View Full Version : Who's still playing?
edyzmedieval
02-04-2011, 23:42
I had enough of ETW and NTW for the moment, so I returned to ye old' faithful, Medieval: Total War. I started an Expert campaign as the Egyptians, one of my favourite factions, so I'm waiting to see how this turns out. :book:
Still playing, my dear MTW comrades?
Certainly. XL/Crusader states/High/Hard.
:thumbsup:
PershsNhpios
02-05-2011, 08:49
I suppose you could say that I am... XLTyb2.2/Byzantines/High/Hard
Also Caravel/English/Early/Hard
BKB/Bohemians/Late/Normal
BTW what are the differences between difficulty levels? AI has more money etc?
BTW what are the differences between difficulty levels? AI has more money etc?
check here (http://shoguntotalwar.yuku.com/reply/16233/Medieval-TotalWar-Numerology#reply-16233)
Thanks, whole thread is very informative :)
Huth, how is BKB compared to vanilla and other mods?
I played XL or vanilla long time ago, so I can't say much about differences... What I like in BKB is this historical feeling of certain period. Every period has its own 'unit_prod' etc. files, so you don't have acces to new units in later periods. This could be minus for players playing slowly, but this gives unique character of every period with units, factions and provinces that make campaign different. Early period is set for Normans, Reconquista, Byzantium, Muslims and crusades, high - religious wars of all kind, late - dominance of western warfare, pikes, full plates etc, but every nation have its unique units, so there's no point for concerning that some nation is less 'cool', but of course historical aspect is deciding, so muslim nations in late aren't that strong and has less variety of units or heroes.
There are many new units, buildings, titles, provinces, nations... I play almost only in late period, because it's the longest one and late medieval units are excellent. Gameplay is epic alike in XL, everyone has enough cash for big armies, heroes and offices guarantee strong enemies, generally it's great fun :P
I remember that I like unit balance more in BKB than XL, where fights are fastest IIRC... Also I like BKB's historical nuances and details.
gaijinalways
02-06-2011, 03:17
I'm still playing vanilla MTW. Started a campaign with the Italians (early, expert) again to get me used to it again. Up past 1205, humming along, though the English just attacked me for some reason, sank part of my navy, grrr!
Will have to see to payback, hope I haven't shifted too many troops away to Constantinople and Antinoch!
I'm about to load it up on my cheesy laptop and see how it goes.
My old game rig died and as far as I know the Nivdia 8800 bug is still alive and well and I can't play it on my present game rig. Totalbummer.com
I like the eye-candy on M:TW2 but the campaign mode drives me nuts. I can't stand it. Would love to have the old campaign mode but with the newer graphics.
edyzmedieval
02-08-2011, 19:16
I turned to the XL Mod, enjoying a nice campaign. ~:)
Hello, guys!
When I'm not modding, I play ReduxTW. It's very different and quite enjoyable. RomanWars comes second. BKB's great but regrettably buggy Age Of Warlords is good for custom battles.
I want to finish up my very old Swiss campaign (the race to 60% or 1453), but RL is killing my gaming time. I got a couple of turns in a few weeks ago, but it's all big battles from here on out and getting the blocks of time necessary is tough. Once done with that I will probably try Caravel.
edyzmedieval
02-10-2011, 01:37
I want to finish up my very old Swiss campaign (the race to 60% or 1453), but RL is killing my gaming time. I got a couple of turns in a few weeks ago, but it's all big battles from here on out and getting the blocks of time necessary is tough. Once done with that I will probably try Caravel.
Banks! Be Swiss! Use banks to fund Swiss Armored Pikemen. ~D
Banks! Be Swiss! Use banks to fund Swiss Armored Pikemen. ~D
Ironically, money has been so tight in this campaign, the Swiss can barely rub two florins together. Poor lands, no trade, constant warfare. I don't even have Switzlerland teched up to SAPs. :shame:
edyzmedieval
02-11-2011, 00:49
Ironically, money has been so tight in this campaign, the Swiss can barely rub two florins together. Poor lands, no trade, constant warfare. I don't even have Switzlerland teched up to SAPs. :shame:
Expand? Just take a nearby province and raid of all the buildings for the money.
I just started a Kiev campaign in early (BKB Super Mod). I'm toying with the idea of doing an AAR. Would it be better to post it in here? I notice the Mead Hall doesn't seem to get much traffic.
I just started a Kiev campaign in early (BKB Super Mod). I'm toying with the idea of doing an AAR. Would it be better to post it in here? I notice the Mead Hall doesn't seem to get much traffic.
We would welcome it here in the Main Hall. :bow:
Expand? Just take a nearby province and raid of all the buildings for the money.
It's 1426 and I have 39 provinces. It's a blitz rush at this point to get to 60%, can't afford to strip down a province when I have to expand so quickly, and can't give up provinces I take.
Trapped in Samsara
02-11-2011, 15:39
Hi
Caravel Mod v2.1, English, Early, Hard. It's 1336 (or thereabouts), and I've got 40-ish provinces. I've only recently got to the point where I have the financial muscle to really start blitzing but, trust me, money is still tight, and all build decisions have to get past several value-for-money committees before receiving the King's approval. My first (and only) level 5 castle only completed a few years ago.
Am in the process of giving the Egyptians a lesson in the strategic application of military assets (naval invasion of Greece to be specific). But it's been a long, hard fight. No kidding. It took me a couple of decades to evict them from Iberia, not least because I couldn't maintain naval superiority to interdict their flow of Saracen Infantry, Ghazis, Desert Archers and Ghulams. There were a couple of close run battles, and at one point I had to abandon Cordoba in the face of 3-1 odds and a superior general. Earlier there was the chevauchée from Portugal to Navarre 'cos I was going to get my @r$e kicked if I tried holding on in the face of continuous rebellions plus probable Egyptian attack.
It's a great campaign. Thank you Gollum and co.
Best regards
Victor
Sapere aude
Horace
I will be playing MTW in the retirement home, that's for sure! Nice to see that it's still going strong.
PershsNhpios
02-12-2011, 11:28
Lehesu, if you decide to make an AAR, in which effort we would all encourage you, please don't hesitate to make a new thread in the Main Hall, as it would be very worth a page of it's own.
edyzmedieval
02-12-2011, 13:50
Good to see people are still enjoying it. ~:)
I might start an AAR as well...
Lehesu, if you decide to make an AAR, in which effort we would all encourage you, please don't hesitate to make a new thread in the Main Hall, as it would be very worth a page of it's own.
Ah, yes, by "here" I meant, "in the Main Hall", not "in this thread". My apologies for the imprecise language.
I am tempted, and have actually already written some pieces, but the truth is, my campaign thus far has been relatively boring. Ten turns and not a single battle yet. I also haven't taken any screenshots worth showing as a result. If I do end up doing it, the AAR will be presented via a series of letter/journal entries from the perspective of different characters within the game.
Thank you for this interesting acccount of your campaign victor. I am glad you are having fun with the mod.
v2.2 includes an enhanced bodyguard behaviour for all factions' BG units - they play more cautiously now coordinating their attacks with the rest of teh AI army and do not charge on their own. You can implement the fix your self in version 2.1 of Caravel, and other people can do the same in the mods of their choices or vanilla - it does make a difference.
I am very seriously contemplating to make version v2.3 within the next week that will include small adjustments to some of the rebel stacks, have unique and more properly priced mercenaries and also have dead bodies for all units as per stazi's suggestion, and that will inevitably involve me playing the game again, after having had a very refreshing break with STW.
....after having had a very refreshing break with STW.
I too have been thinking about Shogun lately. It's such a tight, focused, balanced little artistic masterpiece, even though
I don't have the game I can still feel the quality of it by watching videos on Youtube...
One of the strengths of STW is the elongated shape of the country; it makes for many bottlenecks and that helps keeping up the tension as it takes much less time to re-establish a defensive line for the defender.
In MTW on the other hand, there are too many options for moving armies around (due to large province connectivity) and that effect is multiplied manyfold by navies that provide even more options. This means that, in the long run the AI has much more options, and with having more options he can make more mistakes. You can see clearly the effect of this on the AI performance in RTW where the map becomes a sea of options, as, the 60-100 squares of STW/MTW became thousands of little squares in the RTW/M2TW map that the AI really got a hard time to navigate.
In addition the eurasian/north africa map has more edges than the japanese one. playin the Russians would have been a piece of cake if there was no Mongol Horde as you are basically going straight forward with your back covered, as you are with the English.
STW also has very good art indeed - the game took twice as much to develop as it was riginally planned (it was planned for release in late '98/early '99 iirc) - from two years to nearly four - and in the process the developing team got enlarged. It was meant originally to be a typical WarcraftII/C&C clone with 2D/top-down perspective in the battlemap. This all changed when a young and able programmer set up the battlemap in full 3D without crashing the systems of the time in terms of resources and that was the beginning of TW. Very soon, gameplay was focused around realism and the morale system was born.
MTW on the other hand was caught half way in between RTW and what it finally it became ie an "evolutionary" step from STW. Initially CA intended MTW to be its full "3D men" release, and in fact you can see that in the intro sequence of MTW - that's an early version of the Rome engine. Notice the man climbing the ladder of the siege tower and his animation there - that later on was also to appear (for entire units of course) in RTW.
The unit icons in MTW also were made apparently using that same early Rome "3D" battle engine, with appropriate skins of course. You can see this in their often similar postures - probably they got the same model and applied a different skin - perhaps even slightly change the angle of shooting and voila.
PershsNhpios
02-13-2011, 07:46
Lehesu, excellent! The campaign may be boring, but the AAR is only as boring as you allow it to be. If nothing is happening in your realm you can write pages regarding the battles and excursions of foreign rulers who are influential to your campaign - supplementing that information with pictures of the factions concerned in battle by making screenshots of custom battles to that effect.
You can strip a general of titles or attempt assassination of someone within the realm and make a hullabaloo over that.
Such things can be made very interesting and important to the reader with a little sensationalism and can be used as bridges over boring parts of the campaign.
So let's see it!
-----------------------
I too have STW installed, but I haven't managed to start a campaign yet and it is not the priority assignment in TW for the moment!
edyzmedieval
02-13-2011, 13:15
MTW on the other hand was caught half way in between RTW and what it finally it became ie an "evolutionary" step from STW. Initially CA intended MTW to be its full "3D men" release, and in fact you can see that in the intro sequence of MTW - that's an early version of the Rome engine. Notice the man climbing the ladder of the siege tower and his animation there - that later on was also to appear (for entire units of course) in RTW.
I've been playing MTW for the past 9 years and I haven't realised this. Thank you! :bow:
Tristrem
02-17-2011, 02:18
I've been experimenting with a few good mods, and I am about to try out the Nords in an Age of Warlords campaign, my first for this mod.
If I play any computer game at all, MTW has certainly the highest chance of being the one. Unfortunately or fortunately, but playing any computer game at all does not happen often these days, maybe 5 hours a month. Not enough for a proper campaign... Last time, it was when I was ill a month ago, and I did play MTW :P But with autocalc, cause I didn't have the time for battles.
I still enjoy checking up on my fellow fans though, and seeing the screenshots of the rare AAR.
edyzmedieval
03-01-2011, 17:22
The Seljuk campaign is damn entertaining, XL Mod 3.0. Egyptians have been easy to defeat, Byzantines kept up their stride successfully against me but now I'm worried that if I don't defeat them soon enough the Mongols will come and I will fight on three fronts, destroying me completely. I'm ramping up my defences but I only have 70 years left to train defensive units.
This will be tough.
Kamakazi
03-01-2011, 18:09
im still here not on the forums so much but im always playing
fuzzbomb
03-07-2011, 00:59
Kudos to the guy who figured out how to get the game playing on my NVIDIA system. Got tired of X3 Terran Conflict and went back to MTW. I think I'll still be playing this game when I'm in the old age home (I think someone else said this in this thread....but it is certainly true).
Anyway, started this time as the English, early just to get back into it. When I'm done I think I'll try the Danes early. I have never been able to win with that one.
Welcome to the org and the main hall fuzzbomb, enjoy your stay.
The Danes are pretty easy if you:
1. take on Sweden
2. Build 2 longboats
3. Land on Britain (can start from Northumbria and move south)
4. Conquer Britain
5. Conquer Flanders and Normandy
From that point on you can either conquer the rest of France or land in Spain and conquer that starting from Leon and Castile before taking the rest of the provinces there.
The advantage of Denmark is that they have the Viking unit that has higher attack and morale and armor piercing ability available from the Fort level and costing cheaper to maintain than the equivalent mele unit for the rest of the Catholics (FMAA) that is made available from the swordsmith in Keep level and is less able and has less morale. This means you can spam them and swamp early opposition pretty easily.
If you want a more challenging game with the Danes (or other factions) in the vanilla setting/context you can try the pocket mod (follow link in my signature), or any of the many other mods available.
:bow:
Welcome to the Org, fuzzbomb! ~:wave:
The Danes have some advantages, especially in Early. As gollum said, they get Vikings, which you can spam from anywhere. They get Longboats, cheap and good ships you can use to set up trade routes. And their location, which lets them keep their borders to a minimum if you expand correctly. You do need to be a little aggressive though, taking Sweden is a must and you need a good income to keep your many heirs' RK units paid.
Brandy Blue
03-08-2011, 00:21
Also, if you play the Danes you have to watch your spending until your economy takes off. Denmark alone with no trade just doesn't support too much troop upkeep and leave cash to build. Getting Norway is a nice bonus too. It gives +1 valor vikings.
Indeed Norway produces valored up Vikings, but i usually set up there after i conquer Britain and my cash flow rolls. In the opening stages every second counts and i accelerate preparations for invading the isles. Norway is poor and does not contribute towards that goal at that point, but later its only too easy and natural to make a fort for valored up Vikings and get more trade income from it.
There are by the way a few other routes one may take as the Danes; one is to start bashing the HRE and another to get to Novgorod. However, taking too early on the HRE may fire back and waiting for the proper moment may take too long - as for expanding at teh expense of Novgorod leaves you to take over the steppes that are poor, underdeveloped and most importantly unsafe: by the time you take them over and have built a decent income the Mongols will be knocking at your door.
Invading Britain on the other hand is absolutely safe; the rebels in Scotland and Wales can be left for after you have taken out teh English, and by the time you have Essex taking Flanders and Normandy is just natural and very easy. At that stage taking over France or going to Spain is the only real dillema, although in the long term they both give the same result :)
Generally speaking, taking over Spain at that stage (ie invading by sea) is slightly more adventurous. taking over France is more standard and stable. You'll be moving into Spain anyway, but by land and while being properly set up in France, with trade routes, secure borders and proper infrastructure.
Brandy Blue
03-08-2011, 02:58
Well, yes, Norway is a nice bonus, but Britain is a more important objective.
One of the problems with MTW is that after having played most factions for a while, openings become very predictable. Partly its because of the player being able to read the AI, partly because of the mercenaries that allow the player to force an outcome and partly because certain regions are just too good and so much hinges on them.
The reason the AI os predictable in the strategy portion is because the AI personalities are the same for a kingdom throughout. In STW, every new ruler gets a different AI personality. This means that his faction will play differently upon him taking over the clan. This was possible and worked because changing of the Lord of a clan was a relatively rare event due to teh time scale - STW takes place within roughly 85 years with 4 turns per year, which means that you get 2 or 3 different rulers (Daimyos) at the very most usually.
In MTW on the other hand, rulers change every 25 to 40 years on average as the game covers roughly 370 years with 1 turn per year, and rulers produce progeny that is not "set" to follow historical personalities as in STW, hence it may yield several rulers and the passing of power is a common event - in a full campaign there can be litterally tens of rulers.
In that respect, MTW factions have a faction-centric AI personality, while in STW the AI personalities are person-centric. In MTW this is implausible as the very few years that are available to each ruler would have probably messed AI builds if the personality is changed too often.
On the other hand, although MTW kingdoms benefit by having the same organisation plan, they are more predictable in their actions over time.
In my view, it would have been better to keep the local character of the game with seasonal turns and economics and personal focus (focus on king/sultan/emperor); release many smaller campaigns in various theaters as add-ons; the Crusades, the Reconquista, teh Teutonic Wars, the Hundred Years War, Italian City state wars, etc etc There were very many possibiities without the need to bloat the game in scope and size and every campaign may have had only 2 to 4 factions but well done and well balanced against each other. Campaigns would have more character, better historical plausibility and better balance and so challenge as a result.
But TW went the other way : ) oh well...
i firmly believe that mtw is the ubber title of the total war series, i enjoy the other games, sure, but always come back to the best.
It certainly has many virtues, yes :)
edyzmedieval
03-09-2011, 19:10
i firmly believe that mtw is the ubber title of the total war series, i enjoy the other games, sure, but always come back to the best.
I fully agree with you on this. :medievalcheers:
It certainly has many virtues, yes :)
The most in a Total War game.
Not for me although it comes close - but each to his own :)
edyzmedieval
03-09-2011, 19:15
Not for me although it comes close - but each to his own :)
STW taking your top spot, my friend?
i didn't like , and it was the only thing i didn't like in stw, was the habit of the factions dying out as the game came to conclusion, ya know finishing the game with only rebels to fight, no grand scheme. other than that i love everything about the game. the ai is intense, i would say the best in the series. mtw hit the ground running and didn't look back, except for missing the throne room and the mini movies and such, but i like the fact that the factions could reappear.
Indeed cogre,
in the original game (STW v1.0 to v1.12) factions die for good once killed and teh AI treats his Daimyos as just another general's unit, which makes it easy for them to be killed. This was compensated to a certain extent by a less forgiving economic game as well as the AI bonuses for the harder difficulty (the AI can spend infrastructure money he does not have), especially if you play as the southern clans (Shimazu. Mori and to a certain extent Oda)and have to face any clan coming from the northern rich land. In STW/MI though (with the expansion) there are faction re-appearances just like in MTW.
The AI in STW was good, but in MTW it was slightly better - most notably in flanking with cavalry. One thing however that helped the AI in STW was the pretty strong RPS gameplay and the few, well balanced types of units, as well as teh inability to disengage engaged units, which meant that you had to be careful how you match your units. The AI is pretty good at match ups. In MTW units and most notably cavalry that is helped by virtue of its mobility can disengage which somewhat hurts the importance of match ups (you can correct bad ones).
MTW had many ups over STW too though - the campaign game is more looked after and the battle engine has many improvements. It also has more flavor and more scope for role-playing.
Brandy Blue
03-11-2011, 05:55
I've heard that MI also made it possible for the AI to take advantage of the port bug, though I've never seen it happen.
Yes, i've seen the AI do port raids in MI. It was in a Shimazu camp. and the mori landed in Chikugo at the first 2-3 years of teh camp. essentially they tried to rush me. They got their emmissary there and suddenly landed out of nowhere - it was a bit of a surprise.
bummer i was never able to find mi , only have stw 1.12. that sounds like a fun ai adaption
There is now the "Gold" version in dvd-rom (Warlord's edition i think its called) cogre, available pretty cheaply that has STW/MI.
The expansion also introduces certain unbalances in the orignal units and their stats, most notably the guns are increased 300% in power (from power=4 to power=16) which means they can stop cav charges while they were not intended to do so and can't in the original, but thankfully their stats can be modified in a txt file.
Here is a veteran player's suggestion how to do so:
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?77560-The-old-unit-stats...
yeah , money is tight at the moment. however i plan on keeping this rig for as long as i can to enjoy the best games ever. i want to play with the gunpowder stops a cav charge. that sounds fun , unless, of course, one is on the recieving end
Its fun at first but wears off pretty quickly imo - but of course each to his own. You can mod the arquebusiers to bekillers in MTW though ;)
edyzmedieval
03-13-2011, 00:52
I do feel musketry wasn't quite well represented in MTW but since it finished in 1453 muskets weren't quite as advanced. Still, those siege cannons Muslim factions have are killer! Love them!
The musket wasn't really invented during the timeframe. MTW's timeframe encompassed the handgun and arquebus which were earlier smoothbore firearms that were not as widely adopted as the later muskets. In view of this the representation in the game is probably ok, not perfect, but maybe good enough.
edyzmedieval
03-15-2011, 01:26
Darn this! After 1175, the English want the Crusade points on GA so they declared a Crusade on me and sunk almost all of my fleets, my profit went from 9000 a turn to 800.
This will be very interesting. Crusade and the Mongols soon to lurk around, luckily I allied with the Cumans, I hope they resist.
I think Caravel is right. If the game extended more in timeframe like M2, then gunpowder could be more powerful.
Historical plausibility aside, strong guns are not very well used by teh AI so in a way its a plus. Of course in MTW the same problem exists, just its with arbalesters :)
gaijinalways
03-15-2011, 13:55
Could very well be. I often don't make much use of gunpowder, as I find the range is not very good, with arbs knocking the handgunners and arquebusers off pretty easily. I also find the gunpowder units are generally dreadful at hand to hand, with even peasants giving them a run for the money.
Try using arquebusiers behind your arbalest/crossbow line, and use them to give extra punch in the volley. You can coordinate volleys by putting all missiles out of fire at will and then either click to an enemy unit for them to fire or just enable fire at will so they fire all at the same time. Its devastating.
edit: one more advantage of the coordinated volley is that you can use more effectively your ammo, as you can prevent units from firing when there are less chances to do damage or run at out of ammo due to firing all the time and hence remain without missiles for many more attackng waves from the enemy. This is particularly important with the horde.
Handgunners are a unit used best to melee and its shot can aid that. They aren't fit for missle duels.
I always used coordinated volleys, very rarely targeted enemy units directly. The trick is to select your units in sequence and mouse over the approaching enemy. Once you get a green targeting arrow on all (or almost all) units, it's time to hit the fire at will. I would always hold off a bit longer though to ensure that the leading units got the most devastating volley I could muster. Usually that's more than enough to trigger a rout and you should place all the units back on hold fire and wait for them to regroup and try again - rinse and repeat.
yes, indeed, letting them come a little closer, maybe 2/3 ot 1/2 your average weapon's range gives very powerful shots.
In terms of selecting the units, it can be done also by using the grouping feature - not the grouping of the unit cards.
I mean the grouping where its possible to set groups by control+shift+number and recall by control+number. In this way, no time is lostin the selection.
I find the grouping less useful in this scenario as if only partial group can hit the target, you get the flashing targeting arrow cursor thingy... that could mean that 4 of 5 has a line of site, or only 1 of the 5... this is why I tend to use the tab(?) key to quickly change through missile units and see which units they can hit as the enemy approach. I apply this so all missiles not just arquebus units.
The worse that can happen is if your planned "devastating" volley only includes one unit of archers, while all the others just sit there... it takes some practice but eventually you get the feel of it.
Another good thing about using this strategy is that it helps to keep your battle lines intact - so no missile units changing formation to get a better shot or pursuing enemies (often results in other units redeploying and moving out of position), which can lose you the battle.
I see. My take in guarding against this respect is to catch one of the middle or far back missile units and check when the enemy is in range. Then recall the group by control+number and toggle fire at will on.
Indeed keeping the missiles in line is key. For xbows and arbs and guns, ie missile with slowreload/powershot its good toput them inhold formation and hold position.
Hold formation makes them keep firing even if part of the unit is engaged by enemy troops and hold positoin adds to their defence and pins them to the place they are (they don;t chase other units). It can be used even for archers if you want them to keep fire while the enemy has reached them and not chase after other units in melee once engaged.
You probably have a better method than I had... old habits, etc...
i love how one can learn tactics so many years later on this game. love it
edyzmedieval
03-16-2011, 01:14
i love how one can learn tactics so many years later on this game. love it
That's the whole charm of this game. Endless, the boundaries are almost endless. Classic game.
fuzzbomb
03-20-2011, 07:37
"Re: Who's still playing?
Kudos to the guy who figured out how to get the game playing on my NVIDIA system. Got tired of X3 Terran Conflict and went back to MTW. I think I'll still be playing this game when I'm in the old age home (I think someone else said this in this thread....but it is certainly true).
Anyway, started this time as the English, early just to get back into it. When I'm done I think I'll try the Danes early. I have never been able to win with that one."
Update:
New Danes game.
Year 1174. I own Scandanavia(SP?) Lithuania, Latvia(not sure what the name is, just above Lithuania), Denmark, Saxony, Flanders, All of the English Isles, and most all of Spain (Mopping up the Alomohads). I have a longboat in every sea provence available. Income is about 20some thousand in the black per year.
My biggest problem is getting out from behind the eight ball. Used so many turns early to get the cash flow going, that I am way behind where I normally would be (Tech wise). Fortunately those vikings are everybit as good as everyone said, so hopefully that will be the saving grace.
(Had to edit-the original post is at the top...opps)
edyzmedieval
03-21-2011, 02:34
My biggest problem is getting out from behind the eight ball. Used so many turns early to get the cash flow going, that I am way behind where I normally would be (Tech wise). Fortunately those vikings are everybit as good as everyone said, so hopefully that will be the saving grace.
Try and use a secluded province, such as Norway, to tech up to a top tier castle, that way you get the best troops without the danger of losing your province. Make sure a stack of longboats is there to protect from the waters.
Try and use a secluded province, such as Norway, to tech up to a top tier castle, that way you get the best troops without the danger of losing your province. Make sure a stack of longboats is there to protect from the waters.
Sweden is better than Norway, it has the precious iron. :yes:
Brandy Blue
03-22-2011, 00:27
Well, yes. Norway is more for spamming +1 valor vikings. Sweden is more for top tier troops with iron. The only drawback I find with Sweden as a military base is that it is so valuable economically, and you forfeit economic development for years if you decide to build up its military tech.
edyzmedieval
03-22-2011, 02:06
Well, yes. Norway is more for spamming +1 valor vikings. Sweden is more for top tier troops with iron. The only drawback I find with Sweden as a military base is that it is so valuable economically, and you forfeit economic development for years if you decide to build up its military tech.
True.
Perhaps Denmark in this case? Norway is still the best alternative until Sweden is teched up economically.
Brandy Blue
03-22-2011, 02:33
Well, yes you could tech up Norway to start with and then switch your military base to Sweden later. That would leave Denmark free to produce longboats. Don't they get a bonus there?
Actually, I don't think high tech units are the key when playing Denmark in early. Nice to have sure, especially if you are playing XL and get access to huscarls, etc. However, Viking units are adequate against most enemy infantry in early and you can produce them so easily and cheaply that you can overwhelm your first targets before they can tech up. Not to say that you won't want better units eventually. But you can carve out quite a nice empire with a mostly viking force before you need anything better.
edyzmedieval
03-22-2011, 15:59
Those Viking Huscarls pack a serious punch, use one or two of them in each army to turn the tide of the battle.
My usual tactic with the Danes is to expand by sea, leaving Eastern Europe to loving caresses of the Horde and taking the British Isles, France, and the Iberian Peninsula. You can do a lot with many Vikings, a sprinkling of Feudal and Mounted Sergeants, and your many RK units in Early. Once I unite Scandinavia, I will usually crank out Longboats from Denmark, Vikings from Norway, and FS/MS from Sweden. Getting Sweden running financially is key at the start, but you need to get the basic troop buildings in place so the recruit queue doesn't sit idle. The special Viking style units are not necessary (although fun) for Early, but you want to be able to crank out high-tech upgraded units once High comes along. Early is all about the Viking rush, archers are for the weak and you just need a few spear units to pin cav with. You can even get away with Horsemen to run your opponent's archers off the field if you can't get MS. Vikings will take care of the rest. :yes:
To add to the above, direct your resources towards securing Sweden first. IIRC Norway is more rebellious and will take too large a garrison to hold down, while giving little income. The other benefits of this approach are explained above. Heading for British isles is the easy option - in fact the campaign is quite hard if you choose to take on the HRE, Poles and rebels in the east. Pomerania and Prussia are pagan and will also need larger garrisons, so it's wise to leave those alone until you're strong enough.
It can be hard as hell indeed if you head east. I remember the first time i played it, i took over Novgorod and then in the steppes. By the time i had finished an epic war with the Byzantines the Horde appeared and i was nearly broke and had very little naval safety in my core Scandinavian lands as the seas were dominated by the French, teh Spanish and other superpowers. I left the campaign as i was in a stagnant position and it didn;t seem i was getting anywhere anytime soon.
The next time i took over Britain and then i saw the light... :)
It can be hard as hell indeed if you head east. I remember the first time i played it, i took over Novgorod and then in the steppes. By the time i had finished an epic war with the Byzantines the Horde appeared and i was nearly broke and had very little naval safety in my core Scandinavian lands as the seas were dominated by the French, teh Spanish and other superpowers. I left the campaign as i was in a stagnant position and it didn;t seem i was getting anywhere anytime soon.
The next time i took over Britain and then i saw the light... :)
Too easy though, I wanted a challenge so I took on the filthy pagans, novgorod, the poles, etc... it was a horrid experience. My pathetic, bankrupt faction of pervert princes was "relegated to a footnote of history" time and time again. Eventually I managed it a few times, but it's a huge struggle just to keep afloat. You really have to get trade up and running fast if you go that route.
Yes, too easy indeed. This is why in the Caravel mod Vikings are made available from the swordsmith in Keep level - can't spam them anymore ;)
And also probably why nobody will play Denmark in it... :)
In vanilla you also have the landsmen, carls and huscarles from VI, which make the Dane campaign a bumrush if you start pumping those out early. Personally I mod those out of the main campaign and just leave the standard vikings.
Yes absolutely, although they are only recruitable in early IIRC, but still too powerful and easy to get in fact.
For the same reason they are also moded out in Caravel.
In vanilla you also have the landsmen, carls and huscarles from VI, which make the Dane campaign a bumrush if you start pumping those out early. Personally I mod those out of the main campaign and just leave the standard vikings.
Landsmenn and Carls aren't too bad, but I never build them anyway since plain Vikings are such good value. Huscarles on the other hand...
I too have tried to go East at the start. What a disaster. :no:
edyzmedieval
03-24-2011, 20:33
I put my campaign on pause for a little while and started working on those Historical Campaigns, some battles are really hard. :sweatdrop:
Which hist. camp you are playing?
edyzmedieval
03-25-2011, 01:59
Which hist. camp you are playing?
Barbarossa. I can't get even past the second battle!
If you talk about the one against Pope and allies (carcano?) then remember that the goal is not to beat them but to put some of your units (can't remember how many but not that many) in the small town village opposite that has the flag. If you go to beat the enemy you'll probably never make it - its a run through them mission type thing. Did that mistake sme time ago and was banging the desk for a while until i realised that i wasn't meant to beat the opposition :laugh4:
I don't think I've played the historical battles... ever. This is silly, but I form a connection with my generals, units and army stacks from the campaign level and that continues into battle. Just playing battles doesn't really do it for me.
:bow:
They are fun. If you ever get the game running again give them a go.
I will certainly do that yes.
:bow:
I'm the same way, I don't think I've ever fired up one of the historical battles. I've read about them in the official guide, checked out the txt files with the units and such, but never actually had the urge to play one of them. :stwshame:
nor have i , i just to campaign too much.
I love the historical camps in particular. You read some text that sets the scene and then, without endless turn hitting of management you proceed directly to an intense large army battle... then you sip some coffe while reading the text for the next etc. Its good :)
i am now going to have give it a good try.
I bet you'll get stuck in the Jean D'Arc campaign ;)
Its nice that they are thematically put together. For the 100years war you play the English first, then the French, for the Crusades you play Saladin against the Franks then Richard the Lionheart versus Saladin etc. Good stuff.
edyzmedieval
03-29-2011, 17:49
for the Crusades you play Saladin against the Franks then Richard the Lionheart versus Saladin etc. Good stuff.
I absolutely adore the "Crusade" feel the battles give you, you're so immersed in it because of the proper geography of the battle map and the historical army units and formations. Epic.
Yes indeed its very nice. In general desert battles have a lot of atmosphere.
ok, sold, i giving them a try
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.