Видео

I am playing a game now in the league and my opponent has two elephants. I will post the video later on.

720. Will think about higher next time. Thanks.

But they can charge routing units so that may be the best thing to do. The latest rules about routing mean that doing any shooting at routers is beneficial as it may prevent them from rallying.. LF are prone to running away from difficult or rough terrain if charged so sometimes they aren't so good for holding terrain but otherwise they can do wonders in difficult terrain. Another difference that may be forgotten is that light infantry is not disordered in difficult terrain which means they shoot normally, unlike nearly every other troop type. This is why you put light infantry on a steep hill slope and other medium infantry on rough terrain behind it. I find that usually three full strength shots (standing still) will disrupt most units unless they have better armour or morale.

They generally hold steady v Javelin Horse. 80% chance to hold steady, 8% to disrupt and 12% to fragment. About the same percentages as v Javelinmen. The chance to fragment is a bit higher because of fighting mounted in the open.

Archaic arms has a series on how to use Balearic sling...seems to be obsessed with the thing :) quite interesting results on accuracy and power, so might answer some of your questions.

Okay, good request.

Thanks for the comment. Are there any particular units you would be interested in me examining?

@@simonlancaster1815 Thank you very much for your kind offer. I am just starting in the game, I will watch your videos and give you an answer later on. Thanks

Thanks for the info. Yes, light horse are great. They can also be used in conjunction with regular cavalry and add some bulk to your cavalry wings..

The beat goes on..

Yes, will post some more over the summer!

The games are different. Ancients has more variation in troop type. However, with the later DLCs for Medieval you get more units. Medieval is also brighter and more colourful. Both games are popular for multiplayer.

I am working abroad without my gaming laptop. I will try to get some new videos up in July when I return. Thanks for the kind words!

@@simonlancaster1815 I see. Happy to hear that you will be back!

Yes, lancers have a big advantage on impact v light spear. They are worth the extra 4 pts for sure.

Field of Glory 2. Rise of Persia DLC. For the PC. Well worth checking out.

@@simonlancaster1815 Thanks!

Problem is the Citizen Hoplites only cost 42. You can have quite a lot of hoplites in your army. 36 pts v 42 pts. You are only up 60 pts with 10v10, for example. Not even enough for two extra Medium Foot units in many armies. Your idea is good but a lot of the time your line will crumble before the flankers can really get going.

I was looking at Lithuanian Cav. They do seem quite expensive at 45. 50% bow but they are above average quality so that kept them off the list. They can probably hold off and even beat a lot of cav in melee. Plus their quality will give them an adv v average quality armoured units on impact. Handgunners and Raw Billmen are fair shouts and I will check them out.

Raw Billmen are evens on impact and in melee v Raw Def Spear. Yes, 3 pts more but they can charge without a penalty like Off Spear which Raw Def Spear can't. Spear may be a little better v cav. Overall, a decent unit at the price. Handgunners I still need to check.

@@simonlancaster1815 I think you're right in a way, I have only played them against their "historical" opponents so far and they really don't have an edge there. 39 pts. "normal" cavalry from the Teutons or 36/42 pts. nomad horse archers usally are on equal level. The main problem I have with the raw billmen is, that they suffer more against Knights/ MaA, which are a featured in many armies in their timeperiod, they also can't "hide" in rough ground like Baltic/ Irregular/ Foot or Irish Kern can.

@@l.s.9095 Good point about Raw Billmen. But, there are two things to consider. 1. Both Raw Billmen and Raw Spear are down a lot on impact v Men at Arms (175 v 125 respectively). Both are very likely to disrupt and they do in my tests. 2. The Billmen have an advantage v armoured units, and especially heavily armoured units as HW halves the adv. Thus, Raw Billmen in melee are 125 down and Raw Spear are 175 down v Men at Arms. Against units like Dismountable Men at Arms, Raw Billmen are 100 down in melee and Raw Spear are 150 down (Raw Bill 150 down v Raw Spear 100 down on impact).

@@simonlancaster1815 This is not entirely true. Raw Spearmen half the Swordsmen ability of the Men at Arms, which means that they are "only" down 75 in melee. If you then add the Combat Strenght modifier, they are kind of evens with Men at Arms (in contrast to Raw Billmen, which are slightly down (125 pts. not 100). This of cause only comes to play when the Men at Arms stick for the melee, which - against the Raw Spearmen - should only happen, when they are disrupted, which would then mean that they loose this advantage. So maybe its not that huge of point. But the Raw Spearmen is still more able to survive impact, which makes them more in this regard I think. Against dismounted Men at Arms both units suck, Raw Spearmen more then Raw Billmen (185 pts down to 135pts). But against other less expensive units - prominently featured in this era - (like Longbowmen, Crossbowmen, Brigans, Irish Kerns, etc.) Raw Spearmen often do better, because they half the enemies Swordsmen ability in melee. Then there is maybe also an argument about the fallback triggering of heavy weapons, which makes them harder to use in my opinion, since they often loose contact with the enemy and have to recharge and it also makes it sometimes harder to set up good flank attacks, which is arguably what you want to do with some armies, that can use these units (for example the Anglo-Irish). Overall I beliefe in the "superiority" of the Raw Spearmen, but maybe its also a bit unjustified to call the Raw Billmen one of the worst units in the game. On the other hand...I don't think that any unit is useless, some are just harder to work with. The Raw Billmen is for example at least heavy infantry which the Anglo-Irish lack otherwise (and they don't have acess to Raw Spearmen), so maybe its a good idea to bring them to the field.

That is an interesting point. Do you think that allies used to always stay together as one? You might be right.. will post the question up on Discord!

@@simonlancaster1815 I wouldn't say always, but in most historical battles I read about it is generally along the lines of "X controlled the left and center with Y on the right flank" as opposed to say a battle line being a mixture of Romans and Armenians scattered throughout the lines. I'm sure some cases you could certainly more easily justify it mixing your allied and regular troops. For example Italian/HRE Imperial armies where you could justify the mixing of troops as small areas being under the command of a duke, count, or prince and his direct vassals. So your army where the Left is Imperial, Center-Left is Italian, Center-Right is Imperial, and Right is a mix of Italians and Imperials. The Left is the Duke of Swabia, the Center-Left is the Duke of Milan, the Center-Right is the Emperor, and the right is the duke of Saxony and the Margrave of Tuscany. At the end of the day they're all part of the Holy Roman Empire.

@@hawawah8671 I think it is a fair and valid point. Bunny said that in Sengoku Jidai they split the forces up a bit.

Limp input

The Scandinavian Foot do deserve to be in the top ten. Billmen are evens on impact and +5 in melee against them but you have to take into account the crossbow fire. In my tests the crossbows can get 15-20 casualties with one volley. If you get two volleys off before impact then Billmen are 30-40 men down already. So the combat strength modifier will be in favour of the Scandinavian Foot and put them very slightly up on Billmen. One other factor in favour of Billmen is when fighting Men-at-Arms. Both infantry units are down 150 on impact but then Billmen are only 90 down in melee and Scandinavian Foot are 120 down. The full Heavy Weapon advantage for Billmen does well v armoured units. Longbowmen with stakes do well against any foot other than Dismounted Men-at-Arms. Every army is going to have regular foot as well as those superior quality troops. I will have to play some more but 63 seems a fair price to me.

I've tried Scandinavian Foot and they just seem like a jack of all trades master of none. They don't shoot well enough to disrupt anyone and they don't fight particularly well. My MVP are dismounted men at arms. Yes they're over twice the price, but with that extreme price you get an unmatched shock troop unit, fully armoured, superior quality, heavy weapon. Intersperse artillery, crossbowmen, longbowmen, or billmen/halberdiers and to soften the enemies up further or hold the line until you can start poking holes in the enemy line.

@@hawawah8671 Fair point. Are there any other units that you would put into your top ten that I didn't include?

​@@simonlancaster1815 I might suggest throwing polish Men at Arms with mixed crossbow. I find them effective against armoured infantry as you can shoot at them and force them to charge you in effect getting to hit them twice for each time they hit you. Now in a combat against other MAA they'll come up short, but Polish have mounted crossbowmen and allies with other cavalry options who even if not capable of going toe to toe with MAA can weaken them enough for the Polish MAA to finish them off. Also as a note artillery is savage against MAA. If you can get them onto a hill overlooking the battlefield they are worthwhile even as a sacrificial unit as those two or three volleys they might get off before getting rushed can cripple a MAA unit either making them fragmented or disrupted with so many losses they can't fight any heavy infantry or enemy MAA.

I am actually playing an Epic Battle right now, Thymbra, and the Lydian Lancers are doing poorly v the Improvised Camels and Iranian Armoured Cav. I had high hopes for them but at the moment they aren't disrupting hardly anything on impact. The Epic Battles do have larger units but still..

Some good ideas. I want to keep my videos to 10-15 mins. I like the idea of being a bit snappy and concise. But, yes, some more details I think would be good such as more comparisons and a bit more historical info perhaps.

The Bowmen classification also means that cavalry of all sorts get an additional 100 Impact POA charging them in open terrain. So a unit of say, Veteran Armored Cavalry would get 50 Light Spear, 50 Superior, 100 charging Bowmen in Open, vs 100 Light Spear on Impact. Even light cavalry get this bonus. As you say, Sparabara types are still very dangerous to cavalry, but it is one way in which the Sparabara are worse off than Assyrian Foot.

Great. Thanks for the support. If you have any suggestions then let me know!

Yes, a good point. I guess that is why I put the Phoenician Foot at 5th and Mede Spearmen at 4th - they are cheaper by 3 pts and the same unit. I did mention to Richard that I found the name 'Mede Spearmen' rather confusing as they are actually Swordsmen in melee...

Welcome along. This was one of my first videos and it is very long. Other battles are much shorter. I will put more battles up soon as I have been concentrating on my army analysis series and the top ten lists. If you want to play me then let me know!