Good cavalry faction ? +Some other cavalry question

[RuiQi]

Hello forum ,

I'm a new casual mtw2 player who's just completed the England campaign on E/E. I'm new to such games and therefore i usually spam longbowmen and infantry to avoid confusing myself with too many different unit types to manage.

After facing and getting crushed by the mongols ( even on E/E ) I'm starting to take a liking to their army line-up i.e. , mainly cavalry. I just read a guide titled - Hunters All Their Lives: A Missile Cavalry Guide and i'm really interested to start a decent (M/M) campaign using just missile and heavy cavalry for open field battles. Playing as England , i didn't have too many choices regarding cavalry.

I have read many different threads about the pros and cons of the cavalry from the different factions and im getting a little bit confused myself.
I understand the Moors have the Camel Gunners(good against armor) which unfortunately , can only be trained late into the game. I read some posts saying that Russia have the best cavalry units.
Egypt with their Mamluks, Turks , with their horse archers and so on.

So my first question is , which faction would the forum recommend for an all cavalry(missile + heavy) army ?
Secondly , i have noticed that when my ammunition runs out , the missile units basically becomes useless(?). I'm not able to get high kills using them if the enemy has loads of armored troops. Therefore when i do create an all cavalry army , is it recommended to still have missile cavalry ?
Lastly , how do u use the longbowmen against cavalry archers ? Do u just fire away at their shielded armoured infantry instead ?

I hope the forum can answer my questions
Early thanks , and with that , happy total war-ing

PS : I posted the exact same topic on another forum , but found out it was quite dead.

[Poulern]

Well there is plenty of options, Turks, Russia, Egypt, Hungary, Poland, Moors. Heck even France, the Byzantine empire and HRE can easily sport an Mounted cav/Missile cav army(France has AP missile cav, but its high ages but their Heavy cav is awesome). At that point then you can ask yourself: where in the world do i want to start, Western Europe, eastern europe, the middle east. Every region has some option to a cavalry based army, since cavalry was dominant for a good while in the middle ages.

[Aeratus]

If you want more cavalry, as in numbers, better go with Knight-style factions such as Spain, HRE, Poland, and France.

The Eastern factions require high level stables to be able to train their elite cavalry, even if their elite cavalry is a little better in base stats than western Knights.

[PrestigeX]

Try playing with Egypt.

THe moors are not really a Cavalry Faction in the "Eastern sense" , the closest thing they get to a Horse Archer is the mounted crossbowman later on in the game (just like every other european power) and the Camel Gunner is something you won't see again until close to the end.


The turks require a lot more skill to properly wield , and I'd recommend not starting with them. Russia, same type of thing....


Egypt has the advantage of a strong start, easy to defend and expand, easy to be an economic power house, and their roster is simple and effective.

Basically the only horse archers you will have are Mamluk Archers, but you can very easily hire lots of mercs from home lands -- Turkomans and Bedouin Camel Archers -- extremely good troops.

Mamluk archers are more than capable in hand-to-hand fighting, even against heavy cav if need be, so I'd try them out as you said you have trouble with using HA once they're low on ammo.

[ccgr1121]

My advice would be Poland, Hungary or Russia for your All-Cav army. If your'e new, then choose Russia.

As for missile troops, bring them always, as you will slaughter the AI with them. Even if the arrows do not kill a whole lot of people, then you can use them ex-masse to overwhelm the enemy.

As for longbowmen vs Mounted archers, don't use longbowmen. Use heavy cavalry and herd them into the corner. Although if you're referring to the mongols, you should be fighting them in citadels, and not in the open.

Oh, and welcome to the forums!

[Christonikos]

My advice for both missile and heavy cavalry is Russia. If you want a faction with strong heavy cavalry only pick France.

[Shasqua]

Russia, Poland, Hungary, the Turks, Egypt... all the eastern factions have great cavalry. Russia and Poland in particular are very good.

[Nazgûl Killer]

Hey, we've all been squished by the AI at some point at even the lowest difficulty, it's a learning curve

So my first question is , which faction would the forum recommend for an all cavalry(missile + heavy) army ?

Well, I'd have to recommend either Spain/Portugal (Same thing, actually) or Russia for that. The Spaniards and the Portuguese have excellent cavalry units from the very get-go, as do the Russians. Another good choice would be the Hungarians, with somewhat proper missile cavalry but lacking in heavy cavalry, and the same could be told of the Byzantines and the Turks.
The Egyptians have proper heavy cavalry but no (Or just horrible) missile cavalry.

Secondly , i have noticed that when my ammunition runs out , the missile units basically becomes useless(?). I'm not able to get high kills using them if the enemy has loads of armored troops. Therefore when i do create an all cavalry army , is it recommended to still have missile cavalry ?

When their ammunition runs out I tend to use them as very fast flank-and-kill units in a hammer and anvil movement, so yes, I still recommend them, just be more careful with them and keep in mind that they are pretty much horrible in hand-to-hand combat.
They can also be used as very fast chase-down units to chase routing cavalry units.

Lastly , how do u use the longbowmen against cavalry archers ? Do u just fire away at their shielded armoured infantry instead ?

I'll share examples from my own campaigns; in my battles I make sure I have missile superiority in all cases, I have around 6-7 archer units per army, this grants me perfect control of the battlefield in those terms, I may waste a lot of ammunition but some of those arrows will hit, so it's worth it.

Basically what I'm saying is that if you have enough archer units and no priority targets in your enemy army (Such as spearmen since you're reliant on cavalry, or heavy infantry), shoot down those pesky cavalry archers. In most cases I'd much rather have my archers take down the priority targets such as general's bodyguard units, heavy infantry and perhaps even pikemen or halberadiers.

This is the reason I prefer well rounded armies to all other armies, take time and plan your different armies according to the route and wars you want them to take, perform espionage to look at your enemy before engaging so you can properly adjust your army accordingly (If you see the city you want to take over has a captain guarding it outside of it, with an army consisting mainly of spearmen, utilize a lot of cavalry archers and infantry units and so on). Planning ahead is your friend in any strategy game.

Important pointer if you want to rely mainly on cavalry; Cavalry require a lot of micromanagement, an army consisting only of cavalry will have to use only the cavalry's strengths to its advantage, the speed and charge bonuses. This would mean that you need very good spacial awareness, you need a proper eye for detail and you need to keep things organized, it's hard. Very hard. You'll have to multitask quite often and have to have seven eyes open across the battlefield, watching every single movement, it will require you to often sacrifice a unit or two to lock down the foe while the rest perform a crescent-type flanking action to annihilate them with a charge from behind.

As a final note, I highly advise against this tactic, I suggest you play the game with well rounded, powerful armies, consisting of everything and everyone. A blend of spearmen and heavy infantry alongside archers, and heavy cavalry units covering your missile cavalry. I highly advise against going with just one type of unit or two types of units, it's a recepie for disaster, especially in Vanilla.

However, regardless of the route you pick, I wish you the best of luck. Feel free to come back to ask any questions that pop into your head, and even share your experiences. I've actually became quite curious as to how your campaign will pan out, I've always wanted to try things like this but I had always talked myself out of it... So, good luck! Give them hell!

[Kine]

take time and plan your different armies according to the route and wars you want them to take, perform espionage to look at your enemy before engaging so you can properly adjust your army accordingly ... Planning ahead is your friend in any strategy game.

So true. I rarely go in with a 'balanced' army but instead deploy counter armies for each battle I go into. And in that vein, an all cavalry army is only useful when they happen to be the best / better option. They're pretty useless in siegeing settlements for eg.

I'm not able to get high kills using them if the enemy has loads of armored troops. Therefore when i do create an all cavalry army , is it recommended to still have missile cavalry ?

They're pretty useful in luring troops out of their ranks. Group 2 missile cavs together and send them to harrass an infantry unit. Most times you can fire and forget by leaving skirmish mode on. I often see several infantry units chasing them in vain while the rest of their army is getting killed.

Missile Cav can also act as a last minute emergency charger to support Heavy Cav who got stuck somewhere. In summary it's better to have them around than not.

how do u use the longbowmen against cavalry archers ?

The biggest contribution they bring to the table are the Stakes that they can deploy during the deployment phase. Creative placement can result in entertaining battles. Just bear in mind that those stakes have no prejudices against anyone. It kills your horses just as well as the enemy's.


Personally I think you've made a good start with the Infantry + Missile double line. Definitely worth your while to develop that further.

[tudor93]

Well, you said you got crushed by the Mongols (yeah I was there too ) even on E/E and you want to start a M/M campaign. My advice in this case: don't try Egypt, Russia or Turks because the mongols will crush you (happened to me when I was a beginner and I played on M/M with Egypt, things were going so well, I was so rich and I was fighting like 6 catholic factions (7 if you count the Pope) + I was at war with both Turks and the Moors; and then the Mongols came ... I was left with only my 2 cities near the Nile in just 15-20 turns or so).
You should play France/Spain/Portugal.
Later on when you are no longer a beginner you can try Turks/Egypt/Russia and make the Mongols knee before you bwahaha

[nhinhonhinho]

For Eastern style you can pick Egypt and their Mameluke archer. In Eastern Europe Hungary and Poland is your choice.

Btw i favor Poland. Poland have so so star position. You won't be get rich too soon but you made enough gold for your army. You position is good for expanding too. Take on Hungary soon and you can move into Byzantine Empire and Holy Land

With Poland you have access to Mounted crossbowmen (Strezcy). They're the first cavalry you can get, dirty cheap, so easy to train/retrain and very numerous. The entire army of these can destroy almost anything save Mongol nor Timur thanks for their decent armor, decent melee combat and AP for both range and melee. Again Mongol and Timurid you can simply out number them and you win for attrition war. The second cavalry you got is Polish Noble. They're heavy mounted javelineer with good melee ability. These guys can take on elephants quickly. Later you also get access to some good heavy cavalry and cavalry archers. Poland also is a good place to hire some effect horse archer too

[Double A]

Calvary are gods at defending against sallies, but unless we're talking about a citadel and you don't have any good infantry at all, it won't be worth the time (ironically enough, because that will take the most time).

Everything Naz said except for Mamluk Archers sucking is completely true. If you have an all-cavalry army, you will either take less than 100 casualties if you pay attention (even less if they're all horse archers) or over 500 if you don't. Sometimes you STILL lose hundereds of men if you pause the game every two seconds. My advice is that, unless your only other option is a bunch of new militia units or you are used to playing with cavalry, don't use them much. Generals and a few units for flanking/chasing routers is fine. Not 20 cavalry.

Also, Mongols: You weren't trying to fight them in the FIELD, were you?

[Nazgûl Killer]

Mamluk archers may be all that good, but they're just one unit. I hate relying on one unit in my armies, it serves for predictability and no way to compensate for their weak points with different units.

[Double A]

They're easily trained and can be supported by Mamlukes, Royal Mamlukes, and Desert Cavalry.

[Nazgûl Killer]

They're still just one unit. And I'm not talking about that, I'm talking about using another cavalry archer unit to make them even more deadly. Let's say, like the Turkomans, throw them first into the fray and have them fire to cover the Vardarioti who stay behind them and fire their much-more-deadly arrows. Using the cheaper, less trained unit to cover and assist the costlier, better trained unit.

Or even using the Spanish mounted javelin throwers (Forgot their name) to destroy the heavy infantry units while using the mounted crossbowmen to take down the spearmen.

Each unit needs to supplement the other and cover them in fields they are unable to handle, that's why I hate relying on just one unit or just one unit type for that matter. I like having my forces balanced.

[Double A]

They're still just one unit. And I'm not talking about that, I'm talking about using another cavalry archer unit to make them even more deadly. Let's say, like the Turkomans, throw them first into the fray and have them fire to cover the Vardarioti who stay behind them and fire their much-more-deadly arrows. Using the cheaper, less trained unit to cover and assist the costlier, better trained unit.

Or even using the Spanish mounted javelin throwers (Forgot their name) to destroy the heavy infantry units while using the mounted crossbowmen to take down the spearmen.

Each unit needs to supplement the other and cover them in fields they are unable to handle, that's why I hate relying on just one unit or just one unit type for that matter. I like having my forces balanced.

You can still just train a new one to run in front of your experienced units, or use some LC/Desert Cavalry as a screen. I get what you're saying, but Mamluk Archers aren't exactly expensive.

[Aeratus]

In Vanilla, having an army of all cavalry is a perfectly efficient tactic. In Vanilla, cavalry can charge into spearmen without any major problems at all. In general, there's no need to do crescent-formation flanking at all in Vanilla, because cavalry is so numerous and powerful.

In Kingdoms, all cavalry is not as good, because spearmen and infantry are a bit stronger, as as two-handers who can defeat cavalry. However, I think all cavalry is still viable, but your economy has to be strong enough to support it.

In some of the mods, an all cavalry army would not be advisable. For example, in SS 6.4, cavalry is much more expensive than infantry and takes longer to train.

[Nazgûl Killer]

Of course, that's why I want to use them as a cover for the more expensive units. Lack of choice annoys me when it comes to my armies.

[Double A]

Actually, it's possible to take entire stacks down with the Turks' tier 1 HAs, so...