Is anyone else here as rotten a General as me?

[King Henry V]

Yes, 'tis true, though I absolutely love Medieval Total War to bits and consider it to be the finest game yet made by anyone, I must hang my head in shame and confess that when it comes to commanding large numbers of soldiers on the field of battle against the enemy, yours truly is not one of the Alexanders of this world.
I know it is a great pity, since from what I have heard and seen the tactical side of the game is also a great deal of fun, but I find that when I personally fight battles, they tend to be long-winded, indecisive and usually extremely costly to my forces, so much so that I have come to the conclusion that it is actually better for my empire to let the computer fight the battles for me, and so I merely concentrate on the strategic aspect, recruiting armies, shifting my pawns across the board and building an empire.
Am I alone in this pitiful situation? I give you full licence to mock me for my pathetic tactical skills.

[Haccapelite]

Well, I have to say that you shouldn't feel bad about that at all, since I don't believe that anyone on this forum, no matter how good they are now, were experts in the beginning. And actually the only way to develop your skills is through practice. So, as frustrating it might feel, you should begin to fight battles your self. If you don't feel confident at first, there are some ways how you can avoid ruining your campaings and continue to practice your skills:
1. You could try to fight personally just those battles that seem almost impossible to loose, eg. when you heavily outnumber the enemy, have superior quality of troops, or are fighting from an exeptionally strong defensive position. (like a very very steep hill or a bridge.)
2. Drop down the difficulty setting, this should make battles a lot easier to manage. IIRC the AI will also recruit crappier troops (not completely sure about this, correct if I'm wrong) which helps you a lot. Andon easy- difficulty, your troops gain a +4 morale, and enemy's also receive a penalty to their combat effectiveness, which is a little like a valour penalty.
3. You mentioned having trouble in commanding large numbers of units. This can be avoided by trying to fight only battles where you have a relatively small amount of units, like using only half a stack in fights. This might be hard, since the enemy would then usually outnumber you, but you can also combine this strategy with the first suggestion.
4. An easy way to get battle experience is to pick a faction that has a lot of rebel provinces around it, so that you can fight a lot without actually waging war against anyone who could pose a real threat to you. If you are playing unmodded MTW:VI, you could try either the Russian or Danish, who both have easy acces to rebel provinces and don't have to worrie about any other factions right away. Mods like the XL-mod, also include this kind of factions, even though the amount of factions is increased.
5. This one requires a little more skills, but after practicing a little you could try picking some faction that requires a lot of fighting to survive. Holy Roman Empire is one of these, although it can be pretty tough at first with low-tech armies and fighting off nearly the rest of the europe alone.. But a good compromise that offers many battles and also easy defensive positions, is England. You'll have to fight the french pretty soon, and you also have some nice rebel provinces to conquer on the British isles. And I have to say by my own experiences that the French also give lots of opportunities for great fighting experiences. (I just started my first campaing with hard with the French, and I have been fighting a lot in that game sofar.)
6. How could I forget it! Try custom battles. In custom battles you can choose both your and your enemy's army, so you can basically decide precicesly what kind of enemy you'll be facing. You can also begin with smaller armies on each side, so that you get a good feel about the things.

Im not sure how long you have been playing this game, so some of these suggestions, like dropping the difficulty might sound stupid, but you don't have to try every one of these ideas.

Whoa, my post is getting rather lengthy, so I'd better quit writing so that you wont exhaust yourself reading this post and will actually be able to do some fighting too.

[Martok]

King Henry, what a pleasure it is to see you here! It's not often I see you outside of the Frontroom -- welcome!

In regards to your query, I can assure you that you're not alone. I myself have never been more than an average field commander (and I'm sometimes downright lousy at attacking). I've rarely gotten those lopsided victories where the enemy loses 2000 men and I lose than 100; I'm usually happy if I've simply managed a [losses inflicted/losses incurred] ratio of 1:1.

I know I should probably be better than I am, given that I've been playing the game for 5 1/2 years now, but I've never really improved that much, for whatever reason. I suspect part of it is that I deliberately don't try overly hard, as I don't wish to be able to defeat the AI on a regular basis -- after all, where's the fun in that? That being said, however, I will also admit that I've probably always been just a bit slow on the tactical side of things -- Sun Tzu & Clausewitz I ain't.

[caravel]

I used to be pretty good playing battles and defensive ones in particular. I would rarely autocalc, except sieges - I never played sieges, and usually fight all battles myself.

In contrast my campaign management has always been poor and once it gets over a certain size I usually lose patience with it.

Nowadays I lack patience with the game as a whole which is why I no longer play it (bearing in mind that I had been playing it since 2002). Sadly I now play RTW again (I can hear Martok groaning in disbelief!) and I can say that RTW battles are not as strategic as MTW's but are still quite playable. For me the campaign map problem still exists though as it did in MTW; I simply lose the patience to manage everything and usually quit after a time. Automanagement just doesn't do it for me. I find leaving a settlement in the hands of the AI unacceptable and foolhardy.

In my opinion though, those that don't do well commanding battles have not tried enough. You have to go out there and lose in order to learn how to win. It is also important to get the hang of MTW's RPS (Rock/Paper/Scissors) system and use it to it's fullest. A lot of players don't do this.

There is a lot of advice floating around that centres on the usage of "hammer and anvil tactics" with "uber units". This works in the ideal situation. It works when you're ready and have lots of money coming in and those units have been trained. It doesn't work at all when you're the underdog, haven't trained these units and are losing money. Anyone can pump out, for example, JHI and bumrush them at the enemy, but it is far more satisfying to let the enemy come to you, waste themselves on your lines and under your missile fire and then have the JHI deliver the killer blow to the flank and rout the lot to be mopped up by your light cavalry. This way your entire army gains from battle and your JHI get their kills without having to slug it out head to head, taking more losses.

Also there is the small matter that there is no point in sending an expensive unit out to do a job that a cheaper unit can do and there is no point fighting a battle that can't be won anyway, or without huge losses. This is where new players will often go wrong: Losing a battle that a more experienced one will retreat from and believing that they had failed due to lack of ability.

There is also the matter of selecting a general. In MTW a good general is priceless and send your men into battle without one, or with a coward, and they will soon be turning tail and running away.

[ChaosLord]

I'm no great general myself, unless its in RTW/M2TW(where the reason is mostly horrible balance and worse AI). Whenever I find myself losing in a battle in MTW its one of two things, either i'm hugely outmatched or much more likely i've just been too eager. The urge to charge in is probably the cost of most losses i've had. When you fight, take your time to organize your lines wether on defense or attack. You can check the morale of your units before battle, keep those ones close to your general for his support and to rally them if needed. Be aware of what enemy unit you are going to fight with with which one of yours. Winning battles doesn't take complex manuevers or anything, just get a good formation going and support where needed. Use counters like armor-piercing or anti-cavalry to your advantage. Focus on maintaining a solid line to work on keeping your formation together. Resist the urge to rush madly after a routing enemy when they have reinforcements, the chances you'll tire them out and set yourself up for a rout is too great.

So to condense it, just take your time and use pause as much as needed. It may spoil the cinematic effect of things, but it allows much more control. Hope this helps.

[Roark]

Some tips, dude:

- As Cynwulf has already pointed out, matching up troops is essential. Learn which of your units are good against specific enemy unit types and you will fare much better. (For example: 1. Spears or polearms against enemy cavalry 2. Swords against enemy spears 3. Lightly-armoured infantry against enemy polearms 4. Axes against heavily armoured infantry)
- Pay attention to enemy valour before you hit the battlefield. Yeah, maybe they’re only feudal sargeants, but if they’ve got 5 valour, they will butcher your CMAAs. Bad match-up, haha...
- On defence, the ole “half-hex” of spears/polearms protecting your archers on a hill makes a good formation (keeping fast shock infantry and cavalry on the flanks to counterattack).
- On offence, try to break up the enemy formation by drawing units out with missile cavalry before you launch your main attack. Charge vulnerable and exposed archer units with cavalry to make the main assault less costly in terms of missile damage.
- Try to maintain an advantage of manoevrability. (ie: Don’t pack an all-infantry army against an enemy with lots of cavalry, as you’ll never catch them.)
- Cut off the serpent’s head!! If you see the enemy general wandering around by himself, try to kill him before he can be supported by others.
- Maintain a terrain advantage wherever possible. Even on expert, the enemy can sometimes be drawn into narrow passes and ravines. Give your archers as much time as possible to tax the enemy before melee is joined in earnest.
- PAUSE. Pause is your friend, especially when everything starts to go a bit chaotic and you need to get your head together, or when the battle is spread out over a large area. The camera can be a bit slow sometimes. Hit the pause button and deliver multiple orders before rejoining the game.
- If your general is inferior, your army is smaller, and your units are inferior, just walk away. Even if you choose to go to the battlefield just to see what his formation/position is like, you can still walk away. No harm, no foul. Just plain, sensible Sun Tzu.

[Xehh II]

I am a bad general too, I'm only good at small scale battles, when it comes to bigger armies, I'm useless.

[gaijinalways]

I come across as a fairly competent general at times, and have gotten decnt kill ratios, somtimes losing maybe 500 to 3000 or so. It really depends on who you're facing, the level you're playing on, the terrain, and etc.

Several players have given you tips already, but a reminder is, to get good at something, you do need to practice. I find when I don't play MTW for a while (I rotate the games I play, when my work and wife allow it), I play historical battles and custom battles just to get practice with dealing with troops again.

Another thing I always notice is that baiting tactics often work, hence a reason I like using archer cavs and regular cavs. I often lose quite a few of them (sometimes in the heat of a battle you forget about these guys), but I figure for the havoc they cause and the enemy lines they allow to be broken, it's well worth the casulaities.

Play around with the battles, I love managing the economy too (used to play civ), but fighting the battles is what makes MTW rewarding and memorable. Losing sometimes happens, and sometimes I'll not use the reload button if the battle was close and we both took casualities (I've had battles I've lost where the enemy casuality rate was much higher, a kind of moral victory). You can always reload and replay battles to work on improving your tactics.

[naut]

Ever considered using small unit scale? It halves the amount of men in a unit, which makes the battles considerably easier and quicker.

[Ciaran]

Very true, Rythmic.

I´ve just recently started a new campaign on Large (100 men in infantry, 166 in spears/pikes, 66 in cavalry, that´s Large, right?) after playing on the level one below that for all time before, and the size does matter - the larger units are much more cumbersome to handle and, especially when drawn out into two ranks, tend to stumble into the enemy with their flanks long before I´m halfway ready. So reducing the unit size can actually help a lot to get the hang on the game.

And I believe MTW is way less forgiving to wrong decisions on the field than RTW and M2TW are. One single wrong move can decide a battle, a single unit routed can lead to an unstoppable avalance.

[PrestigeX]

As far as the battles go, I certainly understand how it can be difficult to organize huge formations of troops.

My best advice for you is to Make sure that your army only has. 3-4 different unit types. it gets confusing when an army is not only huge, but it has 12 different types of units = just makes it a mess to re-organize after the fight is done, and to decide how the heck to deploy them.

in your reference to Alexander, well.. he basically had 3-4 different unit types too.. ( Phalangites (the pikemen) , Companion Cav. (heavy cav), Peltasts (skirmisher/light inf), and Allied Horse (regular cav.).

when i play as byzantine (for example) my army is only.. Trebizond archers, Byzantine Infantry, Kataphratoi ( or pronoloi aloi whatever they're called lol), and then maybe as 4th units.. Varangian Guards.. or Catapults.

As the english, my army is only.. Longbowmen, Billmen, and then Knights of whatever kind.. as a 4th unit to the army, I might include some light cav, or some Chilvaric swordsmen.

i hope you understand what i meant by the example.. I don't mean 3-4 different kinds of units by "general type" (ie. horse, infantry, spear, bows etc..) I litterally mean, 3-4 types by exact unit type.

[Lokiss]

I'm with Cynwulf here in so far as I'm pretty good at everything but sieges; and god help me if I try one without at least a ballista. We're talking 10:1 casualties here... minimum

Those arrow/catapult towers are killer, especially since I love spamming Feudal Sgrts and Spearmen. One good shot with a catapult tower and... boom.

[Innocentius]

I'm either a good general or a completely average one, I can't really make that judgement myself. I usually play on Normal and most of the time I achieve rather good kill ratios; between 10:3 and 10:1 if defending and between 4:1 and 1:1 when attacking. This is mostly since I've become rather good at interpreting and predicting the strategic map, which makes me able to pick my battles more often than not. When it is I who am surprised and forced to fight a battle I didn't expect/wanted, I either retreat, suffer a defeat or manage to win a pyrrhic victory.

If you want to be able(r) to choose your battles, you could deploy the "levies" tactic, which means that you simply gather a great number of cheap but useless troops (Peasants in Vanilla or VI, Spearmen/Slavic levies in XL or other mods) and keep them for a single campaign. The AI counts number of troops rather than quality, so with 2,000 Spearmen you can scare an enemy force of 800 CFK away, even though they would normally win. This is also a great way to force the AI to attack you, which is preferable since defensive battles tend to be a lot easier: gather a large army containing a core of good units that you would normally use and than excess amounts of "levied" units for your invasion and then once you've ousted the enemy from the province, disband your superfluos troops and provoke the enemy to attack your much smaller elite core of troops, assuring you an easy victory with a good casualty rate.

[m52nickerson]

The biggest thing that I have learned is the be patience. When ever I rush a battle I have much larger casualties, or may even lose. This is particularly important when attacking.

[gaijinalways]

When ever I rush a battle I have much larger casualties, or may even lose. This is particularly important when attacking.

This is very true, patience definately helps.

As to the earlier comments about deploying less troop types, yes, simplicity does make things easier, though I prefer sometimes various bow types (cross, albs, regular archers) and some sword and spear types.

As to cavs, if they are the same types, that's fine, but I often pick up mercs in some cases as I tend not to specifically raise cav familes. I think tropps that are similar can be grouped for deployment in battle, so handing them isn't that difficult.

[Ciaran]

The biggest thing that I have learned is the be patience. When ever I rush a battle I have much larger casualties, or may even lose. This is particularly important when attacking.

Indeed. Move your army in small steps, and keep everything in formation. That is much, much more important than it is in M2TW or, to a lesser degree, though, RTW. Especially if you´re using units which gain a rank bonus, i.e. spears and pikes. And I suggest taking Frogbeasteggs Beginner Guide, and there the section on the battlefield, to heart. It helped me immensely when I started playing MTW. I still make the mistake to send in my knights prematurely, though.

[Agent Miles]

Save your battles and replay them. This way, win or lose, you can review what happened and actually learn from your mistakes. By zooming in and pausing, it also allows you to study what the AI did, which is an insight that is otherwise not as apparent.

[Knight of the Rose]

matching up troops is essential. Learn which of your units are good against specific enemy unit types and you will fare much better.

Camels rule all. Camels beat archers, camels beat horses, camels beat swords and camels beat spearmen (when you have made them run around the map for an hour, and charged them in the back while they were chasing some other camels). The beat horse archers and they beat heavy cavalry/knights. The beat crossbowmen and woodmen and men-at-arms.

Oh - I think I made my point.

/KotR

[Ronny]

I'm a pretty bad general because I compose my army of mostly peasants and against a large force they flee. My tactic is usually to intimidate rivals through sheer numbers.
But once in battle I'm fairly useless.

[Motep]

Stabalise your econ and get some decenty units worked up. In the field, put your infantry in a deep formation, with support where needed by archers, cavalry, and other infantry. Keep some men to the side just a touch to the rear, to see if you can flank the enemy on the side or the behind (generally use cavalry/light infantry) If not, puch your cavalry into the enemy infantry, and immediately follow up with heavy infantry, you can usually break an enemy line in this way. Have archers fire upon the enemy in the rear ranks (like tehir general, if you kill him, they lose alot of morale). If you keep your formation in shape while breaking that of your enemy, you can snag yourself a phenomonal victory!

I would practise these techniques on the custom battle before bringing them to the campaign.

[Motep]

I'm a pretty bad general because I compose my army of mostly peasants and against a large force they flee. My tactic is usually to intimidate rivals through sheer numbers.
But once in battle I'm fairly useless.

Your tactic makes for a vey fun campaign, I might add. A bit frustrating when 14,000 town watch are butchered by 500 Russians, but very memorable.

[Ironsword]

I'm an awesome general.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

On easy, with an 8 star general, outnumbering the AI 10 to 1, oh, and defending a bridge.

[Motep]

I'm an awesome general.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

On easy, with an 8 star general, outnumbering the AI 10 to 1, oh, and defending a bridge.

arent we all?

[jadast]

Experience has made me better but luck is often a factor.

Sometimes I win big when I think I have no chance. Sometimes I lose when I think there is no way to lose.

[King Henry V]

Sorry for having deserted my own topic, but I just sat my final exams last week so I was a bit busy.

King Henry, what a pleasure it is to see you here! It's not often I see you outside of the Frontroom -- welcome!

Oh that's not much of a surprise. I find in recent years my own life has become rather busy and my arrogance has decreased somewhat, so I no longer think that every one must hear my opinion on such or such a topic, and so I have fallen somewhat to the rank of lurker. But thanks for the welcome, it is must hearty to visit your band of mead-drinking MTW players!

Back to topic, I think the problem lies in the fact that though I started off with MTW, I have never been a great fan of real time games as I find that the go far to quickly and I'm often completely overwhelmed by the enemy or forget about such and such a unit I despatched to do such a task. Therefore it was only when I started playing RTW that I thought "Well why not give these battle things a go?" In doing that, I believe that I got used to the ease with which one could defeat the enemy in battle: just pin down their line, send the old horseys round the back, charge their rear, and before you could say Jacobus Robinus you were chasing down and butchering the poor blighters. But when I tried this with MTW, it was a different matter. Now the computer wasn't actually as mad as a March hare, and my flanking moves didn't always succeed. And when they did succeed, my knights didn't so much as crash into the enemy's ranks as gently amble into their rear, and rather than flee in panic as soon as they got a whiff of a horse's breath, the enemy just stayed there and kept on fighting, never even having the decency to die at an alarming rate. I just wasn't used to this kind of behaviour, got bored because of the length of the battle, and so payed less and less attention to what was going on and I suppose that is when the casualties started to rise.

So looking back on it, perhaps not exactly woeful tactics as such, but lack of patience, which I suppose does make me a bad general.

[Lokiss]

Take the time to organize your knights into a proper wedge, with proper distance to get up a run, and you will see much favorable results then the amble you describe. You also have to remember mounted "sword" or "mace" units are 10x better at melee. Spear/lancer cavalry are best utilized when you order them to withdraw then slam them back in... over and over.

[Kamakazi]

i admit lol that i was really bad when i first started lol i would lose when i was outnumbering the opposing force 2 to 1 lol i was really bad but everything comes down to pactice

[LittleGrizzly]

i admit lol that i was really bad when i first started lol i would lose when i was outnumbering the opposing force 2 to 1 lol i was really bad but everything comes down to pactice

Suicidal head first charges, or isn't there that much in a name ?


I would say a good way to practice your tactical skills is to pitch yourself in custom battles against the AI, give the AI a larger more expensive force and use a small (say 8-10 units) yourself at about 1/2 to 3/4 of the enemy's florin (also pick the enemys army the computer is pretty crap at making armies) this will mean you can devote more time to each unit but each unit has to take on twice its opposing value, i imagine this would get you competent at controlling a small army in no time...

The way i learned was getting my ass handed to me several hundred times on multiplayer, after playing against real people with years of experience on multiplayer going back to playing the AI is just too easy, even on expert, i feel happy to take on the most outrageous odds, regularly i have played in battles where the enemy outnumbers me in skill and size, but as long as i have a half decent force (something to hold the line for at least 30 seconds, something fairly quick to flank with, and at least a few missle units) i feel confident off taking on thousands of troops and at the very least conceeding a phyric (sp ?) victory to the computer

[gaijinalways]

Well, to summarize, a slot of people have stated;

1 Practice. And yes, some of the battles take more time if you play with pausing to allow yourself time to see what all your units are doing.

2 Using group commands

3 keeping some units together (for support, less routing)

4 Keeping complementary unts working together (missile, spear, sword, cavalry)

5 Watching what the enemy does and responding appropriately

6 Using terrain as best you can