Bridges

[MJF]

Am i losing it, or does actually happen that when you fight a bridge battle (e.g. aragon into valencia) sometimes you only get one bridge in the first battle, but a few years later there can be two bridges there?

is this meant to mirror the development of the province or something?
or just one of those little quirks that makes computers so adorable :)

[General Dazza]

Hi MJF,
No, you're not losing it (well, AFAIK in any case ).

Sometimes you get 1, and sometimes you get 2. I think it just has to do with the fact that battles in a province don't necessarily happen at the same place (i.e. at the same point in the river).

Same goes for any province - the map for the province will change in back-to-back battles.

[MJF]

well, nice to know im not going ga ga.

i do find it quite annoying though. because if you prepare the perfect army for a one bridge battle, then find that there's two bridges after all, its not hard to find oneself up a certain river without a certain implement as the enemy simply runs around and gives you a smacking from behind.

ah well, cest la vie.

[General Dazza]

...or in that case, 'cest la mort' ....er not sure if right word there, but there you go.

I don't tend to be too worried whether its 1 or 2. In any bridge battle I usually take:
2-4 artillery (demi-culvs blow opposition to bits)
4-5 missile fire
3-4 defending infantry for defending bridgehead
2-4 attacking infantry
3-4 cav

You can effectively 'seal off' a second bridge with 1 decent defensive infantry unit, 1 missile unit and 1 attaqcking infantry unit.

I just finished a series of bridge battles against a quality rebel unit for control of Constantinople. Though they had decent infantry and cav units, I was able to wear then down as I had 2 catapults and 2 demi-culverins. In the first two battles I shredded their units (missile in particular), so that by the third they were unable to fire much of anything or field solid defensive units.

[MJF]

demi culverins?

i thought serpentines would be the weapon of choice. intended to kill people rather than walls. wouldnt larger cannon be inaccurate and too slow in firing?

[Omanes Alexandrapolites]

Hi MJF,
Serpentines are a little too accurate for a battle - they very often kill a unit a few men at a time which is a little slow - they also have a low range, which enables the AI to sit out of the way of their missiles. Surprisingly cannons, although less accurate, do cause alot more damage and have a higher chance of hitting their targets due to their huge missile size, their almighty power and their missiles ability to bounce into enemy units (especially useful if the missile lands short of their poor old target or the enemy is in a nice long densely packed line). Also, they have a good long range making it harder for the foes to sit far away and be unreachable! Hope this helps, cheers!

[Caerfanan]

...or in that case, 'cest la mort' ....er not sure if right word there, but there you go.

You're correct, General Dazza, c'est vraiment la mort, oui!

If I'm not mistaken, I think that the battle maps are "dynamically" generated, only they have basic statistics, like climate, land type, hills/mountains type, river yes/no, etc... So maybe that "bridge battle" would have sometimes one bridge, other times two bridges.

[DrZoidberg]

[QUOTE=Caerfanan]

If I'm not mistaken, I think that the battle maps are "dynamically" generated, only they have basic statistics, like climate, land type, hills/mountains type, river yes/no, etc... So maybe that "bridge battle" would have sometimes one bridge, other times two bridges.

Exactly. This is down to programing. If they would save every battlefield in a database it would swell to massive proportions fast.

[Caliburn]

The AI won't use the second bridge if you don't have units close enough to it, so blobbing your force next to the single bridge works well enough, and you can later send cavalry to strike the enemy at the rear, as they're attempting a charge. And yes, if you want to, just block the other crossing, as the enemy will usually use only one, and even 1-2 decent spears can hold quite long, so you can reinforce it with other forces.

[Caerfanan]

Exactly. This is down to programing. If they would save every battlefield in a database it would swell to massive proportions fast.

Mmmm, or one map per border? Which would give something like, err, 70*4-5 battlemaps?

[macsen rufus]

FYI battle maps are all saved in the game, there is a fixed range. They're not big files, actually, seem to be just a collection of "texture references" which call up the graphics from the textures folder, and depending on the climate type, different tiles will be called - so the map can be the "same" map yet still have temeprate/lush/arid variants from the same map file.

At the start of battle, the game will pull out a random map from the group which is appropriate to the battle (province and border info) - ie terrain type, climate, whether it has a river or not etc. The map groups contain mostly single-bridge maps, but there are a few double-bridge ones, so it will sometimes randomly select one bridge, other times it will randomly select two bridges. Any apparent "development" over time is purely coincidental.

For a bit of real fun in a two-bridge battle, line up your artillery between the two bridges, then send a fast cav unit running between the two bridges

[caravel]

The two bridge maps are an easy exploit for the player. Send your faction leader alone, but out of range near one of the bridges, usually the one nearest the main enemy force, and cross at the other bridge that the AI has left unmanned for an easy win.

[bamff]

In my opinion, it would add to the drama of a bridge battle if the AI defender were able to destroy the bridge using seige engines of whatever type.

That would really put the pressure on the attacker to take the bridge quickly (ie before it was destroyed) AND secure the other bank.

Just a random thought.

[General Dazza]

demi culverins?

i thought serpentines would be the weapon of choice. intended to kill people rather than walls. wouldnt larger cannon be inaccurate and too slow in firing?

I haven't had serpentines or organ guns yet (am about to in my current campaign though - and am looking forward to it!). But demi-culvs are excellent at bridge battles.

They have an extra advantage in their large range. Often in a bridge battle the enemy will sit just outside missile range on the oppostite bank, and if you have catapults they'll sit just outside catapult range. That means you have to send troops over the bridge to draw in their forces before you can unleash your missiles. But when I've used demi-culvs the enemy will sit much further back, but still within DC range. So I am able to shred them with artillery (and DCs do a solid amount of damage - often I'd see one shot kill 5-7 men) before I move my men over. And because the enemy is so far back, my men were over the bridge before their missiles were fired.

They are quite effective. In the first 2 bridge battles I fought, I reduced the enemy from 700-odd to about 300-odd, but importantly, with few missile troops and much of their elite troops shredded.

[The Unknown Guy]

As a general rule, a culverin beats a serpentine 9 times out of ten in any scenario. In fact, I find it annoying, as having the same building times makes building demiculvs doubtful (I think they have a pinch more of ammo) and serpentines a waste of time. In fact, I´ve pondered lowering the ammo of culvs dramatically, and leaving the ammount of demis somewhat around in the middle. That way, you could either use the Culverins, mostly aimed at bringing down walls, but useful against people due to their sheer, serpentines (viceversa, better at bringing down people than walls) and demiculvs as a middleman.

As it is now you can use Culverins to storm into an enemy province, maul down their defenses, and assault their castle when they are trapped inside (which is actually useful: sometimes you want to take and/or pillage an enemy province before a relief force arrives)
Other possible tweaks:
-Making the culverin non-turnable, as the muslim siege cannon.
-Making the culverin turnable, but prone to explode, a crossbreed between the current culv and the bombard (doubtful)
-Decreasing build costs of serpentines to make them more frequent.

As for organ guns... I´ve never really found an use for them, but I was told that, a few ones, in a big castle, can hold it for years and years and deal humongous ammounts of damage to the would-be assaulters. They could also prove useful in a bridge battle, I guess, but a spear unit is more all-around. AKA: if you get a non-bridge battle you can still shield your projectile users. If you do get a bridge battle they can fill the gap and turn it into a killing zone. I don't see the need of blowing up bridges (althrough it would be cool, and interesting, I grant), as, as it is now, a bridge battle is a fragfest (unless something akin to what Caravel said is used, but I didn't know about that...)

[macsen rufus]

I wonder what difficulty settings people play on, as various accounts of two-bridge battles rarely match with my experience. I always play on hard or expert, which I know gives the AI a bit more tactical nous on the battlefield, and I generally find that if the AI is defending a two-bridge map, then both bridges are covered by its forces. Admittedly on one (usually the remote one from the starting position) the force is small, maybe a single spear unit plus a single missile unit, but it is very rarely, if ever, left undefended, and the main army will move across if it looks like I might be trying to take that bridge (hence the advice above about running fast cav between the two bridges )

In attacking though the AI doesn't seem capable of using the second bridge to try a flanker, even on expert setting. Even so I do still tend to keep it covered, for that one day when I rely on it...

As for organ guns, there was a thread dedicated to their uses or otherwise. I generally find though that in bridge battles, even when I've had them available, I've tended not to deploy them. The main reason being that there were enemy artillery pieces on the opposite bank. A catapult out-ranges an organ gun and can splat it easily, and a ballista could pick off its crew safely. Even arbalests can reach an organ gun unless it is one of those long bridges which are so rare. Now, if I was defending against an army composed of Swiss armoured pikemen then I would deploy the OG, but with any sort of serious (or even half-serious) missile component against it I would probably save it for another day.

As for the other types for use against men, I think the serpentine generally wins on accuracy, certainly once it has a bit of valour, it will usually hit the unit you aim at, whereas the culverins etc will occasionally land a shot somewhere close enough for the target unit to hear the bang, but generally they needn't fear for their lives....

[Bregil the Bowman]

well, nice to know im not going ga ga.

i do find it quite annoying though. because if you prepare the perfect army for a one bridge battle, then find that there's two bridges after all, its not hard to find oneself up a certain river without a certain implement as the enemy simply runs around and gives you a smacking from behind.

ah well, cest la vie.

Well, like a lot of MTW, it makes sense if you think about it. Rivers tend to be long windy things (borders too) and it makes sense not to attempt a crossing at exactly the same place every time. In the run up to Crecy the English and French armies expended a lot of energy looking at the various crossings of the Seine and the Marne, trying to pick suitable ground for a fight or flight.

The fact that you have picked exactly the right army for one type of battle is exactly the reason your opponent may want to fight elsewhere!

[General Dazza]

As for the other types for use against men, I think the serpentine generally wins on accuracy, certainly once it has a bit of valour, it will usually hit the unit you aim at, whereas the culverins etc will occasionally land a shot somewhere close enough for the target unit to hear the bang, but generally they needn't fear for their lives....

I'm not so sure about that macsen rufus. I find that culverins have quite good accuracy given their power. Just last night I won a battle against the Swedes. They lost about 1000 men, of which about 75 fell to my demi-culverin and culverin. Given that they weren't firing throughout and still had ammo left at the end, that's a pretty good return, and would beat the hell out of a catapult.

In the bridge battles I mentioned earlier, the demi-culv hit it's target much more often than the catapult, and did much more damage (usually 5-7 killed as opposed 3-4 on average I reckon).

[The Unknown Guy]

Why do the River battle carnages remind me of "The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly", I wonder??