Aight, we gonna talk about the Battanian Fian Champions?

[Chama]

By far the best unit in the game. I don't even go for any other unit. I just farm forest bandits and create my army of 100 Fian Champions. Can destroy entire army's.

Just split them into 4 groups of 25. Have them all line up, a good distance behind eachother, try to do it on a steep hill.

and just to spice things up, put some peasant infantry out in from of them to cause a distraction

You'll conquer the entire map.

Need to field more Fian Champions? Well. Just stash them into a garrison castle and wait for your next move. When ready, make a companion have his own army. Gift him 80 fian champions that are just stored in your garrison, and make an army at the cost of a whopping 0 influence. Didn't think 100 was enough? Now it's 180. After you've made your military moves, talk to your companion and take them all back and disband his army.

You think that it just started raining on the map? Wrong. It's just 180 Fian Champions with aimbot.

[GamingWithSilvertail]

What companion army can take 180 flann's if you say so and not lose those due to auto resolve?

Thats very late game btw.....

[Grubbs008]

They are good. Very good. But the Khan Guard are alot better imo.

[Chama]

Originally posted by NaliWarcow:

What companion army can take 180 flann's if you say so and not lose those due to auto resolve?

I'm saying is that you'll have 100 Fian Champions, and then you create an army with a companion and gift him 80 fian champions you have stored at a garrison. When you are done with your army, take the fian champions back from your companion before he goes out and gets captured and put them back inside the garrison.

You can do that with any troop. So if you want to really, you can micromanage a giant army of top tier units and then store them back to the garrison so your companion doesn't run out and kill them all

[rokiiz]

They are overpowered, but the main problem i think is that ai armies have mostly trash tier units. It is not uncommon to see army of 600 men, with 500 infantry that is tier 1-2. If you face army like that, they mostly won't have shields and fians look extra busted. If ai would have proper armies, with some cavalry (and not sacrifice them for no reason like they always do with horse archers) that would be a different story

[Hippopotamus]

You need disciplinarian or a castle/town to upgrade bandits tho

My point is that seems like a lot of work.

[Sentient_Toaster]

One downside of having so many infantry is that if you're ever at war with the Khuzaits, it will likely be *infuriating* trying to chase them down. It's bad enough trying to maintain relative position to nudge them towards a dead-end peninsula when you've got a mostly-cav force.

[CyberianK]

Arrows should deal less damage to heavy armor.

Ranged is too strong in this game. Ranged combat did never dominate the medieval battlefield.

[Sigs]

Agincourt *edit* not saying it was that common but. Agincourt.

[Panda]

It's not flans. Sturgian vetaran bowman or imperial palatine guards work very well against masses of recruits. Lords AI need fixing, so they try to level up their troops before get back into fray.

And in general, this game need some som way to train low level troops outside of combat. In Warband it was companions and training fieds, in bannerlord we have nothing.

[CyberianK]

Agincourt is almost a meme at this point. It did enough damage already to the understanding of medieval warfare in the way that it dominates in the English speaking world.

If at all it is the exception that proves the rule as every other battle is NOT Agincourt. And it is even debatable if it was the dominance of Archery that decided this battle or mainly the terrain and tactical errors of the other side.

If ranged was this dominant something like pike and shot with bows and crossbows would have been employed earlier and archers would have been larger parts of medieval armies which they weren't. Archers weren't used much because they were expensive and ineffective against armor. Crossbows are good for castle garrisons as easier to shoot and store despite their shortcomings compared to bows.

[Syllabus]

Originally posted by CyberianK:

Agincourt is almost a meme at this point. It did enough damage already to the understanding of medieval warfare in the way that it dominates in the English speaking world.

If at all it is the exception that proves the rule as every other battle is NOT Agincourt. And it is even debatable if it was the dominance of Archery that decided this battle or mainly the terrain and tactical errors of the other side.

If ranged was this dominant something like pike and shot with bows and crossbows would have been employed earlier and archers would have been larger parts of medieval armies which they weren't. Archers weren't used much because they were expensive and ineffective against armor. Crossbows are good for castle garrisons as easier to shoot and store despite their shortcomings compared to bows.

It's more a problem of player vs AI limitations, and has nothing to do with the archers.

Only players, make a homogenous "only this unit" army of 100+. The AI, currently, is incapable of making 100+ army of counter units to the player army. Players see one unit most AI armies are incapable of handling, then they will select unit and make an army entirely out of them. Does the AI then observe the perceived weaknesses in the player army and make a counter army?

Nope. They don't.

They just make normal armies again and again. In the end, this is the only real problem.

The most simple fix, is properly increasing the maintenance cost of t4 and t5 units, and especially all cavalry units. But of course, the moment TW fixes things this way...

...can you imagine the whines?

[NotoriousNix]

Get the armor does something mod or one of the ranged rebalance mods and you will see a quick balance fix, they will still be good, but nowhere near as broken. Especially with other melee centric mods like the cavalry charge/cleaving mod and other stat fixes.

[Ēarendel]

It doesn't matter what top tier units you have, factions with war exhaustion have a lot of trash units as someone has noted. You can give your army control to AI and destroy an 300-500 troops army with your 100 and little to no casualties (deaths up to 10)

[Jorn Stones]

massed archers work very well indeed against badly shielded, low tier trash units.

However, as far as archers go, Fians have vastly improved range over something such as the palantine guard, and to top it off carry twice as many arrows. Suppose thats fair considering they are the 1 -elite- unit that is not on a horse.

[Val]

its alot of work to recruit them it feels good to have an elite army have a pay off. i think if you have any 1 elite unit x180 you will probably be fine. Arrows are naturally going to be better then swords in large mass. I was owning with just a bunch of Empire Archers (palatine guards?) so yea fians are nice becouse they run fast and shoot fast but it feels fine not OP, an army of horses will still kill them as I fought 80~ calv with my 100 fians and they just charged me and I had to call the retreat or I would lose them. Mass killing 100s of recruits is easy for any army lol.