Light Infantry vs Heavy Infantry

[HistGamer]

It always intrigue me as in how well praised and used the heavy infantry is in, comaprison to the light infantry. The heavy infantry are the glorious knights in shining armour, powerful and formidable shock troops. What about the light infantries? Eerr.. Maybe a few of us would stumble across words such as, cheap, mobile and numerous? OR normally, weak, meatshield or simply, troops to throw away.

Is that another reason that most of our Honourable medieval players prefer european factions where those hard hitting knights in shiny plate armour, charging and slugging it out with axes and swords?(while arrows flutters between the scenes)

Many players chose Muslim factions not because of their huge array of light saharan troops in scarves, but rather, yes yes sir, those MAD archers+horses(just imagine- range of an archers plus the mobility of a light cavalry hmmm) for TRULY they are insane troops. I find it disheartenng that my beloved, bravest and true foot warriors of the deserts are neglected and scorned upon at.

Is that true?

If you agree or disagree, I look forward upon your comments and debates, and hopefully some of you would be on the same par as me(light infantry commanders) and would share your much appreciated and valuable insight. Disregard light infantries as rubbish and prove me wrong, I am looking forward to a great thread and debate, guys. Final word- I hope this thread will unite some of the rarest commanders in Medieval 2 total war- Manueverability + creativity!

In the meantime, Happy Gaming!

[Old_Scratch]

The Moors get one of the best heavy infantry units in the game, dismounted Christian guard. As for light infantry, their spearmen become crazy good in the desert and they have decent militia swordsmen. I actually play the Moors precisely for their good heavy infantry selection and cheap long range crossbows.

Egypt has some decent shock infantry, Taberiyya(sp?), and very powerful heavy cavalry. I find though that all middle eastern factions infantry are a match to western infantry simply because they get naffatun. Even azabs will defeat dismounted knights with naffatun backing them up.

For the Mongols and high period Turks, their archers are actually their best infantry, Mongol and Ottoman infantry. I'll shoot with them and also use them as my front line troops with light spearmen to back them up.

[Peter]

I have actually never played as one of the muslim factions. Reason is that the european factions seems to have a more complete unit rooster. I would hate to see a full stack of european knights against my desert levies. Especially in a siege where the armoured units can slug out longer and almost never rout. Also im a bit bad at commanding mobile armies, like horse archers etc. The AI allways seem to attack leaving me no time to "weaken" them with skirmishers. A solid line of infantry with artillary. Is a much better choice for me. Im going to try one of the muslim factions soon though. Thats whats so good about TW games. There is so much replay value.

[The Sixth Wizard]

Heavy infantry are needlessly expensive and die easily to anything. They also can't be retrained easily. Light infantry suck. Medium defensive infantry or good militia backed by decent missiles are the best kind of footmen.

[Muagan_ra]

I've seen "light infantry" that that have better armour, and sometimes even a better attack, than many variants of Dismounted Knights. Spanish Sword and Buckler men, even Portugeese Swordsmen Militia have comparable armour to "heavy" infantry units.

I do enjoy light infantry; it just makes more sense to have knights as an elite, rather than the main bulwalk of an army.

@ Peter Muslim factions don't have uniform infantry types, though. There are only three of them! The Turks have very solid infantry, including the Janissaries. Egypt is the faction with bog-standard infantry.

[Viking Prince Olaf]

I've seen "light infantry" that that have better armour, and sometimes even a better attack, than many variants of Dismounted Knights. Spanish Sword and Buckler men, even Portugeese Swordsmen Militia have comparable armour to "heavy" infantry units.

The Turks have very solid infantry, including the Janissaries.

1. I love jannisary heavy infantry, their stats suck but they can compete with almost ANY heavy infantry in the game.

2. It's stupid is it not that those powerful Iberian infantry units are considered as "light" infantry as they have that look of heavy infantry, they are equiped with Conquistador armour, and can pawn any European heavy infantry in A fair fight, but this is medieval times man, unless you do A custom battle you won't see hardly any "fair" fights....

[Commander5xl]

Hmm, its true that Moors have one of the best heavy infantry in the Vanilla game, though another reason why people don't play them is the lack of the pope, it can sometimes get mighty boring with a peaceful time and you don't have any missions from pope or anything, it can be worse in Orthodoz factions because if im right they dont even get crusade/jihad?

[Nazgûl Killer]

From my point of view, these are the pros and cons of heavy infantry:
The Good
-Very well armored, the best infantry to fight other infantry.
-Strong weapons, and if used wisely these guys can rip to shreds basically anything.
-Fighting against cavalry, if the cavalry stopped their charge, the heavy infantry can rip them apart.
-High morale, usually.
-Most have shields which provide extra protection against arrows.
-Frightening, even very at times (Notice that in the AI morale).
-They are extremely balanced, one has 22 attack and 11 defense, the other has 11 attack and 22 defense, so a combo of those 2 units is sometimes unbeatable.
-A very, very, very strong defensive line unit, able to protect both archers and spearmen from infantry and cavalry.
-Highly resistant to cavalry charges, at least a lot more than any other units (Aside Spearmen).
-They are just SOOOOOOOOOOO awesome.

The Bad
-Very expensive, in both recruitment and upkeep.
-Slow.
-Weak against javelins.
-Get very tired very fast (Especially in tough conditions like in the desert).
-Immobile almost, hard to get them across the field fast enough.


Now, the question is, do those pros weight out the cons? That depends on your style of gameplay, I looks at the pros and I see they weight, for me, WAY more than the cons, it's up to you really.

Now these are the pros and cons of light infantry;
The Good
-Cheap.
-Numerous.
-Highly mobile.
-Great for filling up armies.
-Great for defending cities as they can totally annihilate spearmen and they usually are at no upkeep.
-Very low upkeep and recruitment cost.
-Can recruit plenty of them, whilst the heavy infantry only a handful, per turn.
-Very fast, good for flanking and making enemies rout.

The Bad
-Extremely weak in hand to hand, unless against spearmen, which they usually come evenly matched or victorious.
-Overwhelmingly vulnerable to cavalry charges.
-Terrible armor, arrows kill them way too easily.
-Javelins take 1 blow per soldier to kill.
-They are so many, that the artillery (Catapults and such) firing at you, will most likely hit and cause a lot of damage.
-Low morale at times.


Overall, I find Light Infantry as a good fill-up for armors and good cannon fodder, and nothing more, maybe an extra unit for my line of defense, but when I bring them into the battle, I am usually very surprised if they survive, even if I don't try to get them killed, they die anyways, but still, they don't seem to fit my style of gameplay, so it's STILL up to you, whether you like them or not.



Now, in conclusion, in my eyes, the heavy infantry won the battle against the light infantry by miles, the pros and cons of both have been presented to you, those are just from the top of my head but I play M2TW quite oftenly, and I've done this comparison plenty of times to see if the heavy infantry/light infantry are worth my money... I found that having a heavy infantry unit with only 2/3 of the men of the light infantry, costing a hell of a lot more money and much slower, is just better than a cheaper unit that usually dies.

[captainbloodloss]

Light infantry are mainly used to defend flanks. Light infantry have a much higher "defensive skill" attribute in their armor rating (values found in the export_descr_unit.txt file) compared to heavy infantry, who have a high shield attribute. This makes the light infantry more able to fight units that partially surround them and it makes heavy infantry more suitable for fighting an enemy to the front. Also, you'll want to use light infantry to combat units like billmen and halberd militia, it is not cost-effective to fight these troops with armoured troops due to their armour-piercing weapon attribute.

[Viking Prince]

Where are you placing the axes in this analysis? The heavy infantry is usally sword and pole arm. The light infantry is usually spear. Again, usually is not always.

I could be missing something.

[A Freaky Name]

It looks like Nazgul-Killer listed all the obvious pros and cons to light and heavily armed men. Although I'm not sure if I completely agree with his conclusion. Usually I'll take heavy over light every single time. However, there are factions (like the Spanish or Polish) who's light infantry are really useful and shouldn't be ignored. Using javalinmen and woodsmen are two really good examples of pretty badass light infantry as both have the advantage of being effective against armour, as well as being faster then their heavily armoured prey.

Natrually light infantry needs to be suported by cavalry, other infantry and missle troops but so do heavies. Both types of troops are meant for different rolls in an army, sure you can use Highlanders to form the center of your line but wouldn't you prefer to use the Noble Pikemen instead, and simply run the quick little highlanders 'round behind the enemy line after they've hit?
To me, comparing light infantry to heavy infantry is like trying to decide if cavalry or artillery is more useful in an army. Both do different things, and at the end of the day all that matters is what you need your army to do that should decide what youre going to use in it.

[Kawee]

AFN is right, there's no comparison. They usually serve different purpose, but because most players go with the conventional strong defensive line of infantry, HI will do a much better job.

But LI has it's merit of course, as the pros and cons by Nazgul-Killer have shown. This is especially true in the early game. I know for a fact that my early expansions as Denmark was based more on my viking raiders than anything.

Because we play against AI, we quickly own them, and later in the game, with so much money and surperior skills we can just use HI.

But if you try playing against human players or improve AI in some mods, LI become even more important as you won't have as much money.

[Deadman1709]

I use heavy infantry most of the time. Pretty much due to the pros that were mentioned earlier. I also suit to my style of playing. Yes, I admit that my army is vulnerable against a big army of horse archers but these guys rip apart nearly anything on open field, except an army with superior horse archer. Therefore, the important thing is on the strategic map: fight the enemy where you have the advantage with your troops (in my case: mountain passes, cities, castle, an bridges).

Against Other European nations, HI is much needed to force my way through their line of defense which is also knights. The Italians with the tendency to recruit loads of xbows used to give me headaches but I improvised my tactics: use archers to draw their fire (in loose formations) and use the HI in LI role: quick charge across open field. This will usually make them from fresh to warm up as they traverse the distance as long as the range of the xbows. But they would usually break through enemy line even before my cav engage enemy flanks or rear. Sometimes, if the enemy is really tough, my cav would do the rest.

Also my style involves taking a lot of cities so it is necessary to load up on heavy infantry. Against factions with strong horse archers, with the Mongols and Timurids being extreme, I would draw them into battle to my advantage. Either taking their cities/castle along with their force or invoke them into taking my own. The thing that really matters to my success is on the strategic map rather than my tactical map.

My tactical map is to further seal the dea.

[MarkCef]

I've played for some time as Egypt and LOVE they spear/saracen militia. GREAT deffence for such a cheap and easily obtainable unit. Especially as someone else said, when backed up with Naffatun. These two unit and some archers are incredibly good for defending. Nothing brings a smile to my face like seeing crusading armies marching into my destroyed gate only to be stopped my hundreds of Saracen militia while being bombarded with Naptha from above. But especially as Egypt, when I have an infantry-heavy army (which is rare -more popular when defending) I usually toss in lots of spearmen/milita with a couple heavy infantry just to take care of the hotspots or defending against siege towers.

[Ulrich von Liechtenstein]

The best thing you can ever hope for is that solid light infantry with axes... They are perfect for taking down heavy infantry... Anyway I must admit HistGamer that I am no Light Infantry Commander... I am a Heavy Cavalry Commander(my bread and butter) which I can take down HA's with my heavy cavalry but that is not the point... A Key point in my strategy is no doubt my heavy infantry backbone... I need something that can get into battle and stay strong for a long period of time... I can't worry about them breaking if my cavalry is having some unexpected issues... While I would use light infantry if I could find a good role for it I see none of the Catholic factions really have good light infantry I can do anything with... I am not a numbers commander... I command well disciplined armies that are well worth there cost... Although I would like to see a battle between us just to see how both sides hold up...

[Muagan_ra]

Ottoman Infantry is the best light infantry available - a powerful, long ranged missile attack, decent armour, shield, and strong melee capabilities? Some armour upgrades and experience makes these guys invincible when used correctly. You don't need missiles, or any other infantry - just have two lines of these guys!

[Deadman1709]

I switched to Hungary the other day and started experimenting their Hungarian nobles. They were fantastic. Good speed, stinging arrows and decent close combat capabilities. Usually by the time the enemy reaches me, they were so heavily battered that only one final push of light infantry + mass charge of the Nobles are enough to mass rout them.

So I'm currently using some light infantry instead of mass army of heavy ones. Mainly due to the fact that my economy is still weak while I'm having to fight the Venice and the Byzantine at the same time. The HRE is pressing.

I like the Hungarian Pavise spearman. Nice troops, good attack vs cav, good def.

[Deadman1709]

Hell, the Conquistadors are heavy but they are quite fast and mobile. And they kick asses. Shame that you can only recruit them in America.

My army is essentially that of from the days of Rome. Heavy infantry make up the core. They should be able to hold their own for a while. In the meantime, the cavalry would do the heavy work.

[Graviak]

From playing only with HI in the beginning of me playing, i´d say in the campaing HI is mandatory for Sieges.

Against Human Opponents, as said before, LI gets some weird and funny things to do.

Scottish Highlanders are exellenct support in cav fights, namly for Scotland.

Lots of LI routs fast with very less casulties. With Russia you almost might reset a battle, with lots of Woodsmen supportet by Dismounted Dvor. You have all the time you want for a cav fight, because the Dvor will skirmish and your woodsmen rout all the time.

Spanish and Portugeese LI is really great. We do not need to talk about that.

Sudanese Tribesmen are realy great LI shockinfantry, with great numbers, great stats and an great prize.
Does anybody know if they lower the moral of the opponents like Highlanders or Assassins?

[Muagan_ra]

Light Infantry do fine - if you rely on guys hacking at eachother until you win in a battle, you're not doing it right. I've seen Byzantine Spearmen holding their own against Mongol Generals, it's all a matter of how you use them.

Strong Heavy Infantry are always good to have around, but your army shouldn't be a one-trick-pony.