relative effectiveness of missiles

[Procrustes]

Hi Folks,

I had a "natural experiment" with MTW that I thought I'd share with you - I thought the results were intriguing.

I fought a defensive bridge battle against a combined Spanish/French force. (I was Novograd.) I had a mish-mash of troops defending, including one parvise arbelast, one merc longbow, one merc arquebus, and two vanilla archers. No extra valor except for the ones from my four-star general. I set up all the missile units so they had a nice clear shot at the bridge - the archers and arqu from the front and the PA and LB at 45 degree angles from the sides. Everyone was on hold position, hold formation, fire at will. I had some spears, vikings and UM foot soldiers down front and I had enough elevation that I wasn't shooting my own men in the back. (At least not too often, anyways.) After the battle, kills in the log were:

Parvise arbs: 128
Longbow: 80 and had to withdraw early for lack of ammo
Archer 1: 38
Archer 2: 47
Arquebus: 6

All the missile troops were firing at pretty much the same time, though the LB and PA had a little bit more range and would engage the enemy slightly before the others would. I was suprised to find the PA so much more deadly than the LB in this situation - I thought they would be more similar. Also, the PA still had plenty of ammo left when the battle was over. If I had to fight it over again I think I would take the LB's off of "fire at will".

What I was especially disappointed to find was small number of kills I got from the arqs. The weather was clear the entire battle, and they were firing away all along. This helps confirm my suspicions that they are pretty well useless most of the time. (Though a couple of times a volley from the arqs was enough to scare one of the crappier units off the bridge, even if it didn't hit anything.)

I know it's not enough to draw lots of conclusions from, but I found it interesting. Hope someone else will, too.

P.

[PittBull260]

wow thats some interesting info, and useful too, I always used longbowmen, they seem to kill a whole lot, but yea they do run outta ammo quick, guess I'll start makin pav. arbalesters from now on :)

[Roark]

I think I'm the only guy on the forum who doesn't use Pav arbs... I like my armies to be as mobile as possible.

[edyzmedieval]

I think I'm the only guy on the forum who doesn't use Pav arbs... I like my armies to be as mobile as possible.

I don't use them also

[antisocialmunky]

What about Naptha?

[CBR]

Yes arbalesters are the best killers. You dont need to buy the pavise version if you prefer mobility. Xbow/arb are also very cheap in upkeep.


CBR

[yesdachi]

I have read that the real longbowmen of old could have 6-8 arrows in the air at once depending on the angle of fire and target distance (I’ve also read that an experienced longbowman could get all 6-8 arrows to hit the target area at nearly the same time). They do seem to frequently run out of arrows for me but if their rate of fire is anywhere near true to life, the empty quivers are all right with me because their number of kills is always pretty good when I don’t misuse them.

[Eternal Champion]

Do arbalesters have to be mobilizing fast?

It depends on your style of play I guess. I like the combined arms approach and will often spilt my armies into several combat groups. Each group can only move as fast as the slowest unit. It's hard to pull off a flanking move or exploit a weakness while waiting for Pavs to lumber up. Also, Pavs have no shot at all of skirmishing as they are way to slow.

[PittBull260]

I have read that the real longbowmen of old could have 6-8 arrows in the air at once depending on the angle of fire and target distance (I’ve also read that an experienced longbowman could get all 6-8 arrows to hit the target area at nearly the same time). They do seem to frequently run out of arrows for me but if their rate of fire is anywhere near true to life, the empty quivers are all right with me because their number of kills is always pretty good when I don’t misuse them.

the best archers are mongols

[yesdachi]

the best archers are mongols

Historically speaking you may be right, I have heard plenty about their accuracy while on horseback but in the game I don’t know, I’ve never played as them.

I’d say that even though I like the structured armies of the English, and the style of the Vikings. The Mongols were probably some of the best warriors in history.

Perhaps I will try a GH game tonight.

[Zarax]

Historically speaking you may be right, I have heard plenty about their accuracy while on horseback but in the game I don’t know, I’ve never played as them.

I’d say that even though I like the structured armies of the English, and the style of the Vikings. The Mongols were probably some of the best warriors in history.

Perhaps I will try a GH game tonight.

In unmodded MTW their missile is exactly the same as vanilla bow, so you might want to treat them like the turcoman foot and cav...

[yesdachi]

In unmodded MTW their missile is exactly the same as vanilla bow, so you might want to treat them like the turcoman foot and cav...

Sounds like a solid plan. More valor gives more accuracy, right?