Best units in Bannerlord update for 1.5.9. up to 1.6.1.

[fragonard]

Ah... horse armor. That could do it. Thanks.

 

[LyonExodus]

Speaking of exceptions, why do you think Bucellarii are so bad? They don't seem too different from Khuz HA on paper for armor and equipment except for 40 vs 48 arrows. The only downside I can see is having to go through 3 tiers of mediocre archers to get them. Am I missing something else?

Biggest and slower horse in class with poor horse armor. 8 less arrows then the standard khuzait. less body armor both on horse and Torso for the rider. the +10 bow skill can't really be seen and in melee they even have slower swing speed. overall it makes for the worst horse archer unit. this is both my opinion on the unit, my experience with them and also some testing that is kinda pointless to show.

 

[fragonard]

OK, got it.

 

[mortache]

Fians are good but Khan's guards are just OP haha. Since no troops can use shields and weapons at the same time, two handed weapons always wreck because all it takes is one or two hits from a glaive to down someone.

Honorable mention goes to Falxmen, they are perfect for harvesting heads. In custom siege battles without artillery I can get 100 fians and 20-30 falxmen to defend against 500 troops of any kind. Less fians would have worked but Falxmen tend to get mowed down by archers when they kill everyone in siege tower ramp and get exposed on all sides to enemy arrows.

 

[LyonExodus]

Fians are good but Khan's guards are just OP haha. Since no troops can use shields and weapons at the same time, two handed weapons always wreck because all it takes is one or two hits from a glaive to down someone.

yeah there is no question that the Khan's guard are arguably better on the field, still they can struggle in sieges (attacks) if we make a unit by unit comparison.

They are both S Tier for units.

Honorable mention goes to Falxmen, they are perfect for harvesting heads. In custom battles I can get 100 fians and 20-30 falxmen to defend against 500 troops of any kind. Less fians would have worked but Falxmen tend to get mowed down by archers when they kill everyone in siege tower ramp and get exposed on all sides to enemy arrows.

indeed, 2H units or Shock Infantry are great but not that much on the field on realistic. that's mainly why i never bother testing them, pretty much nobody uses them on that setting, still it's cool to know that some perform better than others, will probably work on testing them when i can find the time. there are some guys on the Tube who did it already tho, so i kinda don't feel like it's necessary.

 

[mortache]

I

yeah there is no question that the Khan's guard are arguably better on the field, still they can struggle in sieges (attacks) if we make a unit by unit comparison.

They are both S Tier for units.

indeed, 2H units or Shock Infantry are great but not that much on the field on realistic. that's mainly why i never bother testing them, pretty much nobody uses them on that setting, still it's cool to know that some perform better than others, will probably work on testing them when i can find the time. there are some guys on the Tube who did it already tho, so i kinda don't feel like it's necessary.

Don't see how they struggle in siege assaults other than being less expendable. They're excellent archers and excellent shock infantry, and glaives hit harder than 2H swords. In a regular siege, the challenge isn't whether I will win this fight, but whether I will win this without 10 of them dying. But I usually tend to leave my Khan's guards in garrison and call all the vassals to use their troops for the meat grinder.

Shock infantry are amazing if you are good at engaging the archers with your cavalry. Just going close to them and forcing them to run or pull out sword is enough since archers cant shoot when running. Unless you are asking them to run towards a wall of 500 fians, shock infantry will always be useful.

 

[LyonExodus]

weapon length is a factor in cramped spaces, they don't do well at dealing with walls and surrounded by units.

Shock infantry are amazing if you are good at engaging the archers with your cavalry. Just going close to them and forcing them to run or pull out sword is enough since archers cant shoot when running. Unless you are asking them to run towards a wall of 500 fians, shock infantry will always be useful.

this is player preference but infantry and archers are way cheaper and more versatile than what you are suggesting, many others would agree with this statement if realistic is the difficulty selected and no mods are used to make cavalry better.

 

[mortache]

weapon length is a factor in cramped spaces, they don't do well at dealing with walls and surrounded by units.

When surrounded they tend to do overhead swings. One on one it might be troublesome but when they're in a group, a falxman 1 rank behind can thwack on the head of the front row. You should really do some custom siege battles and see for yourself how OP they are.

this is player preference but infantry and archers are way cheaper and more versatile than what you are suggesting, many others would agree with this statement if realistic is the difficulty selected and no mods are used to make cavalry better.

I am not sending cavalrymen deep into infantry formations, I am charging at the archers when they overextend either in front or back. Moving targets are inherently harder to hit and horses also soak up some hits that would hit the person. Their job is simply to harass them as the infantry get into melee range. All the shock infantry are regular troops, so I don't really see the issue there. Its also quite easy to replenish cavalry now since the enemy has more cavalry and drop more horses as loot. I also stock up on cheap imperial chargers whenever I can.

 

[LyonExodus]

When surrounded they tend to do overhead swings. One on one it might be troublesome but when they're in a group, a falxman 1 rank behind can thwack on the head of the front row. You should really do some custom siege battles and see for yourself how OP they are.

man i do sieges every day and dozens of people see them too, i know what i am talking about. thanks.

I am not sending cavalrymen deep into infantry formations, I am charging at the archers when they overextend either in front or back. Moving targets are inherently harder to hit and horses also soak up some hits that would hit the person. Their job is simply to harass them as the infantry get into melee range. All the shock infantry are regular troops, so I don't really see the issue there. Its also quite easy to replenish cavalry now since the enemy has more cavalry and drop more horses as loot. I also stock up on cheap imperial chargers whenever I can.

ehm... player preference like i stated? i am not saying they are bad, i said that infantry and archers are more reliable and versatile, i can then add this: for the large majority of the players.

 

[mortache]

man i do sieges every day and dozens of people see them too, i know what i am talking about. thanks.

I'm honestly not sure why your results differ from mine. Even at this moment I'm doing more siege custom battles as I speak. The only infantry that can defeat Veteran Falxmen in sieges are the Imperial Legionaries which are probably the best shield infantry in the game with their armor and mace. If you don't want the unwieldy Veteran Falxmen you could use Voulgier or Menavliaton instead which eat Legionaries for breakfast.

ehm... player preference like i stated? i am not saying they are bad, i said that infantry and archers are more reliable and versatile, i can then add this: for the large majority of the players.

Do you bring absolutely no cavalry at all? I was just explaining how I use shock infantry in field battles. Even if you aren't going heavily into them, mixing a few with the shield infantry can help since the shield infantry will always be in front protecting them. They're also devastating against cavalry when behind spearmen.

 

[LyonExodus]

I'm honestly not sure why your results differ from mine. Even at this moment I'm doing more siege custom battles as I speak. The only infantry that can defeat Veteran Falxmen in sieges are the Imperial Legionaries which are probably the best shield infantry in the game with their armor and mace. If you don't want the unwieldy Veteran Falxmen you could use Voulgier or Menavliaton instead which eat Legionaries for breakfast.

haven't tested them, i am just talking from seeing the few ones i get in sieges struggle a lot to push the line. i don't actively seek them but the AI will bring them, and their long weapons will get stuck in corridors and they will hit the other units with the stick instead of the blade part.
in an open area they do fine cause they can keep the space between them and the enemy, they are also great at killing a few before tehy go up ladders. but yeah, that thing makes them weaker than most infantry in sieges.

Do you bring absolutely no cavalry at all? I was just explaining how I use shock infantry in field battles. Even if you aren't going heavily into them, mixing a few with the shield infantry can help since the shield infantry will always be in front protecting them. They're also devastating against cavalry when behind spearmen.

i play in a very different way.
archers and infantry are my boys, Cav holds flanks, Horse archers are mainly finishers.
i don't go for Cav mainly because i don't like to use noble troops as they make the game too easy for me, and the standard one are serviceable to say the least. i also don't use Legionaries.
i also don't stack on Horse archers a lot, preferring the foot archer option for any faction.
this makes my infantry the tanky part of the army and since i micro the archers in 2 to 4 formations i simply can't really manage Shock infantry and the few i get i set in formation 2 for protecting the archers.
i am also not very good at using them and with all the units limitations i use.
while cavalry is mainly used for buying time and killing a few archers.

Your tactic is interesting btw. good to see that you can make them perform well.

 

[mortache]

haven't tested them, i am just talking from seeing the few ones i get in sieges struggle a lot to push the line. i don't actively seek them but the AI will bring them, and their long weapons will get stuck in corridors and they will hit the other units with the stick instead of the blade part.

Yes the weapon does get stuck a lot, but whenever it hits it one shots the enemy. I've never seen the overhead swing to get stuck in anything other than the doorways. These troops tend to walk backwards trying to hit the enemy when up close, so they're never permanently stuck at a disadvantageous location. Often what happens in sieges is that after breaking the door the legionary will kill a few of them and move forth. Then they're in range of a lot more enemy 2H and start dying. Soon they're spread thin then its sweeping time. On the siege towers, most of the deaths are from enemy archers and troops falling to the ground overextending and even climbing onto the ladder lol. You should really try it out, I think you'll be surprised how efficient Voulgiers, Line Breakers etc are at siege defense. Their biggest downside which is running up to the enemy under a hail of arrows is negated by the walls.

 

[LyonExodus]

from my playstyle in both sieges and battles there is just no place for an unshielded unit without micro, they will just die from arrows on sieges and they will need to be in a different formation for battles to avoid fire.
without pausing the game 5 formations are already enough to control, there is really no space for a 6th and i have tried them in my last as well since at one point my garrison had 70+ Heroic Linebreakers., they did well but not well enough to really change my mind.

Another problem i have with shock troops is how hard they are to train up, unless you do them in bulk with bandits.
If you keep fighting and sieging, like i normally do, you simply don't have the time to stack 100+ of them and they tend to die in sieges using the tactic i use. they would be counter productive to my entire ecosystem of battle.

You should really try it out,

so yeah, i don't think i will.

you feel free to enjoy them, i am sure they are great.

 

[mortache]

from my playstyle in both sieges and battles there is just no place for an unshielded unit without micro, they will just die from arrows on sieges and they will need to be in a different formation for battles to avoid fire.
without pausing the game 5 formations are already enough to control, there is really no space for a 6th and i have tried them in my last as well since at one point my garrison had 70+ Heroic Linebreakers., they did well but not well enough to really change my mind.

Another problem i have with shock troops is how hard they are to train up, unless you do them in bulk with bandits.
If you keep fighting and sieging, like i normally do, you simply don't have the time to stack 100+ of them and they tend to die in sieges using the tactic i use. they would be counter productive to my entire ecosystem of battle.


so yeah, i don't think i will.

you feel free to enjoy them, i am sure they are great.

Line breakers are fine but best imo are Veteran Falxmen>Voulgier>Elite Menavliaton and I havent really tried Aserai troops. These troops may die to arrows but they get a lot of kills too so they're easy to train up. Of course you don't want 100% of your infantry to be shock troop, these are specialists that will do a lot of damage from the safety behind other front liners. The shielded infantry go in front of them and protect them with their shields when you ask for a shield wall with them in the same formation.

Anyway, I mentioned siege defense especially. For siege assaults they are actually quite terrible because they have to run up to the walls under a hail of arrow and even shielded infantry in their formation isn't enough to protect them from arrow coming from above. Then again everything is terrible in siege assaults, arrows are truly the meta. Though once they do manage to reach the enemy they WILL wreak havoc.

 

[LyonExodus]

Anyway, I mentioned siege defense especially.

yeah i defaulted to attacks. For defense they are way better and don't face the same problem especially at defending ladders and towers, my mistake there.

i mean yes, they are specialist and should be used in the way you described.
I may have said that training them up is hard but after wondering on it a bit you can get them trained real quick without too much risk using the stewardship perks so that problem doesn't really exist outside of the early game.

for attacks it's pretty much what you described.
I build lines of infantry to tank arrows with the archers shooting further back at the walls.
When the rams gets the door destroyed i move all infantry near the entrance and tell them to charge in (shieldwall) if a see them getting pushed back i tell them to line. Haven't really tested which ones works best but in my last campaign i tried using both, and the shieldwall protected the infantry from the odd archers remaining inside resulting in less casualties. usually any siege results in around 100 casualties on a bad one.
When i tell them to charge i charge all units, this also allows the archers to get inside the walls and get some nice kills while helping out the infantry lines.

Since most of my time in the game is spent conquering it's hard to find space for shock infantry. But i do like to leave them in garrisons just in case.

 

[mortache]

Maybe your perception is skewered by the fact that you tried it with Sturgians, not Empire or Vlandia. They might be more prone to dying but they also get a lot more kills so that compensates for it. When I did the 100% Khan's Guard campaign, most of the deaths I had was from these guys. Any cavalry that makes the mistake of diving into infantry gets one shot by them. I haven't tried yet but perhaps a mix of pike bracing and Falxmen will be perfect for defending against cavalry.

For assaults if I don't manage to treb down the walls, don't massively outnumber them and one of their sides doesn't have siege engines, I often concentrate all my troops on that side instead of letting them use all the siege ladders. Especially if the defenses are well designed and archers can shoot my troops in weird angles, I'll have my archers right beside the infantry. Defenders are limited by one thing, their archers have limited spots to shoot from. By overwhelming one side it can be a difference between a defeat and a win with very few casualties.

 

[LyonExodus]

Maybe your perception is skewered by the fact that you tried it with Sturgians,

in all fairness i never really tried to make them work, Sturgians where the ones available at that time but since i don't actively seek for them any would have resulted in the same conclusion.
If i ever do an infantry only or archers forbidden campaign all of this info will be useful. so keep giving me tips about them if you still have some

I'll have my archers right beside the infantry

do you keep the archers in the mainline since you overload one side? or are you able to split shielded and shock infantry?
Anyway that overwhelming of one side seems like a really good idea and one i haven't thought about for the well designed castles.
Since i stream tho, it could end up taking a bit too much time and feel boring to the viewers. that's the only downside i can find in my situation.

 

[mortache]

in all fairness i never really tried to make them work, Sturgians where the ones available at that time but since i don't actively seek for them any would have resulted in the same conclusion.
If i ever do an infantry only or archers forbidden campaign all of this info will be useful. so keep giving me tips about them if you still have some

Archers arent really an issue when the shock infantry is simply in the same formation with other infantry. Even having 10% of them will do massive damage to the enemy. Next time you fight a big army battle against the empire, after the battle sort the enemy troops by kill in the results and you'll see Menavliaton are usually near the top and often kill 2-3 times their own number.

do you keep the archers in the mainline since you overload one side? or are you able to split shielded and shock infantry?
Anyway that overwhelming of one side seems like a really good idea and one i haven't thought about for the well designed castles.
Since i stream tho, it could end up taking a bit too much time and feel boring to the viewers. that's the only downside i can find in my situation.

This technic probably nont be needed if you bring a lot of troops. I just did this today after repeatedly failing a siege and reloading the save to try again. I had 300 of mixed low tier troops and recruits, assaulting a castle with 100+ militia and 70 garrison. A 500 man army was coming my way so I decided that my best bet was to assault the castle without any siege equipment. With regular F6 the cowards ran with 70-80 enemy left. They had two catapults that caused massive losses, and there were side facing archer spots on the wall that were totally shielded from my own archers.

So I told my infantry to go right next to the wall and then charge, and had the archers right next to them. This way they had clear shot of all the archers, even the ones facing sideways. This side had no catapults so I didn't lose a fifth of my army to those lol. Instead of losing horribly I won with only 100 casualties out of 300 mostly tier 1-2 troops. Only 50 actually died. Siege ladders are usually quite terrible because they don't give a foothold to your troops, dropping them in the middle of an enemy crowd one by one. But with all the archers focused here, the wall was easily taken and once my troops had a foothold it was easy sailing from there.

 

[LyonExodus]

will keep this in mind