Completely confused about the English (longish post)

[Kobal2fr]

@Sevinn : You forget a very, very important thing - stakes. While other factions sometimes have archers with better stats, pavise crossbows etc... none of them can put stakes down (well, IIRC the polish or hungarians have an elite archer unit that has stakes as well, but certainly no basic one like Longbowmen).

The English, on the other hand, can deploy their archers in first line with minimal support, and not worry about enemy cav at all. I'd like to watch Adventurers trying that stunt :)

[econ21]

There may be MP issues, but the English work just fine in SP. Take 3-5 missiles and the neighbouring AI factions won't outshoot you.

Have you seen an AI dismounted French archer? It's unlikely, as AFAIK, they are not in the SP game. Have you, as English, seen an AI Scots Guard in your campaign? I'm on turn 90, VH/VH and I haven't. The French have seen rather a few bodkin arrows though, which may explain it.

The longbows are a definitely a worthy upgrade over peasant archers - don't forget their longer range and AP advantage.

I guess you could try a missile heavy approach with the French, but it would be rather long and painful. How long do Scots Guard take to get? (I guess they are like retinue longbows in the tech tree or higher. In my game, it's turn 90 and my armies still don't include many retinue longbows.) The English just do missiles better. The tech tree encourages an appropriate force composition for the two sides.

I agree the French horse archers are ahistoric, but the dismounted ones should be in the game (the English longbows ended up effectively being dismounted ones too, in the HYW). The Scots Guard are fine - one of the most clearly historical units in the game. They were elite, so I am not going to quibble about a +1 attack. A player who spams them is just like someone who spams VG or JHI - putting gameplay above history (which is fine, but they should not complain the game is ahistoric if they indulge in such cheese).

So basically the French have better cav, better archers (dismounted archers, aventurs, Scottish Gaurd), better inf (chivalric foot knights). Any point to playing the English other than RP values? Guess I'll have to wait for a mod to correct all of this. (end rant)

Compared to the French, English cavalry is perfectly servicable - the knights only show a slight inferiority after the feudal "era". This again encourages appropriate force composition for the two sides. The archers, I've dealt with - you won't be outshot, trust me. English heavy infantry is fine in melee. AFAIK, the French don't get Chivalric Foot Knights in SP. And I am not convinced that English CFKs are as useless as other people say - they are excellent flankers.

I agree a realism mod can do it better, but IMO M2TW encourages varied and historic armies - at least more than MTW where things were a little too generic.

[All my comments are SP only. MP balance is much more demanding, but not my thing.]

[chunkynut]

2 words 'Sherwood Archers' :D

Just made my first unit, gonna try them out tonight, better stats than retinue longbows.

As the English the only faction that has outshot me has been the mongols ... and they have missile capabilities in virtually every unit.

[Lord of the Isles]

I've been a little disappointed with the English missile troops too. Or to be more accurate, their missile troops are not too bad it's just that other factions get cheap crossbowmen and mercenary crossbowmen which seem to be able to compete well v the various longbowmen. I suspect those should be toned down to give a better balance.

[Clearchus]

2 words 'Sherwood Archers' :D

Just made my first unit, gonna try them out tonight, better stats than retinue longbows.

As the English the only faction that has outshot me has been the mongols ... and they have missile capabilities in virtually every unit.

Yeah, don't forget the longbowmen are not the best archer unit for England. Sherwood archers are better.

[chunkynut]

Yeah, don't forget the longbowmen are not the best archer unit for England. Yeoman Archers are better, as are the Sherwoods.

The base Longbows aren't bad but there are Yeoman Archers then Retinue Longbows, so there is an advanced longbow unit aswell.

Then there are the Sherwood Archers that have even better stats than the Retinue Longbows.

I think the issue is between SP and MP on this thread some are speaking in soley SP terms (econ21 for example) and some are speaking about MP (dismounted archers for the french, in MP but not SP etc).

I didn't see Scots Guard at all on my English campaign but thats probably because I left the French to stew in Dijon (a city) for about 50 years after taking the rest of their regions.

With the bog standard - base level - non upgraded Longbows I have found that with 2 units on a single Dismounted Chivalous Knights can reduce the unit to 2/3s its original size. And this isn't against a non-armoured unit in which you'd expect to see larger casualties.

Entire armies have routed before they hit my infantry because of the losses they recieved on the march to them.

The Scots Guard are fine - one of the most clearly historical units in the game. They were elite, so I am not going to quibble about a +1 attack. A player who spams them is just like someone who spams VG or JHI - putting gameplay above history (which is fine, but they should not complain the game is ahistoric if they indulge in such cheese).

Exactly, if you can spam this unit and you want to then what is the problem, same thing with MTW and Almohad Urban Militia, people complained that entire armies of them made the campaign too easy .... simple, don't be stupid and balance your army, or don't complain. If there was a MP campaign then these may be valid complaints not self indulgence of creating a uniform uber army.