Will someone please explain how I am losing here.

Sometimes, I truly believe I have lost battles that I clearly should have won. After debating this for some time, I decided to post this picture and ask for others to tell me what happened.

https://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b...lmenLosing.jpg

I'm talking about ALL THOSE BILLMEN fighting that F. Knight. (Substitute the "F" for whatever word you want, I am pissed about this.) My Billmen were getting slaughered there and all I managed to do was kill 3 of the four knights. THE FOURTH ONE RAN AWAY. My Billmen were LOSING BADLY THE ENTIRE TIME. To add this, I charged the Knights, they didn't charge at me. Also, count the flags, I'm no expert but I can see 3 as the valor. Yes, I also see that other flag, thats how I beat them, by sending in the VERY SMALL unit of Billmen to scare them off. I am refering to one of the two bigger units. If you also notice, they all have at least a medium armor upgrade.

Now, I am no expert, but aren't BILLMEN SUPPOSED TO CHEW UP CALV. Plus, I had a height advantage and I am sure the Billmen aren't just a new unit.

Hi Budwise,

If you've not done so already, next game session, go into the Options menu before you load your campaign and tick the box which says 'Battle logfile'. This generates a user-readable txt file in C:\.....MTW\Logfiles

If you have a log for this particular battle, check out the before and after valour on thise knights. The flags indicate the valour of the unit but this is an average score for the men within it. The 'unkillable' one may have been valour 8 or something and his companions were v1 or v2.

It looks like your general is giving a valour boost of +1 to all units and the base valour for your billmen was something like 2? In some ways, this can be bad because, for every v2 billman he kills, that transfers more and more 'points' to him, driving his personal valour up all that more rapidly, to the point where he does become near unkillable.

In the battle logs, you can see how many enemy an individual man killed and how much this has boosted his personal valour level. It often doesn't correlate at all. Killing dozens of valour-0 enemy can result in no valour boost at all and sometimes you can see someone with just one kill but their valour jumped up two levels, probably because it was a highly valoured opponent. This is what I call 'valour transference'.

Another aspect is that if you put a unit of 120 up against just 4 enemy, it ends up being just 4 men vs 4, really. You can see this from your screenshot. Instead of swarming around the knights, the bulk of your unit is holding formation and not participating in the fight.

If they'd been up against a cav unit 20 men wide and four ranks deep, then it would be 20 vs 20 and you'd see a faster rate of cav-chopping.

Hold formation is good for when you want to stop them from breaking through your main battle line but, to get the 'wrap around' effect and get all the men in your unit attacking at once, I wonder if switching to 'engage at will' would help?

One for the experts, perhaps?

Cavalry in MTW, especially when controlled by the AI, is simply off the hook. Inexplicable. I've just accepted it.

DA

Of course this beats STW, where Yari Samurai chewed through Cav like Uzis and stuck to them like glue... :dizzy2:

From the picture it looks like they are on hold formation. Engage at will gets more men attacking at once.

The best bonus's in the game come from charging from the flank or behind. Most of my battles are won with heavy cav crashing a flank and rolling it up.

Some leaders are what you call "jedi", Super high valor really tough to kill guys. Play against the vikings and you will see alot of them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rom

From the picture it looks like they are on hold formation. Engage at will gets more men attacking at once.

The best bonus's in the game come from charging from the flank or behind. Most of my battles are won with heavy cav crashing a flank and rolling it up.

Some leaders are what you call "jedi", Super high valor really tough to kill guys. Play against the vikings and you will see alot of them.

---

I thought of that right off the bat - no, they are Engage At Will I swear on that. Like I said, that was the very first thought that I thought of when I saw this going down. I guess their isn't enough knights to "wrap around"

Also, another topic, can someone please explain how my valor 2 Chiv Knights break even to low level Royal Knights.

I understand the Jedi factor and I believe it contributed to this, but his three companions had the same strenght - I highly doubt it. Plus, would I still be LOSING BADLY. I mean come on.

If there were only 4 men, then 1 would be carrying the unit standard and there would only be 3 left to carry valour indicators. So theoretically they all could have been Valour 5 kajillion, for all you know. ~D

DA

Whenever you come up against unkillable cavalry, I make a 'v' formation with my infantry and charge and recharge cavalry at the general until he dies. I find using cavalry helps against Jedi.

Also, if I'm not mistaken EYG: It's 2 men can fight one man so it's really 8 vs 4 if you mob a unit of four, else numeric superiority is void.

And just out of curiosity, why didn't you surround them?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by antisocialmunky

And just out of curiosity, why didn't you surround them?

---

And why did not you shoot them down with arbs?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by antisocialmunky

Also, if I'm not mistaken EYG: It's 2 men can fight one man so it's really 8 vs 4 if you mob a unit of four, else numeric superiority is void.

---

Actually Puzz3D retracted that assertment over in the MTW Numerology thread at the .c0mmie.

It looks like the billmen are suffering from the squeeze penalty, which is when you have two units on top of each other, they only fight at half effect.

The cavalry unit also probably has fairly high valour.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by antisocialmunky

Whenever you come up against unkillable cavalry, I make a 'v' formation with my infantry and charge and recharge cavalry at the general until he dies. I find using cavalry helps against Jedi.

Also, if I'm not mistaken EYG: It's 2 men can fight one man so it's really 8 vs 4 if you mob a unit of four, else numeric superiority is void.

And just out of curiosity, why didn't you surround them?

---

I still had a battle going on elsewhere, the camera shot was only to show this, I was doing okay elsewhere but besides the Arqs, I had nothing to spare and I was using them to shoot something else.

I figured that those Billmen could hold their own so I didn't send help when I had the chance.

Plus, I didn't feel like shooting my Billmen in the back over just one horse.

Why not pull the billmen back, charge the arbs and send the billmen behind. It's not like Arbs are all that great when the melee ensues. Use arbs to pin and bills to attack from behind, perhaps charging over and over again. I would hope that was the general unit, if he died, that's a -6 or so morale penalty to everyone else. An Arb taking a unit to 1/2 strength only gives a -6 to one unit and constant fire is only a -2.

Well, imho, just looking at the screenshot. I would have fought that differently.

First, looks like there are two units engaged. The first *middle* unit, what formation does it have? I would have had them in Wedge. In my experience, in any *spear* type unit does best against cav **frontally* in Wedge formation. Also Hold Formation; and possibly Hold Position. A unit in Wedge isn't going anywhere to fast.

Secondly, the second unit *appears* to be spread out in a two or three man line. Why so?

I don't see the point in such a thin line. A line that thin won't be able to hold off a frontal cav charge, for more than a moment or so. Better to have them in Close Formation, in a nice Box or, I prefer Rectangle formation (Default).

Thirdly, despite what you say, this second unit is can't be set to "engage at will". They are holding their formation to strongly. They s/b set to engage at will, but more importantly,

Fourth: Flank, Flank, Flank, Flank!!!

The name of this game s/b Flank and Flank Some More.

Should we presume, that these four knights began the battle as a full unit? As Eat yer Greens and others have pointed out perhaps not in so many words, is that, plainly, these 4 are the survivors, which means their Stats s/b somewhat exceptional---though, they may be "Quite Tired" or "Exhausted".

In any event, they are KNIGHTS, no matter what the circumstances Knights are a hard kill. In total war you just have to accept the fact and deal. I never take Knights lightly even if there is just one. As long as a Knight is facing you he is dangerous.

I try not to attack knights frontally, and when I must it always in a holding/pinning action, as I stated Wedge and Hold Formation. I then use another unit to flank--Engage At Will.

Once the flanking unit is engaged I may take the holding unit and set it to Engage At Will also, but only in the case you've illustrated, just a few remnant knights.

Also, those Billmen have no *Attack* value bonus, so that's something to be considered as well.

The inherentness of Knights is to survive, and be capable of taking on many foe. That's what all that Armour and Horsemenship is all about. The game appears to emulate this to an extreme degreed, but then I've never, personally, fought a Knight.

From what I've read, Knights are supposed to be the industructable, battlefield tanks of their time. A picture's worth a thousand words. ;)

In any event, Flank, Flank, Flank, you took them on Frontally, unnecessarily.

Luck!

But Billmen get +2 attack from valour, a few more against knightly armor and a few more still from fighting the horse... It's a good match up which the billmen should win.

I've just had a wee play with Yas's Unit Master and Billmen vs Feudal Knights is fairly close - and valour is all. If the FK's are +2 valour above the Billmen, they'll win. +1 valour means the Billmen win, but at 88% casualties. Armour and weapons make a difference (were your FKs armoured like the Billmen?) but so would V&Vs like Great Warrior.

It's close; knights are tough, high valour knights doubly so. Always shoot 'em down, and flank, flank, flank as ToronagoSama suggests.

Or - send in the camels ~;)

Cheers,
Ulair

I just want to add one thing.

Back in the day (pre-rtw), I coined the use of a term, Statistician. It was not meant to denegrate anyone or anypoint of view, simply to highlight that the *Game* of TW is about MORE than just the Unit Stats. One can learn ALL the Stats, and play to the Stats (Statisticians), but I found it more effective to play to the Game.

That is the good folks at CA created a *revolutionary* game engine and AI, which, for example, like other comparative RTS games Units are fought by way of the Unit Stats; BUT, what how they revolutioned RTS type battle was to create and add, ADDITIONAL effective *battle factors*, which a player can utilize to either mitigate Unit Stats, or, in the converse enhance Unit Stats.

It must truly be examined, mostly in my experience, thru trial and error, all the differing effective battle factors, as well as the creative manners in which they can be utilized.

By way of these *Battle Factors*, Warfar, battles, can be greatly effected by a Player's knowledge and skill development, as well as a player's CREATIVITY.

Of course TW is has a Rock, Paper, Scissor, model, BUT, while battle begins in this way, it does not end at this simple model.

You all have an awareness of these factors:

Rain, wind, uphill, downhill, side flanking, rear flanking, arrows and cannon fire instilling *fear*. Fear itself was/is something unique to RTS battles. I haven't even listed half the battle factors that can effect victory and/or defeat. I'm not even mentioning any of the creative manner in which these things can be utilized on the battlefield. Crap, I've forgotten much.

So, yeah, one can examine the Stats and think that X unit should beat Y unit, the Stats attest to it. One can also run one on one test or multiple tests and note the results, butttt what does it tell you?

It says, that if you add it up like an equation it sums this way; or in a virtual *labortory* setting, the behaviour and results were thus. That's it, that's all it says. It give you a hint, an idea of, generally, what **might** be expected.

But, such methods, cannot tell you, that on a given day, on a given battlefield, with Z battle factors, and with Player A's style, skill and knowledge, that this will be the result.

To do so, imo, is to lock oneself into robotic or *route* action, and prevents one from fully discovering the game and all it has to offer. The Creative Assembly did a masterful job in re-creating and emulating the vagries of battle in the most realistic manner that has ever been effected.

---

Lastly, to highlight my meaning, in looking at the Stats and/or in a *Laboratory* battle, WHERE is the General?? In Budwise's screenshot, where is the General?

We all know that the General's presence and proximity as a GREAT effect upon the Units in battle. We all are aware of ALL the differing factors the makeup the effectiveness of the General's battle effect, right?

It's all about a specific and particular battle and set of circumstances, which frankly cannot be repeated. *Tests* and *Stats* gives one an idea of how things should or might go, but it is not definitive.

Frankly, the greatest effect and factor on the battlefield is not the Stats, but the Player him/herself.

Give me a choice between Billman and a Knight unit, and given *my* particular play style, my particularl skill level, my particularl knowledge level, and my particular experience, which is different than anyone else's, as is everyone's, I take the Knights.

I would take Knights with inferior Stats and battle factors.

Why?

Because I'm going to utilize EVERY advantage that Knights (Hard Cav) provide, in conjunction with EVERY advantage provided by the battlefield; as well as attempt to minimize/mitigate EVERY disadvantage. I am the ultimate factor.

Yeah, hit those Billman straight on-frontally on flat ground, and suprise the Billman win.

Yeah, but who's going to do that? I'm not!

First, I am NOT going to hit them frontally under any circumstances. So, the superior stats of the billmen, are immediately nullified, in my experience. As the Stats are ONLY fully in effect if the billmen are optimally utilized---frontally. I'm not allowing this.

Ideally, I'm going to run my Knights up a hill and then down upon the billmen's rear.

I'm going to tease the billmen, let them follow me all around the map or, up a mountain, whatever, tire them up then flank them and kill them.

Those are just the most basic examples I can think at the moment, but there are other options available on a STW or MTW map. [Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for RTW maps.]

Well, I've rambled enough, thank you for reading, and I apologize to ANYONE who might feel offended, if so it was not intentional.

Statiticians know the stats, but the battles are something additional.

Oh, and Iv'e got a few things to say about Multiplay....... hahaha...

~ToranagaSama

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Grey_Fox

It looks like the billmen are suffering from the squeeze penalty, which is when you have two units on top of each other, they only fight at half effect.

---

I have not seen any details about a "squeeze penalty". I searched the forums using the term but couldn't find anything.

Can someone elaborate on when and how this comes into effect and how specifically to avoid it? I frequently find that I have units clustered in a pitched battle. Should I take special care to make sure they are not mixing?

Great post Toranaga! ~:cheers: Hit us with your MP comments too! ~;)

The information about the sqeeze penalty is on the first page of the link I provided in that post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SirThomasMalory

I have not seen any details about a "squeeze penalty". I searched the forums using the term but couldn't find anything.

Can someone elaborate on when and how this comes into effect and how specifically to avoid it? I frequently find that I have units clustered in a pitched battle. Should I take special care to make sure they are not mixing?

---

Each man requires 1 meter of space around him to fight at full effect. That is the spacing of the men in a typical unit, so it's never good to overlap units. If a man doesn't have 1 meter of space, he fights at half effectiveness.

CA did clarify that more than 2 men can strike at a single man. They said it's only limited by the number of men that can fit around the enemy man. Each sprite has 8 sides. In practice with two units fighting, you don't often see more than two men attacking one even when on unit is much larger because the men tend to stay in formation even when they are in engage-at-will. There was a much better swarming effect in STW. Best way to win is to put the unit that's fighting frontally into hold formation and then flank with another unit. Flanking men get a 250% combat bonus when striking from the side and a 350% combat bonus when striking from the rear.

Probably the main reason those billmen are having trouble killing the feudal knights is that the upgrades are way too strong. In reality, the difference between a green unit and an experienced unit isn't more that 200%, but in the game you have a possible 8000% difference due to upgrades. Modest battlefield upgrades can easily swamp out the 200% anti-cav bonus of the billmen. This is why LongJohn ultimately agreed to remove battlefield upgrades from MTW/VI multiplayer.

Puzz3D, nice post.

Given the 1 meter of space requirement, how do you suggest Bridge battles be fought. Specifically, within the narrow confines of a bridge.

I have STW images of a dozen units split between two sides jammed onto a bridge.

What of the a pushing effect? That is, in such a *jammed* circumstance. Does *pushing* occur? Is there a benefit of men pushing from behind?

Thanks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Puzz3D

Each man requires 1 meter of space around him to fight at full effect. That is the spacing of the men in a typical unit, so it's never good to overlap units. If a man doesn't have 1 meter of space, he fights at half effectiveness.

CA did clarify that more than 2 men can strike at a single man. They said it's only limited by the number of men that can fit around the enemy man. Each sprite has 8 sides. In practice with two units fighting, you don't often see more than two men attacking one even when on unit is much larger because the men tend to stay in formation even when they are in engage-at-will. There was a much better swarming effect in STW. Best way to win is to put the unit that's fighting frontally into hold formation and then flank with another unit. Flanking men get a 250% combat bonus when striking from the side and a 350% combat bonus when striking from the rear.

Probably the main reason those billmen are having trouble killing the feudal knights is that the upgrades are way too strong. In reality, the difference between a green unit and an experienced unit isn't more that 200%, but in the game you have a possible 8000% difference due to upgrades. Modest battlefield upgrades can easily swamp out the 200% anti-cav bonus of the billmen. This is why LongJohn ultimately agreed to remove battlefield upgrades from MTW/VI multiplayer.

---

I figured that much since I've seen units surrounded fighting 8 guys at once. Normally it's about 1 or 2 to 1 if it's from one side and you're outnumbering them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ToranagaSama

Puzz3D, nice post.

Given the 1 meter of space requirement, how do you suggest Bridge battles be fought. Specifically, within the narrow confines of a bridge.

I have STW images of a dozen units split between two sides jammed onto a bridge.

What of the a pushing effect? That is, in such a *jammed* circumstance. Does *pushing* occur? Is there a benefit of men pushing from behind?

Thanks.

---

I too, would like to hear from Puzz3D regarding this. My own experiences indicate that, on attack across a bridge, one should never send more than one unit at a time to avoid the "squeeze effect". I ususally resize the unit selected to no more than 7 or 8 files width, so that they'll fit on the bridge without disturbing the formation alignment. You can resize the next unit selected to cross, and move-click behind the enemy line, then stop them on the bridge just behind the first unit (provided enemy missle fire isn't too much of a factor). If the first unit makes enough space by killing the enemy, then the second unit can advance into it and engage, etc.

On defense, my usual approach is to park a tough unit just off my end of the bridge - there's usually a little rise at that point, so I'm hoping for the "Defender High" effect. Then line the banks of the river with missle troops, and let them do most of the killing. The "3-sided box" at your end of the bridge is another approach, one I have limited experience with (so won't comment).

The only thing I've seen posted on a pushing effect is the cavalry charge "pushback" against infantry. Something happens when high-quality troops hit lesser ones and chew into them - the defenders' formation seems to give somewhat, forming a bit of a bow. But I can't address the cause of what we've all seen, not being intimate with the game's programming mechanics. Hopefully one of the Game Gurus will pass by and enlighten us! ~;)