Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Everything to do with battles

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1

    Post Re: Everything to do with battles

    That's a fairly good question placenik, although for me the priority is typically killing rather than winning. Of course by killing you often end up willing, but reductions in enemy troops are more important. Multiple encounters, each time resulting in victory but lots of damage, are more of a problem for a force than several defeats resulting in minimal losses and maximum enemy casualties.

    For some factions, particularly horse archer based ones, hit and run attacks (attacking, causing damage and then withdrawing) are the best method of eventually gaining victory. These factions frequently do not have the power to win in one battle anyhow, mainly due to the lack of melee value of these units.

    Dawn is nature's way of telling you to go back to bed

  2. #2

    Default Re: Everything to do with battles

    I asked because I always fight to max kills-loses ratio, while almost every guide is advising to rout enemy. It is quite dumb that when enemy rout/retreat it doesn't disperse into the fields, even in small percent.

  3. #3

    Default Re: Everything to do with battles

    How do they differ? Generally when you engineer a rout, with plenty of pursuit opportunity you can inflict huge losses on enemy, with few casualties.

  4. #4

    Default Re: Everything to do with battles

    Differences:
    1. You can inflict cassualties without victory.
    2. If you rout cavalery, it is as good as if they have just withdrown.
    3. Don't forget that you don't always have enough chasing power.

  5. #5
    Senior Member Senior Member Quintus.JC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,572

    Default Re: Everything to do with battles

    "I'm not interested in prisoners, slay them all." Quintus Julius Cicero's pre-battle speech.

    I know you're not allowed to take prisoners in RTW, it's a nice catch-phrase. Anyway just a win isn't good enough for me, normally I tries to wipe the whole AI army, leave no survivers. That's why cavalry plays a signifcant role for me, and that's one of the reasons why I dislikes the Greeks.

  6. #6
    Member Member Slash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Albuquerque, New Mexico
    Posts
    3

    Default Re: Everything to do with battles

    One thing I learned the hard way, is never let the AI control your re-enforcement....in RTR the Gauls were besieging that one settlement with a B next to arretium(I forget the name) where Maesa Haemus was..a two star General, 21 years of age and son of Decimus Haemus whom was a five star general. Well in the battle where Decimus is attempting to keep his son from certain death, bum rushes the Gauls with his Merc army, destroyed and killed. He did enough damage to allow Maesa(me) to rout the seiging army...

    I dont know how far off that is, but when it comes to battles, never trust the AI with your warriors.(I've been playing RTW for a year or so now, I avidly visited these forums but now im seeking to be more active in the community)

  7. #7

    Post Re: Everything to do with battles

    Welcome to the forums Slash

    I've had similar experiences with AI control in the past. The only issue is what you do if you need the extra troops. If you have a twenty unit force and there are re-enforcements available, then you either go for a gradual drip feed of troops which will be well managed or have them all come on to assist at once under low quality leadership. It's often a very difficult balancing act, considering the size of the enemy and the chances of victory in each scenario.

    Dawn is nature's way of telling you to go back to bed

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO