what type of commander are you?

[Ars Moriendi]

My usual army tends to be composed of roughly equal numbers of archers, spears and heavy infantry, deployed on three lines in that order, with 4-6 cav units on the flanks (2-3 each side, BG included).
Depending on the stack's purpose, there might be variations : more heavy inf if assaulting, more cav if field offensive, more spears + missile if defense, but these are exceptions as I don't usually keep dedicated stacks but rather general purpose. Exceptions like the occasional all-heavy-cav army the AI sends to attack - if this happens, I just leave the archers behind and summon more spears from the nearby garrisons.

For example, playing Venice :
5 pav xbows, 5 italian spears, 4 dism. broken lances, 5 militia cav or broken lances,1 BG. That's what I used for the first half of the game, not having any castles. Later on, because of boredom rather than need, I got some castles and replaced the broken lances (foot & horse) with feudal knights and heavy venetian. Castle defense : venetian archers.

Things I don't care much for :
- gunpowder units (they come too late, campaign already ended by victory or boredom)
- artillery (slow; keep them in aux stacks trailing the main and use only on fast sieges)
- specialty units (carrocio ? why ?)
- light cav (too frail; heavies just as good at chasing routed infantry ; enemy cav doesn't outrun bolts)

Horse archer factions : I still keep armies all purpose and balanced, but include more cavalry eg. as Byzantium a normal stack would be 1 BG, 4 vards, 4 byz cav, 2 heavy chargers, 5 spears, 2 byz guard, 3 byz inf and more variations for dedicated stacks as HAs are no good in assaults so replace with arty and heavy inf.

[[R]icK]

Dno if this is weird but i deploy armies depending on terrain or who my General is.

E.g. Otto Von Kessel (Hope thats right) for the HRE starts in Innsbruck castle and i use him for raids and such through the alps and nearly always have 100% heavy horse to sack any army's around the area.

If the AI actually had a clue about sending invasion forces bigger than 3 units i think id go for the more balanced armies

[RoadKill]

I just like peasents.
I send full stacks after full stacks of peasents at my enemies.

[unknown_user]

Being a huge fan of the danes, my armies are largely composed of axemen, swordsmen, and norse archers. Preferred cavalry backup are the War Clerics, because nothing is cooler than watching a cavalry charge with maces.

[Boyar Son]

Ussualy, I ransom my enemies, knowing they will die cuz they general wont pay, but if they do more mone for me.


Dread Lord

[Bijo]

what type of commander are you?

One who prefers an effective mix of different units. To be both capable of effective offence and defense.

Swords and spears; long-range archers; some heavy and light cavalry; and some long-range artillery. Strategical offense and then tactical defense as the foe approaches me instead of me approaching him. Attack and defense are hardly different in nature, but the advantage of (tactical) defense is that you act with greater power whereafter -- if you successfully defend -- you will more easily advance to attack and provide the necessary fatal blow (-- utter destruction of the foe or enforcing his rout).

[rvg]

Back in the shield bug days when infantry was weak as kittens I went all cav all the way (60% missile 40% melee). It was an absolutely deadly combo as well as totally boring. The AI stood no chance against these kinds of armies. Now that the spears are actually capable of doing their job, I am leaning much more heavily towards infantry/archer/xbow/artillery combo with a pinch of cavalry. Much more fun playing it this way. Far more challenging both tactically and strategically.

[Doug-Thompson]

Back in the shield bug days when infantry was weak as kittens I went all cav all the way (60% missile 40% melee). It was an absolutely deadly combo as well as totally boring. The AI stood no chance against these kinds of armies. Now that the spears are actually capable of doing their job, I am leaning much more heavily towards infantry/archer/xbow/artillery combo with a pinch of cavalry. Much more fun playing it this way. Far more challenging both tactically and strategically.

To each his own. To me, wiping out the AI's hordes of spear units with armored shield-and-sword infantry is just as certain, more boring, takes longer and causes more casualties on your side.

I'm not satisfied with just winning. Most of us win against the AI despite all odds. The "challenge," for me, is to wipe out the enemy without losing a man.

[andrewt]

To each his own. To me, wiping out the AI's hordes of spear units with armored shield-and-sword infantry is just as certain, more boring, takes longer and causes more casualties on your side.

I'm not satisfied with just winning. Most of us win against the AI despite all odds. The "challenge," for me, is to wipe out the enemy without losing a man.

That means flanking them with camel gunners with some cavalry support. Those gunners are only a little bit more deadly against most units compared to horse archers, but do they drop morale quickly. I've had professional armies rout against them after only a few casualties.

[rvg]

I'm not satisfied with just winning. Most of us win against the AI despite all odds. The "challenge," for me, is to wipe out the enemy without losing a man.

I see. That is indeed a goal tailor made for horse archers and pretty much nobody else. I don't have the problem with losing men though, if they die, there's more where they came from. Besides, they are just Armored Sarges (the backbone of my armies throughout the ages), so it's no big loss.

[Ciaran]

Basically, I still adhere to Frogbeasteggs army blueprint for MTW from the Beginner´s Guide. It serves its purpose,

[Azi Tohak]

Ever since the days of STW I like my combined arms forces. ~4 archers is the standard, then I build everything else up around that. I tend to rely on strong infantry and lighter cav to run down the routers. I try to play defense as much as possible (much easier in RTW and M2TW than MTW and STW) and with that, I have a line of archers, then my infantry (usually with strongest on the wings), with heavy cav behind and HA on the wings.

BUT, when I was able to play M2TW (can't right now) I had a great time with my Byzantine Vardar HA. Crushed army after army with those boys. But my standard is a heavy combined arms force.

Never have liked units like peasants, highlanders, woodsman etc. I like my infantry to be able to stand and fight.

Azi

[Kobal2fr]

I'm a footslogger myself. I don't know why, but I can never use cavalry, no matter which type, without incurring horrible losses in the process. So I use lots, lots and then some more spears, and a bunch of shock units kept some ways back to quickly charge in where either my line gets weak, or the enemy lines do and need only a gentle armorclad pinch to collapse.

The rest of my combined arms are composed of some archers (mostly to counter enemy archers and HAs, meaning most usually a mere 2-3 pavise Xbows and maybe 1 unit of bowmen to pour fire arrows at the point of the battleline where I need a quick morale break, in conjunction with the shock troops) and token cav to chase down routers and keep the heaviest of enemy cav away from my beloved footmen, buying them time. Most usually the general and his lunatic, drinking, gambling, pedophile half-brother are enough. (I always keep two gens in one stack if I can - hate to have a full stack go rebel because I got unlucky in battle and my star pupil caught an arrow in the gizzard...)

I love arty though. Nothing like lobbing great balls of fire through a broken wall right in the middle of a deep, braced pike unit. If strategically feasible (that is to say, in areas where cities are close to each other, like say Italy, Spain or the Levant) I try to include at least two units of arty in all my armies, more if I expect at least moderately defended castles. Because I utterly suck at siege assaults

[Budwise]

personally im more of an infantry commander mainly archers, its easier to destroy half your enemy before they can evan reach you

I don't care much for cavelry, but I do try to include at least one cavelry unit in my armies so I can run down routers.

I am the exact same way. I usually only have a horse unit or two and I usually never run down routers, but as a whole its mostly longbowmen with stakes placed and other heavy infantry for backup.

[Hellenic_Hoplite]

I am the exact same way. I usually only have a horse unit or two and I usually never run down routers, but as a whole its mostly longbowmen with stakes placed and other heavy infantry for backup.

same here, when you have stakes cav cant charge into your archers without getting destroyed and the archers act as great light infantry if the enemy make it past your arrow shower.

I was playing against this guy today that said archers are useless, lets just say I proved him wrong