Discuss - Less Denarii = Better Battles

[RabidGibbon]

This is probably old hat to all you grizzled veterans out there, but perhaps I can spread the light to some new players (or should I say noobs?).

After a few weeks of playing Rome MP against various people at a denarii range of 12 - 16k i noticed that unless one of us did something truly daft or original battles normally came down to a big clash on both or one flank between all my and my opponents super heavy uber cavalry, and the winner of this would then flank the infantry line, block whatever (I dont include Phalanx squares on purpose - there included in daft :see above) and win the battle. I experimented with trying various ambushes, and then battles came down to will my opponent fall for it, and I soon got tired of trying the same ambushes again and again.

By now I was considering the desperate measure of joining a clan to see what they did or chucking the whole MP thing in when I decided to try cutting the cash down to 6000 denarii. The next battle was on of the best I've played, with jockeying for posistion, feints, specialised units doing specialised stuff and lots of this . Your few elite units become important and useful, as rather than simply plonk a line of sacred band across the centre you have to worry about where your handful of hard troops might be needed. Rather than buy all Royal pikemen and Companion cav you have to buy cheaper troop types and learn how to use them. Anyway this is getting a bit wordy so I'll leave it to 1,000,000 denarii club to make their rebuttal.

[Louis de la Ferte Ste Colombe]

I swear this is not a ghost account of mine

It's not wordy at all, there is a lot more to say for both pros and cons.

One of the pros:
- smaller armies: I end up with 12/16 units per army, it's a lot easier to control, and that also helps make the game enjoyable. It's also a little easier to handle in large size/ 3v3: less of a strain on computer power.
A side effect of smaller army size and lower denarii is that some uber units can't be taken in large numbers.
6 cataphracts all by themselves are a lot easier to handle than 6 cataphracts+ 14 other units. You can stay focused on the uber elites and kick them out faster. I end up thinking that those units are more powerfull in chaotic situation when opposing players are too busy to handle them.
In simpler, less chaotic situation, they are less dominant.

One of the cons:
- smaller armies: some players still think they play 15000 denarii, but with less units. So they play the same army, but reduced to 6/8 units. It can work, but usually it does not and make for a boring game: if you play low denarii, please try to get at least 12 units to give some kind of challenge.

Unfortunately there are other problems related to low denarii games. Still, I play in the 6/8000 / army range as much as I can.

Large size, low denarii game on custom map, and I am a happy smurf

Louis,

[Catiline]

I used to do this loads with STW. A 2000 koku battle with ashi and arq's, plus a couple of one shot only elites, battle winners if you used them right, wasted if you mucked up. Almost always had better battles...

[Crandaeolon]

Low denarii battles are usually much more interesting than 12-15k games. I think Rome has the "best" balance (=the largest number of viable units) at around 7k-8k denarii... 10k is tolerable, but with 10k you can take 10-12 of the best elite units, and that's a bit too much.

Large unit size enhances low denarii games nicely by making infantry more durable; those phalanxes that were "useless" at normal size are suddenly a formidable wall. Even though phalanxes may appear a little underwhelming in 1vs1 custom battle tests, they're very effective in practice when used as a weapon system as opposed to individual units.

some players still think they play 15000 denarii, but with less units. So they play the same army, but reduced to 6/8 units.

This is the biggest drawback IMO. It's very boring to have someone pick 6 praetorian cav, charge stupidly into a phalanx line and rout in 10 seconds. Elite units do have a chance if they're used skillfully, but spamming doesn't work that well.

[Wishazu]

i think 10k is the perfect balance, if you go all elites you`ll still have a small army and get beaten by a player who picked a more balanced force, this is my experience anyway.

[AquaLurker]

I still feel that 10k to 12.5k games are more balance and fun. Games at these amount of denarii still force the player to chose their armies properly as elite units by all means are still expensive while at the same time you can still have a balance army on the field with a good mixture of elites and ordinary troops of about all 20 units. You wouldn't have much denarii left for upgrades anyway.

Games at denarii as low as 6000 may be challenging and a refeshing way to play the game but the armies will usually be very small and the battles unimpressive.

Anyway both denarii games are still open for exploitation by spammers.

[Louis de la Ferte Ste Colombe]

I remember posting some rather awfull 12.5k armies with lot of elite units... Just fill lot of elite with lot of archer, and that's pretty much done.
The only ordinary troops you would see on a 10/12500 denarii game is archer. Their cheapness allows for buying elite units only beside the archer themselves.

Upgrades cost are a problem: not allowing for upgrades is one of the advantage of playing low denarii. It's yet another factor of unbalance that is not available.

If 6000 armies are small and unimpressive, it's probably because you don't adapt to the setting. I end up with 16 units on 6000 denarii... But of course I don't buy urban cohorts only!

Any arguments beside "It's fine"?

Louis,

[RabidGibbon]

I agree with Louis that the only normal units on the 10k+ battlefield are archers.

With 6k I think any army can afford to put 20 units in the field, you just have to look at the lower end of the tech tree where a big infantry unit can be dirt cheap, and downgrading to light cavalry from those super heavy uber elites will enable you to horde more precious denarii.

From the point of view of making battles look impressive, I always try to take my full allocation of 20 units, but if other players insist on not taking any unit that costs less than 700 or so denarii then of course their army will be small, but this is their own fault rather than a nessecarry by product of the cash level.

Aqua's right about all levels of the game being open to spamming though, only th other day I saw a "skirmisher spam" of all things!

[Beefy]

These days im just happy to be able to connect to a game via gayspy! GRRRRRR

but really im not bothered, either way you gain expereince

[Craterus]

Less Denarii = Better Battles

I completely agree.. but the points i was going to make seem to have been made already, so I guess I'm done. :(

[AquaLurker]

Is anyone interested in a low denarii game of maybe around 6000-8000 denarii. I just feel like playing some units that I hardly had the chance of using in multiplayer .

[M.Cornelius Marcellus]

Hi all,
I regularly play RTW at 7k.
I agree with Louis and Crandaeolon totally. 6k - 8k is the best setting with the current standard 1.2. I can build competitive armies formed by 14-18 unit. If all players are honorable and dont use spam with blob mass cav bug the games could be much more interesting and various even than MTW.
In anycase i would like to play even a mod with velocity slowed down and kill rating slowed down: less rush and much more to think, less chaos.
Hoping some of you will join my games.
Hoping that next CA expansion could:
slow velocity
slow kill rating
give us not so overpowered cav
cancel the blob mass bug (like they did with the cav swipe bug).

These things could take TW community to old gold times.

Marcus Cornelius

[AquaLurker]

Marcus what time do you usually play? I will definately be going on line later in another 4 hours time. Look for WinkyWars if you are interested in a game, I also have the chivarly total war mod. If you like we can try that too.

[M.Cornelius Marcellus]

Hi AquaLurker,
I am on line between 22.00 to 1.00 central europe time. Usually there are some friends with me so we can organize some fun battles.

Marcus

[Craterus]

I play 14k per team 2v2

[cunobelinus]

yer it is probaly better with less money but it matters wat type of battle i think

[BeBear]

1 catacamel 2 cataphart, plus 12 +3weapon archer, and enjoy the 6000's fun..

[bodidley]

All those super-cav flanking battles definately get boring, but rather than limit denarii, I prefer to limit #/type of unit.Creative assembly designed most of the non-Roman factions with the intention that they would just get devoured by Romans without a tough fight, and a lot of the units are just runners anyhow . This is one reason (besides poor AI) that the single player isn't particularly interesting If you increase experience-weapons-armor, and use pre-Marian units only for Romans, you can get some real duels!

[Craterus]

No, I prefer limiting money, you can't stop people spamming units until you're in the battle.

[bodidley]

I'm fairly new to multiplayer, though I bought the game immediately after it was released (always found the damn AI to be painfully stupid ) but I've found that usually when you host people play by the rules. If they don't, you try again. The first time I played MP my opponent was a War Elephant Spammer, and he still lost! People spam because they don't have skills or don't want to use them, so I doubt they are very fun opponents anyhow.