Asian Cavalry Archers

[Darth Executor]

As a military general, what would you have done to fight and have a hope at defeating them? For those who don't know what I'm talking about, many asian nations (Mongols, Turks and Huns) employed horse archers armed with recurved bows (bows made out of many layers of wood that were small and shot at a relatively short range but were very effective at armor piercing). The horse archers would charge an enemy army as if about to attack them, then turn back at the last minute, and as the enemy army attempted to pursue them they would ride their horses while firing backwards. It was a slow process but it was very efficient at decimating european armies which employed heavy cavalry and heavy infantry (both were pretty much useless). This is known as "Parthian Tactics".

I was wondering what type of strategies would you employ to minimzie damage, somehow hit the archers, and manage to achieve victory.

[Jaltus]

Pretty much the only way to win is flanking and light cavalry.

[Darth Executor]

I'm thinking that only completely surrounding them with infantry equipped with tower shields would work (Alexander and his turtle formation).

I don't see what light cavalry can do as the archers would likely shoot them down before they get close enough. I'm fairly certain the middle east employed lots of light cavalry and the mongols still beat them.

[rmwilliamsjr]

i am not a military history buff but i am interested in the Mongol campaigns. Their weakness was their reliance on horses, they had no supply lines but lived off the land and their beasts. a scorged earth and concentrated populations guarded by rings of anti-calvary earthworks with a dedicated suicidal anti-horse sabotage looks like a potential set of defenses. aim to destroy their access to grasslands-burn them, aim to kill their mounts, fight during the winter not the springtime.

[Darth Executor]

Mongols were never particularly effective at sieges. The problem is that, as far as I know, they rarely bothered them to begin with. They were extremely patient, and europeans need to work the land to survive. In addition. I'm not so sure that they always lived off the land. They had livestock they carried around which they could always slaughter and preserve in case of a famine. Their real weakness was the fact that they always fought with each other. They needed extremely capable leaders like Attilla the Hun to hold them together. To cripple their army as a whole, an assassination is likely the best strategy, but that's far away from this topic. I'm more intersted in stopping them in "fair fights". Army versus army.

[Jaltus]

Darth,

Light cavalry can outrun horse archers in some instances. Also, infantry with poles can do some damage as long as they have surprise. Also, trenches work very well.

In addition, mounted infantry in a flanking movement can trap them. As soon as the horse archers charge, the MI are sent wide and curl in. This keeps the HA from splitting and firing well.

[Darth Executor]

Darth,

Light cavalry can outrun horse archers in some instances. Also, infantry with poles can do some damage as long as they have surprise. Also, trenches work very well.

In addition, mounted infantry in a flanking movement can trap them. As soon as the horse archers charge, the MI are sent wide and curl in. This keeps the HA from splitting and firing well.

I agreed that flanking could help, but I honestly don't see how trenches would. The archers could simply ensure the soldiers in them are cut from their supply lines and wait for them to get hungry enough to get out. Parthian tactics take a great deal of patience to begin with, so I wouldn't put it past them.

[Jaltus]

No, the trenches are traps, you don't put people in them, you use the trench to slow the HA and funnel them to where you want them.

[JonAdams]

As a military general, what would you have done to fight and have a hope at defeating them? For those who don't know what I'm talking about, many asian nations (Mongols, Turks and Huns) employed horse archers armed with recurved bows (bows made out of many layers of wood that were small and shot at a relatively short range but were very effective at armor piercing). The horse archers would charge an enemy army as if about to attack them, then turn back at the last minute, and as the enemy army attempted to pursue them they would ride their horses while firing backwards. It was a slow process but it was very efficient at decimating european armies which employed heavy cavalry and heavy infantry (both were pretty much useless). This is known as "Parthian Tactics".

I was wondering what type of strategies would you employ to minimzie damage, somehow hit the archers, and manage to achieve victory.As many longbow archers as I could get. Either that or a counter charge with cavarly (preferably from the flanks whilst they charging my infantry).
As I understand it the reason the Mongols decimated the European armies was a different attitude to fighting. The Mongols attacked as a group hitting any target they could whilst European knights would often try and take on only the important targets (commander types) who they considered worthy foes, ignoring other targets. At the very least I would ensure this didn't happen.

Jonathan.

[Darth Executor]

No, the trenches are traps, you don't put people in them, you use the trench to slow the HA and funnel them to where you want them.

Ahh ok, that makes sense.

[TheOneAndOnly]

Playing Medieval Total War I have had to face Mongol Hordes on many occassions. No, listen... I know it's a PC game but ignoring that it may be quite helpful.

The only way I found of defeating them was by choosing high ground flanked on either side by forests. Their arches will not go into the forests and so I would hide some heavy infantry and spearmen in there to wait.
The Mongols, in real life and in Medieval TW, used lightining quick raids and assaults and feigned retreats trying to pry the enemies formations apart until they were scattered, disordered, tired and ready to run for the hills.
In Total War, you can defeat them if you only give them a narrow front to attack on. Then you can return fire with your own archers and ambush them with your infantry waiting in the flanks as they feign retreat.

I also used longbowmen agains them, who were pretty useful except they eventually got surrounded and cut to pieces.

All in all, the Mongol war machine was ahead of its time. I don't believe any general could have turned the tide during their invasions.

[Darth Executor]

Playing Medieval Total War I have had to face Mongol Hordes on many occassions. No, listen... I know it's a PC game but ignoring that it may be quite helpful.

I like that series.

The only way I found of defeating them was by choosing high ground flanked on either side by forests. Their arches will not go into the forests and so I would hide some heavy infantry and spearmen in there to wait.
The Mongols, in real life and in Medieval TW, used lightining quick raids and assaults and feigned retreats trying to pry the enemies formations apart until they were scattered, disordered, tired and ready to run for the hills.
In Total War, you can defeat them if you only give them a narrow front to attack on. Then you can return fire with your own archers and ambush them with your infantry waiting in the flanks as they feign retreat.

I also used longbowmen agains them, who were pretty useful except they eventually got surrounded and cut to pieces.

I'm trying to figure out a way to beat them based on troops and formations alone, and perferably something that doesn't require the mongols to run into a trap (simply because there is no guarantee that they will)



All in all, the Mongol war machine was ahead of its time. I don't believe any general could have turned the tide during their invasions.


They could start by using cavalry archers of their own. The problem was that Europeans and Middle Easterners(until turkey) did not find that way of fighting honorable.

[TheOneAndOnly]

I'm trying to figure out a way to beat them based on troops and formations alone, and perferably something that doesn't require the mongols to run into a trap (simply because there is no guarantee that they will)

In the real world I don't think there is a definite battle plan that can be used to defeat them. Their armies were highly mobile, fluid and could change tactics easily using a complex system of signals they used mid-battle, IIRC. If some Mongol scouts noticed an ambush party on the horizon, they would quickly signal to the main force, who would easily change tactics to accomodate the threat.
In Total War, if you're pushed into a corner then all you can do is throw as much at them as possible. I've stayed up countless nights trying to defend Constantinople from an insanely big Mongol Horde, using inadequate Byzantine weapons. It's not a pretty site, getting totally annihilated like that. Overhwelming force is the best tactic against them.

They could start by using cavalry archers of their own. The problem was that Europeans and Middle Easterners(until turkey) did not find that way of fighting honorable.

Yes, that's what I've heard. Apparently the medieval chivalric spirit prohibited feigning retreat, which is absolutely vital in this sort of battle. I'm not sure how true this is but European knights thought the godless Mongols were pretty cowardly and vile when using these tactics. Similarly when the Mongols first invaded Japan, the Japanese were shocked at the unchivalric actions of the Mongol force. The two ideas of warfare were so different the Japanese couldn't understand the Mongolmindset.

Secondly, medieval European armies were rigid in rank and structure, I believe. It was not possible for a serf to rise to the status of knight (under normal circumstances) even if he was a tactical genius. The mongols would award rank by merit and not just on nobility.

Also the Mongols, being the invaders, got to pick when to attack, who to attack and how to attack. Apparently they were meticulous battle planners, nothing like the shambolic horde image their name conjurs up. I guess they had the best medieval intel. Also everyone was terrified of them, which helps in battle.

[Thomas More]

As a military general, what would you have done to fight and have a hope at defeating them? For those who don't know what I'm talking about, many asian nations (Mongols, Turks and Huns) employed horse archers armed with recurved bows (bows made out of many layers of wood that were small and shot at a relatively short range but were very effective at armor piercing). The horse archers would charge an enemy army as if about to attack them, then turn back at the last minute, and as the enemy army attempted to pursue them they would ride their horses while firing backwards. It was a slow process but it was very efficient at decimating european armies which employed heavy cavalry and heavy infantry (both were pretty much useless). This is known as "Parthian Tactics".

I was wondering what type of strategies would you employ to minimzie damage, somehow hit the archers, and manage to achieve victory.


The Mongols won most of their battles not due to horse archers but to the fact their armies were organized and disciplined. Most of the armies in the 13th century tended to be fuedal so x lord would show up with x number of troops. It was basically a charge when you feel like it, leave when you feel like, support whomever you want too army. The Mongols were notorius for putting their light cavalry out and then flee after a short melee sprinting towards a carefully laid out trap with infantry and their heavy cavalry in wait. The Archers would then turn to face the pursueing troops raining missles on them while Mongol lances took them in the flanks.

[Darth Executor]

The Mongols won most of their battles not due to horse archers but to the fact their armies were organized and disciplined. Most of the armies in the 13th century tended to be fuedal so x lord would show up with x number of troops. It was basically a charge when you feel like it, leave when you feel like, support whomever you want too army. The Mongols were notorius for putting their light cavalry out and then flee after a short melee sprinting towards a carefully laid out trap with infantry and their heavy cavalry in wait. The Archers would then turn to face the pursueing troops raining missles on them while Mongol lances took them in the flanks.

That's a new tactic I haven't heard about before, but I don't the opposition was to blame on those grounds because they(by they I'm referring to europeans):

A) Rarely faced mongols
B) Didn't quite act like that. Once you promised your army for a cause, leaving might result in unfavorable action against them
C) Were led by a king or general who made the plans and they had to conform to hope to win. They weren't idiots.

[Ryokan]

Old thread by my 2 cents.
1. Discipline. The Mongols relied of fients, and the withering fair of arrow charges, to demoralize and disorganize their opponents, hoping they would charge or flee, and be torn apart. A strong, well repected commander who could convince his men not to charge or run is a must.
2.The Mongols tried to draw their opponents out into favorable ground whenever possible. no matter how many peaseants the mongols kill, farms they burn, etc, don't meet them on the open field. Force them to meet you where you want to meet them.
3.Scorched Earth. As someone else already mentioned, the mongols themselves lived of the land. No land, no living. This will be rough for you, but not as rough as being laaughtered by mongols.

[Dienekes]

The raiders of the hun and mongol army were extremely powerful, no doubt. however to beat them in real life is not as difficult as many people have come to believe. For the first thing, the reason why these cultures spread so far was mostly because of their perfect timing. During the huns time the Roman Empire had cut in half, German barbarians were raiding the North and West of the Romans and the Bzyantine half of the Empire was in dissarray with a near pathetic army. In this case the strategy that was exentually used to defeat the repetitive charge, fire, retreat tactics of the Huns was the Testudo formation, as one of the people above me made reference to though incorectly. It is a common misconseption that Alexander the Great used this strategy nicknamed turtile of armadillo however he used an advanced Phalanx, similar in appearance though completely different in how it worked. The Testudo formation is where a shield wall is created in the front, the sides, and the top. Perfect for deflecting missle weapons though when brought in close corters was near worthless as it was too slow and the weapons couldnt truly work to full power.

Sorry, sort of strayed their. To defeat the Huns the Romans used this testudo formation and had their heavy cavalry at both sides. When the Huns came and shot nothing happened. The Huns went into the feint retreat in attempt to lure the opponent to break formation and charge in a mob (a tactic orriginally invented by King Leonidas I of Sparta, Greece seen in the battle of Thermopylae to which he had his 300 Spartan and roughly 7000 light allies hold out against 2 million Persians for fix days until they were finally surounded and all killed amusingly the Persians left the fight with over half their army dead). However the Romans did not break formation and slowly marched forward. Attila then sent his rather miniscule infantry force to attack, the romans walked up to them broke formation throw their pilum spears routed them, went back to formation and marched on. The hunnish cavalry now turned to attack again however the as yet unseen Roman heavy cavalry charged pincering the huns and routing them all.

The stirring defeat of the Mongols by the Mamluks of Egypt was far less tacticly innovative. Of the two Mongols army was worse, having a recurve bow instead of the more powerful hunnish composite bow. The Mamluks having been learned of what the Mongols tactics were decided to skip most of the formalities in the feint retreat that led to an ambush and just used a heavy and light cavalry charge into the ambush and because of superior numbers defeated the Mongols.

Personaly I would use an advanced Phalanx seen by Alexander using his 25 foot long spears and aspis sheilds to either nock around or deflect the missles sent by the nomadic raiders. This would be followed up by Indian foot bows in which the archer lays on the ground and uses his leg muscles for maximum distance and strength to stir them up into a frontal charge in which the Phalanx would cut them to ribbons.

hope u understood that.