Army-Wide Formation Techniques

[OMGLAZERS]

This thread is for anyone to post their example armies and their formation techniques. I made this thread because of the large variety of troops means that there are SO many more possibilities for formations that it might be nice to start a tactics/screenshot thread for it.

So post your whole army formation techniques. Post a screenshot of a good army for you. Whats your favorite formations for early, high and late periods?

Do you prefer to keep your calvary on the wings, or in the back for support? Archers in the front, middle, sides, back? Tell us everything so people here can go back to their campaigns and find a brand new use for their javalin tossers and billmen.

Thanks.

[katank]

For my current english army,

AAAAAA At At AAAAAAAA
(BB)SSSSSS At At SSSSSSSS(BB)
CC G CC

A is archers, At is artillery (ballista out front and catapult in back) S are spear units (militia/levy, merc if possible), B is billmen, G is general, C is cavalry, usually heavier ones closer in and light ones further out.

I mix in armored swords/dismounted knights as reserve to back up my infantry line in center or to flank.

[OMGLAZERS]

For my current english army,

AAAAAA At At AAAAAAAA
(BB)SSSSSS At At SSSSSSSS(BB)
CC G CC

A is archers, At is artillery (ballista out front and catapult in back) S are spear units (militia/levy, merc if possible), B is billmen, G is general, C is cavalry, usually heavier ones closer in and light ones further out.

I mix in armored swords/dismounted knights as reserve to back up my infantry line in center or to flank.

Nice formation. Does the Artillery at front pose any problems for calvalry charges? I usually never use Ballistae (should I be?) since they seem too weak for the exposed risk.

Often I have the classic Spears, Archers dual layer with calvalry on either side along with shock troops.

My armies tend to be pretty long and rather thin.

[BigTex]

I prefer hannible's weak center formation for the double to full envelope.
__________________A
_________________MMM
_______________AHMMMHA
______________ H___G___H
__C ____________ H_____H____________C


M=Militia, other weak infantry.
A=Archers.
H=Heavy infantry.
G=General.
C=cavalry.

I usually let my archers pick off as many as they can, then retreat them to help my flanks with the envelope. My cavalry's first prority is to remove any and all of the opposing forces cavalry, then to eliminate archers in the back. I let them hit my main line and let them crave their way through it. While slowly moving my heavy infantry around and forming a double envelope. After that is formed I send in my cavalry directly into their backs and let the slaughter begin.

[Somebody Else]

Because I don't fight fair.

Sally.

Current formation for use against Mongol hordes. Ranged units up on walls, cunningly placed to make as many of Kiev's cannon towers shoot as possible, as well as puncture any that come near. A unit of cheap but armoured infantry at the gate to run in and out taunting the nomadic morons closer.

Make a cup of tea, read the 'paper. Come back to see a distinct lack of horde.

[Grimmy]

I had something here to represent my basic formations for both equal force on force and when outnumbered but the forum software here dosent seem to recognized spaces and I have no clue how you got your stuff lined up without it all stacking against the left side of the page after hitting submit, so... oh well, life is hard when clueless lol.

[OMGLAZERS]

I prefer hannible's weak center formation for the double to full envelope.

I really like that formation; where'd you pick it up?

It seems like one of the major points of the game, army formations, isn't covered much by the game or the forum.

Pick it up from a history book, perhaps?

[BigTex]

I really like that formation; where'd you pick it up?

It seems like one of the major points of the game, army formations, isn't covered much by the game or the forum.

Pick it up from a history book, perhaps?

I picked it up in a history book. Except the exact crescent doesnt completely work on the games engine. It looks like a stepped crescent ingame but the there's no way to really display that on the forum. If I could figure out how to change the game from taking pictures as TGA's to something like a bitmap then I could show you.

It's quite useful. More so in EB and RTW, which I would use phalanxes on the flanks. Stepping back crescent the enemy to engage 2 units at once, meaning ones going to be on its flank wreaking havoc on morale.

[katank]

Nice formation. Does the Artillery at front pose any problems for calvalry charges? I usually never use Ballistae (should I be?) since they seem too weak for the exposed risk.

Often I have the classic Spears, Archers dual layer with calvalry on either side along with shock troops.

My armies tend to be pretty long and rather thin.

Arty isn't that much of a problem for cav charges. I'd be more worried if AI was less passive. They seem to just take it. Arty out front allows me to take nice cracks at their formations. Ballistas can't shoot unless they are all the way out front (they are afraid of TKing the meatshield out front).

Either case, I keep my spears fairly close to make them charge up when needed. Ballistae are a bit more accurate than the catapult and often can take out nice long files. The flaming bolts also does a huge number on enemy morale.

[OMGLAZERS]

Arty isn't that much of a problem for cav charges. I'd be more worried if AI was less passive. They seem to just take it. Arty out front allows me to take nice cracks at their formations. Ballistas can't shoot unless they are all the way out front (they are afraid of TKing the meatshield out front).

Either case, I keep my spears fairly close to make them charge up when needed. Ballistae are a bit more accurate than the catapult and often can take out nice long files. The flaming bolts also does a huge number on enemy morale.

I never knew ballistae were so effective.

And as for AI passivity, hopefully that will be fixed in the next patch. It kills me that battles are pretty much gathering the troops and beating down on rag dolls. It's just stupid :P

[Kobal2fr]

Depends on faction really. With the early Moors I've been trying manipular formations of Nubian Javelinmen, but that doesn't work very well should the other side have much cavalry... and blasted Jinettes.

As the Venetians/Milanese so far (and with Early troops) I use something akin to katank's formation that goes like this :

_______CCCCCCC K K CCCCCCC
____K SSSMMMSSSSSSMMMSSS K
Lc______________G_____________Lc

K being Knights, Lc being light cav (either sargeants or merchant militiamen).
S is Spears, M is infantry-killing infantry, be them swordsmen, voulges or (surprinsly enough) Caroccio servants.


French formation is about the same, only with more knights and less crossbows up front.


I find that using knights in the middle I can better deal with enemy cav charging my crossbows (since crossbows skirmish like crud due to the length of their firing animation). I used to put them on the wings to deal with that sort of thing, but they would arrive too late in most cases, and suffer much friendly fire on the way. Seems to work better for me this way.


The front knights aren't that vulnerable to enemy fire either : bows aren't effective most of the time, and crossbows I can just charge right into and either slaughter them if the AI put them too far out, or scare them into a retreat and turn back while my own crossbows do the killing bit.


When the crossbows are done shooting, the wing knights take their place, charge right at and through the enemy, closely followed by inf to mop up.


If the enemy only has spear militia and weak inf like that, I'll put the crossbows on hold ground and have the swords charge through if attacked, if their inf is good I'll let the crossbows skirmish back, rely on Italian spears to hold their inf and use the side Knights to wrap around and charge their backs.


Light cav is only for chasing down routed missiles, or for what I call knight-baiting :1 unit moves forward, he charges his knights at it, light cav races across the battleline from one wing to another with the knights in tow, crossbows pumping them full of wood all the while, and the side knights finish them off. Well, that's the idea at least, doesn't always work that smoothly .

[hode]

Just started playing yesterday...

Why do you put the archers in your front line? Don't they get slaughtered by a charging enemy?

Wouldn't it be best to put them in the rear? Or are they not smart enough to fire over your own units?

[Beren Son Of Barahi]

Most people use crossbows at the front as they shoot straight (better when shooting straight) nad most of the Italian factons have paivse (sp) corssbow militia, they have shelds as well, it means they do great damage and take little losses from enemy missile fire. also you can normaly get your archers back behind your lines when the charge comes...

lately i have been using upgraded pikes in a long thin line in guard mode, with muskets in a long thin line in their spears also in guard mode, with heavy inf and cav on the sides, arty at the back. it means that in a charge your muskets, or any missile troops can stand there ground and keep shooting. it has been really effective against the mongols (seiges) or other cav heavy armies.

[Burakius]

I usely go with this one


A=archers AT=artillery C=cavalry G=General I=infrantry melee MH=mounted archers


----- -----------MH - MH - MH - MH - MH - MH
------------------- C AT A A A A A AT C
----------------- ----I I I I I I
------------------- G

[rios]

Because your melee units will get shot at if you do that. and melee are much more expansive. In RTW this was not the case since missiles were nerfed in MP and it was harder to reach routing threshold of infantry. Now, coupled with the stronger cavs, an 70% strengthed foot unit will get annilated and fold the line.