View Full Version : The disadvantage of Peace and Prosperity
Hmm. Playing as the Spanish I've pursued a policy of Peace, Trade and covert ops.
We've not declared war one anyone, and only fought defensive wars (We never start a war, but we always finish it)
Our trade fleets stretch from the Baltic to the Black sea, generating upwards of 15K a year, and supporting a HUUUGE army, with 3 Chiv Sergeants in nearly every province, along with the Pointy End troops scattered across the realm.
Using 12 - 20 spies I've turend my enemy's provinces to muck, and then swept in and disbanded the rebels easily.
Here is my undoing. Becasue the Army is large, and the battles are few and far between, and the rebels bolt easily my entire army, with a few exceptions, are only 2 - 4 valour, and some are even less.
This has been an extremely coslty error when a province was attacked by a crack army my guys routed in no time, and got slaughtered.
So, my theory is that all troops and Border troops in particular should gain Valour over time, regardless of combat. But it should be very slow. Maybe 5 or 10 years a point, less for low valour, more for high.
But here's a question - some buildings give valour advantages, right? If you retrain a unit, does it get the bonus, too? Or does it stick with whatever it had?
rasoforos
12-22-2002, 10:33
people gaining valor for just being in the borders is not realistic to my oppinion. Think of your lazy fat untrained soldiers , who drink all day and never had a fight , watching your enemies' battle hardened and well trained soldiers accross the border. i somehow dun think this would increase their valour...
The Last Emperor
12-22-2002, 10:39
i agree with raso on this, i think its not realistic for soldiers to gain valour without proving themselves in any battles at least once. No pain no gain http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif
I know what you're saying, but Modern Troops fequently never see battle in their career, yet can still be called Elite. Training games and stuff will increase a soldiers ability to cope with real warfare.
Now I can understand rear echelon troops growing fat & Lazy, but border troops would be constantly active, with border patrols, police actions and all. I can see that these activities would increase their battle hardiness.
Now that all said, my problem in my game was a direct result of peace, and careful attention to provinces to prevent rebellions. So I'm penalised for playing well.
The alternative is to either go offensive, which reduces my trade and makes it hard for me to create alliances, or use deliberate rebellions in poor provinces to train troops against, which I think is entirely less realistic than having border troops able to increase valour by existing.
What I'd have thought is that it would take maybe 50 years to get to 4 or 5 valour, and 150 years to get to 7 or 8. Nearly half the game time taken to get there, but it does get there. It would kind of reflect a unit taking in young pups, turning them into men, then the veterans being better placed to train up the next generation of soldiers to come through.
Anyways, it was just a thought.
Papewaio
12-22-2002, 12:29
Quote[/b] (ulyanov @ Dec. 22 2002,05:00)]I know what you're saying, but Modern Troops fequently never see battle in their career, yet can still be called Elite. Training games and stuff will increase a soldiers ability to cope with real warfare.
They may be called specialists but they ain't called Elite.
Elite actually implies battle proven. Most of the Elite special forces are actually in combat somewhere in the world or in exchange with another country that is. A country does not have to be at war for its special forces to be in battle just one of your allies have to have a anti-rebel/anti-terrorist/police/peacekeeping operation.
Well trained is the building bonus improvement. But like anything if you don't use it you lose it. Just maintaining their level of valour is good enough let alone get free bonus valour for sitting in garrison duty.
I do however think a discipline bonus may be in order for having time to drill.
If they were to get that or any other bonus I would say their upkeep would have to be increased to reflect an increased training focus. Also I would decrease the value of those troops in keeping down rebellions as they are off training they are not patroling the lands or escorting the taxman.
rasoforos
12-22-2002, 13:19
well said. Being trained does not mean that you re good. moroever someone can be really well trained in military excercises that are non life-threatening ( almost) but he might run like a woman when he sees someones brains getting shot out of his head in battle. so he does not desrve a high valour. Your soldiers might be well trained and look like Conan the Barbarian but if they dont see battle you ll never know if they act like him as well http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
Leet Eriksson
12-22-2002, 14:40
border troops,yes they should gain valour "if" they invaded,much like the muslims used to do in their early days when they were at war with the byzantines they built and maintained several border forts on the byzantine border,they were garrisoned by trained and drilled infantry(they also went into small skirmishes with the byzantines to "stay in shape" http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/tongue.gif).Later though they stopped raiding and ignored there training so the byzantines eventually overran them and reached allepo(wich is when the hamadan state has fallen).
A.Saturnus
12-22-2002, 16:04
Gaining valour in battle is too unimportant in MTW. It takes very long to raise a whole unit to v4 but giving newbies to a 8 star general has the same effect.
ToranagaSama
12-22-2002, 17:30
Quote[/b] (ulyanov @ Dec. 22 2002,01:34)][snip]
Using 12 - 20 spies I've turend my enemy's provinces to muck, and then swept in and disbanded the rebels easily.
Here is my undoing. Becasue the Army is large, and the battles are few and far between, and the rebels bolt easily my entire army, with a few exceptions, are only 2 - 4 valour, and some are even less.
This has been an extremely coslty error when a province was attacked by a crack army my guys routed in no time, and got slaughtered.
So, my theory is that all troops and Border troops in particular should gain Valour over time, regardless of combat. But it should be very slow. Maybe 5 or 10 years a point, less for low valour, more for high.
[snip]
In what way would this improve the game?
Question, did you troops have Armour or any other "battle" upgrades? You said the enemy had "crack" troops, by "crack" what do you mean? CHMAA vs. MAA (or worse)? Or, is your focus entirely upon "valour" (stars)?
If your definning simply "better" troop types as "crack", then you have the opportunity to build "crack" troops, apparently you did not.
If your definning "crack" as high valour troops, then, admittedly high valour is an advantage, BUT it is not an absolute advantage. One simply need employ superior TACTICS (against the AI this is not too difficult). Good tactics along with Armour and Attack values can easily counter High Valour troops.
The slow as you go method lends itself greatly to training high "quality" troops. MUCH higher than the AI.
Chiv Sargeants do not have great morale and check to be sure your generals don't have bad v&v's. With your economy, you should be able to match your opponents greater valour with numbers. Maybe train some halbrediers or CMAA and knights to back up your spearmen. I found spear troops could stand alone pre-patch, but now they are only good for the niche they were designed for - calvary defense.
Papewaio Said
Quote[/b] ]I do however think a discipline bonus may be in order for having time to drill.
This is a better idea. My main concern about my troops was the ease in which they rout. I discipline helps them hold the line then I'm all for it.
Quote[/b] (faisal @ Dec. 22 2002,00:40)]border troops,yes they should gain valour "if" they invaded,
But in medieval time soldiers were generally police. 2 Nations didn't have to be in a formal state of war for their troops to be trading blows with one another. Much like your Byz example. I'd like to think that sort of action is rewarded, albeit very slowly.
Quote[/b] (A.Saturnus @ Dec. 22 2002,02:04)]It takes very long to raise a whole unit to v4 but giving newbies to a 8 star general has the same effect.
Oh, I never realised that.
/me whacks me with meat tenderiser.
I have Great (capital G and all) generals, and they're all up the pointy end. I'll have to make better use of them, methinks...
Quote[/b] (ToranagaSama @ Dec. 22 2002,03:30)]In what way would this improve the game?
Question, did you troops have Armour or any other "battle" upgrades? You said the enemy had "crack" troops, by "crack" what do you mean? CHMAA vs. MAA (or worse)? Or, is your focus entirely upon "valour" (stars)?
If your definning simply "better" troop types as "crack", then you have the opportunity to build "crack" troops, apparently you did not.
If your definning "crack" as high valour troops, then, admittedly high valour is an advantage, BUT it is not an absolute advantage. One simply need employ superior TACTICS (against the AI this is not too difficult). Good tactics along with Armour and Attack values can easily counter High Valour troops.
The slow as you go method lends itself greatly to training high "quality" troops. MUCH higher than the AI.
Umm..
I'm bitching about having low valour because I've played a quiet game. I'm coming up against units that are well trained by battle, but maybe low on quality (not sure how Muslim/Byz stuff rates vs Chiv Sergeants)
Where I'm running into trouble is when a faction is able to hit my in a well defended area, without a Great leader, so all the defenders are 1 or 2 valour, and they all rout very quickly, even when the enemy is smaller, losses are low but the enemy has (or seems to have) a higher valour. I think it's just a resistance thing.
So I'm not worried about rate of or number of losses, just the ability to withstand routing.
I've got several provinces with steel, so they've been built just to train troops with Att + 2 or +3 and Arm + 3 o +4 but I need to double check to see if I've built the valour bonus buildings - that may have slipped my mind...
Quote[/b] (Exile @ Dec. 22 2002,10:51)]Chiv Sargeants do not have great morale and check to be sure your generals don't have bad v&v's. With your economy, you should be able to match your opponents greater valour with numbers. Maybe train some halbrediers or CMAA and knights to back up your spearmen. I found spear troops could stand alone pre-patch, but now they are only good for the niche they were designed for - calvary defense.
Hrrmm.. Another lesson - I thought CS were pretty good. I usually have 6 - 8 CS backed by 4 Arbs and, 2 Knights (just upgradine to Chiv Knights now) and either halbs or CMAA.
The Battles where I've done poorly is usually CS and Arbs and nothing else. In one case I've left my CS in the trees, hoping to slaughter the enemy cav, but I must got hit by swordmen.
The Last Emperor
12-23-2002, 02:55
CS to me are not considered "cracked" troops. U can beef they up with armour and valour but they wouldn't hold out against other medium or heavy infantry with their low morale, much less against cavalry. I usually use they as garrasion and as governer for my provience.
MizuKokami
12-23-2002, 03:55
maybe in a future expansion, we could get an added option that would allow you to send in your soldiers dressed up as bandits and highway men. they could have an objective.... ie... ransack a village, destroy certain buildings. after they obcheive their objectives, you march off the field. this would increase their valor because it would simulate border skirmishes, and give your men much needed experience, but wouldn't neccisarily send you to war. unless of course your captured men cracked under interogation.
Quote[/b] (The Last Emperor @ Dec. 22 2002,12:55)]CS to me are not considered "cracked" troops. U can beef they up with armour and valour but they wouldn't hold out against other medium or heavy infantry with their low morale, much less against cavalry. I usually use they as garrasion and as governer for my provience.
OK. Lets start from scratch.
I'm needing to defend against 2000 Turks, including just about everything except Janissaries.
What's a good reccomendation for Late, remembering that money is no object, though any new troops will be low valour.
What I had done was 3 CS across the front, with 2 behind to plug the gaps, and prevent stray cav from getting my missiles. Then CS to either side to guard against flanking, and the Knights on either side to chase down anyone who gets too close... CMAA or Halbs hang around anywhere they fit.
Oh, yeah, we're talking Spanish...
Cooperman
12-23-2002, 08:13
Having 3 chivalric sergeants in every province is a waste, move all your chivalric sergeants to the borders and have 3 peasants in each province, they keep the peace just as well and the extra numbers in your borders should help in the battles.
Pellinor
12-23-2002, 15:32
...then disband two of those peasants as you only need 100 men per province, unless you keep your taxes above normal ;-)
rasoforos
12-23-2002, 16:09
and keep a spy or two in every province.
Al Qasim Hussein
12-23-2002, 22:04
and an assassin in evry province (or at least port provinces), and possibly a bishop (or whatever your ethos) in each province as well.
My advice, ulyanov, is to fight the battle as best you can. It's possible that the survivors will gain valor even if you don't win. Then get a non-'good runner' in there commanding the army and reinvade the province. If necessary, invade one of their provinces, burn it to the ground, and retreat back to your own. You should get some good valor troops that way. Retrain them to replenish their numbers and you might just be in good shape.
Pellinor on an expansion drive this will cause disaster, as you often find that you've bitten too much too fast, and some provinces way back in the empire are yellow or even red.
While this discussion has been going on I've had a big rebellion from the Germans, Italians, Polish and Hungarians all in the same turn, all because I beat up the Turks (just after hitting the 60% mark)
I had soo many provinces with 3 Chivs or a mix of lessor spears and archers in the red I had to practically abandon many provinces to keep others green. I ended up with only one battleworthy force, and some small garrisons to hold against sieges. 24 Spears in one province vs 3000 Germans. They'd hold out forever, but the Germans assaulted. I tried to be tricky, and while the germans bashed at the main gate with Knights I ran in and tried to turn him back. When we ran away we were half the number, and the germans were inside the first chamber (bailey?) One of them stood in the gate, so they attacked both gates at once, so my Arrow and Ballista kills were half what they should have been.
It was all moot the next turn - The bad guys are all gone now.
On the plus side - I've picked up some honest valour... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif
Al Qasim Hussein Yes, that's pretty much where I'm at...
It's getting close to endgame now - I hold Western Europe up to Poland, and Africa most of the black sea provinces. Not much to do, but stave off rebellion, and come up with a better plan than just plain passive next time... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif
ToranagaSama
12-24-2002, 05:41
Passive is just fine, simply make better use of your time by building better troops. 2 or 3 units of spears to protect against cavalry and then MAA or better. IMO, anything less than MAA is a waste I NEVER build sargents of any kind and will replace peasants asap with Spears. I'm talking HARD or below. On Expert things may be a little different.
I'm playing Almo, for the first time on Expert and am finding myself "needing" to use more low level troops than I ever imagined. Gotta try Expert with a Catholic faction, I'm more experienced with, to see if I'll still need to use low level troops other than spears.
Hmm. I guess I got all wrapped up in the 1.0 spears kill anything mode, and haven't really made the jump to 1.1
I started this campaign on 1.1 so you'd have thuink I'd learned by now...
I find 1 militia sergeants/chiv sergeants + one reasonable missile unit makes for quite ample garrisons. Dunno about when you are at 60% though, haven't been playing enough to finish a 1.1 campaign yet.
I keep on seeing people talking about training up their troops in battle.
Almost all the valour increases I manage to make are via generals going up in stars.
Cavalry definitely manages to go up. 10+ often enough with general bonus.
The better foot/missiles that have been in battle lots I will manage to get up maybe to 2/3 if you take them out of the army so you can see without the general bonus.
But most of my troops never get past about 1-2 without the general bonuses.
I guess it might just be my fairly conservative style.
I tend to make sure I will definitely win, or otherwise have just so many people that the other side will not attack or will run away without fighting if its me attacking.
Most of the time I'm not attacking, so my missile units get most of the kills and my cav get most of the captures.
More recently, I have been being a bit less careful, throwing armies around without much planning etc and I am finding that I am getting more battles where units go up 2 valour and several/most of the rest go up 1.
The flip side is that I am also taking much higher attrition, so by the time the depleted units are restored to full, most of the valour gains are averaged out. Sometimes I am even completely losing high valour units because I send them off unsupported and they get sandwiched before reinforcements can get there.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.