Strategic Balance

[Si GeeNa]

After playing several factions( Started with Egyptians, played with Almos, took the Spanish, took the English, played the French, took the Byz, played the Turks), I sorta saw a pattern in the Strategic Game.

The Spanish and Almos are meant to balance one another in the Iberian Penin. Their close proximity to one another makes them Natural Enemies.

Ditto for the English and French, notwithstanding the historical issue.

Ditto for the Byz and Turks.

Seems that Egyptians tend to do very well strategically becos of this lack of a Natural Enemy. Lack of antagonists in their area means that they are often free to build at leisure till the crusade comes knocking at their door.

I'm sure u can tell i prefer the Muslim factions over the Catholics.

Anyway, from the Natural Enemies issue, i often see one superpower rising when the other gets destroyed by the former.

There are more than 3 pairs of Enemies.

Others which i think might have a Strategic Balance...

1)HRE and Poland, Italy, Denmark, France

2)Hungary and Byz

3)Italy and Sicily, HRE

Looks like only the Russians and Egyptians have true strategic flexibility.

[Shahed]

Greetings and Welcome http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

I could agree to some degree.

The Egyptians can stay out of the fight for some time. Eventually though the Turks will want Syria, or Antioch. The victor of the Iberian peninsula will come knocking on the Eastern door to Cairo, eventually. This is a better situation though, than most of the other factions who will find themsleves in combat fairly early, in comparison.

[Gregoshi]

Hello SiGeeNa and welcome to the Org. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wave.gif

Nice strategic analysis BTW. You should find no natural enemies here at the Org so feel free to expand your horizons.

[Jxrc]

You might add that the Danes do not have any natural enemy either. Once Scandinavia is yours you can do pretty much what you want and the HRE almost never bother attacking Denmark (unless you leave it without any guarnison at all).

I usually go after the Russian because it avoids creating any chance of a possible conflict with a major catholic power (that happens if you try to grab Scotland, Ireland and, of course, Saxony, Pomerania or Prussia).

I agree that it would be fair enough to say that I always try to wipe out the Russian and step into their shoes in order to benefit from their favourable strategic position with all those easy picking nearby.

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

[ToranagaSama]

Quite astute observations, that's why in an attempt to contain or prevent one of the above factions from rising to superpower status, I try to play one off against the other.

For instance if you're a border faction with one or another potential superpower, say Aragon, it might seem prudent to Ally with Spain, but (at the right time) if Spain begins to have success against the Almos, then it's better to Ally with the Almo. This way Spain must guard its borders with Aragon *and* Almo, disipatating its forces. If, as Aragon, you Ally with Spain, this allows Spain to concentrate its forces against the Almo.

If in the above scenario, the Almo, then, begin to have success against Spain, then it can be prudent to break the alliance with Spain and Ally with Almo, in which case the converse should occur.

I'd call this the Balance of Power (BOP) strategic technique. Aragon might not be the perfect example, but, in general, severs for dicussion purposes.

In the Aragon/Spain/Almo example above, Aragon's goal would be to inhibit either from becoming to powerful, while Aragon's builds its strength. Secondly, and just importantly, Aragon (at the right time) can Ally with Almo and attack Spain. Once Spain is effectively done and carved up by Aragon and Almo, then it would be prudent for Aragon (at the right time) to implement BOP against Almo, Allying with Egypt or whatever faction that would sever as a balance versus Almo.

There are several circumstances in the course of a Campaign, when BOP technique can be quite useful and advantageous, as well as a few variatons that work. If you have the habit of player one of the smaller factions, BOP can be crucial to survive while you build your forces.

BOP can be slightly Cheesy if used when playing one of the larger factions; and most, especially, when a player has more Florins than g_d BOP is legit if the Player is utilizing certain roleplaying/limitations, such as Hardcore Rules.

[Qilue]

Hardcore rules? Is this like fighting all battles with only 1 army with no reinforcements allowed?

[ToranagaSama]

Not exactly, but since you asked, all you really need is a SINGLE stack in virtually ALL situations. Anything more than a Stack and a Quarter Stack is ahhh....not necessary.

HardCore Rules (only for the *Seasoned* Player and works especially well with the MedMod):

1) Governorships may ONLY be awarded to Knights (or knight equivalents), those with Royal blood take precedence, then knights “married” to royal blood, and finally un-royal knights.

2) Limit Agents:

a. One “Spy” per province ONLY
b. Only Two to three Emissaries (rarely have more than two) at any given time.
c. Only Two (sometimes three) Assassins at any given time.

3) Limited “Spying”: NO Border Forts/Watch Towers (If I take an AI province with them I destroy them immediately.

4) I limit “Trading” to a degree (in the main game), by setting a reasonable limit to just how far my ships may travel. For example, as the Danes, I normally don’t build my trade network father than the Spanish peninsula. I “may” push around the peninsula around the Med (Aragon), but no father. If I want/need to get to the rich trading of the Med, then I need to take a province bordering the Med or the Black Sea (??) and “build” a Port and Shipyard(s). All my “Med” ships MUST emanate from that province or any other “Med” provinces I may have.

This, generally, works out that my “Atlantic” trade network, as the Danes, will extend, only, to Portugal most times. In order to get to the Med, as the Danes, I need to take Lithuania and the province below it, Kiev (?), that borders the Black Sea. From here, I attempt to establish my “Black Sea/Med” trade network. (At least that’s the goal, though, it can be difficult.)

5) Basically NO “Cheesy” tactics For example:

a. No Spy “flooding” to incite revolt.
b. Nor “spy” flooding to “Quell” revolts. Only use the “limited” number I allot, above. Only have 5 provinces w. one spy per, for a total of 5, then that’s it
c. No “intentionally” killing off “bad” heirs, kings, or generals.

6) No “Raiding”, in the main game, I suspend that rule, to a degree, w. Vikings (playing the Welsh).

7) I try to ONLY make alliances “strategically”, rather than willy nilly with anyone and everyone just for the sake of allying or the “hope” to gain lands (does this EVER happen?).

8) I’ve never “bought” mercenaries, simply because I don’t like the idea of buying my way out of trouble, nor buying my way to victory. (JMO)

9) Generally, play the most difficult factions, like the Danes or Welsh, etc.

If, I’ve forgotten, one or two I’ll add them later.

Well, this is how I play the game. The purpose is to, attempt, to interject greater “STRATEGIC” elements, and, in general, makes for a MUCH more difficult game.

Seasoned player might find these “Rules”, quite challenging. As the game is, for a good “warmonger, the game is, certainly, quite simple, if not down right, dare I say it, easy.

For the Builder/Merchant, or as I see myself, a “Strategic” player, one who looks to out “-Think” the game, rather than out “-Fight” it, the rules, I believe, add a some MUCH needed “meat” to the plate.

So, what do you guys think? Anyone game to try the rules? I’d love to see how others fare. Or, am I just a bit wacked? Any ideas, that should be added?

ToranagaSama, desires a “Mod” that caters to the above rules.

ToranagaSama, drools for the day CA decides to make a “true” Turn-Based [/B]STRATEGY[/b] version with “real”-time battles. Emphasis on Strategy. Please, less, fireballs, elephants, kensai, and more STRATEGY. (Am I alone?)

ToranagaSama, dreams for the day CA decides to actually FINISH a game. Still waiting for STW and/or MTW to be completed, and am willing to PAY for it.

[Qilue]

I see.

What about the 1 stack only concept. I ask because I play all battles like this. Mostly because I detest having to deal with reinforcements. If I could choose what unit would arrive it might be ok, but the system in MTW 1.1 sucks. So I build my armies using the best possible units.

In your list,
1) I already do this, mostly because non-royal governers and generals usually turn into inbred homosexual alcoholics.

[ToranagaSama]

I'm impressed

The First Rule is the *key* to making the Rules, Hardcore

Regarding 1 Stack, its a position going back to original Shogun. I and many are of the mind that it only takes ONE stack. No matter how many troops the AI brings in the VAST majority of circumstances a Seasoned player should prevail.

Gimme one good stack and I don't care how many troops the AI brings In Shogun and vanilla MTW it holds. I haven't played enough vanilla Vikings to say the same. With the MedMod things can get a little dicey, so bringing an extra quarter will have no argument from me.

I'll do so, sometimes, but often to no good, as by the time I remember that I have reinforcements, the battle is over and/or its too late to make use of them. In addition, that I use them so rarely, that in the midst of battle I have a heck of a time figuring out the Reinsforcement Icons and how they work. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif

TS, has absolutely no idea what people are doing with multiple stacks and the concept of a 3 Hours plus battle is completely mindboggling.

I'm of the, once you've got them on the run, Chase those Suckers Off the Map theory. I believe, there are those who differ, chosing to kill/capture every single last enemy sprite. Totally, unrealistic, imuho. These folks either love the tactical battle to an extreme degree or simply don't comprehend the game's mechanics.

Anyway, I'd be EXTREMELY interested in hearing how your games develop using rule 1). Do you use the MedMod? How much money do you average say the first 100 Turns or so? Are you using Green Generals?

[RZST]

well i cant follow rule #1 since im using a laptop http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif i only play strategic part of map no tactical battles. my laptop cannot handle the battles, it slow as hell.

[Si GeeNa]

Good take TS... I've been sorta making life difficult for myself during the Strategic game.

4) Navy is for a purely defensive posture. It would only be used to defend one's coastline. Nothing more, not even for trading purposes. Unless you play the traditionally more naval powers, like the Sicilians and the Italians. There is more freedom of expression than, depending on one's discretion.

There are many ways to play the game, the point is to always ask yourself the relevant questions on how it can be more fun, more historical, more challenging.

Ive been lapping this game up for far longer than most other strategic games. I have not lost any of my appetite as yet.

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

[ToranagaSama]

Quote[/b] (Ky Kiske @ Aug. 27 2003,20:32)]well i cant follow rule #1 since im using a laptop http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif i only play strategic part of map no tactical battles. my laptop cannot handle the battles, it slow as hell.
What does having a Laptop have to do with awarding Govenorships? Just pick up the little Scroll icon and drop it onto a Unit, or NOT

[RZST]

i meant the only 1 stack army, obviously 1 Ai army cannot win against 5 ai armies Oo

oh okay http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/tongue.gif my bad wrong quote.

[ToranagaSama]

Gotcha The Laptop is a bummer

Hope you can get a new PC soon. Get a MiniTower/Tower next time. Much easier and cheaper to upgrade.

Good http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif Luck

[Qilue]

Oops, forgot to reply, sorry.

Toranaga - Generally, many of my provinces stay ungoverned for most of the game. As a result, my garrisons have to be higher to reach 200% loyalty and I don't have as high an income as with governed provinces.

But, I'm also of the opinion that I must have ships everywhere, LOTS and LOTS of them. Minimum 8 in any sea where I have a coastline, 4 every where else except where the AI is trying to outnumber my ships. I also put 12 in each of the deep sea regions.

Given what I described above, you can well imagine my bank account after 100 turns. My current personal best for annual income is 161k during a game as Italians which was reached in 1378. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

Medmod - I've yet to try this.

Green generals - I don't have VI yet, so I have no idea how this actually works.

One other point I must make. I like playing Italians as well as Danes and I simply must have my armies of assassins and spies. One cannot be Niccolo Macchiavelli or the Danish equivalent without a shadow army.