KOTF OOC Thread

[Zim]

Looks like Staufen should have fallen. Perhaps from an IC perspective we could pretend that peasant archers were recruited, but as the settlement had not been in French hands long they were disloyal and opened the gates...

[econ21]

I think the rules are pretty clear that a player can fight a battle started by a captain; the player just has to be "involved" rather than initiate the attack:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

(c). - Battles: A player whose avatar leads an army that is involved in a battle will be expected to fight that battle. This will involve downloading the savegame of the battle, playing it and then uploading the resulting savegame. Uploading the post-battle save must be done within 48 hours of the pre-battle savegame being uploaded. If the deadline expires, the battle is autoresolved. If a player cannot fight a battle that is assigned to them, the battle may also be fought by any player whose avatar will also be present in the battle. Under no circumstances will a battle be fought by a player whose avatar is not present in the battle. If there is no player available to fight a battle, it must be autoresolved. If there are no allocated avatars involved in the battle at all, it must be autoresolved.

However, they are also pretty clear that we cannot recruit in provinces that are not ratified:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

(b). - Gaining and Losing Provinces: All conquered provinces must be ratified by an edict, which can be passed at the session before the conquest or be applied retroactively at the first session after. If a province is not ratified in this manner by the end of the very next session after it was made, it must be given away or abandoned. While a province is not ratified taxes must be set to the highest level possible and no recruitment can be made in that settlement. Any province conquered and ratified becomes part of the King's Demesne. At the time of conquest, the conquering noble can refuse to hand the province over to the King, but this puts him in a state of Civil War with the King. The King can be prevented from giving any province in the Demesne to another Noble by a two-thirds majority vote of the Council.

Conquered rebel provinces can be regarded as ratified, but not German. I think this rule was supposed to represent "physics" rather than "politics" and to slow us down vs the AI. So I am not sure we should "play on" and deal with it in character. Staufen seems to be a prime case of where we are really stretching things to rush the AI - not even properly defending our conquests - so us taking a hit seems justified. I vote we back up before OKs move and delete the archer recruit.

BTW, I think by the rules Staufen is the King's unless OK refused to hand it over at the time of conquest. The timing matters here - we debated it and although there was disagreement, I think the rules as written reflect the onus on a "rebel" noble to come out and openly defy the King at the time of conquest rather play a waiting game.

[_Tristan_]

I vote we back up before OKs move and delete the archer recruit.

BTW, I think by the rules Staufen is the King's unless OK refused to hand it over at the time of conquest. The timing matters here - we debated it and although there was disagreement, I think the rules as written reflect the onus on a "rebel" noble to come out and openly defy the King at the time of conquest rather play a waiting game.

The first part is hardly doable as it would mean going back to the final save of 1092 and have most of us re-do our moves, including Ramses' fight against Mandorf (which would be shame, with those cool pics). Better to move Ok back and make a sally with the Staufen garrison, sally which is doomed to fail on auto-resolve thus handing Staufen on a platter to te Germans.


As to the second part, that is how I read the rules at first but Zim seemed to consider that the hand-over should be handled at the next council session and that until that time the province belonged to the conquering noble. Then it was either ratified and went to the King or became the start of a civil war, or was handed back to its rightful owner through lack of ratification.

Also, the way the sally situation was played (regardless of Staufen's ownership) is that I don't think we should allow the players to play battles initiated by captain-led stacks even if their avatars are brought in as reinforcements. Let them initiate those battles... Different from when an avatar is brought in as reinforcement through an AI assault on a captain-led stack... Then we should (and we did) allow for the avatar to play the battle...

[AussieGiant]

I agree with Tristan's points in his post above.

I realise now I should have not recruited at all, which means there would have been no siege for the Germans to conduct. Tristan's solution is the best "current" save solution.

The land allocation is also how I've been reading it and dealing with construction and recruitment, except of course Staufen.

I'd prefer us to have the player avatar lead the attack, therefore limiting us in some fashion.

@ Tristan, I am glad you were frank about the situation.

I might not agree with it, but certainly confirming you can pull if off without the pause button on occasion makes things a little more palatable.

I'd just prefer you didn't use the pause button at all to conduct this tactic.

-EDIT-

I wont get to the save until Friday early evening Swiss time so there will be some time for reorganising the save for everyone.

[Vladimir]

While I think the charge trick is neat it seems like we're getting a bit gamey. Is this the norm because Vladimir loves the ballista sally.

[AussieGiant]

While I think the charge trick is neat it seems like we're getting a bit gamey. Is this the norm because Vladimir loves the ballista sally.

wtf is the ballista sally?

[_Tristan_]

You don't want to know...

Some things are better left unsaid...

[AussieGiant]

You don't want to know...

Some things are better left unsaid...

I certainly have that thought flittering through my head Tristan

I'd say the description would lead to statements I made regarding playing ahead with the save as well.

Still I have the ability to "know", and not use.

[Vladimir]

wtf is the ballista sally?

Hey, don't laugh. It's how I took over Europe as Norway.

[econ21]

As to the second part, that is how I read the rules at first but Zim seemed to consider that the hand-over should be handled at the next council session and that until that time the province belonged to the conquering noble. Then it was either ratified and went to the King or became the start of a civil war, or was handed back to its rightful owner through lack of ratification.

OK, my bad. Re-reading the rules, I can see Zim's interpretation.

Also, the way the sally situation was played (regardless of Staufen's ownership) is that I don't think we should allow the players to play battles initiated by captain-led stacks even if their avatars are brought in as reinforcements.

I guess we need Zim's ruling on this, as I think the rules are ambiguous on this at present. In fact, now I can't even find in the rules how we decide which player fights the battle. I think we discussed it just before the game and agreed it was who the computer said commanded. That is fine for single stack battles, but leads to ambiguities in cases such as the now reversed Staufen sally. I agree there is a lot to be said for autoresolving Captain initiated attacks. We did not do that in KotR, but on reflection the main use of Captain initiated attacks seems to be exploit the weak (broken?) AI when facing a sally or to get around restrictions on historical army composition etc.

Factionheir got lots of credit for his use of cavalry without anyone questioning how he achieved such outstanding results, so I find these "accusations" (for lack of a better word) a bit bitter to swallow...

Though some may argue it is just a question of "when" rather than "how"...

And about difficulty, the exact reason why I'm fighting the way I do is to do just that : give myself some challenge that I would not have with a full stack under my command... It is only my avatar I'm putting at risk there, or mostly...

Sorry for opening a can of worms with my question about cavalry tactics. I was not making an accusation, just trying to understand the game mechanics. I never understood how Factionheir got the results he did with his cavalry (although until this PBM, it has never entered my mind to try to defeat whole armies with just one BG), so I was curious. I can understand withdrawing and re-charging to get the charge bonus. That just sounds like sound tactics. But is there something special about withdrawing on the moment of impact? Is it just a matter of min-maxing - allowing you to get one big hit on the spears and giving them at best only a little chance to hit back weakly at you? If that's all there is too it, it does not seem too much of an exploit, although I doubt in real life cavalry would be so precise.

I have a couple of follow up questions on game mechanics players might help me with:

(1) I always thought there were "reverse impact" casualties on charging cavalry (at least attacking spears frontally) - ie that cavalry lose extra men at the moment of impact. Is that people's experience too? Or is it just my imagination? If it you do lose cavalry on impact, surely that would raise the cost of repeatedly charging and withdrawing? Even if it were true, I guess the 2HPs of the BGs insulate you from that to some extent.

(2) I always thought braced spears negated the charge bonus of cavalry attacking them frontally. Is that true? If it is true, I can't see the charge and withdraw tactic having any benefit if applied frontally against them. If so, I guess FH and Tristan etc just avoid charging braced spears frontally. Or maybe it was only true in the older games (STW, MTW)?

Looking at the battle reports, my eyebrows do rise at seeing the King repeatedly leaving a decent army behind him to go and fight alone at 1-10 odds. It might be challenging for you, but it seems odd in character and out of character just brings home the feebleness of the AI. However, you can take that with a pinch of salt. I guess Philippe is just a bad ass (I have read historical accounts of a few knights defeating much larger numbers of foot). Players are free to play in the style they wish to. If we start telling each other what to do OOC, we will stop having fun. If I get a chance tonight, I may try out your tactics against the German remnants you mentioned in Flanders.

[_Tristan_]

I can understand withdrawing and re-charging to get the charge bonus. That just sounds like sound tactics. But is there something special about withdrawing on the moment of impact? Is it just a matter of min-maxing - allowing you to get one big hit on the spears and giving them at best only a little chance to hit back weakly at you? If that's all there is too it, it does not seem too much of an exploit, although I doubt in real life cavalry would be so precise.

Exactly... That's how I see it works... Been doing it since Methodios' times and with success...
You'll notice that my BG unit generally doesn't leave the field unscathed, nor does Philippe (who is two steps up the scars trait line...).

I'll agree that in RL there is no way a charge could be so precise but with so many other things ingame which would be different in RL, I don't think this matters much... Put it down to excellent command

To answer your questions, Econ :

1/ That may be true but differs on experience. Ramses seems to have observed this happening while I didn't notice it. All the casualties, Philippe's BG incurred were due to the withdrawal maneuver or simply remaining too long into the spears.

2/I don't know if spears negate the charge bonus but get a charge into braced spears (not pikes, mind you) and you'll still make a killing. A thing I try to avoid to the best of my abilities, still. I mostly try to get my charges when the spears are reforming or in movement, thus catching them "un-braced"...

As to Philippe going to fight by himself, the first battle was Reims (and was an IC ambush as detailed in the battle report), the second was fighting remnants of the Antwerp siege relief force, a task that Philippe thought was his alone.

I see him as a true warrior-king, intent on preserving the lives of his soldiers and putting his life on the line for that. As for OOC concerns, if you are amazed at my antics, I'm much more amazed by what Ramses or OK are able to accomplish...

Good luck in your German hunting...

[Ramses II CP]

A 'ballista sally' isn't all that bad, really, because anytime you sally against the AI you're abusing. The AI's sally behavior can best be described as: Pull back out of tower range, form up, and wait. Respond only to massive casualties or the loss of all ranged troops. It's the nature of the game that if you sally you are taking advantage of bad AI and you simply can't help it.

It's called a ballista (Or catapult, or any extra long range troops, or cannon towers) sally because if you have a ballista the AI will sit there and let you kill them until you run out of ammo. Cannon towers are, IMHO, a horrific exploit of the AI under almost all circumstances and we should GA to never build them and sell them when we capture them at settlements. I sallied out of a cannon tower city in KotR, towers built by the Danish AI IIRC, and I abandoned the walls as fast as possible specifically so I could avoid the cannon tower abuse.

I do use pause, but if there were a way to turn it off for all players I would be okay with that. It would definitely change the way I approach battles involving more than 5 companies on each side, because when you get that large you can't manage all those men in the spread out manner necessary to correctly manipulate the AI for heavy cavalry charges. When I can get the Marseille battle posted you'll see what I mean.

Unfortunately, with replays working inconsistently, if we take out pause it will be difficult to get good screenshots for battle reports. I'm kinda okay with that, although I do love reading them, because it's about playing the game first, right? I remember some of FH's battles, and (IMHO) FH was a master of manipulating AI morale. If you understand exactly the factors involved in a unit's morale equation you can probably cause it to rout almost before it has a chance to kill any of your men. The AI does little or nothing to 'protect' it's morale situation.

As far as Staufen, I did call AG 'in character' on it, but I saw it more as leverage and less as a rules violation. Staufen belongs to the King, and I presumed if the King ordered something done there that it was okay to do it... but I'm not the rules expert. I thought prioritized recruitment had to go ahead of construction, but I can't find that anywhere in the rules either.

[Ramses II CP]

...

(1) I always thought there were "reverse impact" casualties on charging cavalry (at least attacking spears frontally) - ie that cavalry lose extra men at the moment of impact. Is that people's experience too? Or is it just my imagination? If it you do lose cavalry on impact, surely that would raise the cost of repeatedly charging and withdrawing? Even if it were true, I guess the 2HPs of the BGs insulate you from that to some extent.

(2) I always thought braced spears negated the charge bonus of cavalry attacking them frontally. Is that true? If it is true, I can't see the charge and withdraw tactic having any benefit if applied frontally against them. If so, I guess FH and Tristan etc just avoid charging braced spears frontally. Or maybe it was only true in the older games (STW, MTW)?

Looking at the battle reports, my eyebrows do rise at seeing the King repeatedly leaving a decent army behind him to go and fight alone at 1-10 odds. It might be challenging for you, but it seems odd in character and out of character just brings home the feebleness of the AI. However, you can take that with a pinch of salt. I guess Philippe is just a bad ass (I have read historical accounts of a few knights defeating much larger numbers of foot). Players are free to play in the style they wish to. If we start telling each other what to do OOC, we will stop having fun. If I get a chance tonight, I may try out your tactics against the German remnants you mentioned in Flanders.

1. If you watch a cavalry charge striking a line of set spears in slow motion you'll see that a certain percentage of the cavalry are unhorsed on impact (They fly right over the horse's head). One of the reasons that other mods, Stainless Steel for example, made heavy cavalry companies smaller is so that this number would have a larger effect. Even 2 HP cavalry (Or more than 2, ala Broken Crescent) suffer this effect, hitpoints are no guard against it. I believe it happens even to generals, although I don't have any direct evidence in screenshots to prove it, but it's pretty simple to avoid losing your general. Make your cavalry line so that your general is lined up to 'wrap' the edge of the spear formation. That way his charge doesn't hit the front of the line and he won't be unhorsed.

2. To the extent of my knowledge this is correct only at the moment of impact, as soon as the formation breaks open, which happens almost instantly, the remaining cavalry complete their charge as normal. The more dense the formation the better it holds form against cavalry. Actually the best way to take a BG's charge, from a player's perspective, is to have to overlapping companies of spears set at an angel (A wide V for 2 companies, or for schiltrom one braced square and two bobs o_o). The charge will only strike one company of spears properly, and as soon as the charge hits you order the second company to engage at will against targets that are still trying to fight their way into the braced spears.

You need to keep in mind that, even with this info, spears do far better against a charge than other infantry. I had two companies of mounted sergeants charge some DFKs at Marseille. They lost 3men and left only 6 of the DFKs behind because the DFKs had effectively no defense. If I had pulled the charge trick off correctly I wouldn't have needed to lose any men, or perhaps just one as they withdrew, but I was watching another part of the battle.

[AussieGiant]

You need to keep in mind that, even with this info, spears do far better against a charge than other infantry. I had two companies of mounted sergeants charge some DFKs at Marseille. They lost 3men and left only 6 of the DFKs behind because the DFKs had effectively no defense. If I had pulled the charge trick off correctly I wouldn't have needed to lose any men, or perhaps just one as they withdrew, but I was watching another part of the battle.

Well that's pretty depressing.

[Cecil XIX]

Well that's pretty depressing.

Agreed. Are there any mods that focus soley on the AI which we could install on top of LTC Gold?

[econ21]

Well that's pretty depressing.

Swords were always weak vs cavalry, but with the mod DFK stats have been nerfed quite a bit. I'm not a great fan of the change as it seems to be for "balance" rather than realism. But it's not that bad for gameplay. DFKs used to be pretty uber. Now they are just offensive infantry roughly equal to armoured spears, who are defensive/anti-cavalry infantry. They will have their role e.g. in sieges, I am sure; just not in receiving a cavalry charge.

Agreed. Are there any mods that focus soley on the AI which we could install on top of LTC Gold?

I don't think it's a matter of the AI so much. From Shogun onwards, a good player has always been able to get a lot done with their bodyguard(s) against the AI. (Their bodyguards as part of their army - this solo bodyguard army concept is new to me). It's just we have very good players and the early AI has not built up so much, so the advantage is more noticeable: the AI is not fielding full stacks and their troops are largely lowest tier. I remember in KotR towards the end, the Egyptians started fielding large elite armies that made me blanche (Mameluke horse archers plus those scarey axe wielding dudes).

Given what I have learnt about LotR and from this game, if we were starting again, I would have suggested nerfing bodyguards a little. What the realism mods for RTW gravitated towards, IIRC, is give them one hit point not two and make them smaller, say halve them. That would cut their power statistically to 25% of what it is now.

Raising the base morale of units might also help as I suspect part of what is going on is players engineering a AI morale collapse. There are probably large morale penalties from having cavalry charging your rear, seeing friends rout etc. The RTW realism mods generally give harder battles because the AI clings on, rather than routing early.

I am not sure if we want to make such changes now that the game has started, but it probably would not be hard - just a matter of editing one txt file. Maybe we could consider it as a rules change at the next Conseil?

(a) Reduce bodyguard units to one hitpoint.
(b) Half the unit size of bodyguards.
(c) Add 10 to each unit's morale.

But who knows, maybe attitudes will change when we start seeing player generals die (as they did quite often in KotR and LotR).