Help with a viking battle

[gaijinalways]

I recently started a new campaign with the Danes (my last campaign with the English kept crashing). I took over Sweden (the enemy retreated to Norway), and a few turns later I decided this should be mine as well. First time I attacked I brought a bad general (gluttony, etc). Reloaded and hit bad weather. Came the last time, thought, okay, good weather 420 men (240 archers, 100 peasants, 60 vikings, and 20 royal knights) to 360 (all vikings). Battle started off well, shooting up some vikings. One stack finally got closer (whittled down to 37 or so) and attacks. I have 100 peasants, 60 vikings, and my archers who were out of ammo attack. What happens? My vikes get slaughtered and rout, the peasants take heavy losses (down to 23) and rout, and some of the archers start routing beofre even seeing any action. Gah:furious3: !

Maybe these guys are too tough, though the AI general didn't have so many stars!

Any ideas?

[gaijinalways]

Oh, expert, early campaign.

[Innocentius]

As long as almost a quarter of your men are peasants it's pretty hopeless I'd say. Peasants can pretty much only be used for distracting the enemy for a few seconds or flank (and they are even bad for flanking!). Build up a little, and replace the peasants with random Viking units or FMAA (although even they don't fare ar too well against vikings). Norway is a very poor province anyway, and it's not really worth the fight. It's really only good since it's a pretty isolated province that is hard to reach, this makes it ideal for safely producing ships.

[caravel]

There are a few potential problems there. The first, and most obvious, is that you fielded peasants. These are for garrisons only. You can take them into battle but only as a means to outnumber the enemy. all in all though, they are best avoided.

The next issue is that you had only 60 vikings to their 360. Your 20 Royal Knights would never be a match for them. The peasants and archers are a none entity as once the vikings give chase there's not alot you can do. Archers and Peasants haven't a hope in hell fighting in melee against them. The Viking unit is a very strong one for the early era, that is available quickly. It is in essence a more lightly armoured, non elite, higher morale version of Feudal Men-at-Arms with an armour piercing weapon. Personally I would have bribed them.

The final problem is the difficulty level. The enemy have a morale bonus over you when playing on expert.

Was your general of 2 stars or more?

[Martok]

When invading Norway, I always make sure that I bring with at least as many Vikings as the Norwegians. As the other guys have said, peasants are essentially useless, and I find archers to be of only limited utility in offensive battles - particularly against Vikings.

Given that you're playing on Expert (and the enemy therefore gets a +4 morale bonus), you should really just bring in a lot of Vikings and overwhelm the Norwegians with numbers. Leave your archers and peasants at home! :yes:

[Adrian II]

Leave your archers and peasants at home! :yes:Sound advice. You should only bring Archers to Norway if you get fair weather, if you find a good hill to park them on, and if you get a chance to draw the enemy out of formation and into their line of fire long enough to do some real damage.

In other words, only if pigs can fly... :laugh4:

[Geezer57]

Leave your archers <DELETED> at home! :yes:

While I agree wholeheartedly with the sentiment to bring at least parity in heavy infantry to this scenario, I just don't see any real benefit to leaving your missile troops behind. Since the play level is at Expert (with its morale bonus against you), you'll need something to swing morale in your favor - and that's just what the archers provide, as there's a morale drop for the enemy while under missile fire.

The extra numbers provided by bringing the archers also swings morale further in your favor, as you gain the benefit of outnumbering.

Additionally, if you're short on cavalry, the archers (as they're fast infantry) can substitute on the chase after enemy units are broken by your heavies. This lets your now-disengaged heavies gang up on the enemy hold-outs, dropping in on their flanks or rear.

[Martok]

While I agree wholeheartedly with the sentiment to bring at least parity in heavy infantry to this scenario, I just don't see any real benefit to leaving your missile troops behind. Since the play level is at Expert (with its morale bonus against you), you'll need something to swing morale in your favor - and that's just what the archers provide, as there's a morale drop for the enemy while under missile fire.
I realize that too, but as Adrian said a bit earlier:
You should only bring Archers to Norway if you get fair weather, if you find a good hill to park them on, and if you get a chance to draw the enemy out of formation and into their line of fire long enough to do some real damage. That's a lot of "ifs", and usually at least 2 out of 3 of them never happen (at least for me).

Finding a hill generally isn't hard, of course, since you're fighting in Norway. In regards to the other two variables, however.... The weather rarely cooperates -- I get rained on more often than not --and drawing the Norwegians into the archers' killing zone is extremely difficult, as their Vikings are usually too quick to engage my men in melee, and I try not to shoot my own men if I can help it.


The extra numbers provided by bringing the archers also swings morale further in your favor, as you gain the benefit of outnumbering.

Additionally, if you're short on cavalry, the archers (as they're fast infantry) can substitute on the chase after enemy units are broken by your heavies. This lets your now-disengaged heavies gang up on the enemy hold-outs, dropping in on their flanks or rear.
That's true, but they're still unlikely to get the chance to serve their primary purpose. In the end, they're simply much more likely to be a liability than an asset, and so I rarely bring them along.

[Ironside]

As caravel noted, the easiest way to take Norway quickly is to bribe them. Those vikings are a tough nut to crack and you don't really got the manpower for it early on.

[gaijinalways]

Thanks for the idaeas and suggestions. Couple of comments;

I don't have an emissary yet (Danes, on expert you start with very little).:wall:

FMAA might be aways off yet.:dizzy2:

The idea to bring more vikings, doable, but I will have to wait a few years. Maybe best choice.:idea2:

As to bribing, might be difficult, I'm not flush with cash.:embarassed:

[Adrian II]

Thanks for the idaeas and suggestions. Couple of comments;

I don't have an emissary yet (Danes, on expert you start with very little).:wall:

FMAA might be aways off yet.:dizzy2:

The idea to bring more vikings, doable, but I will have to wait a few years. Maybe best choice.:idea2:

As to bribing, might be difficult, I'm not flush with cash.:embarassed:Your approximate plan of action is as follows:

Denmark --> Longboats --> Trade --> more Vikings --> conquest of Norway --> more Vikings --> conquest of Finland --> Church bonus --> more Vikings --> world conquest --> sexual and culinary oblivion

[naut]

Also there's the fact that on expert your men get -4 morale IIRC, (on easy you get +4 morale IIRC).

[Martok]

By the way gaijinalways, I would feel remiss if I didn't advise you that Innocentius has a point about Norway not being worth invading.

It *is* worth taking....eventually. However, it's really only worthwhile to do so once you've started to get your fleet up and running, as you can then take advantage of the province's trade goods. Until you reach that point, however, Norway really isn't worth the effort it takes to conquer, especially given that you usually have to defeat 360 Vikings in order to do so.

Therefore, you might want to actually hold off on invading it, and instead focus your efforts (and your precious cash) elsewhere in the early part of your game -- such as building a few longboats, perhaps. :yes:


Also there's the fact that on expert your men get -4 morale IIRC, (on easy you get +4 morale IIRC).
Close, although not quite. On Easy difficulty, the player gets that +4 morale bonus in batle. On Expert, the AI factions get that bonus.

[mfberg]

A minimum of 2 RK units is necessary to defeat them. If you are willing to whittle them down over time you can take 1 RK and an archer and just kill some and retreat to wait for the next battle. With 2 RK, 1 archer and 1 spear you can do some serious damage or even kill them off in one battle. 1 RK behind and to the flank of your archers, spears in front, and the other RK to lead the vikings on a merry chase in front of your bows. When he charges your spear line with 1 unit use 1 RK to distract his other two Vikings while your second RK brings the hammer down. It is easier with 1 spear, 1 archer, and 3 RK, but it takes a little while for those sons to come of age.

mfberg

[Deus ret.]

also don't forget that Vikings do enjoy a valor bonus in Norway IIRC and thus some of those 360 (the ones which started there) are even better than regular ones.

I also only invade Norway by the time my fleet's up (=when I have a foot in the game) and I have amassed some spare troops to force them into their petty castle: the AI -will- retreat if you only field enough men :horn:. although I admit that the valor bonus renders the province more of a target for the Scandinavian factions, making it more tempting for them to grab it early on.

[Adrian II]

1 RK behind and to the flank of your archers, spears in front, and the other RK to lead the vikings on a merry chase in front of your bows.Now that's brinkmanship, Old Geek. If you withdraw your RK before those Vikings one time too many, they will rout and keep running all the way across the border. Their leader will get the 'Good Runner' or 'Not so Bold' vice, which, if he happens to be your ruler or crown prince, spells trouble for your fledgling dynasty.

So, this sounds just like the sort of thing Adrian II might try. :laugh4:

[Martok]

although I admit that the valor bonus renders the province more of a target for the Scandinavian factions, making it more tempting for them to grab it early on.
That's true. Fortunately, it usually doesn't take overly long to get the Danes' trade income going, so you can still conquer Norway fairly early in the game (and take advantage of its Viking bonus).

@AdrianII: :laugh4:

[Adrian II]

@AdrianII: :laugh4:Besides, it is fun (and an ideal challenge for veterans) to try and conquer the known world with a dynasty that is entirely made up of Brain-Dead Inbreds, Screaming Girls and Mouth-Foaming Perverts.

Yippeeeeh !! https://img170.imageshack.us/img170/8381/droolingin0.gif (https://imageshack.us) :charge: :dunce:

[Martok]

Besides, it is fun (and an ideal challenge for veterans) to try and conquer the known world with a dynasty that is entirely made up of Brain-Dead Inbreds, Screaming Girls and Mouth-Foaming Perverts.

Yippeeeeh !! https://img170.imageshack.us/img170/8381/droolingin0.gif (https://imageshack.us) :charge: :dunce:
Heh. You forgot the unbalanced, elephant-impregnated paranoids that suck on horseshoes. ~;p

Kidding aside, though, I agree that while it can be an interesting challenge, I still try and keep those guys out of my ruling family whenever possible -- I can't help but feel sorry for the poor men under their command!

[caravel]

I remember sending a horse shoe sucking, perverted coward, that had been badly shortchanged when it came to grandparents, off to Lithuania (ouch! best place for him though) several times, and I kept getting him back. Obviously Lithuania didn't want him either... not even for archery practice.

[Adrian II]

Kidding aside, though, I agree that while it can be an interesting challenge, I still try and keep those guys out of my ruling family whenever possible -- I can't help but feel sorry for the poor men under their command!I swear it is a nice challenge. Just make a vow to never use your Royalty in battle. From then on you face a whole new set of problems. You have to conquer territory, pull off hazardous Crusades and build like mad to maintain Loyalty among you Generals, and this with very little income because you have to keep taxes to a minimum. You end up with a bloated, rambling empire held together by seven-star Peasant Generals and a drooling vegetable in the middle.
Nice. :wink3:

[caravel]

On the subject of norway again. I do take it, but usually via a bribe or with a sufficient force. The +1 valour vikings are good to have.

[Agent Miles]

With the VI expansion, the Danes can build horsemen. The first two things I build in Denmark are a 20% farm upgrade and a Horse Farm. I build a force with one horsemen unit per Viking and Norway is mine by 1100.

[Martok]

With the VI expansion, the Danes can build horsemen. The first two things I build in Denmark are a 20% farm upgrade and a Horse Farm. I build a force with one horsemen unit per Viking and Norway is mine by 1100.
I usually bring Horsemen when I invade Norway as well. They're a suprisingly effective unit in battle, at least for me. Not that you want them to tackle RK's head-on or anything, but I was delighted to discover that they make excellent flankers. :yes:

[Sensei Warrior]

I just recently conquered Norway in a Danish Campaign on Expert/Early. I had the heir apparant, 2 archers, 4Vikings, 2Woodsmen. The Archers did help to whittle them down, the Woodsmen slammed into the Vikings flank along with the Prince. It didn't cause a rout, and I had to slog through the rest of the battle. I suffered considerable losses, and had to reinforce the garrison afterwards to pacify the Provence.

In expert on am reconsidering my opinion of the value of Norway, valoured up Vikings or no. I did put a 5dread gov in charge who helped them stay loyal. His Acumen was 2 but its not like Norway is a moneymaker.

[Martok]

In expert on am reconsidering my opinion of the value of Norway, valoured up Vikings or no. I did put a 5dread gov in charge who helped them stay loyal. His Acumen was 2 but its not like Norway is a moneymaker.
Well Norway *is* a moneymaker -- you just gotta have some boats in the water first. Once I have a halfway-decent trade network going, Norway easily pulls down 1000+ florins a year.

That said, I understand where you're coming from. Norway's nascant farm income is hardly worth the price of being able to train +1 Vikings. :no: ~:rolleyes:

[gaijinalways]

That was the reason I initially wanted it, for the trade value. The viking bonus might be useful, but I am playing a GA game.

I ended up holding off on taking it as I build up my trade and expand around the world. I have built up my buildings as well, so I am just waiting for more ships, and then I will decide whether to stab HRE in the back or try and wipe out the Norso. I have been sitting and just turtling, have two well built up provinces now with a decent army in Denmark for defensive purposes (at the moment,anyway).

I did try one other batle that I won with 60 vikings, 100 spearmen, and 360 archers, and 20 royal knights. I won, but took some heavy losses:embarassed: those vikings move fast, and even when they are whittled down, they fight on and on!:furious3: !:wall: So, I gave up on Norway for now, I may take it if I want to grab another territory now that my trade is up and running.

[Deus ret.]

That said, I understand where you're coming from. Norway's nascant farm income is hardly worth the price of being able to train +1 Vikings. :no: ~:rolleyes:

this is getting off-topic now....but speaking of it, while playing PMTW I noticed that acumen seemed to increase non-farming income (trade etc.) as well --- albeit at a somewhat less calculable rate. anyone got some hints on that? until last week-end, I was convinced that it was utterly sufficient to put low-acumen generals in charge of provinces like Norway who sport little farming but high trade income, but it seems to me now that this assumption was not entirely correct.

[caravel]

The trick with Norway is to get some spies trained as early as possible. I always develop it's trade and expand my fleets. So a castle in either Sweden or Denmark is vital in order to build that first brothel. The presence of a spy in the province will allow you to use a significantly smaller garisson, and save money on support costs. The use of +1 valour vikings in your armies will give you a distinct advantage over your neighbours in the early period. When playing as the Danes I never bother with Huscarles or any of the other units. In early My forces are mostly made up of vikings, armoured spearmen, woodsmen, vanilla archers, Royal Knights and horsemen. The Vikings I use as the rank and file infantry. They gain valour quickly and are cheaper to raise than Landsmenn and Huscarles. The woodsmen as devastating flankers that work well with the armoured spearmen and archers. Once the high era looms I tend to go for the usual catholic line up, as the Vikings begin to show their age. In the Viking the Danes have easily the most powerful, readily available unit of all the catholic factions at the start of the early era. They are rivalled perhaps only by the Spanish and their Jinetes.

(Going slightly offtopic here but, a very interesting English campaign can be had from the early era by invading Scotland and Ireland, and training armies that have Kerns, Gallowglasses, Clansmen and Fyrdmen as their backbone. Many players think of taking Wales and developing it and Mercia for the classic Billmen/longbow combo - it's been a long time since I've played an english campaign - but in the early period many neglect these great units opting instead for classic armies consisting only of the usual suspects and hobilars.

[Martok]

this is getting off-topic now....but speaking of it, while playing PMTW I noticed that acumen seemed to increase non-farming income (trade etc.) as well --- albeit at a somewhat less calculable rate. anyone got some hints on that? until last week-end, I was convinced that it was utterly sufficient to put low-acumen generals in charge of provinces like Norway who sport little farming but high trade income, but it seems to me now that this assumption was not entirely correct.
Governors and state officials improve *all* types of income, period.

That's why playing as the Eggies tends to be so ridiculous (albeit still very enjoyable) --their lands are real cash cows. With Antioch, Egypt, & Tripoli maxed out for trade and a Qadi al Quda with Acumen of 6 or better, I can pull down 10,000 florins per year from each of those provinces. Even Palestine will make me well over 1000 florins per year, even though it doesn't have any trade goods! :yes:

@Caravel: I hear what you're saying, but I still like to train Landsmen and Huscarles even though they're not really necessary. If for no other reason, they seem to turn out better governors than "vanilla" Vikings. Either way, though, the Danes are quite a lot of fun. :2thumbsup:

[drone]

Has anyone ever tried this trick on expert?
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=517796&postcount=23

I tried a different approach to make the conquest of Norway much easier. This was on normal difficulty so I don't know if it would work on harder modes but I will try in the future for sure.

In 1087, attack Sweden with your king alone. This way they AI won't retreat and you will get to fight them. If you win, it is -120 vikings to fight in Norway and it isn't really hard to win 21 vs 120 on normal. I proceeded like this :

Close in to the first squad of enemy vikings so they charge you, then tell your knights to charge to the left and begin a flanking motion until you are behind their general's squad, and charge them, this way, the first squad will be stuck behind the general's one and they won't attack, soon you should kill the general and their moral at the same time making them rout. Fall back a little and charge the other squad immediatly. You should win this with a few casualities (I had 6 deaths) but they should rout pretty fast. You can then capture the rest of the vikings.

Now you will get to fight 240 vikings instead of 360 in norway.
I have tried this on normal a while ago, and it does work. I wonder what the troop threshold is before the AI decides to retreat to Norway. :inquisitive: The best part of the King-only strategy is that if it fails, you are only 1 turn into the game... ~D

[Sensei Warrior]

Martok: It's true that Norway adds to your trade, and once you have your trade network set up can bring in some good income. It's just I took it in the first 10years of the game where money is excrutiatingly tight. If playing Danes on Expert in the future I would probably hold off conquering Norway until after my trade network is up and running.

Drone: The general consensus is any more troops than the King will cause them to withdraw, on any difficulty setting. I pulled off a oddity and got them to commit to a battle with 2 units, but it happened under odd circumstances, and it was the absolute only time I could get them to fight with 2 or more units. I wrote up the whole thing in the Danish guide if you want to check it out.

[drone]

I haven't tried this is a while, but I think I may have done it with 1 unit of archers and a viking unit or the King. The presence of archers (and their lower auto-calc value) instead of a infantry troop got them to stick around for a fight, maybe?

[gaijinalways]

Interesting ideas. I ended up bribing Norway later, and I am still in the process of building it up with a young king who got a builder bonus. I also expanded into Saxony after the HRE had been weakened by the Alomonds as well as taking Friesland from the dying French. I then bribed Ireland, and later Mercia and Scotland as the English got tied up by the same Alomonds. I then invaded Northumbria when it was weakened and became a rebel state (almost unbribable general there).

So now sitting with those provinces as well as Sweden and Denmark. I am wondering if I should bribe the English to death in the UK, but I will have to wait for their king to leave on vacation:laugh4: . The Polish are weaker now, though generally unbribable. The BYZ have expanded far, and the Novgorods are sitting weaker. The Pope is stoll around, small though, and the Turks keep reemerging once in a while.

Interesting fun, one of the few campaigns where I have fought very few battles.:beam:

[caravel]

I tried a different approach to make the conquest of Norway much easier. This was on normal difficulty so I don't know if it would work on harder modes but I will try in the future for sure.

In 1087, attack Sweden with your king alone. This way they AI won't retreat and you will get to fight them. If you win, it is -120 vikings to fight in Norway and it isn't really hard to win 21 vs 120 on normal. I proceeded like this :

Close in to the first squad of enemy vikings so they charge you, then tell your knights to charge to the left and begin a flanking motion until you are behind their general's squad, and charge them, this way, the first squad will be stuck behind the general's one and they won't attack, soon you should kill the general and their moral at the same time making them rout. Fall back a little and charge the other squad immediatly. You should win this with a few casualities (I had 6 deaths) but they should rout pretty fast. You can then capture the rest of the vikings.

Now you will get to fight 240 vikings instead of 360 in norway.

That strategy won't work on huge unit size, which is what I use, as those two 60 men units automatically merge to become 1 unit of 120 men. On huge unit size, you haven't a hope in hell with your 20 man royal bodyguards unit against those 120 vikings. I'd even struggle to do that with the game modded to use scalable bodyguard units, which would mean double size on huge unit size. Even on large units it would still be difficult as you'd have one large unit of 100 and another of 20. If the 20 man unit was the general's, then you may have a very slim chance of pulling it off.

I almost always push them into Norway, then bribe the whole stack there. For me that's the best strategy and saves a lot of time, allowing me to concentrate on developing Denmark and Sweden. I usually disband the lot of them though if I've no need for them, and replace them with a cheaper peasant/spearmen/UM garrison, as cashflow can get very tight. It's necessary to get spies and happy buildings in there ASAP, to maintain loyalty, otherwise the garrison gets very costly.

[Agent Miles]

I love a challenge.

Here's my turn one, MTW/VI 2.01 Expert/Huge units:
https://s132.photobucket.com/albums/q36/AgentMiles/Sweden/

1097, I take Norway with my king, his two sons and two horsemen units that I made in Denmark (you can even auto-calc this victory). I made 595 florins for taking out the Vikings in Norway and 95 for the Swedish Vikings. Now, every other year, you can turn Norwegian rebels into florins while you train your generals.
I can only show you the door.:bow:

[gaijinalways]

Managed to move a lot farther along, something like 1273 or so. Now have taken Livonia and Portugal as well. Have tried other places, but either bribes have been turned down, or usually the Alomonds have crashed my party before the bribe could be looked at:oops: . So I am wondering, with my cash now at about 75K, and am still on a building spree for a quite a few places, ships coming out and some agents (lot of AI assasins running around), wonder what my next move should be.

I think I will turtle another 30 years or so, slowly building up an army too. I have Denmark and Sweden both ready to build for the next stage and go 16 yeas each, with another province ready for that soon as well. Who knows, maybe turtle another 40-50 years. Of course, I will take any chance to bribe some more provinces if I can. The English are barely hanging on, the Turks too, and the Norsogord chugging with 2 provinces, the HRE with 1. The Byz and the Alomonds are both huge. I am now at, what 11 provinces (Ireland, Scotland, Northumberia, Mercia, Freisland, Saxony, Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Portugal, and Livonia). Been trying to bribe Aquitaine and Britany, just no chance, though now with th HRE there, I could invade if I could reach it (forget if there is a port there or not):idea2: .

Had a chance for another African province as well, but decided it is too far away if push comes to shove:juggle2: . Want to build up my kitty more and get more building projects finished (especially the ones that will boost trade) and build a bigger army, though I could merc up as well at some point, but prefer home grown guys at the moment.

Any other ideas? Will consider of course invading a rebel province if I can reach it, as that wouldn't set me back too much for loss of trade.

This is a GA game, so at some point I need to damage my two big allies (yes, still allies at this point) to grab some big points for myself. I kind of wonder, how late can I wait?:sweatdrop:

[Agent Miles]

From Livonia, I usually take Novgorod, Finland, Lithuania and Moscovy. This usually knocks out the People of Nov. They are not a Catholic faction, so this won’t get me in trouble with ‘Da Man’. In Moscovy you can produce Steppe Heavy Cavalry, who are really good mounted archers/medium cav. This helps a lot, since the Danes lack a mounted archer unit. Let Livonia continuously rebel, and you can use it as a training ground for your generals. It only takes eight victories for a zero star to go to four star. I use four each Steppe Heavy Cav/Royal Knights/Chivalric Sergeants/Gallowglass for an assault army. Add a half stack of eight arbs or demi-cannon and you can hold the gates of hell. I think if you plan it right, you can wait until 1400 and still conquer it all!

[Vladimir]

Norway in VI (no mods) is excellent for rebel farming. After that, Vikings make a good spam autocalc unit.

[Adrian II]

Managed to move a lot farther along, something like 1273 or so. (..) I think I will turtle another 30 years or so, slowly building up an army too.You are not in a hurry at all, are you? :beam:

Lately I have taken to turtling as well. GA is more fun than macromanaging a bloated, coast-to-coast nonsens empire.

I have just posted a Danish guide (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1411689&postcount=109)in the MTW Guide section which you may find useful. Alternatively you may want to comment or add your own suggestions. In my present Danish (GA) campaign the year is 1260, I hold a large part of Europe and I am going to destroy the Byzantines -- in my own good time.

EDIT

I am going to add a remark of Martok's to my mini-guide: Huscarls often make excellent governors, with high scores on all the necessary traits.

[naut]

Going slightly offtopic here but, a very interesting English campaign can be had from the early era by invading Scotland and Ireland, and training armies that have Kerns, Gallowglasses, Clansmen and Fyrdmen as their backbone. Many players think of taking Wales and developing it and Mercia for the classic Billmen/longbow combo - it's been a long time since I've played an english campaign - but in the early period many neglect these great units opting instead for classic armies consisting only of the usual suspects and hobilars.
Gallowglasses and Clansmen is what I used in my most recent English campaign, so I can certainly recommend this.

[Martok]

Gallowglasses and Clansmen is what I used in my most recent English campaign, so I can certainly recommend this.
My old roommate actually swears by them, even more so than the Billmen/Longbow combination. (He's always been a sucker for the Celtic units, though, so he may be a bit biased. ~;)) Either way, it's hard to find fault with his results -- he usually owns all of Europe west of the Rhine and most of north Africa by around 1150!

But back to the topic.... I'll recommend Adrian II's mini-guide for the Danes to anyone who's interested. It's pretty thorough, yet still concise. :thumbsup:

[gaijinalways]

Well, I'm thinking about using the clansmen and the glassgows, but at the moment I did take on the Norsogord and took Lithuania and Norosgord from them. I need reinforcements to take their other three provinces, though I noticed they are also fighting near Constanople.

The Alomonds are no longer allies with me (the Norsogord neither, they have one pesky ship left:furious3: ). I have greatly expanded my fleet, still expanding and building up troops, need quite a bit more of both to eventually challenge the Alomonds or the Byz.

I have still been trying to bribe other territories, but I and the Alomonds and the Byz keep assinating each other's agents. The Byz did take the African province, but I really didn't want it as it is too far from my other holdings and not really a good trading province.

Started to build more cav capability as I noticed I am short on cavs. I will want to build more spies too, the assasins come and go, but they enjoy their efforts for my small empire (now at 13!).

Keep hoping the Byz and the Alomonds will start fighting each other, but probably it is wishful thinking.:juggle2: My trade will be expanding as I build a few more merchant houses. Still waiting for Meria to be able to churn out billmen as well.

Any other good suggestions? It's now around 1282.

[Knight of the Temple]

I use a lot of Clansmen and Gallowglasses - I love those guys! I'm around 1291 in my very first campaign (English/Early/Normal) and I have whole stacks of both of these units just waiting to be assigned wherever they're needed. I use Gallowglasses as my specialist desert infantry, keeping them at their initial armour level of 2, so that they can do a good deal of marching, running and fighting in hot climates. I would have loved to use Clansmen as my desert troops but their defence is just too weak at armour level 1 and 2 (and unmounted troops above armour 2 start to be less efficient in the desert). I use Clansmen as medium infantry, and I've just started churning them out with silver (+3) armour, so they're a lot more solid defensively, and with their fast speed and valour bonus (which gives them an attack twice as powerful as FMAA), they are versatile and competent fighters, not to mention extremely economical as well due to their low costs. Gallowglasses too are very kind to the budget and do a good job on the field, although it does take a lot longer to be able to train Gallowglasses than Clansmen due to a higher level of building requirements and, of course, the fact that you need a ship to get to Ireland in the first place; all you need to build Clansmen is a fort.

I think my battle against the Scots was my first experience of the battlefield (other than the tutorials), and the Clansmen I faced were a lot tougher than I expected . . . heh, I'll never forget charging up a hill with some Hobliars to get into a possible flanking position, only to have a unit of Clansmen come tearing down upon me in no time at all and rather than move my horsemen elsewhere I decided to engage them, thinking that my 'mighty' cavalry wouldn't be too troubled by some lightly armoured foot soldiers . . . more than half of my Hobliars were slaughtered on the initial charge, at which point they routed and I was beginning to think I'd made a big mistake invading Scotland when I saw a whole host of other Clansmen charging down another hill toward my main army of Frydmen and Urban Militia . . . it was a sore battle, but I did win eventually. That was my first experience of Clansmen and I was pretty impressed . . . it was also my first time using cavalry and I was mightily disappointed . . . I didn't realise they would be so weak, but that was before I knew much about the game and didn't know much about the actual stats. Never again would I think of any cavalry as being that mighty(!) . . . except for the time when I charged 100 peasants with 3 Royal Knights and quickly slaughtered them all---now that was more like it!

I didn't have much trouble against the army of Vikings in Norway by the time I invaded, but going into battle with a host of archers and some peasants would seem insane to me, especially on Expert difficulty---no wonder you had problems! I think I had several units of Clansmen and Gallowglasses when I faced them . . . not to mention some Longbowmen from a bribed army in Wales . . . all I did was draw them forward with archer fire and then withdraw my Longbowmen behind a spearwall when the Vikings came close . . . and when they hit my spears I charged them from all sides, including an ambush from nearby trees (which was cool), and I hit the general's unit in the rear with some Mounted Sergeants . . . and again I'd been expecting something powerful from my cavalry (I still hadn't fought many battles at this point, and I think this was my first time getting a good, clear charge into the rear of an enemy) but my Mounted Sergeants were rather unimpressive . . . only killing a handful on their so-called 'irrestable charge' . . . heh, but oh well.

[gaijinalways]

Well, I mistakenly thought the archers would take more vikings down, but the Norwegian Vikes are tough and very fast! I have certainly won battles with far less on the field, but the AI always brings surprises.

[Martok]

Well, I mistakenly thought the archers would take more vikings down, but the Norwegian Vikes are tough and very fast!
Indeed they are. Their seeming resistance to missile fire is another big reason why I rarely bother bringing archers with when invading Norway -- they're just not very effective against that shield wall. Much more effective to simply throw a bunch of medium/heavy infantry at Vikings, with a couple cavalry units for flanking.

[Adrian II]

@Caravel: I hear what you're saying, but I still like to train Landsmen and Huscarles even though they're not really necessary. If for no other reason, they seem to turn out better governors than "vanilla" Vikings.My sentiment exactly.


Exhibit A

https://img411.imageshack.us/img411/6775/screenshotdanish1263nj5.th.jpg (https://img411.imageshack.us/my.php?image=screenshotdanish1263nj5.jpg)

[Deus ret.]

I hit the general's unit in the rear with some Mounted Sergeants . . . and again I'd been expecting something powerful from my cavalry (I still hadn't fought many battles at this point, and I think this was my first time getting a good, clear charge into the rear of an enemy) but my Mounted Sergeants were rather unimpressive . . . only killing a handful on their so-called 'irrestable charge' . . . heh, but oh well.

you have to take care that it's also a "clean" charge. granted, this aspect is even more important in RTW-RTR, but even in MTW cavalry profits significantly from a charge pulled off correctly. use the mouse to drag your cav unit into formation, directly facing the enemy, and issue the attack order ONLY when they're properly aligned and not moving anymore. use a single-click, they will approach slowly at first and charge themselves once they've reached the appropriate distance. It takes a bit of practice to figure this out to avoid too long pre-charge strolls but I found it to be seriously effective. MS are the best imaginable unit for this task since they're fast and have a good charge. who needs melee stats if they withdraw immediately for the next charge?

oh sorry, off-topic again....my humblest excuses to those I disappoint. :shame:

[Knight of the Temple]

you have to take care that it's also a "clean" charge . . . use a single-click, they will approach slowly at first and charge themselves once they've reached the appropriate distance . . . MS are the best imaginable unit for this task since they're fast and have a good charge. who needs melee stats if they withdraw immediately for the next charge?

It was a clean charge! A very clean charge. Since there was no one bearing down on me at that time, I did make a point of forming up and manouvering to get an ideal charge. My facing was good, my angle was good, my formation was good . . . everything was good, and I slammed them in the rear---you can't get a much cleaner charge than that. I didn't use a single click when attacking though, and I still rarely ever do, as there's rarely ever time to be strolling about when it's time to attack (especially when you're trying to catch a unit off guard---if you stroll up to attack a unit that isn't already engaged then don't expect them to just sit and wait for you to charge into their backs!) But I'm very careful when moving and charging heavily armoured cavalry or any cavalry in the desert, as obviously they tire more easily.

And withdrawing for another charge is not easy when the enemy is engaging you directly in melee and you're the only unit involved in that fight! And I often use my cavalry on their own, so that's often the situation, which makes withdrawing a bad idea (certainly in my experience). But yeah, if your enemy is already engaged (and distracted) by another unit then withdrawing is easier.

Mounted Sergeants aren't fast cavalry, by the way. Well, not in my version of MTW (I don't use any mods). They have the same speed as regular cavalry (20 run, 22 charge). Fast cavalry, such as Jinetes or Steppe, have a running speed of 24 and a charging speed of 26.

Vikings aren't fast either---they have the regular attributes (10 run, 11 charge). Clansmen are fast (12 run, 13 charge).

And ordinary archers aren't that effective against targets considered to be armoured (armour 3 and above). Vikings have an armour level of 2, but their large shield gives them an additional bonus of 2, so their armour level is actually 4---regular arrows aren't going to cut them down very well.

[caravel]

It was a clean charge! A very clean charge. Since there was no one bearing down on me at that time, I did make a point of forming up and manouvering to get an ideal charge. My facing was good, my angle was good, my formation was good . . . everything was good, and I slammed them in the rear---you can't get a much cleaner charge than that. I didn't use a single click when attacking though, and I still rarely ever do, as there's rarely ever time to be strolling about when it's time to attack (especially when you're trying to catch a unit off guard---if you stroll up to attack a unit that isn't already engaged then don't expect them to just sit and wait for you to charge into their backs!) But I'm very careful when moving and charging heavily armoured cavalry or any cavalry in the desert, as obviously they tire more easily.
This can nullify the charge bonus in my experience. The cavalry run so fast that they are too close to break into a real charge, and instead just run up to the enemy and break into melee. In such cases you need to run you cavalry into position stop them at a reasonable distance, correct their facing if necessary, then single click, as they close with the enemy they will suddenly break into charge speed. The front needs to be level and hit the enemy flank full on. If the unit adjusts it's position the charge bonus could be lost. Running should be avoided where possible, unless you need to get a unit somewhere quickly to relieve another unit, as it tires your units out.

[gaijinalways]

One thing that surprised me in a battle I didn't save was that my group of vikings in the woods sucked royally aganist some alomond cav. Initially, whack, looked good, but these guys later routed (60 vs 20!). What gives?

[caravel]

One thing that surprised me in a battle I didn't save was that my group of vikings in the woods sucked royally aganist some alomond cav. Initially, whack, looked good, but these guys later routed (60 vs 20!). What gives?
Possibly low morale, either that or your opponent had particularly high morale or valour, from a virtue such as e.g. "famously brave" or "pride". If his unit was a 4, or more, star general and yours was only a 0 valour vikings unit, then that may explain it. It also depends on which cavalry unit was involved? I'm guessing Ghulam Bodyguards? Another factor is the surprise attack. If they surprised your units in the wood, then your units would have been fighting at a morale penalty for a time, if hit in the flank this would have been worsened. Then there is the lie of the land to consider. Were your men fighting, in the wood, but uphill? Were they exhausted? Had some of your other units been routed? Had your general been killed? Many factors.

[Knight of the Temple]

This can nullify the charge bonus in my experience.

Hmm . . . interesting. I'll definitely keep an eye out for that happening from now on, but I haven't seen any signs of that so far. The only way I know to screw up your charge is to have your cavalry on 'hold formation' or something daft like that.

I've never really used the wedge formation . . . I don't know how much of a difference that really makes to a cavalry charge. I tried it in the tutorials but that was about it. I know it gives +3 to attack/-3 to defence. As I often use my cavalry to charge on their own and expect them to get involved in a melee I'd be reluctant use the wedge formation, as it's defensively weaker, and so far I've been led to believe by my battle experience that defence is favourable to attack . . . as I've often had high attack/low defence units get killed too easily by high defence/low attack opponents: like Clansmen against Chiv. Sergeants.

[gaijinalways]

My vikings were hiding in the woods, fully rested (hadn't moved), level ground. They got the surprise bonus initally, and yes, they were Ghulam bodyguards if memory serves me right. But even the other group of vikes aganist lesser cav routed almost as quickly too. Maybe my vikes need to be armored and moraled (liquored:idea2: :laugh4: ) up before they can beat even cav!

[bamff]

My vikings were hiding in the woods, fully rested (hadn't moved), level ground. They got the surprise bonus initally, and yes, they were Ghulam bodyguards if memory serves me right. But even the other group of vikes aganist lesser cav routed almost as quickly too. Maybe my vikes need to be armored and moraled (liquored:idea2: :laugh4: ) up before they can beat evn cav!

Break out the drinks, mate - I think you are right. I have seen vikings chew up and spit out RK's.

[caravel]

My vikings were hiding in the woods, fully rested (hadn't moved), level ground. They got the surprise bonus initally, and yes, they were Ghulam bodyguards if memory serves me right. But even the other group of vikes aganist lesser cav routed almost as quickly too. Maybe my vikes need to be armored and moraled (liquored:idea2: :laugh4: ) up before they can beat evn cav!
Seems like either low morale and/or valour may have been the issue then.

[Adrian II]

The quality of your General is of the essence. If he has a -3 Morale penalty, even your best Vikings may run off crying and screaming for their mummies.

[Caerfanan]

I just recently conquered Norway in a Danish Campaign on Expert/Early. I had the heir apparant, 2 archers, 4Vikings, 2Woodsmen. The Archers did help to whittle them down, the Woodsmen slammed into the Vikings flank along with the Prince. It didn't cause a rout, and I had to slog through the rest of the battle. I suffered considerable losses, and had to reinforce the garrison afterwards to pacify the Provence.

In expert on am reconsidering my opinion of the value of Norway, valoured up Vikings or no. I did put a 5dread gov in charge who helped them stay loyal. His Acumen was 2 but its not like Norway is a moneymaker.

Sensei warrior sama, your army's composition is actually the best answer to the beginning of this thread, IMHO.

Gaijinalways, my opinion is that you rely too much on archers.

Against the 6 viks (some being +1 valour), Sensei has:
- 4 viks to stand them in line
- 2 woodsmen to unleash crazy charges on the flanks, or event the rear of an eventual wrapping enemy viking unit
- 2 archers to harass the enemy
- 1 RK to charge in their back and mop up prisoners.

The problem with archers is that they don't kill an enemy unit with their arrows, they just reduce their number, and they are almost like peasants in melee (I think they have -3 defence instead of -4 for peasants, but the same -2 attack)... If they're not being charged at by angry norsemen! :beam:

What I would do in your case is replace 2 archers by 2 viks, if you like a lot the archers and want to have them having an important role in your battle, this would give you something to hold a line. Note that, as Adrian II said with is "if series", archers are way better when you are defending, AS YOU are then morE likely to choose your ground.

Ah, and I wouldn't bring the peasants because they will certainly rout at first schock in melee. Not a problem by itself, if they killed a few enemies, but they will reduce your archers' morale (not the viks and RK though, if I'm correct).

With 3 viks, 4 archers, 1 peasant and 1 RK, the battle will be tough. You'll have to manoeuver your RK to lure enemy viks. If the 6 viks charge head on, you might be in trouble. Create local superiority and try to rout one enemy unit very quickly: this will lower the other's morale, and will provide you with flanking units (the ones you will prevent from chasing the routers!)

(edited two times for spelling)

[seireikhaan]

I have found that invading sweden on the second turn w/ the king and a unit of archers will field very good results, my last try at it resulted in 118 dead/captured swedes to my one dead RK. That left only 242 vikes in norway to beat(there were two who escaped from sweden) and that is considerably easier. So far for me, the AI hasn't retreated once from sweden from the archer/king combo in the seven times I've tried it. The archers make that battle considerably easier than just the king by himself, meaning more RKs to take norway with, making the battle a little easier on top of having to face down less vikes.

[Caerfanan]

Yup.

Not having 360 viks is also a good solution!