@@TheParanoidGiraffe either way communications must have been hell in the midst of battle even with alexanders Companion cavalry. Not to mention Alexander was commonly found on the front of the battle himself
They also had much more time to react but hey.....still too hard when you don't have morden day's records to know just about any strategy and simulations to run your strategies.
@@rtcoffee1235 I imagine that for some rpg game where 8 npcs tell you their experience at the battle of "X land" in exchange you give them booze, and you learn some fighting movement or locations for some loot in exchange
I think they need a lot of booze to wipe out the horrifying screams of pain and the smell of blood and guts as their comrades and opponents alike fell like weeds before a scythe. Their faces will most likely never be able to form a smile after that phyrric victory
Once you realize real tactics work in this game changes the whole game. I used to hit "0" and then "F6" and let them do work while I fight . Being a tactical commander instead of frontline commander seemed boring but winning with no casaulties is way more rewarding feeling.
@@jacobddavis5916 Some do some dont. Pike walls worked splendidly irl, they are completely shite in game. Hammer and anvil tactics on the other hand work really really well.
if theres one thing avatar the last airbender taught be you could just use prisoners of war dressed up like one of your soldiers. either way i get the feeling those archers didn't choose to be there
Aren't lighy infantry or skirmishers supposed to be on the frontline so they can shoot earlier and take enemy charges so the better equipped soldiers have an advantage?
I remember once I used 2 dismounted mailed knights to hold a gate against the mongols in Medieval 2. Once the gate fell they fell back to the 2nd gate but before they could make it they were both mowed down by a hail of arrows. We won the battle and at the end of the battle my casualties read "Mailed Knights casualties healed: 2" the two bros that held the gate survived the battle.
That last group of infantry in the end of that final battle would have to have nerves of steel. To group together and hold out knowing that some of them would die each pass only to help ensure the others would get even a chance of victory. To see something like that in a real battle would create legends.
In real life it wouldnt happen. Unless they were sure cav would continue to charge them for no reason and kill them anyway. But then again, no battles like this would ever happen in real life. If there was a place to run, after 5% casualties the lines would begin to break and be routed
Once you learn what it's like to play games like this, Total War, Age of Empires. You realize how Alexander the Great was a brilliant general because of how he was able to keep an organized network of communication, and keeping his formations in check with a strategic formation like this and the hammer and anvill. And how he was able to keep minimal casualties even when ge was outnumbered from 4 to 1.
Yeah I can't even imagine trying to do all this, but with a massive delay because how long it takes for messengers to relay orders. Not to mention all the intangibles that you can't really program into the game, like encouraging your troops to fight to the death or having such a reputation to make the enemy more likely to flee, etc.
@@Strat-Guides He goes over the plan with his commanders the months and/or day/s before battle and delegates command to them. A cavalry flank manoeuvre was often done by just telling your cavalry commander to find a good spot behind some hill or something and attack when they feel it's the right time; they don't need to wait for a messenger to approve their attack when the local commander can just do it. The commanders are experienced, know what their men are capable of and know what they're doing, they don't need to be micromanaged; all they need to know is what the general plan is and they'll do what they think is right to accomplish that goal or compensate for errors. Battles are decided before they begin.
dont forget to use terrain, in that second battle you should have moved your troops back towards those large rocks, it will give the cavalry less escape routes, and potentially stop a couple of them for easy slaughter
Alexander used his troops to create a gap in Darius' lines, not the other way around. The point being he got his Companion Cavalry to charge directly into Darius position. Forcing Darius to flee when he was almost killed, leaving his army leaderless. It was a really genius move on Alexanders part. The false gap is a good tactic though if you can make it work like in your first few instances.
Yeah I think you're right - this isn't an exact copy of his tactics. My understanding is that he held his shield wall back, then rushed them forward, making the enemy commander think he was weak there and forcing at attack. My goal was to leave a weakness that the enemy would attack, then counter attack. Thank you for the feedback!
@@Cowboys777 On Gaugamela, they stretched themselves just to match the width of Darius' formation. This makes a gap in which Darius sent the chariots. Unfortunately, its a trap and the pikemen from the rear lolstomp those chariots. This dashed a lot of hopes for the Achaemenids to win against the invulnerable Macedonian phalanx. But what about the archers? If you google Macedonian Phalan, pikemen 6 rank or behind doesn't rest their pike on the shoulders or just standing at ready, its angled forward at 45 degrees. This hedges provided some protection from arrows as there is a chance to deflect them. I imagine the Persians decided that fuck it and draw their axes/swords/spears and decided that close combat is the only way. Meanwhile, Cretan archers literally right behind those pikemen uses those arrows to shoot right back. Thank goodness total war doesn't have that mechanic. Reusing slingstones, javelins, and, arrows is one hell of double edged blade
Wow. This is one of the few occasions when someone from the strategy game community gave a proper breakdown of a dynamic battlefield. Usually I hear people who have a decent, but very limited military vocabulary. This was a really first rate overview of a useful but insanely bold tactic that is deceptively complex, especially in just 5 minutes. There's absolutely nothing wrong with being an armchair general if you're learned and not trying to show off. I'm taking notes and everything, very impressive.
i remember in warband that with just 20 swadian knights you could basically win ANY battle of ANY size. outnumbered 10 to 1? well, 30 swadian knights will win this battle for you. i'm glad to see bannerlord is different from this. the whole campaing in warband amounted to getting strong enough trainer skill and companions to raise hundreds of swadian knights in a week. (and rhodok sharpies)
yeah lol, and you just need two upgrades to get the mounted Swadian knights. it was still a grind taking castles though. In Viking Conquest it was a bit more challenging, kind of like this - but you can't really split troops other than Inf, Archer, Cav. There was one time where I got my archers on some hill and just obliterated the enemy inf fighting my inf, I never pulled it off again
That might be an AI issue, because IIRC defending against a knight charge was quite easy if you had big shields and long pikes in a shield wall. That worked especially well if you fought in hilly terrain, because you can use the peak of a hill to hide you from their archers, mounted or not. The moment they show their head they're dead.
@@bramvanduijn8086 yea my knights had trouble with the rhodoks sometimes i'll give you that, specially near the end of the campaing. should have taken them out sooner.
On the second battle it seemed the right shield wall was doing nothing for most of the battle. It could've charged the archers or gone into square formation to protect the left shield wall's back from cavalry charges.
I was going to mention that! A center group (bull) to hold the enemy in place, two weaker forces on the flanks (horns) two to encircle the enemy, and another group held in reserve at the rear (groin) to reinforce any openings. Though I really doubt it will be effective considering the Zulu didn't really need to contend with archers and cavalry. Though if it is a strictly infantry fight, it will probably work wonders.
@@sherrykathman3309 Cavalry would put a real damper on it, but archers shouldn't be to big an issue. Zulus competed with early modern firearms. A fair advantage in numbers and large shields. Speed is another factor. At Marathon, it is said the hoplites rushed as quick as they could to engage infantry, in the hopes they wouldn't spend much time under blistering missile fire. Even better if the enemy is being defensive, paralyzed by the situation. I've heard the Bull's horns described in two different ways, might work either way in Bannerlord. The main body of men and two separate horns. Or the main body just before closing in stretches out to form the horns. In game, I've experimented a bit and could do full encirclement with 3 separate units, but if I did the separation last second, AI didn't reform to meet it (I don't do 100s of tests, not sure how consistent this would be)
@@saarthel8532 History is a bag of candy for unit tactics. Could mix the Bulls Horns with another formation in a book somewhere. Or have reserves that you're comfortable with leaving out of the main fight. Doesn't always play out, but copying the Arivistos is fun. Bannerlord doesn't play my tune, so I can't replicate the feigned retreat well, much to my chagrin. Bet I'm just doing it wrong
I don't know many real life ancient tactics but one I would suggest to try out is "oblique order". Pulled from wikipedia "The oblique order (also known as the 'declined flank')[1] is *a military tactic whereby an attacking army focuses its forces to attack a single enemy flank.* The force commander concentrates the majority of their strength on one flank and uses the remainder to fix the enemy line. This allows a commander with weaker or equal forces to achieve a local superiority in numbers. The commander can then try to defeat the enemy in detail. It has been used by numerous successful generals. Oblique order required disciplined troops able to execute complex maneuvers in varied circumstances."
@@adamrules01 all of the ancient battle strategy's work amazing in total war. hammer and anvil is a really popular tactic in total war that was used by alexander the great irl
I'm working on a couple project zombie videos to toss into the mix and some non-gaming related ones (but hopefully still interesting!). I'll still be covering Bannerlord, but I do need to add some other games and topics soon!
The hidden troops strategy is where you fight with only 2 thirds of your troops, and the rest is stationed in a forest or near a ravine nearby. You engage for a bit but then start retreating your troops, letting them pass by the forest or ravine in which the rest of your troops are stationed. After around 30 - 40% of the enemy army has passed your hiding spot you let your retreating troops charge back at the enemy waiting for them to adjust their formation and THEN you move in with your assassins, heavy troops or whatever from your hiding spot (best some demoralizing troops like war elephants).
That would be a tough one in Bannerlord because the AI knows everything that's on the map and they will probably send their cavalry from the flank to attack them lol gotta love the all-seeing AI :)
If only bannerlord ai didn’t automatically know where you & your troops are. It is so dumb how you can have troops behind a hill out of sight yet the enemy knows exactly where they are. So unrealistic. That’s one of my biggest complaints on this game. It ruins the whole sneak attack from behind or flanks with Calvary or hidden troops, a strategy that was used SO often in war but yet we cannot effectively do it
In theory. On practice its a tough question whether your army is proffessional enough to move backwards or even successfully withdraw in a formation for enemy to feel blood and taste blood and victory in fight enough to be drown into the UNSCOUTED and visible ambush. The mastery of ambush is in making enemy believe he is winning and make him take a height, a better position, give him surrond some of your people, letting him kill a lot - so he would all-in for a final blow and not return to the camp. All you talking about is nothing. Main Austerlitz battle between prussian army for russian money and french goreign legion.. was.. exactly.. not by this book. At all. At. All. And though was exactly by that book in result, haha
I used a similar tactic in TW:Medieval Warfare back in the day. I called it the "French Gate" because I developed it while playing France. It's essentially an unbalanced line with archers in the middle, cavalry on its wing and an infantry line positioned at a 30* angle from the archer/cavalry line on the other wing. If the enemy attacks the infantry line, it can give way until it is parallel with your archers, giving the archers enfalading fire on the enemy infantry. If they attack your archers, the infantry "gate" can close on them surrounding and rolling up their flank. If they divide their troops and send some after the archers and some after the infantry, you can have the archers skirmish while the infantry defeats the opponent in detail. The cavalry is meant as an rapid response force. They either screen opposing cavalry or are used as the hammer against the infantry's anvil if getting shot in the back isn't enough to break them quickly. Sometimes the cavalry might need to defend the far flank at the opposite end of the line. But because the gate is designed to break up formations and maintain local superiority, theres usually spare infantry to refuse the flank to opposing cavalry.
Hopefully the devs see this comment because I agree! They could make it so you unlock more as your tactics skill increases - making tactics actually relevant lol
@@Strat-Guides tbf tactics is a very important skill to have for your companions if they're captains. I've played around with a little and found that captains with no/low(er) tactics are more of the F3 mindset. The higher the tactics, the more actual tactics you see implemented. It's hard to put a finger on it, but you probably know exactly what I mean. Curious to see what Bannerlord or its successor will be like, because Bannerlord's AI compared to M&B's AI is a great improvement
@@Strat-Guidesthis, I wish tactics actually had an effect for non simulated battles, like tactics should effect how well your formations work, how disciplined troops are to stay in formation or use the formation correctly or at least something similar. Having it only work for simulated battles makes it unappealing unless u just simulate the whole game which is no fun at all.
@@MacCarell It doesn't seem hard to set em up that way for deployment or after the batte has already started, Bannerlord troop command system seems way more indepth
Would love to see tactical approaches to handling battles where a predominance of troops are led by allied AI. My riskiest encounters come when I'm assisting allied lords in large scale battles and I can only control a fraction of the troops
I love this type of thing and you're great for taking the time to showcase different tactics such as this one, but I'm afraid I'll always be the "hold this position until they get close to our spawn, then f1 f3, then 0 and F6" guy
That doesnt always work. Not sure about Bannerlord, but some Warband mods used an advanced AI that liked to camp on hills if they had ranged superiority. Then you had no option but to charge them, because they wouldnt come to you
I got into M&B specifically to try out ancient and medieval military tactics and I quickly found out that it's pretty difficult to faithfully replicate them, at least the more complex ones. I know a lot of hard work and time goes into making these videos, but if you included more historical context, making them a history lesson/gaming strat video, I believe you could carve out a new niche...I may be wrong about that, but I haven't seen anything like it on yt. Either way, your content is very entertaining and addictive and I can't wait to watch the next video, thanks!
one thing which let my jaw drop to the ground is, that bannerlords with the rts mod let you use tactics which won't work in modern total war games anymore due to the fast appearing unit blobs
Dude you are like the military genius extraordinaire of Bannerlord, nothing else on the internet even comes close to your level of depth and analysis. Kudos, seriously.
@@CheckingForPulse I meant specifically to Bannerlord, nothing to my knowledge comes close to this channel's level of analysis. I'll look into total war though
Don't know if anyone has commented this, but I'd love to see if Napoleon's column tactics work; splitting the infantry into two or more groups and trying to split their line up would be really interesting.
That's an interesting idea! Probably have shock troops in the front with a couple shields to help them out, bust right through the line and encircle their infantry
Use it with melee cavalry, 1st in column and just before they reach the line during the charge, change the formation to skein so they form the arrowhead column and break through like no problem.
2 of my favorite large battles that I still remember and have videos of were where I used a lot of real tactics. Both we were outnumbered heavily one, and on one fight, I used a large circle formation in a mountain valley with archers in the center to fight against a horde of Khuzait horsemen and spearmen. We held well and slowly dropped their numbers, cutting off calvary that managed to get through and then couldn't get back. The other was when I did a similar tactic to this and split 2 heavy infantry groups on either side of a large boulder and tried to bottleneck the enemy and sandwich them together. Then we regrouped before their reinforcements could flank us and did one massive shield wall push to victory. It was glorious
You should make a video on another one of Alexander’s tactics “The Hammer and Anvil” involving a two segmented infantry line, with two calvary divisions that go around the enemies flank to rapidly encircle the enemy without needing an initial army from behind
For sure! I do have Hammer and Anvil on the list to test out :) I'm going to try for Hannibal's Inverted Crescent formation for next week's video, but it's been giving me trouble so far lol
Awesome display! I wonder if it would have been better to put the infantry groups into square formation after the bulk of the enemy infantry was dealt with to counter the cavalry. Hindsight is always 20/20 though and there was a lot to manage in that second fight. Thanks for sharing this! Edit: Once again I commented before the video was finished and I see that you did change to square formation lol. Sorry! >
Thank you for watching! It's so much easier to see what's going on from above. Sometimes the heat of battle can really obscure things and make it hard to see maneuvers, etc.
Very interesting video and well articulated narration of the troop engagements, would be interested in seeing more historical recreation experiments such as this.
Thank you! I'm working my way down a list of interesting formations to try out :) I'm thinking Schiltron will be next since cavalry are a huge menace in Bannerlord.
Its amazing how many of these plans were developed so long ago but also how much the leaders openly sacrificed certain groups. They have sacrificial lines and attacks knowing they will definitely lose most if not all in certain circumstances
I love this tactic. I might try it myself. I play on the ground with my men. So it's gonna be more tough but WAY more immersive which is what I'm about. I think you just unlocked a new fun way for me to play. I'm gonna look up real strategies that famous generals and lieutenants used. (Idk what ranking system they used in those times but ima bout to learn!) Cheers for the video! Got my like and sub!!
one of my first battles in a total war game i had a 1 percent chance to defeat an invading army so i met them in the forest i had the smaller force but i hid almost half of my army in a near by forest and positioned everything so this force hit them in the flanks hard. i defeated a massive army with half of one that was 12 years ago
Yeah he's amazing to read up on and learn from! I wish he was more popular in modern culture. He's got to be in the top 10 ever to have commanded troops I think!
I love games where real life tactics work great. Another example could be the U-Boat game. I used to attack convoys when approaching them from the side, which gave mixed results. Then I've read real U-Boot tactic to wait in front of the convoy, let it pass so you're in the very middle of it, and then unleash a barrage of torpedoes. During nights it's even possible to gun them down with a deck gun, before the escorts show up. I went from sinking half the convoys in 2-3 approaches, to sinking all transports in a single attack. Granted IRL U-Boots would hunt in groups, but still that tactic worked much better than my player instinct.
I just love cavalry so much. I think 70% of my troops are composed of cavalry+ horse archers. I don t know how efficient it is, but i love leading 140 horse guys into the enemy backline, while my shield wall guys are holding position
That works quite well. The only tricky bit is staying close to your shield wall since your cavalry alone is going to take a lot more casualties when charging a ready line than when charging an engaged line.
Tactics also works in sieges: I like to move 2 divisions of infantry on 1 side with my archers supporting them. Because I only attack when the enemy arty is neutralized, I let my men hang out to the side of the breach/siege tower. And bombard them breach. Sometimes the enemy leaves the opposite breach or climbs down the opposite siege tower and they walk in a line and waltz right into my infantry because they're trying to "shift" to fill my side of the breach. I let my archers span the width of the line so they can shoot them to pieces. Also, whenever my infantry break thru, I have my archers set up in vantage points and this helps decrease casualties.
I tried for over an hour to make these work in the base game and to done degree it sort of works, but melee combat is over so fast that you really don't get much benefit from it :( I've noticed going fancy maneuvers is almost a death sentence since the enemy will have local superiority for 15s or so until you move to the flank, which means you'll have almost nobody left lol I'll keep trying things in both base and modded to see what works!
Good classic use of false gap with a relatively small force. Alexander often did it on a larger scale, shifting the front line in a few spots then closing it after. Now trapped behind the first phalanx engaged with the second ranks, the rear of the first line could assist in quickly disposing the enemy.
I always used real strategies back then when I played this game (back in 2020-2021 and early 2022) in difficult (before Bannerlord difficulty was created) and Bannerlord difficulty. It was really fun and a real advantage, even in multiplayer skimitcher mod. My most favorite tactic was the Funnel Tactics (a Chinese War Tactics) coupled withe Hannibal's Battle of Cannae strategy, Hannibal's Battle of Trebia strategy (if there was some water) and Scipion's Battle of Zama
I still remember how I used to routinely defeat infantry based forces but when faced against Calvary only forces i had to basically relearn everything because all your previous tactics would be useless. These horse archers taunting you like real life mongols made me realise all those history lessons were not a complete waste.
My favourite formation was the use of a collapsing center with horse archers, with the main idea of using archers not to circle skirmish immediately but to be the first in place for desirable terrain … like charging down a hill with lancers or breaking off to then circle skirmish with their main force tied up and cut off from reinforcements.
I always keep my tactics simple. One formation of each type of unit. Charge cavalry to bog down the enemies cav, move up the archers into a advantage point where they can rain arrows and/or bolts onto the enemy and keep the infantry together and slam into the enemies lines as I pull my cav into the rear of them. The idea is to be fast and overwhelm the enemy before they have a chance to get into position. As a more defensive strat I like to hide behind a hill to keep the enemies archers from hitting us. The enemy infantry comes over the hill exposing themselves to my archers as they slam into my lines at the bottom of the hill, my cavalry also hides behind the hill and attacks and pulls back as needed.
Suggestion, Battle of Cannae! First forme a wedge, the slowly let the center go back, while your wings either stay or move forward. I used it in bannerlord a few time, it worked, but honnestly, I havent tested it intensly, nor really compared to other tactics. The AI struggle though to manoeuvre once engage. So I usually form a line instead, and move my center backward right before contact.
You can also use the battle formation of the English during 100 century war . They dispose the bulk of the army at the center and put the archers at the sides … start shooting arrows from the enemy approach ( usually they were inferior in numbers than the French ) Refuse to engage the cavalry and use yours only for reserve … When enemy approach the center of your army meet theirs to battle keeping the archers to shoot to the last arrow and reinforce the sides after that … Remember was pretty common to use the reserve Calvary on foot if the line of the front was in retreat
I make use of a variation of that tactic in Total War games. I'll send my tankiest columns to the front to absorb the charge and hold two or more columns, then as my column gets engulfed I'll charge in troops specialized for dealing damage, or even cavalry if they aren't occupied. To deal with ranged units I'll send some bruiser-type columns to chase them and entangle whoever is defending them, and have my cavalry tackle the ranged units once the opportunity presents itself. For stuff like this, positioning is everything, so to facilitate my flanks and reduce the length of my front line so my flankers and backline tacklers don't have to travel as much, I'll angle my frontline into chevrons. That also makes it much safer for my javelin troops (my preferred ranged units) to throw into the flanks of the enemy frontline, drastically reducing friendly fire while also keeping my javy's safe.
Something id like to see you do more and talk about is use terrain. A great way to counter cav and cav archers is to put your infantry near trees or those big rocks so when they charge into them they get slowed down and the infantry can catch them. you had all this great terrain and met them in a open field. Gotta use the landscape more
Not everyone can be a military genius. I was once surrounded by Camel Cataphracts and I took my small team into the little patch of trees and man did they have a difficult time performing charges and they got stuck most of the time. The battle took like 10 minutes, but the trees rendered the Camel Cataphracts useless.
I notice your charachter name is from the Great Muslim commander Hazrat Khalid Ibn Walid (May Allah be pleased with him), and it's really amazing to see that you can actually do these great tactics with RTS mod in bannerlord.
I'm a huge fan oh Khalid ibn al-Walid! He doesn't get enough attention, but I do think he was one of the best commanders to have lived (at least top 10 for sure).
@@Strat-Guides yeah he doesn't get much attention that's why I mentioned it, not many non Muslims know him well. He was a great commander, warrior and very generous and pious man (May Allah be pleased with him). Keep up the good work man 💪💪
@@m.humaiz1114 Non-Muslim historian here with a big interest in military history. I'd probably put him top 5. All non-Muslims with a serious interest in military history certainly know who he is, I assure you friend!
@@Shambloid nice to hear that friend, indeed historians know him, I am not a historian so I was just talking in general. (For example he is not well known like Gengis Khan or Ceaser)
@@m.humaiz1114 Oh yeah indeed. Both great commanders too of course, but I think more widely known in the case of Caesar because Shakespeare wrote a play about him and his name went on to become the word for 'King' or 'Emperor' across most European languages, and in the case of Genghis because he formed the 2nd biggest empire in history and was so ruthless that he's become synonymous with dread and terror.
This is my preferred technique; create chevrons with gaps between them that are (temporarily) filled with skirmishers that draw the enemy in. Behind the skirmishers is a second line of heavy infantry that holds enemy troops in place, should they try charging in. Then shock troops and the skirmishers are positioned on the flanks of the heavy infantry that annihilate the enemy quickly, and counterattack the enemy attacking the main chevron line. If I can afford the extra units, I'll place more skirmishers inside the chevrons to shoot enemies attacking adjacent chevrons (this is why chevrons work so well with false gap tactics, increased surface area to attack). Most enemies, even those of higher quality, melt under this tactic because it funnels them into places that you can concentrate a lot more force. It is rather micro-intensive though, and leaves little room and resources for cavalry in games like Total War and Bannerlord. Though if used properly, you only need light skirmish cavalry to cut down routing forces
One of Alexander the Great's preferred tactics was to form several phalanx in the center of his army, with his cavaly guarding the flanks. The phalanx would be armed with the sarissa--an unusually long spear that would range in length from 12 to 20 feet or more in length. The first line would have the shorter length, the second would be longer, and the third, fourth, and fifth, progressively longer, still. This would allow his line to lower their sarissa, plant the butt of the weapon in the ground, and present all at once a near-solid wall of spearheads to the enemy at a moment's notice. What would happen is that any enemy attacking his center would suddenly find themselves essentially pinned on this spear wall once those sarissa were raised. He would then bring in his cavalry from the sides and mow down the enemy pinned in the center.
I think it would be interesting to see you try the Roman maniple swap. There’s multiple theories on how it would have worked, but I think you could develop a strategy for Bannerlord with it.
@@Strat-Guides The checker board formation is one theory. The idea is that a maniple pushes the opposing line back, causing the enemy formation to either bulge between the other maniples and get flanked, or maintain the formation, giving the maniples space to maneuver. That is theoretically what makes swapping maniples possible. I’m not sure exactly which units would be best. Skirmishers up front for sure, heavy infantry in the rear to take the place of the skirmishers, and cav on the flanks. The cavalry was really only there to engage enemy cavalry long enough for the infantry to deal with the bulk of the opposing army. The infantry units would likely engage the enemy in formations resembling a shield wall/square formation and rely on shields and swords in close quarters to take down the infantry. Romans didn’t use many archers during the republican period, so no need to recruit them. It’s almost all infantry with cavalry to support them. I think it could work. The infantry required is huge, packed together, and consists of multiple formations placed near each other. Enemy melee cavalry will have a really hard time dealing with this set up because they are not going to be able to charge through them. The skirmishers and cavalry are meant to distract the enemy archers in the back line, so archers should not be major players for very long after the infantry is engaged. I think where this strategy will be most limited is against armies with lots of horse archers, which would be consistent with what happened in real life against the Parthians. I’m interested to see you try this. It probably requires a fair bit of management that would be an excellent challenge. I’ve experimented a little with it, but nothing like what you’re capable of doing.
@@kolbywilliams7234 it's not just Horse Archers, the Parthians also charged with Heavy Shock Cavs. The Roman knew their fucked and realized why Cavalry is very important in open terrain engagement.
@@deepdungeon8465 I realize they had more than just horse archers, but the Romans dealt with cavalry before and won. The thing that set the Parthians apart was how they used cavalry. I.e. mounted archers.
This is the first time I've actually seen any footage of M&B 2, and I'm so happy to see the "tactical map" or whatever it's called since that and creating separate army units were sorely lacking in the first game. Hopefully no more giant blob each of infantry/archers/cavalry.
Neat stuff and well presented. I had no idea mount and blade banner lord had this kind of strategic view or battles. Thought it was much more like the previous mount and blade less like total war games.
Goes to show that Alexander was smart but also lucky. Not to mention, probably had an army that was better supplied and equipped than his adversaries.. I feel like it's not as good of a strategy if all things are equal.. Pyrrhic victory here for sure.
the tactic is for troops that just don't really exist in Bannerlord. Hoplites have very tough shields for their time, and layered spear wall. this focused everything to the front, and the compact formations meant that turning was difficult. this meant that back then against those armies they won pretty much every battle if they could keep the enemy to the front, but lost almost every battle that let the enemy flank them. this creates a flanking attack when the enemy has ensured that you can't go around them. you might be able to make this scenario play out properly if you have a custom map with custom troops, and maybe even a custom AI. the tactic works well enough against an imbalanced force in Bannerlord with mostly infantry (especially if you kill off the archers and cav well before the infantry clash), but because of the openness of the terrain and the armor of the heavy infantry other tactics usually work better (not to mention that in big battles you might not get your 'working group' to spawn in first with everyone else).
No singular tactic is the right answer to all battles. Terrain, forces, and objectives dictate the optimal (and possible) responses. What Alexander accomplished, with hoplites, peltasts, and cavalry, was a victory over an empire's force generally agreed to have a 2-1 numbers advantage, alongside bringing war elephants, archers, and scythed chariots. He accomplished this by drawing Persian forces into attacking him and his cavalry, having his infantry tie up the Persian infantry (using the false gap to draw in charges which depleted the Persian line), and finally being able to disengage with his heaviest cavalry and immediately exploit the gap near the Persian center as it emerged- without the benefit of a birds eye view. His charge threatened the enemy commander directly, causing Darius to break off and retreat, which led to a mass rout. Luck is real- genius consists of anticipating misfortunes and fortune alike, being prepared to cut losses and drive advantages.
You can’t draw conclusions about Alexander from a video game. The AI doesn’t respond the way real people respond, the troops are anachronistic, Alexander also didn’t only use the false gap and knew different applications for it. Strat is also not Alexander, so who knows what Alexander would have done differently. There are so many more reasons, but I hope that’s enough. People really need to stop conflating history with what they see in games and television. The point: It’s fun to see how real history can be applied to a historically inspired game, but the game itself is not indicative of real history.
That's what this video was originally supposed to be lol it's tough! I'll keep working on it and if I can make it work I'll do a video on it. Schiltron will most likely be next since that has decent results!
Cannae was a radical success, while being outnumbered, managed to envelop the larger force. But, in regards to Bannerlord, it may not be as radically successful. Romans went for depth instead of width, which I personally haven't seen the AI do. Hannibal had a significant cavalry advantage. And the whole thing hinged on if his weak center would hold while being pushed/ backed up. I think in Bannerlord, the AI would eventually stretch out to meet the wings, sources don't mention archers or even many slingers. And if your fight is exceptionally big, reinforcements would put pain to the 'we got em now'. Tried to recreate a Carrahe, but AI wouldn't consider existential dread. Had the Cataphractoi and the horse archer, the slowest enemy. Perfect setup for nothing, REEEEEEE
@@troydodson9641 the reason their auxilia were light was due to Hannibal having crushed them outside the city multiple times, thus they did not have access to the skilled mercenaries to have archers, they just had nobles on horses and stock Romans.
@@jamoecw In the period of Hannibal, from what I've read anyways, army was equal parts Romans and Roman 'allies'. But, they were made to fight like the Romans, manipular, 3 lines, etc. Exeption being cavalry, which they were told to bring 900 to the Roman 300. But this is the presented ideal, exceptions and situations make for different. In the same period, Macedonian war, Greek leagues would fight with Rome against Philip, but as greeks. But nothing is written of it being different here, so the typical model applies here me thinks
@@troydodson9641 Hannibal is one of the reasons why they looked to allies to fill the roles of their lines, prior to that you had to be a land owner and have a certain amount of wealth to be a soldier. velites and some of the horsemen were allies, but their main line was citizens, since they did not feel that others would fight as tenaciously for Rome. due to the losses of that war they lowered the property requirement to be in the mainline military from 14,000 to 11,000 asses. this requirement continued to drop until the Marian reforms in 107BC, which also saw that the auxilia (skirmishers, cav, and specialized troops) were replaced entirely with non-citizens and mercenaries. property requirements were dropped entirely and there was no 3 lines (just the iconic legionary), and troops started to get a wage rather than it being a seasonal requirement after joining.
This may be a bit more on an operational or strategic scale than tactical battlefield gameplay, but: Genghis Khan's use of 2+ mutually supporting armies marching in columns. Separated enough to pose different threats, close enough to reinforce each other when attacked. He used these column formations to each aim between multiple targets (cities or forts), forcing the enemy to attempt to protect all the possibilities, then the columns converged to concentrate on one target. Usually a less obvious one. I remember in one case, he aimed approximately between two border cities. Then once the cities were fortified, he drove through between them to strike deeper in enemy territory to take a city that controlled supply lines to the border cities. Maybe this would work in a largeer scale game setting like CK3 or HOI4.
ehh..IDK...seems like the enemy is only slightly better than a zombie hoard. Swarms of soldiers just haphazardly smashing into each other is largely a hollywood myth, in real life -the reason why tactics like this worked was because of a lack of situational awareness by the commanders and a lack of easy communication. Even the routine use of 'top down' topographical maps for military planning is pretty new, only a few hundred years old. So yeah; this only works in the game because the AI is (intentionally?) shitty and not because it has some inherent awesomeness that transcends reality.
You're not wrong about the AI. We've been begging for better AI from the developers for years now :( it's the best we got for now and it is pretty fun to at least attempt historical tactics and see how they work in a simulation. Thanks for watching!
DUDE What is this game??? I had been investigating these tactics and bought a huge book about them in one of my autistic hyperfixation fits and seeing this gameplay just made my face light up like a child in christmas I have no idea why yt brought this up since I haven't searched for this kinda stuff online in a long while, but I sincerely take my hat off to the algorithm I'm equally happy, impressed, and scared, you have no idea
There is a similar tactic where the flanks are heavily stacked and the center is thinner. As the center is pushed back relative to the flanks, the attackers slowly become more and more surrounded by the stronger flanks, trapping them. I can't remember what it's called, if anything, I just remember learning about it being used in some famous ancient battle (which I also don't remember the details of). I'd be a terrible historian, but I think that tactic is pretty cool.
I think I know what you're talking about - almost like a double envelopment but done defensively. Lol don't worry, I get the benefit of editing to make myself seem knowledgeable :D
Another tactics you can try is Hannibal famous retreat at Canne where he started to slowly back the entire center of the line to entangle the bulk of the enemy army within your front and destroy them …
It makes you realize how great the real commander was since they didn’t command on an helicopter with radio communication.
Yeah it's pretty crazy to think they did all this without that stuff AND under the threat of certain death for losing the battle.
Very common for them to watch from hill tops
@@TheParanoidGiraffe either way communications must have been hell in the midst of battle even with alexanders Companion cavalry. Not to mention Alexander was commonly found on the front of the battle himself
They also had much more time to react but hey.....still too hard when you don't have morden day's records to know just about any strategy and simulations to run your strategies.
@@fenilkheni9494 perhaps so but messengers could be lost in battle, stalled or just not reached their target in time.
Imagine the stories these 8 surviving dudes will tell in taverns for some free booze.
Literally something that could be part of the main quest like Neretze’s folly lol
@@rtcoffee1235 I imagine that for some rpg game where 8 npcs tell you their experience at the battle of "X land" in exchange you give them booze, and you learn some fighting movement or locations for some loot in exchange
I think they need a lot of booze to wipe out the horrifying screams of pain and the smell of blood and guts as their comrades and opponents alike fell like weeds before a scythe. Their faces will most likely never be able to form a smile after that phyrric victory
There were 250 more survivors and 523 on the losing side.
thanks to the fallen your village was spared from another raid and pillaging
Once you realize real tactics work in this game changes the whole game. I used to hit "0" and then "F6" and let them do work while I fight . Being a tactical commander instead of frontline commander seemed boring but winning with no casaulties is way more rewarding feeling.
weird enuff some players claims that real life tactics doesnt work...
@@jacobddavis5916 Some do some dont. Pike walls worked splendidly irl, they are completely shite in game. Hammer and anvil tactics on the other hand work really really well.
@@riptrojans7237 Spears = Underpowered in Bannerlord and it is sad
@@TheRepublic4 they're marginally better than warband's spears
@@7-zip315 Low Bar but Fair Point
Imagine being an archer and getting orders to go to the front line with 9 other archers between two groups of shield bearing soldiers. 😅
Lol sometimes life ain't fair :)
Would’ve turned out better had they been crossbowmen, as they have shields… I love the crossbow men for their versatility.
if theres one thing avatar the last airbender taught be you could just use prisoners of war dressed up like one of your soldiers.
either way i get the feeling those archers didn't choose to be there
Aren't lighy infantry or skirmishers supposed to be on the frontline so they can shoot earlier and take enemy charges so the better equipped soldiers have an advantage?
I remember once I used 2 dismounted mailed knights to hold a gate against the mongols in Medieval 2. Once the gate fell they fell back to the 2nd gate but before they could make it they were both mowed down by a hail of arrows. We won the battle and at the end of the battle my casualties read "Mailed Knights casualties healed: 2" the two bros that held the gate survived the battle.
That last group of infantry in the end of that final battle would have to have nerves of steel. To group together and hold out knowing that some of them would die each pass only to help ensure the others would get even a chance of victory. To see something like that in a real battle would create legends.
Good point, reminds me of some epic last stands like Thermopylae!
In real life it wouldnt happen. Unless they were sure cav would continue to charge them for no reason and kill them anyway. But then again, no battles like this would ever happen in real life. If there was a place to run, after 5% casualties the lines would begin to break and be routed
@@ThatSB hmm... in the past it probably would work, when people respect and die for their country... current era? people would run immediately kek
"We die together or we assuredly die alone. I choose together!"
@@PaulGaither That's the spirit!
Once you learn what it's like to play games like this, Total War, Age of Empires. You realize how Alexander the Great was a brilliant general because of how he was able to keep an organized network of communication, and keeping his formations in check with a strategic formation like this and the hammer and anvill. And how he was able to keep minimal casualties even when ge was outnumbered from 4 to 1.
Yeah I can't even imagine trying to do all this, but with a massive delay because how long it takes for messengers to relay orders. Not to mention all the intangibles that you can't really program into the game, like encouraging your troops to fight to the death or having such a reputation to make the enemy more likely to flee, etc.
@@Strat-Guides He goes over the plan with his commanders the months and/or day/s before battle and delegates command to them. A cavalry flank manoeuvre was often done by just telling your cavalry commander to find a good spot behind some hill or something and attack when they feel it's the right time; they don't need to wait for a messenger to approve their attack when the local commander can just do it. The commanders are experienced, know what their men are capable of and know what they're doing, they don't need to be micromanaged; all they need to know is what the general plan is and they'll do what they think is right to accomplish that goal or compensate for errors. Battles are decided before they begin.
@@liamjm9278 If only we could say the same for the AI when we delegate command haha
@@Strat-Guides ohhh i didn’t even think of that. you should get a boosted morale penalty if you execute a lot of leaders
Alexander is a God
dont forget to use terrain, in that second battle you should have moved your troops back towards those large rocks, it will give the cavalry less escape routes, and potentially stop a couple of them for easy slaughter
That rock would have definitely broken a charge or placed your troops between a rock and a hard place.
Yeah. AI gets very trippy on terrain.
@@WarPigstheHun This! Amazing tactics, bad environment
@@ryerye9019 More like a rock and a line of horses
Here's a tactic I'd like! Try and see if you can lose your virginity!
The 10 archers: *”dont put me in the dark, boss, i’s afraid of the dark”*
Lol I felt like Lord Farquaad - "Some of you may die, but it's a sacrifice I'm willing to make"
I think i heard the line before haha its from john koffe in the movies green mile.
@@asyfer729 yep, u got it
Alexander used his troops to create a gap in Darius' lines, not the other way around. The point being he got his Companion Cavalry to charge directly into Darius position. Forcing Darius to flee when he was almost killed, leaving his army leaderless. It was a really genius move on Alexanders part. The false gap is a good tactic though if you can make it work like in your first few instances.
Yeah I think you're right - this isn't an exact copy of his tactics. My understanding is that he held his shield wall back, then rushed them forward, making the enemy commander think he was weak there and forcing at attack. My goal was to leave a weakness that the enemy would attack, then counter attack. Thank you for the feedback!
How did Alexander create the gap exactly?
niggas think holy book's fake but believe in all of Alexander's achievements 🤔
@@Cowboys777 On Gaugamela, they stretched themselves just to match the width of Darius' formation. This makes a gap in which Darius sent the chariots. Unfortunately, its a trap and the pikemen from the rear lolstomp those chariots. This dashed a lot of hopes for the Achaemenids to win against the invulnerable Macedonian phalanx.
But what about the archers? If you google Macedonian Phalan, pikemen 6 rank or behind doesn't rest their pike on the shoulders or just standing at ready, its angled forward at 45 degrees. This hedges provided some protection from arrows as there is a chance to deflect them. I imagine the Persians decided that fuck it and draw their axes/swords/spears and decided that close combat is the only way.
Meanwhile, Cretan archers literally right behind those pikemen uses those arrows to shoot right back. Thank goodness total war doesn't have that mechanic. Reusing slingstones, javelins, and, arrows is one hell of double edged blade
It worked, because in a kingdom the king was the only important person. The soldiers fought for their king, not for their country. No king no fight.
Wow. This is one of the few occasions when someone from the strategy game community gave a proper breakdown of a dynamic battlefield. Usually I hear people who have a decent, but very limited military vocabulary. This was a really first rate overview of a useful but insanely bold tactic that is deceptively complex, especially in just 5 minutes. There's absolutely nothing wrong with being an armchair general if you're learned and not trying to show off. I'm taking notes and everything, very impressive.
i remember in warband that with just 20 swadian knights you could basically win ANY battle of ANY size. outnumbered 10 to 1? well, 30 swadian knights will win this battle for you. i'm glad to see bannerlord is different from this. the whole campaing in warband amounted to getting strong enough trainer skill and companions to raise hundreds of swadian knights in a week. (and rhodok sharpies)
Fian Champions 300 of them wins about every battle sometimes a little infantry to distract front lines helps but they are broken af
yeah lol, and you just need two upgrades to get the mounted Swadian knights. it was still a grind taking castles though. In Viking Conquest it was a bit more challenging, kind of like this - but you can't really split troops other than Inf, Archer, Cav. There was one time where I got my archers on some hill and just obliterated the enemy inf fighting my inf, I never pulled it off again
@@johndavidson5564 a lot of any factions specialized unit if used right can win against crazy odds, hence its more balanced than warband.
That might be an AI issue, because IIRC defending against a knight charge was quite easy if you had big shields and long pikes in a shield wall. That worked especially well if you fought in hilly terrain, because you can use the peak of a hill to hide you from their archers, mounted or not. The moment they show their head they're dead.
@@bramvanduijn8086 yea my knights had trouble with the rhodoks sometimes i'll give you that, specially near the end of the campaing. should have taken them out sooner.
On the second battle it seemed the right shield wall was doing nothing for most of the battle. It could've charged the archers or gone into square formation to protect the left shield wall's back from cavalry charges.
I'd love to see you work with a the special Zulu formation. I think it was call the Bullhorn or something
I think I know which one you're referring to, I'll add it to the list!
I was going to mention that! A center group (bull) to hold the enemy in place, two weaker forces on the flanks (horns) two to encircle the enemy, and another group held in reserve at the rear (groin) to reinforce any openings.
Though I really doubt it will be effective considering the Zulu didn't really need to contend with archers and cavalry. Though if it is a strictly infantry fight, it will probably work wonders.
@@sherrykathman3309 Cavalry would put a real damper on it, but archers shouldn't be to big an issue. Zulus competed with early modern firearms.
A fair advantage in numbers and large shields. Speed is another factor. At Marathon, it is said the hoplites rushed as quick as they could to engage infantry, in the hopes they wouldn't spend much time under blistering missile fire.
Even better if the enemy is being defensive, paralyzed by the situation. I've heard the Bull's horns described in two different ways, might work either way in Bannerlord. The main body of men and two separate horns. Or the main body just before closing in stretches out to form the horns.
In game, I've experimented a bit and could do full encirclement with 3 separate units, but if I did the separation last second, AI didn't reform to meet it (I don't do 100s of tests, not sure how consistent this would be)
I agree it's a tactic that seems vulnerable to cavalry and I wonder how Strat is going to make it viable in a context of medieval warfare
@@saarthel8532 History is a bag of candy for unit tactics. Could mix the Bulls Horns with another formation in a book somewhere. Or have reserves that you're comfortable with leaving out of the main fight. Doesn't always play out, but copying the Arivistos is fun.
Bannerlord doesn't play my tune, so I can't replicate the feigned retreat well, much to my chagrin. Bet I'm just doing it wrong
I don't know many real life ancient tactics but one I would suggest to try out is "oblique order".
Pulled from wikipedia "The oblique order (also known as the 'declined flank')[1] is *a military tactic whereby an attacking army focuses its forces to attack a single enemy flank.* The force commander concentrates the majority of their strength on one flank and uses the remainder to fix the enemy line. This allows a commander with weaker or equal forces to achieve a local superiority in numbers. The commander can then try to defeat the enemy in detail. It has been used by numerous successful generals. Oblique order required disciplined troops able to execute complex maneuvers in varied circumstances."
That one's on the list! I'm excited to try it out :)
@@Strat-Guides Cheers!
I was going to say I had read about that same tactic used in ancient greece. Sure enough wikipedia covered it. 👍 Thebes used it to defeat Sparta.
It works very well in total war games
@@adamrules01 all of the ancient battle strategy's work amazing in total war. hammer and anvil is a really popular tactic in total war that was used by alexander the great irl
Well done, also really happy you are still doing Bannerlord videos.
Check out his other channel.
I'm working on a couple project zombie videos to toss into the mix and some non-gaming related ones (but hopefully still interesting!). I'll still be covering Bannerlord, but I do need to add some other games and topics soon!
@@Strat-Guides Awesome, I greatly look forward to some PZ content from you.
@@Strat-Guides your videos have always helped me with my game. How about warhammer? it's strategy even having magic.
The hidden troops strategy is where you fight with only 2 thirds of your troops, and the rest is stationed in a forest or near a ravine nearby. You engage for a bit but then start retreating your troops, letting them pass by the forest or ravine in which the rest of your troops are stationed. After around 30 - 40% of the enemy army has passed your hiding spot you let your retreating troops charge back at the enemy waiting for them to adjust their formation and THEN you move in with your assassins, heavy troops or whatever from your hiding spot (best some demoralizing troops like war elephants).
That would be a tough one in Bannerlord because the AI knows everything that's on the map and they will probably send their cavalry from the flank to attack them lol gotta love the all-seeing AI :)
@@Strat-Guides tbf, you also know where everything is, at least so far as numbers, direction and distance.
If only bannerlord ai didn’t automatically know where you & your troops are. It is so dumb how you can have troops behind a hill out of sight yet the enemy knows exactly where they are. So unrealistic. That’s one of my biggest complaints on this game.
It ruins the whole sneak attack from behind or flanks with Calvary or hidden troops, a strategy that was used SO often in war but yet we cannot effectively do it
In theory. On practice its a tough question whether your army is proffessional enough to move backwards or even successfully withdraw in a formation for enemy to feel blood and taste blood and victory in fight enough to be drown into the UNSCOUTED and visible ambush. The mastery of ambush is in making enemy believe he is winning and make him take a height, a better position, give him surrond some of your people, letting him kill a lot - so he would all-in for a final blow and not return to the camp. All you talking about is nothing. Main Austerlitz battle between prussian army for russian money and french goreign legion.. was.. exactly.. not by this book. At all. At. All. And though was exactly by that book in result, haha
I used a similar tactic in TW:Medieval Warfare back in the day. I called it the "French Gate" because I developed it while playing France.
It's essentially an unbalanced line with archers in the middle, cavalry on its wing and an infantry line positioned at a 30* angle from the archer/cavalry line on the other wing.
If the enemy attacks the infantry line, it can give way until it is parallel with your archers, giving the archers enfalading fire on the enemy infantry. If they attack your archers, the infantry "gate" can close on them surrounding and rolling up their flank. If they divide their troops and send some after the archers and some after the infantry, you can have the archers skirmish while the infantry defeats the opponent in detail. The cavalry is meant as an rapid response force. They either screen opposing cavalry or are used as the hammer against the infantry's anvil if getting shot in the back isn't enough to break them quickly.
Sometimes the cavalry might need to defend the far flank at the opposite end of the line. But because the gate is designed to break up formations and maintain local superiority, theres usually spare infantry to refuse the flank to opposing cavalry.
If you learned how to program this all these kinds of formation logics into the game you'd have the greatest Mount & Blade mod to ever exist
Hopefully the devs see this comment because I agree! They could make it so you unlock more as your tactics skill increases - making tactics actually relevant lol
@@Strat-Guides tbf tactics is a very important skill to have for your companions if they're captains. I've played around with a little and found that captains with no/low(er) tactics are more of the F3 mindset. The higher the tactics, the more actual tactics you see implemented. It's hard to put a finger on it, but you probably know exactly what I mean. Curious to see what Bannerlord or its successor will be like, because Bannerlord's AI compared to M&B's AI is a great improvement
@@IIchicgo yeah there's a couple thresholds in the code where if your tactics meet them then you unlock all the formation logic in the game.
@@Strat-Guidesthis, I wish tactics actually had an effect for non simulated battles, like tactics should effect how well your formations work, how disciplined troops are to stay in formation or use the formation correctly or at least something similar. Having it only work for simulated battles makes it unappealing unless u just simulate the whole game which is no fun at all.
@@MacCarell It doesn't seem hard to set em up that way for deployment or after the batte has already started, Bannerlord troop command system seems way more indepth
Would love to see the classic double envelopment or pincher maneuver, usually done with cavalry because of their mobility
Would love to see tactical approaches to handling battles where a predominance of troops are led by allied AI. My riskiest encounters come when I'm assisting allied lords in large scale battles and I can only control a fraction of the troops
This could be interesting to see. The only problem would be having to wait for the army he joined to engage a stronger enemy force.
I love this type of thing and you're great for taking the time to showcase different tactics such as this one, but I'm afraid I'll always be the "hold this position until they get close to our spawn, then f1 f3, then 0 and F6" guy
I'm glad you liked it! I've got a few more on the list to try out, hopefully they turn out the same :)
That doesnt always work. Not sure about Bannerlord, but some Warband mods used an advanced AI that liked to camp on hills if they had ranged superiority. Then you had no option but to charge them, because they wouldnt come to you
I got into M&B specifically to try out ancient and medieval military tactics and I quickly found out that it's pretty difficult to faithfully replicate them, at least the more complex ones. I know a lot of hard work and time goes into making these videos, but if you included more historical context, making them a history lesson/gaming strat video, I believe you could carve out a new niche...I may be wrong about that, but I haven't seen anything like it on yt. Either way, your content is very entertaining and addictive and I can't wait to watch the next video, thanks!
Nice idea. I dunno as well, but it could have big potential.
I'm just waiting for the replay editor to do what you're asking about. I will be doing a lot of historical battles.
@@BestMods168 cool, I can't wait
I did not know this was in the game wow this looks amazing
one thing which let my jaw drop to the ground is, that bannerlords with the rts mod let you use tactics which won't work in modern total war games anymore due to the fast appearing unit blobs
Dude you are like the military genius extraordinaire of Bannerlord, nothing else on the internet even comes close to your level of depth and analysis. Kudos, seriously.
I appreciate the kind words :D
dudee please... look up total war battle tactics and just apply it accordingly in bannerlord
@@CheckingForPulse I meant specifically to Bannerlord, nothing to my knowledge comes close to this channel's level of analysis. I'll look into total war though
Thanks!
Thanks again, I really appreciate your continued support! It means a lot to me :D
Don't know if anyone has commented this, but I'd love to see if Napoleon's column tactics work; splitting the infantry into two or more groups and trying to split their line up would be really interesting.
That's an interesting idea! Probably have shock troops in the front with a couple shields to help them out, bust right through the line and encircle their infantry
Use it with melee cavalry, 1st in column and just before they reach the line during the charge, change the formation to skein so they form the arrowhead column and break through like no problem.
Wait till they discover gunpowder.
Imagine this game with gunpoweder?! I can't wait till someone makes a good mod that adds it
2 of my favorite large battles that I still remember and have videos of were where I used a lot of real tactics. Both we were outnumbered heavily one, and on one fight, I used a large circle formation in a mountain valley with archers in the center to fight against a horde of Khuzait horsemen and spearmen. We held well and slowly dropped their numbers, cutting off calvary that managed to get through and then couldn't get back. The other was when I did a similar tactic to this and split 2 heavy infantry groups on either side of a large boulder and tried to bottleneck the enemy and sandwich them together. Then we regrouped before their reinforcements could flank us and did one massive shield wall push to victory. It was glorious
You should make a video on another one of Alexander’s tactics “The Hammer and Anvil” involving a two segmented infantry line, with two calvary divisions that go around the enemies flank to rapidly encircle the enemy without needing an initial army from behind
For sure! I do have Hammer and Anvil on the list to test out :) I'm going to try for Hannibal's Inverted Crescent formation for next week's video, but it's been giving me trouble so far lol
so cool to play the game this way as a commander/total war style. Someone should do a playthrough playing like this
Awesome display! I wonder if it would have been better to put the infantry groups into square formation after the bulk of the enemy infantry was dealt with to counter the cavalry. Hindsight is always 20/20 though and there was a lot to manage in that second fight. Thanks for sharing this!
Edit: Once again I commented before the video was finished and I see that you did change to square formation lol. Sorry! >
Holy shit. The views on this video exploded!! Glad to see it strat. One of the best content creators out there.
Thanks! Yeah man it came out of nowhere lol I had 2 videos that blew up for some reason?
This is awesome!! Love the way you approach showing us viewers how it all looks from a top down perspective.
Thank you for watching! It's so much easier to see what's going on from above. Sometimes the heat of battle can really obscure things and make it hard to see maneuvers, etc.
How is this sky-view achieved?
One thing is missing, the fear factor. In a real battle one side always runs away.
True, bannerlord doesn't do a good job simulating that
One thing that Rome total war does good, the moral system means that the divisions will retreat if they’re losing
Very interesting video and well articulated narration of the troop engagements, would be interested in seeing more historical recreation experiments such as this.
Thank you! I'm working my way down a list of interesting formations to try out :) I'm thinking Schiltron will be next since cavalry are a huge menace in Bannerlord.
Its amazing how many of these plans were developed so long ago but also how much the leaders openly sacrificed certain groups. They have sacrificial lines and attacks knowing they will definitely lose most if not all in certain circumstances
Why can't Total War games feel like this? This is awesome, the fact that each soldier is an individual makes it progress so much more realistically
It's definitely a different feel than the TW games! Especially when you're fighting on the ground with your troops - battles are so chaotic
You should play some old total war
Honestly, it would be great if TW games had a solo fighter mode as on of the heroes, like vanilla (as in unmodded) M&B series.
try rome total war, it works, works very well
This should have been the evolution of the Total War series. Instead we get DLC content that's sold as a $60 game and a publisher in turmoil.
I love this tactic. I might try it myself. I play on the ground with my men. So it's gonna be more tough but WAY more immersive which is what I'm about. I think you just unlocked a new fun way for me to play. I'm gonna look up real strategies that famous generals and lieutenants used. (Idk what ranking system they used in those times but ima bout to learn!) Cheers for the video! Got my like and sub!!
Dude turned the game into total war😆....more plss
one of my first battles in a total war game i had a 1 percent chance to defeat an invading army so i met them in the forest i had the smaller force but i hid almost half of my army in a near by forest and positioned everything so this force hit them in the flanks hard. i defeated a massive army with half of one that was 12 years ago
False advertising. Alexander the Great once said, famously: F1+F3
Haha I thought that was Sun Tzu?! Who wrote it first? :D
Your bannerlord is also named Khalid Ibn Al Walid! That's awesome, great to see another appreciate Khalid :)
Yeah he's amazing to read up on and learn from! I wish he was more popular in modern culture. He's got to be in the top 10 ever to have commanded troops I think!
I love games where real life tactics work great. Another example could be the U-Boat game. I used to attack convoys when approaching them from the side, which gave mixed results. Then I've read real U-Boot tactic to wait in front of the convoy, let it pass so you're in the very middle of it, and then unleash a barrage of torpedoes. During nights it's even possible to gun them down with a deck gun, before the escorts show up. I went from sinking half the convoys in 2-3 approaches, to sinking all transports in a single attack.
Granted IRL U-Boots would hunt in groups, but still that tactic worked much better than my player instinct.
I just love cavalry so much. I think 70% of my troops are composed of cavalry+ horse archers. I don t know how efficient it is, but i love leading 140 horse guys into the enemy backline, while my shield wall guys are holding position
That works quite well. The only tricky bit is staying close to your shield wall since your cavalry alone is going to take a lot more casualties when charging a ready line than when charging an engaged line.
Tactics also works in sieges: I like to move 2 divisions of infantry on 1 side with my archers supporting them. Because I only attack when the enemy arty is neutralized, I let my men hang out to the side of the breach/siege tower. And bombard them breach. Sometimes the enemy leaves the opposite breach or climbs down the opposite siege tower and they walk in a line and waltz right into my infantry because they're trying to "shift" to fill my side of the breach. I let my archers span the width of the line so they can shoot them to pieces.
Also, whenever my infantry break thru, I have my archers set up in vantage points and this helps decrease casualties.
Alternative title: "I used tactics from a REAL battle to win a computer simulation of a battle"
That's a good title as well!
Alternative title: "Ai can't beat humans if we read books"
"Local history fan shoves Ai in the lockers"
" I don't take corporate sponsor money" what a chad, subbed
Showcasing Bannerlord´s (albeit, with the help of mods) true potential for amazing battles! Great stuff Strat!
I tried for over an hour to make these work in the base game and to done degree it sort of works, but melee combat is over so fast that you really don't get much benefit from it :( I've noticed going fancy maneuvers is almost a death sentence since the enemy will have local superiority for 15s or so until you move to the flank, which means you'll have almost nobody left lol I'll keep trying things in both base and modded to see what works!
@@Strat-Guides what is mod list??
Good classic use of false gap with a relatively small force. Alexander often did it on a larger scale, shifting the front line in a few spots then closing it after. Now trapped behind the first phalanx engaged with the second ranks, the rear of the first line could assist in quickly disposing the enemy.
Try Hannibal's tactic against the Romans. Let the center move slowly back, so that the enemy gets outflanked.
That's the one I'm working on for next week!
This is more of a Carthaginian tactic than Hannibal's. The Carthaginians tried it much earlier at the naval battle of Ecnomus and they failed.
Omg strat you reached 700k+ views on this vid congratulations 🎉🎉🎉
It's pretty nutty!
Great episode
I always used real strategies back then when I played this game (back in 2020-2021 and early 2022) in difficult (before Bannerlord difficulty was created) and Bannerlord difficulty. It was really fun and a real advantage, even in multiplayer skimitcher mod.
My most favorite tactic was the Funnel Tactics (a Chinese War Tactics) coupled withe Hannibal's Battle of Cannae strategy, Hannibal's Battle of Trebia strategy (if there was some water) and Scipion's Battle of Zama
I still remember how I used to routinely defeat infantry based forces but when faced against Calvary only forces i had to basically relearn everything because all your previous tactics would be useless. These horse archers taunting you like real life mongols made me realise all those history lessons were not a complete waste.
Man, that wasn't even a victory, that was just 8 troops surviving the onslaught.
Hi, sombedy knows how to separate shock troops in bannerlord? Imperial gurads and menavliatons spawn together.
My favourite formation was the use of a collapsing center with horse archers, with the main idea of using archers not to circle skirmish immediately but to be the first in place for desirable terrain … like charging down a hill with lancers or breaking off to then circle skirmish with their main force tied up and cut off from reinforcements.
Sun tzu once said :
« Fian Champion Spam is op as fuck . »
Lol true story
I always keep my tactics simple. One formation of each type of unit. Charge cavalry to bog down the enemies cav, move up the archers into a advantage point where they can rain arrows and/or bolts onto the enemy and keep the infantry together and slam into the enemies lines as I pull my cav into the rear of them. The idea is to be fast and overwhelm the enemy before they have a chance to get into position. As a more defensive strat I like to hide behind a hill to keep the enemies archers from hitting us. The enemy infantry comes over the hill exposing themselves to my archers as they slam into my lines at the bottom of the hill, my cavalry also hides behind the hill and attacks and pulls back as needed.
Suggestion, Battle of Cannae!
First forme a wedge, the slowly let the center go back, while your wings either stay or move forward.
I used it in bannerlord a few time, it worked, but honnestly, I havent tested it intensly, nor really compared to other tactics. The AI struggle though to manoeuvre once engage. So I usually form a line instead, and move my center backward right before contact.
That one is on the list to try out!
1,2 million views! Contrast man I'm very happy to see your hard work paying off. Been here for a while so its fun to see the growth.
I would likes to see some form of tactics used in Battle of the Teutoburg Forest if it's possible.
You can also use the battle formation of the English during 100 century war .
They dispose the bulk of the army at the center and put the archers at the sides …
start shooting arrows from the enemy approach ( usually they were inferior in numbers than the French )
Refuse to engage the cavalry and use yours only for reserve …
When enemy approach the center of your army meet theirs to battle keeping the archers to shoot to the last arrow and reinforce the sides after that …
Remember was pretty common to use the reserve Calvary on foot if the line of the front was in retreat
I would really want you to do an inverted cresent formation, its one of my most favourite formations
That one's on the list to do soon!
I make use of a variation of that tactic in Total War games. I'll send my tankiest columns to the front to absorb the charge and hold two or more columns, then as my column gets engulfed I'll charge in troops specialized for dealing damage, or even cavalry if they aren't occupied.
To deal with ranged units I'll send some bruiser-type columns to chase them and entangle whoever is defending them, and have my cavalry tackle the ranged units once the opportunity presents itself.
For stuff like this, positioning is everything, so to facilitate my flanks and reduce the length of my front line so my flankers and backline tacklers don't have to travel as much, I'll angle my frontline into chevrons.
That also makes it much safer for my javelin troops (my preferred ranged units) to throw into the flanks of the enemy frontline, drastically reducing friendly fire while also keeping my javy's safe.
Something id like to see you do more and talk about is use terrain. A great way to counter cav and cav archers is to put your infantry near trees or those big rocks so when they charge into them they get slowed down and the infantry can catch them. you had all this great terrain and met them in a open field. Gotta use the landscape more
Not everyone can be a military genius. I was once surrounded by Camel Cataphracts and I took my small team into the little patch of trees and man did they have a difficult time performing charges and they got stuck most of the time. The battle took like 10 minutes, but the trees rendered the Camel Cataphracts useless.
Odds are he's highlighting the tactic itself rather than using the full capabilities of his units.
just got this game because of your video, looking forward to learning it and enjoying more content!
Sweet, I hope you enjoy it! I've got over 4k hours into it so I can say for sure I got my money's worth :)
I notice your charachter name is from the Great Muslim commander Hazrat Khalid Ibn Walid (May Allah be pleased with him), and it's really amazing to see that you can actually do these great tactics with RTS mod in bannerlord.
I'm a huge fan oh Khalid ibn al-Walid! He doesn't get enough attention, but I do think he was one of the best commanders to have lived (at least top 10 for sure).
@@Strat-Guides yeah he doesn't get much attention that's why I mentioned it, not many non Muslims know him well. He was a great commander, warrior and very generous and pious man (May Allah be pleased with him). Keep up the good work man 💪💪
@@m.humaiz1114 Non-Muslim historian here with a big interest in military history. I'd probably put him top 5. All non-Muslims with a serious interest in military history certainly know who he is, I assure you friend!
@@Shambloid nice to hear that friend, indeed historians know him, I am not a historian so I was just talking in general. (For example he is not well known like Gengis Khan or Ceaser)
@@m.humaiz1114 Oh yeah indeed. Both great commanders too of course, but I think more widely known in the case of Caesar because Shakespeare wrote a play about him and his name went on to become the word for 'King' or 'Emperor' across most European languages, and in the case of Genghis because he formed the 2nd biggest empire in history and was so ruthless that he's become synonymous with dread and terror.
what did I just watch... it's like an historical reenactment
It's pretty cool to see in a video game! I really like that Bannerlord uses individual units rather than one big connected mob
Awesome video! How do you stay in tactical view after the battle starts?
Sadly, I believe it's a mod
This is my preferred technique; create chevrons with gaps between them that are (temporarily) filled with skirmishers that draw the enemy in. Behind the skirmishers is a second line of heavy infantry that holds enemy troops in place, should they try charging in. Then shock troops and the skirmishers are positioned on the flanks of the heavy infantry that annihilate the enemy quickly, and counterattack the enemy attacking the main chevron line. If I can afford the extra units, I'll place more skirmishers inside the chevrons to shoot enemies attacking adjacent chevrons (this is why chevrons work so well with false gap tactics, increased surface area to attack). Most enemies, even those of higher quality, melt under this tactic because it funnels them into places that you can concentrate a lot more force. It is rather micro-intensive though, and leaves little room and resources for cavalry in games like Total War and Bannerlord. Though if used properly, you only need light skirmish cavalry to cut down routing forces
Good to see that yer a master at baiting.
I've been called many things in my life - that one probably more than most others lol
One of Alexander the Great's preferred tactics was to form several phalanx in the center of his army, with his cavaly guarding the flanks. The phalanx would be armed with the sarissa--an unusually long spear that would range in length from 12 to 20 feet or more in length. The first line would have the shorter length, the second would be longer, and the third, fourth, and fifth, progressively longer, still. This would allow his line to lower their sarissa, plant the butt of the weapon in the ground, and present all at once a near-solid wall of spearheads to the enemy at a moment's notice. What would happen is that any enemy attacking his center would suddenly find themselves essentially pinned on this spear wall once those sarissa were raised. He would then bring in his cavalry from the sides and mow down the enemy pinned in the center.
I really wish there was a good way to model that sort for formation in a game like this!
I think it would be interesting to see you try the Roman maniple swap. There’s multiple theories on how it would have worked, but I think you could develop a strategy for Bannerlord with it.
I'm sort of familiar with that - checker board formation if I recall? I can give it a try!
@@Strat-Guides
The checker board formation is one theory. The idea is that a maniple pushes the opposing line back, causing the enemy formation to either bulge between the other maniples and get flanked, or maintain the formation, giving the maniples space to maneuver. That is theoretically what makes swapping maniples possible.
I’m not sure exactly which units would be best. Skirmishers up front for sure, heavy infantry in the rear to take the place of the skirmishers, and cav on the flanks. The cavalry was really only there to engage enemy cavalry long enough for the infantry to deal with the bulk of the opposing army. The infantry units would likely engage the enemy in formations resembling a shield wall/square formation and rely on shields and swords in close quarters to take down the infantry. Romans didn’t use many archers during the republican period, so no need to recruit them. It’s almost all infantry with cavalry to support them.
I think it could work. The infantry required is huge, packed together, and consists of multiple formations placed near each other. Enemy melee cavalry will have a really hard time dealing with this set up because they are not going to be able to charge through them. The skirmishers and cavalry are meant to distract the enemy archers in the back line, so archers should not be major players for very long after the infantry is engaged. I think where this strategy will be most limited is against armies with lots of horse archers, which would be consistent with what happened in real life against the Parthians.
I’m interested to see you try this. It probably requires a fair bit of management that would be an excellent challenge. I’ve experimented a little with it, but nothing like what you’re capable of doing.
@@kolbywilliams7234 it's not just Horse Archers, the Parthians also charged with Heavy Shock Cavs. The Roman knew their fucked and realized why Cavalry is very important in open terrain engagement.
@@deepdungeon8465
I realize they had more than just horse archers, but the Romans dealt with cavalry before and won. The thing that set the Parthians apart was how they used cavalry. I.e. mounted archers.
This is the first time I've actually seen any footage of M&B 2, and I'm so happy to see the "tactical map" or whatever it's called since that and creating separate army units were sorely lacking in the first game. Hopefully no more giant blob each of infantry/archers/cavalry.
Try khalid ibn alwalid tactics he is the smartest ever
Neat stuff and well presented.
I had no idea mount and blade banner lord had this kind of strategic view or battles. Thought it was much more like the previous mount and blade less like total war games.
Thanks! There's a mod called RTS camera that let's you see top down
@@Strat-Guides Ah thanks.
Goes to show that Alexander was smart but also lucky.
Not to mention, probably had an army that was better supplied and equipped than his adversaries..
I feel like it's not as good of a strategy if all things are equal.. Pyrrhic victory here for sure.
I feel like this tactic in Bannerlord works well against infantry heavy armies, but not so well against cavalry.
@@Strat-Guides Yeah, i can see that. Cavalry is always my problem in Bannerlord for sure. I guess, as it should be.
the tactic is for troops that just don't really exist in Bannerlord. Hoplites have very tough shields for their time, and layered spear wall. this focused everything to the front, and the compact formations meant that turning was difficult. this meant that back then against those armies they won pretty much every battle if they could keep the enemy to the front, but lost almost every battle that let the enemy flank them. this creates a flanking attack when the enemy has ensured that you can't go around them. you might be able to make this scenario play out properly if you have a custom map with custom troops, and maybe even a custom AI. the tactic works well enough against an imbalanced force in Bannerlord with mostly infantry (especially if you kill off the archers and cav well before the infantry clash), but because of the openness of the terrain and the armor of the heavy infantry other tactics usually work better (not to mention that in big battles you might not get your 'working group' to spawn in first with everyone else).
No singular tactic is the right answer to all battles. Terrain, forces, and objectives dictate the optimal (and possible) responses. What Alexander accomplished, with hoplites, peltasts, and cavalry, was a victory over an empire's force generally agreed to have a 2-1 numbers advantage, alongside bringing war elephants, archers, and scythed chariots. He accomplished this by drawing Persian forces into attacking him and his cavalry, having his infantry tie up the Persian infantry (using the false gap to draw in charges which depleted the Persian line), and finally being able to disengage with his heaviest cavalry and immediately exploit the gap near the Persian center as it emerged- without the benefit of a birds eye view. His charge threatened the enemy commander directly, causing Darius to break off and retreat, which led to a mass rout. Luck is real- genius consists of anticipating misfortunes and fortune alike, being prepared to cut losses and drive advantages.
You can’t draw conclusions about Alexander from a video game. The AI doesn’t respond the way real people respond, the troops are anachronistic, Alexander also didn’t only use the false gap and knew different applications for it. Strat is also not Alexander, so who knows what Alexander would have done differently. There are so many more reasons, but I hope that’s enough. People really need to stop conflating history with what they see in games and television.
The point: It’s fun to see how real history can be applied to a historically inspired game, but the game itself is not indicative of real history.
Watching your content and implementing it in game has made bannerlord so much more fun than it already is. Good stuff man.
Nice, I'm really happy to hear that! :D
what about Hannibal's retreating center leading to a double envelopment? something tells me it would be pretty tough to pull it off in Bannerlord.
That's what this video was originally supposed to be lol it's tough! I'll keep working on it and if I can make it work I'll do a video on it. Schiltron will most likely be next since that has decent results!
Cannae was a radical success, while being outnumbered, managed to envelop the larger force. But, in regards to Bannerlord, it may not be as radically successful. Romans went for depth instead of width, which I personally haven't seen the AI do. Hannibal had a significant cavalry advantage.
And the whole thing hinged on if his weak center would hold while being pushed/ backed up. I think in Bannerlord, the AI would eventually stretch out to meet the wings, sources don't mention archers or even many slingers.
And if your fight is exceptionally big, reinforcements would put pain to the 'we got em now'. Tried to recreate a Carrahe, but AI wouldn't consider existential dread. Had the Cataphractoi and the horse archer, the slowest enemy. Perfect setup for nothing, REEEEEEE
@@troydodson9641 the reason their auxilia were light was due to Hannibal having crushed them outside the city multiple times, thus they did not have access to the skilled mercenaries to have archers, they just had nobles on horses and stock Romans.
@@jamoecw In the period of Hannibal, from what I've read anyways, army was equal parts Romans and Roman 'allies'. But, they were made to fight like the Romans, manipular, 3 lines, etc. Exeption being cavalry, which they were told to bring 900 to the Roman 300.
But this is the presented ideal, exceptions and situations make for different. In the same period, Macedonian war, Greek leagues would fight with Rome against Philip, but as greeks.
But nothing is written of it being different here, so the typical model applies here me thinks
@@troydodson9641 Hannibal is one of the reasons why they looked to allies to fill the roles of their lines, prior to that you had to be a land owner and have a certain amount of wealth to be a soldier. velites and some of the horsemen were allies, but their main line was citizens, since they did not feel that others would fight as tenaciously for Rome. due to the losses of that war they lowered the property requirement to be in the mainline military from 14,000 to 11,000 asses. this requirement continued to drop until the Marian reforms in 107BC, which also saw that the auxilia (skirmishers, cav, and specialized troops) were replaced entirely with non-citizens and mercenaries. property requirements were dropped entirely and there was no 3 lines (just the iconic legionary), and troops started to get a wage rather than it being a seasonal requirement after joining.
I couldn’t perceive the video seriously after I realised that what was going on on the screen resembled an anthill rave
Haha yeah the hivemind is real with this AI
Playing mount and blade like total war.
how wild, I thought this was a total war game, until you said it was bannerlord. I couldn't even believe it.
Haha nice! That's definitely a complement for Bannerlord as all the TW games are amazing :)
The fact you can't split a unit like that to attack both of them in total war videogames is nuts.
This may be a bit more on an operational or strategic scale than tactical battlefield gameplay, but: Genghis Khan's use of 2+ mutually supporting armies marching in columns. Separated enough to pose different threats, close enough to reinforce each other when attacked. He used these column formations to each aim between multiple targets (cities or forts), forcing the enemy to attempt to protect all the possibilities, then the columns converged to concentrate on one target. Usually a less obvious one. I remember in one case, he aimed approximately between two border cities. Then once the cities were fortified, he drove through between them to strike deeper in enemy territory to take a city that controlled supply lines to the border cities.
Maybe this would work in a largeer scale game setting like CK3 or HOI4.
Iam a big fan of khalid ibn al walid he was the Greatest general and he was Muslim. He never lost a battle
It's amazing what he was able to accomplish, just sad that he never really gets the attention he deserves!
@@Strat-Guides yeah he was the sword of the god
Btw who's you're fav general mine khalid and Napoleon
Using camels as mobile water storage was genius and brutal.
@@MohammedAbdulNoor that's a tough one! Those are both on my list. I enjoy reading about Gustavus Adolphus as well
You had such a nice rock nearby, at the end of the second battle, to slow down and disrupt cav charges.
Yeah but terrain wasn't the focus of the video, it was tactics. But maybe I'm just sperging out
ehh..IDK...seems like the enemy is only slightly better than a zombie hoard.
Swarms of soldiers just haphazardly smashing into each other is largely a hollywood myth, in real life -the reason why tactics like this worked was because of a lack of situational awareness by the commanders and a lack of easy communication.
Even the routine use of 'top down' topographical maps for military planning is pretty new, only a few hundred years old.
So yeah; this only works in the game because the AI is (intentionally?) shitty and not because it has some inherent awesomeness that transcends reality.
You're not wrong about the AI. We've been begging for better AI from the developers for years now :( it's the best we got for now and it is pretty fun to at least attempt historical tactics and see how they work in a simulation. Thanks for watching!
Very cool, Strat, and as usual, thanks for making this video!
I'm glad you enjoyed it! I've got a few more in the works :D
You and this channel is so awesome man. Thank you for your Bannerlord content! 🤌
I appreciate your kind words!
You are going really fast, slow down a little
#twss
Imo, Mount and Blade, unlike any other game, really gives you an idea of how these battles would have looked in real life.
DUDE What is this game???
I had been investigating these tactics and bought a huge book about them in one of my autistic hyperfixation fits and seeing this gameplay just made my face light up like a child in christmas
I have no idea why yt brought this up since I haven't searched for this kinda stuff online in a long while, but I sincerely take my hat off to the algorithm
I'm equally happy, impressed, and scared, you have no idea
I counter your superior tactics with just like, 300 Battanian Fians that I lazily plant on a hill, ensuring victory
It's hard to beat the fians! They pretty much counter everything
There is a similar tactic where the flanks are heavily stacked and the center is thinner. As the center is pushed back relative to the flanks, the attackers slowly become more and more surrounded by the stronger flanks, trapping them. I can't remember what it's called, if anything, I just remember learning about it being used in some famous ancient battle (which I also don't remember the details of). I'd be a terrible historian, but I think that tactic is pretty cool.
I think I know what you're talking about - almost like a double envelopment but done defensively. Lol don't worry, I get the benefit of editing to make myself seem knowledgeable :D
Its the battle of Cannae no? With Hannibal in southern italy vs the romans. I think at least.
The masculine urge to join those eight men to break that cavalry charge.
Damn, feels like in watching a total war vídeo instead of a bannerlord, awesome
Strat: *Serious Tactic
Enemy Cavalry: "Wheeeee.......!!!"
Another tactics you can try is Hannibal famous retreat at Canne where he started to slowly back the entire center of the line to entangle the bulk of the enemy army within your front and destroy them …
That one is in the works for next week! It's tough to pull off, but I think I can manage