I remember my first time playing as Denmark in the vanilla game I was practically able to cut through the Holy Roman Empire like a hot knife through butter. By the time I eliminated them I wanted to invade Italy, but tiny little Milan was standing in the way. I had never fought Milan or played as them before, so when I finally marched on them I was a little surprised to see that half of their army was Genoese crossbowmen. I thought it was weird. ...Then nearly 1/4 of my entire army was killed before i could even get close enough to fight them. Milan then preceded to kick my ass with no regard for human life. It was the most brutal, one-sided beating I had ever fought, and I was on the receiving end of the punishment. Do *not* fuck with the Milanese crossbowmen.
Milan is my favorite Italian faction! Those Genoese Crossbowmen are absolutely brutal on the field, not quite so much during a seige though because they can't really hit targets that come too close. For the Duke!
fruitblood in the Britannia expansion as the Welsh I Anhilited a quarter of the English army with my longbowmen before they even reached my troops,their importance can't be overstated!
Any of you folks come across the 'Hussite' crossbowmen? They only appear in rebel armies in Bohemia. They are so overpowered! 15 missle attack - beating that of the Genoese and Aventurier. Also, they have 'good morale' and can fight really well in melee. The only downside is their lack of shield
+ElAshtonio Remember your enemy can pull down your walls with artillery and outflank this obstacle though :( Maybe encircling the city/castle centre with stakes and holding out here would be better
`Not as if the English ever threw their archers into melle` Umm, I'm pretty sure that they won agincourt partially down to their longbowmen engaging in melle. Sure, it was after a good pelting and it was very muddy, but still; they beat French knights with mallets and light armour.
+andrew wheeldon Also the knights were dismounted and their amour made it almost impossible to stand so its kinda like stabbing a bunch of turtles on their backs.
This list is good if you consider just archer vs archer fights and some skirmishing, but it misses the point of using archers as part of a combined arms warfare battle to support infantry and cavalry. Bowmen really start to shine in that sort of deployment.
@@Chriscs7 they have a higher rate of fire and can bring more effective firepower down on the opposition. If they're capable of AP like English longbows that nullifies crossbows usual big advantage as a ranged unit in a battle.
@@Chriscs7 if all you want to do with your archers is kill the opposing archers then sure pavise crossbowmen are great. If you want to kill the enemy army with your army then being able to put more arrows down range counts for a hell of a lot more. What would happen if those archers targeted the enemy's infantry line instead?
@@coreymicallef365 I have at least 3 videos in my channel for reference as well that the archers did not do as good as crossbowman. Also bowman don't have armor piercing damage. I use them against enemy infantry too. Additionally, one time I spent all my Scot Guards bows against a single cavalry unit and could barely kill them while the crossbowman destroyed one general bodyguard cavalry with 4 cycles of charge shot (2 pavise). I totally agree with you on the other part that bowman are more versatile in crazy terrains. I like to use them only in hilly terrains or behind the infantry in uneven terrains as they don't night much of a straight line like crossbowman do. The only problem I face is in flat lands like Grassy Plain map where they get demolished in skirmish fight by the pavise even 4 vs 6 still get demolished.
Im pretty sure that Byzantine Guard Archers have better moral than mongol infantry and from personal experience beat dismounted lancers and ottoman infantry
I did some tests, Retinue longbows are basically slightly better versions of Dis Dvor and cheaper... How you brushed over the retinue longbows I will never know edit: Oh and they get stakes
Hello, I was looking for some Medieval II channels and I found you a couple of days ago. I have to say that I'm really pleased wachting your videos, both battles and rankings like this one. I had some ideas you can implement if you want that I find quite interensting: Since making a top10 for every kind of unit would take too long, making a special unit ranking including: pikes, horse archers, and the other exceptions like naffatuns, hashashins, elephants, reiters, camels, etc. would be supercool while interesting. Another idea I had would be to make specific factions analysis where you guys could speak about their strenghts and weaknesses, playstyle, strategies you use and that sort of things, it could be like a mini series, or a video explaining them all shortly. May you recommend me some other channels where I can see multiplayer battles of medieval II ? You should know some pro players :P thank you in advance for your videos! Nice job!
Heck yeah Dismounted Dvor are so awesome! Such versatility. Good archers, yet at the same time, they have armor piercing which similar to Venetian heavy infantry, they can almost guaranteed allot of enemy deaths, even against heavy infantry.
They are only good archers, but are outclassed by a lot of other missile units. Their one saving grace, as you mentioned, is the incredible melee stats for an archer. But a skirmish unit should focus on defending against enemy missiles first and foremost, since that is where they are going to be used first.
Excellent video, just thought I would point out that the English often did through their bows into melee. They did so throughout the 100 years war with France because their armies were largely composed of bowman. It worked pretty well considering it was not really done before and would have been thought of as pretty foolish. They also used swords, so they would be a bit better in melee in reality compared to their mallet wielding game counterparts :P
Did a few test battles with the Retinue Longbowmen against the ai and it seems that they will decimate the top listed crossbow units in a skirmish battle. However the Retinue Longbowmen will always run out of ammo before destroying the enemy archers, though the enemies will chain route as soon as their charged (some enemy units down to less then 5 or 10 men). The crossbowmen couldn't compete with the longbows range or rate of fire, by the time they'd gotten into firing range and fired their first volley the longbows had fired about 5.
I know this is an old comment, anyway I think you should consider recruit cost and upkeep (if you play campaign), especially recruit cost. But I agree with you about rate of fire of archers are faster than Xbowmen. And I think bowmen can arc their shot better than Xbowmen...
Did testing of my own back in the day. Retinue Longbowmen vs. Dismounted heavy Mongol archers. The verdict? Both were equal and tie in at #1 spot for deadliest archers. Sure Pavise crossbowmen are great but vs. great archers they will lose base of the fact that they are weak melee units.
I understand the fascination with archers capable in melee when it comes to the heat of battle. But in a skirmish battle, which is where archers will be the majority of the time, shooting at each other, nothing will beat Pavise crossbowmen's ability to take fire and dish it out tenfold. For their cost, Pavise crossbowmen are ridiculously good.
First Milan game ever, I had just taken constantinople but the Timurids wanted it back (I got late as shit in the campaign somehow) I sallied out because I had a large chunk of cavalry. Somehow I was able to micro my shitty cavarlry to completely destroy theirs, but I had completely forgotten my infantry. My crossbows were in the frontline... They had been fighting the entire timurid army for minutes, not retreating, not dying, and it gave my cavarly a chance to flank the enemy and crush them. They have insane morale.
The title is about top 10 archers while you put crossbowmens in entire video :D . So just asking where is the sherwood and janissary archers which are the most badass archer units in this game?
I wish Scots Guards would've taken a place on the real list. I mean they are damn expensive, but they're really good as well, and I think they should've replaced atleast 1 of the units on the list.
Pixelated Apollo I recommend that you pair them with a few mounted and many dismounted English Knights. The mounted knights to deal with powerful missiles and pinning cav, then support with the dismounted units(because they can ruin cav.) while your archers murder infantry.
Genoese Crossbow Militia was my favorite unit when i played Milan for the first time, it is cheap, and easy to get early on... There is really nothing better that is non-militia for Milan that is THAT good, i literally had armies that were 1/2 Genoese Crossbow Militia, as they also do really good in mele early on.
Janissary archers have the best morale (11) and can use stakes which means that they can stand against the enemy charge while Genoese crosbowmen will flee (5 morale, no stakes) at the first close contact. Also the janissary archers fires twice faster.
I figured my beloved Byzantine Guard archers would be a bit higher. By the time you get to build them they form the backbone of my armies, and they're absolutely deadly defending walls. By the time most enemies have reached my line infantry, they're down almost half from Vardariotai and Byzantine Guards feathering the ever-loving hell outta them. Still, good list though maybe a little favoritism towards crossbows.
I like the guard archers as much as the next guy. But the pavise crossbow superiority is real. Its not really the crossbows that are the issure, although long range armour piercing hurts. Its the large pavise shields that block almost all incoming fire.
I just did a pitched battle between the Genoese Crossbowmen and the Retinue Longbowmen and the GC won (They had 30 soldiers left when my last man died) which would make them the better unit. However, they lack stakes which means that if cavalry charges them, they're screwed. Whereas the Retinue Longbowmen, since they do have stakes, are protected. But for the sake of the "Which archer unit is best at ranged engagements" argument, the GC is by far the best. But on the flipside, you don't need to protect your RL from cavalry which then allows you to allocate your troops more freely.
It always made me sad to see that french archers were better than english one's in this game, really too unrealistic, and I'm french, so it hurts me to say something good towards the rosbeefs.
I think one thing you're really missing out is the availability of these units in campaign. regular longbowmen are buildable from the practice range and are leagues above almost any other ranged unit at that stage in the game. on the other hand many of the units you feature here require the level 3 or 4 archery buildings. worst of all is mongol infantry who require the level 3 infantry building, which up to that point produces nothing useful whatsoever and then renders your investment into mongol archery buildings obsolete.
Their mostly focusing on the battle capabilities. I'm sure if they did a campaign archer list it would be different. Personally I love the Scots guard but in campaign I love mass recruiting mercenary crosbowmen and sniping enemy generals.
the thing is that archers didn´t have a big impact at all. having a big army using no archers but more cav instead vs an army with archers the one without archers will win at least 8/10 times. in other games like Rome2, Shogun 2 ... archers or range units in general had much more effect on the battle than in M2
I agree with you to some extent. There is a noticeable difference between the effectiveness of missile units in later titles. But missile units are far from weak in M2tw. Armour plays a big part of M2tw, which helps against archers, but is almost useless against crossbowmen and the early gunpowder units. A lot of the higher end crossbowmen also have long range, making them Medieval snipers. Also, to add more confusion to the list, a lot of foot archers are also not too bad in melee, making them hybrid units. I can say with confidence that I would much rather have a handful of missile units than be without and forced into a rush.
its a fair review. personally i prefure the Scots guard. yes they are pretty crazy expensive, but boy i love them. Full plate warriors rocking archery skills and dont break and have good stamina. they are freakin beasts thats worth their weight in gold. i could easily see myself fielding a full army of these multipurpous beasts
Karaus Did you listen at the end? They have poor stamina and morale. Much like Pavise, they'll get tired halfway through their ammunition and become less effective, and a cav charge will break them easier.
Karaus You have forgotten that Pavise shields in Medieval 2 seem to be made out of titanium and diamonds. When using archers against pavise crossbows, you only have a very short window to fire and sometimes you miss it entirely. This list isn't based on stats alone, stop complaining on every video.
Personally i love the sherwood archers even though they dont have a good defense, their decent as a little shock troop too and they can hide very well so great for amushes
Just finish a Milan campaign VH/VH, autosave only, no castles. I got to say Genoese Crosbowmen is disappointing. Because you only need them and Italian Spear Militia to rule the world (with some Standards for siege battle and Hospitaller wherever St John Guild is available). It took me 84 turns to finish and the gunpowder technology is still somewhere in China 😂 They are ridiculously OP. As for campaign overall, I'd say Muslim Archers are top-notch. Good in melee, earlier to recruit, hardy, and cheap to maintain. Norse archer also nice, they're basically Norse Swordmen with bows.
After playing Sicily for the first time i think Muslin Archers should have been mentioned, they have 9 missile attack, and no piercing, with 10 defence and no shield, so as archers they are worse than Pavisse Crossbowmen or the Geonese Crossbow Militia, but they have 11 attack in mele and 5 morale (compared to the crossbows of 3), they are a good combo unit, not as good as the Mongol archers, but still they fare a lot better for defensive sieges than the crossbows.
As a campaign player (I actually never play custom battles - it's not it when the context lacks somehow, and even in campaign - 99% auto) I rarely look at the unit's cost, but the upkeep - I find it far more important. It is what you pay for every turn - what you must count on when building the army in the long run, since you may pay that price (100,150,250...) for the rest of the game.
As a campain player, I would that the upkeep cost is pretty much irrelevant because you make so much money that something like 100 florins extra upkeep becomes negligible.
@@Uragan00829 make so much money? If that's true, you are probably an apt leader of your kingdom, but it's not always the case, especially in the beginning!
@@petarniciforovic6543 Well, maybe the upkeep cost is a nuisance in the first 10 - 20 turns, but after that, you will probably make a lot of money that it becomes irrelevant. This tw Medieval 2, one of the easier TW games. Compare the upkeep cost to a TW title where it actually matters - Warhammer. Upkeep cost is perhaps the biggest pain in the ass in Warhammer. Also I played Napoleon and upkeep cost is much more relevant than in Medieval, even tho it isn't Warhammer level of annoying. That's a long paragraph for such a kinda pointless thing!
Good video... but forgot to mention the huge bonus of longbows range. You can get 2-3 volleys before they enemy archers can return fire... while not the best. I think they should have been 5-6 spot.... and dealing with crossbows... just make it that they need to do their arching shot... get enemy infantry between their archers and your infantry
The gap between the rate of fire is not as big as you think. If it was, then it would make the difference. But crossbowmen are just too good to make archers comparable.
I can realize M2TW is just a game, but crossbows are for sure more lethal than any type of bow at short range, but xbow bolts are lighter and shorter and do lose momentum faster than arrows, therefore their effective range is considerably shorter. Conclusion: NO CROSSBOW SHOULD HAVE BETTER RANGE THAN BOWS.
I don't think there will be any more of these but I can summarise. Spears vs cav always goes the cavalries way unless they are stood still, very light cavalry or inthe Kingdoms expansion. Gunpowder units are pretty much all the same. The Musketeers, Cossak Musketeers and Janissary Musketeers are the best foot gunpowder units. For general gunpower, there is the Timurid elephants with gunpower armed men on top, the Timurid cannon mounted elephants and the Moorish camel gunners. Horse archers is a bit trickier, as it depends highly on cost, how you plan to use them. My personal top 4 (which I am pretty certain) would be Byzantine Vardariotoi, Polish Strzelcy, the Mongol heavy horse archers and Dvor. TBH they are all pretty much the same, the difference between a lot of them is bows vs xbows, light fast moving vs heavy armour and AP melee weapons or not.
I think that crossbowmen should have been in their own category. crossbowmen specialize in armour piercing but consistently have less range than all but the lowest tier arches. To rank them alongside each other is an apples and oranges comparison.
andre robinson "crossbowmen specialize in armour piercing but consistently have less range than all but the lowest tier arches" Late crossbows actually have similar range to bows.
kubaGR8 not good enough. The fact that you have to wait till the late game to even be comparable to bows in terms of range and even then they are largely out ranged proves my point. In any case all crosbows have better armor piercing abilities than all but the best archers. It's an apples and oranges comparison.
andre robinson Checked M2:TW wiki. Peasant Archers and Peasant Crossbowmen actually have the same ranges. Same for Crossbow Militia and Archer Militia. Every Pavise Crossbowmen unit available has range equal to Retinue Longbowmen (even Pavise Crossbow Militia), with some exceptions, like french Aventurier (which have same range, but no pavise).
My number one is just the british longbows.... I cannot for the life of me use crossbowmen due to the sheer amount of micromanagement they tend to need. With England i just deploy the yeomens on the flanks, use stakes, put a unit of spearmen in front of the stakes and use have 2 units of cav on each flank protecting them + intimidating the enemy, then i use alot of infantry to hold the line. It's so passive and yet i havn't really seen any army that can defeat this on a generally flat map
That's because the AI doesn't know how to use artillery properly. Trebuchets, catapults and ballistae are woefully inaccurate; but serpentine's and mortars can defeat this English strategy if used correctly. Focus all your guns on one enemy flank, and it will either roll up like a carpet or they will be forced to break formation - allowing your cavalry/infantry to advance to the opening weakspot.
I’m 3 years late but I think there is a error in the top ten list pavise crossbowmen cost 490,missile12,attack 6,defence 16 and charge of 1 while Genoese crossbowmen cost way more and and have 1 less defence,but yet they are higher on the list.
Yeoman and Retinue longbowmen should be higher, two armor upgrades, long range ap fast reload bows, stakes, and to top it all off yeoman have melee ap hammers as well, this all together makes them top 5 at least for archers, and considering the terrain problems that crossbows can have and no flaming missiles for burning siege equip I will take English archers over just about every other missile unit aside from gunpowder of course
I agree with Celestino the Sherwood Archers are far better than any other ranged unit in the game. They engage in melee effectively and they NEVER rout...
are u deaf? he said more on missile capability and less in melee ability . they may have higher range but damage is less and also cost out recruitment and upkeep is quite high
longbows do need some buffs, then again their stakes are op, you can defeat a full cav army using a full longbow army by creating a circle of stakes, me for one was panicking and scared of the large swarm of french knights, but turns out, they are very pathetic when they try to charge through stakes
Can someone please explain why pavise xbow were placed at 5 with better stats and less cost than Genoese xbow militia at 3? I'm not really understanding how they can be better when they have exact same stats but 1 less defence point than the pavise xbow with a higher cost?
Sherwood archers are also pretty good because they have a pretty decent melee can be hidden and have good range only problem you only get 24 in a unit.
i don't know i read it somewhere that in Medieval Archers are totally useless in Sieges.wtf?i never siege a city without archers/crossbow.just station them in front of the enemy gate and let them shoot inside.they kill half the enemy before they run out of ammo.(i usually bring 4 units,some factions 2).
hmmmm but what about the sherwood archers? they chew up heavy infantry like they are peasants and they have surprisingly good armor (do they have kevlar under their green tunics?)
Pixelated Apollo And also I remember there are three type of defense...for ranged warfare defense skill is useless...I m not sure adventurer would win with shooting yeoman or pavise (France does not have)...when you consider it french is really not that a strong faction...
姚光迪 You are correct, the lack of a shield make aventurier weak in a missile duel. Its a good job they are beasts in melee otherwise they would not have made the list.
The fun fact is that Pavia is about 40 km from Milan. And All the world has pavise crossbowman except from Milan. And Historically, Milan and Genoa never was under the same rule, while Pavia was within Milan domain. Absurd
I absolutely agree with Genoese crossbowmen being no. 1. But I would keep yeomen above peasant crossbowmen just because of one reason..Stakes. The problem that I find with crossbowmen is when a unit of enemy cav charges towards you, you can only fire one volley. All except Genoese and Aventurier does not do a significant damage. One more question..are Dismounted Dvor better than retinue longbowmen and scotts guard?
Not sure if this was a glitch or not, but a couple of time when I have charged some dismounted feudal knights into some Pavise Crossbowmen, instead of them switching to melee weapons they just kept bending down, reloading and shooting their bolts close range. They fucked up my knights. This seemed ridiculous!
GoldenbanjoDJ yea.. i get that too... but i could ever get my own archers to do it... i remember one time i charged peasant crossbows with a unit of woodsmen (cheap, unarmored 2-handed axemen)... the crossbowmen who are not engaging in the melee keep pouring volley after volley at point blank range, it's really annoying..
GoldenbanjoDJ If I were at the back of the unit while the front row fights Dismounted Feudal Knights in melee, then I would probably shoot the knights instead of waiting with my sword.
were are the ventiean heavy archers? are they counted as the venitian heavy infnatry from top 10 infantry units. beacuse those archers are good when the enemy is unable to get to them. also they look cool for a archer.
How come I don't see Sherwood Archers anywhere in this list?? Not even in honorable mentions??? Those guys can deplete ENTIRE units with their arrows! And are way better than yeoman! Even if they are lil harder to get (all you do is keep building yeoman in Nottingham till you get them).
with the stats you're showing the genoese crossbows are worse than the pavise crossbows - they cost 80 more and have 1 defence less. If you say they are better because more stamina or something you have to show it, because all we see is they are exactly the same unit - just a different name with a bigger pricetag.
They seem to be great for sieges, where their small unit size is not a restraint by the streets/walls. But they lack armour and are half a unit. Their only saving grace defensively is the 2 hit points but that will not save them for long.
I remember my first time playing as Denmark in the vanilla game I was practically able to cut through the Holy Roman Empire like a hot knife through butter. By the time I eliminated them I wanted to invade Italy, but tiny little Milan was standing in the way. I had never fought Milan or played as them before, so when I finally marched on them I was a little surprised to see that half of their army was Genoese crossbowmen. I thought it was weird.
...Then nearly 1/4 of my entire army was killed before i could even get close enough to fight them. Milan then preceded to kick my ass with no regard for human life. It was the most brutal, one-sided beating I had ever fought, and I was on the receiving end of the punishment.
Do *not* fuck with the Milanese crossbowmen.
Milan is my favorite Italian faction! Those Genoese Crossbowmen are absolutely brutal on the field, not quite so much during a seige though because they can't really hit targets that come too close. For the Duke!
i attacked north italy only with 20 dismounted fedual knights and they literally swept out all the armies up there like 4-5 armies.
fruitblood in the Britannia expansion as the Welsh I Anhilited a quarter of the English army with my longbowmen before they even reached my troops,their importance can't be overstated!
A few Feudal Knights should do.
My calvary:shame
Any of you folks come across the 'Hussite' crossbowmen? They only appear in rebel armies in Bohemia. They are so overpowered! 15 missle attack - beating that of the Genoese and Aventurier. Also, they have 'good morale' and can fight really well in melee. The only downside is their lack of shield
The Hussites are not someone I like to mess with
Can you get them in pvp?
No, bru. I think you can get them as mercenaries from Bohemia.
Hm never paid attention to that
A lot of unique rebel units are scattered about in this old game
Longbow men are also great in seiges deploy some stakes behind your gate and you can negate all cav for that battle great against mongols and generals
Also they tend to have a longer range hen other archera
Yes they are very good against heavy inf.
Just dont have cav sally forth.
Playing yhird age mod and forgot the stakes. Rip swan knights
Oh wow, I never even considered putting stakes behind gates. Thanks!
+ElAshtonio Remember your enemy can pull down your walls with artillery and outflank this obstacle though :( Maybe encircling the city/castle centre with stakes and holding out here would be better
I actually think Venetian Archers should be an honourable mention. They make for good (not great) archers, but also pretty good melee if necessary.
+ParkRangerStan Agreed
+ParkRangerStan agreed
ParkRangerStan agreed but the test here is about missile capabilities if you know what i mean
ParkRangerStan agreed but the test here is about missile capabilities if you know what i mean
They're better than the Desert Archers in every way.
`Not as if the English ever threw their archers into melle` Umm, I'm pretty sure that they won agincourt partially down to their longbowmen engaging in melle. Sure, it was after a good pelting and it was very muddy, but still; they beat French knights with mallets and light armour.
+andrew wheeldon lol im talking about med 2, not history. i think :P
+andrew wheeldon Also the knights were dismounted and their amour made it almost impossible to stand so its kinda like stabbing a bunch of turtles on their backs.
+Pixelated Apollo in the historicalbattle they are key though in the med 2 historical battle i mean
+Robby Mullarky armor in that day weighed less than a US Marines gear weighs, it's not all that heavy
Max Dahlin Murphy full plate? its about 100 pounds and the limiting movement made it hard to stand.
This list is good if you consider just archer vs archer fights and some skirmishing, but it misses the point of using archers as part of a combined arms warfare battle to support infantry and cavalry. Bowmen really start to shine in that sort of deployment.
Why do bowman shine there and crossbowman don't
@@Chriscs7 they have a higher rate of fire and can bring more effective firepower down on the opposition. If they're capable of AP like English longbows that nullifies crossbows usual big advantage as a ranged unit in a battle.
@@coreymicallef365 not sure i had English longbowman vs pavise crossboman in field battle and my 6 english longbowman got destroyed by only 4 pavise c
@@Chriscs7 if all you want to do with your archers is kill the opposing archers then sure pavise crossbowmen are great. If you want to kill the enemy army with your army then being able to put more arrows down range counts for a hell of a lot more. What would happen if those archers targeted the enemy's infantry line instead?
@@coreymicallef365 I have at least 3 videos in my channel for reference as well that the archers did not do as good as crossbowman.
Also bowman don't have armor piercing damage. I use them against enemy infantry too. Additionally, one time I spent all my Scot Guards bows against a single cavalry unit and could barely kill them while the crossbowman destroyed one general bodyguard cavalry with 4 cycles of charge shot (2 pavise).
I totally agree with you on the other part that bowman are more versatile in crazy terrains. I like to use them only in hilly terrains or behind the infantry in uneven terrains as they don't night much of a straight line like crossbowman do.
The only problem I face is in flat lands like Grassy Plain map where they get demolished in skirmish fight by the pavise even 4 vs 6 still get demolished.
There's a typo on the Pavise Crossbowmen: they have a defense of 14, not 16. That's why the Genoese Crossbow Militia are ranked above them.
Im pretty sure that Byzantine Guard Archers have better moral than mongol infantry and from personal experience beat dismounted lancers and ottoman infantry
They really are my saving grace on some battles with the Mongols and even timurids if my cav get decimated but the enemy is tired.
I did some tests, Retinue longbows are basically slightly better versions of Dis Dvor and cheaper...
How you brushed over the retinue longbows I will never know
edit: Oh and they get stakes
They are quite a bit worse in melee, with only a slight edge in the ranged attack.
Retinue longbowmen don't have AP Melee. Yeoman Archers and Longbowmen do. All three can plant stakes
Can we get a top ten factions?
@It's Ryan 333 gaming loooollll
Overall, my favorite faction is Milan for siege battles and it it mainly because of the genoese and musketeer combo.
Hello, I was looking for some Medieval II channels and I found you a couple of days ago. I have to say that I'm really pleased wachting your videos, both battles and rankings like this one. I had some ideas you can implement if you want that I find quite interensting:
Since making a top10 for every kind of unit would take too long, making a special unit ranking including: pikes, horse archers, and the other exceptions like naffatuns, hashashins, elephants, reiters, camels, etc. would be supercool while interesting.
Another idea I had would be to make specific factions analysis where you guys could speak about their strenghts and weaknesses, playstyle, strategies you use and that sort of things, it could be like a mini series, or a video explaining them all shortly.
May you recommend me some other channels where I can see multiplayer battles of medieval II ? You should know some pro players :P thank you in advance for your videos! Nice job!
Heck yeah Dismounted Dvor are so awesome! Such versatility. Good archers, yet at the same time, they have armor piercing which similar to Venetian heavy infantry, they can almost guaranteed allot of enemy deaths, even against heavy infantry.
They are only good archers, but are outclassed by a lot of other missile units. Their one saving grace, as you mentioned, is the incredible melee stats for an archer. But a skirmish unit should focus on defending against enemy missiles first and foremost, since that is where they are going to be used first.
Excellent video, just thought I would point out that the English often did through their bows into melee. They did so throughout the 100 years war with France because their armies were largely composed of bowman. It worked pretty well considering it was not really done before and would have been thought of as pretty foolish.
They also used swords, so they would be a bit better in melee in reality compared to their mallet wielding game counterparts :P
Dismounted Dvor are the main reason to play as Russia
Do a top ten peasants lol for peasant challenge campaign
Transylvania peasants! With halberds.
Did a few test battles with the Retinue Longbowmen against the ai and it seems that they will decimate the top listed crossbow units in a skirmish battle. However the Retinue Longbowmen will always run out of ammo before destroying the enemy archers, though the enemies will chain route as soon as their charged (some enemy units down to less then 5 or 10 men).
The crossbowmen couldn't compete with the longbows range or rate of fire, by the time they'd gotten into firing range and fired their first volley the longbows had fired about 5.
I know this is an old comment, anyway I think you should consider recruit cost and upkeep (if you play campaign), especially recruit cost. But I agree with you about rate of fire of archers are faster than Xbowmen. And I think bowmen can arc their shot better than Xbowmen...
What about Sherwood Archers? They do loads of damage.
Too small of a unit
What was mentioned at 24:00 was the Bulgarian brigands. Excellent campaign archers. Really good, can fill many roles, look like vampires. Hire them.
Bulgarian Brigands are so good
There's only one type of Crossbowmen that are the best in Medieval 2: Total War.
*_It starts with "P", ends with "avise"._*
Did testing of my own back in the day. Retinue Longbowmen vs. Dismounted heavy Mongol archers.
The verdict? Both were equal and tie in at #1 spot for deadliest archers.
Sure Pavise crossbowmen are great but vs. great archers they will lose base of the fact that they are weak melee units.
I understand the fascination with archers capable in melee when it comes to the heat of battle. But in a skirmish battle, which is where archers will be the majority of the time, shooting at each other, nothing will beat Pavise crossbowmen's ability to take fire and dish it out tenfold.
For their cost, Pavise crossbowmen are ridiculously good.
First Milan game ever, I had just taken constantinople but the Timurids wanted it back (I got late as shit in the campaign somehow) I sallied out because I had a large chunk of cavalry. Somehow I was able to micro my shitty cavarlry to completely destroy theirs, but I had completely forgotten my infantry. My crossbows were in the frontline... They had been fighting the entire timurid army for minutes, not retreating, not dying, and it gave my cavarly a chance to flank the enemy and crush them. They have insane morale.
The title is about top 10 archers while you put crossbowmens in entire video :D . So just asking where is the sherwood and janissary archers which are the most badass archer units in this game?
Would the Venetian Archers get an honorable mention? They're pretty armored, cheap, long-ranged, and decent in melee.
I wish Scots Guards would've taken a place on the real list. I mean they are damn expensive, but they're really good as well, and I think they should've replaced atleast 1 of the units on the list.
The Dismounted Dvor are definitely my favorite archer unit.
Even though they aren't the best archers, the Yeoman archers combined with a good English infantry/cav mix become a bitch to deal with
no doubt, their range is crazy!
Pixelated Apollo I recommend that you pair them with a few mounted and many dismounted English Knights. The mounted knights to deal with powerful missiles and pinning cav, then support with the dismounted units(because they can ruin cav.) while your archers murder infantry.
Pixelated Apollo where is sherwood archers
They didnt make the list because they are a small unit. And are just not as effective compared to a xbow unit
Dismounted Dvor are my favourite unit in the whole game.
English longbowman and the danes and scottish archers are truly good! You just shoud know how to use them
Not the Case for me. Pacise crossbows militia destroyed my retinue longbowman
Genoese Crossbow Militia was my favorite unit when i played Milan for the first time, it is cheap, and easy to get early on... There is really nothing better that is non-militia for Milan that is THAT good, i literally had armies that were 1/2 Genoese Crossbow Militia, as they also do really good in mele early on.
Probably the best missile troop in the game for campain
Just curious, but would you ever think of doing lists like these for the units in the expansion?
What about the Sherwood archers? I thought they were supposed to be pretty good. Just wondering.
Janissary archers have the best morale (11) and can use stakes which means that they can stand against the enemy charge while Genoese crosbowmen will flee (5 morale, no stakes) at the first close contact. Also the janissary archers fires twice faster.
informative video, im intrigued what game where you talking about where you were surprised by the peasant crossbowmen
I figured my beloved Byzantine Guard archers would be a bit higher. By the time you get to build them they form the backbone of my armies, and they're absolutely deadly defending walls. By the time most enemies have reached my line infantry, they're down almost half from Vardariotai and Byzantine Guards feathering the ever-loving hell outta them. Still, good list though maybe a little favoritism towards crossbows.
I like the guard archers as much as the next guy. But the pavise crossbow superiority is real. Its not really the crossbows that are the issure, although long range armour piercing hurts. Its the large pavise shields that block almost all incoming fire.
I just did a pitched battle between the Genoese Crossbowmen and the Retinue Longbowmen and the GC won (They had 30 soldiers left when my last man died) which would make them the better unit. However, they lack stakes which means that if cavalry charges them, they're screwed. Whereas the Retinue Longbowmen, since they do have stakes, are protected. But for the sake of the "Which archer unit is best at ranged engagements" argument, the GC is by far the best. But on the flipside, you don't need to protect your RL from cavalry which then allows you to allocate your troops more freely.
Russia was my hands down favorite faction due to archery influences mixed with european and viking
It always made me sad to see that french archers were better than english one's in this game, really too unrealistic, and I'm french, so it hurts me to say something good towards the rosbeefs.
crossbows yes. bows, english wins
Super crossbows and traditional bows are two different things.
I played Milan once and they reckt Byzantine probably my favorite factions
God damn, every time I'm charging Pavise Crossbows with my cavalry and they finally turn around and stand up I just shit bricks.
I wish you could create your own units in this game!
I think one thing you're really missing out is the availability of these units in campaign. regular longbowmen are buildable from the practice range and are leagues above almost any other ranged unit at that stage in the game. on the other hand many of the units you feature here require the level 3 or 4 archery buildings. worst of all is mongol infantry who require the level 3 infantry building, which up to that point produces nothing useful whatsoever and then renders your investment into mongol archery buildings obsolete.
Their mostly focusing on the battle capabilities. I'm sure if they did a campaign archer list it would be different. Personally I love the Scots guard but in campaign I love mass recruiting mercenary crosbowmen and sniping enemy generals.
I use pavise crossbowmen most of the time I play online.. They come in handy.. Kills 1/3 of the army before they even breach the walls.. 😁
the thing is that archers didn´t have a big impact at all. having a big army using no archers but more cav instead vs an army with archers the one without archers will win at least 8/10 times. in other games like Rome2, Shogun 2 ... archers or range units in general had much more effect on the battle than in M2
I agree with you to some extent. There is a noticeable difference between the effectiveness of missile units in later titles. But missile units are far from weak in M2tw. Armour plays a big part of M2tw, which helps against archers, but is almost useless against crossbowmen and the early gunpowder units. A lot of the higher end crossbowmen also have long range, making them Medieval snipers.
Also, to add more confusion to the list, a lot of foot archers are also not too bad in melee, making them hybrid units.
I can say with confidence that I would much rather have a handful of missile units than be without and forced into a rush.
Loving these top tens guys! Can't wait to try these units out to see for myself :)
Great! Im glad you enjoyed the series!
Pixelated Apollo I have! If you do another which genre of soldier would you look at?
Robbie Moore mounted bows :D
Pixelated Apollo nice :) I guess that will be a bit limited though, since most mounted archers are eastern, I'll be interested nonetheless :)
Bro those Genoese Crossbowmen are really good .They have never let me down.
its a fair review. personally i prefure the Scots guard. yes they are pretty crazy expensive, but boy i love them. Full plate warriors rocking archery skills and dont break and have good stamina. they are freakin beasts thats worth their weight in gold. i could easily see myself fielding a full army of these multipurpous beasts
You said defence? Now see this:
NUMBER (#) ONE *GENOESE CROSSBOWMEN* stats:
*DEFENCE*
*Total defence*: 16
Armour: 6
Defence skill: 4
Shield: 6
Hit points: 1
NUMBER (#) TWO *DISMOUNTED DVOR* stats:
*DEFENCE*
*Total defence*: 15
Armour: 5
Defence skill: 4
Shield: 6
Hit points: 1
NUMBER (#) THREE *GENOESE CROSSBOW MILITIA* stats:
*DEFENCE*
*Total defence*: 15
Armour: 6
Defence skill: 3
Shield: 6
Hit points: 1
NUMBER (#) FOUR *AVENTURIER* stats:
*DEFENCE*
*Total defence*: 15
Armour: 7
Defence skill: 8
Shield: 0
Hit points: 1
AND,
NOT IN EVEN TOP TEN *OTTOMAN INFANTRY* stats:
*DEFENCE*
*Total defence*: *17*
Armour: 5
Defence skill: 6
Shield: 6
Hit points: 1
*Good job Apollo*.
Karaus Did you listen at the end? They have poor stamina and morale. Much like Pavise, they'll get tired halfway through their ammunition and become less effective, and a cav charge will break them easier.
Karaus You have forgotten that Pavise shields in Medieval 2 seem to be made out of titanium and diamonds. When using archers against pavise crossbows, you only have a very short window to fire and sometimes you miss it entirely. This list isn't based on stats alone, stop complaining on every video.
+Karaus This is only about skirmishing not about melee
Ottoman units suck in multi. one of the worse factions to pick unless you are a siege defender
I didn't say the "Ottoman Infantry" is the best. I said he could put it in *top ten*.
Personally i love the sherwood archers even though they dont have a good defense, their decent as a little shock troop too and they can hide very well so great for amushes
Only archers that can constantly take a wall
Janissary archers can also use stakes
Just finish a Milan campaign VH/VH, autosave only, no castles. I got to say Genoese Crosbowmen is disappointing. Because you only need them and Italian Spear Militia to rule the world (with some Standards for siege battle and Hospitaller wherever St John Guild is available). It took me 84 turns to finish and the gunpowder technology is still somewhere in China 😂 They are ridiculously OP.
As for campaign overall, I'd say Muslim Archers are top-notch. Good in melee, earlier to recruit, hardy, and cheap to maintain. Norse archer also nice, they're basically Norse Swordmen with bows.
The Retinue longbowmen are fucking overpowered in Campaign
Bonus for Genoese Crossbow militia. They're free upkeep when garrioned in cities
Retinue longbowmen is best imo best range and got stakes
After playing Sicily for the first time i think Muslin Archers should have been mentioned, they have 9 missile attack, and no piercing, with 10 defence and no shield, so as archers they are worse than Pavisse Crossbowmen or the Geonese Crossbow Militia, but they have 11 attack in mele and 5 morale (compared to the crossbows of 3), they are a good combo unit, not as good as the Mongol archers, but still they fare a lot better for defensive sieges than the crossbows.
I’m really suprised Sicily’s moorish archers didn’t get mentioned. Decent archers and solid light infantry.
As a campaign player (I actually never play custom battles - it's not it when the context lacks somehow, and even in campaign - 99% auto) I rarely look at the unit's cost, but the upkeep - I find it far more important. It is what you pay for every turn - what you must count on when building the army in the long run, since you may pay that price (100,150,250...) for the rest of the game.
As a campain player, I would that the upkeep cost is pretty much irrelevant because you make so much money that something like 100 florins extra upkeep becomes negligible.
@@Uragan00829 make so much money? If that's true, you are probably an apt leader of your kingdom, but it's not always the case, especially in the beginning!
@@petarniciforovic6543 Well, maybe the upkeep cost is a nuisance in the first 10 - 20 turns, but after that, you will probably make a lot of money that it becomes irrelevant. This tw Medieval 2, one of the easier TW games. Compare the upkeep cost to a TW title where it actually matters - Warhammer. Upkeep cost is perhaps the biggest pain in the ass in Warhammer.
Also I played Napoleon and upkeep cost is much more relevant than in Medieval, even tho it isn't Warhammer level of annoying.
That's a long paragraph for such a kinda pointless thing!
Good video... but forgot to mention the huge bonus of longbows range. You can get 2-3 volleys before they enemy archers can return fire... while not the best. I think they should have been 5-6 spot.... and dealing with crossbows... just make it that they need to do their arching shot... get enemy infantry between their archers and your infantry
The gap between the rate of fire is not as big as you think. If it was, then it would make the difference. But crossbowmen are just too good to make archers comparable.
Yeomen archers would easily beat crosbows in a skirmish except for the pavise crossbows
I can realize M2TW is just a game, but crossbows are for sure more lethal than any type of bow at short range, but xbow bolts are lighter and shorter and do lose momentum faster than arrows, therefore their effective range is considerably shorter. Conclusion: NO CROSSBOW SHOULD HAVE BETTER RANGE THAN BOWS.
Would lika 3 more top 10 like these 3 Spears (or vs cav infantry at least), gunpowder units and missiler cav
I don't think there will be any more of these but I can summarise.
Spears vs cav always goes the cavalries way unless they are stood still, very light cavalry or inthe Kingdoms expansion.
Gunpowder units are pretty much all the same. The Musketeers, Cossak Musketeers and Janissary Musketeers are the best foot gunpowder units. For general gunpower, there is the Timurid elephants with gunpower armed men on top, the Timurid cannon mounted elephants and the Moorish camel gunners.
Horse archers is a bit trickier, as it depends highly on cost, how you plan to use them. My personal top 4 (which I am pretty certain) would be Byzantine Vardariotoi, Polish Strzelcy, the Mongol heavy horse archers and Dvor. TBH they are all pretty much the same, the difference between a lot of them is bows vs xbows, light fast moving vs heavy armour and AP melee weapons or not.
Genovaaaaa so badass crossbowmen
"Yoman" Whats up?
make me laugh
I think that crossbowmen should have been in their own category. crossbowmen specialize in armour piercing but consistently have less range than all but the lowest tier arches. To rank them alongside each other is an apples and oranges comparison.
andre robinson Genoese Crossbowmen have the same range as Yeomen Archers.
kubaGR8
so what?
andre robinson
"crossbowmen specialize in armour piercing but consistently have less range than all but the lowest tier arches"
Late crossbows actually have similar range to bows.
kubaGR8
not good enough. The fact that you have to wait till the late game to even be comparable to bows in terms of range and even then they are largely out ranged proves my point. In any case all crosbows have better armor piercing abilities than all but the best archers. It's an apples and oranges comparison.
andre robinson Checked M2:TW wiki. Peasant Archers and Peasant Crossbowmen actually have the same ranges. Same for Crossbow Militia and Archer Militia. Every Pavise Crossbowmen unit available has range equal to Retinue Longbowmen (even Pavise Crossbow Militia), with some exceptions, like french Aventurier (which have same range, but no pavise).
My number one is just the british longbows.... I cannot for the life of me use crossbowmen due to the sheer amount of micromanagement they tend to need.
With England i just deploy the yeomens on the flanks, use stakes, put a unit of spearmen in front of the stakes and use have 2 units of cav on each flank protecting them + intimidating the enemy, then i use alot of infantry to hold the line. It's so passive and yet i havn't really seen any army that can defeat this on a generally flat map
RJSNew Challenge accepted :P
RJSNew not unbeatable but a very good formation indeed.
RJSNew Don't forget Sherwood Archers, Those guys outclass EVERY archer unit in the game!
That's because the AI doesn't know how to use artillery properly. Trebuchets, catapults and ballistae are woefully inaccurate; but serpentine's and mortars can defeat this English strategy if used correctly. Focus all your guns on one enemy flank, and it will either roll up like a carpet or they will be forced to break formation - allowing your cavalry/infantry to advance to the opening weakspot.
I put billmen behind the stakes to finish of any cavalry that goes thru the stakes
England's Longbowmen...
Where's the scots guard?
In honourable mentions.
I think the English longbow should have better range for balance against xbow extra damage
Yeomen archers ? why not retinue longbowmen, lol. And aventuriers are more deadly than russian dvor.
+Milan K Russian Dvor fuck people up, trust me, I play as Russia.
+Richard Wheeldon
yes russian dvor is good, but I tried 1v1 aventurier vs russian dvor and aventurier won everytime
Milan K One on one yes but how about in combat? Fire arrows also help; and its russian so it is also a step above frog crossbows.
+Richard Wheeldon
which version you play in online ? 1.1 or 1.3 ?
+Milan K yer right
I’m 3 years late but I think there is a error in the top ten list pavise crossbowmen cost 490,missile12,attack 6,defence 16 and charge of 1 while Genoese crossbowmen cost way more and and have 1 less defence,but yet they are higher on the list.
I expected only archers, not crossbowmen. Touché.
The Pavise crossbowmen should have stuck their pavise in the ground in front of them.
excuse me.... no norse archers?
Yeoman and Retinue longbowmen should be higher, two armor upgrades, long range ap fast reload bows, stakes, and to top it all off yeoman have melee ap hammers as well, this all together makes them top 5 at least for archers, and considering the terrain problems that crossbows can have and no flaming missiles for burning siege equip I will take English archers over just about every other missile unit aside from gunpowder of course
Also how are Janissary Archers left off this list?
Sherwood archers are my favorite unit
1v1, Aventuries beat Geonese Crossbows easily, I tested it. Good list though.
I agree with Celestino the Sherwood Archers are far better than any other ranged unit in the game. They engage in melee effectively and they NEVER rout...
are u deaf? he said more on missile capability and less in melee ability . they may have higher range but damage is less and also cost out recruitment and upkeep is quite high
longbows do need some buffs, then again their stakes are op, you can defeat a full cav army using a full longbow army by creating a circle of stakes, me for one was panicking and scared of the large swarm of french knights, but turns out, they are very pathetic when they try to charge through stakes
SHERWOOD ARCHERS GUYS
Can someone please explain why pavise xbow were placed at 5 with better stats and less cost than Genoese xbow militia at 3? I'm not really understanding how they can be better when they have exact same stats but 1 less defence point than the pavise xbow with a higher cost?
Does it just come down to morale or what?
they have bad moral that is BAD they will break faster
Sherwood archers are also pretty good because they have a pretty decent melee can be hidden and have good range only problem you only get 24 in a unit.
chakatBombshell are you playing with the small scale unit ?
Nice ratings, but how do u guys think of sherwood and venetian archers
i don't know i read it somewhere that in Medieval Archers are totally useless in Sieges.wtf?i never siege a city without archers/crossbow.just station them in front of the enemy gate and let them shoot inside.they kill half the enemy before they run out of ammo.(i usually bring 4 units,some factions 2).
hmmmm but what about the sherwood archers? they chew up heavy infantry like they are peasants and they have surprisingly good armor (do they have kevlar under their green tunics?)
You can win just about any battle with dismounted dvor. All you need is a decent infantry line and the dismounted dvor behind them
And other units to defend the flanks
Milan my favourite! A bit weird for italians to have "bad" knights( historicly). But damn their Crossbowman shine as italian kitchen!
True, if not good melee stats than at least really good late plate armor.
great list but......aventurier does not have shield...
thanks, its still a great unit
Pixelated Apollo And also I remember there are three type of defense...for ranged warfare defense skill is useless...I m not sure adventurer would win with shooting yeoman or pavise (France does not have)...when you consider it french is really not that a strong faction...
adventurer have crossbows. They will beat Yeoman in a duel. And the adventurer are good at melee. The french factions is a good one
Pixelated Apollo Cool thank you.
姚光迪 You are correct, the lack of a shield make aventurier weak in a missile duel. Its a good job they are beasts in melee otherwise they would not have made the list.
The fun fact is that Pavia is about 40 km from Milan. And All the world has pavise crossbowman except from Milan. And Historically, Milan and Genoa never was under the same rule, while Pavia was within Milan domain. Absurd
I absolutely agree with Genoese crossbowmen being no. 1. But I would keep yeomen above peasant crossbowmen just because of one reason..Stakes. The problem that I find with crossbowmen is when a unit of enemy cav charges towards you, you can only fire one volley. All except Genoese and Aventurier does not do a significant damage.
One more question..are Dismounted Dvor better than retinue longbowmen and scotts guard?
Puneet Upadhyay The main difference between a crossbow and an archer volley is the crossbow volley stops the car dead.
Not sure if this was a glitch or not, but a couple of time when I have charged some dismounted feudal knights into some Pavise Crossbowmen, instead of them switching to melee weapons they just kept bending down, reloading and shooting their bolts close range. They fucked up my knights. This seemed ridiculous!
GoldenbanjoDJ yea.. i get that too... but i could ever get my own archers to do it... i remember one time i charged peasant crossbows with a unit of woodsmen (cheap, unarmored 2-handed axemen)... the crossbowmen who are not engaging in the melee keep pouring volley after volley at point blank range, it's really annoying..
GoldenbanjoDJ If I were at the back of the unit while the front row fights Dismounted Feudal Knights in melee, then I would probably shoot the knights instead of waiting with my sword.
GoldenbanjoDJ If guard mode is on, each crossbowman will only fight in melee if they absolutely have to
+FlipUltraHD thats a great strategy to use wow
+TL DR
I should add, usually. Sometimes they all go right into melee but most of the time they don't.
The merc unit he refers to is the Bulgarian brigands
I never looked at stats so I thought Sherwood Archers were top 10
Longbow: am i a joke to you?
were are the ventiean heavy archers? are they counted as the venitian heavy infnatry from top 10 infantry units. beacuse those archers are good when the enemy is unable to get to them. also they look cool for a archer.
It’s crazy yo, apaches don’t stand a chance. I’d like to play Czech Jan cziska
How come I don't see Sherwood Archers anywhere in this list?? Not even in honorable mentions??? Those guys can deplete ENTIRE units with their arrows! And are way better than yeoman! Even if they are lil harder to get (all you do is keep building yeoman in Nottingham till you get them).
Scattman101 This list is for multiplayer
with the stats you're showing the genoese crossbows are worse than the pavise crossbows - they cost 80 more and have 1 defence less. If you say they are better because more stamina or something you have to show it, because all we see is they are exactly the same unit - just a different name with a bigger pricetag.
Honestly, I just wanna know, how good actually are Sherwood Forest Archers???
They seem to be great for sieges, where their small unit size is not a restraint by the streets/walls. But they lack armour and are half a unit. Their only saving grace defensively is the 2 hit points but that will not save them for long.
Captain Invisible oh ok,thanks man
Awsome video guys!
That nerd voice at the beginning was hilarious.