relative effectiveness of missiles

[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.

[CBR]

Actually at 2 ranks only, you get volley fire with all men firing. For continous firing then 3 ranks is best but for that controlled pointblank salvo that can kill a lot and rout an enemy unit (including cavalry) the 2 rank formation is great but requires good control.

STW seems to have a bit of a problem with switching fire at will on as there is big delay IIRC (only had a quick test) but in MTW it works much better and I use it Samurai Wars mod (STW for VI) whenever I can to stop a cavalry charge.

One tactic of mine is to have 2-3 guns in 3 rank formation doing the normal shooting against enemy guns and 1-2 standing a bit back in 2 ranks waiting in case the enemy tries to send cav against my front gunline.


CBR

[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.