Any way to play the battles on hard and the campaing map on easy?

Well, Spain just suicided itself. They had 4 provinces, just send out a successful crusade (well, almost successful - 1 step away from target)

They attacked me with an all cavalry army through a river... I did not have any missle troops - maybe thats why. But they managed to have their king killed in the battle and there was no heir... 4 rebel provinces gonna be mine. (I made a house rule that I will not attack except for crusade target province and try to bribe rebels not attacking them.)

I am playing this on easy with Sicilians but the battle was way too easy. The spainsh cavalry allowed to trap, sandwich and crush itself.

The trap is closed...

http://bretwalda.uw.hu/mtw/spain/trap_sm.gif

Cavalry in sandwich...

http://bretwalda.uw.hu/mtw/spain/trap2_sm.gif

No one escaped death or capture...

http://bretwalda.uw.hu/mtw/spain/done_sm.gif


Is it only on easy that the AI makes such mistakes? I wish if I could battle on normal or on hard and do campaign map on easy... Which is funny because I am otherwise a TBS fan, with heavy civ1-2-3 experience so I should be doing better on the campaign map :)))

nope

don`t worry, jump into the water!

as a matter of fact, experience cannot be shared/transported, but..

it won`t turn out that cruel you may suppose. you shouldn`ta pay much attention to the "normal" settings. have one or two "quick battles" and start a campaign you like to play (in normal, so you get the feel for which provinces are important, troop-lane, etc.) then hop`right to hard. the reason is the AI who won`t start the fight below (example: no moving in castle- setup)

i`m certain you`ll have a lot of fun, especially you win the first time against a couple thousands more :bow: (..a good moment to think about war, again..but you`ll see)


pps: very bloody this bridge fighting. try to catch them at your sides entry. so it`s forces look like an icecream in waffles(?)[traffic-jam an the foe`s front unit will *blow* up, because they are kind of pressed forward] and you start to lick´ row by row away...

I'm not sure that's possible. The only thing I could think of that may do it is if you take your turns, and then switch the settings to hard before the end of the year. My guess is that will calculate the CPU's moves on hard though.

Bridge battles are ALWAYS easy. I've NEVER lost a bridge battle before and have been in some pretty tight spots with troops. I agree it's regrettable the CPU doesn't use the other bridge. They just send everyone across one and allow a flank, but that's how it goes.

If you want a good challenge when fighting play more offense. Even if they are invading your province, march out to meet them in the center of the field. Sitting on a hill somewhere and letting your missles kill 1-200 troops before you even start fighting is easy. I like to meet my advesaries chivilrously (stupidly) and march straight at them, send everyone in and let them hack it out.

Definately NOT the best way to win, but if you're looking for more excitment in defensive battles, it certainly fits the bill.

A

Thanks for the thoughts!

Quote:

---

(...) then hop`right to hard. the reason is the AI who won`t start the fight below (example: no moving in castle- setup)

---

Could you explain a little bit more? What is the difference between the levels on the campaign map and on the tactical battlefield? Why is it only hard where the AI plays it real? I read somewhere about the levels, but that only said what is not being done in easy, but all the rest seemed quite similar at least on the battlefield...

Quote:

---

very bloody this bridge fighting. try to catch them at your sides entry. so it`s forces look like an icecream in waffles(?)[traffic-jam an the foe`s front unit will *blow* up, because they are kind of pressed forward] and you start to lick´ row by row away...

---

Can you explain that a little better, too? Maybe with a screeshot, how to do it? Put 3 Chivalric Serg-s like U shape or how? I tried that but did not work very well -seems better when I leave 1 Sarge to block the exit from the bridge and missile troops are pounding from all sides and back.

Quote:

---

I'm not sure that's possible. The only thing I could think of that may do it is if you take your turns, and then switch the settings to hard before the end of the year. My guess is that will calculate the CPU's moves on hard though.

---

Could you tell me where can I change the difficulty in an ongoing campaign?

:book:

Actually, I did see the Mongols use both bridge in the second attack wave and I would never try to flank them in a Kiev bridge battle or I'd be dead ;) I even almost managed to lose a bridge battle, when I killed tons of mongols but they kept coming and I ran out of missile (even though I shot like 10-12 units' ammo into them with cycling missile units) and my spear troops slowly wore down, exhausted and run... But luckily the time was up before they could rout all of my troops, but they broke through and only the clock saved me...
:charge:

I may be wrong, but I believe that all the difficulty settings pertain to the battle maps, not the strategic map. The only exception is that on the easier settings you get a little more money to start with. (At least this is the understanding I took from the manual and from section 1.3 of the "begginers guide" that is stickied in the guides section.) I also don't think there is a way to change the difficulty settings after you have started a campaign.

If battles with two bridges are too easy then try to restrain yourself from using the second bridge - slug it out instead, or use a lot of missiles to break the enemy from across the river. Still a lot of fun. I've seen the AI use the second bridge - if it has the troops it will try to flank, or will at least send some mounted missiles and a spear over to defend it. I've tried lots of different things at bridges - when attacking I always enjoy throwing some heavy melee infantry onto the bridge to hack away while I cycle units of javelins in behind them - bloody, bloody, bloody. I've lost bridge battles two ways: (1) I got into an attritive slugfest but didn't have enough troops to outlast my opponent, and (2) I broke his frontline forces and charged across the bridge pell-mell, only to see him rally and swarm my disorganized pursuers, trapping my commander leading to a general route.

Quote:

---

Can you explain that a little better, too? Maybe with a screeshot, how to do it? Put 3 Chivalric Serg-s like U shape or how? I tried that but did not work very well -seems better when I leave 1 Sarge to block the exit from the bridge and missile troops are pounding from all sides and back

---

Either way works, but I started your way and now prefer the U shaped way. you basically make a box with three units, two parallel to the bridge on either side, one facing the bridge at the back of the box. Any units coming over the bridge are allowed into the box and then get attacked from at least two and usually three sides. You can still line up missile troops to fire onto the bridge itself.

You get the attack bonuses and they get the moral penalties for side and rear attacks this way which you don't get if you just plug the bridge.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by English assassin

You get the attack bonuses and they get the moral penalties for side and rear attacks this way which you don't get if you just plug the bridge.

---

Hmm, and what troops do you use in the U?

If you attack with the surrounding troops you lose the rank bonus and they run easier, aren't they?. I had to survive Kiev battles against the mongols with really low quality troops - and the plug seemed to work better... But, again no battles are the same - I might be wrong, there could be other major difference.

For Russians, Halberdiers. For Byzies, Byz Inf at the end and VG on either side.

By chance I don't think any of those give rank bonuses but I'm not sure you would lose them anyway?

But if the plug works for you stick with it, I only started trying this when I had to do a bridge defence and lacked many missile troops. I saw it as a way to get more infantry into combat. Like I say it works for me but...

The difficulty cannot be altered in the middle of a game. It is set when you start a new game.

Like Procrustes said, the difficulty is only for the battle map, and the only difference on the strat map is the money you start with. I think your provinces might be a bit less rebellious on easier difficulties, but I'm not sure about that.

The idea with the U shape at the end of the bridge works with the idea that enemies attacked from the front and both sides suffer large penalties and will rout much faster. I've always found that putting a U shape at a bridge with three units works much better than just plugging the bridge with one unit-you're taking away your defensive advantage! By plugging with one unit, you're effectively "attacking" the bridge rather than defending it. Let the enemies come to you, and wipe them out from three sides as they come off the bridge. My preferred units for the U shape would be a strong spear unit directly opposing the bridge set to hold formation/hold position, and two high attack sword units on both flanks set to engage at will. Anything-and I mean anything-coming off that bridge will die. Don't use vanilla spears, their morale could fail and then things would not be good.

However, I often favour a different form of bridge defence. Often plugging the bridge with either one unit or the U shape will mean the AI will put missile troops on the other end of the bridge and shoot them to bits. So I tend to have my units a bit further back...but still very much ready to destroy. ;)

If someone could tell me a place I could upload images and link to them I'll post some example screenshots of the U shape thing and my other tactic.

I guess my problem was that I had to survive with Chiv Sarge, Feudal Sarge and even with spearmen... That makes for a different tactics :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by English assassin

For Russians, Halberdiers. For Byzies, Byz Inf at the end and VG on either side.

By chance I don't think any of those give rank bonuses but I'm not sure you would lose them anyway?

But if the plug works for you stick with it, I only started trying this when I had to do a bridge defence and lacked many missile troops. I saw it as a way to get more infantry into combat. Like I say it works for me but...

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HicRic

If someone could tell me a place I could upload images and link to them I'll post some example screenshots of the U shape thing and my other tactic.

---

Try Photobucket.com, you can create a free account there.

I've used it and it works fine.

Marquis

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bretwalda

I guess my problem was that I had to survive with Chiv Sarge, Feudal Sarge and even with spearmen... That makes for a different tactics :)

---

Can't you build Feudal Men-at-Arms? They should be fine for attacking at your end of the bridge.
And if you can buy mercenaries, get Almohad Urban Militia or, even better, Druzhina Cavalry that you can dismount into Feudal Doot Knights - they'll annihilate just about anything in bridge battles (they are expensive though).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marquis de Said

Can't you build Feudal Men-at-Arms? They should be fine for attacking at your end of the bridge.
And if you can buy mercenaries, get Almohad Urban Militia or, even better, Druzhina Cavalry that you can dismount into Feudal Doot Knights - they'll annihilate just about anything in bridge battles (they are expensive though).

---

Well, I learned a lot since I posted this question. At that time I did not know much about the different unit types. You have to play a few battles to get "to know" the units really and what they are capable of. Also it helps if you have good generals - and I did not really have them because I did not develop them. Also, I did not trade enough and did not concentrate on a few provinces to develop arms production, instead I had a lot of low quality units and a few similarly developed provinces. So I did almost everything wrong :wink: but hopefully I am getting better... ;)