Battlefield Strategy Guide

Users who are viewing this thread

I rely on the basic formation a good knight or general should know
First row
Knights
Second row
Foot soldiers
Third row
Archers

Cavalry will go first after then foot soldier will after them, Archers will support fire.
 
I got a Charger, a Morningstar (the perfect 'normal' weapon against Freaks), and the Hunter's Night set. With that, I can hunt down any foe on the battlefield; Artificers are my least feared foe now.
Also, Shadowlords stand little chance against Swadian Knights (when you have enough of them).
I always tell my infantry and cavalry to charge if there is good terrain for it; When unhorsed, Cavalry becomes infantry and I don't want to limit them with orders, so that they have a bigger chance of survival.
 
I usually adopt the same tactics as in Native. If the enemy force is overwhelming I look for a defensive spot, spread my archers and put them in the first line. Then I make my infantry stand in tight ranks behind them while keeping my cavalry far to the flank. When the enemy gets close I'll merge the archers in the tight infantry formation and let the cavalry charge from behind.
In case we're somewhat even I put my archers on the left flank, infantry middle and cavalry on the right. This way my archers will have a somewhat clear line of fire.
 
Anything that's at hand, really. A hill, a river, a bunch of trees. I generally don't pit my troops to the border of the map because I feel that's cheating.
 
I used patchwork in the old version. Now or you have to get a diamond or you have to reach Zendar to use Necronomicon, so you will made enough corpses for zombies at that point. Can be useful for garrison.

If you use native companions, just get fleshburn armor for them (require only 9 strenght).

Archers could be a problem. Golems are rare, also better artificer set than six golems. Revenant are very good, but you will lose when you will promote them.

Cavalry. Horror seems very fragile, just promote them to abomination. Acolytes once upgraded seems very good. Scavenger seems useless, upgrade them in Necromancer and you have a good cavalry with less upkeep than horrors! After necromancer i would get plaguedoctor: better armor and after access to artificer. Artificer kill very fast infantry just crushing, they are useful in siege because they can use shield and they have the rifle, but they aren't very good in cavalry battle because their weapon is short. Bloodpreservers seems bad. Fleshburn line could be more useful against Khergits, don't know what is better between Hellraiser and Shadowlord.
 
For example horrors seems fragile, but are they? They fall quite easily if you manage to hit them and their armor resemble the body armor you get from corpses. Can't be sure because I didn't make the mod so I haven't the proof, but if they just wear body armor that has 25 protection value, they are more fragile than necromancer that have the 50 armor and a sturdy shield and cost less to upkeep. Only reason to get horrors is that they are spammable while acolytes are rarer (you get tons of corpses, for acolytes you rely on tavers and captured enemies), but abominations are better in every way except speed.

Scavengers are in game, but I can't really explain why. The chance of getting random equipment mean they can get worse stuff than the necromancers...acolytes are so rare that is a pity to waste them as scavengers.

Bloodpreserver's horse is the worst of the 4 final acolytes upgrade. Artificer's "horse" can knock infantry more easily, Hellraiser's horse has the best armor value, Shadowlord's horse has the best maneuver value, Bloodpreserver's horse is a little slower and less armored and have 50 hit points less. Ah, also Bloodpreserver's shield is big but is half sturdy than the other three shields and Artificer's shield is both big and sturdy.

About Revenant they are very good when you get them, but they become obsolete soon, that is the reason archers could be a problem: if you stick with revenants you will lose horrors (that are always better except sieges) and abominations (that are always better).
 
vota dc said:
About Revenant they are very good when you get them, but they become obsolete soon, that is the reason archers could be a problem: if you stick with revenants you will lose horrors (that are always better except sieges) and abominations (that are always better).
Why would you lose horrors if you stick with revenants?
kabogh said:
I also saw your post on another topic telling to shoot the legs of the guy,I'm going to try it now!
His shield can't protect his legs.
 
This is my big Idea for battles until i get special units

                                        Infantry
                          Spreaded  ------  Hold Position

                                                                                        Cavalry
                                                                              Stand close-----Hold position

       
            Archers

Spreaded----------Hold position


Everybody is forbidden to use ranged weapons until the enemy is on a mid-distance, then we release an arrow storm,  Infantry is usually Nords, cavalry a mix of Swadians, vaegirs and Khergit, and for last, archers are a mix of Vaegirs and rhodoks. I play on a defensive position because AI is usually offensive, otherwise with the same formation, we go getting closer for 10 steps every 2 seconds. When I get Special units:

                Same formations, just replace all infantry for Werewolfs and vampires, but in a less quantity, and all cavalry for hellraiser, shadowlords, and a mixture of all the other undead cavalry. 

The companions are usually set into Infantry-cavalry-archers according to their skills and inventory.

What do you think about my strategy?
 
I would put my infantry in the middle while having archers and cavalry on the flanks. Otherwise it sounds pretty solid, provided that your character starts out by recruiting faction troops and has no problem recruiting troops from different factions.
Also; don't overcomplicate things. The best solution is always simple. :wink:

Captured Joe said:
Horrors are deadly.
Yaya, I get it now. Was a misunderstanding on my part.
 
Ok here is the test report of " Shooting the legs of the alchimist " :

Weapon | Bow | Crossbow | Gun | Thrown Weapon |
Number of success | 1/5 | 0/5 | 0/5 | 3/5 |

Conclusion: I don't recommend this strategy
 
Did your arrows hit his shield or did you miss? If they hit the shield you're aiming too high and if you missed, well, you missed. Another reason to shoot characters in the legs is because of the usually low armour value.
 
Just hit the freaks with a Morningstar. Usually that's the only weapon which works for me on these creatures.
Or stab with other weapons. You'll need to get a point through those things in order to hurt it.

Edit:
Before the latest version came out, there was a reasonable way to obtain the Hunter's Night while being a "good guy". That set works great against any kind of Freak too.
Unfortunately, Nought in all his wisdom has decided one needs to be a Werewolf in order to get the weapon of the Vampire Hunter; To become a monster in order to fight mosters with a suitabl weapon. Nought works in strange ways for humans, but who am I to question his genius?
 
Untitled. said:
Did your arrows hit his shield or did you miss? If they hit the shield you're aiming too high and if you missed, well, you missed. Another reason to shoot characters in the legs is because of the usually low armour value.

The fact is that even if it works more for bows and thrown weapons to hit the legs,you have to use the right weapon,stones don't deal enough damage by example and also I talk as a medium level player,I am not the super accurate marksman or the eternal noob; the reason why I don't recommend.Also I precise the tests were done WITHOUT any melee weapon or shield; then maybe the strategy can be considered.The other thing is the slow recharge of the bolt/cartridge of the crossbow/pistol and one more disadvantage of the flintlock pistol:
The great inaccuracy of the thing.

Removed some cringy ****.
 
Well I'm quite partial to an infantry line (Recently battled, got killed by, then recruited a few vampires, These things are not so much killers as butchers) Archers if any would be deployed in front of the infantry with horse(loose terminology) deployed behind. If the Enemies suicide their horse straight on I'd pull back the archers into the infantry, kill of the horse then redeploy the archers. Once the enemy infantry gets half way my horse is sent around to their flank, archers get pulled back when the infantry is just about on top of them.

Infantry and Horse clears the field.
 
Back
Top Bottom