Archery in M2 - Analysis from in-game testing

[dopp]

Yes, but what I'm saying is that you can see your enemies' arrows coming at you and take cover. They do take a while to travel the distance.

I'm pretty sure the longbows would have brought shields along if expecting lots of well-protected archers. Hence part of the reason why Retinues have those small shields.

[Alatien]

Great analysis!

Some threads ago (I cant find the old thread) I have posted my test of Genoese XB Militia vs various units. Among them were Longbowmen, Yoeman, and Retine units. I have tested on 2 ranges:

Long:
GXBM has defeated (less losses) Longbows, tied with Yoemen, and lost to Retine.

Medium:
From my testing GXBM has beaten all of them (I believe 2 tests each) with Retine coming close.

My conclusion:

On Medium range crossbows (GXBM) have large advantage. Seems that on Long range the bolts are sent in steep parabola, that reduces their killing power (very realistic). However on Medium range, when XB fire in shallow trajectory, they are quite devastating. Short range, thou not tested 1 on 1, is even more deadly from XB. That I have noticed in campaign, where GXBM managed to kill 21 armoured spearmen in 1 short range volley. Looked like entire 1st rank was wiped out.

And please, if you want to rant about hisory find another target. I am not going there.

PS. All test conducted fairly = level, nul exp/arm/attack, 2 difficulties M and H.

[Reapz]

The pavise was usually held by someone else, so he could always vary the angle at which it was held..... The Genoese at Crecy were sent into battle hastily and left their pavises on the wagons, with predictable results.

We need a new Assassin function - "Sabotage Pavise Wagon" or - "Steal Pavise Wagon".

[Reapz]

Alatien thanks for the feedback and input

Some threads ago (I cant find the old thread) I have posted my test of Genoese XB Militia vs various units. Among them were Longbowmen, Yoeman, and Retine units. I have tested on 2 ranges:

Long:
GXBM has defeated (less losses) Longbows, tied with Yoemen, and lost to Retine.

Medium:
From my testing GXBM has beaten all of them (I believe 2 tests each) with Retine coming close

I found the thread
Here is the salient info:

Meanshile I have done some testing, all on flat ground, Medium difficult and on still, not rainy day. Both sides deployed in loose formations, firing on long/medium ranges. The results below show the final numbers in units (starting 60) after depleting ammo by both sides:

Gen. Crossbow Mili. vs Longbowmen
36 - 20

Gen. Crossbow Mili. vs Yoeman Archers
33 - 6

Gen. Crossbow Mili. vs Aventurier
56 - 5

Gen. Crossbow Mili. vs Pav. Crossbow Mili.
42 - 25

Gen. Crossbow Mili. vs Musketeers (just to see how they do vs gunpoder unit)
0 - 41

I have also tried on Hard setting and i got
Gen. Crossbow Mili. vs Longbowmen
44 - 7
51 - 6

These all seem to be amazing results, especially since it is a Militia unit! And an early one! Add to this a decent melee skill and low price. The main disadvantage is longer reload time, but if used correctly this doesnt hurt that much.

Anyone has other experiences?

The reason your results are different? You stated that, - "The results below show the final numbers in units (starting 60) after depleting ammo by both sides"

If you watch the battle you will see the longbowmen shoot 40 arrows in the time it takes the Crossbow Militia to shoot 24 bolts. After that exchange longbowmen are well ahead and that's where I stopped. The reason:

Seems almost worse to compare those numbers (no offense). I wouldn't have let my longbowmen stay within range of the enemy if they were out of arrows. Why should the test?

Your numbers had the longbowmen stay in range of enemy projectiles, without returning any fire, after they had exhausted their arrows to let the crossbowmen shoot their remaining bolts. The advantage the developers gave the longbowmen was rate of fire not attack points. So if you keep them under fire long enough for slower units to fire all their projectiles you nullify their advantage.

BTW this is an example of why it is really helpful if people have different results or impressions that they post their test setup so we can reconcile any differences and learn from them (friendly @ CeltiberoMordred)

Thanks again Alatien. One final thing I would say is that if you look at my tests you will see that the results can vary markedly from test to test under identical conditions so you might want to run say 5 tests of each scenario to be sure.

[Bob the Insane]

I am very interested in this discussion but I am having some conceptual issues with the decission to retreat the Longbow once they are out of ammo.

Thiis is not because it is a sensible thing to do (it is) but how can you define this as a victory for the Longbowmen? Even if they have scored more kills up to this point they are the ones who quit the field while the crossbows are still firing? In an SP battle some unit (if not the Longbows) are going to absorb those bolts.

I guess if the effect you are looking for is the decimate the enemy missile troops and then start advancing your infantry to engage once your missle units are spent then Longbow has superiority going by your statistic. But is a defensive engagement where you are defending with Longbows then unless they are capable of actually driving off the enemy xbows before they run out of ammo then those xBow bolts will hit some of your units.

So I would say the Longbows superiority is situational. But then I guess that fits with the whole, there is no uber unit thing. Just the right tools for the right job, decent tactics and use of ground and a little luck.

[Reapz]

I am very interested in this discussion but I am having some conceptual issues with the decission to retreat the Longbow once they are out of ammo.

Thiis is not because it is a sensible thing to do (it is) but how can you define this as a victory for the Longbowmen? Even if they have scored more kills up to this point they are the ones who quit the field while the crossbows are still firing? In an SP battle some unit (if not the Longbows) are going to absorb those bolts.

I guess if the effect you are looking for is the decimate the enemy missile troops and then start advancing your infantry to engage once your missle units are spent then Longbow has superiority going by your statistic. But is a defensive engagement where you are defending with Longbows then unless they are capable of actually driving off the enemy xbows before they run out of ammo then those xBow bolts will hit some of your units.

So I would say the Longbows superiority is situational. But then I guess that fits with the whole, there is no uber unit thing. Just the right tools for the right job, decent tactics and use of ground and a little luck.

Bob my point about "how can you define this as a victory for the Longbowmen?" is that Sonny WiFiHr had said crossbowmen own longbowmen head to head; I would say they don't and outcome depends on several things including experience and how you use the units. I think the testing shows that.

I'm trying to get people who have gripes about unit balance to consider the possibility that they may get a better result if they are willing to change the way they use units, or at least understand a little better their strengths and weaknesses. Longbows have a faster rate of fire but are weakly armored compared with crossbows. So if you fight them head to head get your longbowmen in and back out as soon as they're done, then make your move with a tactic other than missile fire.

You're right about "superiority is situational". That's true in war. From a gaming perspective isn't that a good thing though? If they were just an uber unit that always won there would be no scope for tactics and less fun overall I think.

[Alatien]

@ Reapz

Thanks for having a great (non-ranting) discussion. What a pleasant change


Yep, I agree with the argument, following tests are up to 1st ammo depletion.

Since the test are mostly at max range, I was wondering what the effect of shorter range is. So I have made few additional tests at 2 ranges:
MEDIUM (60-75% of max range)
SHORT (25-30% of max range).

Test on grass plain, sunny, no exp/arm/wep mods, Medium diff., alternating player choice. Unites tested: Longbowmen (LB) and Genoese Crossbow Militia (GXBM)

Here are results - men count at test end:


Player -- Range -- GXBM -- LB -- Test end trigger
GXBM --- Medium --- 27 ---- 9 ---- LB out of ammo
GXBM --- Medium --- 37 ---- 5 ---- LB run away
LB ------ Medium --- 23 ---- 35 --- LB out of ammo
LB ------ Medium --- 20 ---- 33 --- LB out of ammo
GXBM --- Short ----- 39 ---- 7 ---- LB out of ammo
GXBM --- Short ----- 25 ---- 2 ---- LB run away
LB ------ Short ----- 14 ---- 21 --- LB out of ammo
LB ------ Short ----- 20 ---- 3 ---- LB run away

AVERAGE Medium -- 26.75 -- 20.5
AVERAGE Short ---- 24.5 --- 8.25

This shows that at short range XB are very effective. It must be added that XB usually lost between 2-5 men while advancing, whil LB lost on average 2.

In general I am suprised by these results. I thought that at Medium range LB will completly own XB since they manage to get 2-3 volleys for "free". But Medium seems rather balanced. Again, hats off for CA.

[Reapz]

Alatien

Very interesting - again shows the value of testing.

BTW I tried testing against AI as Milan using their Genoese Crossbowmen (non-militia) against basic longbowmen and I found that the AI crossbowmen start at long range but then as the battle proceeds they advance to short range by themselves. They advance one to three times during the battle - essentially move in for the kill when they are winning the exchange. You might want to run that scenario just to watch the AI do that.

[Lord Condormanius]

Well put. I agree woth just about everything you say. I love my longbowmen and I have not ever had any problem with them that I thought I needed to write angrily about. I use them wisely and am aware of their weaknesses. More importantly, I use them with they understanding that they are not and were not invincible, nor were they meant to be.

[Lord Condormanius]

Why on earth would you let missle units that are out of ammo stand in range of those who do. That would be a silly test proving only that longbowmen can get killed easier when they are out of ammo.

[dopp]

Then the longbowmen will be even more effective, since they can frontload their damage and run away before the crossbows can take revenge.

[JCoyote]

Then the longbowmen will be even more effective, since they can frontload their damage and run away before the crossbows can take revenge.

Actually I have an issue with the game engine there, in that ALL loading of all units is performed before firing. While this is very true of archers and siege weapons, it shouldn't be true of... just about anything else out there. While even if an archer's got his arrow nocked, he'll still have to draw once he reaches his firing position. Crossbows and firearms should always get off the first volley if other factors like range are equal. Crossbowmen should have their weapon's loaded long before approaching the enemy; they should be able to run up and fire immediately.

After all, the earliest crossbows were small and worthless against armor, they were a way of keeping a bow at ready without tiring out your arm. That advantage needs to be in the engine.

This is also a big issue for the ribault, as an anti-infantry weapon I shouldn't have to wait til an enemy is within firing range before they even start loading the weapon.