How UNDERRATED is the Heavy Axeman? Bannerlord Infantry Units Guide

This is a 1.8. Bannerlord in Depth Analysis of the Infantry troop knows as heavy Axeman.
This video is part of a Mount & Blade II: Bannerlord Playlist where we analyze each unit not only based on their equipment but also on statistics taken after intensive testings.
The Data will be trimmed down and showcased both throughout the video and at the end to allow the viewer to know as much as possible about the unit in question.
A score will also be provided at the end based on Lyon’s opinion, this score shouldn’t be taken as hard evidence, as different playstyles may impact the way viewers evaluate units.
In this here video we are going to talk about the Sturgian Heavy Axeman.
A unit who has been splitting veterans and the community apart on it's performance. can we shed the light in what makes the Axeman stand out or fall into the darkness?
And remember, criticism and constructive feedback are always appreciated.

[@takuoku2546]

I wish sturgian noble line was infantry not cav... they could have both 2 handed axe and 1 handed axe with shield

[@LyonExodus]

More variaty for noble troops is what i would like too. everything gets cav apart from the Khuzait and Battanians.

[@ilayohana3150]

Yeah i also thought about that, its kind of strange when you think about it because their infantry is their main idea and most of the druzhinnik line is infantry do wtf is that horse doing there

[@knunk5476]

True, but the sturgeon druzhinik performs pretty well when dismounted so I think that’s partially implemented

[@BaskinTimi]

Just dismount the druzhniks they are the best inf

[@carpetseller1268]

@@BaskinTimi because cavalries AI is sucks

[@09Ceekay]

The heavy axeman really shines if you play a shieldbreak build. 2-3 throwing axes and the enemy shield is gone, it's very devastating against shieldwalls.

[@LyonExodus]

Them and the Linebreakers can just pop shields all day

[@A.Deer_]

I’m c

[@anthonybielecki4069]

I think you deserve far more views than what you have and I hope you keep making videos! I can tell you put lots of effort into your videos and you genuinely enjoy making this content. Also would like to see the imperial cataphract ranking. Seriously keep it up man.

[@LyonExodus]

Many thanks Anthony. It means a lot, it really does.

[@andreachiado3664]

Very well thought analysis, keep it up mate!

[@LyonExodus]

Thank you for the nice words, Andrea.

[@simpumba3798]

Very interesting findings, I started a sturgia playthrough again yesterday and will admit I gave them more of a hard time than I should, in bandit lairs they seem to never die for me. I think a lot of people like myself think they're meh because Warbands top units were very different to Bannerlord. In warband things like huscarls, sharpshooters, and swadian knights were quite above other factions units that were of the same unit and tier. The exception to this I think is the Khan's guard and battania archers. Meanwhile in Bannerlord, a banner knight and a druznik are different in some areas, but the weapon/stat gap isn't big enough generally for one side to always be the victor. Even though many claim X or Y is the best faction for cav.

[@LyonExodus]

Yes. i think the general thing about Bannerlord is how much stronger ranged options tend to be. And Sturgia not having great archers can have a ripple down effect and make the infantry units feel a bit worse than they are. Khans and Fians are definately on another level in comparison to anything. They can be effective both from distance and up close. Infantry in general i feel like should be given more armor to compensate for range superiority. While archers should maybe be given more ammo and less accuracy to have more of a supress fire role rather than the miniguns they currently seem to be.

[@savic101]

Your view rate vs subscribers has been crazy recently, awesome work man

[@LyonExodus]

I was doing a few things wrong we tweaked out. And getting better in the editing also helepd a bit. Thanks for the nice words, they always keep morale high.

[@tequilasunsetus8847]

Did someone say that this unit is the worst? Of course, I myself wrote that this unit became really weaker after the deterioration of its armor and the fact that throwing darts for axes were taken away from it (in my opinion, axes are inferior to darts at the moment), but it's still a very strong unit.

[@LyonExodus]

I think people just want Sturgian infantry to be really, really good. Which i do understand. But the Axeman are still doing very well in the current meta. They should give them some sort of shoulder armor tho, so the 2 perks i mention can give them an extra +5.

[@Oddigan]

A bit late with this reply, but I personally despise using them because they don't successfully do the one job they should be good at: Breaking shields. I have watched an army of 500 heavy axemen break only a single shield against an even mix of 500 stationary trained imperial infantry, veteran imperial infantry, and legionaries using all of their axes. It was absurd. Because throwing axes are so weak, Heavy Spearmen seem to fair better against everything else that isn't low tier foot troops without shields, and their direct competition with Axemen makes me neglect the Axemen despite them being strong relative to other infantry.

[@noctusfury6918]

People got spoilt with how OP Nord units in Warband were. 🤣

[@said_aliev]

Great video

[@LyonExodus]

Many thanks

[@Halo-wp3zh]

Damn i found a nice channel thx youtube recommendations, also can I suggest a vlandia guide, since they seem like the weakest faction for 1.8 at least that's what I get from your videos, they're still my favourite tho

[@LyonExodus]

Glad you enjoy it and blessed be the 01010101 that make up the Algorithm gods. Also, you don't need to look far for a Vlandian analysis. we just wrapped it up a few days ago

[@Halo-wp3zh]

@@LyonExodus oh nice can't wait

[@unkon129]

i think a big pro of axemen are their axe's length and speed- in shield walls or just line battles you soldiers are right next to each other so there is zero space for swings, especially with long swords. And well, faster weapon is just better weapon in hands of ai, so imo its still a lovely unit to use

[@LyonExodus]

That's the big plus of short weapons many don't see. They just don't get stuck on shields or enemies as much. And with 1.8. making all units face hug they are even better

[@agroplode9680]

@@LyonExodus Do you know if the length is changed by where the soldier hold the axe or not?

[@LyonExodus]

Nope

[@LyonExodus]

In the sense that i don't know

[@orlandoactab3034]

where is that cutscene from the part of the vid from?

[@LyonExodus]

with 1.8. a dozen of cutscenes have been added. that one happens when you get elected as the leader of a faction.

[@colhammer1]

For Sturgia, For the algoritme!

[@LyonExodus]

experimenting with this one a bit. will see how it does

[@Saladon89]

The heavy spearman use to be one of the best, until they remove their javelins or was that the heavy axemen ??? havnt played for over a year

[@LyonExodus]

i think you are talking about the Axeman. If you want to know the storyline of the Spearman there is a video for them too.

[@Saladon89]

@@LyonExodus yea, i think it was the axeman, they got nerfed, was soo disappointed. Legionary got nerfed too, they can no longer throw their pilum

[@varpix5026]

How about heavy spearmen?

[@LyonExodus]

coming soon

[@danielmajor3843]

I dont know where you heard that they are bad, it was always a consensus that they are the 2nd best melee infantry. The heavy spearmen used to get titled as the worst before 1.7.2 as they were really really bad before that, now they are just somewhat bad. In this video you havent considered the troop tree sadly, I say this because the sturgian infantry line before the T5 is pretty crap, bad armors bad weapons, bad shields. But nevertheless great video.

[@LyonExodus]

For infantry i rarely consider the troop tree as, unless it's a clear clash for synergy, like the Oathsworn Vs Wildling situation the lower tiers don't end up impacting the army playstyle much. But i understand what you are trying to say, altough, i haven't run any tests on how really bad or not they are. so i am not going to confuse players with information that might not be true (cof, cof. Unlike some people who made this kind of videos in the past) For the unit itself i have come across soo many player stating how bad they are. and i think that's because they are used to some OP units who can kill anything even with the worst commanding possible. Personally i always consider them to be the best infantrymen for a long time, only struggles when facing empire high tiers.

[@danielmajor3843]

@@LyonExodus TBF my greatest problem with them right now is that they lost their majestic plated warlord helmet and lost most of the cool factor

[@LyonExodus]

FashionLord points -20 / 5

[@Apenimon444]

In my first ever campaign I took over half the world with this unit as my main. Never knew they were considered weak

[@hannes0000]

They are not weak,if you mass them and use close formations they are best, short axe can hit easy but most other infantry has longer swords that can't land a hit in cluster.

[@Apenimon444]

@@hannes0000 they did their job perfectly whatsoever

[@hoticeparty]

The human player is op with basically every unit

[@liviubostan7229]

I hope Axemen get their shoulderpads back or a better helmet.

[@LyonExodus]

the current helmet made them lose a lot of style. and i have no idea how TW can still not give high tier units at least a scarf in the shoulder section

[@liviubostan7229]

@@LyonExodus helmet is also the most important armoutlr for infantry. Especially infantry tgat fights in tight fornation where only upper spashee are available

[@LyonExodus]

That seems to be the case. Head armor is way more important than body and i think it's due to the headshot DMG and the "stun" mechanic. if it was for me most infantry would have at least 50 armor there

[@liviubostan7229]

@@LyonExodus True. I think they need to give the Axemen the Head Armour of Druzhinik(T5 one) to make them good.

[@noahtremblay2676]

@@LyonExodus they deserves some mail shoulders the new helmet gives them that viking look though kind like it tbh

[@thehashslingingslasher6443]

I want the old heavy axemen. the new ones are horrible.

[@Jompo92]

Why do the devs hate norse? I remember in old mount and blade the norse were often the weakest and always lost, now is the same with sturgia in bannerlord. But why?

[@kacpereo3176]

Sturgia should have tier 6 shock infantry with 2handed axe instead of cavalry... Vikings didnt even use horses in battles

[@Lobster_Lars]

Sturgia arent vikings

[@kacpereo3176]

@@Lobster_Lars they are varyag rus so they technically are vikings.. or atleast they have 80% things from vikings

[@shocklogic8107]

Are we just going to ignor the fact that Heavy Axe men are terible aganst cav and get beat in mele by the Vlandian Sergant?

[@LyonExodus]

5/5 for creativity. have a check at 1:43 for cav performance

[@shocklogic8107]

I just tested them against cav. You have a fair point and I apoligize for my rash statement. However, It looks like you slitely over exagerated there effective ness against cav. They do very well against mixed ters of cav, they do slitly worse but still good aganst high ters. The only cav unit that they realy have a problem with is the Aserai Vangard Faris. There also not bad in mele but still don't do well agains the VS.

[@LyonExodus]

Well done for going back, test it yourself and apologize when wrong. They thing about cav is that as long as infantry is togheter they simply win, they all can win effectively enough that ther's only a few units that deserve praise for their lances. unfortunately we haven't cover any of them yet. Melee wise i'll state this again. The difference in Vs T5 performance among units is largley not important in a vanilla setting, as it's unlikely you will face more than 10% T5 or T6 in most armies. This is a game problem of course, and one i don't like. On paper it sounds like High tier performance should be very important (i used to think it was too) but when you factor in that high tiers are very rare for the AI and that you are going to siege any other battle you start to understand that performance Vs lower tier becomes more important, that's what i heavely judge any units on. Now to pick up some numbers: Axeman Vs T5 0,5 K/D (not great but still 3rd best) Sergeant Vs T5 0,88 K/D (way better and 2nd best) Axeman Vs 1-4 216 K/D (keep in mind in the video T4 is not included) Sergeant Vs 1-4 50,1 K/D You can see that that it is quite different. Roughly 4x more for the Axeman With this information and knowing one brings throwables and you can decide to not use them if you want by telling them to Hold fire. which one has more upside? Now, as to why in your tests the Axmean are not performing this good i have no idea other than maybe you are not using Shield Wall when charging, Shield wall has been the best command to give to cavalry and infantry formations when also selecting charge for well over an year at least. But hey, view stuff this way. i don't want to give 0s to units because i hate them. it's because i want them to get buffed. I hope these videos can work as evidence for whoever is in charge of TW troops balancing to view and take action.

[@user-rp2rp6zu2d]

@@LyonExodus bro but why are u grouping ur tests like that(T5 and T1-4)? If u are reffering to the most common situations shouldnt u avoid testing dudes against tier 1 infs? Because T1 infs are not a problem of other higher tier infs at all. They all got shut down by archers when the army close in for melee. And the second question is wouldnt it be more accurate to rate infantry after testing them against mixed T2-T5 or at least T1-T5 instead separately against T1-T4 and T5? I think having a 25% of T5 infs instead T1 would dramatically change the results and wash off the shame for vlandians being one of the worst infs in 1.8.0

[@LyonExodus]

the tests are split in that way because they aim at understanding the difference among the units. Sure, you can add a Vs mixed infantry melee performance but that would generally be redundant and way more RNG dependent, since in 1 test the T5 infantry might be in a decent size group and kill way more than they should if mixed properly. (also if a player runs infantry only he will have no archer to take care of the T1s, also not all T1s stay in the front and get killed by archers) Same goes the other way around. At times a more mixed test just doesn't yield accurate results. in the case of the Aserai Vetarans you know they perform great against every unit but struggle against High tiers. if the tests were to be mixed you would never understand their weakness as a T1 might end up killing a unit that was brought down to 2hp by a T5. In this case you end up thinking the T1 did it, while instead it was the T5 doing most of the job. thus running more tests tier by tier gives you better results and makes you understand the strengths and weaknesses of any unit. While a mixed army test doesn't achieve the same level of understanding, you would just know if they perform better or worse than other units in that scenario. which is important by itself, and might be an addition going forward when the videos will need to be updated in a few weeks. But at the time i started gathering the data i had no additional time for 5 extra tests for all 34 units nor it crossed my mind. Then, what if you find yourself against an army that has a bunch of T2 but not a lot of T4 & 5. Wouldn't the way i run the test give you a better indication of how your troop is going to perform? Anyway, i have been running tests of this kind for a good year and a half, not just for myself but to create extensive guides. i run into the mistake of many of believing Vs T5 performance was more important than it is in reality. and many other mistakes along the way. Can the tests be improved? yes, surely. Do i think running a mixed army test over tier by tier is better? no, the latter is more informative as long as the tester has the time to run a lot of them. Do i think a mixed army test should be run? yes, given the right amount of time is found.