Poll: How often do you autoresolve?

[Mount Suribachi]

I got thinking about this cos if I'm gunna play RTW, I'll have to autoresolve all my battles cos my PC will be not capable of running the battles.

Me, I occasionally autoresolve battles, mainly when I have several battles in a turn, so I click on save in the pre-battle screen, but then I have to autoresolve all my battles before I can get out the game. If I win all those autoresolves with acceptable losses then I take those results & save http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[Yoko Kono]

i fight most bottles but occassionally if im on a major offensive and get distracted by a fight elsewhere ill auto resolve so i can concentrate on my offensive battles

[Brother Derfel]

In the early stages of a campaign I will usually fight the samm number of battles I have each turn, but come the peak of my empire i have far too many battles to fight to possibly play them all so i generaly autoresolve the ones where i feel it is safe.

[jLan]

I do the same as Brother Derfel

[Suppiluliumas]

I have to auto-resolve everything as my computer can't seem to last for an entire battle. All that will change within the week though and I should be able to run RTW without problems then as well. I'd imagine that I'd be fighting at least half of my battles in the future. I won't go away from auto-resolve intirely since it speeds up the game quite a bit.

[RollingWave]

I usually fight the important (espically outnumbered ) battles... but if I have a overwhelming advantage or if I think winning or losing htis fight doesn't chage the big picture too much I auto resolve... I often auto resolve seige too for some reason the comp usually seem to do a better job than me.... (though I try not to direct assualt if avoidable... preferring starvation or spy or bribe)

[Teutonic Knight]

Quote[/b] (Mount Suribachi @ Aug. 02 2003,02:13)]I got thinking about this cos if I'm gunna play RTW, I'll have to autoresolve all my battles cos my PC will be not capable of running the battles.
and what exactly are you basing that on? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif


They haven't even come out with the min. requirements yet...

In fact so far they're saying that it's actually running more smoothly than M:TW did http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/rolleyes.gif

[Mount Suribachi]

I'm basing it on the fact that the screenies & video we've seen so far of RTW is http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/eek.gif and http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/shock.gif and my PC struggles with the battles in MTW as it is.

RollingWave I too find the CPU does a better job of siege assaults than me - lower casualties, but for some reason, they seem very good at getting my unit leaders killed http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/frown.gif

[TheSilverKnight]

Sometimes battles can be long and inconclusive. Good idea to split up 50/50 http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[DemonArchangel]

I never ever ever ever auto resolve, cuz it's cheap.

[jLan]

I hate to sound like a total newb, but what can a spy do to besieged forces/leaders?

[Doug-Thompson]

I autoresolve a lot simply because I like to finish a game once in a while.

=======

I had a low-end video card when I first bought the game and, oddly, had no trouble at all fighting battles --- but the strategy game wouldn't work Go figure.

[The_Emperor]

I like to fight most of my battles and I only auto-resolve if I don't have the time to fight it, or if my Empire is so large that I have too many battles to fight them all myself.

Autoresolve is rarely used by me.

[jas]

Quote[/b] (jLan @ Aug. 02 2003,17:50)]I hate to sound like a total newb, but what can a spy do to besieged forces/leaders?
If you drop a spy onto an enemy's besieged castle, they get a chance to open up the gate and resolve the siege without fighting. Don't know what the chance is based on (apart from spy's stars) but in my experience it is usually fairly low if not zero.

I only occasionally autoresolve if the battle is irrelevant or a foregone conclusion, usually late at night ..

[Teutonic Knight]

Quote[/b] (jas @ Aug. 03 2003,07:58)]I only occasionally autoresolve if the battle is irrelevant or a foregone conclusion, usually late at night ..
Amen http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smokin.gif

[RZST]

most of the time, since my comp somewhat lags on VI, damn bugs. plus i do enjoy sending men to their doom without feeling guilty http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[Arrowmaker]

I would like to know if the pc takes individual valour into account when calculating auto results.

[Demon of Light]

An example of when I autoresolve:

5 archers vs 2 archers, 4 Feudal Men at Arms, 2 Feudal Sergeants.

I did NOT want to chase those archers down for an hour when I knew I'd kick the crap out of them.

[hoom]

The only time I autoresolve is if I have made a quicksave & want to quit the game.
I have to autoresolve to get to the end of the turn so I can quit.
When I load the game I go from the quicksave so the autoresolve is ignored anyway.

The reason autoresolve gives fewer casualties in castle assaults is that the autoresolve doesn't take the castle into account.
This has been discussed already.
Knowing that & continuing to autoresolve sieges is cheap & frankly cheating.

I even fight my 3 peasants defending a castle vs 10 units of enemy and other such trivial battles.

I just like it http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

One of these days I will have a campaign where I only autoresolve regardless of the situation...
But only when I'm bored of all those battles http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/flirt.gif

[Doug-Thompson]

Quote[/b] (jas @ Aug. 03 2003,07:58)]If you drop a spy onto an enemy's besieged castle, they get a chance to open up the gate and resolve the siege without fighting. Don't know what the chance is based on (apart from spy's stars) but in my experience it is usually fairly low if not zero.
This feature is much more useful in the "Viking" game. Had a game last night when a warrior hold had a 96 percent probability with a spy with no valor, for instance.

[jas]

Quote[/b] (Doug-Thompson @ Aug. 04 2003,17:39)]This feature is much more useful in the "Viking" game. Had a game last night when a warrior hold had a 96 percent probability with a spy with no valor, for instance.
Thanks, thats useful to know. I had pretty much given up on spies vs castles because there never seemed to be much chance they'd get anywhere. This implies that the chance is related (inversely proportional) to the size of the castle also.

I really don't see the point of autoresolving every battle so you're just playing the strategic game. Why not just play EU2? Its a much better strategy game, although taken against M:TW it really loses out for me because of the inadequate battles (two guys hammering pots in the top left corner of the screen until one runs off). It's the combination of strategy & tactics that makes TW work for me ever since S:TW.

[Degtyarev14.5]

I want another option: Rarely.

I once made the mistake of hastily autoresolving when my king and two princes had to subdue a small rebellion of horse archers (four units, I believe).

=> Mistake. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/eek.gif

A.

[Shadow_Wolf33]

only when I'm tromping through egypt with 5 full stacks of FMAA/CMAA.

most run...but the ones that don't get to deal with an autoresolve against 4000 FMAA/CMAA. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

dang I haven't done that in a while...its a real good way to take out the almohads, egyptians, and anyone else off in the bottom right corner of the map at the time....those groups take a while to run out of steam too.

[ShadesWolf]

With me autoresolve depends on what typ of game i'm playing.

If Im doing one where im working on trade, or vices or building stuff, then Im not really bothered about the combat side of the game, and as long as I have a strong army and an able general and good ods then I will always autoresolve.

If im doing a SP guide campaign and the battle is a very important part of the story, ie im invading constantinople in a crusade, then I will not use autoresolve

So basically is depends on what Im trying to achieve

[Sam Adams]

Usually Ill have 1 or 2 main armies that do most of my fighting. They have the exact troop setup I want, the best valor, and my best general. Ill almost always fight these battles, only autoresolving when the enemy is vastly outnumbered.

Ill fight significant battles with my secondary troops. Minor battles with secondary forces I almost always autoresolve.

[o_loompah_the_delayer]

I often autoresolve when I have the king isolated in a province. I have never managed to capture an enemy king alive, but with autoresolve they have never died yet so I can gt the ransom money.

[solypsist]

i autoresolve on castle assaults if my banners do not have any decent siege engines.

[Dr_No]

only autoresolve small battles i'm pretty sure of winning or castle bastles without siege engines- can't quite see my cavalry running headfirst into a wall and hoping it breaks..

also start autoresolving when i realise its 3am and i've got work the next day http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif

[Obex]

In my current campaign, the only auto resolve ive used was when my crusade of ~30 3/4 or 1/2 strength random units had to fight a doomed battle against a superior egyptian army. i had given up on the success of the crusade, and i didnt want to fight a long, protracted battle using units i did care about anyways.

ive recently begun to fight out castle sieges, siege engines or not. the campaign is easy enough as it is.

[katar]

sometimes for sieges, never for battles, why miss out on the fun http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[A.Saturnus]

Well, some battles are just boring.

[Mount Suribachi]

I have come to an executive decision.

In light of the glacial pace of the campaign after 50 years and the large numbers of large battles thereafter AND the fact that I've never finished a full campaign (I got to 1200 once you know&#33http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif and in the name of "realism"

I have decided that from now on, I shall autoresolve all battles where my King is not the general.

This should speed my games up as well as increasing the difficulty somewhat and represents the fact that IRL a King could not control every battle from Northumbria to Naples.

[jLan]

I generally fight the battles I have to fight to win, and auto-resolve the ones where the result is given; for instance when i have my 8 star general facing a 1 star general, with me having more and better units.. I'll auto-resolve. If I'm outnumbered or some such, Ill generally fight it myself. Sometimes I quicksave, auto-resolve to see how the comp does, then fight the battle myself and try to beat the computer http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[econ21]

I am loathe to autoresolve field battles, as I can usually suffer much lower casualties. The opposite tends to be true of sieges. However, I agree that fighting every battle manually takes a horrendous amount of time.

One strange thing I did experience recently [in the Almohad VI PBM campaign in the Entrance Hall], was that in a hopeless battle where you are going to lose, autoresolving can inflict higher casualties on the victorious AI than playing it manually does.

There was one big battle where playing manually, I just could do nothing to avoid being over-run by massed Byzantine heavy cavalry, but inflicted serious casualties using auto-resolve [Yes, I know this is kind of cheating...].

I think autoresolve may be generally more bloody and specifically does not factor in the kind of precipitous rout that can allow a stronger force to almost costlessly over-run a weaker one.

[The Last Emperor]

Never, the stratigic AI i feel is already at a disadvantage against humans and so i rather fight out my own battles than further increase my advantage against the AI.

[Odyssey of War]

More than often I autoresolve due to the fact that I am more interested in the strategy part of the game than the real-time strategy and battle part of the game. Essentially I just live with the wins and losses that happen. Plus it makes the game go faster. Not saying that it is bad or good. Its just what I do.

[TheViking]

only when the hordes arrives and i when i own kazaar at that time.

i played it 3 times

first time it took more then 4 hours
secone time it took almost 4 hours
third time took 3,5 hours, but before i could save after that battle the game crashed

after that i just auto, its no use to fight one battle for hours then it just crash.

[Dîn-Heru]

Quote[/b] (arrrse @ Aug. 04 2003,14:19)]The only time I autoresolve is if I have made a quicksave & want to quit the game.
I have to autoresolve to get to the end of the turn so I can quit.
When I load the game I go from the quicksave so the autoresolve is ignored anyway.

I even fight my 3 peasants defending a castle vs 10 units of enemy and other such trivial battles.

I just like it http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif
Same here

[ShaiHulud]

I almost always auto a seige assault. The program is, apparently, a genius at storming. It takes a dozen casualties taking a castle that would cost me over a hundred just getting through the gates. (I rarely use seige weapons)

[Qilue]

For me, it depends on what effect I want to have. Auto-resolve generally inflicts more casualties, whereas fighting it myself results in more captives. Putting it simply, do I want to butcher the enemy, or do I want to add insult to injury.

Like Viking above, I auto-resolve the GH in Khazar unless I'm playing Russians or I've thought up a new tactic that needs testing.

[BDC]

Most of the time.

I'm lazy. A huge 3000 a side battle doesn't appeal to me.

[NewJeffCT]

Sometimes late in the game, the battles get boring if the other side does not retreat to the castle or abandon the province. But, in my current campaign as the HRE, it is the late 1200s and I am closing in on 60% domination. The Almohad still control most of Spain, Except for my Navarre and Leon. I also have Aquitine and Toulouse and control the oceans. The Almohads had 4 stacks in Aragon, but it was almost 50% peasants and urban militia. So, I sent in over 6,000 troops to begin my offensive to wipe out the last Muslim faction, with many chivalric knights, chiv sergeants and chiv men-at-arms, arbalesters, etc, many with master metalsmith and master armorer upgrades. No peasants, urban militia or plain spearmen in the bunch. There may have been 1 60 man unit of militia sergeants. It was led by a 6 star general. The Almos had a 2 or 3 star guy in charge.

I had already been playing for a few hours, then decided I did not want to play out what was obviously a slaughter. So, I auto-resolved and ended up winning with 1,200 enemy killed and only 100+ losses for my troops.

[Brown Wolf]

I auto-resolve for 3 reasons.
1) I hate fighting in the beginning because I normally only have urban milita and spearmen
2) The game goes faster.
3) I am not that good in the combat part http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/mecry.gif

[Longasc]

You can use autoresolve as a build-in cheat:

Usually, autoresolve gives you much better Castle Assault results

I once uploaded a quicksave of a Castle Assault, and nobody here was able to beat the AI in terms of losses

You can manually fight Castle Sieges -> the AI assaults now more often, and when you fight manually, you can very often actually throw them back badly instead of losing the Castle

This is kind of a cheat -> I usually play all battles, and so I mainly use it when I simply do not have the nerve or time to fight manually...

[Warmongerer]

I almost always auto-resolve unless my interest is piqued by a particular scenario. The day-to-day military operations of my empire aren't very entertaining; I only get involved when something important is happening, like a last stand for either my army or a rival king, or a battle for an important province like Constantinople.

[Shaitan]

Occasionally.

Only when I try to decimate an enemy army with some mercenaries.

[YunDog]

I used to only do it when I outnumbered the enemy grossely or for castle battles (Cheesy I know ). Lately I played as the Polish and the Golden Horde arrived with their 10s of 1000s, and he was kicking my arse with those calvary (Im so shit ) http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/rolleyes.gif so I couldnt be bothered fighting my way through all those battles so I put every man I could muster on my defending provinces and started autoresolving almost every battle - and I started winning that way HA HA HA http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/idea.gif I definetly won battles I wouldve lost had I commanded the army myself

eh eh eh http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smokin.gif

[Quokka]

It's still a new game for me so the battles are really enjoyable. I like using an army that I have spent time building up, and I especially love it when the enemy breaks and I thrash him.
I do auto-resolve castle seiges if I don't have any seige engines and small non-consequential battles, but anything that is likely to have an effect on my campaign I fight.

Crush your enemies,
See them driven before you,
and hear the lamentation of the women.

[Louis de la Ferte Ste Colombe]

Never.

I play mostly MP, and autoresolve is not available for battles... Too bad, that would give me a chance.

I don't know how good autoresolve is, but I think I am going to learn fast in this thread (http://www.totalwar.org/cgi-bin/forum/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=25;t=10484) (and here is the storyline (http://www.totalwar.org/cgi-bin/forum/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=25;t=10485))

I am pretty sure I'll have some good opportunites at cursing this feature

Louis,

[gaelic cowboy]

about 50 50 for me it just takes to long to o all the battles.

[Dhepee]

I wish that you could autoresolve in the middle of a battle. I've been in situations where I have several battles to fight, and I want to command personally in all of them, but the battle gets boring. Usually they have a few scattered units that are routing all the way across the field or there is one catapult that I haven't taken out and is hidden in the trees. It would be nice to just get out of there and go on to the next one.

[magnatz]

I usually try to avoid commanding:
- battles with huge armies that take forever to finish.
- battles I know I'll win anyway.
- battles I know I'll lose anyway.
- sieges, expecially when I have no artillery.

So basically I play on the strategic level, and step down to take command of a battle only when I am bored, or in special cases, ie when I want to capture a king, suppress a peasant rebellion with a bunch of battered elite units, and so on.

[Mount Suribachi]

Quote[/b] (Dhepee @ Sep. 11 2003,17:20)]I wish that you could autoresolve in the middle of a battle.
That would be lovely, instead if you try and quit when the enemy has 1 peasant left against your 500 AUMs, you lose the battle http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/angry.gif

[rory_20_uk]

Since the ability to save the game has been added before battles, I do not auto resolve, as what is the point? Before I was very reluctant to do so, as if it were only as small fight I might as well see it through, and if it is a large fight I am not going to let the computer mangle a crucial event.
I find that autoresolving by its nature takes men from several different units. Often I have units that I want to protect, and others that are there to take the brunt of the attack. For example, if a rebellion happens in the middle of my empire and I can use my king, I will often let him do the brunt of the work, both to increase his ability, and also that any losses of horse will be replaced free.
Autoresolving offers a poor return when defending, as I am sure everyone here has somehow lost a surefire win on favourable terrain (when I used to autoresolve, I would replay particulary destructive defeats to see how great the difference would be). Did the AI charge with the archers? Did he decide that altitude sickness might play a factor, or that I was paying too much out in army upkeep, so he'd thin my army out a bit? Sometimes I did wonder
My PC will not play RTW either (I have a Geforce graphics card), so my next purchase is a new graphics card at the end of November. Playing RTW without the battles is UNTHINKABLE http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/dizzy.gif

[lancer63]

I agree with a lot of people here that auto resolve, while useful when pressed by the late hour or by higher demands has lost a lot of it's usefulness with the quick save before battle.
I ussually auto resolve when I bribe a general and has to face impossible numbers without help, but once I clicked the wrong button and had to stay for the party. Of course I lost; but my losses were fewer and the AI took more punches than when I autoresolve. I don't like to see my boys lose a battle but I guess it's better to take a few more foes with you, by running the battle yourself, than let the machine decide how many of your troops are gonna die.

[Brutal DLX]

I tend to autresolve most of the times now. I only command the interesting or important battles where a success is needed.
You may lose more men on the average by autoresolving, but you conserve a lot of time not fighting repetitive battles, which is a big pro in my opinion.

[Hamburglar]

I almost never autoresolve. I think doing it for siege assaults is cheesy because its basically a bug or exploit, so I always do the siege myself.

As for battles, I probably fight about 95% of them. If I have 3000 guys and the AI has 200, I usually auto it because I'll spend more time loading the battle screen then I will fighting the battle.

As for battles of 3000 AI vs 200 of my own men, I always fight it. My favorite battles are last stands and I like to see how much damage I can do as my men die one by one.

[MizuKokami]

i tend to autoresolve when i've been playing alot in the evening, and don't realize it's past time to take a break.