Why were horse archers so OP? How tf did you counter them?

They can't do sieges, so you just keep everything valuable behind walls. The same works against vikings, too.

>>3148883
Bribe them, raid them to keep them weak, turn them against each other. If all else fails, just genocide them.

>>3148883

You don't, really. Pre-gunpowder, it was basically an uncounterable tactic on open ground.

>>3148889

That's not a "counter" any more than "run away as fast as you can" is.

>>3148883

Foot archers can out-range them, but in terms of forcing them to fight and beating them, the approach historically was to simply hire other horse archers.

>>3148930
>How do I counter a thing?
>You do this and it neutralizes their advantage
>DURR THAT'S NOT A COUNTER DURR!
You're an idiot.

>>3148942
>cofuses preventative measure and counter

hiding behind a castle does nothing for you in an open field so you can brag about your counter all you want while you starve behind walls as all your farms are burned or looted.

I wonder who the idot actually is

>>3148883
That one time the mongols got united don't make horse archers overpowered OP.

>>3148883
Shields. Big shields like pavises. With crossbowmen behind them. And infantry with polearms to protect them from enemy cavalry and infantry.

Foot archers and crossbowmen have the advantage of range and accuracy over horse archers

>>3148942

If you are being besieged, you haven't "neutralized their advantage." You have given up your entire country and are waiting for rescue before you starve or they build siege engines. But rescue won't come because you have no counter to their tactics.

>>3148883
Get yourself an armour.

>>3148889
If you're stuck behind your walls and can't come out, is that not de facto a siege?

>>3148954
>hiding behind a castle does nothing for you in an open field
That's why you create a fort in the open field. It's like you idiots never read about a Roman battle before. Fortify! Fortify! Fortify! If there is an open space, build a fort there.

>>3148994
If they're besieging you then they aren't attacking your holdings. Also, how do you besiege someone with a skirmisher army? You just ride along in front of their walls and get plinked by arrows? Your only options are to withdraw or dismount, either one gives the defender the advantage.

File: 1453821920710.png (32KB, 324x583px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 324x583px

>>3148883
armored knights

File: Sassanid battle line.jpg (219KB, 2226x778px) Image search: [Google]

219KB, 2226x778px

>>3148883
This. I put more arrows down range than you. Being highly mobile and fast and loosing arrows leaves your horse archers vulnerable to missiles themselves

>>3148883
They aren't OP, the Romans and Chinese figured how to deal with the Parthians and Xiongnu a long time ago. Keep in mind that most of the civilizations that the Mongols fought east of Persia were also horse archers and they got curbstomped too.

It was everything else the Mongols had (like have an actual intelligence network, virtually no supply line, and incorporating superior technology and specialists from other nations) that made them so effective. Horse Archers are overrated but Mongols are underrated.

>>3148883

Do what the successful Chinese dynasties did

> create alliances with some of the steppeniggers, play them against each other so they never band together.

> Use your own larger population and resource base to create a bigger horse archer army of your own

> sneak up on the nomad's tent cities, then kill every man, woman, and children that you find.

>>3149267
That and also a metric fuckton of crossbows.

>>3149184
> rides my horse around your fort. Now what?

>>3149283
Now you are in the enemy territory, surrounded by fortifications, without any supply lines. In that case if you are crushed, whole force will be annihilated.
Reminder, that OP asked about horse archers, not Tatars, not Mongols, not similar.
Or he thinks, that Mongols armies were pure horse archers. In that case he is just retarded.

>>3149190
>Also, how do you besiege someone with a skirmisher army?

What's a "skirmisher army?" They aren't units in Age of Empires, they are people. Horse archers are a TACTIC that they would use in the open field. Having secured the field, they can assault fortifications using the same tactics as anyone else, at their leisure, since nobody can rescue the fags hiding behind the walls.

>>3149328
>surrounded by fortifications,

wut

>>3149482
A skirmisher army means one that is very mobile, carrying their supplies on saddle bags without a supply train. That's an army that can't lay siege to anyone.

>>3148883
They aren't. Just use your scorpions and shoot them when the unit stands still to shoot at you. Christ have you never played Total War before?

Usually they're steppe nomads, which means that they have no fields to toil, no peasants, and no lands to defend.
Which in turn means they can mobilize a huge proportion of their population and outnumber you 10:1.

Yes, usually the steppes aren't fertile enough to support a big population, and they're usually divided between themselves. But once in a while favourable weather conditions persist, one dude unites them and they roll over you.

Caltrops?
Area denial could work. Horse archers rely on mobility so take that away from them.

File: caltrops.jpg (28KB, 500x459px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 500x459px

>>3149562
Forgot image

>>3149562
>Caltrops?
You'd need a fuckload of caltrops. Go and make your army some crossbows instead.

>>3149502
>That's an army that can't lay siege to anyone.

So how did the Mongols conquer hundreds of fortifications?

>>3149570
Why are minefields placed around military installations when the soldier have guns?
The enemy's movement becomes restricted and more predictable. No shit you can't scatter caltrop all over a country but you can around castles.

>>3149607
>Why are minefields placed around military installations when the soldier have guns?
Because mines can exploit weaknesses people with guns can't, like weaker floor armor in tanks.
>The enemy's movement becomes restricted and more predictable. No shit you can't scatter caltrop all over a country but you can around castles.
Ah yes, congratulations on limiting the distance from "literally anywhere" to "literally anywhere except for a bit of space outside the castle."
It's not like even horse archers would be dumb enough to ride horses at the walls anyway.

>>3149593
They used the Chinese to do it for them.

>>3149593
chinese engineers

keep in mind though that mongols were really the only famous horse archers to use siege weapons

It's really not all that hard
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Lechfeld_%28955%29

>>3149618
I didn't mean within pissing distance of the castle walls lol. Areas which might be appealing for a besieging army to set up camps etc are prime targets. This isn't exactly a crazy idea. Caltrops exist because they have been used successfully in the past.

>>3149699
>Areas which might be appealing for a besieging army to set up camps etc are prime targets
What the fuck are they going to do when their scouts run into caltrops in their campsite, just spontaneously die until the whole horde/clan just slowly and silently extinguishes themselves? They're going to turn around and ride to somewhere else to camp.

They're nomadic, anon, they can set camps anywhere there's some grass and some access to water. What are you going to do, put caltrops all the way along the river?

>>3149607
Who attacks a castle with cavalry?

Easy. Give them tribute, prostrate myself to their leader, marry off a few of my daughters and point them toward my enemies.

>>3149715
Exactly, they won't camp where they wanted to. It could give better opportunities to raid them. When did I say cover the entire area with caltrops?

>>3149732
How are you going to bring supplies to maintain a siege? Horses!

>>3149764
>Exactly, they won't camp where they wanted to
Yeah I'm sure it will be incredibly time consuming and difficult for an entirely equestrian army to move to a similar spot.
>It could give better opportunities to raid them
If you're smart enough to determine what the optimal camping spot for an army of Horse Archers is, you're better off NOT putting caltrops on that spot and raiding them, instead of alerting them to the fact that you are aware of their approach and what they prioritize.

>>3149732
It's almost like the horse and the warrior riding are two separate beings and the warrior can just... hop off... woah

>>3148964
This
The counter to horse archers is and always was foot archers

>>3148883
Crusaders had a method that sometimes worked:

(1) Hide your own heavily armored (slow-moving) cavalry in the middle of a lot of infantry with shields who can take the punch from arrows, plus some foot archers of your own.

(2) Let the horse archers tire out their horses riding around you.

(3) At the right moment, your infantry opens up a path, and your heavy cavalry, with relatively fresh horses that haven't been maneuvering all this time, charge out and catch the horse archers in hand-to-hand.

File: 1309459783138.jpg (107KB, 679x930px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 679x930px

>>3148883
Easy:

>King Béla IV took note of this, and spent the next few decades reforming Hungary in preparation for possible future invasions. He used a variety of methods to do this. In 1247 he concluded a feudal agreement with the Knights of St. John, giving them the southeastern borderland in exchange for their help in creating more armored cavalry and fortifications. In 1248, he declared the country's middle strata could enter a baron's service, on the condition that the barons lead the men on his land properly equipped (in armor) into the king's army. Documents from the time state that "the nobles of our country can enter into military service of bishops in the same way in which they can serve other nobles". After 1250, free owners of small or middle sized estates serving directly under the king were included (along with barons) in the nobility. Finally, new settlers were given "conditional" nobility in exchange for the requirement of fighting mounted and armored at the king's request.[10] In 1259, he requested that the Pope put him into contact with Venice, as he wanted to hire at least 1,000 crossbowmen (crossbows having also proven a very effective weapon against the Mongols, despite the relatively small numbers of them actually deployed by the Hungarians in 1241).[11]

>To cement his new defense doctrine, the king offered grants and rewards to cities and nobles in exchange for the building of stone fortifications. The reforms ultimately paid off. By the end of his reign, Béla IV had overseen the building of nearly 100 new fortresses.[12] Of these 100, 66 were made of stone.[13] This was a major upgrade from 1241, when the kingdom only possessed 10 stone castles, half of which were placed along the border with the Duchy of Austria.[14]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Mongol_invasion_of_Hungary#Military_reforms

>>3149957
>heavily armored (slow-moving) cavalry
I actually wonder whether that was historically the case. Are there any sources which mention that knightly cavalry was slower than horse archers? Europeans had access to larger horses, much stronger breeds. Naturally one would assume them to be faster, even with an armoured man on top. At least for the charge.

>>3149328
How many castles you build broke many castles per square mile. Given it's less them 1 I'll just raid your villages and take all the food. Plus if you won't leave your forts who cares how many you have

>>3148883
build wall

>>3149553
Steppe nomads never had a bigger (total) force than any big settled nation, unless they were using auxiliaries from another culture as the bulk of the army.

>>3149593
Starvation or settled allies.

>>3149753
>they sack you anyways because they see your act as weak
>then they demand more tribute

Settledcucks lmao

>>3149624
How did the seljuk and early ottoman turks conquer so much then?

File: T'ang Horse Archer.jpg (43KB, 700x385px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 700x385px

>>3148883
Have some of your own.
Combined arms.
Guns.

File: Saladin And The Saracens-28.jpg (459KB, 1200x1611px) Image search: [Google]

459KB, 1200x1611px

>>3151667
Anon is wrong.

If anything, the Turkics adapted better to civilization. The Mongs tried but their clannishness and "muh Steppe pride" got in the way.

File: BigAlex.jpg (442KB, 1200x720px) Image search: [Google]

442KB, 1200x720px

With combined arms and flair
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Jaxartes

>>3149237
what up with that guy in the back?

>>3149267
Genocide is hella fun

>>3152422
Officer, keeps the levies in line

>>3148994
its not unheard of for a siege to fail without being broken

>>3148883
Contrary to the beliefs of those who played Rome Total war horse archers were actually not that big of a deal. Usually they rode smaller, weaker horses so large battle steeds usually could catch up to them. Heavy cavalry was quite effective against them. So were foot archers (they were more accurate and generally had better bows with stronger pulls on foot aswell).

File: stephenhawkings.jpg (23KB, 380x353px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 380x353px

>>3152496
>mfw I thought that was medieval dynamite

>>3148883
With regular archers and bare minimum fortifications. A waist high wall will give your archers the edge, and horse archers are almost exclusively light cavalry, so they can't meaningfully charge your position.

>>3152422
To make sure no one retreats. Common tactic. Why do you think the romans put the veterans and only traditional spear armed soldiers at the back?

>>3151667
Well, they mostly just used big ass cannons, so that adds the question into this scenario, is this pre or post gunpowder, if it is pre, then horse archers cannot do sieges, if it is post, then armies using guns can defeat them in open combat.

>>3148889
are you fucking kidding me? The Mongols were the best siegers in the business! inb4 muh Chinese engineers, you have to cut down forests and chop a lot of fucking wood to make the engines

>>3150038
we've been over this the Bela defenses were not against a true Mongol horde, but really the poorest ones living on the outskirts of the Empire and on top of that, those armies were mostly just Kipchaks and varies other mercs that were only lead by a core of Mongols

>>3149607
You know what the Mongols would do? Round up every able bodied person in a fifty mile radius and force them to sweep clear the caltrops and any other obstacles before they lay siege and assault the castle. Your only choice would be to shoot and kill your own people. Congratulations, you just made a ton of caltrops that made not a lick of difference.

>>3149788
This guy hates caltrops

>>3150045
The horse literally has armour

>>3148883
Crossbow archers, heavy cavalry can counter them

>>3153455
Probably had a bad experience with them. Maybe his horse archers got fucked up by a field of caltrops

File: finngolcavalry.png (173KB, 400x255px) Image search: [Google]

173KB, 400x255px

>be light cavalry tucked behind your lines
>Mongol horse archers are exhausted after trying to wear down your shields and crossbowmen all day
>Grand Prince Sviatoslavopolk Vladimiryodmtryvych finally gives order to charge
>ZA RODINU URAAA!
>the Mongol warriors have 4 horses each
>they jump from an exhausted horse to a fresh one
>as they retreat they take parthian shots, targeting your horses
>the nobles leading the charge have barding but most of your cavalry don't
What now?

Genocide them.

>>3153536
>Capture the exausted horses left behind
>Repeat this 3 more times
> Cuck the horsefuckers forever

>>3153080
They would have beaten any other kind of Mongol just the same.

>>3153459
As I said: it's a larger, stronger horse and therefore it's possible that it's faster even with armour and an armoured man on top. At least during the charge, where it matters.

>>3152535
This. Not to mention crossbowmen who reload and shoot their weapons from behind cover.

>>3153062
The seljuks didn't have "big ass cannons" neither did their successor states for a long time.

>>3153622
All the while they are peppering your horses and captured horses with arrows? Not sure that would work.

>>3148883
>muh horse archers
like half of the mongol forces were heavy cavalry
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_military_tactics_and_organization#Cavalry
>Six of every ten Mongol troopers were light cavalry horse archers; the remaining four were more heavily armored and armed lancers. Mongol light cavalry were extremely light troops compared to contemporary standards, allowing them to execute tactics and maneuvers that would have been impractical for a heavier enemy (such as European knights). Most of the remaining troops were heavier cavalry with lances for close combat after the archers had brought the enemy into disarray.

>>3154065
Not that guy but its difficult to have an entire armies worth of horses nearby for fast swapping. At best they could have units of men constantly getting their fresh horses. Like if the spare horses were close enough to the battle that they can easily be swapped out an enemy army could just run over and take them.

>>3148889
>they cant do sieges
>siege of baghdad
>literally assraped every nation they came across in China, ME, transoxania, eastern europe EVEN IN SIEGES

>>3149203
>30,000 vs 1500
>casualities : heavy

lol

too lazy to cut and paste pictures

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasion_of_Rus%27

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasion_of_Europe

>>3154136
>Six of every ten Mongol troopers were light cavalry horse archers; the remaining four were more heavily armored and armed lancers
>half were heavy calvary

please stop 3:2 ratio isnt half u fucking idiot.

>>3154292
i said "like half" you retarded autist

50% and 40 % are "like the same" to anyone who isn't a braindead RETARD like YOU

neck yourself

>>3154281
what's your point?

>>3154179
Skirmishers at the front line are trained to deal with a charge, they quickly retreat to their comrade holding their spare horse, hop on and ride away firing parthian shots. If your horse has 1 arrow in it, it is unlikely to catch up. Only a bottleneck can slow them down.

>>3148883
Armored infantry with archers.
Alternatively, armored cavalry with bows fighting in organized units.
Walls.
Force them up against a river and then kill them in close combat.

>>3148930
>Pre-gunpowder, it was basically an uncounterable tactic on open ground.
And yet, they lost battles and wars.

>>3149482
>Having secured the field, they can assault fortifications using the same tactics as anyone else
Given their tendency towards lacking armord and not being very good at close combat, no, they generally cannot if the defenders aren't shit.

>>3149593
Chinese troops and willingness to have their own army utterly shattered. Also betrayal. Mongols loved finding traitors in the walls.

>>3153459
Knights did not have armor on their horses until the absolute tail end of the medieval period.

>>3153536
They didn't literally bring the horses with them in battle. They'd be held somewhere in the rear.

>>3154388
People literally did exactly what the other anon is describing. Horse archers are not unbeatable, quit fucking fanboying.

Horse archers don't actually cause that many casualties. They are a tool to bait the enemy into action and counter attack, since no one likes getting shot at. The decisive counter-blow is struck by the heavy cavalry, once the enemy is is goaded into a foolish attack.

The counter to horse archers is thus outshooting them so that they can't bait you. Your own horse archers, crossbowmen, or hand gunners are suitable.

File: Crassus.jpg (24KB, 338x423px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 338x423px

>>3155446
>Horse archers don't actually cause that many casualties.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Carrhae

>>3155453
Did you even read that article or are you just smugly linking it? It took an entire day of shooting at defenseless infantry. It was a cunningly laid trap.

>>3153046
>Why do you think the romans put the veterans and only traditional spear armed soldiers at the back?
to not waste their best men during the part of battle where armies just grind each other down regardless of individual skill

>>3155485
Triarii weren't their best men, the Principes were. Triarii were old and past their prime and were only expected to fight in case of a disaster.

>>3155484
Yes, I did. They were defenseless because they were infantry and light cavalry against horse archers, who BTFO of all of them. The best the Romans could do was turtle up, and that just made them look stupid and waiting to die. Which they were, and which they did.

File: AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.gif (712KB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

712KB, 320x240px

>>3152570
>allahu ackbar intesifies

Mice

>>3155519
...except the roman cavalry specifically got crushed by the cataphracts, not the horse archers.

File: Afrikakorps Vorposten mit MG.jpg (107KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 640x360px

>>3148883
>How tf did you counter them?

File: Crossbowman with shield.jpg (38KB, 367x499px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 367x499px

>>3155746
alternatively spam these and give them spears/pikes for close combat

>>3153579
Genocide what? Horses or archers?

File: horse archery.webm (3MB, 400x194px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 400x194px

>muh mongols

Many more cultures used horse archery way before the overated mongols.

>>3157142
>Over-rated
>defeated (and recruited) Turks
>defeated Persians
>defeated Russians
>defeated Hungarians
>CONQUERED CHINA

>>3148883
shield wall with archers behind

>>3158465
They move too fast for that shit.

Crossbows.

Barbarians of all kinds fear the might of crossbows.

-t Tang/Han

>>3148883
Cut off their arrow supplies

With siege units.

File: korean-cataphract.jpg (41KB, 566x424px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 566x424px

>>3148883

Cataphracts are a good start.

>>3148883
>How tf did you counter them?
By sticking your dick into their tribal politics to prevent any one becoming strong enough to get an army together.

As with all barbarians. Pay them to fuck off.

>>3148883
A big porcupine of pikes backed up by heavily armoured cavalry and ultra-long range crossbow infantry. Combined arms > muh horse archer spam

>>3158566
No.

>>3148931
Foot archers were too weak against lancer charge and weren't guaranteed to bring them down decisively. Crossbows solve that by facefucking the charging mongoloids as they race up to fire. The faster they are running at you, the harder that bolt is gonna hit. No armies had the organization or economy to combine a mobile field army with crossbows supported by an infantry shield wall

>>3148883
Foot archers
>horseniggers try running away
>archers/crossbow men don't have to follow them to kill them
>horseniggers get BTFO

>>3149482
Sieges were very risky. Your army would die of shitting out every hole far before the captive population inside would be threatened. You would need a massive amount of supplies to camp out, for years at a time under the city. You fuck up and they manage to repulse any part of the line and resupply? You're done and have to resiege their supplies out again.

Chokepoints on bridges and river crossings.
Letting them siege you and wait for them at the town center.
Kill their generals with assassins.

source, Rome Total War.

>>3158566
If they are completely encircling you on flat ground you are fucked anyways, as you should be since the commander fucked up where they chose the fight.

>>3148883
>How tf did you counter them?
By not following them when they run away. Guaranteed to work 100% of the time if you follow this simple step.

>>3160809
If the infantry are armored, that is nowhere near as catastrophic as you would think. It became a standard tactic of the crusaders.

Build a box of spears and crossbows and march, with your cavalry safely in the middle. You can't stop the infantry from moving unless you're willing to commit to close combat, you can't get close enough to reliably kill them without being shot to shit AND getting run down by knights, and sitting at range means you shoot at a wall of shields all day while getting picked off by crossbows, while the knights sit and eventually charge you when they think the timing is right.

lots of slingers

>>3161182
Those were highly trained and seasoned orders of knights I presume. Not the usual crop of soldiers. Being surrounded is a terribly frightening thing.
Got some battles to cite?

>>3161760
They literally just used whatever knights they had. Knights in general were not the buffoons pop culture likes to pretend.

It's harder on the infantry than the cavalry. The cavalry are almost entirely safe until it actually comes time to charge.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Arsuf

http://bobrowen.com/nymas/podcasts/John%20France%20-%20Crusades%20128.mp3

>>3153068
romans were the best at sieges you pleb

>>3161821
That was one battle posted, couldn't listen to the podcast yet and wasn't against a nomadic army. But it does seem correct. Combined arms was interesting in that battle, but I wonder if anyone could have managed tercio formation with crossbows.

File: cool_bus.jpg (98KB, 600x422px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 600x422px

>>3150045
>Europeans had access to larger horses, much stronger breeds. Naturally one would assume them to be faster

Naturally, the same way a school bus can out run a Corvette...

>>3161191
this guy attila's

>>3161949
It's not very different from what the eastern Romans did, and they spent centuries fighting horse archers, both settled and nomad.

They just aren't capable of reliably breaking good infantry who can actually shoot back and aren't allowed to be forced into a place with no water.

>>3161976
The romans actually did exactly that in reality.

>>3153068
This is a textbook example of a salient point being made in the most retarded way possible. Forest chopping? What?

>>3161980
i know, just another reason attila is so great

>>3161974
No, more like a grown man can outrun a midget.

File: 1499113386115.png (28KB, 1910x930px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 1910x930px

>>3148883

File: 9715b93c0a67f7a515f9a599dc28e492.jpg (195KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

195KB, 1024x768px

>>3161991
>No, more like a grown man can outrun a midget.

Except the Mongols weren't riding midget ponies.

You know why you don't see Clydesdales racing in the Kentucky Derby?

Because they're slow as fuck and are gassed out after running 50 yards.

>>3162016
>Except the Mongols weren't riding midget ponies.
They were tiny people on tiny horses.

>>3162016
>Except the Mongols weren't riding midget ponies.
They literally were by comparison to other peoples horses.

>>3162016
seriously:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongolian_horse
They're fucking small, and were remarked upon as being small at the time.

Steppe people have far more pressing concerns than speed when breeding horses and literally always have.

File: logo-large.png (3KB, 284x115px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 284x115px

>>3162039
>>3162066
>>3162082

>>3155509
napoleon had the same system.

File: King Rhodok.png (903KB, 709x687px) Image search: [Google]

903KB, 709x687px

>>3161994

>>3148889
That worked so well for the Khwarezmians. Oh wait it didn't, the Mongols starved them out and then slaughtered them to the last man.

File: flavius aetius.jpg (32KB, 289x267px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 289x267px

*blocks your path*

They were only effective if you kept them constantly trained. Kublai would rotate his Mongolian soldiers from China to the steppe just so they wouldn't get soft. Steppe people always assimilated and became weak.

>>3148883
>>3148883
>>3148883

>How tf did you counter them?

By using mobile fortifications (like wagons), skirmishers, archers, later on also musketeers. Most important thing is that discipline holds and morale doesn't break.

I know people who do some reenactment of HA and it's nothing overpowered. The range and accuracy are mediocre at best, HA were probably pretty easily outranged. The HA's main strength is that they could advance rapidly, shower enemy with arrows, and then retreat to safety before the enemy deploys to counter them. Then they will try again, in different place. And again. The goal is that enemy army slowly loses its cohesion and finally implodes with every man looking for his own safety. This however cannot succeed if the enemy knows what he is doing and rapidly deploys effective countermeasures and most importantly has a cool-headed commander who maintains his army's discipline.

The gunpowder-era battle of Podhajce in which a small detachment of Poles defeated a much larger force of Tatars that surrounded them should be seen as a textbook example of how to defeat horse archers.

>>3163970
>Oh wait it didn't, the Mongols starved them out
No they didn't. They found traitors inside the walls to let them in.

>>3165248
That, or the counter is simply built into the army, like the eastern Romans did.

Infantry formations ended up virtually all being 1/3rd archers, and the cavalry was organized and trained in a manner that shit all over steppe tactics by forcing them to confront armored cavalry who would shoot volleys into them, and charge down anything stupid enough to close with lances.

Add in that they're trained to NEVER break formation against nomads whop appear to be fleeing, and steppe warriors run out of options very quickly.

>>3153455
He's right but also heavily autistic apparently.

File: Heinrich III.jpg (25KB, 200x337px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 200x337px

>Be Kaiser Heinrich III
>1051
>Time to invade Hungary again
>For the 3rd time
>It worked out well the first two times
>Penetrate the country from multiple directions, an enormous main force invades Pannonia from Steiermark led by Heinrich himself, a secondary force encircles Pressburg while a large fleet led by a Bishop Gebhard controls the Danube and provides supplies
>Nothing can possibly go wrong
>The northern force is bogged town at Pressburg
>Fucking Magyars have figured out fort construction and defense
>Main force is slowed down because the Magyars burned down everything that Heinrich III could use
>Scorched Earth. This is getting interesting.
>Bishop Gebhard sends an envoy to the Emperor inquiring about where and when to link up with the supplies
>Meanwhile the Magyars outflank Heinrich's main forces, the Kaiser is stuck on hostile grounds, cut off from all supplies and reinforcements
>The envoy is captured, the Magyars forge a letter supposedly written by the Emperor to Bishop Gebhard, ordering him to scuttle the ships and withdraw to Regensburg because the Empire is under attack, the Hungarian campaign no longer matters
>The letter is given to some random yokel and sent to Bishop Gerhard who immediately has the supply barges sank and gets the fuck out of Hungary with haste.
>Meanwhile the Eternal Horse Archer constantly terrorizes the main force, while avoiding a direct battle
>The large Holy Roman army is now suddenly a slow, useless, starving and thoroughly demoralized rabble, the Emperor himself barely has anything to eat
>Heinrich now begs the Hungarians for a truce and for something to eat, they accept and send 50 fat sturgeons
>The Magyars organize a victory feast, invite some of the Imperial troops over because why not.
>The remnants of the army starts eating like crazy
>A lot of them die because suddenly eating a lot after a long period of starvation is a bad idea
>The survivors decide to flee Hungary as fast as possible.

Fear the Horse Archer.

File: 170px-Heinrich_III._(HRR)_Miniatur.jpg (34KB, 170x372px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 170x372px

>1052
>Let's try this 'Invasion of Hungary' thing again.
>The entire HRE force besieges Pressburg again, but once again the Magyars stubbornly refuse to die.
>Pope Leo IX personally tries to convince the Magyars to submit, but in vain.
>The Magyar forces constantly sally forth from Pressburg, causing considerable losses
>And then the supply barges start sinking
>The Magyars now have combat divers, what the fuck
>Turns out, some of the horse archers can fucking SWIM and drill holes into the hulls of the ships
>After a few sunk ships, Heinrich III decides to break siege because fuck this, we can't deal with a shitty little fort and the Hungarians can sink our ships with impunity, last year they almost made us starve to death and then fed us to death
>Let's just get the fuck out of here before they come up with something even more horrible

Heinrich III never had a fifth attempt at invading Hungary.

File: Moon irl.jpg (1MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3264x2448px

>>3165510
>>3165588
Holy fuck this is hilarious