Ideas and suggestions

[mitra]

This is part of balance; if irregulars was resistent to arrows like more expensive infantry this will be a unbalance the game, of course you mean let me purchase the armour as upgrade, but at this point is not better take directly the militia swordmen? I did frequently armies like you describe powerful cavalry and mass of irregulars infantry. Usually the best tactics is (assuming you has the cavalry superiority) use your infantry as target (set it in open mode) and hit his arrows with your arrows. At the end it will be forced to make a choice between it infantry or your arrows. At the end your infantry is so big in number that he cannot make too hard damage if your shooters press his ones.

I can assure you a big mass of irregulars on three lines in compact formation with a general in the middle is very hard to defeat if you has not a strong superiority in shooters.

[ThisIsRealWarfare]

Originally Posted by mitra

This is part of balance; if irregulars was resistent to arrows like more expensive infantry this will be a unbalance the game, of course you mean let me purchase the armour as upgrade, but at this point is not better take directly the militia swordmen? I did frequently armies like you describe powerful cavalry and mass of irregulars infantry. Usually the best tactics is (assuming you has the cavalry superiority) use your infantry as target (set it in open mode) and hit his arrows with your arrows. At the end it will be forced to make a choice between it infantry or your arrows. At the end your infantry is so big in number that he cannot make too hard damage if your shooters press his ones.

I can assure you a big mass of irregulars on three lines in compact formation with a general in the middle is very hard to defeat if you has not a strong superiority in shooters.

The cavalry part, it's a bit difficult. Depending on enemy army, they have a great superiority with Horse archers. I really think they hit way too much, I mean horse archers can barely miss. Neither Crossbows nor archers would in most situations get time enough to destroy enemy horse archers. For example, the mongol forces does only consist of cavalry. Half of that cavalry is usually melee, half horse archery. My army is for now consisting of some knights (mounted), many pikemen, many good Xbows, and really good infantry overall. However, I cant beat any mongolian force...

The thing is that, when they charge my infantry, I only have once choice; putting them in circle formation (Schiltron). When doing that, they can easily defend themselves against the enemy melee cavalry, but with about 750 horse archers (In an average mongol army) behind them, they bombard my formations and kill them within a matter of minutes. If charging with my cavalry to chase away those horse archers, my cavalry simply dies. My archery cant hit half as much as the enemy horse archers, and they reload way slower. There is basically no chance of defeating a mongolian army unless you have tons of archers and pikemen, plus a very good position (preferably a hill)

[mitra]

Yes mongols are hard but is not easy to use for a human over all the the grounds, usually the good choice is to place yourself over high ground, external ring of armoured troops, internal of bowmen, pike behind bowmen, and use the cavalry for feint attacks for force them to don' shoot from statis position (shoot in movement has penalty) . If you has sufficient cavalry you can try a anvil hammer tactics using your infantry as anvil.

[mailor]

Never engange in a battle against mongolians in the field. Hide in your castles when they approach

Not a very good tip, I know.

[PeteSKTemplar]

When I was forced to run after horse archers with my heavy cavalry I use spread formation until they reach end of map, when I catch them I use close formation again. I know it is taking advantage of game mechanics but I have not found yet other solution besides using my 7 units of irregulars x-bows upgraded to 2nd primary weapon, 3rd is still very expensive for me.
I agree that it would not be good to have cheap units resistant to damage because they always were kind of canon fodder another idea I got is if we could have possibility to choose instead of 2 irregulars one militia unit, instead of 2 militia 1 sergeant etc, possibility to choose huge low cost armies or smaller but expensive, it is just an idea, to have different option and experience, it would be similar how it is with foot and mounted version of same unit, first is bigger and cheaper, second (mounted) is smaller and more expensive but instead of just unit option we might have an army option for something like that. If it was possible then I could have entire mounted army as Mongols or Prussian have because right now I cant have any cavalry instead of irregulars. I repeat its just an idea no complaining. Also do you like how mangonel is useful against infantry but useless against cavalry even when cavalry is stationary? I would prefer if mangonel would hit at least few of those when stationary.

[mitra]

Yes, I sent already your idea to developers, my point is only that they take very seriously the balance of game factors so respect other gameplay changes those of battle mechanic are less rapids (the game mechanic has been adapted by a Napeolonic wargame rules). About the effect of siege weapons on cavalry I saw the same against the mongols (too little effect) but siege machine are still in works for improve them, so I think is one of things already in correction list.