The Grand School of Cavalry

[Toorima]

Welcome to the Grand School of Cavalry!

I found it quite difficult to use cavalry effective without causing major casualities. Furthermore I'm not yet sure what the best use for each of the several classes of high and light cavalry is. So I thought it might be useful to create a thread to gather all the experience and to work out some tactis for each of the cavalry classes.
To make a start, I'll begin with some general observations.

- First of all it seems, as if shock tactics from MIITW won't work that well anymore, at least they don't on VH

- Instead, I found it quite effective to save my heavy cavalry for the turning point of battle to deliver the decisive blow then

- Fast units, like Hussars or Ulans are quite useful to encircle the enemy and sweep aways his artillery

- Dragoons are well employed to protect your flanks; Position them left or right of your flanks and as soon as an enemy regiment outflanks your line, you outflank the outflanker; Once the two lines of infantry are engaged in face to face battle; take your dragoons to the enemy's rear.

- Light Dragoons serve quite well for skirmishing missions in order to distort an advancing enemy

Please add your personal experience and tactics! You might add the level of difficulty you made the experience on, because morale and stamina change considerably by it.

[Sirex]

My experience from Cossacs 2: Napoleonic wars / Battle for Europe.

Use light cavalry as scouts and grap importan terrain, is there a hill you want to reach? A crossing somewhere on the map? Send your cavalry their and some light artillery and hold that until your cavalry arrives.

Also harass your enemy! If the enemy is lacking in cavalry, and you place your light cavalry around his flank he needs to stop and secure or deploy artillery and take is more slowly, almost like in chess.

Heavy cavalry you should use for creating cavalry superiority, i mean destroy his cavalry so your light cavalry can terrorise with out being hasseld. And heavy cavalry can be used for flank attack or last resort attack, often it is not worth throwing away heavy cavalry at head long charges.

[Homeros]

Cavalry is overpowered in ETW, a frontal assault meant suicide in the real world. The best way to use them is to scare the enemy or in ETW terms to lower the enemy's morale. To do this you'll need to flank the enemy so they are under attack from multiple sides. Just point at the enemy unit to see if it works, they say something like 'concerned by attack from the rear'. On harder difficulty levels this means that you will lose most cavalrymen, but this doesn't matter really. You want to rout the enemy and the most effective way to accomplish this is to attack their morale. So use your cavalry as some sort of kamikaze unit. They will sacrifice themselves, so you will win the battle.
One other thing though, the AI will use similar tactics so you need to keep an eye open for the enemy's cavalry. Try to beat them first.

[Toorima]

Cavalry is overpowered in ETW, a frontal assault meant suicide in the real world.

Not quite. Saying line infantry fire was not accurate would be a gross understatement. There is historical evidence such as a frontal cavalry charge of 300 riders out of whom not more than three (!) got killed by shot before reaching the enemy ranks. Furthermore playing on VH, I had cuirassier charging into already reduced infantry regiment, butchering about the half of them in seconds and still not routing them. But I guess this is rather a morale problem of the infantry which needs to be fixed patchwise.

[kemor]

Remember that Dragoons are mainly foot infantry using horses just to move around swiftly. There are far better cavalry units available if you just need cavalry charges.

I found that dragoons are usually best used to reinforce a flank very quickly rather than just charging in. They are of course great versatile troops to run down routing enemies.

[Homeros]

Not quite. Saying line infantry fire was not accurate would be a gross understatement. There is historical evidence such as a frontal cavalry charge of 300 riders out of whom not more than three (!) got killed by shot before reaching the enemy ranks. Furthermore playing on VH, I had cuirassier charging into already reduced infantry regiment, butchering about the half of them in seconds and still not routing them. But I guess this is rather a morale problem of the infantry which needs to be fixed patchwise.

If the infantry fired at them at 100+ yards they would miss, but fired at -50 yards horse(men) where impossible to miss (they are huge targets). Something like that was only possible if the infantry was to stupid to wait till the cavalry was close enough or they were reloading. Furthermore, the infantry, at least the decent ones, were trained to form a square formations in case of a cavalry attack (frontal) and their bayonets would have done a lot of damage to say the least. The single reason why the muskets they used where so big and heavy was to fend off cavalry, the bayonet was designed to create a universal type of infantry so pikes were not needed anymore. This meant that the musket could be used as both a firearm and as a pike.

[Toorima]

You're right, veteran troops of course could cause a lot more damage to advancing cavalry, but nethertheless only few of all the battle casualties were actually killed by bullets.
The muskets weren't that big to fend off cavalry better, but because they looked more proportional when being carried by the soldier. As odd as its sound, the musket was never exchanged for the far more accurate rifle, because a) a musket looked better at a parade and b) rifles' accuracy was far to dangerous to the social system, as it made officers a most favored target.

Anyway, I think none of us is proposing to charge his cavalry right into the enemy front, so we don't need to continue the discussion about historical evidence whatsoever.

[Endeav]

Anyway, I think none of us is proposing to charge his cavalry right into the enemy front, so we don't need to continue the discussion about historical evidence whatsoever.

More like the rate of fire of the rifle was far too low compared to the musket for mass volley fire and that a rifle was considerably harder to manufacture, rifled barrled vs smoothbore barrel when machining tools were imprecise meant rifles came from specalized gunsmiths. Of course, you can look to the american civil war to see the outcome of set piece battles and infantry armed with breech-loaded rifles ;o that would make ETW quite a boring game to play as both sides die at ~100 yards a lot faster than they do now.

[Grifman]

As odd as its sound, the musket was never exchanged for the far more accurate rifle, because a) a musket looked better at a parade and b) rifles' accuracy was far to dangerous to the social system, as it made officers a most favored target.

Not really. Why were rifles used later on then?

The reason rifles weren't used is that they fired slower because reloading took longer and they required more training to aim accurately. It was easier to train a bunch of peasant conscripts the drills to use the musket in mass volley firing.

[PendragonLoT]

There is historical evidence such as a frontal cavalry charge of 300 riders out of whom not more than three

Do you have a source for this? I'm really interested in reading more about it.
Afaik it has always been the biggest problem of cavalry to charge a wall of men. It is almost impossible to train a horse to do that. Therefore, cavalry was mostly used to counter enemy cavalry and to ride down fleeing enemies...

[Toorima]

I read about this incidence in a book by the german author Jürgen Luh, Kriegskunst in Europa. 1650 - 1800. He strongly argues that musketfire was very weak in dead and most battle casualties were killed by cold steel.

There's a chapter worthreading in Bert Halls Book "Weapons and Warfare in Renaisance Europe" about the firing abilities of gundpowder weaponary from the 15th to the 19th century. He's referring to a expedient modern day test of such weapons. Most notable, muskets didn't improved much since the late 16th century onwards. Beyond a range of maybe 30m it was not very likely to cause considerable damage with them. If infantrists managed to hold their fire until the enemy reached that killing zone he might do some harm, but even than it was unlikely to rout the enemy.

The use of cavalry was constricted not by their limited tactical abilities, but by the high costs of upkeeping (Even by mass confiscating it was often impossible to find enough sufficient horses), makeshift fortifications on the battlefield and the simple fact that most 18th century battles where in fact - sieges, where neither side could make use of many mounted soldiers.

[kemor]

If the infantry fired at them at 100+ yards they would miss, but fired at -50 yards horse(men) where impossible to miss (they are huge targets). Something like that was only possible if the infantry was to stupid to wait till the cavalry was close enough or they were reloading. Furthermore, the infantry, at least the decent ones, were trained to form a square formations in case of a cavalry attack (frontal) and their bayonets would have done a lot of damage to say the least. The single reason why the muskets they used where so big and heavy was to fend off cavalry, the bayonet was designed to create a universal type of infantry so pikes were not needed anymore. This meant that the musket could be used as both a firearm and as a pike.

Fear is a pretty good reason to fire early I think, especially when you have 50 men charging your flank, sabers clear.

At the end of the day, all these battles were really fought on morale, training and of course, tactic (which includes a general knowing his troops and the enemies). Nothing puts more the fear into men than madmen charging you on horses when you know you won't have time to reload before they get to you and only really well trained (brainwashed) troops could pull it off in order. The rest bailed out and against cavalry, that's like a death wish. :hmmm:

Ok, maybe a hundred 8" tall lunatics built like trucks and looking like bullies on a bad day, throwing grenades at you then charging you as if you looked like dinner to them are scarier, damn I love grenadiers!

[SarcasticReaper]

If the infantry fired at them at 100+ yards they would miss, but fired at -50 yards horse(men) where impossible to miss (they are huge targets). Something like that was only possible if the infantry was to stupid to wait till the cavalry was close enough or they were reloading. Furthermore, the infantry, at least the decent ones, were trained to form a square formations in case of a cavalry attack (frontal) and their bayonets would have done a lot of damage to say the least. The single reason why the muskets they used where so big and heavy was to fend off cavalry, the bayonet was designed to create a universal type of infantry so pikes were not needed anymore. This meant that the musket could be used as both a firearm and as a pike.

I have to agree with you. At such a range I think we can say with confidence the musket men would be fairly accurate. I'd imagine the horses took the majority of the musket balls? So maybe the calvary men themselfs aren't getting shot but the horses instead. I'm not sure how much damage a musket does to a horse but considering their size i'm fairly certain it would take some serious damage for them to die, or at least some time for them to die.

Maybe its this way in the game also?

Though to be honest i'm not quite sure and all of this is just speculation.:hmmm:

Yay for my first post.

[J. Fishman]

So maybe the calvary men themselfs aren't getting shot but the horses instead.

That is pretty much what happens, yes. And having a horse fall on you is no picnic. As TW doesn't allow a cavalry unit to be partially dismounted, a cavalryman without his horse is out of the fight.

I'm not sure how much damage a musket does to a horse but considering their size i'm fairly certain it would take some serious damage for them to die, or at least some time for them to die.

Muskets do quite considerable damage. Oldstyle black powder muskets kick like mules(mitigated in part by the fact that they are also very heavy weapons) and fire a shot much heavier than a modern bullet. Being hit by one of these at close range can really ruin your day. The thing is, the bullets aren't terribly aerodynamic or made to fine tolerances, so they tend to rapidly lose killing power and accuracy at range.

As far as the value of cavalry in ETW goes, Cavalry is Must Have when engaging an enemy army in the field. You can win a battle without infantry, and you can win a battle without artillery, but without cavalry, you are simply wasting your time: More than half the enemy army will simply bugger off the map and you'll be stuck fighting that same army over and over again. Sure, you can try to chase them down and bayonet them to death with line infantry, and you might even get a few enemies that way, but for some odd reason people running for their miserable lives tend to run faster than those trying to kill them, plus they have head starts. EVERY army needs cavalry and something else, preferrably multiple something elses. The only time you can get away without cavalry is when you are sieging vs. militia, where it doesn't matter if they escape. This is a good time to break some or all of your cavalry and sweep the countryside for stragglers. Cavalry may no longer be the armored fist that punches your enemy's guts out, but they remain the jackboots beneath which you crush your enemies.

The only thing more awesome than regular cavalry...would be bear cavalry.

[Nuxes]

The single reason why the muskets they used where so big and heavy was to fend off cavalry, the bayonet was designed to create a universal type of infantry so pikes were not needed anymore. This meant that the musket could be used as both a firearm and as a pike.

Bayonets don't seem to do much against cavalry. I had a regiment of provincial cav charge straight into my line infantry (w/ slotted bayonets), I lost about 20 of my troops instantly, while the cav only suffered about 5. The shock of this lowed my moral and eventually the infantry routed. This was on VH.

Shouldn't cavalry charge + unbroken infantry = horse shish-kabobs?

[paw]

i think setting the ai on very hard just take the fun out of it
the units get extra bonuses
i might as well auto resolve.cost me less men then going byonet to byonet
what settings do u guys play on?

i tested this in custom battle
ai on very hard
1 unit of light dragoon vs 1 unit of regiment of horse
the stats for both the dragoon and regiment of horse are the same but the dragoons have 20 more men on ultra!! so its 80 vs 60
but when i play it on very hard my dragoon get routed almost everytime
this is not the case when i play on hard or normal
so erm i thought ai suppose to play the role of a player? sounds like cheating to me

[Grifman]

There is historical evidence such as a frontal cavalry charge of 300 riders out of whom not more than three (!) got killed by shot before reaching the enemy ranks.

History says otherwise. Unbroken infantry was not normally going to be defeated by a cavalry charge. Cavalry continued to decline as a decisive arm throughout the period covered by the game. Outflanked infantry, routed/retreating infantry, infantry broken up by artillery were all vulnerable to cavalry, but these the exceptions, not the rule.

[twisted]

I only use calvary to hunt down those that retreat. Always been an infantry man. But then again i ussually play very defensive on the battlefield. Minimize casualties and try to hit the enemy from range. Till now i have found most calvary units very usseless compared to other TW games.
Sometimes i do use the dragoons to flank a Unit. But that's about it for the action the get.

@ Homeros. it still is suicide. It depends how you deploy youre men. When calvary attack's my men on a frontal assault 75% get's killed in the first wave. It's all about discipline with controlled fire. Let them come near, then open fire.

[Jayzilla]

I charged 4 units of cav, 2 flanking left and two flanking right on a single line infantry squad, and lost.

Now I just tech up so my dragoons have guns and use them like quick-moving line infantry.

[gammalfarmor]

Death or glory.
Casualties are expected.