The greatest battle ever?

[Rosacrux]

What is the greatest - in terms of numbers - battle you have ever been involved into? In MTW of course http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif

I thought my 1100 byzantines vs 7000+ spaniards was going to top my own list, but I was wrong.

Last night I was trying to make a GA victory with my personal MOD (one province per faction, strong rebel armies everywhere, rebellius provinces - factor 2, 3 and 4 - all over) playing (again) the Byzantines.

Well, at one point I moved to take Khazar. I neglected to do so in the early stages, due to the massive Rebel army (2000+) that was stationed there, but I have had grown big enough, so I could spare a decent force to take it. I moved a stack (1200+ troops - Byz cav, Varangs, Byz inf, one Katapract, one Pronoiai allagion) and the rebels fled. To my surprise I saw that ALL provinces nearby had multiple huge rebel stacks in them. I didn't think though they would move in all at once... which is precisely what they did.

Now... sit tight... my 1200+ army faced an army of no less than 11.850 rebels! A darn huge army, if I may say so. Luckily, I got the bridge defence and after hours of play (my wife got tired to wait for and went to bed during the battle) I managed to route the last (12th or 13th, I am not sure... might even have been the 14th) wave of them. Endless hordes of steppe cavalry, feudal sergs and MAAs, horse archers, basic archers and spearmen and urban militia (NO peasants... why???) crashed on my brick-wall of Varangian guard and byz inf, while the byz cav (with unlimited ammo http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/wink.gif ) rained arrows. Occasionaly, I would direct the Pr. Allagion (even my 9-star generals Kats twice) via the second bridge to catch some prisoners while they routed. Note that the AS (artificial stupidity) never used that second bridge!!!

Final result: 6870 rebels dead, 1240 prisoners - I lost 580 men.

What is your most massive battle?

[cin.Thrawn]

Nothing as big as that, normal game no MOD
3000 of mine BRITS vs 6000 of them SILICIANS

LOST, lol my king gave a -6 morale

[chunkynut]

With the hordes of almos on my southern border i thought well what the hell may as well send in an army. I had only played one campaign b4 to get me used to the game and aborted it when it became too easy (it was on easy difficulty). I sent 1900 men from aragon to valencia and didn't take out their ships.

9000 of the buggers came in from neighbouring teritories and the sea!

But my cats took out loads and so did my longbows, until their gen (king) died and they ran away.

[This message has been edited by chunkynut (edited 10-18-2002).]

[Magraev]

My highest numbers were 1.400 egyptians (me) vs. 4.500 almohad. Nothing compared to the ppl above.

I lost just under 200 men, killed 800 and captured 1.200.

[oZoNeLaYeR]

6500 Turks VS 8600 Eygptians, i lost, i had too many armoured troops, while we were fighting in Sinai(desert)... *sigh* back to my english campaign.

[Kocmoc]

this exactly shows, how stupid the SP campain is!

u just waste ur time with fighting stupid battles, where u at he start already know how it will end!

so why u spend so much time for such a battle?

if the AI would be clever or intelligent maybe it would be fun, but like he act now its very stupid.

i played the SP campain a it and i realy miss some fun, or even some good tactical moneuver.

koc

[Veiny Eyeball]

My 1300 Frenchmen vs 9000 Elmos. I was defeated in the first clash though (300 dead, 500 captured) and all my reinforcements routed immediately.
I only killed about 90 Elmos.

[Rosacrux]

so true cosmoc... so true. But it gives you a certain "win against the odds" feeling, when they outnumber you like 12-1 and they still (manage to) lose.

Anyhow, I don't play the campaign for the battles, I love the general strategical aspect of it. Battles are just to spice things up, for me.

[hrvojej]

I don't recall people ever questioning the intelligence of the MP players, so could anybody tell me why are the SP players honoured with this treatment again?

[This message has been edited by hrvojej (edited 10-18-2002).]

[maroule]

there has been a lot of debates on Kocmoc irruptions (the last thread 'this game is boring' went over 150 posts I think)

and the general opinion was that this guy was nice, despite his moronic way of expressing himself (again, nothing to do with his poor command of english or his 50 words vocabulary base : he actually manages here to use both 'clever' and 'intelligent', which proves that while the concept is foreign to him, he has two words to designate it). Frankly, I doubt it.

So Kocmoc, loose your MP superiority complex, get a diploma, a first girlfriend, a skin treatment, a job outside of McDo, probably a haircut and a shower and STOP questionning how people use their spare time.


[This message has been edited by maroule (edited 10-18-2002).]

[chunkynut]

Maroule I disagree with Kocmac but that was harsh.

Kormac ppl on this thread have said they have lost against these odds, and with bad v&v's your troops with you as the large numbered opponent can still lose to a smaller better force controlled by the AI.
There are many factors to overcome and if your a good/lucky tactician you can.

And i agree with hrvojej how comes we SP guys get all the flak??

[hrvojej]

To answer and comment at the same time:
Do you think that people that shout down benevolent comments from posters who are "moronic enough to talk about the SP while they are debating the incredibly deep issues of MP" ever think for a second whether their comments are "harsh"?

[Furtrapper]

I'm continually perplexed by these posts on how stupid the AI is and how SPs are sad etc

I was playing the Russians (on normal) last night - 4 star King's army of 1,500 men - when the province was attacked by a Turkish Jihad. They had some 2,200 in total. I confidently expected my halberdiers and arbalesters to hold fast and peppered the foe with boyars and horse archers. To cut a long story short, a Turkish charge at my centre practically routed the whole army, and it was only a strong rally which saved me. Result: lost 201 men, killed 700, captured 200.

The point of this is that I was completely engrossed by this battle and there was a point where I thought I was going to lose...

In the campaign as a whole, the Almohads are the richest and have the largest army. By the time I come into contact with them, they are going to be able to deliver some serious whuppass!

Now I'm playing on normal, pretty well and fairly conservatively, not too aggressive and continually allying myself, not breaking alliances with surprise attacks etc

I consequently have no idea what some of these 'this game is too easy and the AI is rubbish' players are talking about! The whole point of a game is that you are supposed to be able to WIN!!! It has to be a challenge, otherwise it's just not fun, but we have all played - and quickly abandoned - games which are just too damned hard.

To my mind, MTW is still providing me - three weeks after purchase - with enormous fun. I've only had a go at three factions and haven't touched a difficulty setting above Normal. I have had literally days' worth of fun out of it so far, with plenty to go (I'm just getting my first taste of gunpowder). And all that for £30!!

This board is great because it gives tips, discusses bugs and shares experiences - I personally love reading campaign or battle reports!! What I don't love reading are tiresome rants from people with a distinct lack of perspective and a churlish attitude. If you don't like the game, play something else! This board proves that there are plenty of people out there who love this game - despite its minor flaws - and who are keen to support the developers' efforts to make it better by pointing them out in a constructive and positive manner.

Rant over!

[Inferno]

Fur,

While I accept your view, I don't agree with it. For me, even on expert, the AI is not challenging. Which is a shame, because it so nearly could be. The computer sometimes can be quite fantastic in making decisions and often does exactly what I would have done in the same circumstances.

There are other times though (and this is the problem) where the AI makes insanely stupid decisions (IMHO). Like advancing it army's general on his own towards the mass ranks of your army. Or moving from hill to hill to hill until all their troops are exhausted. Or advancing to just in front of your troops and then standing there, not moving getting pummelled by my arbs. Or attacking a river that has two bridges and only using one of them.

Like I said, most of it is good. However, these few pieces of stupidity really make SP campaign battle far too easy.



------------------
It's getting warm in here...that must be one hell of an INFERNO!

[Papewaio]

Maroule at no point does Kocmoc make a personal attack on anyone unless you count the AI as a person which I do not, it would truly be moronic to do so.

For veterans of STW both SP and/or MP the AI is not enough of a challenge and hence boring. The irratating side of the weakness in the AI is some of the rank stupidity of the AI like charging generals or stand and get shot at. This diminishes the challenge and hence the fun.

Now one of the reasons Kocmoc and others may be particulary angry is some of these very problems where part of the first patch for STW. Daimyo and Taisho tended to lead from the front... way in front. Like leading with the 11 man Heavy Calvary over a bridge while the rest of the forces are still half a map from said bridge. It is slightly upsetting to see that some of the original flaws have happened again.

Now Kocmoc is upset. He would like a challenge. He would like the patch ASAP.

It is irratating that he states thus often.

However none of this gives you the right to make snide petty remarks about the intelligence of a fellow patron, nor go on to make churlish remarks about other factors like acne, job, graduate level and relationships are totally out of line.

Do it again and I will ask TosaInu-Sama to have you banned for as long as he feels fits the transgression.

-----

By the way I only play SP. So this isn't a MP versus SP. This is about reading the terms that you agreed to as a patron of this board and having the ability to honour that agreement. I'm sure TosaInu-Sama will be able to quote you chapter and verse on which part you have failed to uphold.

If you or anyone else attacks a fellow patron in such a disgusting manner in this forum you also attack the Org as a whole.

[maroule]

Quote Originally posted by Papewaio:
Maroule at no point does Kocmoc make a personal attack on anyone unless you count the AI as a person which I do not, it would truly be moronic to do so.
[/QUOTE]


- feel free to ban me if you see fit
I, however, saw racial/nationality comments of a much worse nature on this forum, and saw no correction from your part. But, papewaio, I will now pay a good deal of attention in the future on how virulently you react to the same type of 'infrigements'.

- Kocmoc did comment on 'u just waste ur time with fighting stupid battles'. That's very short of implying we're stupid wasting our time, and a lot of other patron will have understood that.

- My comments were ad hominen and I have no problem apologising for that. The fact is that he comes across as a monomaniac teenager with a superiority complex, and I have the right to be irritated. That he might be a personal friend of yours and that you feel the need to jump to his defence doesn't change it. The discussion went on already last week, caused by the same type of remarks, so there is no need to go over it again.

Kocmoc wants the patch NOW, but we all do. Yet some of us make useful suggestions. I did my part. Surely, you noticed that too, eagle eye.

[This message has been edited by maroule (edited 10-18-2002).]

[Soapyfrog]

We're not so smart as you Kocmoc, some of us lose occasionally even against the AI.

Biggest flaw in SP campaign is not the battle AI (which does need some improvement) it is the inability of the AI to effectively deal with strategic agents, especially spies.

Rosacrux's story would have been very different if he had not been across a bridge, and had been playing wth limited ammo.

MP right now is a bit idiotic... it's kinda fun for awhile, but since there is no larger context for the battles, you get stupid armies and people using their troops in ways they would never do in a campaign setting.

So why waste time on MP? The battles mean nothing, victory means nothing... the difference between a minor victory and a crushing victory is... nothing!

The only way I will play MP is to set up a MP campaign with some friends, and that's just a LOT of work.

[Papewaio]

Quote Originally posted by maroule:

- feel free to ban me if you see fit
I, however, saw racial/nationality comments of a much worse nature on this forum, and saw no correction from your part. But, papewaio, I will now pay a good deal of attention in the future on how virulently you react to the same type of 'infrigements'.

- Kocmoc did comment on 'u just waste ur time with fighting stupid battles'. That's very short of implying we're stupid wasting our time, and a lot of other patron will have understood that.

- My comments were ad hominen and I have no problem apologising for that. The fact is that he comes across as a monomaniac teenager with a superiority complex, and I have the right to be irritated. That he is a personal friend of yours and that you feel the need to jump to his defence doesn't change that. The discussion went on already last week, caused by the same type of remarks, so there is no need to go over it again.

Kocmoc wants the patch NOW, but we all do. Yet some of us make useful suggestions. I did my part. Surely, you noticed that too, eagle eye.[/QUOTE]

1/ I am not at the boards very often in the current phase. Only because of recent events am I here with frequency. That is why this forum has three moderators. I am the ghost moderator.

2/ Two wrongs do not make a right. So seeing worse does not entitle you to be obnoxious. If I applied that logic in my day to day life I could say that I saw someone bash his wife to a pulp and that gives me the right to backhand my brother.

3/ Wasting your time... that is an individuals choice and if you are enjoying the battles I do not see it as such. I think the point Kocmoc was trying to make is that if you already know you are going to win because of flaws in the AI or if you readily exploit those flaws then there is no challenge and hence no fun or glory in winning the battle. There is a difference between saying the battles are stupid, that wasting your time playing something that you know you will win, and again another difference when turning around and calling someone stupid.

4/ Kocmoc is not a personal friend of mine. But he is a patron and so are both of us. I have an additional responsiblity as a moderator of MTW. Regardless we should all endeavour to be as polite and informative as possible. Good natured teasing is one thing out and out rudeness is not acceptable. If the names where reversed and I had come across this thread it would be Kocmoc receiving the warning.

5/ Apologies to all for the spelling. My conjuctivitis is playing up and is made worse by using a PC... one of the reasons I'm not moderating as much as I cannot read as much as I should and when I do react I tend to be far from my normal jovial self.

[maroule]

2/ Two wrongs do not make a right. So seeing worse does not entitle you to be obnoxious.

Indeed not. But that was not my point, what I implied is that you had double standards. I'd have liked to see more of you in the nasty greek-turkish exchanges that went on, for example. But I understand you have a life too.


3/ I think the point Kocmoc was trying to make is that if you already know you are going to win because of flaws in the AI or if you readily exploit those flaws then there is no challenge and hence no fun or glory in winning the battle.

But that's the whole point, and why I call him a teenager. I don't play games to win (even if I don't mind winning), because I have no point to prove or no imbalance in my life to redress through gaming. I play to be entertained, and it's not the end result (winning/loosing) that matters. When people like Kocmoc will understand that, they'll see games for what they are and have a more balanced approach to it (and stop breaking b***s). You want glory or respect, get it in real life.


4/ Kocmoc is not a personal friend of mine. But he is a patron and so are both of us. I have an additional responsiblity as a moderator of MTW. Regardless we should all endeavour to be as polite and informative as possible.

Sure, *sigh* no more ad hominem.
But I still think he needs to grow up.

[/B][/QUOTE]

[cart6566]

Thread officially hijacked.

Back on topic: about 3,000 elmos vs. my crusader army of around 1,500. I won just barely. The AI is occasionally challenging, will be much more so when the general is used more cautiously. In my current campaign, the Danish General routed, I did ctrl-A and double clicked him with 7 spear/militia sergeant units. As I am watching him get chased off the map, he suddenly turns around and charges the 7 units!! Just him (the other men in his unit all dead)!!! It helped me out, because he died with no heirs and I didn't get a Pope warning, but couldn't help feeling like I "cheated".

[Papewaio]

Yes there is glory and honour in this. In every part of our lives we can find honour and glory... from the way we treat others, to how hard we work, to doing a job well, even to washing dishes as well as we can.

Of course beating a bunch of sprites on a PC is not exactly large on the glory or honour scale. But as honour is more an internal approach to life and it is about consistency across the board then playing a game to win while not exploiting AI stupidity or purposely doing so to fix it does add some honour.

Now if there is no glory then what is the point of posting ones greatest battles, to boast of ones wins or near wins against possible odds. The glory does come from the adulation and amazement of your fellow patrons.

You can still make witty off the cuff remarks. Just try and go for more funny ones then nasty.

As for:
Quote Originally posted by maroule:


But that's the whole point, and why I call him a teenager. I don't play games to win (even if I don't mind winning), because I have no point to prove or no imbalance in my life to redress through gaming. I play to be entertained, and it's not the end result (winning/loosing) that matters. When people like Kocmoc will understand that, they'll see games for what they are and have a more balanced approach to it (and stop breaking b***s). You want glory or respect, get it in real life.
[/QUOTE]

Kocmoc is looking for a greater challenge and a greater chance of losing. He is not looking for something to stroke his ego by letting him win, he too like you is looking for something that will entertain him by being challenging enough to keep him on his toes.

As for respect in real life. One has to start with respect for oneself. Personally that includes not cheating on oneself by only having small challenges. Respecting oneself should include pushing your limits to excel, not confining oneself to a mediocre existence.

Also respect is about respecting others. Not about belittling their existence when making a point but by proving the point with facts, examples or wit.

[maroule]

Quote Originally posted by Papewaio:
[B]
The glory does come from the adulation and amazement of your fellow patrons.

B][/QUOTE]

??? Either conjuctivitis has hallucinogenic properties, or I'm in the wrong forum.

That's not why I'm here. I do not look for adulation and amazement, I'm here to exchange experiences, funny stories, tips/hints and historical points with fellow gamers. I do that because I reckon MTW is a heck of a game, done and played by people that have a very close taste in historical games as mine, and because I want to share the excitement of playing it. Getting adulation and amazement! How many patrons are here for that? (well, there's always Kocmoc, of course)

On your other points about respect and life, you sound like a pasteur for the Sunday preach, and there is nothing to disagree on.

[yosemite125]

Hey this is a cool topic. I never had a battle that was lopsided at the one above, but i did have a battle with me as the Brits with 1100 troops, and the Germans with 2400 toops.

The reason i liked that battle was we both had good troops, but for some reason which hasn't really happened before, i completely destroyed them.

By the time they fled, I had lost 200 men, and thy had lost 1100+ men.

Maybe not as good as some of yours, but I really liked that battle.

[hrvojej]

Without the intention to make "the greatest battle ever" the one between the patrons here, I feel obliged to say something, since all this could be understood as if maroule was responding to my rhetorical (and potentially inflammatory, I admit) question.
A lot of people are getting shouted down, their only sin being that they prefer to play the game against the AI instead of human opponents. Those shouts may not qualify as being hard enough to ban people, but can most certainly be perceived as rude, excessive and unnecessary. In this particular case, just before I read this thread and posted my question, I was reading the last page of the longbowmen thread, where the poster of a perfectly benevolent comment ended up being told to shut up, solely because some people had a different vision of the nature/topic of the thread. Although I find the overall tone of this forum to be commendable, and the low need for moderator intervention being another proof of that, we have seen quite a lot of these incidents lately, and I think that it is understandable, if not justifiable, that the tolerance might be lowered for the other side as well. Autocensorship can sometimes be a hard thing to apply unilateraly.
That said, I apologize if it was me who started all this mess, and hope that all subsequent posts will actually discuss the topic and the game.

[This message has been edited by hrvojej (edited 10-18-2002).]

[Papewaio]

Quote Originally posted by maroule:
??? Either conjuctivitis has hallucinogenic properties, or I'm in the wrong forum.
[/QUOTE]

Unfortunately it doesn't. I did say the glory was very small on the scale of things. I would really put it below actual real life events. But glory in my terms is bestowed on individuals by their fellows, like clapping at the opera or typing ROLF at a forum. Not quite as glorious as saving someones life, beating cancer, or exploring for gold in Asia and the Outback and still not 30 http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/biggrin.gif, but enough about me.

I just would like to see more politeness and less whining in these boards. I wish to a return of the spirited yet respectful debates. That way I can get back to being my ironic bastard self and stand out in these boards. You see its purely self interest at heart here http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/wink.gif.

[Cyricist]

With such great people like Kocmoc around, dare I post here..?

Well, I'll try it anyway. My best job on the field as of yet isn't that fabulous. I had one particular case I do remember however:

I was playing the English and got invaded by an Almohead army rougly twice my size. I had about 1200 men and he had about 2300+ men. The reason I remember it was not because of the size of the armies (which wasn't very impressive, you'll agree) but by the kills/casualties/prisonner numbers. After about 45 minutes of intense field combat, on the field lay dead 150+ Englishmen, mostly spearmen and some peasants, and 1700 (!) Almohads including their 5 star commander and about 500 Almohead Urban Militia. Apart from that, I held about 300 men prisonner (courtesy of my men-at-arms who had surrounded his main horde). The only real losses I had, including a few peasants and spearmen I named earlier, was a full unit of Hobilars (*crying* wheeeeeeheheheheeeeee valour 6!! *sniff*) and a small heap (about half a unit) of men-at-arms.
I saved the replay to entertain my friends (it was unlikely for someone of my skill to finish with this result, or so I thought) but unfortunately replays with reinforcements seem to be bugged http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/frown.gif. I truly hope they fix this.

The funny thing is I had a 6 star general commanding this army.. and about three years later he was 'unfortunately slain before the pox could kill him' when a catapult shot knocked him out. He wasn't even in actual combat when it happened.

Kocmoc,

To answer your question, I play SP to avoid people like you. Over the years I've tried online many times, often because I had to to review a game. Inevitably the number of people like you far, far exceed the number of people who are agreeable to play with.

Also, as someone else said, in SP your success or lack of it has some greater meaning beyond proving ones manhood (which has always seemed pointless).

As to the original topic: So far my best stands have been as the Egyptians, early in the Early campaign against the Byzantines, who attacked me for no reason I know. True, these only involve 2,000 men at most, but managing to win anything against the Kats and their evil, 9-stars feels like winning a marathon.


Remember,
No matter where you go,
There you are,
V'ger gone

[MarkF]

Hi papewaio I just want to say that I support you in all that you have said in this thread...

On the topic:
A few days ago I fought a battle which was 800 of mine byz against 1100 turks. It was not so much a big battle as it was epic.

Since the battle was on expert the enemy had a moral bonus 2+ (I think). He had a 8star prince in command eith the great leader vice (+6 to morale?). In command of my forces was my best prince who is a 9star also great leader. All these wery significant bonuses ment that all the troops were prepared to fight to the death.

The vista of the battle was flat grassland so I took on a defensive position in the rear of the map, so that his troops would be a get a bit soft by the walk before joining the party...

The core of my army was made up of byz inf with a few varangians. About a third of my army was made up of treb archers. The remainding 1/4 or so was kats with the exeption of one unit of merc (alan lights..).

The turkish army started to advance on me, with his different types of horse archers in the lead (mostly turcoman horse I think). he sent thim in to harass my lines, and they wore a pain in the neck. My lack of fast cavalry was annoying at this point..

I had sent my archers to the front line when I saw his advancing horse archers. He kept swirling them cleavarly just out of range of my archers trying get to my vulnerable infantry. But I kept countering him and at last the first arrows were exhanged.

During this deadly dance his line of han-to-hand fighters had advanced. Soon the general melee had started. It was my byz inf and varangians against a battle line heavy in saracen infantry. The battle was even, with me slightly in the lead. I was pleasanlty surprised by the AI:s behaviour as he cleavarly countered my flanking attacks and often tried to do some of his one. During this time his horse archers were inflikting sewer damage to my troops while mine far less moblie trebs wore probably not as useful.

The strategy I had been going for the hole battle would be to engage him with the infantry and swing my tanks(kats) around his flanks. So therfore I sent my brave alan lights against some of his turcoman horse trying to clear a way around his flanks. The alans couldn't catch the turcomans and they had huge losses. But it made the trick and cleared the way and bought me the few moments I needed to get around him.

So I had the victory in my hand. 4 units of constantinoples finest charged a mighty charge in to the back of the infidels. The sight was mighty. But the turks didn't rout they kept fighting with bravery.

while my kats charged home. They swung 4units of their turcoman and spihais of the porte (now out of arrows) around my flank. So I sent my trebs against them not wanting them attacking the backs of my infantry line.

The klup of turks surrounded by my troops were slowly but steadily shrinking, but not without taking many byzantines with them to the grave. Behind my battleline the situation was the reverse and my trebs were overwhelmed and they routed after getting their numbers lowered to about 10-11 per unit, but the turks went after them and they were slain to the last man..

After finishing my archers their horse archers wheeld around and attacked the two units of byz infantry I had been able to free from the melee..

And so the battle continued until finally the turks were routed and their reinforcments were delt with. Only about 80 turks out of 1100 made it home that day. And only 50 or so alowed them selfs to be captured. The brave and honorable turks had sent about 600 of my troops to heavens. One unit of kats gained 4 valor points and in that unit only 3 out of forty men were left after the battle. That unit had killed over 200 turks.

This was the greatest battle I have ever fought and probaly ever will.. It alone was worth the 30£ the game cost..

[Cyricist]

Good grief.. what slaughter haha! Have you got screenshots or a replay? I want to see this!!!

[TheLastEuropean]

Nice battle MarkF (both because it was and because it brings this thread back on topic!!) http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/biggrin.gif

My biggest battle was also the most suprising. I sent my English King's 931-man-stack into Hungary. There was 2 large stacks in there I wanted to wittle down but they retreated. Some were left in the castle under siege - the rest made their way over the border to the safety of their Hungarian comrades. That border province now contained 4 large stacks and we all know what was coming. Next turn I was utterly shocked to see they had pumped over 8000 men into Hungary to re-take it. I doubted I could win and was concerned for my king but 'went for it' anyway. I should've read the battle screen info first!!

As the map was loading the first thing to happen was the map-sound started whilst only 2/3s loaded. I could hear...... water. Water!! Could it... might it be... yes, oh yes it was a bridge map!! Things were immediately looking up, maybe I could win this one. There was 2 bridges. I had 2 SAP units, so I parked one at the end of both bridges and drew up the remainder of the army in between the two, ready to move to the threatened bridge fast. I hit 'Begin Battle'.

Immediately there was the sound of fighting!! What the hell??? Who, where, what... omg there was a unit of mounted sergeants on the bridge already!. No, not quite, only about 10 were on the bridge, the rest were on MY side of the bridge!!! What the hell is going on?? Then, I saw a large Byzantium army on the other side of the bridge!! Byzantiums???? For a moment I reeled. It was a double attack! As the penny dropped I suddenly realised 'Oh no the Hungarians have started on MY side' I panicing madly, beginning to wheel and move units accordingly, before I realised that I was wrong. Phew, it was just that the Mounted Sergeants had started too close to the edge and thus were put on my side. The rest were on the opposite side as they should be. No matter, just 1 less unit of theirs to worry about.

By now, I was 99% certain I could win this. Instead of fighting 8000 I was fighting 2x4000 which meant 2 lots of waves each time. This was much preferable as it reduced the time it would take. Well, the SAP took 1 (double) wave by themselves (although there was a lot of cav.). With the improved 'Withdraw' command it was a piece of cake to swap units when fatigued/reduced for fresh ones. 2 SAP plus 1 Halberdier and 3 Billmen units where going to be very hard to beat. And they were! I won, but it was not as straight forward as I imagined it would be. Towards the end their numbers were beginning to tell but I eventually clinched it although there was absolutely no way I could retain Hungary.

End result: 2382 killed, 1112 captured, 364 lost. My King had 3 men left after getting trapped chasing routers across the bridge. I was a little disappointed by the end results but it can be explained by the fact I could hardly chase any routers since between the 2 factions there was always a constant stream of reinforcements arriving.

[MarkF]

That sort of thing happened to me once to sort of. But instead of his army beeing splitt up it was min... Attacking as the russians my gluttonos alcoholic of a king was stuck alone on the wrong side of the river right in the lap of some very unfriendly frenchies...

gah! =)


no screenshots of previously mentioned battle though http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/frown.gif

[MarkF]

sometimes aj jast kaent bilivee maj speljing

http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif

[ToranagaSama]

Quote Originally posted by hrvojej:

A lot of people are getting shouted down, their only sin being that they prefer to play the game against the AI instead of human opponents.
[This message has been edited by hrvojej (edited 10-18-2002).][/QUOTE]

Its not that they prefer to play vs the AI, its that they play Total War for the revolutionary aspect that actually IS TW. That is the "Context" that the Strategy portion of the game provides for the Battle portion. Frankly, w/o this, there is no TW!

Thank you Maroule and Soapyfrog for taking up the mantel!

Papeio (sp?), I believe Maroule has gotten your point!

On his point, since your here with us for the moment, if possible, as "THE" moderator, it might be a good idea to review some of the posts he mentions. I don't recall them, but THERE HAS BEEN other posts of similar ilk made by others! So, he may feel a bit singled out.

Perhaps a general message to the forum might be the way to go re "insults" AND "tone", etc.; might be a more appropo way to go. So, enough said on this topic, both of you let it rest!!!

Nexxxtttt....:

Let's talk about the more prevelant, if not more relevant, topic that Maroule and Soapyfrog bring up. For the greater part this topic has been ignored. Since you've been away, you may not be aware of a certain "underlying" division between those whose "preference" lies with either MP or SP.

Maroule and Soapyfrog (and include me) are correct that MPers post their comments with a certain obstinate tone, that may or may not be deliberate. I tend to think that for most its undeliberate (indeliberate??). Nonetheless, its, for want of a better term at the moment, insulting. (Maroule, correct me if I'm wrong) Its this context that surrounds his post.

The crux of the matter is that SPers enjoy TW in its entirety, while MPers enjoy just the "facet" of MP (Tactical, that is).

Given the diffculties, and the consequent frustrations, that are present in MP, the MPers are whinning quite loudly and persistently resulting in the "shouting down" of most things Single Play. (Perhaps, unintentionally)

An example of this is exhibited in Komoc's posts, which show a strong disregard for all that is VERY good about the SP Campaign.

Comments such as, "...This game is Stupid...." ["game", meaning SP] [and taken withing the context of his post] is CERTAIN to rile the SPers up! If one's focus is MP, one may be oblivious to why another one might take umbrage with such a comment.

I believe its the Administrator/Moderator's responsibility to 'ascertain' and 'navigate' this adroitly. [Of course, this w/b holding the Org to higher standard than most any forum/group. So, shouldn't the best be held to a higher standard?] How? Just to begin:

1) There s/b some sort of definition provided to posts, so that SP or MP "focused" post are more easilty identifiable. JMO, but there's a lot of confusion leading to contention.

2) The ole subject of separate SP and MP forums needs to be debated (w/o the MPers "shouting" things down).

Well, now TorangaSama will shut his mouth. Nobody listens to me anyway.

ToranagaSama, in a measure of respect, does a 1/4 bow, head straight, left hand on his sword hilt, eyes upon his adversary,

Aragoto!

-------------
For true Samuri, there is only "The Way"; his purpose is to serve.

[anymapkoku]

About the insulting MP intelligence vs insulting SP intelligence post, that's easy. You're only as intelligent as the player you beat. This is why smart people prefer players with brains and I think that's what kocmoc was trying to say.

[anymapkoku]

If you want to win against the odss paly someone who is good at the game unlike the computer ai. Or host a 1vs2 or something. Then the "odds" have a fighting chance.

[anymapkoku]

If there's no point in MP battles then there's no point in beating the SP campaign, winning the superbowl, playing poker, or yawning. I would just think someone would prefer the mp battles because they like military strategy.

Any,

Would you explain to me the STRATEGY in the MP component of M:TW? There is no STRATEGY in that part of the game at all. There is only tactics.

One's intelligence, or lack thereof, has nothing to do with the venue one chooses to exercise it in. That would be equivalent to saying that only smart people lease cars and stupid people buy them.

I simply don't care to compete with mostly juvenile (in spirit, if not in fact) players using a small part of a much greater game. I got past having to compare myself to others in this manner some time back.

Really, there's no point in most things we choose for entertainment, it is an escape from reality as we find it. No more, no less.

Having said that, the excercise of creating a mighty empire from scratch, building up through the techtree and beating a computer opponent senseless (or having my head handed to me) is intensely pleasing in a manner I've never gotten from playing against ONLINE opponents.

Now, if you want to speak of playing face to face with friends, well, that's another story. I've spent may pleasurable hours playing my friends.


And so it goes,
V'ger gone

[anymapkoku]

I'm not going to get into a hgue debate over the difference between strategy and tactics, but there's a big difference between what the campaign is and strategy.
I don't know I just would rather play against a juvenile that thought for himself and challenged me than a computer which had perfect manners but no personality or brains. If I thought MP was really that bad I just wouldn't play either, but no matter waht I've got to have a brain behind my opponent putting up some kind of fight. I can't really see it your way but I guess that's ok.

[anymapkoku]

You're car analogy is wrong. If both people play MTW then both are exercising in the same venue. The better player of the two will naturally be the one who can beat the other. It's like if I beat Mike Tyson's punchout on Nintendo, but I've never boxed anyone in real life, I can't claim to be a very good boxer. Similiarly, I can't claim to be very good at MTW if I haven't beaten a good(real) player at MTW.

[hrvojej]

And why do you need to tell us this, that is my question? Did anybody tell you that you are a bad player, or an unintelligent individual? Why the need to do this to other people then, huh? After all, why don't you debate this way with people who are actually interested in debating this way, who WANT to be GOOD and be considered as such by others, instead of trying to persuade someone who has a completely different idea of fun than your own? Is the whole world really just an enemy that has to be beaten, is the urge to beat people to dust really that strong that you just cannot restrain yourself from smacking everybody, no matter how rude and unnecessary it is, even if it's outside the game in a public place where you should show some manners and consideration toward other patrons?

[This message has been edited by hrvojej (edited 10-20-2002).]

[MarkF]

I thought we had got this thread back on track.... Maybe a bit unnessisary to hijack it again.... http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/frown.gif

[insolent1]

I've had some big battles. The biggest single battle was 8882v924 but it was easy as I was the italians with a lot ITL's & it was against the poor turks over constantinople it normally does bring some of the biggest battles. The best battle I have had was more of a serious of battles that lasted 8 hours(praise for the pause key & a good pc). It was against 3 factions I was the Polish, expert GA & high period. The danes attacked sweden with the the comical danish royal knight attack. The almos attacked me in saxony 4312v961& franconia 5212v1100. I just happened to be attacking constantinople on that turn with 1260v2112 byzantines(rank 9 coward) & the byzantines had also decided to launch an attack into khazar 2484v863 polish loons. It was a long day with meal breaks & even a trip to the shop. I won all of them but the danes nearly got me & I have the pics http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif

[Swisspike]

OK! THAT"S IT!

Anymapkoku, you slammed sp mode hard, basically stating that smart players prefer multi-player.

That really pushed a button for me.

RANT ON
The plain truth is that smart players prefer NOT to play vs. whiny, kewl-doodz wannabe's.

There are many on this board (the majority, perhaps) who have little tolerance for the gamy, arrogant, ultra-competitive punks that gravitate to gamespy.

These doodz are the same punks that caused my wife and I to stop playing Everquest.

These doodz are the same punks that you see driving chopped Civics, weaving in and out of traffic, rap music blaring through sub-divisions at 3 AM.

So, to sum it all up in a form you and your buddies can understand, STFU!

RANT OFF

Insolent1,

Those all sound quite fun, but some questions occurred to me.

On the whole, is a 9 star coward a plus or a minus?

It is my observation that the Islamic factions (except, perhaps for the Elmos) have much weaker armies. I find that when playing as a Catholic faction or as the Byzantines, I can win when greatly outnumbered, but in my games as a Turk or Egyptian, I'm doing well to win at 1:1 odds vs non-Muslims.


Klatu?
V'ger gone

[malkuth]

Moderator you need to put you personal Views aside. Being a moderator negates being a patron. You need to take this discussion and waring to the offenders email. Close this now dead thread.

[hrvojej]

V'Ger, the 9 stars offset the coward vice somewhat to keep the overall morale around the value that the units would have without a vice and under a 0 star general. Of course, you still get the bonuses for attack and defense, so you'll lose less men, and that should benefit morale as well. If you think of it this way, instead of pining for that what you might have had, it's still an ok situation. http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif
And I wouldn't say that muslim armies are weaker, you just need to play them differently, and you'll get the same against-the-odds victories. I found that exploiting the speed and combined arms of muslims instead of playing on raw power that you do with the catholics does the trick for me.

Insolent1,

I've not played Muslim factions much and only just seemed to have (part of) my problem right before my Egyptian campaign refused to load.

The major problem I'd been having was trying to kill Kats. They just wouldn't go down. Since it was early in the game (before 1180), I didn't have much in the way of advanced troops and was trying to take them on with Kwars, Ghulams, a few Saracens and mostly Nubians, plus Dessert Archers.

I finally started having some success when I built a few crossbows, so I began focusing on AP troops and life got a little better.

In the bad, early days I was shooting them with arrows, sticking them with spears, then hitting them from the flank and rear, but it they didn't seem to care. I could almost never get them to rout and they were very slow to die, even in those circumstances. Of course, that 9-star verses my (if I'm lucky) 4- or 5-star wasn't helping.

I had problems with the Byz Inf and Vars, but nothing like trying to deal with the Kats.

Plus ca change,
V'ger gone

[Rosacrux]

I am really disspointed to watch a thread started by myself evolve into some sort of flamefest...

Whatever... thanks to those who try to keep it on track.

[sapphoo]

'big' battles tend to happen quite often (more than 1000 each side), but they are not necessarily the most fulfilling. I like those battles that are against the odds, and the ones you think you will win easily, but somehow you struggle, and even lose.
This morning i had a fight of about 2000 against 4000+, and won it nicely.

The great thing about SP is of course that you can use your imagination better. In MP you just do a battle, but in SP it is just a battle.

for example

I often keep troops from the beginning of the game until the end of the game, even though they are inferior. I sometimes retrain them though so that they have nice shiny shield and swords. And it is a nice feeling when a huge army attacks one of those old armies and my army beats them. I then carefully retrain them and feel proud of them.

yes...i am pathetic.

[maroule]

Quote Originally posted by sapphoo:


yes...i am pathetic.[/QUOTE]

no, no (tap on the shoulder), we understand...

That's the role play part and is intensely fun. ACtually, I'd like to be able to separate/individualise even more my most senior troops. Let's face it, we all love the idea of the Old Guard of Napoleon/ legendary Roman legions made of hard core veterans. Right now, except for the 4 in value, nothing separates a spearman from another one. Besides, if your general is good, even new recruits will have a 4 value, so apart from romaticism, there's no point in holding on to veterans.

[Don Megel]

Whoa, don't ya'll get fired up?

I like SP not becouse the battles are potenialy eaiser but for the entire SP package. In MP its me with my ideal troops vrs someone with htier ideal troops. In SP its me with what ever I've managed to scramble together vrs the PC with the same. The entire game world changes based on what I do and this sets me up for the next battle. If I get stomped in Battle A then I wont have the troops to fight battle B. See what im saying?

MP is great for some people. To them thats why they bought the game. Let them/us play the game how we want to. It was our money...

600 Italians vrs 3000 Turks. Only hideing in the trees and 200 Clansmen saved my life. I still think of that epic ordeal.... *Shiver*

------------------
Praise the Lord for He is mighty and great!