Fighting in woods

[Jikot]

I imagine tons of threads must have been made on this subject, only I've never seen one.

I absolutely ABHOR fighting in woods. They cut overhead visibility to zero, forcing you (me) to pause every two seconds, zoom all the way into the grass and start panning all over the place to get some degree of overview of the carnage.

Manoevering becomes a near-impossibility, and battle length is extended by a factor of ten. The very second I come to the dreadful conclusion that there isn't a usable open patch in the dense woods to position, I just leave and reload the game to let the AI take care of it, win or lose.

This is the major reason why I haven't gotten into any Celctic factions or the Swebi (Gaul and Germania seem like one extensive canopy of lush green forest), which just seems a shame.

Anyone know like a minimod or something which removes all dense forestation, or renders them invisible in some way? Or some tactic which magically renders forest battles more enjoyable?

I know forest combat was a reality in many an ancient warfare, but it's just no fun to play. At least not to me.

[Skullheadhq]

Only one that removes the big trees.

[Poulp']

And now, play with camera general.

That's why I only march in Germania/Gaul/Iberia/wherever there's forest when I know I have an overpowering force.

Yet I'm loving every minute of it. Talk about immersion... I can nearly feel my soldiers being nervous.

[anubis88]

I imagine tons of threads must have been made on this subject, only I've never seen one.

I absolutely ABHOR fighting in woods. They cut overhead visibility to zero, forcing you (me) to pause every two seconds, zoom all the way into the grass and start panning all over the place to get some degree of overview of the carnage.

Manoevering becomes a near-impossibility, and battle length is extended by a factor of ten. The very second I come to the dreadful conclusion that there isn't a usable open patch in the dense woods to position, I just leave and reload the game to let the AI take care of it, win or lose.

This is the major reason why I haven't gotten into any Celctic factions or the Swebi (Gaul and Germania seem like one extensive canopy of lush green forest), which just seems a shame.

Anyone know like a minimod or something which removes all dense forestation, or renders them invisible in some way? Or some tactic which magically renders forest battles more enjoyable?

I know forest combat was a reality in many an ancient warfare, but it's just no fun to play. At least not to me.

Check out the unofficial mod section. There's a mod that removes them, and replaces them with normal trees

[Vasiliyi]

One way to get rid of this is to build a fort whenever your unsure of the landscape. Building a fort automatically creates a "non-wooded" battle, but your units start in a fort. Its not a perfect solution, but its better, in my opinion than having to fight in a germanic forest.

[Jikot]

Thanks for the suggestions all, I'll be sure to try that small tree mod after the weekend!

Horum omnium fortissimi sunt Belgae

[Dyabedes of Aphrodisias]

The tree-mod seems to kind of make it worse to me, as the foliage of the trees is now at a realistic height. I've been playing an extensive campaign as the Sweboz and have only fought two completely forested battles, both in the same spot, and it was in neither Gaul nor Germania. So don't be afraid to play those factions.

But I found it kind of fun - much easier to lose control of or forget about a flank, much harder to see the enemy, much more difficult to do any kind of tactical maneuvers. Though yes, I agree it is frustrating not being able to move the camera above the lowest point.

[Cute Wolf]

I usually solve this problem by carrying tons of archers and slingers toward the forest... and if I were the Sweboz themself, Medikikas is really awesome!!!

[Subotan]

It's totally unrealistic, forcing you to fight and direct orders from the ground level, rather than soar above the battlefield like an allseeing eagle. It totally ruins the historical experience, acting historically, for me.

[Jikot]

It's totally unrealistic, forcing you to fight and direct orders from the ground level, rather than soar above the battlefield like an allseeing eagle. It totally ruins the historical experience, acting historically, for me.

I know army commanders did not have the "soaring eagle" overview we have in the game, but don't forget that once a battle had started, they also did not have that much immediate control over any troops which were not in their close vicinity.

Typically different flanks, troop types or even small regiments would have their own commanders who ideally adhered to the orders the general issued before battle as closely as possible.
These more junior commanders would improvise and let their own tactical skills shine in the absence of (or in spite of) in-battle directions from the general or their more immediate superior.

In the game, the player is the general, the regiment commander, and the soldier; and he is charged with micromanagement of all troops deployed on the field. Strategy is determined almost exclusively during combat (barring pre-battle deployment layout), not outlined beforehand.
This is why we need the overview, simply because units cannot be trusted to make tactical decisions of any kind; besides fighting to their or their opponent's breaking point and chasing routers.