how big an archer block are we talking? issues could be that 1 - heavy cav attack the centre, 2. if you have a large number of archers on loose formation it'd take up huge amounts of room, but if they're not on loose they may struggle to handle enemy archers (if in similar numbers and similarly ranged), 3. similarly ranged archers could fire on your skirmishers without engaging your archers (probably fine as it wastes their arrows).

Without armour piercing arrows, does this work against foot knights with shields? it may as arrows seem to do a lot of damage (and sometimes you wonder quite how)

The archers fire straight forwards where there are the gaps in the schiltrons. I did tests. It SEEMS to have more powerful, and is definitely more accurate.
As of the amount of archers, two or three on tight formation and as close as possible (put all of the units where they make on square).
The enemy archers, if wise, will target your schiltrons, not your archers (the archers and schiltrons support each other), as to target both would take a lot of work and they'd hit their own units.
Remember, the enemy will have to deal with the skirmishers, who will retreat, only to return when the enemy is locked in melee or missile fire with your schiltrons no matter their own numbers, and the schiltron, especially four close to each other, less than three quarters of another schiltron apart for ones on the same side, is either completely unbreakable (conditions depending) or will take ages to wear down even with a heavy assault.
And no enemy of note is going to get between the schiltrons. I tried this, and the AI don't actually seem to want to attack your archers directly. I'm not sure if that makes sense or not, but...
Knights will be decimated by your skirmishers if you prioritise your targets. Your archers may not even need to fire on them before they rout. And if they return, they are a lot less of a threat.

[This message has been edited by gallowglass (edited 05-17-2008 @ 12:03 PM).]

ahh, I was thinking you were using a largeish army. I suppose you could put an extra box on the side (although thinking about it, 3 archers + 4 corners + skirmishers doesnt leave many extra chaps). The plus side of this is that it sounds quite low cost, which would overcome having lots of heavy infantry charging you (I still don't see them all turning tail so easily, but I may be under estimating the skirmishers).

what would be the effect of rotating your square 45degrees? would that make it more vunerable to flanking (yes, flanking a square sounds a bit silly) or just have no real effect?

Hmm...rotating it would have a few effects on the AI or human strategy scheme, I think. I'd be much more willing to do something stupid, like try to surround this formation without thinking it's MADE to be surrounded, if it looked thinner by being rotated.
Or rotating it might put someone off an attack, so they send far fewer soldiers than they need to.
You're slightly underestimated the skirmishers, too, if you keep an eye on them they'll work perfectly.

I can see it work against AI. Then again an all out charge with heavy cavalry works just as well, only a lot faster

What do you reckon would happen if you put both strategies together, then?

Hmm although I love to have some cavalry in whichever army I command, your strategy doesnt really need any cavalry support. It is self supporting enough. Moreover, the unit roster is pretty cheap so it is viable early on when compared with all out cavalry army. Only time I can see the AI defeating your army is when they spam Horsearchers and Catapults as the Turks or Egyptians. Especially when they are Jihading early on. I nearly lost my "all Byzantine Guard Archer" army(yeah I love to spam in campaigns) to such an army. Those artilleries made my units break pretty fast although they had 9 morale.

This strategy and mounted calverinmen hate each other more than pigs hate sausages. If the enemy throws in a bombard, you have problems. I did testing, and the only other threats this formation has is units armed with poleaxes, warhammers, or, of course, elephants, although they will need to be used with extreme micromanagement abilities and the willingness to sacrifice them if needed. How William Wallace lost Falkirk with this strategy design (more or less) I have no idea : )
I reckon that someone knows how to defeat elephants and calverinmen with this strategy, though...if so, reply here, and see the slow creation of a strategy which will guarantee victory...

[This message has been edited by gallowglass (edited 05-10-2008 @ 03:30 PM).]

You would be very vulnerable to enemies with superior archers or artillery, who could just pick you off from a distance. Also, I suppose it's possible that an enemy could concentrate all his infantry of one of the schiltrons and overwhelm it. But it's unlikely that the AI would be that intelligent...

[This message has been edited by Wolfpanzee (edited 05-10-2008 @ 09:40 AM).]

The more I learn about this strategy, the more I tweak it, and the more I tweak it, the better it is. I can feel it is nearing invincibility...um, yay?
There still seems to be something I'm missing, though. I lost a battle with it earlier (although against a total force four times the size and by a marging the width of the skin of a worm's teeth). I'll make a plan of the strategy with all the improvements and put it in one of the messages I post in this sub-forum, but only when I know more weaknesses and how to counter them...

I can feel it is nearing invincibility

Nah...no strategy is invincible. As I said, you would be incredibly vulnerable to artillery.

You reckon poleaxes will totally decimate your spearmen, then wait till you've seen what my Zweihanders can mange to do to them *evil laugh*.

I put Forlorn Hope against a single schiltron, but up until medium difficulty the spearmen won. I'll try it with zweihanders, as this strategy is so close to perfection.
To combat a lot of light troops, put your archers in a square around all four of your schiltrons together, and retreat them inside when the infantry get close. Archers firing straight forward are a lot more accurate.

Well easy equates to yourself gaining a bonus in morale, attack stats and such for troops and such, while the AI gets the reverse and is nerfed. When playing on Medium the playing field are level and in essence no player has an upper hand, but skills and such come into that as the AI isn't exactly the smartest thing ever. Hard from memory gives your troops a slight nerf and the AI troops a slight buff while Very Hard goes the whole hog and gives out bigger nerfs to yourself and buffs to the AI troops in stats for morale and such.

I always play on hard. I'll put all the improvements people have suggested or I worked out to this strategy together, and see exactly what the strategy can do, then post the results in this message later.

Trust me though it will never be invincible, they said that of the Spartan Circle, Desert Cavalry and such and I've defeated them all in Rome: Total War, and if you have seen old desert cavalry that were damn right rediculously deadly you'll know what I mean.

Agreed with Scipii here. It may even be that against the AI there are near-unbeatable strategies, but most battlefield strategies are about exploitation, which means there's always a way to win against any strategy with the right units and formation.

The game is like rock-paper-scissors in what units can target and what can target them...is there a way you can exploit rock-paper-scissors?
No.
Come on, any ways to make this as good as possible are have we exhausted all of them?

While the Total War series basically revolves around a battle of what has been sterotyped as rock-paper-scissors, otherwise also known as Hard Counters, the game actually has an amazing depth of slight variation between different units and such. An example would be with experience and weapon\defense upgrades, of coarse an exact same unit with one using one bronze chevron and one using one bronze weapon and armour upgrade appear the same statistically, and the bronze chevron unit has better morale, the result could astound yourself. There are many small intricies amongst M2TW which are still yet to be explored actually which could help turn the tide of a battle. I am sure Gauis would know what I am talking about if I mentioned Demi Lancer (if he remembers the convo).

You should sometime either draw up a picture diagram, take a screenshot, post a reply or something of your idea as not only can player skill impact on several smaller things in M2TW but just seeing how you personally handle the army compared to someone else can help as you may lack a little more finesse in cavalry manage for example then someone else.

Okay

We've exhausted all the strategies to make this better, it seems. There we have it, fellow Warlords (note the Terikelesqueness ), the nearest we can get to invincible within Medieval 2 Total War...unless anyone has other ideas...
I'll draw this strategy up and put it against armies of various factions and soldier numbers, and see what the results are in the meantime.

[This message has been edited by gallowglass (edited 05-17-2008 @ 12:06 PM).]

I would suggest cavalry to flank and annihalate the artillery.

Yay! Another idea at last! Heavy cav or light? I did some testing, and heavy seem to work best for me. Which do you use/suggest?

What is what should be obvious. Say if it isn't. This is still the most effective version of this strategy, I think, but customise it as you will.

All I have to do is take out your archers wih my cavalry, who either run back to the square (So engage with archers) or get killed. Run around the back, pick off your cavalry. Spread out and wait for you to make a move against all the arrows I'm hurling at you

If you move against my cavalry at any stage, I charge with something to catch you offbalance, recycle my cavalry and charge again. However, if you have superior infantry in the circle you should weather it until some lances plough into your back.

Alternate method- Trebs.

Perhaps more cavalry to compensate?

[This message has been edited by EnemyofJupitor (edited 06-21-2008 @ 07:28 AM).]

I'll try it now *tries to go to other computer* Damn chair wheels...this might take a while