Retraining "Dilution"

[Zild]

I virtually never retrain. For one reason or another, I almost always find it preferable either to merge two armies or to let a weak unit simply die out, if not disband it myself.

Today I had a perfect opportunity to do so, but what I saw amazed me. A single Border Horseman (yes, one guy) retrained into a full unit, his experience jumped from 3 to 4! I am fairly certain there were no buildings to give an exp. bonus (there were practically no buildings at all - it was maybe 10 turns into the game, it was Caernarvon) so where did the exp. gain come from? Honestly, I expected him to drop down to one exp. not jump up by one!

Any thoughts? Is this normal and I've been playing wrong all these years?!

[gollum]

AFAIK it is normal yes. It happens in RTW too IIRC and thus yes you have been playing wrongly as far as taking full benefit of game mechanics is concerned.

In the older games STW/MTW, retraining would average down the unit experience (the experience of the remaining individuals would be shared bythe new recruits by divide it by their number and then given to the unit or something of that sort), but in RTW/M2TW (that share the same engine), somehow retrained units get full benefit from the experience of survivors irrespective of their number. Either that or its a bug.

In any case, the AI very rarely retrains stacks in the systematic way the player does if at all. As such, you may have a more balanced game experience if you continue playing as you did, as this means that you set yourself in a more equal footing with what he can do.

[Zild]

Well I guess it makes sense in some ways. Existing survivors can impart their experiences upon new recruits, teaching them the little tricks that the official training program might shun. Perhaps this was part of the reason for changing the term from "valour" to "experience.

I do not see it as an exploit in terms of realism, but I do wonder why the AI makes little use of the method. (To be honest, I thought the AI was keen on retraining...)

[Prussian to the Iron]

If you dont like retraining (which can add several turns to a military campaign), you can use my method of a sort of "Supply Train" or Reserves:

Basically, I figure out which of each type of units I have most of in my campaigning army (like i have chivalric knights for all 3 Cav+general, Sergeant Spearmen for 4 of my infantry, dismounted fuedal knights for the other 4, and 8 longbowmen for the rest) than bring a proportionate amount of those kinds of guys behind the army. so for that army I would have a unit of Chivalric knights, 2 units of Sergeant Spearmen, 2 units of dis. fuedal knights, and 3 units of longbowmen (since thye are missile and dont die often).

then if i ever lose a large amount of men, I bring up my Reserve train and merge the reserves with the depleted units. This can be a very effective way of continually moving forward while replenishing your forces. Plus, if its something like:

"Ok, i just took a castle, now I gotta take one more to finish the crusade!"

than you can use the Reserves to garrison the ungarrisoned castles, and move your main army up to deal with what you need to take.

[Zild]

...and yet sometimes my units will auto-merge after a fight?! What's going on there then?

Prussian Iron, that plan sounds like it is worth some investigating...

[gollum]

Originally posted by Zild
Well I guess it makes sense in some ways. Existing survivors can impart their experiences upon new recruits, teaching them the little tricks that the official training program might shun.

Imo it makes sense to impart the valor of the survivors to the new recruits as in the old games - the more new recruits you have the more the valor is dilluted. Having more valor than the survivors for a whole unit of new recruits isn't exactly realistic.

Perhaps this was part of the reason for changing the term from "valour" to "experience.

Or maybe they wanted a more universally recognizable term - in the older games "experience" was named in a fashion that was relevant to the perception of experience/battle ability in society; honour in STW, valour in MTW. In Rome and onwards though it gets to be called "experience" and represented by "chevrons" which are irrelevant within the historical context afaik unlike the predecessors.

It seems to me that it has to do with accessibility and marketing.

I do not see it as an exploit in terms of realism, but I do wonder why the AI makes little use of the method. (To be honest, I thought the AI was keen on retraining...)

It is actually a huge exploit that tips the scales significantly towards the player; using massretrain you can conquer significant parts of the map without ever having to spend the recruitment money for units; the AI does not retrain so he always ends up paying them - if you count them in the long run as well as the recruiting times they add up to a very significant advantage for the player in terms of cost and time.

[Zild]

That's curious - I thought it cost the same (or perhaps even more) to retrain than it did to train fresh units. Then again, I've also seen 59 crossbowmen retrain (adding one) for 57 florins, then again for only 12 florins a few turns later. This game is making less and less sense!

[gollum]

Oops - you are right Zild - the cost of retraining should be comparable to that of recruiting - however the time issue is for sure for the benefit of the player especially since the AI does not use it. This alone does make retraining "unfair" for the AI.

The discrepencies may be due to different valor/weapon/armor upgrades; all have their cost afaik.

[Gray_Lensman]

That's curious - I thought it cost the same (or perhaps even more) to retrain than it did to train fresh units. Then again, I've also seen 59 crossbowmen retrain (adding one) for 57 florins, then again for only 12 florins a few turns later. This game is making less and less sense!

Within the game, retraining is a broad term. It can mean replenishing the manpower, bringing the armor up to current settlement standards, or even enhancing the weaponry of the unit being retrained. Any combination of the above actions result in retraining meaning you might have a unit that only needs a few of its men retrained for just one of the above circumstances resulting in a lower cost than one might have expected. The game makes perfect sense in this respect. You just have to understand the mechanics.

[Zild]

Both times there were no armour and no weapons upgrades involved and I believe the experience of the units was the same. Of course, two units each with 1 chevron could have very different amounts of experience behind the scenes - 1.0 and 1.999... - which could easily account for the difference.

[Old Geezer]

I often will recruit a unit and send it on a mission to attack a stack of rebels or another faction just to get as many of them killed as possible so that I can merge it with a more experienced unit. A unit with 9 chevrons can often bring such a unit up to silver (4 chevrons). You may consider this an exploit or a cheat or just smart management. The AI doesn't care and neither do I.

[Zild]

I'd call it calous, but not an exploit! Would be nice if your faction leader / local generals gained traits as a result of such actions...

I accidentally let some unsupported artillery (my favourite pair of 5XP ballistae and a catapult!) get caught up in a field battle (the rest of the army had pressed on to besiege Marseille). I let them mash up the enemy before retreating (first shot killed their general :D ) but was enjoying the fireworks too much and sustained substantial losses. Still, that upped their experience somewhat and after retraining one of them is now a 20-strong 7XP unit! I am pretty sure they cost substantially more to retrain than training a no-experience ballista, so I do not consider this an exploit.

But what would you guys do about the following? I have (or rather had, he died off a few days ago!) an 8XP Crusader Knight (is that the right name? The early period mounted unit only available on crusades) It will be a long time before I can crusade again to get him any friends, and being a special crusade unit there is no retraining option. I would like to make him a general through Man of the Hour (would the general keep this experience?) but I do not know how to force him to take command, and I can hardly send him alone against a real enemy! And even if I did, the lone knight would still remain...

What would you guys do with such a unit? Does a MOTH general have the experience of the unit he commanded in battle? How is the general determined in armies without a family member?

[_Tristan_]

To answer yor questions in order :

1 - Keep it until the next crusade away from the frontline and retrain it at the earliest opportunity

2 - Nope. The general will be created with no XP. But the lone Crusader Knight will remain. So you'll have two units in that stack instead of one.

3 - At all times the general is determined by who is the captain of the stack (the unit with the golden star), unless he dies in the battle. The game generally determines who is the captain in a stack depending on the type of units in the satck, starting with cavalry then missile infantry, then heavy infantry and ending with spearmen or artillery. And also in their order of appearance in the stack. However if a MoH genral is created, it adds up to the units in the units without taking out a single man out of the unit it originates in.

[Zild]

Thanks.

I suspect mercenary units (which would theoretically include crusade units) have a lower chance of being general.

[_Tristan_]

Not at all... If they are the most valuable unit of your stack and the captain of said stack...

Ie, take a former crusader stack made of one Crusader Knight and several units of Pilgrims. The captain will most certainly be the Knight unit. If this stack manages to obtain a MoH (a difficult task, I'll admit...), then the general will be chosen from among the knights, not that it makes any difference as the general units is not substracted from the unit it comes from... Nor does it keep its former unit experience...

In fact, MoH adds a general unit to any stack that deserves it, regardless of its composition...

[Diamondeye]

Another considerable side effect of the AIs lack of retraining is that many of their divisions will be "roughened", meaning not as full regiments. After a series of sustained losses (this goes even more for MTW and RTW), you could be facing an enemy army where most of the regiments are halved in numbers. It makes it much easier to rout them (otoh, it makes artillery a bit less effective).

[Prussian to the Iron]

but on anything above easy arty is good for nothing short of siege battles, and battles where you have 6 ballistae in your army, are backed up in a corner, with 4 full stacks coming at you from the front up a hill.

P.S.: I did this once, it ended up being a horrible defeat when those damnable Moors killed my army of uber high-tier Aragonians.

[Diamondeye]

I wouldn't say that, but I agree that apart from easy and really early-game, artillery's primary function is sieges. But if your enemy brings archers/siege onto the field, he will often wait until he's emptied his ammo bars before attacking. If you have quadruple his artillery, this often becomes a bad decision for the AI, since you can then mow down his army considerably before he's finished holing through your skirmishers.