Denmark

[Iavorios]

First of all sorry for the spelling in the last posts. I have no idea what happened, i use spell check every time.
Enyway, i thing that fighting Russia early on is not a god idea. This means fighting not only them, but Poland and Hungary as well, as soon as you take western and southern part of the country. Both are HA heavy, so it is really painful. And as i said it- it's not whorth it.
There is something i don't get. Many people use two handed units, despite the fact they are weaker and harder to get than the DFK. I mean DFK will always perform better than the norse axemen, or the obmbudsier. I don't like it, but it's a fact, unless you mode your game. Just test them on hard difficulty on custom battle. The dismounted huskarls are good, cheap and easy to get, but are weaker. So the only reason to use norse axemen and obmbudsier is to feal more unique game and pure fun, or make the game harder. In both cases you have my respect .

[PuppetMaster]

I know what you're saying about Obudashers, it does seem like they are relatively weak in combat against say billmen, armored swordmen, etc., so I try to use maybe 2 or 3 battalions of them MAX in an army, just to mix things up a little and defend the flanks.

However, Norse Axemen have proven to be a menace against enemy troops of all types and have taken minimal losses in combat, so idk whatever. I'm playing on VH/H, so its not like its on easy or medium.

Norse swordsman are fun to use as a heavy infantry type fodder (I know that sounds sort of like an oxymoron, but hear me out). They are powerful enough to crush most other spearmen in the game, but are not as powerful as DFK. Plus, they are cheaper than most Danish infantry if I recall, so I use them to fight and takre a majority of the losses in battle while my DFK and Norse Axemen hang back or flank, where I only use them if the battle goes against my favor. Kind of like what the roman republic did w/ triarii in battles, but my troops have huge beards and axes, lol

[Mad Mac]

Obudashers have proven very effective for me. The thing is, you have to turn spearwall off for fighting infantry. I've tested this with various halberd units. I'm not sure what the difference is, but I've figured out that Halberds in spearwall=dying like flies, while Halberds running around with spearwall and guard wall off=ownage. Weird but true.

[Ramses II CP]

The trouble I have with Norse Swordsmen is they have no stamina. They're cheap, and relatively high durability, but if you need to fight two stacks or have them run some distance they get tired quickly, and then they break or get torn up in the fight.

Don't get me wrong, I still find them useful, I just hate to have any part of my army break just because they got tired.

[SeekerDK]

I mean DFK will always perform better than the norse axemen, or the obmbudsier. I don't like it, but it's a fact, unless you mode your game. Just test them on hard difficulty on custom battle. The dismounted huskarls are good, cheap and easy to get, but are weaker. So the only reason to use norse axemen and obmbudsier is to feal more unique game and pure fun, or make the game harder. In both cases you have my respect .

I'm sorry Iavorios, but I think you a missing a vital point.

First of all, it seems you hugely overestimate the power of the DFK. I agree that they have and incredible talent for staying alive thanks to they wooping 21 defence, but their attack is a measly 13 with no bonuses (AC / AP) and going against anything more armored then a low-end swordsman would be bad tactics unless its defensively. Their a no-brain unit if there ever was one. Thou they are good tanks (disregarding their lack of killing power), perfect meat shields and their high morals let you charge them anything and anywhere without them running away.

So you tested them in a head-on collision with some axemen? It should have been a forgone conclusion. Axemens 17AP attack is fighting DFKs 21 defense (17,5 with AP reduction), while as DFKs meager 13 attack is sufficient to take out the axemens no-shield defense of 11.
Try another custom where you have 2 DFKs vs 1 axe + 1 DFK (or even norse swordsmen). Have the swordsmen charge into battle (preferably engaging both DFKs) and the axemen flank. Since the DFK cant kill anything with more armor then a garden snail, you'll have plenty of time to position you axemen for a full speed flank charge. Bare in mind that axemens charge bonus are second to non and rarely match and they will slaughter through the DFKs like nothing else can.

Its all about tactics.

I personally hoped for a very powerful axe to handed sword units, and some spears. Instead we got a typical catoliks whith powerful FK, DFK and CK. I expected infatry heavy armies, and i got cav heavy instead.

I'm sorry, are we playing the same game? Denmark has 9 different infantry units and only 2 light (Including Viking Raiders, which in my book, can hardly be called "light"). No other faction has more then 8 infantry units and their axemen are only bested by some of the late noble swordsmen. They almost total lack of middle age spearmen are annoying at best, thou combining high attack/AP axes and high defence swordsmen makes up for some of it.

The fact that they late cav's, are par with every other faction, is a general game flaw, in that it bases most late cavs on guildhouses and general building (thus standardizing all factions to FKs, CKs and small variety of noble/religious knights). Thou and interesting note, the Norse War Clerics's AP proficiency is quite unique and actually put them at par with any other highend cav, if fighting heavy armored units and not charging.

Still working on that "Norse Archer" post

[SeekerDK]

Norse Archer thread :)
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=93479

[Iavorios]

Ok. I dont understand why wold someone use heavy infantry for flanking when you have CK or norse war clerics, or even FK. It is possible, but not as effective. In fact in all my battles the cav does the killing. I use DFK to kill spearmen and to fight on the walls only. Using heavy cav is much more fun, more effective and way more easy. Only 4 or 6 units of heavy cav can rout and kill the enemy if it is pin down by the rest of your troops. I will love to use heavy infantry only when i am certain that they will kill the enemy easily and without constant micromanage. Like the JHI (except in 1.02 ver.) .O and for the last time- 2 handed units in this game are buged. Norse axemen should be unstoppable unit of man killing psihopats, but they are not.

[SeekerDK]

Ok. I dont understand why wold someone use heavy infantry for flanking when you have CK or norse war clerics, or even FK. It is possible, but not as effective. In fact in all my battles the cav does the killing. I use DFK to kill spearmen and to fight on the walls only. Using heavy cav is much more fun, more effective and way more easy. Only 4 or 6 units of heavy cav can rout and kill the enemy if it is pin down by the rest of your troops.

Using your cavs to hunt down archers makes more sens to me and cavs only really makes sens if the have enough room for a full lance charge, which is not always the case. From my perspective, Axemen and dismounted Huscarls are still very acceptable choices for flanking units.

I will love to use heavy infantry only when i am certain that they will kill the enemy easily and without constant micromanage. Like the JHI (except in 1.02 ver.)

One might dare to dream :) I agree, that it is less then optimal in multiplayer battles, where you can't pause for micromanagement and sure, it can be a hassle, but also well worth the effort.

O and for the last time- 2 handed units in this game are buged. Norse axemen should be unstoppable unit of man killing psihopats, but they are not.

Well, it was actually the first time I've read it, but I must say i suspected it and totally agree. But even thou the don't live up to their stats, it doesn't make them useless and when used correctly, they're still a darn good unit.
FollowUp: Found a fix for the 2H unit animation bug: http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=74094 thou looks like it's made for 1.0 and 1.1, so not sure if it works on 1.3 (will try to find time to test).

[rvg]

A word about Viking Raiders: they RULE! They are cheap to recruit, they come in large numbers (112 men on large unit size) and they get 3(!) armor upgrades.
Raiders with 3 armor upgrades beat fully upgraded Dismounted Feudal Knights into bloody pulp. Raiders are great for taking and defending walls, chopping up *any* melee infantry, they are very easy to retrain and being a low level unit they gain experience like crazy? Dismounted Huscarls? Norse Axemen? Nah, Raiders get a much better bang for the buck. By the time I dismiss my raiders, I am ready to replace them with Obudshaers, Arquebusiers and Serpentines. Pre-gunpowder though, it is all about the raiders. My typical army would have 12 Raiders, 4 Norse Archers, 2 Catapults, and a couple of Generals (or a general + feudal knight/war cleric).

[Sebastian Seth]

I started with these:

1. Marry princess to english heir.

2. Peace with HRE and Poland as long as possible.

General 1: Hamburg -> Maddeburg -> Settin -> Brugges -> Flanders -> Caernavon -> Dublin -> Castle in north of Scottland
General 2: Oslo -> Stockholm -> Riga -> Helsinki -> Castle below Riga -> Kiev

At this point I had strong alliance with the english and option to attack russia whit out excommunication. The economics where good and I used dismounted huscarls and norse archers as core units. Im a firm believer in mercenery forces and usually at some point the original viking army has been switched to all mercenery force.

General 2: Cordoba

I had new family members at the time. One assembling force to attack novogrod in helsinki and few in Aarhus assempling force for reinforcing new russian front. And the general 2 from dumbling/caernavon was in crusading army that just took Cordoba. (Aim of the crusade was antioch but I usually take out quite a few settlements on the way.)

This is point where computer ai did some stupid moves.
- Polish sieged Riga with few units and took the castle below riga.
- French attacked Brugges and took it.
- Scottish Sieged castle in north of edinburgh.
- French attacked the english castle of Caen.

- I retaliated Riga from helsinki and attacked setting from Aarhus.
- English landed near the scottish and I used them as reinforcements to repel the scottish (happened twice).
- I turned my army in Kiev around and attacked polish castle near Krakow and after that the polish kapital Krakow.
- I send another of the new family members to attack Bruges and got it back. After that I took paris and Rhein as well. (France where going strong on english and there was very weak militia defence).
- I send the other family member from Aarhus to attack rest of the polish settlements.

By this time I was exomunicated and in war with France, Poland, Scottland and Portugal. And also had very bad relations with HRE, Spain, Milan and Venice.

I tried to reconciliate with the pope and cease fire with the natios I was in war with but me efforts was not met from the opposite site.

I had quite a few family members at that point (or actually quite little but I tend to build one stack army to every one so they where quite good military power). So I tought I eliminate the catholic factions that cause me trouble and then retry to reconciliate.

- I took out the portugese, french and polish. This lead to war with milan, HRE and spain. I avoided the conflict against spain and stayed on defence there. Against milan I attacked straight away because their army is largely based on italian militia and genoese crossbowmen. Dismounted huscarls, huscarls, norse swordsmen and norse archers are really nice force against them. This maybe because the faction leader was over 10 star general with 8 dread and the huscarles where silver/gold veterans.

I had so much family members that I could actually start war agaisnt ordodox nations. Russians where quite hard since I had to run around eastern europe conquering these small castles but I got them destroyed finaly. I attacked constantinopole from the sea right after that too.

After english king died I had control of edinburg as well. The english back attacked me right after in france and I took everything in brittain as revenge. English got caen but I got it back later on with the forces from london. Killed english in bretagne for good.

Destroyed Factions: France, Portugal, HRE, Poland, Russia, Scottland, England, Milan and Papacy(?).
In war with: Constantinopole, Spain, Hungary, Sicily, Moors, Egypt.

Theres definedly something wrong with the AI and its diplomatics. I only wanted to war against the Islamic and ordodox factions but the AI decided otherwice. Pope is stubbarn as well, when it comes to amount of christians I control and the amount of popes I killed. I should be able to choose next pupet pope.

I didnt want to go to this but they forced me by stupid attacks. None of them got excommunicated.

[Paladin1965]

Just finished a Dane short campaign. Money was a little tight at first, but was not a concern in later turns. Turned the northern factions (Oslo and the like) into my viking factories. Waited for the HRE to turn on me; unfortunately, the Russians and the Poles chose to do so at the same time, but was able to handle it.

[locked_thread]

edit

[kitbogha]

I was a bit bored the other day and looking through my old saves to see if anything struck me I could finish. I saw a Danes game I had forgetten all about. I can't even remember starting it. However, I loaded it and found I was on turn 102 with 15 provinces spaced between Scandinavia, Britain, Northern Europe (Caen, Antwerp, Bruges, Hamburg etc) and Jerusalem. It was one of the first campaigns I played and I have obviously picked up a few tricks (often through fellow generals on this site).
After a couple of sessions I am now at turn 123 and have 26 settlements. My expansion has been largely at the expense of Sicily and Milan, who had the bad luck to be excommunicated. Also I have taken the opportunity to take almost all the Egyptian provinces, except the one at the bottom of the map (name eludes me) and Jedda which I have an army marching on as I type. An Alliance with the Moors has strengthened my Western flank. My standing with the Pope has shot right up-it was poor at the recommencement of the campaign-due to dealing with the rogue Catholic factions and the Infidels. Due to my perfect relationship with the Holy Father I can now pick my targets. Someone is always getting themselves excommunicated and if not I can pick off Muslim factions from my Middle East bases. Jerusalem is always unruly and costly to pacify so I simply removed my garrison-after stripping it off any buildings of value and left it to rebel. I hold Gaza and Alleppo so can easily and quickly build an army to retake it if required to by the Pope.
The only fly in the ointment is my extended borders in Northern Europe and their vulnerability to attack from France and HRE, who I am allied to but knowing those sneaky continentals I can not rest easy! An excuse for war with France would be welcomed-currently as well as being my allies they have a high standing with the Pope-as it would enable me to convert a few of my castles to cities in Britain, Caen etc and reduce my garrisons along those borders in Northern Europe. Next moves? Consolidate in the Levant, prepare for war with the Moors-I must remember to spam out some priests from Egypt to smooth the way-, advance down the Italian peninsula while the Sicilians and Milan are still on bad terms with The Pope, take Ajaccio and Cagliari in preparation for war with Moors and as launching pad for attacks into Spain. Build up settlement on eastern Scandinavian coast-?Gothenburg-for forays into Russian held lands, maintain good relations with Poland and HRE for the time being.
My impressions of the faction:
1) The faction starts in a decent strategic position with expansion possible on all sides. Alliances with France and HRE can enable expansion across the English channel to North of Scotland, down to Hamburg and across to Bruges and Antwerp taking only rebel strongholds. Then the choice is yours:there's money to be made in Britain and the opportunity I missed to take on a still weak France leaving opportunities to the South and East. I also did not take advantage of the Danes seafaring reputation and launch assaults into the vastnesses of Russia-there are lots of rebel settlements in the Baltic states, which would be an excellent bridgehead both for trade and a war against the Russians.
2) The heavy infantry is the strongest side of the army. Viking raiders (as has been stated here) are a very good, cheap backbone for your army. They have high stats for attack and reasonable stats for defense. I have found much of the roster to be fairly bog standard and unadventurous. I like cavalry and artillery and enjoyed a fine win against the Sicilians just now grinding down their infantry with bombardment from a trebuchet, three bombards and four sets of ribaults then piling into them from both sides with six units of feudal knights and my Generals bodyguard-the routing sicilians were truly a beautiful sight to behold! I am using sword staff militia and norse archers as garrison troops.The troops are reliable but unadventurous.
3) For some reason other factions tend to hold their alliances with you longer than in other games I have played-when I play as England I am forever being stabbed in the back by my "allies".
4) Once you are in the Popes good books, it is easy to move forward and stay popular.

I am enjoying this campaign, even though I can't remember starting it (serious lack of sleep due to new baby the likely cause!)