Right? They are some of the best shields in the game, offering a ton of hitpoints, as well as near total body coverage. Its shields like that that made crossbowmen effective in the real world, as well as in Warband.
Crossbowmen will always be worse than bowman in low numbers (fians are always better tho). However once you get something like 50+ crossbows the extra damage per shot starts to really show as the slow fire rate starts to not matter as much and they either equal or often exceed the damage of their bow counterparts low tier crossbows also tend to be better than low tier bows because they are inherently more accurate but you need numbers. The biggest difference however is that crossbowmen are hybrid units they are designed to get into melee at some point so the best use of (especially the vlandian ones) them is to mass them and dont even bring other infantry
Yeah, i typically utilize bowmen more heavily, but only in factions where it makes sense to do so. When i play as the Empire or Vlandia, its the crossbow life for me.
Late to the party, crossbowmen are excel in siege defense, except sword sister. The sisters have no place in my army because they don't comply to OSHA. Where is your helmets?!
I know it's a bit late. Not just that there is one major downside to xbows in field battles all the bows need to arch fire over infantry heads while the crossbows need a more direct line of fire as the lines get closer and meet. Attacking a feif I prefer bow men but for defense xbows all the way when they bend over to reload they dodge alot of incoming fire while the archers just sit there and take it
Crossbows dont actually have better range. They start shooting farther away, but they will miss most of their shots at that range. Get a bit closer, just enough for the archers to start shooting, and at that range the archers win
Used only Boar Champions and Vlandian Traders/militia that i liberated/captured and they made their work well until i leveled up enough trade/Smithing and get enough renown to create my own Kingdom. Now i've mostly taken Calradia but my Capital still keep a core of Boar guys in Memory of the old days.
Pretty much everywhere used that strategy. In fact for a good portion of their history most formations used large shields and short swords. Still spear and shirld troops just not the main infantry.
I always preferred crossbows in warband because the sharpshooters were almost as good in melee as the Sargents. Cavalry charge in and don't charge out.
I love your videos but I have a serious question regarding how you collect your data to determine the ranking system. Do you base your decision solely on the listed stats or do you do actual simulation and campaign battles? Because in my experience there are units who have good stats on paper, but that doesn't necessarily translate into actual gameplay, and vice versa.
It's both. I use the visible stats and equipment to decide who to test, and then i perform a lot of tests. Both simulated battles, and battles that i personally control. Because, some troops perform poorly in simulation, but are actually very effective when strategically controlled. I weight all of the data differently, to try to get an average, and i use the average to rank them.
Great video! I like crossbow troops better than regular archers if I'm trying to keep my army small because they can double a halfway decent infantry, you just have to micromanage when to have them hold fire, just like skirmish infantry. You can't let them shoot wily Nily at long range targets and waste ammo, but a mid to close range volley can be devastating and the armor penetration and damage to horses is pretty good too.
I like the Boar troops, they are just too rare to be a whole lot of use in the game. It may take a little while, but you can get large groups of Sword sisters and Mercenary crossbowmen, the Boar troops are too limited for that.
Crossbows: higher damage, long range, capable in melee but have low ammo and shoot slowly. Bows: more ammo and shoot faster but are generally worse in melee and deal less damage to armored foes. Exception being the Battanian Fians who dominate the ranged category
Basicly they are safer units overall. They have shields and they get down to reload. Especially good in sieges. And they are shield infantry once they charge. Their range advantage is only theoredical. They start shooting at a longer range than archers but miss almost everything and do little damage. Get a bit closer, to where archers start to shoot, and the archers do more damage there
Makes no sense why other cultures don’t have crossbows. Historically arabs, mongols and scandinavians had crossbows
I long for the tactical deployment of those Pavise Shields 😔
I know right
Right? They are some of the best shields in the game, offering a ton of hitpoints, as well as near total body coverage. Its shields like that that made crossbowmen effective in the real world, as well as in Warband.
I like how you see elements of both The swadians and the Rhodoks in the Vlandians.
Yes, i think the developers did a good job with this game as a prequel. The factions mostly make sense in how they would look in the future.
Crossbowmen will always be worse than bowman in low numbers (fians are always better tho). However once you get something like 50+ crossbows the extra damage per shot starts to really show as the slow fire rate starts to not matter as much and they either equal or often exceed the damage of their bow counterparts low tier crossbows also tend to be better than low tier bows because they are inherently more accurate but you need numbers.
The biggest difference however is that crossbowmen are hybrid units they are designed to get into melee at some point so the best use of (especially the vlandian ones) them is to mass them and dont even bring other infantry
I really appreciate how Jordan Peterson is exploring other topics now.
Great stuff. As much as i prefer Bowmen, just in general, i do recognize that in the right situations, the Vlandian Sharpshooters are great.
Yeah, i typically utilize bowmen more heavily, but only in factions where it makes sense to do so. When i play as the Empire or Vlandia, its the crossbow life for me.
Late to the party, crossbowmen are excel in siege defense, except sword sister. The sisters have no place in my army because they don't comply to OSHA. Where is your helmets?!
It's simple better range, and per shot damage, vs faster fire rate, and more ammo.
That is correct. In a nutshell, that is the whole difference.
I know it's a bit late. Not just that there is one major downside to xbows in field battles all the bows need to arch fire over infantry heads while the crossbows need a more direct line of fire as the lines get closer and meet. Attacking a feif I prefer bow men but for defense xbows all the way when they bend over to reload they dodge alot of incoming fire while the archers just sit there and take it
Crossbows dont actually have better range. They start shooting farther away, but they will miss most of their shots at that range. Get a bit closer, just enough for the archers to start shooting, and at that range the archers win
Used only Boar Champions and Vlandian Traders/militia that i liberated/captured and they made their work well until i leveled up enough trade/Smithing and get enough renown to create my own Kingdom.
Now i've mostly taken Calradia but my Capital still keep a core of Boar guys in Memory of the old days.
I have found that a good block of Vlandian Sharpshooters and a decent heavy cavalry charge is all you need to win in this game.
This is true. One of the most reliable battle tactics is the central crossbowman block supported by heavy cavalry.
I love crossbow units because in my opinion have more advantages. Not to mention I think they look better than many of the bowman.
Another thing with the Sword Sisters, they don't need a horse in order to upgrade to cavalry
Definitely an advantage.
Is it because they are mercs?
I came into this video thinking "are there even 5 tier 5 crossbowmen in the game to be ranked" and, as it turns out, there arent
I knew it wouldn't be long before we had the Crossbowman answers. Thanks for this.
Glad to help!
Imagine if we got shieldwalls where spears would poke from inside like in the roman empire! 😍
Pretty much everywhere used that strategy. In fact for a good portion of their history most formations used large shields and short swords. Still spear and shirld troops just not the main infantry.
You know what i would like to see. A full series about all the specific troop armor specs for each faction.
That's a great suggestion. I think i will look into that.
👀 😎
I always preferred crossbows in warband because the sharpshooters were almost as good in melee as the Sargents. Cavalry charge in and don't charge out.
Well thats the fians now
I love your videos but I have a serious question regarding how you collect your data to determine the ranking system.
Do you base your decision solely on the listed stats or do you do actual simulation and campaign battles?
Because in my experience there are units who have good stats on paper, but that doesn't necessarily translate into actual gameplay, and vice versa.
Prime example is the Aserai veteran solider, literal trash with their slow sword compared to alternatives.
It's both. I use the visible stats and equipment to decide who to test, and then i perform a lot of tests. Both simulated battles, and battles that i personally control. Because, some troops perform poorly in simulation, but are actually very effective when strategically controlled. I weight all of the data differently, to try to get an average, and i use the average to rank them.
This channel is underrated
Great video! I like crossbow troops better than regular archers if I'm trying to keep my army small because they can double a halfway decent infantry, you just have to micromanage when to have them hold fire, just like skirmish infantry. You can't let them shoot wily Nily at long range targets and waste ammo, but a mid to close range volley can be devastating and the armor penetration and damage to horses is pretty good too.
I agree. I typically focus on crossbowmen early in my empire playthroughs and Vlandia playthroughs for that very reason.
Great ur ass
YEET
YOTE
No golden boar , are they worse than sisters?
Sword Sisters are some of the best crossbow troops 🤣
I like the Boar troops, they are just too rare to be a whole lot of use in the game. It may take a little while, but you can get large groups of Sword sisters and Mercenary crossbowmen, the Boar troops are too limited for that.
Is there any benefit to crossbows vs bows?
Crossbows: higher damage, long range, capable in melee but have low ammo and shoot slowly. Bows: more ammo and shoot faster but are generally worse in melee and deal less damage to armored foes. Exception being the Battanian Fians who dominate the ranged category
The crossbows have some serious range!
@@LCInfantry Yeah, pretty much medieval sniper rifles, at least in Bannerlord
@@NMGSGaming yah I was really talking mainly about fians
Basicly they are safer units overall. They have shields and they get down to reload. Especially good in sieges. And they are shield infantry once they charge.
Their range advantage is only theoredical. They start shooting at a longer range than archers but miss almost everything and do little damage. Get a bit closer, to where archers start to shoot, and the archers do more damage there