Turks fighting two enemies

[amir]

Every where I read about the turks was the line saying to never fight both Egypt and Byzantines at the same time, I just tried it and it was easyI started by attacking the Egyptians and a couple of years later i attacked one province of the Byzantines and their king died (perhaps he was'nt use to lose???(he was'nt even in the province)), and the Egyptians start having rebellions, and in no time i reach Constantinople and Egypt

so i ask myself what so hard about it???

[Blodrast]

heh, maybe the difficulty level ? :P
try starting in High (so you can have a bit of fun with the Golden Horde in 25 years), on expert...it should definitely be a nice challenge ;)

[amir]

yeah i guess that easy does easing stuff

[Xiahou Liao]

lol, that might be it... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/ceasaryes.gif

[Don Corleone]

Even putting it on Normal difficulty rating will make a signficant difference in gameplay. In Easy, the AI does a LOT of stupid things on the battlefield.

[amir]

yeah i noticed, i once used 40 horse archers(one unit) to kill 80 byz infantry and 20 kathraktoi

[motorhead]

keep in mind that each time you play a campaign different factors can have an impact. First 2 or 3 times i played turks (early/expert) I blew the egyptians and byz out of the water, fighting them both at the same time. But, i got lucky cuz the byz and egyptians were also fighting on multiple fronts. After countless turk campaigns i can say, IMO, the easiest strategy overall is to attack the egyptians first, secure your border at Egypt, then turn north to take on the Byz.

[Marquis of Roland]

Amir when you play on easy your men get an automatic +4(?) valor over computer's men. That is a pretty significant advantage; the enemy will probably start routing on contact hehehhe. Also their campaign and battle decisions basically suck.

On expert the computer has a automatic +4 valor advantage over YOU. Plus the decisions that the comp. makes in campaign mode and especially battle mode are a lot better. Thats when things get interesting . http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smokin.gif

[jelirus]

Excellent advice I thought to concentrate on the Egyptians.

One enemy at a time is plenty, unless you can afford it. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

[amir]

the Egyptians starting amount of forces is ain't big and you start with almost the same amount of forces so you can quickly build some more and in no time take the Egyptians out after that taking the byz and the rest of the world is easy(except the Mongol part)

[Imperial Buffoon]

Quote[/b] (Marquis of Roland @ June 23 2004,19:37)]Amir when you play on easy your men get an automatic +4(?) valor over computer's men. That is a pretty significant advantage; the enemy will probably start routing on contact hehehhe. Also their campaign and battle decisions basically suck.
You get a +4 morale bonus so they may not break on contact but your peasants will certainly break his (this is relevant comparison for Eggy which even on higher difficulty fields very low moral armies of peasants and camels).
If you want to blitz, the starting money being less for higher difficulty levels also makes your life harder as you can't use that many mercs to deal with the armoured byz units.

[amir]

alright one thing i learnd: never play on expert

[scooter_the_shooter]

play on normal thats what i do http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/bigthumb.gif

[amir]

but i afraid to lose

[scooter_the_shooter]

normal is not much different from easy except they will cancel alliances to you dome times. and they are a little smarter. i my self have never ventured in to the unknown scaryness of expert. and i have had the game for years

[amir]

cancel alliances- thats actually be easier at easy they just attack you while ally and not inform you before

[Imperial Buffoon]

I would suggest hard, the only big difference is that you get less money at the beginning and the computer pulls no punches. But one or two campaigns in easy may help understand the mechanics of the game better

[amir]

Quote[/b] ]I would suggest hard
you could just say you wanna see me lose http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/mecry.gif

[Gregoshi]

amir, the level at which you play must be whatever you are comfortable with.

My own thought on the subject centers around one concept: challenge. If you are winning every campaign and playing on Easy, then where is the challenge? If you know the outcome before you start playing, then why play? And if you win all the time, then boredom will soon set in. I like to play to a difficulty level whereby I'm never sure if I'm going to win the campaign. There lies the challenge - can I win? Can I overcome a major setback? Resolving that uncertainty is the lure to play. The really good players who find Expert too easy (imagine that), make up Ironman rules to handicap themselves and increase the challenge. Others mod the game or install mods to increase the difficulty.

The other aspect of a challenging game, is that it forces you to improve. You won't learn to ride a bike if you don't take off the training wheels. Sure, you may fall down a few times, but you'll learn from your mistakes and soon you'll be riding that bike. Same holds true in MTW. My first campaign had limited success - I was pretty good on the battlefield, but I was too florin poor to support the army and buildings I needed to win the game. I knew about trade but didn't understand it and therefore ignored it. You better believe that before I started my next campaign I did a bit of reading here in these forums to learn how trade worked. In my next campaign, my king was bathing in the excess florin that was flooding my treasury. So the failure in the first campaign led to success in the next. Failure is a good teacher...as long as it isn't teaching all the time. Then it is just frustrating.

The bottomline for you is if Easy is a challenge for you, then easy is what you play. But don't be afraid to take the occassional chance at Normal. You never know, you may be better than you think http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/medievalcheers.gif

[Ar7]

Actually hard ain't hard http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif No really, i played my first game on easy, got bored and didn't even finish, the same thing happened on normal and now i am playing hard http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smokin.gif . I wont play expert though, i don't like cheating and automatic +4 morale just sounds a bit like it. Hard is the best since, the AI plays on full power and doesn't cheat....or does it? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-inquisitive.gif

[amir]

i'm going super good and easy an about until i conquer 50% and then u start having a huge amount of rebels, i do manage to get to 60% but after it its just 10 rebels every year

[Gregoshi]

There are ways to control those rebellions amir. Seek the answer and ye shall find it.

[Chimpyang]

I think you forget to kepp the provinces loyal to you by keeping a garrison, a unit of peasents won't cost muh and it's much better to spend a little more than to lose your province to rebels.

[amir]

yeah i know u can also put spies in provinces,
that question is what lead me to that site, and cause i found this site just be4 three days ago i havent yet finished to get to a late time so i havent enaugh to check those things

[Inuyasha12]

Yep a peasant army's always worked for me, i think it's even cheaper than a spy(considering the buildings)
I think about 200 peasants does it , maybe 300 if you just took it. If it's got a different religion than you maybe more, that is if you want it in very low taxes.

[amir]

Thats depend on what province you want to control, for example portugal and some russian lands are naturaly rebellious and 300 peasnts won't settle them down at late part of the game, i think its best to use both spies and peasnts on those provinces.

[Inuyasha12]

I don't think i've ever used a spy.
really

[Marquis of Roland]

Quote[/b] (Gregoshi @ June 24 2004,11:38)]My own thought on the subject centers around one concept: challenge. If you are winning every campaign and playing on Easy, then where is the challenge? If you know the outcome before you start playing, then why play? And if you win all the time, then boredom will soon set in. I like to play to a difficulty level whereby I'm never sure if I'm going to win the campaign. There lies the challenge - can I win? Can I overcome a major setback? Resolving that uncertainty is the lure to play.
Gregoshi, you took the words right out of my mouth http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/bigthumb.gif

I started on normal just to see how hard the game with on standard levels, beat that, then played hard, gained some new tactics, beat hard, and now I'm working on expert (that +4/-4 morale difference is a real killer http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/mecry.gif ). But like Gregoshi said, if you know you're gonna blow the competition away, what is the accomplishment of beating the game?

Now I want to test my skills on multiplayer, unfortunately my connection is too slow (plus my computer tends to crash when I play custom battle with more than 4 factions that is not good).

In fact, I playing on normal taught me some bad habits I had to break on harder difficulties So just keep playing and never stop learning http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-book2.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-2thumbsup.gif

[Gregoshi]

Roland, about online play, just stick with 1v1s or 2v2s if your PC has trouble with more armies. They are fun too.

[mcv]

Instead of peasants, you can also use crossbowmen or arbalesters at provinces near a border. They have the same support cost, but are useful in a battle. In provinces with low income, just drop the tax rate. Compare the differences in income at different tax rates to the support cost of the peasants needed to keep them happy.

The only problem at Expert, in my opinion, is that your allies abandon you, nobody wants to be your friend and nobody wants to marry me. This really hurts income from sea trade.


mcv.

[amir]

you can trade even while on neutral, just keep large enaugh ships fleets and troops on borders and they wont dare attacking you.

[ah_dut]

Quote[/b] (amir @ June 26 2004,16:31)]you can trade even while on neutral, just keep large enaugh ships fleets and troops on borders and they wont dare attacking you.
Or look at my thread in guides, MTW economics 101 (http://www.totalwar.org/cgi-bin/forum/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=34;t=18839)

[Mightypeon]

I play generally on expert, unless I am playing someone hopeless like Russians in high. (Oh high mr. Khan)
Medmod makes it even worse....
Well, the +4 morale thing is essentially a Cathedral in all enemy provinces.
And do not forget the valour boon the enemy recieves.
In short, you will always be beaten with eqal units.
If your units have one valour more you might win.
Expert also seems to influence see battles.
Its not unusual to see attacking fire Galleys with better command loose the plain galleys or even Dromons.
However, I like the challenge...
Its just that the medmod Golden Horde is so overpowered....

[amir]

Quote[/b] ] unless I am playing someone hopeless like Russians in high
why hopeless? they start with two provinces that are nearly as advanced as constantinople is, and that is a huge pro

[Inuyasha12]

Yeah but their military sucks
in my opinion

[amir]

But boyars are very strong(although its the only strong thing they have)

[Inuyasha12]

Yes boyars are good, and they get access to steppe heavy cavalry, and steppe cavalry.
But as i said before heavier european cavalry simply stomps them, their rus spearmen are also very good in early and maybe in high. But when they reach late, they are very outdated.

[amir]

The Russian faction is a high time faction, just like the Turks are a late time faction. so with the russians you must quickly get number advantage before you are outclassed, because then you will at least have numerical advantage, although you can conquer a very large part of the world before getting to late.

[Malachus]

The AI on expert really doesn't change much in terms of the campaign map (based on my experiences playing all four difficulties). The only difference may be the comp will attack you a year earlier or build a tad bit faster, but usually it'll go unnoticed. The battles used to be a pain in the tail, seeing as the comp gets that +4 morale bonus. But, nowadays I can crush the comp on expert without a problem... I actually fought a battle where I won with 1300+ kills and only a little over 100 losses... and it was an even battle in terms of units... not chivalric knights vs. peasants. For those who want to win on expert easily... archers are the key. When engaging in melee, the comp can send your troops packing, but when you make full use of archers, that +4 morale bonus becomes non-existent. Of course, once you realize this, it's not as challenging or fun to play against the comp...