Favorite Army?

[Aetini]

So, due to my Mouse not working I've recently gotten back into this game and was pleasantly surprised by how much more fun it was my 2nd time coming back to it.

Anyways, I've been experimenting with army types and find the Spanish to be the most interesting playstyle. Specifically, the Spanish Early Tercios of the early 1600's 30 Year's War (around 1530-1540's Tercios).

What's your favorite Army? Also on that note, any tips or tricks for the Spanish Early Tercios is appreciated. They're fun but in Custom Campaign against the French (a prime historical opponent), they do have issues overall due to lacking cavalry.

[Shotgun]

i like english civil war troops primarily because i can relate to them , being english, i like to play with supportet musketeers and hide in woods

[WhatIsLove?]

Originally posted by Aetius:

So, due to my Mouse not working I've recently gotten back into this game and was pleasantly surprised by how much more fun it was my 2nd time coming back to it.

Anyways, I've been experimenting with army types and find the Spanish to be the most interesting playstyle. Specifically, the Spanish Early Tercios of the early 1600's 30 Year's War (around 1530-1540's Tercios).

What's your favorite Army? Also on that note, any tips or tricks for the Spanish Early Tercios is appreciated. They're fun but in Custom Campaign against the French (a prime historical opponent), they do have issues overall due to lacking cavalry.

Thirty years war was 1618-1648 and not 1530-1540 but probably you meant something different.

Anyway i like the spanish army too. Also polish with those winged hussars.

[Kyso4ek]

Age of Machiaveli i love polish and russian armies. Also the swedish army. All large shooting blobs with cavalry. The former two have arquebus blobs which eat infantry. Swedish are crossbow infantry with double the range although lower damage.

[Franz]

I like the Imperial Army, the combination of Serbo-croatian Border skirmishers and Heavily armoured cavalry is really interesting to me. (Totally not biased opinion)

[Verboxe]

Ottoman Turkish , late 1600s.

No pike, inferior cavalry and a biased game developer that didnt add evasion for cavalry nor field fortifications for infantry which they historically had... Ironically all this makes it better for it forces radical thinking in terms of terrain usage and formations.

I also like 1630s Swedish but frankly it is broken. Salvo foot and Hakkapealitta ( Finnish and their k,t, and l letter fetishism...) decimate pretty much anything and everything.

[SnuggleBunny]

Originally posted by Sleepy Uni:

Ottoman Turkish , late 1600s.

No pike, inferior cavalry and a biased game developer that didnt add evasion for cavalry nor field fortifications for infantry which they historically had... Ironically all this makes it better for it forces radical thinking in terms of terrain usage and formations.

I also like 1630s Swedish but frankly it is broken. Salvo foot and Hakkapealitta ( Finnish and their k,t, and l letter fetishism...) decimate pretty much anything and everything.

The lack of evasion for Ottoman and other such cavalry was a purposeful game design decision - it was found to make those factions too strong in testing. Pike and Shot's sister games, Sengoku Jidai Shadow of the Shogun and Field of Glory II do have evasion for some cavalry.

The game also does have field fortifications, if you set up an attack/defend battle.

[Verboxe]

Well then I guess the purpose of late 1600s bow/carbine equipped Ottoman cavalry is to charge into the Holy League cavalry and get obliterated into oblivion. I understand and know that Ottoman military was in a relative decline by late 17th century but for the love of god there is excuses and there is excuses. If developers didnt add evasion for Ottoman cavalry than they clearly either didnt bother playing Great Turkish War campaign or have a different agenda... which wouldnt surprise me much given their name.

[SnuggleBunny]

The developers do not have some kind of hidden anti-Turkish agenda. The Ottoman army in game is quite good, perfectly able to slug it out with the Imperialists. The bows of their cavalry are useful for getting disruptions against enemy cavalry.

The main weakness of Turkish horse in game is that their melee POA is Swordsmen, whereas European cavalry by the late period of Pistol melee. Swordsmen melee is canceled against Pistol melee in Open terrain, unless the enemy is unsteady. So, with Turkish cavalry, you want to harass western cavalry with your light troops and inflict disruptions before contact, or find a way to fight them in rough ground.

The absolute wrong thing to do is "charge into the Holy League cavalry and get obliterated."

I'm happy to play some mirrored MP matches to test our theories.

[Verboxe]

I will give the manual another read. Thought melee POA values were fixed with the main factor in melee being the terrain and how it influenced a units steadiness based on whether if it is light/medium/heavy/mixed/determined etc. Thanks for your explanation.

[SnuggleBunny]

Be sure to turn on Detailed Tooltips in options to have all that stuff displayed in game. CTRL+clicking on your units will also give all of the POA explanations for their capabilities.

[cruiser]

Tercios and cuirassiers definitely.

[mario.castillo1234567]

Spanish Army

[BurakAkyokushin]

Originally posted by Uni:

Ottoman Turkish , late 1600s.

No pike, inferior cavalry and a biased game developer that didnt add evasion for cavalry nor field fortifications for infantry which they historically had... Ironically all this makes it better for it forces radical thinking in terms of terrain usage and formations.

I also like 1630s Swedish but frankly it is broken. Salvo foot and Hakkapealitta ( Finnish and their k,t, and l letter fetishism...) decimate pretty much anything and everything.

Originally posted by SnuggleBunny:

Originally posted by Sleepy Uni:

Ottoman Turkish , late 1600s.

No pike, inferior cavalry and a biased game developer that didnt add evasion for cavalry nor field fortifications for infantry which they historically had... Ironically all this makes it better for it forces radical thinking in terms of terrain usage and formations.

I also like 1630s Swedish but frankly it is broken. Salvo foot and Hakkapealitta ( Finnish and their k,t, and l letter fetishism...) decimate pretty much anything and everything.

The lack of evasion for Ottoman and other such cavalry was a purposeful game design decision - it was found to make those factions too strong in testing. Pike and Shot's sister games, Sengoku Jidai Shadow of the Shogun and Field of Glory II do have evasion for some cavalry.

The game also does have field fortifications, if you set up an attack/defend battle.

Originally posted by Uni:

Well then I guess the purpose of late 1600s bow/carbine equipped Ottoman cavalry is to charge into the Holy League cavalry and get obliterated into oblivion. I understand and know that Ottoman military was in a relative decline by late 17th century but for the love of god there is excuses and there is excuses. If developers didnt add evasion for Ottoman cavalry than they clearly either didnt bother playing Great Turkish War campaign or have a different agenda... which wouldnt surprise me much given their name.

anyway if in history, Ottomans should have 2times bigger size army than western counterpart, especially in early time

[Lothar]

Swedish 1630-1634AD list,salvo infantry is powerful and with light guns,cavalry is good too,but not good than salvo infantry.

[Athos1660]

French :
(1623-1634) for their infantry with Impact foot
(1635-1642) for their fun Commanded Shots
(1670-1690) for their strong Cavalry (and numerous dragoons)