Printable View
yes, indeed, letting them come a little closer, maybe 2/3 ot 1/2 your average weapon's range gives very powerful shots.
In terms of selecting the units, it can be done also by using the grouping feature - not the grouping of the unit cards.
I mean the grouping where its possible to set groups by control+shift+number and recall by control+number. In this way, no time is lostin the selection.
I find the grouping less useful in this scenario as if only partial group can hit the target, you get the flashing targeting arrow cursor thingy... that could mean that 4 of 5 has a line of site, or only 1 of the 5... this is why I tend to use the tab(?) key to quickly change through missile units and see which units they can hit as the enemy approach. I apply this so all missiles not just arquebus units.
The worse that can happen is if your planned "devastating" volley only includes one unit of archers, while all the others just sit there... it takes some practice but eventually you get the feel of it.
Another good thing about using this strategy is that it helps to keep your battle lines intact - so no missile units changing formation to get a better shot or pursuing enemies (often results in other units redeploying and moving out of position), which can lose you the battle.
I see. My take in guarding against this respect is to catch one of the middle or far back missile units and check when the enemy is in range. Then recall the group by control+number and toggle fire at will on.
Indeed keeping the missiles in line is key. For xbows and arbs and guns, ie missile with slowreload/powershot its good toput them inhold formation and hold position.
Hold formation makes them keep firing even if part of the unit is engaged by enemy troops and hold positoin adds to their defence and pins them to the place they are (they don;t chase other units). It can be used even for archers if you want them to keep fire while the enemy has reached them and not chase after other units in melee once engaged.
You probably have a better method than I had... old habits, etc...
i love how one can learn tactics so many years later on this game. love it
That's the whole charm of this game. Endless, the boundaries are almost endless. Classic game.Quote:
Originally Posted by cogre
"Re: Who's still playing?
Kudos to the guy who figured out how to get the game playing on my NVIDIA system. Got tired of X3 Terran Conflict and went back to MTW. I think I'll still be playing this game when I'm in the old age home (I think someone else said this in this thread....but it is certainly true).
Anyway, started this time as the English, early just to get back into it. When I'm done I think I'll try the Danes early. I have never been able to win with that one."
Update:
New Danes game.
Year 1174. I own Scandanavia(SP?) Lithuania, Latvia(not sure what the name is, just above Lithuania), Denmark, Saxony, Flanders, All of the English Isles, and most all of Spain (Mopping up the Alomohads). I have a longboat in every sea provence available. Income is about 20some thousand in the black per year.
My biggest problem is getting out from behind the eight ball. Used so many turns early to get the cash flow going, that I am way behind where I normally would be (Tech wise). Fortunately those vikings are everybit as good as everyone said, so hopefully that will be the saving grace.
(Had to edit-the original post is at the top...opps)
Try and use a secluded province, such as Norway, to tech up to a top tier castle, that way you get the best troops without the danger of losing your province. Make sure a stack of longboats is there to protect from the waters.Quote:
Originally Posted by fuzzbomb
Sweden is better than Norway, it has the precious iron. :yes:Quote:
Originally Posted by edyzmedieval
Well, yes. Norway is more for spamming +1 valor vikings. Sweden is more for top tier troops with iron. The only drawback I find with Sweden as a military base is that it is so valuable economically, and you forfeit economic development for years if you decide to build up its military tech.
True.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandy Blue
Perhaps Denmark in this case? Norway is still the best alternative until Sweden is teched up economically.
Well, yes you could tech up Norway to start with and then switch your military base to Sweden later. That would leave Denmark free to produce longboats. Don't they get a bonus there?
Actually, I don't think high tech units are the key when playing Denmark in early. Nice to have sure, especially if you are playing XL and get access to huscarls, etc. However, Viking units are adequate against most enemy infantry in early and you can produce them so easily and cheaply that you can overwhelm your first targets before they can tech up. Not to say that you won't want better units eventually. But you can carve out quite a nice empire with a mostly viking force before you need anything better.
Those Viking Huscarls pack a serious punch, use one or two of them in each army to turn the tide of the battle.
My usual tactic with the Danes is to expand by sea, leaving Eastern Europe to loving caresses of the Horde and taking the British Isles, France, and the Iberian Peninsula. You can do a lot with many Vikings, a sprinkling of Feudal and Mounted Sergeants, and your many RK units in Early. Once I unite Scandinavia, I will usually crank out Longboats from Denmark, Vikings from Norway, and FS/MS from Sweden. Getting Sweden running financially is key at the start, but you need to get the basic troop buildings in place so the recruit queue doesn't sit idle. The special Viking style units are not necessary (although fun) for Early, but you want to be able to crank out high-tech upgraded units once High comes along. Early is all about the Viking rush, archers are for the weak and you just need a few spear units to pin cav with. You can even get away with Horsemen to run your opponent's archers off the field if you can't get MS. Vikings will take care of the rest. :yes:
To add to the above, direct your resources towards securing Sweden first. IIRC Norway is more rebellious and will take too large a garrison to hold down, while giving little income. The other benefits of this approach are explained above. Heading for British isles is the easy option - in fact the campaign is quite hard if you choose to take on the HRE, Poles and rebels in the east. Pomerania and Prussia are pagan and will also need larger garrisons, so it's wise to leave those alone until you're strong enough.
It can be hard as hell indeed if you head east. I remember the first time i played it, i took over Novgorod and then in the steppes. By the time i had finished an epic war with the Byzantines the Horde appeared and i was nearly broke and had very little naval safety in my core Scandinavian lands as the seas were dominated by the French, teh Spanish and other superpowers. I left the campaign as i was in a stagnant position and it didn;t seem i was getting anywhere anytime soon.
The next time i took over Britain and then i saw the light... :)
Too easy though, I wanted a challenge so I took on the filthy pagans, novgorod, the poles, etc... it was a horrid experience. My pathetic, bankrupt faction of pervert princes was "relegated to a footnote of history" time and time again. Eventually I managed it a few times, but it's a huge struggle just to keep afloat. You really have to get trade up and running fast if you go that route.Quote:
Originally Posted by gollum
Yes, too easy indeed. This is why in the Caravel mod Vikings are made available from the swordsmith in Keep level - can't spam them anymore ;)
And also probably why nobody will play Denmark in it... :)
In vanilla you also have the landsmen, carls and huscarles from VI, which make the Dane campaign a bumrush if you start pumping those out early. Personally I mod those out of the main campaign and just leave the standard vikings.
Yes absolutely, although they are only recruitable in early IIRC, but still too powerful and easy to get in fact.
For the same reason they are also moded out in Caravel.
Landsmenn and Carls aren't too bad, but I never build them anyway since plain Vikings are such good value. Huscarles on the other hand...Quote:
Originally Posted by Caravel
I too have tried to go East at the start. What a disaster. :no:
I put my campaign on pause for a little while and started working on those Historical Campaigns, some battles are really hard. :sweatdrop:
Which hist. camp you are playing?
Barbarossa. I can't get even past the second battle!Quote:
Originally Posted by gollum
If you talk about the one against Pope and allies (carcano?) then remember that the goal is not to beat them but to put some of your units (can't remember how many but not that many) in the small town village opposite that has the flag. If you go to beat the enemy you'll probably never make it - its a run through them mission type thing. Did that mistake sme time ago and was banging the desk for a while until i realised that i wasn't meant to beat the opposition :laugh4:
I don't think I've played the historical battles... ever. This is silly, but I form a connection with my generals, units and army stacks from the campaign level and that continues into battle. Just playing battles doesn't really do it for me.
:bow:
They are fun. If you ever get the game running again give them a go.
I will certainly do that yes.
:bow:
I'm the same way, I don't think I've ever fired up one of the historical battles. I've read about them in the official guide, checked out the txt files with the units and such, but never actually had the urge to play one of them. :stwshame:
nor have i , i just to campaign too much.