Getting Good Cav Charges

[Carl]

I know this was discussed to death in another thread, however I never saw a clear consensus achieved, so I’d like to hear how you manage it, (unpatched BTW). As the method I used in the Gold Edition Demo, (right click once and let them walk up, then they lower lances and charge once in range), just doesn’t work at all. They get spread out while walking and then do terrible as they don't do a formed charge.

In addition, when I tell units to withdraw from combat I’m getting an annoying situation where they literally ignore the order totally, and I know they are ignoring it was other selected units do it but one or 2 always ignore it and keep fighting.

Between these two problems I’ve lost easily a half a dozen generals and 1000's of cavalry in just 4 campaigns (I’ve quit most of them because of this bug). It's particularly troublesome in battles that are against me as I often use bodyguard cav charges in RTW to turn the tide. This doesn’t work in M2TW, and it utter murder winning such battles.

[econ21]

I'd like to hear this question discussed in the context of the post-patch game (no objection to discussing it pre-patch as well). I suspect most gamers here have patched the game and cavalry charges were changed with the patch to make them easier to get off.

[Skott]

Prepatch couldnt get charges to work at all. Post-patch its sorta hit and miss. Sometimes they charge and sometimes they dont. Most times they dont I'm experiencing. When they do charge properly its amazing to watch! The AI doesnt seem to have any trouble doing it though. Obviously CA needs to do some more work on the cavalry charges.

Just my two florin

[Foz]

Yeah... some thoughts:

1. Get the patch. It helps a ton. Also, it seems that the charges will go off with single- or double-click attacks post-patch which is really great if you need your guys to hurry, but still charge. For me, even the post-patch charges weren't totally spot on though. That brings up 2:
2. Mod charge distances in the export_desc_unit.txt file. The originally proposed changes here were to set units with original settings to the new settings as follows (via find and replace):

stat_charge_dist 30 -> stat_charge_dist 9
stat_charge_dist 40 -> stat_charge_dist 12
stat_charge_dist 45 -> stat_charge_dist 22

Props to --HorseArcher-- for the idea and initial modification. 30 and 40 are the 2 charge distances used for infantry, while 45 is that of cavalry in the vanilla file. The benefit of lowering the charge distances is that the units will maintain a good tight formation for much longer into the approach, only breaking into a charge much later. This in turn tends to keep them grouped better even as they impact, and additionally makes the charges go off correctly more (almost 100% from what I've seen) of the time.

For my tastes, though, 9 and 12 were too low for infantry - the guys are almost close enough to shave each other before they start trying to charge, and it's especially weird looking if the target tries to counter-charge. I tried the following, and was much more pleased - the charges are still more accurate than vanilla settings, and happen late... but not so late as to look unnatural:

stat_charge_dist 30 -> stat_charge_dist 15
stat_charge_dist 40 -> stat_charge_dist 20
stat_charge_dist 45 -> stat_charge_dist 22

That's what I'm using at the moment, though I will probably push the cav setting up to 25. Having it at 22, I've watched as an infantry group counter-charged, and the cav just barely got lances down in time. An extra 3 should do the trick I think... plus 15/20/25 looks really nice

[Skott]

Keep us posted how that works out for you, Foz. I may try your mod myself but I'll wait for you to test it a bit more before changing the distance myself. looking forward to your results.

[Hamburglo]

Arrange cav 3 ranks deep, perpendicular to the target at a decent distance.

Right click on the target.

Press R.

Watch.

The only vital part of a charge now is that before the cavalry begin the final lances-down charge they must be facing the target unit directly and be in a coherent formation. Giving them plenty of time walking (or running) towards the target outside of charge distance helps them bind together a lot. A couple of small things can still hinder them, such as the target unit being spread all over the show but its less hinderance than it was pre-patch. Works 99% of the time for me, and when it doesn't, I know what I did wrong.

If you keep in mind that they're an OFFENSIVE weapon, and you use them accordingly, you'll have muchos success. The 1st units to hit the enemy line in my battles are the heavy cavalry. Once they've killed their lot, withdraw them and throw in the infantry. You could withdraw and charge again if they're not taking too many losses. Offense, offense, offense!

Its still very difficult to charge in settlements although its a minor sort of point.

[RTKBarrett]

In multiplayer ive found units with lances such as knights are best used two lines depth... its important to have them lined up with the target before the charge otherwise it becomes a bit messy.
Myself and others have found that once a cavalry unit draws swords after initial charge then reforms, they rarely go back to using their lances... Ive tried alt + attack and its had better results with the charge *use of lance* than just double right click.

[Carl]

Obviously CA needs to do some more work on the cavalry charges.

They just need to change it back to how it was in RTW. If I’ve heard correctly it's the same engine as RTW so it should be easy to do.

Thanks for the info BTW, I’m holding of on the patch because I’m still somewhat new to the TW games despite my RTW experience, (only had that a week), so I don't want to put up with mad naval invasions.

The advice of getting them opposite the target is good, but honestly I don't really have the time for that most of the time. My cav have 3 distinct jobs in RTW, (and even more so in M2TW with no infantry based cav counter being around), one was to charge enemy cav units by using my cav en-mass, Phalanx units where always bypassed and the Romans don't have any counter cav inf units early on. second, was to charge enemy missile units whilst the infantry lines closed, and the third was to charge the flanks and rear of enemy inf once the battle lines had closed. Now i lose 90% of my cav just dealing with enemy cav as mine refuse to charge.

The problem really is the way the formation falls apart totally whenever they go ANYWHERE. it get so spread out and never comes back together that it's never going to do a formed charge. In the demo, generals bodyguard actually kept formation at least.

I'll try the charge distances though.

[Von Nanega]

Actually Carl, I think the Naval invasions are not so bad. You should patch it up so that cav gets some fixes. Also, the naval invasions add some fun gameplay IMO.

[Carl]

I might try it TBH as i've abbandoned umpteen campagins because of it to date.

[Ulstan]

They just need to change it back to how it was in RTW.

But all forms of cavalry are far too powerful in RTW :D

[Doug-Thompson]

I've started using waypoints.

Charging across a battlefield filled with troops is more a factor of luck than skill. So now I set waypoints to some clear area beside or behind the target unit and at an appropriate distance.

Try setting a waypoint or waypoints, then click on the target unit. Your cavalry will advance to the waypoint(s) unless they are interfered with, then charge.

By the way, I can't find it if there's any mention of how to set waypoints in the instructions or the key-mapping screen. Hold down "shift" and right-click.

[gardibolt]

I have the same problem mentioned above about cavalry refusing to withdraw (playing England, M/M patched). It happens well over half the time. So if I have them charge, I have to make sure 1) they'll either rout the unit they hit or 2) make sure they have plenty of infantry backup or 3) leave them to die.

[Skott]

Yeah, getting them to withdraw is difficult at times but thats true of any unit in this game. RTW units did withdraw easier IMO. In M2TW once committed the units seem to be more stubborn about withdrawing or disengaging once they are into the thick of it than in RTW. The pathing problem in M2TW doesnt help any either.

Not trying to critisize CA but there are a whole lotta little things in this game they shouldnt have missed if they play tested it. My guess is they knew about it but sent the game out as is and decided to patch it later. Same thing happened in RTW. The publisher may have had alot to do with this though. The gaming industry is full of this type of decisions.

[PaulTa]

Just my two cents real quickly...

The cavalry charges in Rome and the cavalry charges in MTW2 are, as far as I see, different things. The difference is that in MTW2 we have cavalry with lances, and I don't remember any such thing in Rome. Since one needs to get enough distance between the target and the enemy unit to actually build up speed and lower lances, just "reverting back to Rome" would probably seriously damage game mechanics.

[Carl]

@PualTa: In RTW they had spears instead of lances, same thing, just a smaller version, theirs no intrinsic problem because of lance as they're just bigger versions of the spears.

But all forms of cavalry are far too powerful in RTW :D

Maybe, but they're even worse now, if you can get a good charge reguarly you'll use them all the time, If you can't you'll abbandon them. So if they are usd they are even more overpowered. in RTW they could just adjust the power with stats, here the power of the charge is such that nothing they do is going to help.

Not trying to critisize CA but there are a whole lotta little things in this game they shouldnt have missed if they play tested it. My guess is they knew about it but sent the game out as is and decided to patch it later.

I've heard some people saying that the game was finiished so last minute that it never got ANY playtesting, (which makes a lot of sense with so many of these bugs), but I don't know weather they where telling the truth about being "in the know".

[dopp]

M2TW cavalry have new charge mechanics that make them devastating, much more so than RTW. For me this is understandable as the focus of this game is on knights, whereas RTW was mostly about infantry. To compensate, charges are also harder to pull off (to be fair, the cohesion bug seems to have made them much harder to pull off than intended). From the blog on Update 2, it seems that CA is moving back in the direction of RTW (less powerful but more consistent charges).

[JCoyote]

@PualTa: In RTW they had spears instead of lances, same thing, just a smaller version, theirs no intrinsic problem because of lance as they're just bigger versions of the spears.
Actually a lance is significantly different from a spear. It has much more mass, and has no real utility outside of a charge. Lances developed AFTER stirrups for a reason, there wasn't any use for them until a rider could anchor himself to a horse better. It's like comparing an assault rifle to an MG... sure, they both spray bullets, but one is a multi tasker while the other is highly specialized to perform one task MUCH better.

[Foz]

Actually a lance is significantly different from a spear. It has much more mass, and has no real utility outside of a charge. Lances developed AFTER stirrups for a reason, there wasn't any use for them until a rider could anchor himself to a horse better. It's like comparing an assault rifle to an MG... sure, they both spray bullets, but one is a multi tasker while the other is highly specialized to perform one task MUCH better.

Agreed on most counts. If you charged with a spear the same way you do with a lance, odds are you'd snap your spear long before penetrating the enemy's armor, it's just not built in a way that can withstand so much force being put on it. The heavier and broad-to-narrow construction of a lance is intended to bear all that force on the tip, letting the rider focus so much energy on a small spot of the enemy that the enemy's armor becomes pierced.

As for lances being developed after stirrups, though, I'm not certain when each was invented. I do know that stirrups, and indeed even a saddle, are not necessary at all in order to use a lance effectively. A rider can grip the horse sufficiently enough to accomplish a devastating charge using only his legs. The most useful piece of riding equipment for this purpose is actually the saddle, which aids the rider in not sliding backward off of the horse. This is because the primary force on the rider lifts him up and backward with respect to the horse - the first due to the target typically being lower than the rider's hand which carries the lance, and the second because of the target being in front of the rider. A target more to the side would push the rider oppositely (i.e. a 45 degree right target would push a lancer back and left) however in practice this is not possible as either the lance snaps, or simply glances off the target harmlessly. A narrow field (say 15 degrees either way) in front of the rider is the only viable impact angle to appropriately focus the energy and utilize the lance to great effect. Stirrups are almost entirely inconsequential to a lance charge, as they do nothing to counteract the up and back force being applied to the rider upon impact. The rider will, however, have great use for those stirrups directly after the charge, as they are tremendously helpful for standing up in the saddle and thus making the most effective use of his sword - in fact, as far as combat is concerned, this of course is the primary usefulness of stirrups.

[katank]

The lack of lance charges before stirrups is a complete myth. Iranian cataphracts were using lances effective in early history. Even if you read about medieval knights in classics like Ivanhoe, they talk of gripping the horse with your legs as that's the biggest force you can apply to prevent yourself from sliding off. The hand guard on the lance is useful though to prevent your hand from sliding forward, thus reducing the impact.

[BigTex]

Gah another stirrup debate......

The saddle is what is important for a lance charge. A solid saddle, developed well before the romans, can hold the man implace, and absorb the impact. The stirrup is there for after the lance charge. So you have a stable position to lean out from and swing with your weapon of choice.

Lance charges have been around since the days of Alexander and before. Let's not forget he's the man who created the wedge they use in the game. That formation's soley relly's on the lance charge to be effective. Stirrup's are not neccesary for a lance charge, they merely speed up the time it takes to train heavy cavalry.

The Kontos was a lance, not a spear. More of the reason lance technology didn't advance before the stirrup was that heavy cavalry wasnt used alot until the stirrup. Cavalrymen take alot of time to train, the stirrup made this faster, more cavalry more of a need to get better lances. During the classical period cavalry werent as important. Heavy infantry was more important in those days. Just look at the rate the pike developed in the classical period. Went from a simple 6 foot spear to a massive 16+foot pike.

Just like any other technology, lances developed when there was more of a need for them. Without the ease of training the stirrup helped to create there wouldn't be a need to have better lances. The stirrup was not neccesary for the charge, it merely decreased the training time, as with the saddle.

Back to the actual topic. Knights wont always listen to your orders to withdraw. They have the trait of charging without orders, and that means they will also stay engaged without orders. There heavy cavalry anyways, withdrawing them after a charge is going to cause massive cassualties. Plan your charges so you will not need to withdraw. Hit their flanks head on, so you can ride through if neccesary. Don't expect to be able to turn and run out after hiting their center.

A wise idea would be to have light infantry as a back up for your knights. Send them in once the knights have charged. That will make it easier for them to withdrawl. Don't use heavy infantry though, as their too slow. Quick peasants or spear units work fine.

[Skott]

I never considered cavalry in RTW overpowering personally. One thing that made cavalry good in RTW was that the infantry units didnt always turn to when cavalry were charging from behind. This made it easy to hit infantry untits with cavalry in RTW. So far from my experience in M2TW I see the enemy units turning to defend against cavalry more often than in RTW. Which is a smart thing for any unit to do. Assuming they arent engaged in a fight already.

My biggest gripe about M2TW calvalry is getting the charges to work as intended. That walking up to a fight bug just drives me nuts. As I mentioned before the patch helped but more tweaking is needed.

[Carl]

Actually a lance is significantly different from a spear. It has much more mass, and has no real utility outside of a charge. Lances developed AFTER stirrups for a reason, there wasn't any use for them until a rider could anchor himself to a horse better. It's like comparing an assault rifle to an MG... sure, they both spray bullets, but one is a multi tasker while the other is highly specialized to perform one task MUCH better.

None of that has ANY relevance to PualTa's point however, he tried claiming lances worked differently IN GAME in M2TW to how spears worked for cav in RTW. They don't they work exactly the same, lower them and charge in at high speed is the basic description.

I don't know how it worked in terms of the actual behind the scenes stuff in RTW, but all it looked like was that if the unit was going above a particular speed when it hit it got all the bonuses associated with charging. That was all their was in game to it.

In fact, (pure speculation), I suspect the whole formed charges bug stems from the way animations now trump stats, in effect they only uses their lances under specific circumstances. these create the bug as when they don't happened they don't get the benefit of the Lance and thus the charge bonuses that are tied to it. An easy way to check this would be to take away all their non-lance weapons and see how they do.

Plan your charges so you will not need to withdraw. Hit their flanks head on, so you can ride through if neccesary. Don't expect to be able to turn and run out after hiting their center.

The problem here is that more often than not my knights fail to charge properly, (although I’m getting better), and spear units are cheap an plentiful early on. If you don't wipe them out with a formed charge they are as deadly to cav in M2TW as in RTW, it's only the formed charge that’s really neutering spears ATM. I've even massacred Generals Bodyguard cav with English spear militia before with acceptable losses, (3 units, about 50% losses on each unit).

The disobey problem defiantly isn't related to charge without orders as where talking Generals bodyguard cav and Hobladiers and Mailed Knights here rather, all of which don't have this. it only seems to happen when I order them as a group, individually they always try to run off. However, as a group, some units will simply ignore the order.

Thanks for the replys guys, allthough TBH i'm auto resolving a lot now so it raerly matters anymore.

[Kraggenmor]

By the way, I can't find it if there's any mention of how to set waypoints in the instructions or the key-mapping screen. Hold down "shift" and right-click.

Not that is shouldn't be in the manual - should - but, using way points is covered in the tutorial.

[Kagemusha]

I rather like the cavalry charge method in M2TW. During my games the thing to have succesfull charges is to line up your cavalry before a charge. I usually line them only 2 ranks deep so they dont get too mixed up if the distance of the charge is even little bit longer then short. In RTW you could pick your whole cavalry wing,right click them first near the flank or rear of the enemy and double click the whole lot of units at one point and each unit would execute a perfect charge no matter if they would have to go through half of thousend of friendly cavalry troops before.
Now in M2TW if you try a massed cavalry charge without exact commands for individual units,most likely it will turn into complete mess or you just dont get a devastating impact since only few units will actually charge the enemy. I think this is just the way it should be.If the cavalry units get mixed or other cavalry units in front of them are engaged already on melee they cant execute a good charge. All you need to do in order to get good charges is to: 1.Start the charge from orderly formation. 2.dont try to charge for too long distances. 3.Dont mass charge a single unit with multiple units or they get mixed and possibly wont charge at all.

[Carl]

I rather like the cavalry charge method in M2TW. During my games the thing to have succesfull charges is to line up your cavalry before a charge. I usually line them only 2 ranks deep so they dont get too mixed up if the distance of the charge is even little bit longer then short. In RTW you could pick your whole cavalry wing,right click them first near the flank or rear of the enemy and double click the whole lot of units at one point and each unit would execute a perfect charge no matter if they would have to go through half of thousend of friendly cavalry troops before.
Now in M2TW if you try a massed cavalry charge without exact commands for individual units,most likely it will turn into complete mess or you just dont get a devastating impact since only few units will actually charge the enemy. I think this is just the way it should be.If the cavalry units get mixed or other cavalry units in front of them are engaged already on melee they cant execute a good charge. All you need to do in order to get good charges is to: 1.Start the charge from orderly formation. 2.dont try to charge for too long distances. 3.Dont mass charge a single unit with multiple units or they get mixed and possibly wont charge at all.

And everything you've listed as liking is exactly what WRONG with cav charges in M2TW they require far too much micromanagement because you have to order every unit around separately, you can't turn a big number of cav units lose on one enemy unit, something you HAVE to do when flank charging. Finally the cav charges are simply too powerful, yet with the current system of formed charging it's simply not possible to use cav as the powerful flankers they once where and they now NEED to be able to deal with the enemy head on.

It's also not unrealistic how 3 units could charge at once and work perfectly, the reality is that training would kick in and they'd form up during the charge into 1 single really large unit, rather than staying as 3 separate units getting in each others way, (which is what happens in game). representing this would be nightmarishly difficult to code so the odd happenings of RTW are an acceptable, (allthough not good), compromise until they do decide to code a feature like that in.

[Kagemusha]

And everything you've listed as liking is exactly what WRONG with cav charges in M2TW they require far too much micromanagement because you have to order every unit around separately, you can't turn a big number of cav units lose on one enemy unit, something you HAVE to do when flank charging. Finally the cav charges are simply too powerful, yet with the current system of formed charging it's simply not possible to use cav as the powerful flankers they once where and they now NEED to be able to deal with the enemy head on.

It's also not unrealistic how 3 units could charge at once and work perfectly, the reality is that training would kick in and they'd form up during the charge into 1 single really large unit, rather than staying as 3 separate units getting in each others way, (which is what happens in game). representing this would be nightmarishly difficult to code so the odd happenings of RTW are an acceptable, (allthough not good), compromise until they do decide to code a feature like that in.

Well everybody is entitled into opinion. When flanking you could always choose the cavalry group you want and drag them in right position where you want them, before charging,Instead then double clicking them all over the battlefield.Or when charging a battle line pick individual targets for individual units.In my opinion in RTW all you need to do to rout the enemy was to get them cavalry beyond the reach of enemys battleline in order to rout them and that is not what i look forward for tactical battle game.
About collision of 3 cavalry units before their target and succesfully continuing charge.Please give me an any example from cavalry history when charging cavalry units which have mixed and collided with eachother have succesfully continued their charge without loosing cohesion.Ofcourse you could get rid of the problem for example ordering your cavalry group of there in column where units charge in in waves, but you have to imagine the situation where for example "the 80 Knights of "Duke Godfrey" have already charged the enemy spearmen line and Baron Huntington cant charge becouse he would not hit the enemy spearmen,but the backs of Godfrey´s men. So Baron Huntington Goes around the Spearmen to find an exposure and hits in there with full force". I would suggest that you practice some more how to command cavalry in M2TW,rather then demand that it should be turned back like it was in RTW. But ofcourse if you dont like to command your troops in detail you are completely entitled of doing just that.

[Carl]

I agree on the opinions stuff BTW, wasn't trying to suggest anything against you, I was just pointing out that what you'd described as liking was what I disliked so much.

Your right in that I can't come up with any examples of units joining from history, and that’s because it wouldn't have been documented as most likely it would have been both common and unknown, (nobody would have actually realised it had happened IMO), the units wouldn't have realised they'd merged. It wouldn't have been the leaders saying "lets merge", it would have been two, (or more), units coming close together and getting intermingled, at which point all that training would have taken over and they'd have acted just like a single big unit. even when charging a single unit along with several other units they wouldn't have gone smashing into each other as they got so close to the target that they started to intermingle. Training would have taken over and everyone would have kept the appropriate distance.

The idea of picking separate targets on the enemy battle-line works fine when you can attack different targets without having to go through other enemy units. However when your on the flank you CANNOT do this.

You COULD go right round the rear, but in that time the enemy infantry will probably rip your pinning units apart as the requirements of formed charges mean you have to go right round and some distance behind before you can pull off a useful rear charge.

Now you probably ARE going to pull me up on my comment about the pinning force getting ripped to shreds. the reason is that with charging being as it is, i'll only bother trying to go around the enemy army now if i believe I can't beat them head on with a cav charge followed by infantry backup. In that instance the enemy would have to be superior to my units and I need to get into the flanks of my enemy very quickly.

On the other hand I understand your frustration with RTW, it was daft a lot of the time, (even I think that), but most of this has to do with the fact that their where very few spear armed units I could see that where not also phalanx units. As a result I found it very hard to get my infantry to face cavalry, and thus counter them. As a result cav totally dominate things as they can get flank and rear charges at will. A greater minimum charge distance for cav, (to give more reaction time), and a greater number of non-phalanx spear units would have helped tremendously.

Your point about not liking lots detail management I’m going to leave alone, except to say that for me the less speed clicking a game requires, (yes, even a Real-Time one), the better I believe the strategy component is, (as the game focuses more on that and less on micro). I won't say any more as it will develop into a "Micro" flame war if I do.

[Kagemusha]

I agree on the opinions stuff BTW, wasn't trying to suggest anything against you, I was just pointing out that what you'd described as liking was what I disliked so much.

Your right in that I can't come up with any examples of units joining from history, and that’s because it wouldn't have been documented as most likely it would have been both common and unknown, (nobody would have actually realised it had happened IMO), the units wouldn't have realised they'd merged. It wouldn't have been the leaders saying "lets merge", it would have been two, (or more), units coming close together and getting intermingled, at which point all that training would have taken over and they'd have acted just like a single big unit. even when charging a single unit along with several other units they wouldn't have gone smashing into each other as they got so close to the target that they started to intermingle. Training would have taken over and everyone would have kept the appropriate distance.

The idea of picking separate targets on the enemy battle-line works fine when you can attack different targets without having to go through other enemy units. However when your on the flank you CANNOT do this.

You COULD go right round the rear, but in that time the enemy infantry will probably rip your pinning units apart as the requirements of formed charges mean you have to go right round and some distance behind before you can pull off a useful rear charge.

Now you probably ARE going to pull me up on my comment about the pinning force getting ripped to shreds. the reason is that with charging being as it is, i'll only bother trying to go around the enemy army now if i believe I can't beat them head on with a cav charge followed by infantry backup. In that instance the enemy would have to be superior to my units and I need to get into the flanks of my enemy very quickly.

On the other hand I understand your frustration with RTW, it was daft a lot of the time, (even I think that), but most of this has to do with the fact that their where very few spear armed units I could see that where not also phalanx units. As a result I found it very hard to get my infantry to face cavalry, and thus counter them. As a result cav totally dominate things as they can get flank and rear charges at will. A greater minimum charge distance for cav, (to give more reaction time), and a greater number of non-phalanx spear units would have helped tremendously.

Your point about not liking lots detail management I’m going to leave alone, except to say that for me the less speed clicking a game requires, (yes, even a Real-Time one), the better I believe the strategy component is, (as the game focuses more on that and less on micro). I won't say any more as it will develop into a "Micro" flame war if I do.

I apologize if i my reply came out as agressive and im happy that you dont want to turn the discussion into "micro" flame war. If you are worried about your infantry line not holding as long for the cavalry to act as the hammer when the infantry is your anvil.I do my flanking manouver this way: When offensive once you see that you are going to capture the end of the enemys infantry line on fight with your own infantry.Select your cavalry wing from that side and draw them in a single line near the flank of enemy line.

cav
------             
archers                    I
--------                   I Your cav
enemy inf.                 I
-------------              I

From there you can aim each cavalry unit to deploy a devastating charge and keep track where you want more routing power to deploy.If your infantry line is not completely inferior to enemys line it should hold for the time it will take from you to deploy. To save your men in your inf line i suggest to switch your archers to shoot on targets behind the main battle line so they wont hit your own troops.If the enemy tryes to turn its infantry towards your cavalry they will be doomed becouse your infantry can attack the opened flank.If they stay on place they are doomed aswell, becouse soon they have lances on their sides or backs.

[crpcarrot]

i just feel some people want it to be more easy thats all.

charges do work and its good that u cant just double ckick and be 100% sure u cavarly will charge properly.

if people want that what double click should do is istead of immediately charging the unit shouold automatically take it self to the appropriate distace, align itself properly and then charge. this would still keep the need for proper positioning for the charge but reduce the need for micromanagement. maybe use a specail command instead of double click. but i'm sure theres be a millon post complaining that a charge takes too long.