Strategy Map - Marching Unitited or Concentration at a Point?

[RLucid]

I saw your post later that you mean AI reinforcements armies of three units. I didnt realize that, but I woldnt bother bribing these armies. Usually I would send out whichever family member was closest with a smaller army (the heavy cav of the family member would ofcourse give a decisive edge to me) and try and pick up some experiencce and traits.

In some situations I don't want to do that, because it's a diversion from the main objectives. I may have a twin thrust attack, and I don't want the enemy blocking units slowing movement, perhaps preventing a more important attack. Also the reason for it can be to do with timing of re-inforcements, sometimes I initially lay siege with slender force advantages and even 3-4 units arriving on the AI turn would permit a successful sally. By bribing them, even extra 2 units of Hastati arriving on my turn make the siege a comfortable victory.

A good way to blood the many spotty teenagers the Roman factions get. Admittedly this is harder with the other factions which to me always have far fewer family members for some reason.

Another argument for multi-stack. Actually I'll blood Generals with mopping up & secondary tasks in exactly that way, whilst the big guns deal with the main challenge.

I meant wait for the AI to assault you and then slaughter him in a defensive battle.

The key word is "wait". The multi-thrust style, means amassing the forces, to sustain an offensive, and keep posing threats, so the opponent is just being reactive. Setting up ambushes, and massacres at choke points, may also allow denial of mercenary re-inforcements where you cross recruiting zones. Sitting and letting them turn up outside a town, disrupting trade, against the main force doesn't fit in with that strategy. It does nothing to unbalance the opponent, who meanwhile waste population producing units and may gain time for stone walls etc.

Narbo is one place I wouldnt do this though, mainly because whenver I have tried to take it as the Julii, the Gauls have always had three largish armies nearby, presumably the army recruited at Narbo,

*nods* Yeh. I've actually allowed Narbo to be recaptured by cease-fire breaking Gauls, because by allowing that to happen, I could threaten Alesia, destroy their weakened force in open, and grab the capitol turn after, still lightly defended. Think a bribe prevented re-routing of a small stack which was heading south to Narbo area.

See I dont think we are that different after all. In a similar situation I would garrison Corduba as lightly as possible (my defensive army) but also send out the rest also by sea as all Spanish provinces are easily attackable from the sea except the one in the northwest, Asturicas?

I suspect folk do take similar decisions, it's just that I've not seen any discussion on the forum. If ppl really do play very simplistically on the Strategy map, build a big army, send it out to a town, rebuild & repeat; then I hope the discussion frees them up to experiment with more opportunistic (but riskier hence more exciting) strategies.

Only with the Iberians scurrying back I wouldnt chase them (as Corduba would revolt)

The Corduba army was able to leave the town, and was headed for the W. Atlantic coast, not the threatening army. Of course as it moved, it took a strong defensive river position, preventing AI stack moving on Corduba.

Chasing the army with a weaker force within range, was to inhibit it's movement to relieve a siege of capitol, or concentrate against another target. It's hard to picture, without map, but it's all down to the potential concentrations of force against the points the AI army could possibly move to. It forced the AI to make a decision, and multiple weaker armies could paradoxically advance, due to this effect.

The closest I have ever come to anything Napoleonic would probably be the fighting around Narbo. Over two turns I would have two fight three or four battles against the three sperate gaulish armies, making sure that at the end of each turn I was in the yellow zone of no more than two of the Gaul armies so that they couldnt combine overwhelming force against me. I flatter myself that its rather like Nappy in his frist campaign in Northern Italy, trying to maintain a siege in Mantua (Narbo) while beating the the various Austrian relief armies crawling all over the place.

Very Scipio like then! You are a to

You don't get much maneuvering effect because the AI appears to only understand the most crude effects. ie. Marching on it's capitol, sieging some town, or moving with a big army through it's territory.

The other difficulty, is the coarse grained 6 month turns, Though the units can't move nearly as rapidly as they did in reality (1 Roman army with Consul who arranged supplies to be prepared on route, marched up from South to North to aid other consul fighting Hannibal in 2 weeks or so, and then battle over, marched back with Hasdrubal's head even faster).

Somthing like the Ulm campaign wouldnt be possible I think

Don't know about the details, but the basic idea I was trying to describe is of using maneuver as a weapon, to make feints and threats to draw off forces, making the main thrust face lighter resistance. So I wasn't really meaning Napoleon, as the whole period is generally known as Napoleonic, and covers a long period where armies used marching as a campaigning weapon, as much as actual battle.