Questions by Shamus

[Shamus]

Rather than starting a new thread every time I have a query, I will just post the new question in this thread. I don’t imagine that the mods are amused with me starting a new question thread every other day. Please note that I do look for the answers myself before posting a question. I have read through all of the beginners guide to total war, along with the table of contents supplied at this forum. I state this as I know that it can be frustrating to deal with someone who wants to have all the answers spoon-fed to them.

That said, here is my first question of this thread. I had been campaigning against the Egyptians lately, and found that something rather frustrating kept happening. Each time I would try to assault a castle to end the siege and take the territory, the Egyptians would sally forth, and Egyptians from other provinces would come to help. When they lost, those still alive would return to the security of their castle, only to sally forth again, making the taking of the territory long and grueling. That was annoying, but a good tactic on their part, so I respect them for that. What drove me nuts was the fact that my generals kept ransoming my prisoners back to the enemy. Any enemy units I hadn’t officially “killed” the first time around, would be back to fight me the next time. This more than doubled the time it took for me to take the castles.

I have been searching but have been unable to find a solution to my problem. Is it possible to turn off your general’s ability to ransom prisoners, or does that option not exist?

[Eastside Character]

I would suggest killing the captured enemies before a battle ends. But if you do it your general gets a vice (scant mercy?).

[Game Over!!!]

Shamus, don't autoresolve your battles. If you do your generals will automatically ransom back the prisoners. Take charge of the battle personally and if you don't want to fight them again...kill them all in battle and execute the prisoners. Yes you will get a vice after a couple of 'execute the prisoners' situations but you certainly will not be fighting the same troops again.

[Shamus]

I never autoresolve my battles, even one I had last night that pitted my army of 500+ units against a lone rebel catapult. I like to have full control over every aspect of the game, no matter how small that aspect may seem.

When I am just grabbing a single territory for economical purposes, then I tend to release all the prisoners, and kill the ringleaders. However, when trying to claim one new territory after another, I prefer to execute them all. That’s why I was so perplexed when my generals began ransoming prisoners without my permission.

[Cazbol]

The only time your're asked what to do with prisoners is when they're rebels. There the choices are to execute them, execute the ringleaders or release them, which will give you no ransom money.

When taking prisoners from another faction the general will always try to ransom them back and only execute them if their king won't pay. The only way around this is to press the button with the bloody knife on the battle screen, in which case all prisoners will be killed.

[Obex]

As for prisoners, heres my wisdom: I only kill them if im attacking or if they are good units. I dont usually kill prisoners when im defending. Here is my thinking. if ive routed a large army, then i can probably do it again. what i dont want is for them to replace the slain, weak units with fresh teched up ones. so i let them bring back their low valor archers again. plus, returning the crappy army will bolster their army size, and provoke another doomed attack.

one thing that i advise is that when you are attacking, or defending against a seige break attempt, try to let some of the enemy rout without capturing them. that way, the castle fills up and will shortly fall, as opposed to having to later assault a castle to kill the 6 archers inside.

i hope that some of this made sense. i need to sleep.

[Shamus]

Interesting. I had been wondering if the amount of time a castle could hold out was partially based on the number of individuals inside. There have been a few cases where one or a few soldiers had held out indefinitely on their own. Now I know.

I had completely forgotten about hitting that knife button during battle. I sure wish I had remembered that last night. I attacked a Hungarian province of about 900 men in retaliation for attacking me several years previous. I killed about 200, and took about 500 prisoner. Had I killed them before the battle was over I would only have to deal with 200 men, instead of the 700 I now have to contend with. Ah well, live and learn. Next time…..

[Cheetah]

Have you tried to bribe the defenders?

[Shamus]

I was wondering if people think it would be worth my while to try and bribe various enemy armies at this point in the game. All but a few factions have been wiped out, and most of those who remain have large tracts of territory. Several of those factions have declared war on me. I can hold most of my borders with little difficulty, but there are a few territories to the north that I grabbed for economic purposes, which now find themselves cut off due to recent naval activities. They are fairly well protected, but are not yet able to produce more high-end troops (as I had been focusing on their economies), so I’m not sure how long they would hold up to a war of attrition. One such province is being approached by three stacks of French units. If I was to bribe those armies, not only would that stave off the attack, but the French provinces behind those armies, are relatively unprotected and those open to attack. I have half a mind to take several powerful armies and just ransack my way through France in the hope of crippling both their armies and their economy (France is by far the biggest threat right now). Not only that, but I would be able to intercept a crusade on its way to my borders.

This is the first time I have found myself to be defending my lands on virtually every front. I have about 320,000 florins in my coffers, and while the trade side of my economy has taken an obvious hit, I am still making a surplus of about 10,000 florins per year. Because I have never been in the position of a long, drawn out, economically draining war, I’m not sure if my current economic situation will still be holding in 20, 40 or 60 years. I’m wondering if you think it would be worth my while to bribe those armies I mentioned (and possibly others) or whether my economy doesn’t look like it will be able to handle the strain down the road.

[Shamus]

Quote[/b] (Cheetah @ Dec. 03 2003,10:14)]Have you tried to bribe the defenders?
Heh, I just read that after I posted my bribe question. I guess someone read someone’s mind. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[Ironside]

Bring a larger army to siege the castle, the comp won't attack a army 2-3 times bigger than thier own.
But I know that the comp is quite mad when it comes to saving castles. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

[Game Over!!!]

If you have to attack a castle because there are only 6 archers in it...it won't fall without a direct assault, move a spy into the province and wait about 4 or 5 years. In that little span of time the percentage of opening castle gates gets above 50% and use your spy. You get the province and you didn't have to attack the castle.

[desdichado]

Shamus,

Bribing opposing factions is a bit hit and miss. If the enemy stack has a high ranking general with good troops it will cost you a fortune 40-50,000 (possibly over 100,000) forins with no guarantee the army will survive by itself assuming it actually accepts the bribe. enemy stacks with low ranking general or even zero star general is obviously cheaper but is very unlkely to survive if stranded in middle of enemy lands.

It can be useful tactic and can at least disrupt the enemy and you have the money to do it but if it were me I'd save the money and create my own armies and go ransack France - chevauchee (did I spell it right?) can be so much fun http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif and its not like the french weren't used to it at the time

[Cheetah]

desdichado, we are talking about the bribing of an already besieged garrison and not a far away province. IMHO it is the fatest option to finish with a siege in which the besieged garrison has reserves for many years without wasting your troops.
So IMHO in the field battle you have two options: either try to kill and capture everyone and then bribe the survivors, or rout the opposing army, but let them escape so that the castle should fill up leading to the quick fall of the garrison.