Help with a viking battle

[gaijinalways]

I recently started a new campaign with the Danes (my last campaign with the English kept crashing). I took over Sweden (the enemy retreated to Norway), and a few turns later I decided this should be mine as well. First time I attacked I brought a bad general (gluttony, etc). Reloaded and hit bad weather. Came the last time, thought, okay, good weather 420 men (240 archers, 100 peasants, 60 vikings, and 20 royal knights) to 360 (all vikings). Battle started off well, shooting up some vikings. One stack finally got closer (whittled down to 37 or so) and attacks. I have 100 peasants, 60 vikings, and my archers who were out of ammo attack. What happens? My vikes get slaughtered and rout, the peasants take heavy losses (down to 23) and rout, and some of the archers start routing beofre even seeing any action. Gah !

Maybe these guys are too tough, though the AI general didn't have so many stars!

Any ideas?

[gaijinalways]

Oh, expert, early campaign.

[Innocentius]

As long as almost a quarter of your men are peasants it's pretty hopeless I'd say. Peasants can pretty much only be used for distracting the enemy for a few seconds or flank (and they are even bad for flanking!). Build up a little, and replace the peasants with random Viking units or FMAA (although even they don't fare ar too well against vikings). Norway is a very poor province anyway, and it's not really worth the fight. It's really only good since it's a pretty isolated province that is hard to reach, this makes it ideal for safely producing ships.

[caravel]

There are a few potential problems there. The first, and most obvious, is that you fielded peasants. These are for garrisons only. You can take them into battle but only as a means to outnumber the enemy. all in all though, they are best avoided.

The next issue is that you had only 60 vikings to their 360. Your 20 Royal Knights would never be a match for them. The peasants and archers are a none entity as once the vikings give chase there's not alot you can do. Archers and Peasants haven't a hope in hell fighting in melee against them. The Viking unit is a very strong one for the early era, that is available quickly. It is in essence a more lightly armoured, non elite, higher morale version of Feudal Men-at-Arms with an armour piercing weapon. Personally I would have bribed them.

The final problem is the difficulty level. The enemy have a morale bonus over you when playing on expert.

Was your general of 2 stars or more?

[Martok]

When invading Norway, I always make sure that I bring with at least as many Vikings as the Norwegians. As the other guys have said, peasants are essentially useless, and I find archers to be of only limited utility in offensive battles - particularly against Vikings.

Given that you're playing on Expert (and the enemy therefore gets a +4 morale bonus), you should really just bring in a lot of Vikings and overwhelm the Norwegians with numbers. Leave your archers and peasants at home!

[Adrian II]

Leave your archers and peasants at home!

Sound advice. You should only bring Archers to Norway if you get fair weather, if you find a good hill to park them on, and if you get a chance to draw the enemy out of formation and into their line of fire long enough to do some real damage.

In other words, only if pigs can fly...

[Geezer57]

Leave your archers <DELETED> at home!

While I agree wholeheartedly with the sentiment to bring at least parity in heavy infantry to this scenario, I just don't see any real benefit to leaving your missile troops behind. Since the play level is at Expert (with its morale bonus against you), you'll need something to swing morale in your favor - and that's just what the archers provide, as there's a morale drop for the enemy while under missile fire.

The extra numbers provided by bringing the archers also swings morale further in your favor, as you gain the benefit of outnumbering.

Additionally, if you're short on cavalry, the archers (as they're fast infantry) can substitute on the chase after enemy units are broken by your heavies. This lets your now-disengaged heavies gang up on the enemy hold-outs, dropping in on their flanks or rear.

[Martok]

While I agree wholeheartedly with the sentiment to bring at least parity in heavy infantry to this scenario, I just don't see any real benefit to leaving your missile troops behind. Since the play level is at Expert (with its morale bonus against you), you'll need something to swing morale in your favor - and that's just what the archers provide, as there's a morale drop for the enemy while under missile fire.

I realize that too, but as Adrian said a bit earlier:

You should only bring Archers to Norway if you get fair weather, if you find a good hill to park them on, and if you get a chance to draw the enemy out of formation and into their line of fire long enough to do some real damage.

That's a lot of "ifs", and usually at least 2 out of 3 of them never happen (at least for me).

Finding a hill generally isn't hard, of course, since you're fighting in Norway. In regards to the other two variables, however.... The weather rarely cooperates -- I get rained on more often than not --and drawing the Norwegians into the archers' killing zone is extremely difficult, as their Vikings are usually too quick to engage my men in melee, and I try not to shoot my own men if I can help it.

The extra numbers provided by bringing the archers also swings morale further in your favor, as you gain the benefit of outnumbering.

Additionally, if you're short on cavalry, the archers (as they're fast infantry) can substitute on the chase after enemy units are broken by your heavies. This lets your now-disengaged heavies gang up on the enemy hold-outs, dropping in on their flanks or rear.

That's true, but they're still unlikely to get the chance to serve their primary purpose. In the end, they're simply much more likely to be a liability than an asset, and so I rarely bring them along.

[Ironside]

As caravel noted, the easiest way to take Norway quickly is to bribe them. Those vikings are a tough nut to crack and you don't really got the manpower for it early on.

[gaijinalways]

Thanks for the idaeas and suggestions. Couple of comments;

I don't have an emissary yet (Danes, on expert you start with very little).

FMAA might be aways off yet.

The idea to bring more vikings, doable, but I will have to wait a few years. Maybe best choice.

As to bribing, might be difficult, I'm not flush with cash.

[Adrian II]

Thanks for the idaeas and suggestions. Couple of comments;

I don't have an emissary yet (Danes, on expert you start with very little).

FMAA might be aways off yet.

The idea to bring more vikings, doable, but I will have to wait a few years. Maybe best choice.

As to bribing, might be difficult, I'm not flush with cash.

Your approximate plan of action is as follows:

Denmark --> Longboats --> Trade --> more Vikings --> conquest of Norway --> more Vikings --> conquest of Finland --> Church bonus --> more Vikings --> world conquest --> sexual and culinary oblivion

[naut]

Also there's the fact that on expert your men get -4 morale IIRC, (on easy you get +4 morale IIRC).

[Martok]

By the way gaijinalways, I would feel remiss if I didn't advise you that Innocentius has a point about Norway not being worth invading.

It *is* worth taking....eventually. However, it's really only worthwhile to do so once you've started to get your fleet up and running, as you can then take advantage of the province's trade goods. Until you reach that point, however, Norway really isn't worth the effort it takes to conquer, especially given that you usually have to defeat 360 Vikings in order to do so.

Therefore, you might want to actually hold off on invading it, and instead focus your efforts (and your precious cash) elsewhere in the early part of your game -- such as building a few longboats, perhaps.

Also there's the fact that on expert your men get -4 morale IIRC, (on easy you get +4 morale IIRC).

Close, although not quite. On Easy difficulty, the player gets that +4 morale bonus in batle. On Expert, the AI factions get that bonus.

[mfberg]

A minimum of 2 RK units is necessary to defeat them. If you are willing to whittle them down over time you can take 1 RK and an archer and just kill some and retreat to wait for the next battle. With 2 RK, 1 archer and 1 spear you can do some serious damage or even kill them off in one battle. 1 RK behind and to the flank of your archers, spears in front, and the other RK to lead the vikings on a merry chase in front of your bows. When he charges your spear line with 1 unit use 1 RK to distract his other two Vikings while your second RK brings the hammer down. It is easier with 1 spear, 1 archer, and 3 RK, but it takes a little while for those sons to come of age.

mfberg

[Deus ret.]

also don't forget that Vikings do enjoy a valor bonus in Norway IIRC and thus some of those 360 (the ones which started there) are even better than regular ones.

I also only invade Norway by the time my fleet's up (=when I have a foot in the game) and I have amassed some spare troops to force them into their petty castle: the AI -will- retreat if you only field enough men . although I admit that the valor bonus renders the province more of a target for the Scandinavian factions, making it more tempting for them to grab it early on.

[Adrian II]

1 RK behind and to the flank of your archers, spears in front, and the other RK to lead the vikings on a merry chase in front of your bows.

Now that's brinkmanship, Old Geek. If you withdraw your RK before those Vikings one time too many, they will rout and keep running all the way across the border. Their leader will get the 'Good Runner' or 'Not so Bold' vice, which, if he happens to be your ruler or crown prince, spells trouble for your fledgling dynasty.

So, this sounds just like the sort of thing Adrian II might try.

[Martok]

although I admit that the valor bonus renders the province more of a target for the Scandinavian factions, making it more tempting for them to grab it early on.

That's true. Fortunately, it usually doesn't take overly long to get the Danes' trade income going, so you can still conquer Norway fairly early in the game (and take advantage of its Viking bonus).

@AdrianII:

[Adrian II]

@AdrianII:

Besides, it is fun (and an ideal challenge for veterans) to try and conquer the known world with a dynasty that is entirely made up of Brain-Dead Inbreds, Screaming Girls and Mouth-Foaming Perverts.

Yippeeeeh !!

[Martok]

Besides, it is fun (and an ideal challenge for veterans) to try and conquer the known world with a dynasty that is entirely made up of Brain-Dead Inbreds, Screaming Girls and Mouth-Foaming Perverts.

Yippeeeeh !!

Heh. You forgot the unbalanced, elephant-impregnated paranoids that suck on horseshoes.

Kidding aside, though, I agree that while it can be an interesting challenge, I still try and keep those guys out of my ruling family whenever possible -- I can't help but feel sorry for the poor men under their command!

[caravel]

I remember sending a horse shoe sucking, perverted coward, that had been badly shortchanged when it came to grandparents, off to Lithuania (ouch! best place for him though) several times, and I kept getting him back. Obviously Lithuania didn't want him either... not even for archery practice.

[Adrian II]

Kidding aside, though, I agree that while it can be an interesting challenge, I still try and keep those guys out of my ruling family whenever possible -- I can't help but feel sorry for the poor men under their command!

I swear it is a nice challenge. Just make a vow to never use your Royalty in battle. From then on you face a whole new set of problems. You have to conquer territory, pull off hazardous Crusades and build like mad to maintain Loyalty among you Generals, and this with very little income because you have to keep taxes to a minimum. You end up with a bloated, rambling empire held together by seven-star Peasant Generals and a drooling vegetable in the middle.
Nice.

[caravel]

On the subject of norway again. I do take it, but usually via a bribe or with a sufficient force. The +1 valour vikings are good to have.

[Agent Miles]

With the VI expansion, the Danes can build horsemen. The first two things I build in Denmark are a 20% farm upgrade and a Horse Farm. I build a force with one horsemen unit per Viking and Norway is mine by 1100.

[Martok]

With the VI expansion, the Danes can build horsemen. The first two things I build in Denmark are a 20% farm upgrade and a Horse Farm. I build a force with one horsemen unit per Viking and Norway is mine by 1100.

I usually bring Horsemen when I invade Norway as well. They're a suprisingly effective unit in battle, at least for me. Not that you want them to tackle RK's head-on or anything, but I was delighted to discover that they make excellent flankers.

[Sensei Warrior]

I just recently conquered Norway in a Danish Campaign on Expert/Early. I had the heir apparant, 2 archers, 4Vikings, 2Woodsmen. The Archers did help to whittle them down, the Woodsmen slammed into the Vikings flank along with the Prince. It didn't cause a rout, and I had to slog through the rest of the battle. I suffered considerable losses, and had to reinforce the garrison afterwards to pacify the Provence.

In expert on am reconsidering my opinion of the value of Norway, valoured up Vikings or no. I did put a 5dread gov in charge who helped them stay loyal. His Acumen was 2 but its not like Norway is a moneymaker.

[Martok]

In expert on am reconsidering my opinion of the value of Norway, valoured up Vikings or no. I did put a 5dread gov in charge who helped them stay loyal. His Acumen was 2 but its not like Norway is a moneymaker.

Well Norway *is* a moneymaker -- you just gotta have some boats in the water first. Once I have a halfway-decent trade network going, Norway easily pulls down 1000+ florins a year.

That said, I understand where you're coming from. Norway's nascant farm income is hardly worth the price of being able to train +1 Vikings.

[gaijinalways]

That was the reason I initially wanted it, for the trade value. The viking bonus might be useful, but I am playing a GA game.

I ended up holding off on taking it as I build up my trade and expand around the world. I have built up my buildings as well, so I am just waiting for more ships, and then I will decide whether to stab HRE in the back or try and wipe out the Norso. I have been sitting and just turtling, have two well built up provinces now with a decent army in Denmark for defensive purposes (at the moment,anyway).

I did try one other batle that I won with 60 vikings, 100 spearmen, and 360 archers, and 20 royal knights. I won, but took some heavy losses those vikings move fast, and even when they are whittled down, they fight on and on! ! So, I gave up on Norway for now, I may take it if I want to grab another territory now that my trade is up and running.

[Deus ret.]

That said, I understand where you're coming from. Norway's nascant farm income is hardly worth the price of being able to train +1 Vikings.

this is getting off-topic now....but speaking of it, while playing PMTW I noticed that acumen seemed to increase non-farming income (trade etc.) as well --- albeit at a somewhat less calculable rate. anyone got some hints on that? until last week-end, I was convinced that it was utterly sufficient to put low-acumen generals in charge of provinces like Norway who sport little farming but high trade income, but it seems to me now that this assumption was not entirely correct.

[caravel]

The trick with Norway is to get some spies trained as early as possible. I always develop it's trade and expand my fleets. So a castle in either Sweden or Denmark is vital in order to build that first brothel. The presence of a spy in the province will allow you to use a significantly smaller garisson, and save money on support costs. The use of +1 valour vikings in your armies will give you a distinct advantage over your neighbours in the early period. When playing as the Danes I never bother with Huscarles or any of the other units. In early My forces are mostly made up of vikings, armoured spearmen, woodsmen, vanilla archers, Royal Knights and horsemen. The Vikings I use as the rank and file infantry. They gain valour quickly and are cheaper to raise than Landsmenn and Huscarles. The woodsmen as devastating flankers that work well with the armoured spearmen and archers. Once the high era looms I tend to go for the usual catholic line up, as the Vikings begin to show their age. In the Viking the Danes have easily the most powerful, readily available unit of all the catholic factions at the start of the early era. They are rivalled perhaps only by the Spanish and their Jinetes.

(Going slightly offtopic here but, a very interesting English campaign can be had from the early era by invading Scotland and Ireland, and training armies that have Kerns, Gallowglasses, Clansmen and Fyrdmen as their backbone. Many players think of taking Wales and developing it and Mercia for the classic Billmen/longbow combo - it's been a long time since I've played an english campaign - but in the early period many neglect these great units opting instead for classic armies consisting only of the usual suspects and hobilars.

[Martok]

this is getting off-topic now....but speaking of it, while playing PMTW I noticed that acumen seemed to increase non-farming income (trade etc.) as well --- albeit at a somewhat less calculable rate. anyone got some hints on that? until last week-end, I was convinced that it was utterly sufficient to put low-acumen generals in charge of provinces like Norway who sport little farming but high trade income, but it seems to me now that this assumption was not entirely correct.

Governors and state officials improve *all* types of income, period.

That's why playing as the Eggies tends to be so ridiculous (albeit still very enjoyable) --their lands are real cash cows. With Antioch, Egypt, & Tripoli maxed out for trade and a Qadi al Quda with Acumen of 6 or better, I can pull down 10,000 florins per year from each of those provinces. Even Palestine will make me well over 1000 florins per year, even though it doesn't have any trade goods!

@Caravel: I hear what you're saying, but I still like to train Landsmen and Huscarles even though they're not really necessary. If for no other reason, they seem to turn out better governors than "vanilla" Vikings. Either way, though, the Danes are quite a lot of fun.