Playing as a Muslim Faction

[gollum]

You are exactly right. Thats their achilles heel, like with all pure archer units. They unbalance the army composition (detract from average stack melee capacity). Thats why the JA are a plus in this point - after you make them emptry their quivers carefully (ie without participating directly in the missile duel and take many losses) you can use them as reserves. JA are meant as the cherry in the pie not bread and butter like TF/xbows.

TF on the other hand are made exactly for the missile duel as you say - because of the armor. Yet not only they cant melee after it but also they cant be used like crossbows/arbs that can dissuade enemy units from reaching them with mass coordinated volleys in the end phase.

They are a weak unit in that respect, and they need quite some teching up to get (Castle/bowyer3). Its only their cheap maintenance cost that still makes them useful in high as archer substitutes. But by high in vanilla, most (pure) archer units are semi-obsolete - xbows are cheaper to recruit and maintain and much more useful (volley mass/armor penetration). I recruit 1 or 2 units of archers in high per stack and 3-4 crossbows. Since the xbows work as the main missile component adding more missiles is only worth it if they can melee too. Hence prefer Nizaris and JA and much less Futuwas and TF.

[bondovic]

You are exactly right. Thats their achilles heel, like with all pure archer units. They unbalance the army composition (detract from average stack melee capacity). Thats why the JA are a plus in this point - after you make them emptry their quivers carefully (ie without participating directly in the missile duel and take many losses) you can use them as reserves. JA are meant as the cherry in the pie not bread and butter like TF/xbows.

I have a problem with this. The meele stats of the JA's are not terrific, especially when compared to the +2 valor TFS. Either way - to use them as "reserves", as you suggest, leaves a lot to the imagination. As flankers? Or anti-line infantry?

For flanking purposes the +2 valor TFS perform on par, I'd say, with the JAs because of their speed that makes up for a slightly lower atk value. But the bonuses to the atk value for a flanking unit are so rampant that even peasants make decent flankers against most but the heavier foes.

As for the other option - to use them as anti-line - I just never go there unless I really need to. Anyways, the JA are crap at this, just like the TFS are.

I think this started out as a debate on wether JAs are redundant due to the JI. If they use the same bow then, yes, they are. Because not only can the JI do everything that the JA can, but they can do a hell of a lot more. Even go anti-line.

[gollum]

Hello Bondovic,
thats exactly right, imagination - you name it, they (JA) do it; when your melee line is faltering they plug the gap, when the enemy line is faltering they give it a push to tip it over, when your general is fighting a vicious cavalry melee with some nasty knights/HC they flank the enemy and give him a breather, when the two sides are exhasted they sit a top a hill fresh and claim victory by a glorious downhil charge to the enemy tired and depleted infantry, when enemy slow heavy infantry is caught between them they shoot it before ambushing it (with the aid of TH or BGs), when conditions allow they do the occasional flanking and more according to the situation.

Your arguments about +2 valor on TF sound persuasive.

For my part i play a home-mod of vanilla that takes out all province valor bonuses, all armor bonuses all weapon bonuses and all morale bonuses so added valor isnt a factor. But thats just me.

You are right that JI make JA redundant when they appear in vanilla. Theoretically however you can tech up faster to JA and JHI that take the master bowyer and spearmaker that usually are built anyway. The JI need the full swordsmith building line too that takes a lot of time, is expensive and relatively useless for the Turks (other than for Futuwas that i am not particularly fond of due to their abominal defence). So you can stick with JAs and JHI combo as i do - just another way to combine the janissary units.

[caravel]

(other than for Futuwas that I am not particularly fond of due to their abominal defence).

On the other hand I love Futuwwa, but they have to be combined with Saracens and TF. I've lost count of how many times Futuwwa units have saved the day with a timely flank charge. Unlike Ghazi infantry Futuwwa have a bow which makes them much more useful. I also find a use for Ottoman Infantry believe it or not.

[gollum]

I love Ottoman infantry too. Not only they are easily available and cheap - but they have an armor piercing attack - the perfect cheap hybrid for late. The reason i dislike Futuwas is the same reason i dislike Nizaris - they take a lot of casualties from missiles and in the melee. They win you battles but you need a new stack to continue the campaign. However as the Egyptians there is no alternative - but not to worry, the Egyptians can train arbalasters

[caravel]

Futuwwa often charge without orders, as with Ghazi, and this can be quite devastating. I totally agree with your criticisms of them, i.e. their poor defence etc, but I enjoy trying to utilise units that have specific strengths and weaknesses. The trick with Futuwwa is to deploy them so that rhe enemy are focusing their missile fire on your better armoured units (Saracens and Turcoman foot). So the Futuwwa should be bringing up the rear.

The big difference between JA and these others is the elite status. This means you won't see them running along with the non elite units. IIRC there is no other elite pure missile foot unit?

Nizari are like souped up Ghazi with bows - minus the AP bonus. The problem there is the defence, as with Ghazi it's extremely poor. Even Futtuwa have better defence, which makes them more useful if they get stuck in melee.

[gollum]

Indeed. Futuwas are the archetypical flanker unit, fast, lightly armored, with great attack, good morale and low defence. They are good for hammering anviled battle lines as you say, as well as taking advantage of high angles of attack by virtue of their high morale that enables them to travel away from the main army in smaller groups. The fact that they have bows, just makes them even more deadly and flexible.

[Roark]

Nizari are like souped up Ghazi with bows - minus the AP bonus. The problem there is the defence, as with Ghazi it's extremely poor. Even Futtuwa have better defence, which makes them more useful if they get stuck in melee.

I think that, given the Nizaris' cost, high speed, charge and attack, it would be a crime to use them as anything BUT a shooting flanker.

No unit in the same class does it better, though.

[bondovic]

Hello Bondovic,
thats exactly right, imagination - you name it, they (JA) do it; when your melee line is faltering they plug the gap, when the enemy line is faltering they give it a push to tip it over, when your general is fighting a vicious cavalry melee with some nasty knights/HC they flank the enemy and give him a breather, when the two sides are exhasted they sit a top a hill fresh and claim victory by a glorious downhil charge to the enemy tired and depleted infantry, when enemy slow heavy infantry is caught between them they shoot it before ambushing it (with the aid of TH or BGs), when conditions allow they do the occasional flanking and more according to the situation.

All right, I suspected as much. Daddy is not convinced, however. Mainly because: out of the jobs you so eloquently describe there isn't really anything there that the TFS actually aren't better at. This is not only based on experience but also on actual numbers. The only task I'd choose JA over TFS for is flanking. This because of their slightly higher atk (I[!]IRC). Regarding gap-plugging I give the nod to the TFS because of their substantial edge in def over the JA.

I'd love to dwell further into this subject, but I really have to get on with RL. Stay tuned...

[gollum]

Big Mamma isnt convinced either Bondovic

Good luck with RL and return soon...