MP is Great! (if they fix the lag)

[Kenchi_Sulla]

Well, you need some understanding of the units at hand and the ranges involved. Adventuriers are a hybrid unit (missile/melee). Peasant archers are not effective vs armoured units (pavise crossbows use armour as well). his 2 crossbows are effective against pavise, but take more losses because of their weaker armour. The time that pav xbows face the enemy fire is rather short. So we have 2 ineffective peasant archers (220 florins each), 2 good crossbows (330 florins each) and 4 hybrid (690 but also usable in melee - so maybe 220 can be used to calculate their missile value) vs 3 pavise (490 florins each)

Thats 1320 + 660 = 1980 florins for 480 men (on normal settings) vs 1470 florins for 180 men with better armour and overall better armour penetrating ability.

Then you have facing and spreading your troops. Double lines take more casualties. If you put your pavise in a single line (2 deep, 30 wide times 3) the crossbolts have a smaller chance to hit something then when you put them 6 deep 10 wide AND put another line of archers behind them.

Is this unfair? I don't htink so - it's using your troops the right way. Depth of formation matters, deployment matters, armour matters, understanding the role of your troops matters.

You could also decide to skip the whole skirmish face and just sacrifice your archers in the already famous - light infantry shootout. Kill the enemy's unarmoured troops and attack his position.

ps

played a 3 vs 3 yesterday. The other side used pavise, we used only archers and some xbows. We won anyway with skirmishing so no unbalance there.

Overall I'm pretty satisfied about the gamebalance and gameplay in multiplayer. Ofcourse there is the at times annoying lag but that isn't an issue in this discussion. Puzz, don't be so frustrated about it - the game really isn't that bad.

-------------------

It's not like RTW-multi (that one I won't even discuss, they did a piss poor job there)