Strategy and Tactics: How to Conduct a Battle

[Katana]

The refused flank:

This is a variation of the tactic above, really. What you do, is put all your good units on one flank, while leaving the dirt units on the other. This will allow the good flank to kill the enemies on their side, and swing back to kill the ones tied up with your dirt units. It has limited use in the late game however, as your forces are usually all-elite. But it's useful in the early game, when you have to make do with what you've got.

pardon me, but i believe you are incorrect. at least, if you are if you are referring to a tactic i usually call "denying a flank," so apologies if you are not. i usually think of what you described above as overloading a flank or using an unbalance line, but terminology is somewhat superficial.

anyways, denying a flank. denying a flank is usually employed when you are outnumbered, or when you are concerned that the enemy will attack a particular side of your battle line. the basic idea is that you form your normal line, only at the end of whatever side you are concerned about, you turn the last unit (or more, if you want, but that can be risky) 90° to the rest of your line, so they are effectively already oriented to recieve a attack on the flank. of course, you can do this on both ends and make a horseshoe-shaped line if you wish, but keep in mind your line will cover less space.

the most commonly used units to deny flanks are those which are able to fight cavalry well, since cav is most commonly used to attack flanks.

i find that it's useful to deny a flank (or both flanks) to create a pocket out of which my archers can fire safely. this is a bit like offensive linemen in american football. i also use it when my battle line is heavily outnumbered, and troop quality considerations will not allow me to streach my line out to at least match the length of my enemy's.

denying a flank was enormously useful when commanding a outnumbered battle line of phalanx spearmen, which sometimes happened in rtw. though i haven't played m2tw, i imagine it would be useful with a line of spearmen pikemen, or any line with either on the flank. of course, it can get a little hairy if you don't have spears or pikes, but swords may be able to effectively deny a flank, though their ability to do so depends heavily upon the makeup of the flanking force.

denying a flank will not protect from attacks that come from the rear, of course. if the enemy manages to manouvre around to the rear of your line, you may be forced to use...

double envelopment

double envelopment (at least as i understand it; feel free to correct me if i'm wrong) is a somewhat risky strategy to employ. the basic concept is to invite the enemy to flank your battle line (which is in this case used as bait), and then hit his engaged flanking units with your reserves. this seems counter intuitive, and it almost always results in heavy casualties for the flanked force. if you are willing to accept this however, double envelopment can be a useful tool, especially if the enemy uses valuable troops for the initial flanking.

deciding troop deployment with double envelopment is tricky. if the battle line / bait is pressured from two directions, it will likely rout - unless you commit fairly valuable infantry to that role. even then, they are likely to take heavy casualties. the general idea, as with most risky roles in battle, is to use the lowest value troops who can get the job done. in any case, if double envelopment is to be effective, your bait must be able to hold long enough for the outflankers / double envelopers (aka your reinforcements, aka the good guys) to slaugter or rout the flankers, who will likely be among the best troops the enemy commands.

double envelopment is always a gamble, since you are effectively wagering that your bait is worth less than the troops the enemy will use to flank your bait, or that you can afford to have your bait flanked from the rear. this is important to remember when considering whether to try to use it.


i'm not exactley a total war guru, so if anyone has anything to add (or any constructive critisism to make!) i am entirely open to that.

cheers!

[pike master]

refusing a flank is usually a defensive term. while attacking with economy of force in the oblique order is a whole different thing.

refusing the flank is a tactic used to keep an enemy from making his way around your flanks without weakening his middle to a center thrust. it could also be called denying the flank.

the attack in oblique order economizes your best troops into the combined arms spearhead of which its left or right flank is held and advanced in echelon so as to delay its engagement until the battle with your strongest forces is well underway and hopefully succeeding.

examples of the oblique order are the battle of leuctra, isis, guagemela

[kawligia]

Hello all. I am just coming back to the game now that I hear the overdue patch is coming out soon...

Anyway, I remember having some trouble executing some of the manuevers mentioned here.

Double envelopment was very difficult because there is no option to "fall back". All you can do is turn around and try to run the other way for a while. Also if you deploy in a "u" shape to start, the AI likes to scatter its units like a bunch of coackroaches and turns the battle into a total clusterf***. If you deploy in an "n" shape or just a plain "-" line, the AI will keep its forces together, but by the time you bring the other ones around, one side's units are already dead/routing.

One person mentioned punching a hole in the line and pushing through it. I was never able to do this because when one man in a unit gets in combat, the whole unit gets stupified. Very hard to get them to move past enemies unless there is a LOT of space which there usually isn't.

Flanking itself is somewhat tough because you have to move your forces in such a wide arc to avoid the stupification, that by the time they are in position, one side is already dead/routing.

The Denying a Flank thing never really seems necessary. The AI doesn't flank that much unless you are REALLY outnumbered and they just can't fit all their men into the melee "blob". Also, unless you are sporting pikes, the formed cavalry charge will annihilate your front anyway.

Really the only one I can get to work is to put a lot of strength on one side and make that side rout quickly. When your unit is chasing a routing unit, they don't go stupid when they get close to another enemy unit. That means you can let them push themselves (by chasing routers) past the line and then call them back to attack from the rear....but again, by the time the first unit routs, the rest are only seconds away anyway..especially since all my infantry is usually of near equal quality.

So usually what I wind up doing is just amassing huge numbers of good infantry and then its "Release the BLOB!" LOL I wish I had some of those RTW berzerkers so I could just line them up and press the "freak out" button :P GO GET 'EM! LOL

I know that realisticly these strategies are quite sound...I just can't seem to get my dudes to cooperate. If anyone has any tips on convincing the units to actually do what I want them to do, it would be worth your weight in Florins. :)

[sapi]

Good idea Foz

[Didz]

My basic battlefield strategy is as follows:

Missile troops are there to inflict the casualties and make up close to a third of my army. Mercenary Crossbowmen are the mainstay of this force unless and until I can get something better to replace them.

The rest of my army are there to protect these missile troops or expliot their success.

Spearmen/Heavy Infantry make up the largest part of my army, usually around 50%. There role is to stand in a two deep battleline and act as a mobile castle wall behind which my missile troops can withdraw if the enemy attacks. They always fight on 'Hold Formation' and only advance once my missile units have fired all their missiles. Then they simply walk over the opposition I literally just move the battleline forward to a position on the other side of the surviving enemy.

Heavy Cavarly/Generals Bodyguard. These stay at the rear of my army out of the way. They occassionally counter-charge if it looks like enemy cavalry might breach my batteline and sometimes attack the flanks of the enemy engaged with my infantry to help finish a battle early. However, their main job is to ride down and massacre the enemy infantry after they have been broken and are running for the line.

This approach seems to work against most armies and where it doesn't, such as in the case of the Mongol Horde then I use sally battles to wear them down until it does.

Use of Terrain
Again pretty simple, grab the highest ground you can find and hold it. If the enemy gets to it first then work your army round until you can either get above them or tempt them down off it. If you can't do that then approach them up the shallowest part of the slope and keep your missile units as far forward as possible. One advantage of an enemy deployed on a forward slope is that their ranks are steeped towards you, that seems to result in a much higher hit percentage for overshot missiles, when firing down a slope remember to try and have your missile in the front of the formation for as long as possible as overhead fire is even less effective than usual against an enemy on ground that slopes away from you as the troops in front tend to mask those behind.

[HoreTore]

Well... Seems like different things have the same name. Anyway, the "refused flank" tactic I was thinking of, is the one I described. Haven't seen the other variations before, to be honest. And it is offensive, not defensive, like all the others I wrote about.

[econ21]

A few obvious points on the use of missiles:

Target selection with your missiles is an important issue, particularly when you are the attacker (when defending, I find the AI rushes me so my missiles have only limited time to do their job).

When I have superior firepower, I would prioritise enemy missiles[1], aiming to break them and leave me free to kill off the AI at range without loss. However, you may hit diminishing returns, as the AI goes into loose formation and loses men. I often alternate targets to try to overcome that.

[1]Except siege engines - they seem very bad targets for missile fire: it is very hard to kill off the crew and they seem able to fire with extremely depleted numbers.

Beyond that, I will target the main enemy threats. In the early game, that is either elite foot (e.g. dismounted knights) or mounted knights. Often judicious use of missiles can declaw an enemy army in the field.

Flaming arrows seem quite effective in dealing with pavisse crossbowmen and perhaps armoured troops. The morale effect is particularly useful when the purpose of your volleys is to soften up the defence. The main downside seems to be slower rate of fire, so I would tend to use them against melee troops rather than missiles.

When attacking in a siege, it is rather hard to use archers - intervening walls or streets usually make firing a waste of time. They may be useful against enemies hunkering down in the town square, especially if you can get them to turn their backs to you.

[Wodeson]

If you have Cavalry Superiority then the Linear Formation is appropriate:

.Cv.Cv.Cv. .Ms.Ms. .Inf.Inf.Inf.Inf. .Ms.Ms. .Cv.Cv.Cv.

Cv = Cavalry
Inf = Infantry
Ms = Missile Troops

In this scenario your Cavalry charge forward immediately to rout their opposite numbers, while your Infantry slowly advances to pin the enemy centre. Missile Troops are then free to move to your enemy's flanks and open fire, while your Cavalry moves to your enemy's rear surrounding them.

When facing Enemy Cavalry Superiority a Refused Flank Formation can work:

.Cv.Cv.Cv.
. . .Ms. . . . . .Inf.Inf.Inf.Inf.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .MsC.MsC.MsC.

MsC = Missile Troops in Cover (such as in Woods, behind Stakes, or on top of cliffs.)

This Scenario plays out as before except that you attack on only one flank rather than both, and delay the enemy on the opposite flank.

[Theodoret]

double envelopment (at least as i understand it; feel free to correct me if i'm wrong) is a somewhat risky strategy to employ. the basic concept is to invite the enemy to flank your battle line (which is in this case used as bait), and then hit his engaged flanking units with your reserves. this seems counter intuitive, and it almost always results in heavy casualties for the flanked force. if you are willing to accept this however, double envelopment can be a useful tool, especially if the enemy uses valuable troops for the initial flanking.

Somewhat different to the double envelopment tactic that Hannibal is said to have used (and which I find rather effective).

To perform the Hannibal double-envelopment manouvre, you set up a convex line of holding troops in your centre (Spearmen are best), and place some elites on either flank.

Place plenty of cavalry behind and to the sides of your main line - you want the enemy to ignore these if possible.

The plan is that the enemy will engage and attempt to break through your comparatively weak centre. As they engage the weak centre it is pushed back (hence the convex line deployment). You send your elites, which you have positioned on the extreme flanks, to wrap around and flank the enemy (the first envelopment). As this is happening you sweep your cavalry around the flanks and engage the enemy line from the rear (the second envelopment).

The enemy is now surrounded, will probably rout, and their escape route is closed.

This is not a low risk tactic. Hasdrubal tried to double envelop Scipio during the Iberian campaign, and Scipio managed to smash right through his centre and defeat his army. Nevertheless, it allows an army with weak infantry to engage an army with strong infantry and win big.

[adembroski]

Both refusing the flank theories are wrong... the misconception is tied to the common descriptions of the Battle of Leuctra, in which Epaminondas both overloaded his left flank and refused his right flank...

Refusing the flank is curving your line by marching one flank ahead of the other so that your opponant must break their own line if they want to reach your back flank.

I use this tactic a lot in RTW when I use the Greek Cities, but lining with my Spartans to the left, 2-3 units deep, while using a thin 1-unit line the rest of the way down, and refusing my right flank, permitting my spartans to cut the opposing right flank to ribbons, since no army can match elites with mine when I have Sparta.


Top is traditional hoplite tactics, bottom is an illustration of Epaminondas' tactics at the battle of Leuctra... note the overloaded right flank and the refused right flank. Highlighted in red are either side's elite troops.



At any rate, in M2TW, Hammer and Anvil is by far my most common tactic.

I place my elite infantry at the center to create a bow... I want them to curve in on me, giving my cavalry easy targets from outside the flanks. Prior to first contact, I pepper the center of my opponents line with archers to weaken those units.

Often my interior troops will collapse the center and split the line, creating a two front battle... this in-essence rotates the battle lines outward, exposing the rear of my opponent to my heavy cavalry.

I go into most battles with relatively equal numbers of infantry, missile, and cavalry... though generally speaking, less cavalry will do, I use much of my cavalry as cavalry controllers... in the diagram below the further forward cavalry are in a position to screen opposing cavalry in order to allow rear cavalry to hit the enemy line from behind.

If I am unable to collapse the middle of the line, I will simply bow my flanks by retreating... this is risky, as retreating units take heavy casualties and have a nasty tenency to run, but either way, this exposes the opponents flanks to my cavalry... if I break the line, I win the battle.

  * * * * * 

  S S E S S
C A A A A A C 
     C G C  

     * * *
   * S E S *
C S  A A A  S  C
     A    A
  C     G   C

       *
C-->*  E *<----C
C->* S  S *<-- C
   S A A A S 
   A    G    A

*- enemy line
S- spears
E- Elite infantry
A- archer
C- cavalry
G- General

[pike master]

sorry but there was more involved to the battle of leuctra than what is described in the above diagram. also if they fought exactly as you show then the thebans would have been wrapped by the opposing spartan elite.

the composition of the entire spartan army is somewhat in question as it is known that the spartan elite never number more than 5000 at its highest number.but at leuctra the spartan army numbered 11,000 with a weak cavalry contingent. so we must assume that the right contained the elite units while further left you went you would have encountered the helot and slave hoplites.

now the thebans numbered only 6,000 but they had superior cavalry a factor i will describe later. also included was the 300 strong sacred band [a tactically flexible force that could move rapidly much like the foot companions of alexander]

now the spartan elite positioned on the right were the finest hoplites in all of greece and they were opposed by the more numerous elite hoplites of the thebans, however the theban hoplites by themselves even in a deeper phalanx were no match for the spartans. there deeper formation would by time against the spartans.the sacred band were positioned to the left of the theban hoplite column while the thinner hoplite formations were postioned to the right facing the weaker helot hoplites of the spartan center and left.

the battle opens up and the thebans advance in oblique order as stated above. firstly a cav melee ensues on the theban right in which the spartans are bested and their horse driven from the field. the strongest hoplite formations clash and are deadlocked in battle.

now the sacred band rushes up the left side of the theban hoplite column and hooks the spartan hoplites in flank and sometime close to this the theban cavalry slams into the rear of the elite spartan formation causing the breakdown of the spartan phalanx. which is said to have routed.

now the weaker spartan formations observing the destruction of their elite spartan hoplites paniced and were more easily routed from the field.

by itself i would tend to believe the deeper theban column was only used to hold from breaking against the spartans and buy time for the sacred band and theban cavalry to hit the spartans in flank and rear.

[Doug-Thompson]

The primary target is not enemy units. It's enemy morale. Once you've got them panicked, killing them all is easy.

[HoreTore]

Both refusing the flank theories are wrong... the misconception is tied to the common descriptions of the Battle of Leuctra, in which Epaminondas both overloaded his left flank and refused his right flank...

Uhm.....As I wasn't referring to any actual tactic, but describing a tactic I use in this game, how on earth can I be "wrong"...?

Only possibility I can see for being wrong, would be if the tactic didn't work....which it does. Remember, this thread is about M2TW tactics, not historical tactics and battles.

[adembroski]

Uhm.....As I wasn't referring to any actual tactic, but describing a tactic I use in this game, how on earth can I be "wrong"...?

Only possibility I can see for being wrong, would be if the tactic didn't work....which it does. Remember, this thread is about M2TW tactics, not historical tactics and battles.

Okay, fine, the person who responded to you was the primary target of my post... that said, why would you publicly use a term for a specific tactic under a different name? Seems like you are likely to confuse people that way, or at least give them misconceptions when they're watching the History Channel:P

[Wodeson]

Defensive English Longbow deployment:

.BmCvIT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .BmCvIT.
. . . . . .LbS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .LbS.
. . . . . . . . .LbS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .LbS.
. . . . . . . . . . . .LbS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .LbS.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .LbS. . . . . . . . . . . . .LbS.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .DsK.DsK.DsK.DsK.

BmCvIT = Billmen in Woods/Cavalry in Open, or Impassable Terrain.
LbS = Longbows behind Stakes.
DsK = Dismounted Knights.

One tactic that works well in M2TW is 'enfilading' or flanking fire. Essentially all missile troops do much more damage to the enemy by firing along their line than by firing from directly infront of them. This is especially true when firing into an enemy's unshielded side.

By sweeping the Longbows forward into a shallow V-shape, enemies advancing against you are exposed to lots of flanking crossfire regardless of whether they target your centre or wings. (With some exceptions playing on Huge Unit Scales, where the Longbows lack the range to cover each other completely.)

However for this formation to work ideally both your flanks must be anchored. Farmhouses, City Walls, Rivers or Cliffs can be used to this effect for a strong anchor. Failing that, rough terrain troops such as Billmen can provide a similar effect inside woods. Failing that Cavalry can be used to defend the flank as best they can in good going.

Failing that, you must rely on the M2TW AI to ignore your flanks and charge your centre. (Which it may do.)

[Odin]

The Clog: This is a strategy I have employed in other TW games. The primary requirement is ample florins as you will need to be able to purchase, maintain and retrain units. The Clog uses the theory that there are in fact expendable troops in the total war environment. From peasants to militias, every faction has a low end melee unit which can be produce with minimal investment in buildings and florins.

The Clog is a variation of the Hammer and Anvil in one crucial sense, the primary goal of the clog is to whittle down enemy troops before the hammer drops. To do this you need a secondary unit and that is a HA unit. Most factions have some form of Horse Archer and some are very cheap to produce. Their mobility is key in the clog strategy solely because you must be able to pursue, surround and hunt down routers.

A simple formation for the Clog is as follows: Wave 1 (X= low level infantry, V HA unit)


------------------------ V---X X X X---V------------------------------

----------------------V-------------------V---------------------------


Wave 2:

-------------------------V---X X X X---V-------------------------------

-----------------------V------------------V-----------------------------


Wave 3: the hammer (H= elite melee unit available, HC= Heavy Cavalry, GU= Generals unit)


---------------------------H H H H-------------------------------------
-----------------------HC-----------HC
-----------------------------GU----------------------------------------


Wave 1-2 are simple the low level melee unit attacks an advanced archer or section of the infantry line with weaker infantry units and "Clogs" that section. The HA unit in 2-4 groups moves to available positions around the clogged units and opens fire targeting 1 enemy unit. The theory is that the clogged low level infantry with immense fire power will cause major losses on the clogged section of the enemy line, rinse repeat down the line.

Eventually your low level infantry will break and rout, and 9 times out of 10 the enemy will chase allowing more damage from HA units. In addition to this, wave 2 has the opportunity to now engage as their friendly units rout past them, and reclog the unit that is chasing. Subsequently wave 2 melee units break and the same effect occurs, with the noted exception that now Wave 3 invokes the hammer and anvil tactic.

Wave 3 engages an enemy unit that has been riddled with arrows, suffered losses from melee, and has some degree of exhaustion, wave 3 execution is much easier and the enemy unit will rout faster due to the reasons listed above. This is when the HA units immediately chase down routers from the enemy unit.

While this isn’t pretty it’s an effective tactic when you have a faction whose strength lies in horse units (Hungary, Turks, Egypt and to a lesser degree Russia due to their superb dvor unit). This strategy requires florins as you will loose a lot of low level infantry and need to replace them. It requires a capable commander as well, so the initial waves don’t instantly break.

On the positive side this strategy keeps your best units away from combat until the end of the cycle where the enemy has already engaged thus increasing your chances for faster routing of the enemy and minimizing losses to your elite troops. This strategy worked well for me in MTW and I have had some degree of success with it in MTW2 (LTC mod).

I’d love to have a discussion on the merits of this strategy and ways it can be improved or tweaked within the confines of the tactics. I understand it’s not for everyone and is counter intuitive to cost effective armies and wasting troops, but it’s worked for me in the past when I have had the florins to pull it off. This is a strategy I use soely for TW, it isn’t a military strategy I read in history and is simply based on my preferred style of play with horse archers and an effort to minimize losses to blue chip units.

[HoreTore]

Okay, fine, the person who responded to you was the primary target of my post... that said, why would you publicly use a term for a specific tactic under a different name? Seems like you are likely to confuse people that way, or at least give them misconceptions when they're watching the History Channel:P

Well, basically because that was the name given for a tactic for another game I read, and I've used it in this game.

And I'm no good at naming things...

[Rhyfelwyr]

This was a guide I made under my old name here, Woad Warrior (still known as that to the MA team). Its for RTW, but same basic idea:

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=63532