really don't see the point. IMHO, arbs are just to be deployed; they rock, and you let the good times roll...

[yesdachi]

I have read that the real longbowmen of old could have 6-8 arrows in the air at once depending on the angle of fire and target distance (I’ve also read that an experienced longbowman could get all 6-8 arrows to hit the target area at nearly the same time). They do seem to frequently run out of arrows for me but if their rate of fire is anywhere near true to life, the empty quivers are all right with me because their number of kills is always pretty good when I don’t misuse them.

[Eternal Champion]

Do arbalesters have to be mobilizing fast?

It depends on your style of play I guess. I like the combined arms approach and will often spilt my armies into several combat groups. Each group can only move as fast as the slowest unit. It's hard to pull off a flanking move or exploit a weakness while waiting for Pavs to lumber up. Also, Pavs have no shot at all of skirmishing as they are way to slow.

[PittBull260]

I have read that the real longbowmen of old could have 6-8 arrows in the air at once depending on the angle of fire and target distance (I’ve also read that an experienced longbowman could get all 6-8 arrows to hit the target area at nearly the same time). They do seem to frequently run out of arrows for me but if their rate of fire is anywhere near true to life, the empty quivers are all right with me because their number of kills is always pretty good when I don’t misuse them.

the best archers are mongols

[yesdachi]

the best archers are mongols

Historically speaking you may be right, I have heard plenty about their accuracy while on horseback but in the game I don’t know, I’ve never played as them.

I’d say that even though I like the structured armies of the English, and the style of the Vikings. The Mongols were probably some of the best warriors in history.

Perhaps I will try a GH game tonight.

[Zarax]

Historically speaking you may be right, I have heard plenty about their accuracy while on horseback but in the game I don’t know, I’ve never played as them.

I’d say that even though I like the structured armies of the English, and the style of the Vikings. The Mongols were probably some of the best warriors in history.

Perhaps I will try a GH game tonight.

In unmodded MTW their missile is exactly the same as vanilla bow, so you might want to treat them like the turcoman foot and cav...

[yesdachi]

In unmodded MTW their missile is exactly the same as vanilla bow, so you might want to treat them like the turcoman foot and cav...

Sounds like a solid plan. More valor gives more accuracy, right?

[Zarax]

Sounds like a solid plan. More valor gives more accuracy, right?

Yes, be aware also that the mongol warriors are better suited for attack than defence, sort of armoured trebs they are...

[CBR]

Valor doesnt give that much of an increase so dont count on upgrades to boost your missile power.


CBR

[yesdachi]

Yes, be aware also that the mongol warriors are better suited for attack than defence, sort of armoured trebs they are...

Thanks, I’m thinking of raiding until I can establish a base of provinces to call home. I would kind of like to see just how far west I could go if I just stay on the attack.

[Zarax]

MHC is ideal for raiding, they are pretty much like mongol katanks...

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

Arquebuses are great. You just didn't use them right. The way to use arqubuses is to engage the from of the enemy with cheap units and bring the arquebuses behind them and really really close. Then let a volley go, and see what I mean. I killed 15 Royal Knights and an English King with one volley.

[antisocialmunky]

@Mongols

It's quite funny how many times in history animal herders in the middle of nowhere just slaughter everything in their collective path.

@Longbow

During the campaign, I find it handy if I'm playing defensive to have reserves of longbows so I can rotate spent longbows and bring in fresh ones. It's especially fun against the Horde in Russia.

[Patron]

Against the AI or crappy multiplayer humans, it is best to have Arbalesters as they will probably have arbalesters or longbowmen of their own and you can expend your arrows into enemy units that matter, then charge your fresh un pepperred troops in.

In multiplayer though I prefer longbowmen as they can kill more before the enemy close in and can continue to fire on enemy units which have not engaged after my halbs and elite infantry deal with the enemy charge.

Once I'm in range I usually send a defensive unit like spearmen in to get rid of enemy ranged units, then charge in with the rest of my units. The spearmen survive too long for the enemy to obliterate them and they help my slow infantry to flank.

[Procrustes]

Arquebuses are great. You just didn't use them right. The way to use arqubuses is to engage the from of the enemy with cheap units and bring the arquebuses behind them and really really close. Then let a volley go, and see what I mean. I killed 15 Royal Knights and an English King with one volley.

Hmmm - I wasn't really close, but I was close enough for them to engage on fire-at-will. I'd assumed this meant they were close enough to be pretty effective, but I'll do as you suggest and use them at closer range next time. (Actually, I still have the save-game, I may be able to re-fight this battle.)

[Procrustes]

Regarding arbs vs lbows, I still use archers and lbows much of the time because they can fire over the heads of my foot soldiers, and I like the rapid rate of fire sometimes - especially when I'm on the attack. But I have felt that on the defense it's fantastic to have a couple of arbs. They outrange most everything, especially if you can get a little elevation. I don't know the stats, but they seem to do a better job per-volley at taking out armored targets than longbows, and they don't get the rain penatlies that the other bows do.

[antisocialmunky]

I was refering to the SP. I make stacks of longbows and withdraw spent untis of Lbows and reinforce with fresh ones so I can have all 30 minutes worth of arrow storm.

[m52nickerson]

The fact that abs can fire over people never bothered me. I just line them up in front of my polearms and let them fire until the enemy get close enough for me to charge. I normally have three units of abs in my Polish armies.

[antisocialmunky]

I run around with 2 to sit infront of my infantry. Alot of the time, even the AI will just charge at you and arbs don't get enough shots off. I use them as a cheap breakwater so the enemy wastes their charge on a bunch of arbs.

[Procrustes]

I run around with 2 to sit infront of my infantry. Alot of the time, even the AI will just charge at you and arbs don't get enough shots off. I use them as a cheap breakwater so the enemy wastes their charge on a bunch of arbs.

I've used that on the Horde more than once. The other factions seem more likely to approach tenatively and get shot to pieces, GH warriors charge you once they've started taking fire.

[Ludens]

Interesting experiment, Procrustes.

Hmmm - I wasn't really close, but I was close enough for them to engage on fire-at-will. I'd assumed this meant they were close enough to be pretty effective, but I'll do as you suggest and use them at closer range next time. (Actually, I still have the save-game, I may be able to re-fight this battle.)

My arquebuses seldom hit anything unless it is really. Their accuracy is the worst of any unit in M:TW, with the possible exception of handgunners. You can't use them for softening up the enemy before the charge like other missile units, since the enemy needs to get within charge distance before it takes any serious damage. I therefor use them in the same way as evil_maniac. When I use them, that is, because I seldom do.

[antisocialmunky]

Handgunners have swords though so they can give a -6 morale and charge home.

[CBR]

Of course a good trick to enhance arqs is to put them in 2 ranks only, hold position and fire at will off. Then wait until enemy is close and then put unit on fire at will. That way you ensure all fire at the same time and at a more effective short range.

But in general they are not that good and better to invest in arbs if you want real killing power.


CBR