I don't think you should have tested the archers against crossbowmen. The pavise shield in the game appears to be made out of titanium and carbon fibre because even Retinue Longbowmen can't beat Pavise Crossbow Militia.
+Snafu The Sniper even so its a very commonly used unit in multiplayer if they can field pavise 90% of the time people field pavise so its in this case not only between 2 different archer units but also compared to a very common unit in multiplayer
+FlipUltraHD It doesn't matter if Janissary Archers can beat other archers, because they're still overpriced and garbage compared to a much more cost-effective force of crossbows.
FlipUltraHD Fair enough. But the point still stands, and that is that it doesn't matter if archers can beat other archers because they're still bad in comparison to the far more effective crossbows.
I know a lot of you do not play multiplayer. Having played as the Turkish forces online a couple of times I can safely say that a combination of dismounted Sipahi lancers, Hashashim and Ottoman infantry make a sturdier front line than Janissanry heavy infantry. The combination of the defensive abilities of the dismounted Sipahi lancers, mixed with the aggressive cutting power of the Hashashim, supported by the Ottoman infantry with their bows and decent melee stats is a lot more effective.
I can agree, i used that kind of built for Turks. The Hashashim i put them on the flanks with one unit of cheap spearmen because it depends on how much money you have left. I'm still on the learning curve of army comps rn, but I can at least try making a good fight. I love the respect some players give to me when I do 1v1s or 2v2s.
I don't play turkey much, and I knoW this is fiVe yeaRs aGo but honestly, as soon as I can get Qapakulu i have no need for hashashim because Sipahis are pretty good defensive wise and so I just need to hold the liNe
The reason why people say that Janissary units are the best is because that was said at the time before all the patches, in which they were much stronger then.
I still prefer other units to use than expensive ones. Even cheap troops can do something. For example Ottoman inf. it was back when I played them in very cheesy ways because I make weird army comps.
As someone on the other side of Europe from Turkey... Janissaries ARE pretty badass: Well-equipped, well-disciplined, weird social ladder position of 'slave-knight'
Pixelated Apollo Well i am not one of the fanboys but i do agree that janissary inf and janissary archers needed a buff long time ago, to actually give some advantage to turks instead of spamming units that useless to win. don't know what the developers were on about how much i dislike the extreme love againts janissaries i do actually agree that they should have atleast something that gives them advantage and possibly victory againts lesser costing units.
I feel like Ottomon Infantry are ridiculously underrated. Yes there stats aren't amazing but that's not that point. They're archers AND line infantry. And they do a pretty decent job in both rolls.
Which is why I field them as Turks. Because they can be used as archers and inf. Turks at only good if u can field troops that aren't trash. I won a game just because of my ottoman inf. I used most of my ammo and charged holding choke points while my teammate backs me up with his expensive archers and troops. It was a siege battle Me as Turks. My bud as France which is pretty strong for defending. Then we were up against England and Spain. Except they played not so good.... Their elite inf. got rekted by my Bud's crossbows.
The thing is that by trying to be both they’re not fantastic at either, while being just as vulnerable to cavalry as any other infantry unit. They’re not great. The Turks are probably the worst faction in vanilla medieval 2
@@er4din903 not really... the worst the Timrids are probably the worst and the Mongols cuz nobody I mean nobody plays them from what I've seen. And Mongols don't have the strong infantry to go against armored knights. The Timrids only relies on elephants and horses aswell since they both have mainly spear infantry. Turks are not top tier but they atleast can contend if you pick the right troops. Ottoman infantry not the best but their cost effectiveness depends on how you use em like every other units. If this was the crusades multi-player the turks get a newer unit I don't know what their called but their like this melee infantry I don't remember I haven't touched the game in awhile. But yeah Turks aren't top tier but that doesn't mean they suck especially if I can pull something off as winning in a siege. Their probably the most versatile unit aside from Guard Archers from the byzantine who are also a great unit on high money games due to they can fight in combat. If I asked other people "Janisarries or Ottoman infantry if your playing as turks" most wpuld pick Ottoman infantry even if they aren't winning the skirmish they have a small shield that adds to their armor stats while the janisarries don't have a small round shield to make up for their overpriced purchase.
Janissary archers are alright but I prefer ottoman infantry instead, seeing as they have better armour stats and can be used as a melee unit to support your spears or heavy infantry when needed depending on the situation.
@@houseking9211 they are and you don't have to worry about how poor their combat is, since they can hold on their own like the Byzantine guard archers.
From my experience janissary heavy infantry is highly effective in castle battles rather than open field.It may sound unusual. The plus point is they have high moral and stamina which decreased the possibility rate of routing.
Easy explanation. Feudal have shield, so alabard charge is neutralized. Then, in close combat, their sword has serious advantadge. You should try feudal against chivalry, and jenizard against the same chivalry, and compare results.
+Gustavo Santos thats like saying at the start of the battle ok im using jannisary inf dont bring units with shields ok? ok deal the test you speak of is too much set up the best test is on equal terms you might as well give the janisary the hill advantage they will have a better chance
@@koreancowboy42 debatable the reason sword and shield units tend to win is because melee defense skill has effect on bock frequency making it so al 2 handed weapons cant land any hits on them unless its 2 models vs 1 model giving ridiculous battle outcomes where a unit with double the attack value can barely kill 10% of a sword wielding unit this is why units like dismounted english knights wich are supposed to absolutly annihilate dismounted feudal knights almost always lose whilst their stats would suggest they should be shredding them, its not necessarily sword infantry being broken tho just that two handers are almost as badly implemented as pikes.
The problem with stating that crossbows categorically outperform bows (within the game, naturally), based on pitting the two against each other, is that it doesn't take into account the wide variety of targets they will be facing in your usual field battle. Whilst I would concede that crossbows in general outperforms bows on a volley-to-volley basis, the higher fire-rate (and subsequently quicker response-time) does mean that the bows are (in my experience) more efficient in targeting (light) cavalry raids and massed, non-knight infantry. I'd much prefer, say, Mongol Infantry over Pavise Crossbows if I face off against Scotland, reliant on light infantry, or Hungary/the Seljuks where Horse Archers are the order of the day.
Though crossbows are superior with AP attack. In this he could've gotten a bow unit like guard archers, Scots guard, Sherwood archers, and any other archers unit except crossbows.
The best unit value I've found Woodsmen to be. They cost around 170 and they pierce armor. They have no armor though, so they get destroyed by ranged attacks.
I used to use JHF but then in a battle they lost to dismounted dvor. Now i used Dismounted Sipahi Lancers with upgrades because they can ACTUALLY do something unlike the crappy JHF.
Look, I'm no janissary fanboy, but putting them against pavise crossbowmen way a little unfair IMO. Pavise crossbowmen are made for countering other ranged units, it was no suprise that they won. The janissaries shoot faster, can use fire arrows, and deploy stakes (if I'm not silly and don't know what I'm taking about). That gives you more options in battle, and since they have stakes you can use your cav more liberally in the early stages of the battle.
I agree that the archer fight may have been slightly unfair, the crossbow militia also have added ranged armour due to their back shields and the janissary archers in certain situations may prevail when special abilities are used.
You need to test this with another archer unit not crobows and NOT PAVISE CROSBOWS PAVISE CROSBOWS HAVE SHIELDS ON THEIR BACK MAKING THEM ALMOST INVINCIBLE EHILE Reloading
At that cost the cheaper pavise crossbowmen should still get beaten. The pavise crossbowmen do not just outperform the Janissary archers in a skirmish against other missiles. They are better against heavy infantry and cavalry. Archers are obsolete much to my disappointment.
Janissary archers costs more because they can use spikes against cavalry witch is really good when mongols invade . Also , they have large amount of ammunition , again is very good at the walls. Crossbowmen are different than arrchers
I was looking for Janissary pic too ! Also he is ot fair with the heavy infantry, because I would to see how well the dismounted knight fair against cav....
janassary heavy infantry is good for suporting then main janassary core is the musketers in a late period battle. the musketers dominate the heavy cavalry is behind the musketers to protect them from enemy cavalry and if infantry attacks your cav charge head on into them and then retreats and if enemy cavalry attacks your cav charge the cav and the heavy infantry follows in you regroup the musketers and then withdraws the cav and repeats the process.
doesn't this kinda make sense tho? I mean they designed the game around western mediaval nations having heavier more sturdy units, while the eastern nations rely upon mobility. I'll give you that those eastern units should have more charge bonus or something to make up for the lack of that standing power. Another thing you got light armored archer units fighting against crossbow units that have AP damage and are pelting them at point blank range, what do you expect to happen?
@@abdallaha92 it's not worth it, since Byzantine guard archers, Mongol Inf. are too good and better. I wouldn't compare the Janissary archers to Scots Guard, Sherwood archers, Retiune archers, etc. Like Janissary archers might win against desert archers, but will lose to other archers or crossbow units. Though comparing Janissary musketeers against other musketeers unit will be interesting lolz.
Personally, I think that Ireland's Muire are really good! I know they are in the Britannia Expansion but still. Those boys send other units running for their lives haha. Maybe me being Irish might influence me haha I don't know just having used them online I found them really a very good unit!
As an Englishman I also agree that the Muire are a formidable unit to come up against. They are especially good in sieges, where the streets and walls make their numbers moot.
The reason Jan. archers are expensive is that they can lay stakes, and they have very high melee stats. With 10 attack and 8 melee defense, they can go toe to toe with a lot of the mid-strength melee infantry. The stakes prevent cavalry from crushing them; a lucky player with light cavalry can ruin pavise crossbowmen's day. They are very poorly optimized against units with a high shield stat, due to being archers without AP, and are not great in a firefight due to their lack of shields. If you want Turkish units that can outshoot their enemies, you go with Ottoman archers and of course musketeers.
***** Its all wasted energy. Some people cannot be helped. Fortunately, none of them play online so do not have to witness their Janissaries get demolished by other heavy infantry.
juan juan No stfu stop talking out of your ass, as a Turk living in the Netherlands I agree that Turkish people are nationalists but don't lie that we are directing hate towards kurds. Erdogan is actualy kind of hated because of how often he supports kurds during his speaches but he absolutely hates the kurdish terrorist groupes and rightfully so ( and any other terrorist group ). One of my best friends here is a kurd and we both agree that terrorism is never going to help the kurds get their country back. the kurdish terrorist groupes are the biggest reason behind the hate between turks and kurds. Don't compare every single person you hate to hitler you fucking twat. And the explanation behind why these turks are so butthurt is because janisaries were legendary forces from old times, but this is just a game no reason to get butthurt. Most of these turks hating probably haven't even played this game. The twohanded glitch fucks the jhi combat effectivenes pretty hard plus they are just way to expensive for their stats. Here you'l here it from a turk who actualy plays this game, the janisary heavy infantry in medieval 2 are trash and the janisary archers aren't that great either i prefer the ottoman infantry over both of these units. At least the janisary gunners are pretty good. But in vanilla multiplayer the Turks are just not a great faction to play as. At least they are a very different faction to play in campaign, hell the blitz world records was done as the turks. I probably talked way to much since only 2 or 3 people are going to read this. Just know that most of the butthurt turks haven't even played this game and are blinded by nationalism.
by the way, there's something strange,years and years ago i did every test and the janissery heavy inf lost only against swiss guard, dismounted conquistadores and venetian heavy inf....it's strange that they cannot even beat dismounted feudal knights which are only my guinea pigs for personalized battles XD
Especially on the topic of Janissary and the Gothic units: Janissary is for DEFENSIVE purposes, as they are halberdiers. GOTHIC KNIGHTS are used on the flank, that's the ENTIRE purpose of that kind of unit, a "shock infantry". Janissary hold the line and the Gothic Knights are for flanks.
Except Janissaries don't hold the line at all. And 800+ florins for a purely flanking unit, something every other heavy infantry can do for less, is not cost effective at all. Anything both these units can do can be done better by cheaper units.
While I would not contest the point that pav xbows are a more cost effective unit in pitch, this test is very unfair. The pav xbow is designed for prolonged skirmish against other archers, so of course it will be more cost effective against jan archers. The test is about as fair as running expensive knights into the front of a cheap spear wall and saying the pikemen are a better unit in this game. There are units other than the opponents skirmishers that can be fired at in a pitch battle. Why not line up a unit of infantry at maximum range for each unit to shot at and see which takes more casualties? That would be a better test of firepower. This test only proved that the pavise shiled works, which is only useful against arrows. You could have also tested their ability to survive in melee. All this being said I would concur that the pav xbow is more cost efficient option to put into ones pitch army, but that doesn't make the jan archer bad.
Nice vid, but a few tweaks you could've taken into consideration. For the archers it would be better to have first the pavise on a medium wall shooting at a spread unit of feudal knights or something. Time how long it took and look at their mood /morale after they killed them all. Do the same with janisary archers then compare. For the infantry the janisary are glitched because they are two handed, unless you have a fixed version then its weird how they did so bad. Oh and pls make a top ten gunner series, light cavalry and ships. That will be epic
There's no point in using a halberd unit in an open battle and without naffatun against the feudal knights. Janissary archers cannot use stakes against crossbowmen. These units have to be used together with other units in appropriate ways to be effective. One on one may seem fair but is inappropriate for the Turks and Egyptians. 840 for the Janissary infantry is worth it if you have access to naffatun by playing the Turks. In most of your battles the Turks usually win or cause the most casualties.
This is so weird. I just did my own tests after seeing this video, since I always saw Jannisary Heavies kicking ass. And that's what I kept seeing: I tested them 1 on 1 vs. Armoured Swordsmen, Varangian Guard, Venetian Heavy Infantry, and English Dismounted Knights. They won all engagements. I did them all on Grassy Plains and didn't fiddle with formation, upgrades, nothing. Just clicked an attack order. I'm confused. Is this like the M2TW version of that White/Gold-Blue/Black dress?
James Brookes i did the same with AI very hard difficulty the Jannisary heavy inf. won some, form 10-5 on the list. i know they are are not the best cause the game nerfed them to shit but i would say they are a waste. plus in multiplayer battle you use tactics and the Jannisaries aren't good alone. Im Turkish myself and think they are not the best unit, but they r not bad if u know how to use them.
The Knights are a counter with their swords as compared to the spears [Halberd is under 'spears'] should have tested them against cavalry,spears can't do much when they don't have space to stab or swing in such close quarters.
I replayed this battle on custom mode between dismounted feudal knights and janissary heavy infantries (same experience, same amount). The results were very different than yours. At the end of the battle, Janissary Heavy Infantries had %50 loss and Dismounted Feudal Knights had %95 loss :((((
I know this comes very late, but when I tested JHI (unit size large) against Feudal Knights AI I gave an attack order the moment the battle started and they absolutely butchered the Feudal Knights on the charge (The AI turned around few moments afterwards but the JHI could have easily defeated them with 75% left or so). But when I switched roles, let the Feudal Knights again charge, the moment the battle begun, the AI as always walked firsat and the charged the last few meters and now the result was similar to the one shown in the video. Maybe it‘s the charge distance, who plays a role
THIS IS ABSURD! Their armor is wrong, their weapons are wrong! Halberds? What are they halberdiers? What the hell is this crap?!? I dont know what game this is, but the developers clearly havent done their research. The early janissaries used a curved sabre called a yatagan, it was their trademark and it was very deadly. They sometimes used other melle weapons such as maces, one handed axes and a bow. I've never read or heard of a chronicle ottoman, byzantine, arabic or otherwise, mentioning janissaries doing battle with spears or halberds. That part was saved for more expendable troops of the ottoman empire. This is espetially true for the Halberd as it is a well known european weapon. That's like making a game with norman knights and giving them sabres, camels and saracen armor. it's just plain wrong. They spend their entire life perfecting their combat abillities and were legindary marskman and hand to hand warriors. After the XV century they adapted to using muskets, which may have been a mistake since muskets were not very accurate like all early gunpowder weapons. They were just trying to keep up with the times.
+knifed91 in mtw2 the turks are specialized in horse archery and foot archery. crossbows are overpowered in this game *cough* and in the other total war games *cough*
+Arda Basturk how about telling the full scoop. Ya'know, the part about the Polish being outnumbered 3-1? Yaaaaa it doesn't show Turkish superiority there.
lol those poor janissary's just got absolutely rekt. nise job on the vid and did you end up going with shadowplay in the end ? or did you find a better alternative ?
so much sass lol. Oh and by the way could you maybe do a top ten spear units video. I know that they are not used very often in online battles but I just think that it would make for an interesting video.
The game launched with a bug where shields stats in melee where 0. The game was balanced around that. When they fixed the bug it made any unit without a shield useless in melee
Lol, after watching the ottomans in Kings and Generals, I think they did it for historical reasons. You get at the battle of Eger and Szigtvar where the ottomans suffered very high casualties (Eger, they lost, Szigtvar, costly victory) Quantity over quality, like in real life
Of course the janissary heavy infantry are being raped by the feudal knights. They're spearmen/halberds. It's not a secret in any Total War game that swordsmen are always an advantage over spearmen. Face the janissary heavy infantry against other spear or cavalry units. Janissary archers are very good at melee. After they have run out of arrows they can be put to very good use against spearmen.
you shouldnt take jannisaries in vanilla. But i tried them in the kingdoms expansion. They worth their cost. Ottoman Infantry is better than jannisary archers. The have some fancy shields and nice armor. Ottoman infantry is a great choice at defence battles.
These are one of the completely inexplicable units. Since they're so expensive, you'd think that they can at least do something other units can't. But they're just terrible. There's no logic behind them. Edit: They somehow thrashed a unit of Dismounted Noble Knights, then the second time they narrowly lost.
You have to put Janissary heavy infantry in loose formation. Thats what you have to do with all two handed weapon units. They will win every infantry exept dismounted conquistadors and Venetian heavy infantry, and not every time. Many times Janissary will win even them. But they are very vulnerable aganst mounted knights.
sure, but in a campaign, the Upkeep no longer gives the same result: for 10,000 florins of upkeep, you have 44 knight battalions, whereas you'll have 57 Jenissary battalions. This makes your battle invalid, as you have to put 4 battalions against 6 for it to be valid. A unit is not evaluated on its personal capacity, but on the whole army, which makes the Jenissary more effective than the chevalier on the long term in campaign (you have more of them with their anti-armor bonuses and better morale).
Is this with the mods that fix the errors with two handed weapon animations? Because when this game came out it became hated in the community for these types of flaws. I think you will experience very different things if you apply the mod that fixes the animations.
Janissary Heavies just have such a crap stat line for shock infantry, they are more along the lines of a Swiss Guard or something. I sometimes wonder if they were originally supposed to be a halberd spear wall unit but then got changed at the last minute and they forgot to adjust their stats to suit.
I feel like devs did that intentionally to piss off nationalist turks xD PS, through they fixed them in the kingdoms expansion, they are pretty good in that.
As time progressed, the Janissaries became less competitive. The Sultan had a never ending hunger for more men so he finally opened the corps to Muslims. They were then allowed to marry and had greater power. The Sultan finally took control and blasted them into eternity in 1820. Those that survived were then beheaded and the Janissary corps came to an end. The Sultans also became weak staying in the boudoir rather than participating in campaigns.
about janissary inf you are right. but about archers i dont think so, janissarys have stakes and much bigger range, also lets not forget that archers are much batter on uneven ground. damage output for crossbowmen is unbelievable and that is all what was tested.
To be fair. Before the 2 handed glitch the Janissary would completely destroy any other armored unit. After the glitch yes they are horrible (just like any other 2 handed unit).
I think Swiss guards are the best halberdiers in the game. Spear wall is really good at city warfare. But, for the best infantry, Scottish noble pikemen are like Alexander's phalangists. They butcher even conquistadors in spear wall formation. Btw, Turk here.
I don't think they count as infantry. When you say infantry people are gonna think melee infantry like sword and shield. I think you mean the best pike unit. Yeah the Scottish is pretty good with pikes. Swiss guards are pretty good if you can keep them alive long enough from archers and crossbowmen. The best infantry would be the venetian heavy infantry they beat every other melee infantry note this is on a different category. Apollo and other people in a video did tests when doing their top 10
Have you ever tested this with both sides with full upgrades? I do my 1v1 tests that way and they do always seem to come out on top. I even tried it on Stainless Steel 6.4 and the only unit that beat them was a fully upgraded unit of Gothic Knights (and it was majorly close!) & Foot Ritterbrüders also did well (but lost). Again that was in a battle on the Grassy Plains map with full upgrades on both units involved. Might be something worth checking out. All in all, I enjoy your videos and keep up the good work :)
Its wrong to compare missiile units only for missile duel purposes. See which of them would perform best against advancing cavalry, in the limited time before contact.
Ottoman infantry aren't bad on walls but yeah I rarely seen the Turks in a online battle. Their lack of good infantry to handle the hand to hand fighting.
The Prodigy the Portuguese arquebusiers are good in melee but have shorter range than the janissary musketeers. That’s why the janissary and Cossack musketeers are the best musket units in the game. There’s no unit called “Portuguese Musketeers.” It’s instead called “Portuguese Arquebusiers” because they had an arquebus rather than a musket.
@@yagzyalcntas553 yep, plus that the Janissary musketeers can shoot rank, unless other factions can do it too? Cuz when I use Turks, their musketeers seem to do fire by rank.
Janisarry infantry are flexible units. Light armor and high stamina makes them much better in prolonged battles. They can flank very fast and can fill multiple roles including chase. You have to look the armies as whole. They perfectly match with cavalary archer heavy army composition.
+Ali Alemdaroğlu Feudal Knights have 22 defence, janissary heavy inf have 12. Feudal knights also have high stamina and good moreale. Any unit can flank, and I don't know what you mean very fast, unless you're talking of the stupid AI. Any infantry is good against stationary cav. You're just not wanting to see things how they are.
+lostin nepal i know that they are not as good as they were in mtw 1 however, the holly lands are located at desert so lighter armor is an advantage (units tire slower with light armor) in the campaign versus the crusading armies. Therefore they fit for the purpose in the game although not in multiplayer battles.
Ali Alemdaroğlu I'm only talking in multyplayer. And don't get me wrong, the janissary heavy infantry aren't that bad, but the cost-efectiveness of them is just terrible. For defending siegs, I've learn from experience, they can hold the line for some time, and combined with a great unit like Dismonted Christian Guard that will hold the line forever, the janissary heavy infanrty have more space to pierce through armour. Though I like the janissary heavy infantry, they are not cost-effective, not worth it. I just get like 2 of them when I play with the turks because of their meaning
Did the people who said that the janissary troops are the best ever play online or campaign beyond easy difficulty? I like Ottoman history and wished they were better represented in this game, which is one of my favourites in the series, they deserved to be a power faction, But in THIS GAME it is a sad fact that they are not good. They do look good at least.
this test proves almost nothing, feudal knights counter spear units( jannisaries in our case) and archers are weak against crossbows, yet archers are really good at aiming and taking down light units while crossbows take down armored. you can't judge a fish by his ability to climb a tree
Janissary Heavy Infantry should be kick ass in this game! I don't really understand why they wouldn't. I've read a lot of shit about the Ottomans and Janissary Infantry fucking destroyed people!
I was playing an online battle against a player using Scotland and he did have knights and town militia (that was his mistake) as well as mounted knights with Highland Archers. I did have a few Jan. Heavy Infantry with some Jan. Musketeers and a few weak units. I won.
All the musketeers my friend. They out-range everything, but artillery, Scotland can bring and cause morale penalties against them. By the time the Janissary Heavy infantry made contact I bet the Scottish army was already wavering.
To also be fair, he had a few town militia that was in Schiltron. Plus, when I play Rome, I use Parthia over OP factions like Rome. So I'm used to playing with weaker factions. Now I could've just had good luck. If I fought you or say Pixie, I would lose cause you two could find ways to counter me more.
the Janissary in Medieval Total War 2 is literally innaccurate, there were no ottoman turks in the time Med2 Total War takes place and there were no janissaries as they were made by ottoman sultan Bayezid not by the seljuq turks
I agree with this video though, even in campaign they can be overrated when facing western european factions or any faction that focuses on heavy units, decided to spend ALOT of florins on a few armies that were Janissary based (with alot of good cavalry units of course they were the Turks) got flattened by a few average Holy Roman Imperial armies, might be my tactics but these are supposed to be the elite. Never again.
Again like I mentioned in your Gothic Knights video I suppose it's how you use them that make them good, don't necessarily know how to use them in such a way that they may be the "best in the game" if they don't succeed in the most basic of tasks in battle but I'm sure there's a particular method to using them.
To late comment but whatever XD. All the two-handed military soldiers suffers a bug that makes them attack the slowest possible that's the reason why all those units always lose against almost all kinds of infantry. Some time later in TWCenter some user fix this bug reducing the frames of the attack animation-lenght. That's why the two-handed only works "well" in the autoresolution because of their stats mostly.
The Varangians are better with the two handed weapons bug or not I put Jens vs dismounted feudal knights and they lost, I put varangian guard they lose again due to the bug but they inflict much heavier casualties The Jens lose to feudal knights (on horseback) but the Varangians win. They are clearly better
Is there a general difference between archers and crossbowmen? Beside rate of fire and damage of course. Do archers shoot better in high arc shots but crossbowmen better in flat direct shots?
alright lets do this, 'keep in mind' that u should read the discriptions of units before playing, those feudals knights have no chance against the hordes of mongols, but put the jennissary infantry at the enterance of your castle gate or bridge, they can slay horseman allday long, that is why they are the best, jennissary archers are the best archers becouse of their penetration bonus to heavy armor, they may not win against 1v1 but they are more affective against the units that cost way way more than their production cost
It's not a fair comparison. There is no unit equivalent to Feudal Knight in the Turks. As a shield-bearing, defensive infantry unit. You should compare the Janissaries with Dismounted Noble Knights or Dismounted English Knights. The equivalent of Feudal Knights, Hashashim normally. Of course, the game makers could not simulate history as real. Janissaries appeared after 1360. The Persian immortals in ancient times were the best, and in the middle ages the Janissaries were the best. In fact, the Janissary was a much more powerful and feared military unit. This continued until the end of the 1600s.
They were one of the best than the nerf came. All two handed units were attacking slower meaning after the charge these units had to defend always. This makes these unit shock troops. High charge high damage nice armour they are like knights with lances without horses now. Which is stupid. Before the nerf they were my favorite unit.. Janissary archers always sucked though. I like the ottoman infantry(archers) more at least they have a shield they can fight in melee too.
Halberdiers were misused but even so if you balanced the cost in florins you can get practically 2 units of feudal knights at the cost of one unit of Janissary heavies. Still didn't have to be a dick about it, but you're no less correct. Janissary archers get flaming missiles and have good morale so they could be situationally better than the pavise but I'd never take situational efficacy over general efficacy.
Please make another video testing each against a more similar unit the of course the archers are gonna lose to crossbows in a standup fight. For the most part archers are better simply because they have higher rate of fire. Crossbows are op and you know it.
Thats the point though, if youre using these in an online battle why would you bring them if someones bringing crossbows? Theyre cheaper and more effective
@@stevenh9413 downfall of crossbowmen is their morale. Not saying crossbows aren't bad but honestly if your playing factions that only have bows you can still win if you plan and manage to do something. Plus it depends whether it's on pitch battle or sieges. Bows are still rather effective even during the age of crossbows.
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
I don't think you should have tested the archers against crossbowmen. The pavise shield in the game appears to be made out of titanium and carbon fibre because even Retinue Longbowmen can't beat Pavise Crossbow Militia.
+FlipUltraHD The point of that fight was to prove that crossbows in general are just better than bows in general.
+Snafu The Sniper even so its a very commonly used unit in multiplayer if they can field pavise 90% of the time people field pavise
so its in this case not only between 2 different archer units but also compared to a very common unit in multiplayer
+FlipUltraHD It doesn't matter if Janissary Archers can beat other archers, because they're still overpriced and garbage compared to a much more cost-effective force of crossbows.
+Lord Commander
I never mentioned Janissary archers. By the way, Sherwood archers will beat them.
FlipUltraHD Fair enough. But the point still stands, and that is that it doesn't matter if archers can beat other archers because they're still bad in comparison to the far more effective crossbows.
I know a lot of you do not play multiplayer. Having played as the Turkish forces online a couple of times I can safely say that a combination of dismounted Sipahi lancers, Hashashim and Ottoman infantry make a sturdier front line than Janissanry heavy infantry. The combination of the defensive abilities of the dismounted Sipahi lancers, mixed with the aggressive cutting power of the Hashashim, supported by the Ottoman infantry with their bows and decent melee stats is a lot more effective.
I can agree, i used that kind of built for Turks. The Hashashim i put them on the flanks with one unit of cheap spearmen because it depends on how much money you have left. I'm still on the learning curve of army comps rn, but I can at least try making a good fight. I love the respect some players give to me when I do 1v1s or 2v2s.
I don't play turkey much, and I knoW this is fiVe yeaRs aGo but honestly, as soon as I can get Qapakulu i have no need for hashashim because Sipahis are pretty good defensive wise and so I just need to hold the liNe
I use Janissary heavy infantry for holding the line, because they have good morale and stamina.
The reason why people say that Janissary units are the best is because that was said at the time before all the patches, in which they were much stronger then.
Exactly. They used to be amazing, not anymore though
well I hope this video clears things up
I still prefer other units to use than expensive ones. Even cheap troops can do something. For example Ottoman inf. it was back when I played them in very cheesy ways because I make weird army comps.
@@koreancowboy42
Good tactics can make up for weaknesses in a roster.. no doubt at all.
@@rbarnes4076 yep
It seems like people love the Janissary units due to their nationalism and naught much else.
As someone on the other side of Europe from Turkey... Janissaries ARE pretty badass: Well-equipped, well-disciplined, weird social ladder position of 'slave-knight'
Joshua Sweetvale Yeah they were quite good IRL but not in this game.
And jenissaries weren't even turks xd
@@thletrelas3817 but teached by turks
@@AGiantPie they were good in the game but the devs nerfed them maybe people with a crusader profile pic were whining alot about them
The amount of Turks in the comments section being pissed is just comical :D
Im just talking about the units in the game. Not real life lol
Pixelated Apollo
And 80% of their comments are "Go learn history bro" xD
haha yeah.
Pixelated Apollo Well i am not one of the fanboys but i do agree that janissary inf and janissary archers needed a buff long time ago, to actually give some advantage to turks instead of spamming units that useless to win.
don't know what the developers were on about how much i dislike the extreme love againts janissaries i do actually agree that they should have atleast something that gives them advantage and possibly victory againts lesser costing units.
yeah, they were really good when the game first released
I feel like Ottomon Infantry are ridiculously underrated. Yes there stats aren't amazing but that's not that point. They're archers AND line infantry. And they do a pretty decent job in both rolls.
Which is why I field them as Turks. Because they can be used as archers and inf. Turks at only good if u can field troops that aren't trash. I won a game just because of my ottoman inf. I used most of my ammo and charged holding choke points while my teammate backs me up with his expensive archers and troops.
It was a siege battle
Me as Turks.
My bud as France which is pretty strong for defending.
Then we were up against England and Spain. Except they played not so good.... Their elite inf. got rekted by my Bud's crossbows.
The thing is that by trying to be both they’re not fantastic at either, while being just as vulnerable to cavalry as any other infantry unit. They’re not great. The Turks are probably the worst faction in vanilla medieval 2
@@er4din903 not really... the worst the Timrids are probably the worst and the Mongols cuz nobody I mean nobody plays them from what I've seen. And Mongols don't have the strong infantry to go against armored knights. The Timrids only relies on elephants and horses aswell since they both have mainly spear infantry.
Turks are not top tier but they atleast can contend if you pick the right troops.
Ottoman infantry not the best but their cost effectiveness depends on how you use em like every other units. If this was the crusades multi-player the turks get a newer unit I don't know what their called but their like this melee infantry I don't remember I haven't touched the game in awhile. But yeah Turks aren't top tier but that doesn't mean they suck especially if I can pull something off as winning in a siege.
Their probably the most versatile unit aside from Guard Archers from the byzantine who are also a great unit on high money games due to they can fight in combat. If I asked other people "Janisarries or Ottoman infantry if your playing as turks" most wpuld pick Ottoman infantry even if they aren't winning the skirmish they have a small shield that adds to their armor stats while the janisarries don't have a small round shield to make up for their overpriced purchase.
@@koreancowboy42the vanilla beyond mod does a lot more justice to the Islamic and Christian orthodox factions
What did ot do my friend ?@@alexkerr5804
janissary heavy inf in MTW1 were beast. they had the halberd and a gigantic shield. quite stupid but they were a joy to behold.
Janissary archers are alright but I prefer ottoman infantry instead, seeing as they have better armour stats and can be used as a melee unit to support your spears or heavy infantry when needed depending on the situation.
+SwedishLandsknekt Ottoman inf would do better in mele then Janiss havy inf vs feudals + they have bows.
+SwedishLandsknekt Definately Ottoman infantry over Janissary Archers
yeah, Ottoman inf is just so much better lol
@@houseking9211 they are and you don't have to worry about how poor their combat is, since they can hold on their own like the Byzantine guard archers.
From my experience janissary heavy infantry is highly effective in castle battles rather than open field.It may sound unusual. The plus point is they have high moral and stamina which decreased the possibility rate of routing.
Easy explanation. Feudal have shield, so alabard charge is neutralized. Then, in close combat, their sword has serious advantadge. You should try feudal against chivalry, and jenizard against the same chivalry, and compare results.
+Gustavo Santos what about buying real spear units instead :D -what comes next - the archers should fight each other in meele ?!
+Gustavo Santos thats like saying at the start of the battle
ok im using jannisary inf dont bring units with shields ok? ok deal
the test you speak of is too much set up the best test is on equal terms
you might as well give the janisary the hill advantage they will have a better chance
They need to nerf shield and sword units
@@RocketHarry865 no they don't dude.
They are balanced already.
@@koreancowboy42 debatable the reason sword and shield units tend to win is because melee defense skill has effect on bock frequency making it so al 2 handed weapons cant land any hits on them unless its 2 models vs 1 model giving ridiculous battle outcomes where a unit with double the attack value can barely kill 10% of a sword wielding unit this is why units like dismounted english knights wich are supposed to absolutly annihilate dismounted feudal knights almost always lose whilst their stats would suggest they should be shredding them, its not necessarily sword infantry being broken tho just that two handers are almost as badly implemented as pikes.
When this game was not on steam, I did every test. Janissaries beat every one of them except the hashashins. After the patches it must have changed.
The problem with stating that crossbows categorically outperform bows (within the game, naturally), based on pitting the two against each other, is that it doesn't take into account the wide variety of targets they will be facing in your usual field battle. Whilst I would concede that crossbows in general outperforms bows on a volley-to-volley basis, the higher fire-rate (and subsequently quicker response-time) does mean that the bows are (in my experience) more efficient in targeting (light) cavalry raids and massed, non-knight infantry. I'd much prefer, say, Mongol Infantry over Pavise Crossbows if I face off against Scotland, reliant on light infantry, or Hungary/the Seljuks where Horse Archers are the order of the day.
Though crossbows are superior with AP attack. In this he could've gotten a bow unit like guard archers, Scots guard, Sherwood archers, and any other archers unit except crossbows.
apollo: the feudal knight cultist, fanatic, and extremist
Nope, that's me. Accept the way of the feudal knight.
hahah
I prefer knight/crusader units myself
giorgi lobjanidze Camel gunnerz 4 life.
+Captain Invisible Accept the way of the dismounted chivalric knight. That's right, one extra defence.
The best unit value I've found Woodsmen to be. They cost around 170 and they pierce armor. They have no armor though, so they get destroyed by ranged attacks.
I used to use JHF but then in a battle they lost to dismounted dvor. Now i used Dismounted Sipahi Lancers with upgrades because they can ACTUALLY do something unlike the crappy JHF.
6:18 I could not tell chu how many times men have died to mah sweet dismounted Dvor.
Look, I'm no janissary fanboy, but putting them against pavise crossbowmen way a little unfair IMO. Pavise crossbowmen are made for countering other ranged units, it was no suprise that they won. The janissaries shoot faster, can use fire arrows, and deploy stakes (if I'm not silly and don't know what I'm taking about). That gives you more options in battle, and since they have stakes you can use your cav more liberally in the early stages of the battle.
that's the point, they are very easily countered by cheaper units that can be brought in bulk
I agree that the archer fight may have been slightly unfair, the crossbow militia also have added ranged armour due to their back shields and the janissary archers in certain situations may prevail when special abilities are used.
You need to test this with another archer unit not crobows and NOT PAVISE CROSBOWS PAVISE CROSBOWS HAVE SHIELDS ON THEIR BACK MAKING THEM ALMOST INVINCIBLE EHILE Reloading
At that cost the cheaper pavise crossbowmen should still get beaten. The pavise crossbowmen do not just outperform the Janissary archers in a skirmish against other missiles. They are better against heavy infantry and cavalry. Archers are obsolete much to my disappointment.
The reason I showed the xbows fight was because of my 10 ten archers list. Everyone said Janissary archers were #1 over all. That just not true
Janissary archers costs more because they can use spikes against cavalry witch is really good when mongols invade . Also , they have large amount of ammunition , again is very good at the walls. Crossbowmen are different than arrchers
I swear Turks just look up Turkish key words in UA-cam, then go the videos to talk about great (not really) they are.
Well as a Turkish, I can confirm that cause I do
I was looking for Janissary pic too !
Also he is ot fair with the heavy infantry, because I would to see how well the dismounted knight fair against cav....
Daniel W. Still gretaer than most of european nations who filled their history with things that are not real at all.
everybody already knows the dismounted christian guard is the best infantry and the peasant crossbows are basically snipers.
janassary heavy infantry is good for suporting then main janassary core is the musketers in a late period battle.
the musketers dominate the heavy cavalry is behind the musketers to protect them from enemy cavalry and if infantry attacks your cav charge head on into them and then retreats and if enemy cavalry attacks your cav charge the cav and the heavy infantry follows in you regroup the musketers and then withdraws the cav and repeats the process.
apollo, you should have tested the Janissary archers against other composit bows
+Monkey Cookie why?
doesn't this kinda make sense tho? I mean they designed the game around western mediaval nations having heavier more sturdy units, while the eastern nations rely upon mobility. I'll give you that those eastern units should have more charge bonus or something to make up for the lack of that standing power.
Another thing you got light armored archer units fighting against crossbow units that have AP damage and are pelting them at point blank range, what do you expect to happen?
@@abdallaha92 it's not worth it, since Byzantine guard archers, Mongol Inf. are too good and better. I wouldn't compare the Janissary archers to Scots Guard, Sherwood archers, Retiune archers, etc. Like Janissary archers might win against desert archers, but will lose to other archers or crossbow units. Though comparing Janissary musketeers against other musketeers unit will be interesting lolz.
Personally, I think that Ireland's Muire are really good! I know they are in the Britannia Expansion but still. Those boys send other units running for their lives haha. Maybe me being Irish might influence me haha I don't know just having used them online I found them really a very good unit!
As an Englishman I also agree that the Muire are a formidable unit to come up against. They are especially good in sieges, where the streets and walls make their numbers moot.
The reason Jan. archers are expensive is that they can lay stakes, and they have very high melee stats. With 10 attack and 8 melee defense, they can go toe to toe with a lot of the mid-strength melee infantry. The stakes prevent cavalry from crushing them; a lucky player with light cavalry can ruin pavise crossbowmen's day.
They are very poorly optimized against units with a high shield stat, due to being archers without AP, and are not great in a firefight due to their lack of shields.
If you want Turkish units that can outshoot their enemies, you go with Ottoman archers and of course musketeers.
DIS TEST AIN'T FAIR! You have to let the janissaries charge the feudal knights from behind damn totally unsubscribing :P
***** Its all wasted energy. Some people cannot be helped. Fortunately, none of them play online so do not have to witness their Janissaries get demolished by other heavy infantry.
juan juan No stfu stop talking out of your ass, as a Turk living in the Netherlands I agree that Turkish people are nationalists but don't lie that we are directing hate towards kurds. Erdogan is actualy kind of hated because of how often he supports kurds during his speaches but he absolutely hates the kurdish terrorist groupes and rightfully so ( and any other terrorist group ). One of my best friends here is a kurd and we both agree that terrorism is never going to help the kurds get their country back. the kurdish terrorist groupes are the biggest reason behind the hate between turks and kurds.
Don't compare every single person you hate to hitler you fucking twat.
And the explanation behind why these turks are so butthurt is because janisaries were legendary forces from old times, but this is just a game no reason to get butthurt. Most of these turks hating probably haven't even played this game.
The twohanded glitch fucks the jhi combat effectivenes pretty hard plus they are just way to expensive for their stats.
Here you'l here it from a turk who actualy plays this game, the janisary heavy infantry in medieval 2 are trash and the janisary archers aren't that great either i prefer the ottoman infantry over both of these units. At least the janisary gunners are pretty good.
But in vanilla multiplayer the Turks are just not a great faction to play as. At least they are a very different faction to play in campaign, hell the blitz world records was done as the turks.
I probably talked way to much since only 2 or 3 people are going to read this. Just know that most of the butthurt turks haven't even played this game and are blinded by nationalism.
Angel Canseco
lol
by the way, there's something strange,years and years ago i did every test and the janissery heavy inf lost only against swiss guard, dismounted conquistadores and venetian heavy inf....it's strange that they cannot even beat dismounted feudal knights which are only my guinea pigs for personalized battles XD
Especially on the topic of Janissary and the Gothic units:
Janissary is for DEFENSIVE purposes, as they are halberdiers.
GOTHIC KNIGHTS are used on the flank, that's the ENTIRE purpose of that kind of unit, a "shock infantry". Janissary hold the line and the Gothic Knights are for flanks.
Except Janissaries don't hold the line at all. And 800+ florins for a purely flanking unit, something every other heavy infantry can do for less, is not cost effective at all.
Anything both these units can do can be done better by cheaper units.
No, they are supposed to beat DFK, the fixing of the shield bug made them severely underpowered.
Never played as the turks even in campaign.
if you play medieval 2 tw 1.0 they are best but after updates they are useless
While I would not contest the point that pav xbows are a more cost effective unit in pitch, this test is very unfair. The pav xbow is designed for prolonged skirmish against other archers, so of course it will be more cost effective against jan archers. The test is about as fair as running expensive knights into the front of a cheap spear wall and saying the pikemen are a better unit in this game.
There are units other than the opponents skirmishers that can be fired at in a pitch battle. Why not line up a unit of infantry at maximum range for each unit to shot at and see which takes more casualties? That would be a better test of firepower. This test only proved that the pavise shiled works, which is only useful against arrows. You could have also tested their ability to survive in melee. All this being said I would concur that the pav xbow is more cost efficient option to put into ones pitch army, but that doesn't make the jan archer bad.
these prices are a bit more balanced in Kingdoms campaign. Janissary Infantry cost 680, Archer like 640 or something like that... Musketeer 700.
Nice vid, but a few tweaks you could've taken into consideration. For the archers it would be better to have first the pavise on a medium wall shooting at a spread unit of feudal knights or something. Time how long it took and look at their mood /morale after they killed them all. Do the same with janisary archers then compare.
For the infantry the janisary are glitched because they are two handed, unless you have a fixed version then its weird how they did so bad.
Oh and pls make a top ten gunner series, light cavalry and ships. That will be epic
Best ships?? His ratings are for online battles...
There's no point in using a halberd unit in an open battle and without naffatun against the feudal knights. Janissary archers cannot use stakes against crossbowmen. These units have to be used together with other units in appropriate ways to be effective. One on one may seem fair but is inappropriate for the Turks and Egyptians. 840 for the Janissary infantry is worth it if you have access to naffatun by playing the Turks. In most of your battles the Turks usually win or cause the most casualties.
all the butthurt people in the comments though. lol
Yet I've held lines with Volgiers for entire battles....interesting.
yeah, but they have units that are 100% better and cheaper
This is so weird. I just did my own tests after seeing this video, since I always saw Jannisary Heavies kicking ass. And that's what I kept seeing: I tested them 1 on 1 vs. Armoured Swordsmen, Varangian Guard, Venetian Heavy Infantry, and English Dismounted Knights. They won all engagements. I did them all on Grassy Plains and didn't fiddle with formation, upgrades, nothing. Just clicked an attack order.
I'm confused. Is this like the M2TW version of that White/Gold-Blue/Black dress?
what patch do you have? Do you have the steam version?
Yeah, running the Steam version.
Did you do it against AI?
James Brookes What difficulty?
James Brookes i did the same with AI very hard difficulty the Jannisary heavy inf. won some, form 10-5 on the list. i know they are are not the best cause the game nerfed them to shit but i would say they are a waste. plus in multiplayer battle you use tactics and the Jannisaries aren't good alone. Im Turkish myself and think they are not the best unit, but they r not bad if u know how to use them.
The Knights are a counter with their swords as compared to the spears [Halberd is under 'spears'] should have tested them against cavalry,spears can't do much when they don't have space to stab or swing in such close quarters.
I replayed this battle on custom mode between dismounted feudal knights and janissary heavy infantries (same experience, same amount). The results were very different than yours. At the end of the battle, Janissary Heavy Infantries had %50 loss and Dismounted Feudal Knights had %95 loss :((((
I know this comes very late, but when I tested JHI (unit size large) against Feudal Knights AI I gave an attack order the moment the battle started and they absolutely butchered the Feudal Knights on the charge (The AI turned around few moments afterwards but the JHI could have easily defeated them with 75% left or so). But when I switched roles, let the Feudal Knights again charge, the moment the battle begun, the AI as always walked firsat and the charged the last few meters and now the result was similar to the one shown in the video. Maybe it‘s the charge distance, who plays a role
THIS IS ABSURD! Their armor is wrong, their weapons are wrong! Halberds? What are they halberdiers? What the hell is this crap?!? I dont know what game this is, but the developers clearly havent done their research. The early janissaries used a curved sabre called a yatagan, it was their trademark and it was very deadly. They sometimes used other melle weapons such as maces, one handed axes and a bow. I've never read or heard of a chronicle ottoman, byzantine, arabic or otherwise, mentioning janissaries doing battle with spears or halberds. That part was saved for more expendable troops of the ottoman empire. This is espetially true for the Halberd as it is a well known european weapon. That's like making a game with norman knights and giving them sabres, camels and saracen armor. it's just plain wrong. They spend their entire life perfecting their combat abillities and were legindary marskman and hand to hand warriors. After the XV century they adapted to using muskets, which may have been a mistake since muskets were not very accurate like all early gunpowder weapons. They were just trying to keep up with the times.
+knifed91 HARUMF! ABSURD, I TELL YOU!
+knifed91 in mtw2 the turks are specialized in horse archery and foot archery.
crossbows are overpowered in this game *cough* and in the other total war games *cough*
+Arda Basturk how about telling the full scoop. Ya'know, the part about the Polish being outnumbered 3-1? Yaaaaa it doesn't show Turkish superiority there.
Winged Hussars ftw!
you're so lame
lol those poor janissary's just got absolutely rekt. nise job on the vid and did you end up going with shadowplay in the end ? or did you find a better alternative ?
so much sass lol. Oh and by the way could you maybe do a top ten spear units video. I know that they are not used very often in online battles but I just think that it would make for an interesting video.
Or pikes, guns, art or horse archers?
:D
hahah its playful sass. And I going to make a top ten faction list soon
sass?
sass = sass as a noun - or a verb, meaning to talk in a cheeky way.
I Googled it.
Basically the fixing of the shield bug messed up the unit balance, essentially any unit without a shield is severely underpowered.
If you own the Kingdoms expansion, the two-handed weapons work much better.
Still, I rather have other units to choose from that can be worth the cost.
Historicaly it makes perfect sence- janissaries were famous for their arquebusiers, not their heavy meele infantry.
Anyone know why the JHI were nerfed so bad in the patches? I remember them dominating in the vanilla version.
Just bad decision making on the devs. They let a few complaining kids influence their decisions
Jefferson Benavides what a shame. Nerfing the first standing professional soldiers of the medieval age
The game launched with a bug where shields stats in melee where 0. The game was balanced around that. When they fixed the bug it made any unit without a shield useless in melee
Lol, after watching the ottomans in Kings and Generals, I think they did it for historical reasons. You get at the battle of Eger and Szigtvar where the ottomans suffered very high casualties (Eger, they lost, Szigtvar, costly victory) Quantity over quality, like in real life
Top 10 Missile Cav :D. Include Kingdoms!
nice vid apollo and why not do a top 10 missile cav or mercineries
You would think that the much faster rate of fire from archer units would make them more deadly.
Of course the janissary heavy infantry are being raped by the feudal knights. They're spearmen/halberds. It's not a secret in any Total War game that swordsmen are always an advantage over spearmen. Face the janissary heavy infantry against other spear or cavalry units. Janissary archers are very good at melee. After they have run out of arrows they can be put to very good use against spearmen.
Still rather prefer Ottoman infantry more armor and versatile
The amount of shade being thrown in this video is unreal
I think it was a little bit unfair for the archer battle because the paves have shields on their back. Good vid though.
that's the point...
you shouldnt take jannisaries in vanilla. But i tried them in the kingdoms expansion. They worth their cost. Ottoman Infantry is better than jannisary archers. The have some fancy shields and nice armor. Ottoman infantry is a great choice at defence battles.
These are one of the completely inexplicable units. Since they're so expensive, you'd think that they can at least do something other units can't. But they're just terrible. There's no logic behind them.
Edit: They somehow thrashed a unit of Dismounted Noble Knights, then the second time they narrowly lost.
You have to put Janissary heavy infantry in loose formation. Thats what you have to do with all two handed weapon units. They will win every infantry exept dismounted conquistadors and Venetian heavy infantry, and not every time. Many times Janissary will win even them. But they are very vulnerable aganst mounted knights.
sure, but in a campaign, the Upkeep no longer gives the same result: for 10,000 florins of upkeep, you have 44 knight battalions, whereas you'll have 57 Jenissary battalions.
This makes your battle invalid, as you have to put 4 battalions against 6 for it to be valid.
A unit is not evaluated on its personal capacity, but on the whole army, which makes the Jenissary more effective than the chevalier on the long term in campaign (you have more of them with their anti-armor bonuses and better morale).
Is this with the mods that fix the errors with two handed weapon animations? Because when this game came out it became hated in the community for these types of flaws. I think you will experience very different things if you apply the mod that fixes the animations.
Janissary Heavies just have such a crap stat line for shock infantry, they are more along the lines of a Swiss Guard or something. I sometimes wonder if they were originally supposed to be a halberd spear wall unit but then got changed at the last minute and they forgot to adjust their stats to suit.
Try them at defending settlement
I feel like devs did that intentionally to piss off nationalist turks xD
PS, through they fixed them in the kingdoms expansion, they are pretty good in that.
The Turks got a huge buff in Kingdoms. Their cavalry units were improved too, and crossbowmen don't have as much impact vs foot archers.
Captain Invisible yea I know, Egypt also did, especially with the 2h buff.
Ps. Is there still an active community playing this game online?
I have not been online in almost 12 months, so I am not sure. There is usually 1 or 2 games going on.
As time progressed, the Janissaries became less competitive. The Sultan had a never ending hunger for more men so he finally opened the corps to Muslims. They were then allowed to marry and had greater power. The Sultan finally took control and blasted them into eternity in 1820. Those that survived were then beheaded and the Janissary corps came to an end. The Sultans also became weak staying in the boudoir rather than participating in campaigns.
about janissary inf you are right. but about archers i dont think so, janissarys have stakes and much bigger range, also lets not forget that archers are much batter on uneven ground. damage output for crossbowmen is unbelievable and that is all what was tested.
To be fair. Before the 2 handed glitch the Janissary would completely destroy any other armored unit. After the glitch yes they are horrible (just like any other 2 handed unit).
Janissary archers can deploy stakes, cure for the mongol nightmares.
I think Swiss guards are the best halberdiers in the game. Spear wall is really good at city warfare. But, for the best infantry, Scottish noble pikemen are like Alexander's phalangists. They butcher even conquistadors in spear wall formation.
Btw, Turk here.
I don't think they count as infantry. When you say infantry people are gonna think melee infantry like sword and shield.
I think you mean the best pike unit.
Yeah the Scottish is pretty good with pikes. Swiss guards are pretty good if you can keep them alive long enough from archers and crossbowmen. The best infantry would be the venetian heavy infantry they beat every other melee infantry note this is on a different category.
Apollo and other people in a video did tests when doing their top 10
It’s the early ages of janissaries, it’s like arguing why aquebusers are shit because it’s the early age of fire arm use.
Have you ever tested this with both sides with full upgrades? I do my 1v1 tests that way and they do always seem to come out on top. I even tried it on Stainless Steel 6.4 and the only unit that beat them was a fully upgraded unit of Gothic Knights (and it was majorly close!) & Foot Ritterbrüders also did well (but lost). Again that was in a battle on the Grassy Plains map with full upgrades on both units involved. Might be something worth checking out. All in all, I enjoy your videos and keep up the good work :)
He's just making these videos to prove he is right. He's not going to do anything to make it seem otherwise.
Its wrong to compare missiile units only for missile duel purposes. See which of them would perform best against advancing cavalry, in the limited time before contact.
Ottoman infantry aren't bad on walls but yeah I rarely seen the Turks in a online battle. Their lack of good infantry to handle the hand to hand fighting.
No dog in this fight but J’s cost more but are cheaper in support costs (50$ worth). Garrison/shock troops, so to speak.
At least Janissary musketeers are beast :)
Nuff said.
:)
Tell that to portuguese musketeers
The Prodigy the Portuguese arquebusiers are good in melee but have shorter range than the janissary musketeers. That’s why the janissary and Cossack musketeers are the best musket units in the game.
There’s no unit called “Portuguese Musketeers.” It’s instead called “Portuguese Arquebusiers” because they had an arquebus rather than a musket.
until they get in range Janissary musketeers will kill half of them so...
@@yagzyalcntas553 yep, plus that the Janissary musketeers can shoot rank, unless other factions can do it too? Cuz when I use Turks, their musketeers seem to do fire by rank.
Janisarry infantry are flexible units. Light armor and high stamina makes them much better in prolonged battles. They can flank very fast and can fill multiple roles including chase. You have to look the armies as whole. They perfectly match with cavalary archer heavy army composition.
+Ali Alemdaroğlu Feudal Knights have 22 defence, janissary heavy inf have 12. Feudal knights also have high stamina and good moreale. Any unit can flank, and I don't know what you mean very fast, unless you're talking of the stupid AI. Any infantry is good against stationary cav. You're just not wanting to see things how they are.
+lostin nepal i know that they are not as good as they were in mtw 1 however, the holly lands are located at desert so lighter armor is an advantage (units tire slower with light armor) in the campaign versus the crusading armies. Therefore they fit for the purpose in the game although not in multiplayer battles.
Ali Alemdaroğlu I'm only talking in multyplayer. And don't get me wrong, the janissary heavy infantry aren't that bad, but the cost-efectiveness of them is just terrible. For defending siegs, I've learn from experience, they can hold the line for some time, and combined with a great unit like Dismonted Christian Guard that will hold the line forever, the janissary heavy infanrty have more space to pierce through armour. Though I like the janissary heavy infantry, they are not cost-effective, not worth it. I just get like 2 of them when I play with the turks because of their meaning
Did the people who said that the janissary troops are the best ever play online or campaign beyond easy difficulty? I like Ottoman history and wished they were better represented in this game, which is one of my favourites in the series, they deserved to be a power faction, But in THIS GAME it is a sad fact that they are not good. They do look good at least.
this test proves almost nothing, feudal knights counter spear units( jannisaries in our case) and archers are weak against crossbows,
yet archers are really good at aiming and taking down light units while crossbows take down armored.
you can't judge a fish by his ability to climb a tree
Have you done a video on gunpowder units yet? Not that there is a great deal of variety though.
What I don't get is why Jannisaries get destroyed on the charge and feudal knights only lose like 5 men?? That is dumb
Federales yeah not very balanced
Janissary Heavy Infantry should be kick ass in this game! I don't really understand why they wouldn't. I've read a lot of shit about the Ottomans and Janissary Infantry fucking destroyed people!
jack16895 Janissary Gunners best gunners.
They nerfed
dismounted sipahi lancers or Janissary heavy inf? whats better for my campaign stack opinions
20 ottoman infantry, you wont regret it.
I was playing an online battle against a player using Scotland and he did have knights and town militia (that was his mistake) as well as mounted knights with Highland Archers. I did have a few Jan. Heavy Infantry with some Jan. Musketeers and a few weak units. I won.
All the musketeers my friend. They out-range everything, but artillery, Scotland can bring and cause morale penalties against them. By the time the Janissary Heavy infantry made contact I bet the Scottish army was already wavering.
His main force was kept out of range the entire time. I was just firing at the archers and mounted knights when they were in range.
Awesome. Nothing is going to out-range Janissary Musketeers so it was the perfect position for them.
To also be fair, he had a few town militia that was in Schiltron.
Plus, when I play Rome, I use Parthia over OP factions like Rome. So I'm used to playing with weaker factions.
Now I could've just had good luck. If I fought you or say Pixie, I would lose cause you two could find ways to counter me more.
Janissary archers's arrow have a really amazing piercing in real life.Cause of Turks fought heavy armored Europeans.
the Janissary in Medieval Total War 2 is literally innaccurate, there were no ottoman turks in the time Med2 Total War takes place and there were no janissaries as they were made by ottoman sultan Bayezid not by the seljuq turks
Jannisary musketeers are even worse. They have a glitch that makes them not form correctly and unable to shoot
I agree with this video though, even in campaign they can be overrated when facing western european factions or any faction that focuses on heavy units, decided to spend ALOT of florins on a few armies that were Janissary based (with alot of good cavalry units of course they were the Turks) got flattened by a few average Holy Roman Imperial armies, might be my tactics but these are supposed to be the elite. Never again.
Again like I mentioned in your Gothic Knights video I suppose it's how you use them that make them good, don't necessarily know how to use them in such a way that they may be the "best in the game" if they don't succeed in the most basic of tasks in battle but I'm sure there's a particular method to using them.
To late comment but whatever XD. All the two-handed military soldiers suffers a bug that makes them attack the slowest possible that's the reason why all those units always lose against almost all kinds of infantry. Some time later in TWCenter some user fix this bug reducing the frames of the attack animation-lenght. That's why the two-handed only works "well" in the autoresolution because of their stats mostly.
For your troubles, have a thumbs up.
Jannissary Infantry is kinda easier to recruit in the Late campaign tho.
Cities
The Varangians are better with the two handed weapons bug or not
I put Jens vs dismounted feudal knights and they lost, I put varangian guard they lose again due to the bug but they inflict much heavier casualties
The Jens lose to feudal knights (on horseback) but the Varangians win.
They are clearly better
Is there a general difference between archers and crossbowmen? Beside rate of fire and damage of course.
Do archers shoot better in high arc shots but crossbowmen better in flat direct shots?
Some crossbow men get shields on their back which gave which intercepts rounds while loading the cross bow.
Marcel Klein Most crossbowmen heavy a very bad arc of fire
I love how angry you are :D nice vid
Ionno, historically i hear Jannissaries i think their gunpowder units. Didnt know they had other units.
Why Janissaries have halberds or maces ? They should be have a sword or axe etc.
alright lets do this, 'keep in mind' that u should read the discriptions of units before playing, those feudals knights have no chance against the hordes of mongols, but put the jennissary infantry at the enterance of your castle gate or bridge, they can slay horseman allday long, that is why they are the best, jennissary archers are the best archers becouse of their penetration bonus to heavy armor, they may not win against 1v1 but they are more affective against the units that cost way way more than their production cost
nope. i mean seriously? y not use like the 10 tikes cheaper pikes which do wag better against cav?
i dont say that the janissary archers are the best in the game, i just say that this was bad testing.
It's not a fair comparison. There is no unit equivalent to Feudal Knight in the Turks. As a shield-bearing, defensive infantry unit. You should compare the Janissaries with Dismounted Noble Knights or Dismounted English Knights. The equivalent of Feudal Knights, Hashashim normally. Of course, the game makers could not simulate history as real. Janissaries appeared after 1360. The Persian immortals in ancient times were the best, and in the middle ages the Janissaries were the best. In fact, the Janissary was a much more powerful and feared military unit. This continued until the end of the 1600s.
They were one of the best than the nerf came. All two handed units were attacking slower meaning after the charge these units had to defend always. This makes these unit shock troops. High charge high damage nice armour they are like knights with lances without horses now. Which is stupid. Before the nerf they were my favorite unit.. Janissary archers always sucked though. I like the ottoman infantry(archers) more at least they have a shield they can fight in melee too.
bruh... you didn't even show us the EXP, ARMOUR AND WEAPON level
Did you play oldest patch? And close fighting is different than war.jenisarry is defensive unit.
Halberdiers were misused but even so if you balanced the cost in florins you can get practically 2 units of feudal knights at the cost of one unit of Janissary heavies. Still didn't have to be a dick about it, but you're no less correct.
Janissary archers get flaming missiles and have good morale so they could be situationally better than the pavise but I'd never take situational efficacy over general efficacy.
The archer test wasn’t the most fair but still I agree with you.
In real life the jannisaries where fairly good against the Eastern forces the only problem is the wepon and armor type then I wouldn't have a problem
not even fair comparison, feudal knights have 13 atk and 21 def
Janissary have only like 13 atk and about 12 def
Please make another video testing each against a more similar unit the of course the archers are gonna lose to crossbows in a standup fight. For the most part archers are better simply because they have higher rate of fire. Crossbows are op and you know it.
Thats the point though, if youre using these in an online battle why would you bring them if someones bringing crossbows? Theyre cheaper and more effective
@@stevenh9413 downfall of crossbowmen is their morale.
Not saying crossbows aren't bad but honestly if your playing factions that only have bows you can still win if you plan and manage to do something. Plus it depends whether it's on pitch battle or sieges. Bows are still rather effective even during the age of crossbows.