The real purpose of a Cantabrian circle?

**Maklodes** · August 30, 2013, 11:56 AM

I'm wondering what people regard as the purpose of riding in a Cantabrian circle.

In TW games so far, it's been a way of making enemy archery less less effective against the missile cavalry. I'm not sure it would make much difference in real life in comparison to a comparably loose formation, though. If archers/crossbowmen/slingers/whatever are shooting volleys into a general kill zone, then I'm not sure circling would reduce casualties much, although at closer range when the enemy is trying to take more direct, aimed shots as specific foes it might help (although the deadliness would still probably be higher than with volleyed shots into a killzone).

However, one advantage of the Cantabrian circle that the games may have neglected is that if you shoot an arrow while riding directly toward the enemy, the horse's speed combines with the bow's shot for a faster, more powerful shot.

If you're on a horse going 10 m/s, and you can shoot a bow at 60 m/s, then shooting at you are going straight toward the enemy means a 36% increase in kinetic energy of your shot. With slower weapons, such as javelins, the advantage is much more pronounced. If you can only throw a javelin at 20 m/s, then throwing at in the same direction as you're riding your 10 m/s horse means a 125% increase in kinetic energy. (If a mounted javelinman riding 10 m/s throws a javelin at an enemy horseman who is also riding toward him at 10 m/s, then we're looking at a 300% increase in KE)

However, the Cantabrian circle has a vulnerability: the horsemen who are galloping toward the enemy also suffer from increased velocity from any enemy projectiles. If the circle is going in a clockwise direction, then enemies could aim their own projectile toward the right side of the circle, and would benefit from both a deeper local concentration of forces and from the fact that enemies are coming toward them, increasing the relative velocity of their own shots.

I'm wondering what the benefits of the formation in TWR2 will be. Thoughts?

**redxavier** · August 30, 2013, 12:09 PM

I would have thought one of the main advantages of the formation was that it kept everyone moving, allowing them to more easily withdraw if the enemy sent out their own horsemen.

**HuangCaesar** · August 30, 2013, 12:31 PM

Originally Posted by Maklodes

I'm wondering what people regard as the purpose of riding in a Cantabrian circle.

In TW games so far, it's been a way of making enemy archery less less effective against the missile cavalry. I'm not sure it would make much difference in real life in comparison to a comparably loose formation, though. If archers/crossbowmen/slingers/whatever are shooting volleys into a general kill zone, then I'm not sure circling would reduce casualties much, although at closer range when the enemy is trying to take more direct, aimed shots as specific foes it might help (although the deadliness would still probably be higher than with volleyed shots into a killzone).

I think the circle widens the field of coordination the enemy fires upon, plus confusing the enemy where to shoot, plus the target is moving side to side. Would you feel more confrotrable shooting a stationary formation of horse archers or horse archers moving and coming back?

Originally Posted by Maklodes

However, one advantage of the Cantabrian circle that the games may have neglected is that if you shoot an arrow while riding directly toward the enemy, the horse's speed combines with the bow's shot for a faster, more powerful shot.

If you're on a horse going 10 m/s, and you can shoot a bow at 60 m/s, then shooting at you are going straight toward the enemy means a 36% increase in kinetic energy of your shot. With slower weapons, such as javelins, the advantage is much more pronounced. If you can only throw a javelin at 20 m/s, then throwing at in the same direction as you're riding your 10 m/s horse means a 125% increase in kinetic energy. (If a mounted javelinman riding 10 m/s throws a javelin at an enemy horseman who is also riding toward him at 10 m/s, then we're looking at a 300% increase in KE)

An arrows traveling at 60 m/h is a very low velocity. Most arrows go up to 150 or 200. I don't think it is huge difference since the guys moving away are also shooting.

**Maklodes** · August 30, 2013, 12:55 PM

Originally Posted by HuangCaesar

An arrows traveling at 60 m/h is a very low velocity. Most arrows go up to 150 or 200. I don't think it is huge difference since the guys moving away are also shooting.

As far as I can tell, the fastest modern compound bows shoot at about 110 m/s (360 fps). I've never heard of ancient bows that shoot at 150-200 m/s. (It's true that 60 m/h would be an extremely slow speed, though. I'm talking about arrows that go 3600 times that fast, though.

)

**HuangCaesar** · August 30, 2013, 01:35 PM

Originally Posted by Maklodes

As far as I can tell, the fastest modern compound bows shoot at about 110 m/s (360 fps). I've never heard of ancient bows that shoot at 150-200 m/s. (It's true that 60 m/h would be an extremely slow speed, though. I'm talking about arrows that go 3600 times that fast, though.

)

60 m/s I'm sorry.

I don't think the moving makes a whole much difference. I don't think they would be at full gallop in the circle and arrow is pretty fast compared to even horse.

**Col. Tartleton** · August 30, 2013, 01:48 PM

You maximize fire on a single point in the line as opposed to thinner volleys. Cantabrian circles should break up army cohesion. It's like using a revolver rather than a volley gun. You keep up the pressure where you need it and it's cost effective for arrows. If everyone stands and fires from a distance the formation is less accurate and will use arrows faster. Plus individuals all need to be within the same range. With a wheel you can move into enemy range and shoot, take less of their fire in return and then be out of their range.

These circles need to be very large or the concept is silly.

**Maklodes** · August 30, 2013, 09:05 PM

Originally Posted by HuangCaesar

I don't think the moving makes a whole much difference. I don't think they would be at full gallop in the circle and arrow is pretty fast compared to even horse.

Perhaps, but I think that the original Cantabrians mostly used mounted javelineers, not horse archers, and I think the Romans mostly adapted it for use with their javelin cavalry too. Javelins are thrown faster than horses go too, generally, but they're not as fast as arrows.

**Col. Tartleton** · August 31, 2013, 01:20 PM

Originally Posted by Maklodes

Perhaps, but I think that the original Cantabrians mostly used mounted javelineers, not horse archers, and I think the Romans mostly adapted it for use with their javelin cavalry too. Javelins are thrown faster than horses go too, generally, but they're not as fast as arrows.

You'd be correct. I thought I said that in my post but I apparently didn't.

That plays into the short range extending principle. If two groups are armed with equivalent missile weapons, then the wheeling unit will take less returning fire than the massing unit by the fact the entire enemy unit is inside the range of the cantabrians and almost none of the cantabrians are within missile range. Just the handful at the point of release.

I think it's a far better maneuver than the Caracole. Although the Caracole is probably a lot less tiring for the horses since they're basically just trotting around (fast walk). A Cantabrian Circle requires a canter I think (run) or maybe gallop (sprint).

**Carpathian Wolf** · August 31, 2013, 05:08 PM

Originally Posted by Maklodes

I'm wondering what people regard as the purpose of riding in a Cantabrian circle.

In TW games so far, it's been a way of making enemy archery less less effective against the missile cavalry. I'm not sure it would make much difference in real life in comparison to a comparably loose formation, though. If archers/crossbowmen/slingers/whatever are shooting volleys into a general kill zone, then I'm not sure circling would reduce casualties much, although at closer range when the enemy is trying to take more direct, aimed shots as specific foes it might help (although the deadliness would still probably be higher than with volleyed shots into a killzone).

However, one advantage of the Cantabrian circle that the games may have neglected is that if you shoot an arrow while riding directly toward the enemy, the horse's speed combines with the bow's shot for a faster, more powerful shot.

If you're on a horse going 10 m/s, and you can shoot a bow at 60 m/s, then shooting at you are going straight toward the enemy means a 36% increase in kinetic energy of your shot. With slower weapons, such as javelins, the advantage is much more pronounced. If you can only throw a javelin at 20 m/s, then throwing at in the same direction as you're riding your 10 m/s horse means a 125% increase in kinetic energy. (If a mounted javelinman riding 10 m/s throws a javelin at an enemy horseman who is also riding toward him at 10 m/s, then we're looking at a 300% increase in KE)

However, the Cantabrian circle has a vulnerability: the horsemen who are galloping toward the enemy also suffer from increased velocity from any enemy projectiles. If the circle is going in a clockwise direction, then enemies could aim their own projectile toward the right side of the circle, and would benefit from both a deeper local concentration of forces and from the fact that enemies are coming toward them, increasing the relative velocity of their own shots.

I'm wondering what the benefits of the formation in TWR2 will be. Thoughts?

Arrow shooting in a military battle comes in volleys not target specific shooting. You don't shoot at an individual, you shoot at formations of men. The best way to understand how the C circle gives protection from missile fire is through this example: take a box and set it on the ground. Pick up a handful of rocks and toss it up in the air so that it lands on the box. That box is a tight formation. Chances are most of those rocks hit the box. Now take a hoop and set it on the ground. Toss the same amount of rocks at that hoop. How many of those rocks do you think landed on the hoop itself? Most of them probably fell in the middle or outside missing the actual hoop. The hoop is suppose to be the circling riders. Again it isn't as if the foot archer is standing there trying to shoot individual riders.

The circling itself does nothing to really avoid missile fire. For all extensive purposes the riders could be standing still and you'd get the same advantage as far as that goes. The actual advantage of circling is that the "close side" of the formation could be just close enough to be in range of the enemy missile fire while the other portions of the formation are not. This means that you give your enemy a tiny portion of your formation as target while all of your riders cycle into range to fire off their shots.

**John Adams** · September 01, 2013, 02:12 PM

The difference is static versus non static shooting.
Archers in companies are trained to shoot together as a group. For some reason people take this to mean each archer is now shooting blind. That's just stupid. You still pick out individual targets, or at least a narrow group of targets (i.e. between that tree and that other tree, or the twenty guys infront of you). You aren't just mechanically drawing and loosing arrows aiming for the same spot every time, regardless of whether anyone is actually there or not.
Massive volleys of arrows inflict more casualties on a group of static people then they do on a group of mobile people because, by nature, the mobile are not only more loosely spaced, they are also constantly moving.
Additionally you have to account for more variables then range when shooting against mobile targets (leading the target). While mobile archers against static archers only need to account for range to hit their target (all things, like wind, being equal). This means that a mobile force can inflict more casualties on a static force quicker, because there are less factors to weigh on.
Keep in mind the horse archers are not moving around in a perfect circle. The circle is always expanding and collapsing, so the factors increase for the static archer. Where as the static archer can move, but generally cannot move as much or as fast as the mounted archer.
The purpose of a Cantabrian circle is to provide focused fire on one part of an enemies line while not expending the mobility of mounted archers by making them fight a static battle.