10 heavy cavalry vs some troops & mages

[Ezco]

That should be simple enough scenario. What tactic would you use for your cavalry to kill some mages? My basic tactic would propably go like this.

6 at front on the side scripted hold and attack rear

2 little further back center scripted attack rear

2 little further back other side scripted attack rear

What do you think? You can do pretty complex tactics with these simple commands so please keep it to topic. And no you don't know anything more than this about the scenario. You absolutely definitely have no further intelligence on this scenario you don't know what troops there are, what mages there are, are you attacking, are they attacking etc.

[Teraswaerto]

So you have the 10 cavalry? What is "some troops"?

I think would put all 10 in one group to either side with orders to attack rearmost (though they would still probably attack the main enemy troop formation), or if the number of enemies is very low, to the center with no orders. A larger group is less likely to rout.

[Ezco]

"self censored"

[Evilhomer]

probably 2 or so in center told to hold attack closest (hoping that these will get the attention of the "some troop", 4 to each side told to hold attack archers (have had better luck taking out commanders/mages with this one).

edit: all 3 groups would be somewhere in the front section

[Taqwus]

You use a scout to attack and retreat the expensive heavy cavalry, because it's not exactly a brilliant move to waste ten expensive heavy cavalry unsupported at mages with troops -- given that they may smack into orb lightning, astral fires, magma eruption, nether darts, F9W9 lava warriors, et al. If they're a mix of summon-spammers and attackers, you could lose 'em all for no gain.

[Evilhomer]

I agree with you Taqwus, still it was not what the poster asked about...

[Ezco]

Yes little better. But still not good I think. I have rarely seen attacks from both flanks at the same time succeed. And remember in my tactic those decoys at center have a chance to get through if opponent has deployed all his troops to sides. Has happened. And if someone still deploys his mages in front of or in archer squads I suggest you stop it. Good for their health. I don't know what to say to those opinions about small heavy cavalry squads not being good against mages. Only that in my opinion they are almost THE best strategy against someone who likes to use mages with some troops. If you use those decoys effectively you can almost always draw their fire so those other heavy cavalry troops get close. But if you want to start that discussion please make another thread and know I won't be part of it.

[Nick_K]

In my experience attack rear targets the rearmost unit of regular troops. I have not seen it attack lone mages, although I haven't tried it with such small numbers. Small units can potentially rout very quickly indeed, even with heavy cavalry's good morale. I've recently seen an AI unit of two elite knights (of the chalice IIRC) break without even suffering a casualty. I'd recommend keeping them together in one group. Set as far to the front as possible. Might try to attack rearmost but they'd probably attack the troops - I'd hope they'd break the enemy troops and then run down the mages.
When you say you 'have no idea' what you'll be facing.... unless you're attacking indeps it seems unwise to enter battle with such a small force. An enemy army could easily massively outnumber yours. Against a large force you'll never close with the mages.

[Evilhomer]

I still belive "attack archers" will have a better chance at getting the job done than "attack rear"

[Teraswaerto]

Heavy cavalry does not have good morale.

I find the question rather pointless. When would you have no idea what troops or mages there would be in this situation?

Depending on the positioning of the troops it will likely be impossible to get the cavalry to attack the mages instead of the troops. The whole idea of deploying an army of 10 cavalry is bad, though if the question is supposed to be some kind of bizarre test, then whatever...

Thanks for recognizing my signature's brilliance though.