relative effectiveness of missiles

[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

[EatYerGreens]

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

From experience with STW, I found that three ranks gave the smoothest performance for the unit as a whole. Zoom in close enough and you can see the forward rank fire, then shuffle to the back rank to reload, then take their turn to ripple forward for their next shot. With two ranks, you get bang, bang, pause, pause (during which time they are vulnerable to a charge for maybe 20-30 seconds). With three ranks, it's a constant bang, bang, bang. Okay, it's now only 33% firing, not 50%, but anything which approaches them will get steady mangling and no breathers. If I hear right about this morale hit when under fire, then that stays continuous. Very effective if you have multiple Arq units side by side, all aimed at the same approaching unit.

Another thing to beware is that the width of the two-rank formation is such that the guys on the ends might regard the target unit as out of range and not take part in the volley - e.g. when defending a bridge from a short distance back and the target unit has narrowed itself to the width of the bridge. The diagonal distance to it, from the ends of your 2-rank, might be slightly too far, even though the unit-fire icon shows green. If your graphics settings inclide smoke, you'll sometimes see the visible evidence of this partial volleying.

In STW, I used to use Arqs for two specific roles. One for river defence (always with a reinforcement stack of archers, for poor weather). The other was as cheap, low maint, garrison troops, reasoning that following an unexpected attack, I could retreat them to the fort or castle and any castle assault would be very expensive for the attacker. The AI knows this and will try to starve them out instead, which gives me time to roll up reinforcements and attempt to lift the siege.

[DensterNY]

Even though I haven't really developed up to Pavise Arbalesters in my first full campaign I am anticipating their arrival from reading this post. I can see from what you guys have said how valuable they'll be for defensive armies... perched atop a hill raining wave upon wave of death on my enemies...

Wow, another element of MTW that just amazes me... as each age approaches and technology pushes forward the Art of War takes on another angle.