launching invasions

[Kommodus]

Paul, your observations are correct. When I first played the game, I assumed that movement was "simultaneous" - that is, every faction makes their strategic moves for the year, and then each battle is resolved. That would explain why you can't move troops around in response to an enemy attack - you've already made your moves, and you would have had to anticipate an enemy attack in order to meet it properly. My assumption was partially true, except that the player must make his moves first, and the AI factions move afterwards, knowing what the player did.

This may seem like an unfair advantage for the AI. In theory, it is - until you realize that the AI in this game (especially the strategic AI) is not very good, and needs every advantage it can get. In fact, it adds a bit of strategic depth to the campaign, since you need to anticipate your enemy's moves, such as where it will attack and what reinforcements it will bring in to counter your attacks. As others have said, use strategic agents, such as emissaries, spies, and religious agents, to inform you of the strength of your enemy.

Once you have a few basic battlefield tactics down, you will find that most battles are decided at the strategic level, rather than the tactical. The proper deployment of armies and agents at the strategic level will enable you to win victory after victory on the battlefield.

[Ulair]

I recall a quote from one of the devs reproduced here a few times to the effect that all moves are simultaneous with one caveat: the AI does peek, but "doesn't make use of the information". Whatever that means

However I've never seen any AI behaviour that suggests it does cheat - sometimes it's lucky, more often it's dumb.

Think of your turn as giving orders for moves, not the moves themselves.

Ulair

[bretwalda]

Actually I think AI does not peek... Because sometimes it moves troops OUT of the attacked territory... You can think of it as reinforcing a given territory.

Anyway: there must be a way to separate data from the AI, since it now all even that it would not be able to see, but still cannot use that info. Whatever

I recall a quote from one of the devs reproduced here a few times to the effect that all moves are simultaneous with one caveat: the AI does peek, but "doesn't make use of the information". Whatever that means

However I've never seen any AI behaviour that suggests it does cheat - sometimes it's lucky, more often it's dumb.

Think of your turn as giving orders for moves, not the moves themselves.

Ulair

[BakTraq]

Kommodus is right: It's just like a board game, and you're the first player to move. The only difference is that the AI gets a chance to respond appropriately to your moves before the battles are conducted.

But if you'll notice, whenever there is a rebellion in one of your provinces, you have the oppurtunity to counter it as you see fit. Such is the case because the rebellion occurred at the very end of the previous year, after all the factions had taken their respective turns, yet still before your next turn. When rebels attack your provinces, it's the same scenario as when you invade the AI's.

Now, as to how you should deal with this disadvantage. First, take note of the amount of troops stationed in the region you are attacking. Not just in a particular province, but in the bordering provinces also, as well as any troops that the enemy could move in by sea. The potential exists that the enemy will move all of these troops in to defend the province. So, to be safe, always assume that the enemy will counter your attack with every man it possibly can, and plan your troop type/numbers/strategy accordingly.

However, no disrespect to ichi, but you will always want to avoid doing what he suggested. Calling off battles, especially when you do it repeatedly and with several generals, is a dreadful idea. Why? Because, when you call off battles (or retreat when you're the one being attacked), you earn your generals the 'Hesitant', 'Eager to Retreat', etc vices, which significantly lower your mens' moral, and are also permanent.

Instead, in order to keep the reinforcing troops in their own provinces, you should simply attack them with a small force, perhaps a couple of peasant or militia units. The opposing army (the bulk of it) will either stay to make sure the province is defended, or it will give it up in order to defend the more important one, meaning your troops can storm in and raze it (or pacify it, depending on the circumstances). Usually it's just a suicide mission for the poor guys, but that's the price of Europe domination.

Cause heros get remembered bud, but legends never die

[ichi]

However, no disrespect to ichi, but you will always want to avoid doing what he suggested. Calling off battles, especially when you do it repeatedly and with several generals, is a dreadful idea. Why? Because, when you call off battles (or retreat when you're the one being attacked), you earn your generals the 'Hesitant', 'Eager to Retreat', etc vices, which significantly lower your mens' moral, and are also permanent.

I think that you misrepresented what I suggested, in that post I said:

I usually have an idea of what the AI has for possible reinforcements by saturating the provinces that are just beyond my borders with agents like emissaries and priests.

Then I try to send in a force large enough to be able to handle the AI forces plus some reinforcements.

The option of calling off an attack is only mentioned in case it looks like your army is going to get slaughtered. In the case where the AI moves in 2-3 times the force that I'm attacking with, I'd rather risk the acquisition of a Vice than commit army suicide.

Instead, in order to keep the reinforcing troops in their own provinces, you should simply attack them with a small force. . .

is pretty much what I suggested:

You can also interfere with the AI a little by attacking multiple provinces - even if some attacks are only with a few hundred men. You can always decide to call of most of htese 'fake' attacks. This seems to lessen the amount of movement that you describe.

I've only gotten the Hesitant or Eager to Retreat Vice two or three times. I agree with you that these Vices are pretty nasty and can be acquired the first time you call off an attack.

While never desirable, the option to retreat has to be acknowledged and used where appropriate.

ichi

[Procrustes]

...

Hey, that's good stuff. One question - when the AI moves, do the AI factions cooperate with each other in any way? Or do they all move independently, but after you.

Thanks,

P.

[BakTraq]

One question - when the AI moves, do the AI factions cooperate with each other in any way? Or do they all move independently, but after you.

If I'm not mistaken (of course I could be), the AI factions take their turns seperately, in the order of the kings' pictures that appears after you hit the 'End Year' button (Yea, they all move after you). The game, to get you back in control as quickly as possible, however, simply moves all their pieces at the same time, making it seem like they're all coordinated in some way.

And ichi, you're right man, I completely misunderstood the gist of your post. For starters, I should have said the 'third' paragraph of your suggestion, but even then I would've been wrong. Cause I'm assuming you simply meant to move a couple hundred guys in with a low rank general, which in turn would mean that his 'Hesitant' vice would be irrelevant anyway as soon as he came back under the command a stronger general. My apologies I wasn't thinking clearly.

[ichi]

NP mate

you made a good point about the unintended consequences of retreating.

BTW

Welcome to the Org

*bows*