Oh, Portucale!

[PershsNhpios]

Please aide me in my quest to understand the battles of MTW..

I have just failed a campaign as Portugal in XL, but unexpectedly, I shall explain shortly this time;

I did not want war at all with the Castilians, and after losing a campaign as the Castilians themselves, (Which was going very well), to a sudden attack by the Almoravids, I wished to keep a peaceful border on all fronts.

So I planned to make Portucale an impenetrable city-state until I had enough currency to send an army someone, and until then make my largest surplus through crusades.

I built the greatest amount of trading buildings I could, upgraded the farmland to 80%, and meanwhile I created an army thus:

3 Urban Militia

4 Feudal Sergeants

2 Spearmen

3 Archers

3 Royal Knights (Royal family & King Henrique II)

It was the most I could afford up until my demise, each unit had 1 unit of valour.
When the Genoese were excommunicated, as they always are, I sent a crusade to Genoa.
Unfortunately by the time the Crusade reached the Provence, the Genoese Consul had eradicated the Papal authority.

I had all buildings that could financially assist me built, and decided I would continue to crusade towards Serbia until my Castle was built in 12 turns.
Meanwhile I kept my garrison as strong as mentioned, it consisted of 1021 men, and attempted to ally with everyone.
But NO ONE, not even the Pope previously, would ally with me.
Only Serbia when they heard of 4360 devout Catholics marching to Croatian Illyria.

Suddenly, whilst my crusade was approaching Navarre, (I love that province!), the Almoravids attacked with 960 men with 400 reinforcements, led by the Khalifh himself.
It consisted of roughly;

5 (Muwahdi?) Infantry

4 Almohad Urban Militia

5 Desert Archers

1 Peasant company

4 Ghulam Bodyguards (Khalifh & Co)

1 Ballista crew

Ha ha, I love my memory!

Anyway, I positioned myself on a small, but very steep eminence with a forest directly adjacent to it, halfway down the slope.

I placed my Sergeants thus :

- - -
-

And position my spearmen on the right, with my King behind them to fill the formation perfectly.
To fill the left, I placed the archers.

Then halfway down the hill I placed the Urban Militia with the Princes in front.

The enemy engaged, the spearmen both engaged two Ghulam Bodyguards downhill with the King attacking the right flank as they did.

The Sergeants flew down the hill as the enemy traversed the steepest part and engaged the Muwahdi evenly, the archers, being out of ammunition, engaged a third party of two Muwahdi as the rushed to join the battle from my right.

Below this, the ambush from behind was stopped by the sheer amount of Urban Militia that, although ambushed and attacked on their flank as they attempted to engage the Sergeants, tore apart all my forces in the forest.

It seems no matter what I do, I always see my forces, 'Losing Badly', even though they are given every advantage always.

The battle was fought for about 8 minutes, with my troops losing constantly, and suffering over 50% casualties.
Suddenly, the enemy, still fighting uphill, lost, and the centred battle gave way to the Sergeants, who chased the enemy down the hill.
Then the Almohad militia routed, and all the Muslim militia began to run.

The Ghulam bodyguards however, 40 of them, had killed 200 spearmen and 19 Royal Knights whilst surrounded and fighting uphill against a wall of spears, for them victory was never in doubt, they lost 10 men.

My King ran away with 50 men.

In the following siege of the castle, all but 78 of the Almoravid army was killed by the Ballista towers attempted to break through.. Ridiculous.

The province rebelled and there was a small battle of 128 v 78 to fight.

By this time I was doubtful I could win even that, so I came here...

I love the battles in this game, I do really, they feel far more satisfying, and I love the idea of losing for once even though I outnumber the enemy, or have a good fortification, but I can't enjoy it if I am left in disbelief..

Why?

[caravel]

I placed my Sergeants thus :

- - -
-

And position my spearmen on the right, with my King behind them to fill the formation perfectly.

It is better to form spear units into single wall. Slightly curve the wall if necessary, or forming a blunt arrow formation, and place the flanking units near to the ends. The two units of spearmen should have been towards the centre of the formation as they have the weakest morale. You don't want them routing and taking the rest with them.

To fill the left, I placed the archers.

Archers should be to the rear of the spears or directly in front allowing them to skirmish back from the enemy cavarly charge decoying it onto the spear points.

Then halfway down the hill I placed the Urban Militia with the Princes in front.

I'm not sure I'm following this correctly? Your cavalry were up front with the UM? Thne cavalry should have been behind all of the rest, and the UM on the wings of the spear units to act as flankers.

The enemy engaged, the spearmen both engaged two Ghulam Bodyguards downhill with the King attacking the right flank as they did.

Vanilla spearmen are outclassed vs heavy cavalry. The Sergeants would have been the better choice.

The Sergeants flew down the hill as the enemy traversed the steepest part and engaged the Muwahdi evenly, the archers, being out of ammunition, engaged a third party of two Muwahdi as the rushed to join the battle from my right.

The sergeants were probably better left in position. Wait for the enemy to close and do all of the walking and running when you're on the defensive this tires them and not you. Sergeants vs Muwahid Foot soldiers is a bit dodgy also as the Muwahid are the stronger attackers. I would have targeted these with missiles first then waited for them to close in, and moved your UM onto their flanks. You'd probably have routed them doing this unless their morale is sky high through the general's command bonus. Avoid chasing the routers and stay in position.

Below this, the ambush from behind was stopped by the sheer amount of [Almohad?] Urban Militia that, although ambushed and attacked on their flank as they attempted to engage the Sergeants, tore apart all my forces in the forest.

The AUM are strong units and you really need to get those flank and rear charges in from your heavy cavalry to deal with them, this is what your Royal Knights need to be reserved for. A head on charge, even down hill will still result in disaster though, as the RKs are not in large enough numbers. You will need to pin with the FS, but only for a short time as they will be wiped out. Wear them down with your archers before engaging them in the flanks and rear with your RKs.

It seems no matter what I do, I always see my forces, 'Losing Badly', even though they are given every advantage always.

The battle was fought for about 8 minutes, with my troops losing constantly, and suffering over 50% casualties.
Suddenly, the enemy, still fighting uphill, lost, and the centred battle gave way to the Sergeants, who chased the enemy down the hill.
Then the Almohad militia routed, and all the Muslim militia began to run.

The Ghulam bodyguards however, 40 of them, had killed 200 spearmen and 19 Royal Knights whilst surrounded and fighting uphill against a wall of spears, for them victory was never in doubt, they lost 10 men.

My King ran away with 50 men.

In the following siege of the castle, all but 78 of the Almoravid army was killed by the Ballista towers attempted to break through.. Ridiculous.

The province rebelled and there was a small battle of 128 v 78 to fight.

By this time I was doubtful I could win even that, so I came here...

I love the battles in this game, I do really, they feel far more satisfying, and I love the idea of losing for once even though I outnumber the enemy, or have a good fortification, but I can't enjoy it if I am left in disbelief..

Why?

You'll need to radically adjust your approach to battles. In MTW factors such as morale and fatigue come into it much more. These are not the shock and rout battles of later TW games such as RTW in particular. You will get used to it, but you'll need to "unlearn" what you've learned from the other games and start afresh. Command star rating makes a big difference to valour and morale in MTW battles so check your generals stats and vices and virtues compared to the enemy.

[sharpshooter]

Hello Glen ...

Bad luck at losing the battle - never a good feeling. Sounds like it was an epic encounter, though.

At first glance the Almohad force looks much stronger - unit for unit his troops are better, and outnumber yours. If I had been the Spanish I would have been nervous about the outcome of the battle from the start. What you describe seems realistic to me - and you did well to rout his infantry.

The Muwahids, though a smaller unit, are better spears than Feudal Sergeants, and have better morale. They should have slaughtered your Archers in that fight.

The AUM (Almohad Urban Militia) are the jewel in the Almohad infantry crown. They are stronger again, and much better than anything you have - they should walk through your Urban Militia and Feudal Sergeants. Even uphill the Almos should do better. I'm not surprised your troops were shown as losing badly everywhere. Nonetheless it seems your infantry won the day in their battle, but with high casualties.

I'm not sure why the Ghulams won uphill against your spears - the ordinary ones, I assume. I would suspect that the Ghulams were high valour units. Did your spears have any armour bonuses? With them losing so badly they needed help much sooner - you mention only that an RK unit lost 19 against them. At this point I'd have been looking to attack their rear or flank with your RKs and charging them in. The big danger was that when the Ghulams won all your troops would suffer a big morale loss with cavalry in their rear.

With your troop placement I'd have put the Archers behind the spears. When they were out of ammunition I'd have been looking to flank with them - they are not good in melee, being weaker than anything the Almos had, except possibly his peasants. Putting them into to hand to hand fight is a last resort. They were no match for Muwahids.

The princes - Royal Knights - might have been better placed at the back, rather than the front. I'd have been looking to flank with them, attacking his Desert Archers first, and then charging his infantry from the rear. This would also have lowered the Almo morale. I'd have been looking to engage his Ghulams with them, attacking his flank while your spear units were pinning them ... or charging downhill at them.

You've not mentioned the number of stars of the opposing generals - your king, and the Khalifah. This is the single most important factor - if the Khalifah had more stars than your king the already stronger Almos would have been further boosted.

You've also not mentioned Armour, and Valour - another two important factors. Did your troops have Armour bonuses - from an Armourer, or Armourers Workshop? Did his? This will affect the amount of casualties you get, and how quickly you get them.

With the tactics, I'm wondering if you let your infantry chase the Almos for too long when they routed. With the spears losing against the Ghulams I'd have been looking to bring back the Feudal Sergeants to fight them. Here too the Royal Knights would have been effective hitting them from the flank while they were engaged frontally with your spears. You could have let what was left of your UM and Archers chase his routers.

Regarding the battle overall it seems morale was a decisive factor. First the Almo infantry morale collapsed and they routed. Then your spears losing to the Ghulams broke. Now the Almos had cavalry units behind your infantry - which would have panicked them. Your troops' morale collapsed in turn, and everyone ran away, leaving the field to the Almos.

Your force, for a Spanish force, seems to lack FMAA (Feudal Men at Arms), Militia Sergeants - and Spanish Jinetes. Also Javelinmen.

The FMAA and Militia Sergeants would have been good against his Muwahids and might have held his AUM while other troops attacked their flanks. The Javelinmen would have been good against his Ghulams - behind the spears,or flanking the Ghulams. They would have caused many more casualties there.

Finally the Jinetes are one of the most useful Spanish units - and would have caused casualties to all the Almo units. You might have been able to pull his Ghulams away with them, and being faster, the Ghulams would have trouble catching them to engage. Jinetes are also ideal for chasing routers.

It's easy to say these things after the event - and it sounds like the battle was a very close thing. It was his 2 Ghulam units that proved decisive, and that's not such a big margin. Those Ghulams must have been of high valour. In fact, I'm surprised that you managed to defeat his infantry.

Now you have a battle with the remains of both armies. You don't give the composition of the troops, but it sounds like a close thing. Check the valour and armour of the opposing units. Look to pin his better units with your spears, and get other units to do flank and rear attacks. Get at least one of your units completely behind his to lower the morale of his troops. Try and beat his weakest units decisively to get them routing further lowering the morale of his troops.

I wonder if you've read FrostBeastEgg's guide in the Guides section here. A good read if you haven't done so - about the units and tactics for them.

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/forumdisplay.php?f=47

Also, the YAS unit comparison guide, where you can check the stats of the MTW VI units. It's on a long list of downloads, available here:

http://www.atomicgamer.com/directory.php?id=1173

Good luck - and let us know how it turns out.

[Don Corleone]

I noticed two things about your forces, Glenn.

First, lack of an actual fighting infantry unit. The spears (both the feudal sergeants and the vanilla) are there to hold a line. They can stop and hold things, but they don't do a great job engaging in combat itself. Your urban militia was outclassed. Unless I'm the Italians and building them out of Tuscany, I rarely build these guys, or keep the ones I have. Tech up to feudal sergeants, or better yet, feudal men at arms as quickly as you can. Then you'll have somebody who can give those AUM a run for their money.

Second, you're light on archers. In hilly provinces, a defensive unit should have at least 4 if not 5 archers. Don't use them in hand-to-hand combat unless it's a desparation ploy (you're trying to buy time to get your king or heir off the field). Plain archers are terrible at combat.

Basically, with the army you had and the terrain you described, you should have perched yourself at the top of a hill and let the Almoheds come to you. As Caravel said, put your vanilla spears in the center, your FS on the wings. Put them into 'hold formation/hold position' and don't move them for love or money. Put your urban militia behind and to the sides. When the Almoheds engage your spears, flank with the militia, and eventually, the cavalry.

[Tratorix]

My main advice on this topic would be to try an easier faction. You pretty much jumped right in with a faction like portugal, which can be difficult even if you are experienced. My advice would be to try a larger Catholic faction, like the English. They have a fairly strong position and good unique units once you hit the high period. The Byzantines are also a good choice, unique unit roster, which is pretty much unmatched in early. Also, they have large borders, which means you will get plenty of combat practice.

I wouldn't get discouraged over your recent losses either. I switched to playing RTW for about a month after playing MTW for about a year. I was losing battles left and right when I came back to MTW. The real thing to remember in this game is to not rush off after a routing enemy. It is very possible for them to rally and cut you to pieces as you try and chase them off the field.

You should also definitely read Frogbeastegg's unit guide( the link in sharpshooter's post). It has a lot of useful information on morale, fatigue, formations and all that other stuff that is oh so unimportant in RTW, but could mean death in MTW.

Also, i'm wondering, how were your archers formed up? I know in Rome you don't have to worry about it, but in Medieval, they need to be formed up about two ranks deep, otherwise only the front two rows will shoot.

[PershsNhpios]

Brave Sah, I hope you are truly a Robin, as that is the guild of my family!
I love the song of Camelot.. - I - have - to - push - the - pram-a-looooot!

As far as faction choice is concerned, I always pick the harder challenges in all aspects and dilemmas of my life, it is my custom, and that leads me to do the same whenever I play this game.
Not only for my asceticism, but also for my greater comfort with small beginnings - I do not like being thrown into the government of a great empire.

Thank you for your advice on archers - I have not yet played a game where my archers were less than 3 ranks deep!
Yes, this is a product of the Rome: Total War doctrine, in which archers could be in column formation and still loose with great effect.

Corleone, I had not used any Men-At-Arms, for I found them to be very weak in a previous campaign as the Castilian faction - however I feel this is because I probably asked to much of them, and expected them to be the spearman and the swordsman.
I will try them in the way you have mentioned.

As for archers, I had lost faith in them because they did not seem to be effective in mounting casualties, I had one unit loose it's entire ammunition supply and have caused ten deaths.
However, as you have seen, this is because of the ranks in which I deployed them, and I will now use archers with greater ability thanks to Sir Robin.

I did perch my men atop a hill - admittedly it was the smallest hill, however it was also the steepest hill, and the closest to the enemy, meaning I was immediately able to loose arrows amongst them, and pressure the Muslims into attacking immediately up a steep advance.

As for the confusion about my formation, don't allow my diagram to fool you, the forum font setting shattered it.
I had my sergeants formed in a Roman Manipular position, as I intended to charge the enemy when they were climbing the sharpest ascent of my hill.

This allowed two gaps on either side, on the right I placed the King and two units of spearmen to flank and drive away cavalry.
The other side housed my archers perfectly, but ineffectively because they were ranked in 4 lines each.
Now, here is the main confusion;
halfway down the eminence, at the place where the ascent is steepest and most difficult, at the point where I intended my infantry to hit the enemy - I placed in hiding two units of Royal Knights - to deliver a heavy charge and then retreat, and three units of Urban Militia to cut apart the back of the enemy.

This failed because the flanking units were outnumbered by the amount of enemy companies still attempting to catch up to the front line which was fighting the Sergeants.

I know realise about all the units you have mentioned however, and I have learnt harshly that both Almohad Urban Militia and Danish Viking units are champions of all battlefields - and cheap!

I found that the Scottish armies are far more suited to my fighting style.
I am still fighting a rather interesting campaign, in which I was going to make Scotland a peaceful, yet powerful trading kingdom that kept peace with England and conquered Ireland and Scandinavia.
However my paranoia went insane when England starting massing troops in Northumbria, and the army of 8 Clansmen and 4 Royal Knights (Including King Malcolm II), suddenly declared war on England and attacked Northumbria.

I was outnumbered 2:1, however by using the speed of my infantry to cut around the English militia and gain their target mountain, I charged them down a great descent, and by shock and bravery - routing the four weakest units with sly discrimination - the entire army only withstood the attack for fifteen seconds, and Prince William III was killed.

Though this petrified the English of my army, my most expected peril occurred, a counter attack was launched on the homeland, and I lost Edinborough to King William the Conqueror.
So I used that same tactic mentioned, and raided every English province, Mercia, Wessex, Wales and Northumbria again.
They would take back a province because I had left it, and within two turns I would of shocked them out of the province.

With my army of 760 men I killed over 3000 English, and took around 1300 prisoner, including King Alfred II, (William II was killed in action by King Malcolm III), every province I took, I destroyed every piece of infrastructure.

I used a cheat to see how this affected England on the continent, and saw that France owned all provinces except Normandie - though they never declared war!
Due to the havoc at home, England had lost over 9 Provinces to rebellion, and now King Alfred II and an army of 395 men sleep under the stars in Mercia with a bare income.

Meanwhile Malcolm III is back in Scotland in command of Edinborough, with a treasury of 25,000 from the constant raids and ransoms, and developing Scotland in total privacy and security!!

The year is 1107.

I found my preference it seems!

[Peasant Phill]

Corleone, I had not used any Men-At-Arms, for I found them to be very weak in a previous campaign as the Castilian faction - however I feel this is because I probably asked to much of them, and expected them to be the spearman and the swordsman.
I will try them in the way you have mentioned.

Wait, you found MAA to weak and you used UM instead? Um's are of the lowest quality not in the last place because they are peasants (low morale). MAA will be your best offensive unit until high.

As for archers, I had lost faith in them because they did not seem to be effective in mounting casualties, ...
However, as you have seen, this is because of the ranks in which I deployed them...
I did perch my men atop a hill - admittedly it was the smallest hill, however it was also the steepest hill, and the closest to the enemy, meaning I was immediately able to loose arrows amongst them, and pressure the Muslims into attacking immediately up a steep advance.

You use your RTW experience for MTW battles which will get you routed more than you like. Like someone else said, you have to unlearn first. Missile units aren’t the killers in MTW, they are used to cause disruption. They cause premature attacks, halted advances and most importantly they cause a morale drop. This is also where your number of rows come in. The moral won’t drop unless at least 1 soldier dies in a unit. The loss of moral is only temporarily so you have to keep killing with arrows until they rout. The difference between 2 rows and 3 rows is the amount of arrows in 1 volley and the amount of volleys it can fire in 1 minute. 3 rows will fire more volleys of less arrows each. Normal bows reload fast enough that they can keep the moral down deployed in 2 rows. Xbows and firearms can’t always manage that so they may benefit from 3 row deployment.

Another tip, make the enemy fatigue itself. If the Almohads had to walk half the map, they would be less fit to fight and would rout sooner. Besides a bigger hill = bigger range for your archers = more depletion of enemy units and a less eager attacking force.

…
I had my sergeants formed in a Roman Manipular position, as I intended to charge the enemy when they were climbing the sharpest ascent of my hill.

Why would you want to charge with your spears when your enemy comes to you? Formation is everything for spear units. Without a close formation they loose a lot of their fighting skill and charging is one of the biggest disrupters of a close formation. Only charge your spears if the enemy doesn’t come to them.

This allowed two gaps on either side, on the right I placed the King and two units of spearmen to flank and drive away cavalry.
The other side housed my archers perfectly, but ineffectively because they were ranked in 4 lines each.

Good placement of your knights as they are immediately able to flank. You might consider moving your general more to the center if you are afraid it has low moral (locale moral boost).
But don’t use spearmen as flankers, flankers are fast and have decent melee stats. Spearmen are to cumbersome if you run them round the flanks as they need to reform before engaging and they just don’t kill fast enough. They only serve to lower moral of the flanked unit. Like it has been said, you should’ve used your horses and your UM’s for that.

halfway down the eminence, at the place where the ascent is steepest and most difficult, at the point where I intended my infantry to hit the enemy - I placed in hiding two units of Royal Knights - to deliver a heavy charge and then retreat, and three units of Urban Militia to cut apart the back of the enemy.
This failed because the flanking units were outnumbered by the amount of enemy companies still attempting to catch up to the front line which was fighting the Sergeants.

It was a excellent plan, using appropriate units to ambush and flank but the execution may have been less than excellent.
Firstly your UM’s and RK’s should hide somewhere to the side of the path the enemy will most likely take. Otherwise the enemy will stumble on your hidden troops and you will have successfully handed over an isolated part of your fighting force.
Secondly don’t spring the trap to soon. When you charge out before the enemy is engaged they’ll simply turn and meet you head on. You’ll soon be overwhelmed if this happens. You could charge out sooner if an isolated part of his army is within reach and you’re confidend that you can disengage or destroy that part before help arrives.

I found that the Scottish armies are far more suited to my fighting style.

Clansmen seem to be your cup of tea but don’t forget gallowglasses (AP) and viking units as other similar units. AND don’t forget to build spear units. Clansmen just die to fast if they can’t attack.

[caravel]

Why would you want to charge with your spears when your enemy comes to you? Formation is everything for spear units. Without a close formation they loose a lot of their fighting skill and charging is one of the biggest disrupters of a close formation. Only charge your spears if the enemy doesn’t come to them.

This is a point I can't emphasise enough. Spears are defensive units. They can hold their own in melee against poor quality infantry but against anything else they're not going to get a lot of kills. It's in defence against cavalry units that spears excel. The trick with spear units is not to attack but to use drag positioning and place them in the best position to either hamper your enemies movements, protect your vulberable units tie up/delay specific enemy units while other units are brought in. They are also ideal for hammer and anvil type tactics where the enemy units are held by the spears, and hit from the rear or flank(s) by a good flanking unit.

On the subject of flankers, good flanking units are those with reasonably good attack, a decent speed, a very strong charge and preferably an armour piercing ability. This can be either cavalry or infantry. Some good flankers are units such as Ghazi Infantry, Gallowglasses, Mamluk Cavalry, Woodsmen, Clansemen and others. Polearm units make the best flankers when dealing with cavalry due to their anti cavalry bonus, especially medium to heavy cavalry that your weaker infantry may not be able to handle. Polearms units include Billmen, Janissary Heavy Infantry, Halberdiers, Swiss Halberdiers and Chivalric Foot Knights (dismount unit).

[sharpshooter]

I just twigged that the "Spanish" game was in fact Portugal with the XL Mod - so no Jinetes for them, I guess.

@ Glenn I'm glad you found something suitable to play style. It's fun watching you learn the MTW pieces - and we're all so eager to share when you ask us! (Perhaps you noticed).

I wonder, though, if Scotland can ever have peace with England in this game ... I am sure your paranoia was justified at seeing an English build up in Northumbria. Where else could those armies go but Scotland?

It seems you have shown the English the error of their ways. I'll admit that I don't raze provinces - I view them as my property on loan to another faction. I find it a bore to build up from scratch, but hadn't considered ignoring another faction's lands completely.

With the Scottish clansmen, just be aware that as time passes the other factions will start to armour up and get better units. By 1150 or so they'll be a lot less vulnerable to being swamped by those speedy fanatics. Heavy cavalry charges will do damage to your clansmen, and if you run into a lot of FMAA you will have trouble once the shock of the clansmen's charge is over.

That said, when playing England I'll always have a unit or two of clansmen around my armies (errr ... of course I take Scotland when I'm playing England).

Just a minor point - you can identify who has which province if you click and hold a strategic agent over the map - hover it, don't drop it. You'll get the owner of the province in the tooltip. If you want the agent to go back where it came from and have forgotten the drop the agent over the sea - it will return to its start point.

Let us know how you progress ....

(I do take the point generally about spears - using them defensively, and so on. Sometimes though you might be stuck needing to use them offensively ... and there are specialty spears like the Muwahids who beg for the chance to charge. The important thing, I think, is to let them form up facing the opposition, if possible. The damage comes when you suddenly ask them to attack someone on their flank, or half way through a manoeuvre.)