BOARD SHIELDS ANNOY ME

[HitMoose]

hit him in the head?

 

[AlienKnight]

(...)
Tell the cavalry to hold position at medium range, then alone I go behind them and start killing some of those who aren't in formation. Then when every enemy is looking at me, I send a direct charge, it always results.
Or I just rush into them and with a charger hit them all, but I always take a beating for doing this, spears are not friends  .
(...)

Yeah, that's a smart way, too. I do this when I've got plenty of archers (whom I make to hold position) and the enemy approaches hidden behind shields. If you get behind them and not too far away, they all turn back to watch you and so they expose their backs to get arrows in The drawback of this tactics is that you are in danger if the enemy has some archers. They will all aim at you so you need a good shield, armoured horse and zig-zaging...

 

[tbj28]

Alienknight, thats not a tactic but more like taking advantage of the poor AI, atleast in my opinion for a tactic to be valid it most not take advantage of the AI but rather tactics youd use vs an human mind.

 

[Riobux]

I'm going to go with "get a big sodding axe" approach as well. Is there really a better way to remove a shield from the enemy's grubby hands?

 

[Stin]

Ahem, bump 'em with your horse so they lose their balance, dropping their shield, and then slash away.

 

[mat2d2]

Seriously, every damn time I get into a war with the Nords, EVERYBODY is using a massive axe and they are bloody hard to get past. Even if I'm on a horse, they are amazingly hard to block from chopping my shield up. Kite shields just fall apart from them, and using a knight shield is akin to blocking a wet piece of paper to stop a tank.

Thoughts?

隐藏

This is a bit of a joke but man attacking those Nord castles in warband with my swadians   

 

[Stin]

Well, it would be common sense to just shoot the crap out of them if they had no shields right? Because those great axes don't allow you to hold a shield at the same time. Or are they holding shields?

 

[HitMoose]

also, aim for there feet or head with a bow or crossbow

 

[AlienKnight]

Alienknight, thats not a tactic but more like taking advantage of the poor AI, atleast in my opinion for a tactic to be valid it most not take advantage of the AI but rather tactics youd use vs an human mind.

Well, perhaps you are right. But what actually could enemy troops do in reality if I'm behind them with a bow and in front of them there are more archers? They can defend themselves with shields only from one side at the time. So the game AI chooses the enemy who is closer to pay attention to. I think something like this would / could happen in real life, too. I mean how long could enemy troops ignore that arrows keep coming from behind? They would turn back, wouldn't they?

It's the same story if in melee combat you approach enemy and hit him on the back while he fights another of your troops.

 

[tbj28]

Well firstly it whoulden take more than one well placed shot to bring your horse down or you.... i dont really think anyone whould be dumb enough to try flank an army solo, mounted or not... all they likely whould need is to send 4-5 man to take you out while while focusing on the main army... also likely that while you get killed your peasant army whould  cheer and scream.... the bastard is death we no longer need to fight lets return home lads!

 

[HitMoose]

you have a fine flare for the creative. In this game, as long as you don't run into too thick a clot of guys, or a rock/tree/obstacle you cant jump over, then you wont have problems, just keep moving........ this is of course assuming your on a horse, pref a fast one

 

[AlienKnight]

Ha, ha, ha,...

Of course, you're right. I was just trying to make some though about AI behaviour in case the enemies are in front and at the same time behind, too... I mean what should system architect do with the algorithm? Ignore the enemies behind? Or maybe care for them only if there is more than X people? Of send out limited number of troops to deal with them while the rest maintain formation (this actually happens sometimes)?

The question at hand was: getting behind enemy formation to draw attention of the enemy troops, so they turn back and become vulnerable for the rest of my troops to send arrows in their backs - is it just exploiting poor AI (shame on us) or should we be not ashamed to do so 'cause this might be real situation, too?

 

[placenik]

Well, actually horse archers are meant just for that purpose, to annoy enemy who is just holding their ground, so no shame in it...

 

[Heimir]

Simple solution...BUY A GODDAMN MORNINGSTAR.

 

[AlienKnight]

Well, actually horse archers are meant just for that purpose, to annoy enemy who is just holding their ground, so no shame in it...

So I believe, thanks.

 

[Lychee Nut]

Ya, they should really implement a box formation for the Rhodoks, and you can't really complain at the board shields. they ARE historically accurate. however, we can't plant them into the ground like the the genovese crossbowmen did.

 

[Karankb]

I have created my own tactis for beating rhodoks (by diverting their attention, of course)  but their shield wall is really amazing 

 

[HHUK]

I use the plain old two handed sword approach, just overhead swing, if they block, go for the side, if they're insanely good at blocking then kick them and then smash them.

 

[funk]

i use moded throwing axes to smash them as a shout at them to fight like men.

 

[aristocracy]

Rhodoks are gods. They are sharpshoots plus nice melee fighters ... and they castle, wahooo, so hard to get it down!!!
When I fight them in the wild, (I'm serving the Nords), order melees to cease fire, then, set their really point to Rhodoks army,
these footmans will hold their shields and advance, no harm to them because they have nice shields too, lol.