View Full Version : Are Men at Arms better than Normans?
The real game stats seem to be a mess regarding Normans. Expensive units are expensive to heal as well so Normandy's Normans seem a big advantage but not if they are worse than Men at Arms.
Anyone?
For extra points what are your favourite Infantry and Ranged units?
in vanilla (1.03 unmodded version) Normans have advantage towards m-a-a that they are more numerous, but Normans have no arour what's really weird...
in various mods those stats are changed... in my mods, Normans are one of my favourite infantry units(it depends on which unit can I use, I prefere Normans, Roman infantry or Hospitaliers
Infantry: Teutonic Knights
Archers: Heavy Archers/ Longbowmen
Yes, that is weird. The library states something about chain mail armor, but in reality it is zero. Bit flawy.
Adrian ROM
06-09-2005, 15:53
what about archers and crosbowmen?
which one is the best?
Naturally, I'd say crossbowmen. Seems far more advanced than simple archers. Longbowmen, for instance, and other advanced archers should be better than crossbowmen. 'Course there's heavy crossbowmen, too.
Angryminer
06-09-2005, 17:42
Archers are better against unarmored enemies due to their longer range. Crossbowmen are superior against armored enemies because their bolts can easily punch the enemy's army.
Angryminer
Empress Meg
06-09-2005, 18:19
I like to get the English warbows when I can. I find them to be rather efficient killers and seem t taker on armored units well. I did have some heavy crossbowmen in my last few battles and enjoyed them as well. I like to have a good mix of them now. Arrows will kill armored troops, not as fast as the heavier bolts of a crossbow will, but it takes time. Crossbows on the other hand do not have the range needed to take on massed formations from afar. That is why I suggest a mix if you can get it.
Devoirs The Empress
Adrian ROM
08-09-2005, 12:52
But mounted archers are better than the heavy archers and heavy crossbowmen?
I think the mounted archers probably have worse range than most archers and crossbowmen, but they move a lot faster, fire alot faster than crossbow. So their main strength is mainly the hit-and-run tactics.
Wolfgrin
09-09-2005, 15:45
Crossbowmen are lethal during town assaults. A couple of units of them can decimate town guards in moments. If you can get your crossbowmen into the enemy's towers, they can often take out the knight and his guard, as well as other defenders.
rubenmic
12-09-2005, 16:49
Though, I've found an army of simple bowmen can do wonders. Best to get level 3 jousting for your marshall. Assemble your archers in an overall tight formation, but not necessaraily the squads. Keep some in reserve (don't have them shoot). Then use your Marshall to lure the enemy in. If they have calvery don't do this, but anything else is easy picking. It really helps because the enemy will run, wearing out their stamina and so by the time they get to the archers, have to walk, not charge- even more, that means the archers have more time to pick them off. Did this when outnumbered by a Crusader Army and an ally of his. I lost 40% of my archer army! Try it.
One Word: Janisaries
Yeah, in my turk game (Seljuk, then reunited ottoman), the janissaries were my key tool. 2-3 squads of them, 1 of longbowmen (mercenary), 2 spahias, 1 halberdiers (yes, I did eventually own Provence, where you can get them), 2-3 roman infantry. Another army had norman mercs, varangians (I fortunatelly got thrace and nicea early on). I thought of using ghulam cavalry, or pronias instead of spahis, but spahias have a bigger squad, and that's useful.
I prefer longbowmen, but I also completely upgrade your marshall's archery skill, so allied units won't get hurt by friendlyu arrows.
sometimes I play with 6 squadrons of longbowmen, so this is useful.
my favourite when plaing as muslim are assassins(made them almost stronger than janissaries)
and generaly Normans
assassins ? I tried to install your mod but it didn't work :( I copied all the maps into directory
assassins ? I tried to install your mod but it didn't work :( I copied all the maps into directory
assassins are in the pack with complete mod
mapchanges are only mapchanges without def and other changes...
My armies normally have the exact same composition, being 3 squads of crossbowmen/heavy crossbowmen, 3 squads of mounted units (Feudal knights/cataphracts),3 squads of either type of infantry (preferable men at arms, or varagians when available) and either 4 trebuchets and 2 catapults or only trebuchets. The problem with trebuchets is that once deployed, they can no longer be moved around. This aspect is detrimental only when personally leading your troops into battle.
In the early stage of my kingdom's military expansion I usually have an all-archer or all-swordsmen army. This because they are easily accessible and suffice in strength to defeat the AI's predominantly peasant armies.
My inclination towards crossbowmen rather than archers derives from the fact that archers appear to be significantly less capable in melee combat and wear no armour.
Finally, I have a question. Can anyone tell me why crossbowmen and their heavy counterparts do not differ in training costs in spite of the obvious superiority of heavy crossbowmen?
heavy crossbowmen are very rare, I think few provinces can create them. But yes indeed, making them a little more expensive would be logical.
I never use cavalry units, don't ask me why.
heavy crossbowmen are very rare, I think few provinces can create them. But yes indeed, making them a little more expensive would be logical.
I never use cavalry units, don't ask me why.
They are excellent for eliminating enemy archers since they can easily manouver around enemy flanks and penetrate the soft core due to their speed.
vBulletin v3.5.4, Copyright ©2000-2007, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.