help me this is important

ok i was playing julii and i conquered a few regions and then i had flavius Julius and he had ten stars and i used him and i started to lose alot and and i am not talking win then lose thn win then lose then lose then win but we are talking lose lose lose lose win that kind of deal and flavius Julius never died but he also never ran i even did auto game and i played it on the battle map and i still lost so whatis going on?

the other thing is that Flavius Julius is 82 years old and in Rome the average life age was 50 years old so what is going on do i have a spiecil game or something because i also have a video section where i can watch videos of real war in Rome but my friends don't have that so why do i do i have the same game used on Decisieve Battles that came on the History Channel?

I really don't see what you are asking in this. If you are asking why you are losing with a ten star Roman general against the Gauls in the very early game it is because

A) Your army is outnumbered.
B) Your army is outclassed. (probably not)
C) You are using the wrong tactics
D) You just suck

For the first section of the second paragraph:

There have been threads regarding the age of generals. If I am not mistaken, there have been generals over 100 years. So nothing strange there.

Also, I don't think that you have a "spiecil" game.

The rest of the post was incomprehensible to me, for the most part.
Something about the History Channel

...I don't know...I give up...


If you had given some more information (and used spell check) I might have been able to give you a proper answer. What difficulty were you playing on? I was just assuming you were fighting (and losing) against the Gauls, is that correct? And I really don't know what you are trying to say when you are connecting R:TW to the History Channel.

Oh, and it would help immensely if you would use punctuation once in a while.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bubbanator

I really don't see what you are asking in this. If you are asking why you are losing with a ten star Roman general against the Gauls in the very early game it is because

A) Your army is outnumbered.
B) Your army is outclassed. (probably not)
C) You are using the wrong tactics
D) You just suck

For the first section of the second paragraph:

There have been threads regarding the age of generals. If I am not mistaken, there have been generals over 100 years. So nothing strange there.

Also, I don't think that you have a "spiecil" game.

The rest of the post was incomprehensible to me, for the most part.
Something about the History Channel

...I don't know...I give up...


If you had given some more information (and used spell check) I might have been able to give you a proper answer. What difficulty were you playing on? I was just assuming you were fighting (and losing) against the Gauls, is that correct? And I really don't know what you are trying to say when you are connecting R:TW to the History Channel.

Oh, and it would help immensely if you would use punctuation once in a while.

---

i am not out numbered because i had 200 men and they have only 10 men and i still lost

First of all dont use autobattle. Also if you can always try to out number them anytime you can. If you go to battlemap, try to make a efficient formation that you know that works.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lancome

First of all dont use autobattle. Also if you can always try to out number them anytime you can. If you go to battlemap, try to make a efficient formation that you know that works.

---

i did and i still had 200 men and they only had 10 and i lost

auto calc is Bugged/broken, don't use it.



do not use auto calc, or tho shall be smited
I love big letters! ~:cool:

i fought on the battle map and still lost

It looks like you need to try a new strategy, that`s all.

You lost on the battle field??? ~:eek: go play the tutorial/read frogbeastegg's guide.

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=38382

If they had big point sticks, and you're just piling you're men in there at the front of them, then maybe you could try slamming your cav into their rear? Or it could just be true, you suck. Heck, when we all get a new game, we all suck at first.

[COLOR=Blue]i am saying how can i have 200 men and still lose to 10 men how? how? how?[/COLOR]

~:confused: Could you give me some more info? Maybe you're tactics are very bad.

Because of yoùr skills CB!


Er, you`re a junior Mikeus! ~:eek:

Eurf, don't remind me. Once they decide i'm a good boy, they might raise me to member status, and at least then i might get my signature back, maybe even my edit button.

i have had the game game since it came out i pre bought it i am also good at it and there where no pikes they where all swordsmen

You`ve got a screenie or something CB?

You`re just confusing me. ~:confused:

CB, with the current info you gave us, we cannot help you at at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mikeus Caesar

If they had big point sticks, and you're just piling you're men in there at the front of them, then maybe you could try slamming your cav into their rear? Or it could just be true, you suck. Heck, when we all get a new game, we all suck at first.

---

i never sucked in games. i'm good

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by clayton ballentine

i have had the game game since it came out i pre bought it i am also good at it and there where no pikes they where all swordsmen

---

why not tell us exactly what kind of units the enemy had?

the enemy where gauls and they had swordsmen i had a verity of units

Dunno what to say. I suck mightily at this game but even I have been able to win in 200 to 10 situations. Try telling us who you were fighting, what kind of units they had, where you were fighting, what units you had, and how you used them. Go slowly and give lots and lots of detail, because something seems not right here if you're having worse results than I am---as I mentioned on another thread, my battlefield skills are such that autocalc usually works better, but I keep beating my head against the wall believing I'll improve. But this seems like a good case history for analysis for the benefit of noobs like me.

Can't help you with the loosing battles part, but about the 82 year old general. The average life expectancy might have been 50 years back then and there, but that doesn't mean people can't get very old.
If the average age is 50, and a lot of infants dies at birth, or very young,(which probably was very common then) then there must be some people that got a lot older than 50 or else the average age wouldn't be 50!

I can't see a reason why someone back then couldn't get as old as someone can today, or atleast nearly so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by clayton ballentine

the enemy where gauls and they had swordsmen i had a verity of units

---

still I can offer no help. were they regular swordsmen or chosen? were they perhaps naked fanatics? (still shouldn't matter, as if you had a general his cavalry would decimate a 10 man army)

EDIT: come to think of it, RTW usually forces small, battered units like those of 10 men to disband after battles. So i must ask what were the circumstances you encountered these 10?

Having lost a few battles your general will have a whole bunch of vices that will be negatively affecting your troops.
He must have run to lose so many battles.
He quite possibly had developed several bad traits already over his career.

If you have a variety of troops consisting of mostly light troops + highly negative general vs 10 elite, upgraded swordsmen then you can expect to lose.

Give us more precise info about your & the enemies army make up (unit names/experience/upgrades/general traits etc)

Try just sitting back & shooting them?

Can clayton still post?

Back to the subject: Did you mod the game? 10 swords men can do alot of damage if they have 15 hit points and 45 attack ~;)

Well, ok, 10 vs 200 seems very strange to me. Unless the 200 were peasents, but he does say it was a variety of troop types. Even if they were just peasents, the general could take them out.

So, since the troop types can't have that much of an effect (let's not consider lvl 9 +weap+armour chosen swords) my guess is that you were assaulting a town, on auto calc.

Is that it?

I don't think that it's possible to lose a 200vs10 battle, unless, of course, you were the 10.

Unless he's fighting against the Army Rangers or something.

The only way that could be possible is if it was a 10 star family father or something weird like that since sometimes they've been known to do that.

Maybe it had something to do with battle difficulty.

Maybe he was Kiano Reeves or something.

BTW- You're not helping by saying "... but I still lost." Making it blue just makes you look more like a annoying loser, bud. If you don't give a detailed account, then no one can help you, pretend its story time if it helps.

I believe the only way could be that Clayton is nothing more than a troll, and that Mikeus should be restored to his previous level. Although it's fruitless to harass a troll, it should not be deemed wrong, imho. :bow:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bulawayo

I believe the only way could be that Clayton is nothing more than a troll, and that Mikeus should be restored to his previous level. Although it's fruitless to harass a troll, it should not be deemed wrong, imho. :bow:

---

Is that supposed to be humorous? because it's not. I could just as easily call you the same thing as your post serves no purpose to the thread, but it does insult an .org member and asks that Mikeus be given member status again. Both of which have nothing to do with the thread, therefore rending your post useless. Considering Mikeus and Clayton's past, saying what you did could be considered a big jab at clayton.

who is the troll supposed to be again? (just to clarify)

Quote:

---

saying what you did could be considered a big jab at clayton.

---

Such is life........
As long as you allow Clayton to post here, things will likely never improve!
Lets face it, he really does not seem to be getting the message. While some, and I stress "SOME" of his posts may have merit, the majority just seem like a strangled cry for attention. I've lost count of the times he has been asked to collaborate all his questions then post in a single post. Perhaps not the best solution to the problem, but certainly the least antagonising as far as those folks whom he rubs the wrong way are concerned.

I say reinstate him and raise the warning level to 10 and run a book on how long it takes him to reach it.
Go Clayton go! :charge:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Revelation

Such is life........
As long as you allow Clayton to post here, things will likely never improve!

---

Wow, one patron causes the whole .org experience to come crashing down? surely he doesn't do that much damage. Of course, you always have the option to...wait for it... Ignore him.

Quote:

---

Lets face it, he really does not seem to be getting the message. While some, and I stress "SOME" of his posts may have merit, the majority just seem like a strangled cry for attention.

---

And THIS alone merits a ban from the entire site for good? how easy moderating is in your eyes. I wonder if the same people who claim to want a ban for clayton would be the same to support a thread that said we went to far if we ever did.

Quote:

---

I've lost count of the times he has been asked to collaborate all his questions then post in a single post. Perhaps not the best solution to the problem, but certainly the least antagonising as far as those folks whom he rubs the wrong way are concerned.

---

If you don't like him, it's very simple. Don't read his threads. The world will not come to an end...

Enough! No more Clayton bashing.

We have rules here: no flaming, no personal insults, no harassing other patrons. Those rules apply to everybody equally. We do not and will not tolerate bullying.

As Monk says, if a patron annoys you put them on your ignore list.

I am sorry if I offended you Monk. My post was not intended to be humorous. I thought more of it like a voice of reason, or something like that. I have played enough of RTW to see the unreasonable loss of 200 romans lead by a 10 star general vs 10 gallic swordsmen. Neither do I judge Clayton just because of this single thread. But I do have a quite good ability of seeing patterns, if you get my point?

Anyway, I'll stop this immediately, now that I have got your point.

Blessings

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bulawayo

I am sorry if I offended you Monk.

---

You did not offend me, but over the last week clayton has been bashed at every turn. As an Assistant Moderator my purpose is to make sure patrons are not doing what has been going on.

Posting 'he's a troll', even if you have reasons for doing it, is an attack on him no matter if you, or I, or anyone think it's a justified one or unjustified. The .org does not stand for such attacks.

It is easy to forget that the one you are speaking with may be much younger than yourself, and even a statement like the one you made could hurt them deeply. That is why our policy is that it is.

Quote:

---

Anyway, I'll stop this immediately, now that I have got your point.

---

you have my thanks. :bow:

Just because it's easy and fun dosen't make it right...don't bully him...if he continues this he will get himself banned in no time. (just guessing based on the rate that he is getting warnings)


Anyway, as you can see the moderators have been dealing with the issue. He has goten a level 5 warning, and has been banned. So why bother?

Just my 2cents... :bow:

'why is he banned.

Why does Claytons threads always go down the pan? It only attracts people who want to have a go at him - I admit I have done so myself and was warned about it. This sort of behavior is not good for the .Org and I apologize to Clayton and others for my part in this. If you really feel so strongly about it - ignore him - as your attacks only draw attention to yourself.

ah i'm not attavking him. i'm one of the few people helping and protecting him. i told him to keep low profile and not to get banned. so i wanna know why he's banned for. can anyone tell me

i play Rome Total War almost every day so how can i lose to 10 men!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by clayton ballentine

i play Rome Total War almost every day so how can i lose to 10 men!

---

Makes the game more exiting don't you think? Not much fun if you win all the time ~;)

Just try different tactics, skirmish more before they reach your battle line, flank them with light cavalry if you have them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Templar Knight

Makes the game more exiting don't you think? Not much fun if you win all the time ~;)

Just try different tactics, skirmish more before they reach your battle line, flank them with light cavalry if you have them.

---

tried it i am like a JR Julius Caesar at RTW (Rome Total War) so HOW CAN I BE LOSING

Maybe you should lay off the drugs, send your cavalry around back, have your infantry throw pila first, and make sure that they're facing the right way?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CMcMahon

Maybe you should lay off the drugs, send your cavalry around back, have your infantry throw pila first, and make sure that they're facing the right way?

---

i do i even use the Tustido formation to get by Archers i use town watch agianst Calvery and i use Calvery agienst Archers so why am i losing i am doing everything right so how is it that i lose to Gauls and Numandia HELP

Take some time, collect your thoughts, check your spelling and grammar, and use sentences. That's the first step towards being a winning general.

Well the testudo formation is seriously bugged and town watch are pretty rubbish so maybe that is what you are doing wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CMcMahon

Take some time, collect your thoughts, check your spelling and grammar, and use sentences. That's the first step towards being a winning general.

---

oh. you. mean. like. this. is. this. better. for. you. ok. i. need. help. to. win. battles.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by clayton ballentine

i do i even use the Tustido formation to get by Archers i use town watch agianst Calvery and i use Calvery agienst Archers so why am i losing i am doing everything right so how is it that i lose to Gauls and Numandia HELP

---

Are you outnumbered in most cases? Although that should not be a problem to Roman infantry.

He claims to have a 20-to-1 advantage in manpower.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by clayton ballentine

i am not out numbered because i had 200 men and they have only 10 men and i still lost

---

That is rare, almost impossible.

no i am not outnumbered. i have two hundred men and they had only one hundred men. why would i be losing? i hope this time i am using the right grmmar. mabe someone can teach me this stuff. like they can e-mail me and i e-mail a report back and they give me a grade. ~;)

The only other thing is that the battle timer ran out other than that you need to brush up on your tactics then you will be like me: 400 Roman's beating 4000 Gauls. ~:)

i am very good at the game i did the same tactics in other battles at teh same place with the same number agianst the same number and i still lost.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by clayton ballentine

i am very good at the game i did the same tactics in other battles at teh same place with the same number agianst the same number and i still lost.

---

Good at the game but not good on the battles. Just play about and see what tactics work best. ~:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by clayton ballentine

no i am not outnumbered. i have two hundred men and they had only one hundred men. why would i be losing? i hope this time i am using the right grmmar. mabe someone can teach me this stuff. like they can e-mail me and i e-mail a report back and they give me a grade. ~;)

---

Wow, that was great! It's so much easier to read your post's when you use punctuation ~:thumb:


1: what exact units are you using? do you use alot of town watch/velites?
2: did you attack the enemy up hill?
3: What was your over all battle plan?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CMcMahon

Maybe you should lay off the drugs, send your cavalry around back, have your infantry throw pila first, and make sure that they're facing the right way?

---

Lol, that is the funniest thing i have seen yet...especially the comment about making them face the right way. But, i have to ask one question. Why would a junior member who only joined recently have something against clayton already? Usually you have to be quite well established member here to have a dislike of him, but you already seem to hate him. Unless you are on of the other members here, with a secret account so that you can flame clayton without anyone finding out? Trust me, it doesn't work.

to answer your question MC , he is probably here for the flame war ~;)

On topic :

If you keep losing , try making them attack you , fire at will on , and guard mode , that will help.

:balloon2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mikeus Caesar

Lol, that is the funniest thing i have seen yet...especially the comment about making them face the right way. But, i have to ask one question. Why would a junior member who only joined recently have something against clayton already? Usually you have to be quite well established member here to have a dislike of him, but you already seem to hate him. Unless you are on of the other members here, with a secret account so that you can flame clayton without anyone finding out? Trust me, it doesn't work.

---

I've been thinking the same thing Mikeus.I also think it's a possibility that Clayton is in fact also another members alter-ego who likes to stir it up a bit.He doesnt bother me however as i find it all very amusing and as a moderator pointed out we can ignore him if we wish to.I don't see the need to however. ~:cheers:

I actualy find it funny how everyone is yelling and arguing about this. I've always loved reading flamewars. I would be annoyed about all of the spam, but it is just too much fun watching everyone scream at each other. I do think he should put all the questions in one post though. Maybe we could limit him to one new thread a week so that he would have to put down many questions at once. That would be nice.

Clayton, it's because you suck. Man, you have velites or skirmisher or hastati, you should chuck those pointy mushrooms(Don't know where I got that from~D ) at those poor gits and they're dead.

Funny, once I was laying seige to Pergamun with a full stack Brutii army, but ran out of ammo (with my onagers), and since I didn't have any ladders or towers etc, and time was talking ages to run down, i decided to withdraw. I got a close defeat, i.e. only lost 5 men or so to some archers, but on the Campaign map, my entire full stack literally disappeared.

Why? I only withdrew. I didn't disband the entire unit.

Do you have 1.2?

no. 1.0

Ah, that was a 1.0 bug. 1.2 should fix it.

Cheers. ~:)

What units did you have Clayton? How did you lost? How many units did the enemy have etc. etc. I need more info to answer your question!(if that`s what you want :dizzy2: )

I won with 10 men in MTW. But I though such great heroic last stands such as that were inpossible in RTW. Mabey its because they took out the jedi generals part. Shame, I liked my 20 valor prince. But alas no such luck in RTW, the highest I have ever had is silver level in Rome. Honestly though I don't see how that could have happened, save mabey they were light horsemen who just ran away constantly untill the battle timer went down. But if thats not the case, go and rase a huge army of 4000 men, march them at the heroic ten and smash them into nothingness, mathmatically its impossible for them to win, and they will be surrounded.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mikeus Caesar

Unless you are on of the other members here, with a secret account so that you can flame clayton without anyone finding out? Trust me, it doesn't work.

---

I LOLed. I can guarantee you that I'm not an established member using this username for flaming purposes. I just happen to happen to be a fan of the proper use of the English language, and common sense in battle tactics. I mean, seriously, unless you're fighting 10 general's bodyguards with 200 peasants inflicted with the plague, I find it incredibly hard to believe that you could possibly lose, especially when you have a general and his bodyguards on the battlefield as well.

I think if you run all the time, avoiding battle, your unit kinda "auto-routs".

So you can't fool the game by toying with the timer when u'r on defence.

Not too sure tho.

He [clayton] later admitted to having not 10 enemies, but 100! This is more understandable. Besides that, everyone makes mistakes occasionally. Even the good people.

Still easy, 200 Romans v 100 Gauls. Lose that and you suck big time

Yeah, i read his last post saying 100, but in all others he said 10. So it could be just another "zero" in his last post.

However, 200 vs 100, then yes quality of troops gets in the equation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ColdKnight

I won with 10 men in MTW. But I though such great heroic last stands such as that were inpossible in RTW. Mabey its because they took out the jedi generals part. Shame, I liked my 20 valor prince. But alas no such luck in RTW, the highest I have ever had is silver level in Rome. Honestly though I don't see how that could have happened, save mabey they were light horsemen who just ran away constantly untill the battle timer went down. But if thats not the case, go and rase a huge army of 4000 men, march them at the heroic ten and smash them into nothingness, mathmatically its impossible for them to win, and they will be surrounded.

---

just 4 chevs. that's low. i have over 20 units with 9 chevs. and in one army i have 20 9 chev legionares.

You should go Alexander and see how much of the known world you could conquer with mercs and that stack.

well a whole lot. i've been attacked by 20000 egyptian soldiers (in 3 waves in 1 turn) i had 2500, when those battles were won (3x heroic victory) i had 2000 men left. and i had killed 15000

On what difficulty level is the game?

In 1.0 and 1.1 is you played on battle difficulty higher then medium, AI units got attack and morale bonuese.

.

In 1.2 they added those same bonuses to player faction too, makin higher level battles not more difficulty, but faster.

I miss 1.0/1.1 difficulty settings...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Emperor Umeu 1

just 4 chevs. that's low. i have over 20 units with 9 chevs. and in one army i have 20 9 chev legionares.

---

Yeah I know, I'm admit i'm not that great at RTW. MTW is my game. Ahh the days of fighting in multiplayer, the great battles, the whipping the lesser clans as a ronin. Ok ok enough floating back.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Emperor Umeu 1

well a whole lot. i've been attacked by 20000 egyptian soldiers (in 3 waves in 1 turn) i had 2500, when those battles were won (3x heroic victory) i had 2000 men left. and i had killed 15000

---

3 waves = 30,000 that's 10,000 / army, but 20*240 (largest size)= 4,800. So the max no. of men/army is 4800

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Emperor Umeu 1

well a whole lot. i've been attacked by 20000 egyptian soldiers (in 3 waves in 1 turn) i had 2500, when those battles were won (3x heroic victory) i had 2000 men left. and i had killed 15000

---

Btw, having 20 legion.cohorts exp9 in 1 army is a waste of them imho, unless of course you want to have them grouped for fun ~D .
Sorry, but this line didn't for some reason fit in my previous post :embarassed:

there were 3 waves. in total 20000 men. there were about 7 armies attacking + the garrison of the besieged city. so it's like this. 2 armies attack me and the garrison joins. i win. and that 3 times.

also when i say legionares it's like this.

10 legionaries (late)
4 archers
4 cavalry units
1 praetorian cohort
1 first cohort

so not really a waste, all of them had 9 chevs. they were the best out of 5 invasion forces. the rest had between 5-8 chevs units only. the have beaten the shit out of those eggy's. all are captain led to make it more interesting.

the eggy's had a huge empire (and still have) with about 100 regions.