Only slight problem with the battle’s depiction here is that Henry’s army is shown to be roughly 50/50 between heavy infantry and archers, when in reality it was more like 80% archers. English battle tactics at the time were basically to amass a huge army of archers and shoot the enemy to death, protecting them with sharpened stakes and a hard core of heavily armoured knights.
I preferred Rome. The siege battles in Medieval II were absolutely terrible. The horrible pathing of the AI cost me so many sieges. They were even worse than Empires siege battles, and that's really saying something!
Right after the first cavalry charge, I ran all my troops to the hill in the back. I put all my archers on high ground, and had my melee troops form a line on the hill. That way the enemy can't attack from behind and their soldiers would have to travel farther for each wave they send. Pretty much my archers cut down everyone before they came close and I ended up losing about 25 men total. Heroic victory :)
1 At first position your infantry ALL behind the spikes, the first cavalry charge will fall apart soon without an losses on your side. 2. immediately retreat to the large hill on the southeastern part of the map. Maximum speed. Occupy the hill, archers behind, infantry in front. 3. Defend the hill with minimal losses. 4. Because time is running low, charge down the hill into the last charging part of the enemy force.
Best way to win it with 500 and less lost is that ; you retreat your billmen and henry behind stakes at first calvary charge, then you replace them in a 3-4 thick line just behind of stakes but in front of archers. Disable fire at will of archers, use them simultaneoulsy to make the gap bigger between heavy and vougiers. while you do that, put 3 packs of unit and henry to wait for calvry behind.
You're gonna want to protect your archers, they will be the key to winning the battle. Move those billmen in front of the line until the French try to charge from behind - then take them back to deal with the cavalry. Once that's done, you're just gonna want to hold the line and protect your archers - they're valuable, and they can actually be used rather effectively in melee, if need be.
"The French forces awake and take a leisurely breakfast." I don't know why I found that part funny. Battles like this were a disaster for them and never really recovered in the war until Joan of Arc arrived.
the first french wave (those two cavalry units) can be routed before they make contact, just use fire arrows and focus fire them :D great battle anyway :D
How to counter cavalry charge from behind ...I tried using Billmen and dismounted English knights but both of em get stomped ( i mean almost 40 men die atfirst but then they win anyway )
Chikalita2 Kingdoms are DLC for new campaigns,like the Teutonic expansion is based around the Baltic And has a much more detailed map of it,and has new factions,like Lithuania and The Teutonic Order.
The English army was mostly, in rags, not armour and 'uniforms'. Many of the archers were almost naked and the armoured nobles were less than 20% of the army. The English formation os totally wrong.
ummmm no. The archers were heavily armoured, they were an elite force, not the usual standard archers of the time. Hence why they ripped straight through the French when they got to close quarters. Yes they were tired, and sick, but they were still elite.
The archers were commoners. They were poorly paid and regarded as inferiors by the men-at-arms and the nobles. Your reference to their being "elite" is nonsensical, apart from the sense that they were very effective in war. Being "elite", however, does not mean that they were well-clothed or even 'uniformed'; they were not. AND to say that archers were "heavily armoured" is too ridiculous for words. You clearly have no understanding of the physical freedom required in using a powerful bow, and an even greater lack of understanding of the high cost of medieval armour, which would be far beyond the means of a English archer....even if he was stupid enough to try to draw a bow wearing metal gauntlets and metal plating.
Baskerville22 ok so firstly you are wrong about quite a lot of this, so please research before replying. The archers were not nobility, but they were professionals, well equipped, well trained, and well armoured. They wore padded jerkins, often mail, helmets and all had hammers, swords or other short weapons. There is literal documents from Henry outfitting them before they left. They also all rode horses, bet you didn't know that either
No the archers were not nobles, but they were still well /decently paid. They were paid 6 pence per day (minus what their captain took from them) and this is apparently the wages of a 'skilled' labourer in London at this. That may not be much, but the SAS and the US Marines aren't paid a great deal more than the average person. Archers were at the bottom of the military spectrum in Medieval Europe in most countries most of the time. The next thing is is that 20% of the army were not nobles by this time, they were commoners, but remember Hugh Grant is a commoner, most of the English army was made up of average off commoners and well off commoners (for the Men-at-Arms). Most of the Army was supposed to be very well trained. Also, archers only had to get over the initial investment of buying their armour, but going to battle without armour is a psychology that doesn't work.
Quite a few of the archers were suffering from dysentery and fought without trousers due to their constant and uncontrollable defecation, although the majority were wearing their campaign gear which was scruffy and filthy (albeit probably still able to turn away a glancing blade strike) by that point. The main reason the English archers beat the French knights was because the English wore very little armour. The French were tired and stuck in the mud while pressed into a very tight crowd where they couldn't maneuver. The English were able to run around them with their weighted mallets and polearms and batter them since they had more room and less weight on them, while all French armour did was make it so that the French knights couldn't extricate themselves from the mud nor the crowd, with quite a few falling over and drowning and even more being pressed to death against the stakes since parts of their armour were actually made of painted and boiled leather.
This battle can be won by doing nothing at all. Yes, by doing nothing at all I mean doing nothing at all. You just don't give any commands to your army and watch them win the battle. I tried 5 times and I got 5 victories.
Easy battle, all you have to do is retreat the first line of archers if its threatened, and put your Billmen behind your troops, expecting the upcoming cavalry that's gonna flank you. I didn't do ANYTHING else. Auto-attack till the end ftw. Oh yeah, maybe sending your King from time to time (just make sure he survives). That's it.
Experimented with billmen, seems they can't do shit against spears, pike, infantry AND cavalry. They're better off as conscripted bait to make enemy cavalry formation a mess whilst you charge your trusty knights at them.
It's really annoying how longbows are underpowered in this game. Retinue Longbowmen won't even beat Pavise Crossbows, because their plywood shields are apparently made of concrete and titanium.
+That Awesome Valflame In real life perhaps, but in the game the longbow arrows can cut through the best armour like a knife through butter. It should be able to penetrate a wicker shield.
+FlipUltraHD what-re ya talkin about? Longbow archers are one of the best units in this awesome game! a good number of them behind your main line will decimate the enemy army.
@Thetacticalcorner the french cavalry did advance. that was the problem. the ground was too slippy and the english had prepared for it with stakes and the french fucked up. They DID charge.
1. The french cav rode into the stakes 2. Most of the inf. was jammed stepped on by theyr own men and cut down by arrows after running in mud imagine yourself. the battle didnt go this way.
+marshall886 There were 3,000 English bowmen on each flank of the 1,000 heavily armored English men-at-arms. The French heavy cavalry engaged in a flanking manouver which was supposed to break up the archer formations easily since the archers wore little or no armor, , thereby flank attacking and surrounding the English center, and capturing Henry V. But The longbow was devastating on the french cavalry from 200 yards, killing more horses than men during the charge and piling up the dead into a formidable wall to protect from further cavalry charges. The stakes driven into the ground by the archers finished off the initial French cavalry charge and few french knights made it to the archers' lines. Once the archers' position on the flanks was secured, they could pour arrow after arrow into the main French infantry that was attacking Henry's infantry in the center.
marshall886 the French Commander wanted to outflank them,however the forests were too thick for any large amount of men to get through them,so he ditched the idea,and unbeknownst to him some English Longbowmen were hiding in those woods.
Visually chaotic and historically inaccurate. A poor depiction of a significant medieval battle that changed the face of Europe. It fails to emphasize the key role of the English archers and the resulting decimation of the French ruling class.
For my school project I brought my laptop to school and played this battle for a project on the 100 year war.
No you didn't.
And then everyone clapped
Only slight problem with the battle’s depiction here is that Henry’s army is shown to be roughly 50/50 between heavy infantry and archers, when in reality it was more like 80% archers. English battle tactics at the time were basically to amass a huge army of archers and shoot the enemy to death, protecting them with sharpened stakes and a hard core of heavily armoured knights.
"Once more, into the breach my lord" Shit, that line is fucking awesome.
THIS WAS THE GREATEST GAME OF ALL TIME
In a way its still the best;)
After Nagashino
I preferred Rome. The siege battles in Medieval II were absolutely terrible. The horrible pathing of the AI cost me so many sieges. They were even worse than Empires siege battles, and that's really saying something!
no rome total war 1 was
Age of empires 2 is very close behind
It was a miricle only 112 English were killed.
300 according to uhh... uhh....
and that's just from the loudness of this video
The day I will beat this fucking hard historical battle will be the one of my coronation to king of Italy...
“Those cowardly dogs are behind us” while we camp in the middle of the field
Right after the first cavalry charge, I ran all my troops to the hill in the back. I put all my archers on high ground, and had my melee troops form a line on the hill. That way the enemy can't attack from behind and their soldiers would have to travel farther for each wave they send. Pretty much my archers cut down everyone before they came close and I ended up losing about 25 men total. Heroic victory :)
thats exactly how i have done it at well. It was a great pleasure, only time is running low at the end.
I cant belive how I managed to complete this at 8 years old, the first time I tried it. Now its really hard!
I read Shakespeare's book and now this video is suggested to me today
1 At first position your infantry ALL behind the spikes, the first cavalry charge will fall apart soon without an losses on your side.
2. immediately retreat to the large hill on the southeastern part of the map. Maximum speed. Occupy the hill, archers behind, infantry in front.
3. Defend the hill with minimal losses.
4. Because time is running low, charge down the hill into the last charging part of the enemy force.
My men stood 'till their swords fell. Henry died unfortunately, along with everyone else, except a few archers.
Best way to win it with 500 and less lost is that ; you retreat your billmen and henry behind stakes at first calvary charge, then you replace them in a 3-4 thick line just behind of stakes but in front of archers. Disable fire at will of archers, use them simultaneoulsy to make the gap bigger between heavy and vougiers. while you do that, put 3 packs of unit and henry to wait for calvry behind.
"Once more into the breach..." - was from the siege of Harfleur, not Agincourt (in Shakespeare's HENRY V)
"Once more unto the breach dear brothers"
I sware the way the battle plys out in this game is likely the most historically accurate depiction of the battle.
@NinjaMuzz Its the recording program
@TheAtood i think historical battles don't have a difficulty selector in medieval 2
Very nice video
You can win this battle by doing nothing XD
☆尺卂ㄚ☆ if you do something you lose trust me
True. But still great scenery :)
simply amaizing the way you have organised the battle! how many hours did you spend playing this game?
You're gonna want to protect your archers, they will be the key to winning the battle.
Move those billmen in front of the line until the French try to charge from behind - then take them back to deal with the cavalry.
Once that's done, you're just gonna want to hold the line and protect your archers - they're valuable, and they can actually be used rather effectively in melee, if need be.
these fps drops are as severe as smashing ma face with a polearm
"The French forces awake and take a leisurely breakfast." I don't know why I found that part funny. Battles like this were a disaster for them and never really recovered in the war until Joan of Arc arrived.
This battle is hard to win.
We all know the French got totally slaughtered as they do against the British but in the batlle its hard to win.
*English
France won the war
the first french wave (those two cavalry units) can be routed before they make contact, just use fire arrows and focus fire them :D
great battle anyway :D
very nice gameplay well done
How to counter cavalry charge from behind ...I tried using Billmen and dismounted English knights but both of em get stomped ( i mean almost 40 men die atfirst but then they win anyway )
you should of put guard mode on
By the grace of God. Our fou is utterly vanquished. Let all who remember this day, remember it as the day of our most glo-
*foe
@@stefanjevtic7175 english is hard
Actually the English right flank took the brunt of the attack, where they suffered most of the casualties....
Hey I'm a bit new to Total War games, is does Medieval 2 total war kingdoms have the same campaign as the first one..? Confused
Chikalita2 Kingdoms are DLC for new campaigns,like the Teutonic expansion is based around the Baltic And has a much more detailed map of it,and has new factions,like Lithuania and The Teutonic Order.
gud quality broh
The English army was mostly, in rags, not armour and 'uniforms'. Many of the archers were almost naked and the armoured nobles were less than 20% of the army. The English formation os totally wrong.
ummmm no. The archers were heavily armoured, they were an elite force, not the usual standard archers of the time. Hence why they ripped straight through the French when they got to close quarters.
Yes they were tired, and sick, but they were still elite.
The archers were commoners. They were poorly paid and regarded as inferiors by the men-at-arms and the nobles. Your reference to their being "elite" is nonsensical, apart from the sense that they were very effective in war. Being "elite", however, does not mean that they were well-clothed or even 'uniformed'; they were not. AND to say that archers were "heavily armoured" is too ridiculous for words. You clearly have no understanding of the physical freedom required in using a powerful bow, and an even greater lack of understanding of the high cost of medieval armour, which would be far beyond the means of a English archer....even if he was stupid enough to try to draw a bow wearing metal gauntlets and metal plating.
Baskerville22 ok so firstly you are wrong about quite a lot of this, so please research before replying. The archers were not nobility, but they were professionals, well equipped, well trained, and well armoured. They wore padded jerkins, often mail, helmets and all had hammers, swords or other short weapons.
There is literal documents from Henry outfitting them before they left. They also all rode horses, bet you didn't know that either
No the archers were not nobles, but they were still well /decently paid. They were paid 6 pence per day (minus what their captain took from them) and this is apparently the wages of a 'skilled' labourer in London at this. That may not be much, but the SAS and the US Marines aren't paid a great deal more than the average person. Archers were at the bottom of the military spectrum in Medieval Europe in most countries most of the time. The next thing is is that 20% of the army were not nobles by this time, they were commoners, but remember Hugh Grant is a commoner, most of the English army was made up of average off commoners and well off commoners (for the Men-at-Arms). Most of the Army was supposed to be very well trained. Also, archers only had to get over the initial investment of buying their armour, but going to battle without armour is a psychology that doesn't work.
Quite a few of the archers were suffering from dysentery and fought without trousers due to their constant and uncontrollable defecation, although the majority were wearing their campaign gear which was scruffy and filthy (albeit probably still able to turn away a glancing blade strike) by that point.
The main reason the English archers beat the French knights was because the English wore very little armour. The French were tired and stuck in the mud while pressed into a very tight crowd where they couldn't maneuver. The English were able to run around them with their weighted mallets and polearms and batter them since they had more room and less weight on them, while all French armour did was make it so that the French knights couldn't extricate themselves from the mud nor the crowd, with quite a few falling over and drowning and even more being pressed to death against the stakes since parts of their armour were actually made of painted and boiled leather.
This battle can be won by doing nothing at all.
Yes, by doing nothing at all I mean doing nothing at all. You just don't give any commands to your army and watch them win the battle. I tried 5 times and I got 5 victories.
Easy battle, all you have to do is retreat the first line of archers if its threatened, and put your Billmen behind your troops, expecting the upcoming cavalry that's gonna flank you. I didn't do ANYTHING else. Auto-attack till the end ftw. Oh yeah, maybe sending your King from time to time (just make sure he survives). That's it.
Pablo Blo That rear cav charge later on fucks me up, even when I put two billmen AND my king there to stop them.
Experimented with billmen, seems they can't do shit against spears, pike, infantry AND cavalry. They're better off as conscripted bait to make enemy cavalry formation a mess whilst you charge your trusty knights at them.
It's really annoying how longbows are underpowered in this game. Retinue Longbowmen won't even beat Pavise Crossbows, because their plywood shields are apparently made of concrete and titanium.
+FlipUltraHD Arrows cannot go through wood and steel together, not even the longbow arrows.
+That Awesome Valflame In real life perhaps, but in the game the longbow arrows can cut through the best armour like a knife through butter. It should be able to penetrate a wicker shield.
FlipUltraHD Merasmus! (TF2 reference)
+FlipUltraHD what-re ya talkin about? Longbow archers are one of the best units in this awesome game! a good number of them behind your main line will decimate the enemy army.
+elchico unsl
And a good number of Pavise Crossbows will do the same for two-thirds of the price.
@Thetacticalcorner the french cavalry did advance. that was the problem. the ground was too slippy and the english had prepared for it with stakes and the french fucked up. They DID charge.
No flaming arrows?
this whole ten minutes and thirty one seconds was better than the entirety of The King
1. The french cav rode into the stakes 2. Most of the inf. was jammed stepped on by theyr own men and cut down by arrows after running in mud imagine yourself. the battle didnt go this way.
Kingdoms has 4 new differwnt campaigns than the normal one,including americas crusaders teutonic order and british isles
Difficulty?
Medieval 2 or Rome 1? Which one is better?
Medieval 2 in my opinion
Both
"Powermonger" wasn't it?
Why didn't the French try an outflanking manoeurve?
marshall886 the actual historical terrain did not allow it.
marshall886 Forests on either side of the field, and the army was full of arrogant twats who wanted to look as heroic as possible.
+marshall886 There were 3,000 English bowmen on each flank of the 1,000 heavily armored English men-at-arms. The French heavy cavalry engaged in a flanking manouver which was supposed to break up the archer formations easily since the archers wore little or no armor, , thereby flank attacking and surrounding the English center, and capturing Henry V. But The longbow was devastating on the french cavalry from 200 yards, killing more horses than men during the charge and piling up the dead into a formidable wall to protect from further cavalry charges. The stakes driven into the ground by the archers finished off the initial French cavalry charge and few french knights made it to the archers' lines. Once the archers' position on the flanks was secured, they could pour arrow after arrow into the main French infantry that was attacking Henry's infantry in the center.
marshall886 the French Commander wanted to outflank them,however the forests were too thick for any large amount of men to get through them,so he ditched the idea,and unbeknownst to him some English Longbowmen were hiding in those woods.
No, they did try a flanking manoeuvre- with cavalry.
Are the spanish good in this game?
David Colomer Overpowered.
heheh, try to play defensively like i did. Try to not move your army and use the advantage of those pikes you got against their cav.
Shame it's not historically accurate 😱
really wow i,am gonna do thath to
Visually chaotic and historically inaccurate. A poor depiction of a significant medieval battle that changed the face of Europe. It fails to emphasize the key role of the English archers and the resulting decimation of the French ruling class.
im sucks at this game :)
Haha nice joke :D