Currently viewing this thread:

Ncallstar08

Recruit
You have 40 ppl in your party.
50 archers are coming at you in open field
You have an even mix of Infantrymen, horse archers, horsemen, and archers.
How would you set up formations?

this is mostly out of curiosity for myself as I struggle with large groups of archers currently :smile:
 

imgran

Squire
If there are hills, set your footmen at the bottom of the hill with your archers above them. Use them to keep the enemy archers busy until you can get your mounted units around the side and catch the archers while they're distracted. Once the archers react to the presence of your cavalry, charge with your infantry and cavalry, and advance with your horse archers.

if it's flat, advance slowly in a line until arrows start flying at you, then as your archers go after theirs, order your infantry to charge horse archers to follow you and ring the enemy archers while the infantry closes in. Once the infantry engages, get up close and personal with the horse archers and cavalry to keep them off balance and prevent them from firing volley.

The idea is to force the archers to face in multiple directions rather than concentrating their fire. Concentrated volley fire is devestating, but if you put the archers on the defensive you can prevent them from volleying and win fairly easy

Not a perfect solution but it's better than lolcharge
 

meiileo

Recruit
Their army comp is good because they can decimate you before you reach them but also a gamble because theyre fked if you reach them with enough men. What id do is ill have the cavalry disrupt them while your infantry rushes in with archers behind in loose formation. Important thing youd have to consider is timing, have the cavalry hit them before the infantry gets in range of their archers and make sure they attack from the sides or behind for a flanking maneuver.

Basically just use cav to disrupt their volley while your men run in.
 

Ted Striker

Regular
Enemy NPC archers are godlike. Do your infantry have shields and shieldwall? Advance a shieldwall and have your cavalry flank wide. Don’t know how the AI will prioritize targeting though. Cavalry on their flanks may make them split up and expose their sides.

I need more experience with Bannerlord’s AI. Would they target the advancing infantry under shieldwall or would they begin turning to face the cavalry flanking them? Horse archers I know skirmish automatically but I don’t know foot archer behavior enough yet.
 

VanHoven

Veteran
Would they target the advancing infantry under shieldwall or would they begin turning to face the cavalry flanking them? Horse archers I know skirmish automatically but I don’t know foot archer behavior enough yet.

In my experience they focus on the nearest target, put your cav on follow mode and flank around the archers into their rear, picking up some on their sides while infantry advances. Once they arrived give cav attack order. May go horribly wrong when they kill you instantly upon advancing though :wink:
 

Lovec1990

Regular
Enemy NPC archers are godlike. Do your infantry have shields and shieldwall? Advance a shieldwall and have your cavalry flank wide. Don’t know how the AI will prioritize targeting though. Cavalry on their flanks may make them split up and expose their sides.

I need more experience with Bannerlord’s AI. Would they target the advancing infantry under shieldwall or would they begin turning to face the cavalry flanking them? Horse archers I know skirmish automatically but I don’t know foot archer behavior enough yet.

Horse archers are best for distracting archers becouse unlike ordinary cavalry they are harder too hit
 

Ted Striker

Regular
Horse archers are best for distracting archers becouse unlike ordinary cavalry they are harder too hit
Well you don’t want your cavalry to distract them, you want your horse archers and infantry distracting them while cavalry flank and charge into them with lances.

Assuming that’s the kind of cavalry we are talking about. And I’m hearing imperial lancers are currently broken.
 

Pejot

Sergeant Knight
WBVC
I'm putting archers in loose formation in front of footman footman in loose formation behind them cavalry in reserve. After they exchange some shooting I'm putting infantry in shield wall and advancing and taking my cav in the meantime to flank them.
 
The first thing I would do is probably pretty counter-intuitive to what many people might do: dismount the horse archers. Archers get better if their firing platform is more stable. The advantage of horse archers is their ability to run from the enemy. Their horse is a bigger target. Dismount them.

After that, put my infantry in a shield wall with the archers some ten paces behind them. I would have the cavalry follow me, to switch them to F6 when the archers get into firing range. ALWAYS ensure the shieldwall infantry is closest to ensure they soak up the damage.

If there is a hill, take it. Archers on top, infantry in front.
 

Ted Striker

Regular
The first thing I would do is probably pretty counter-intuitive to what many people might do: dismount the horse archers. Archers get better if their firing platform is more stable. The advantage of horse archers is their ability to run from the enemy. Their horse is a bigger target. Dismount them.

After that, put my infantry in a shield wall with the archers some ten paces behind them. I would have the cavalry follow me, to switch them to F6 when the archers get into firing range. ALWAYS ensure the shieldwall infantry is closest to ensure they soak up the damage.

If there is a hill, take it. Archers on top, infantry in front.
You think it’s wise dismounting them? They are a lot more useful on horseback I think.

I wouldn’t even engage my archers. I’m advancing with my shieldwall while I and the cavalry flank wide. Minimize the damage as much as possible from those Legolas NPC archers.
 
You think it’s wise dismounting them? They are a lot more useful on horseback I think.

I wouldn’t even engage my archers. I’m advancing with my shieldwall while I and the cavalry flank wide. Minimize the damage as much as possible from those Legolas NPC archers.

The advantage of horse archers is their ability to engage an enemy that is on foot from a distance AND the ability to get where they are needed quickly. Their disadvantage is their larger profile (larger target) and the fact that shooting from horse back, especially when mobile, comes at a significant price in accuracy.
In a battle between horse archers and foot archers the foot archers will generally win because of this.

The case presented here has the player outnumbered against a troop that in the current game build is devastating (archers). The ai however shoots at the closest target only, as far as I've seen. Placing the horse archers behind the infantry allows the shield-bearing infantry to soak up the arrowfire. Since the archers are therefore immobilized, I see no reason why the archers should lower their accuracy by being on horseback.

The only real argument in this case for leaving them on horseback would be the ability to fire at the enemy from a side where they do not wear a shield. However, archers are unable to wield shields while they fire, making shooting them from the back or side useless.
 

Ted Striker

Regular
The advantage of horse archers is their ability to engage an enemy that is on foot from a distance AND the ability to get where they are needed quickly. Their disadvantage is their larger profile (larger target) and the fact that shooting from horse back, especially when mobile, comes at a significant price in accuracy.
In a battle between horse archers and foot archers the foot archers will generally win because of this.

The case presented here has the player outnumbered against a troop that in the current game build is devastating (archers). The ai however shoots at the closest target only, as far as I've seen. Placing the horse archers behind the infantry allows the shield-bearing infantry to soak up the arrowfire. Since the archers are therefore immobilized, I see no reason why the archers should lower their accuracy by being on horseback.

The only real argument in this case for leaving them on horseback would be the ability to fire at the enemy from a side where they do not wear a shield. However, archers are unable to wield shields while they fire, making shooting them from the back or side useless.
I wouldn’t order the horse archers to attack until the shieldwall got close enough that the enemy AI wouldn’t turn its focus away from it. I would want that shieldwall to soak up as much of that damage as possible. Horse archers maintain a good distance but they aren’t useful in this fight. It’s the cavalry I’d rely on to break them.
 
I wouldn’t order the horse archers to attack until the shieldwall got close enough that the enemy AI wouldn’t turn its focus away from it. I would want that shieldwall to soak up as much of that damage as possible. Horse archers maintain a good distance but they aren’t useful in this fight. It’s the cavalry I’d rely on to break them.

I certainly agree the archers are probably the least interesting asset in this battle, but given the changes to the lethality of footmen formations when you crash into them, I'd be weary of charging into them very early in this battle.

I think you could argue the best way to handle this might be to have all your cavalry follow you and swing the horse archers around the enemy formation once they engage your infantry in order to fire into the archers backs. However, I think the archers are unlikely to give you the opportunity to do so.

Your cavalry, greatly outnumbered, is unlikely to be able to handle to full size of the 50 archers in a charge. So you have to reduce the number of archers first. I would argue the horse archers are more valuable as foot archers behind the infantry line to reduce the number of enemies rather than as shock cavalry charging.
The third option, using the horse archers as mounted archers, is arguably the worst. It draws attention away from the main infantry block and serves no purpose (again the archers don't have shields, firing at them from side or back should be equally effective), so why waste the accuracy?
 
Top Bottom