So you really are making it tougher playing on Hard at the start - especially as you don't know what is coming in terms of missions
Cheers
Pip
Feedback
Moderator: Slitherine Core
-
pipfromslitherine
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9898
- Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 10:35 pm
The difficulty level work by basically altering the chance to hit calcs that we do in the model. We decided to go this route because it doesn't negate any equipment for your troops or skills which might come into play, but it does mean the enemy will tend to hit you more often thus testing your survivability against the specific troop types.
So you really are making it tougher playing on Hard at the start - especially as you don't know what is coming in terms of missions
Cheers
Pip
So you really are making it tougher playing on Hard at the start - especially as you don't know what is coming in terms of missions
Cheers
Pip
So the actual enemy troop numbers and equipment are the same on hard as compared to normal, but their hit chances are improved?
-
I now see that some terms might have caused some confusion in our discussion, direwolf.
When I say “Man at Arms”, I'm talking about my infantry, not the starter cavalry, Man at Arms being one of the armour upgrades for the infantry.
The best idea is to start with a solid core of light infantry and peasant archers. I suggest purchasing more peasant archers first, as winning the raid the countryside mission with 5 units of peasant archers is a piece of cake, and you probably won't lose a single soldier, as long as you use the superior range of your longbows to counter the peasant archer unit from a distance.
Completing the raid the countryside mission a lot at the start is a good way to get some cash to get you started. Of course, the challenge is to play the game without playing many side missions, but the game is probably challenging enough as is on harder difficulties not build a solid core early on.
In my game, the year is 1370 it seems and there's a battle at Lussac, and a siege at Perigord, as well as advanced raid missions.
My core:
Infantry:
Man at Arms:
Two Lvl 6:
Equipment: Cutting Sword, Large Shield. The equipment is the same for all Man at Arms units in my army.
Skills: Sword Mastery, Foyne.
These guys are the latest arrivals, so they're regulars compared to the rest of my veteran core.
Two Lvl 9:
Skills: As above and Hewing the Legs, Pommel Strike, Winding (very good skill to have).
Three Lvl 10:
Skills: As above and Forsetting, Ward.
I wanted to beef up their defences a bit, hence the defensive skills. I'll probably save up for Slipping the Point now. I might save the points of the lvl 9 Man at Arms when they reach lvl 10, so they can get Slipping the Point at lvl 11 instead of lvl 12.
Archers/Longbowmen:
Four lvl 10:
Equipment: Cutting Sword, Longbow, the same for all archers.
Skills: Bow Mastery, Nocking and Drawing, Ward.
Bow Mastery and Nocking and Drawing are essential for archers. I had a point to spare, which I spend on Ward.
All lvl 10 archers have 6 skill points left to spend. I might invest them in Firearms Mastery and in any firearms related skills that pop up if the firearms are good enough. Otherwise I'll put them all in defensive skills.
One lvl 11:
Same as above, but with 8 skill points to spend.
Mounted Knights in Mail and Plate:
Two lvl 8:
Equipment: Lance, Pointed Shield, the same for all cavalry. Prior to lances becoming available they used swords.
Skills: Lance Mastery, Foyne, Horsemanship, Slipping the Point.
One lvl 9:
Skills: As above and Trample.
For the French troops during a charge by my cavalry, the Trample skill is the difference between being hit by a large truck and being run over by a 50 wagon freight train.
Mounted General in Mail and Plate lvl 9:
Equipment: Same as cavalry.
Skills: Lance Proficiency, Leadership, Tactics.
For me, the key for the first few level ups is to go for the skills that give you a more room in your card deck during a battle.
The general has two skill points, but I'm saving up for Lance Mastery.
-
As to the defeat French raiders mission: do you mean the mission where you start with 4 deployment squares in the village and the rest at the lower portion of the map?
-
I now see that some terms might have caused some confusion in our discussion, direwolf.
When I say “Man at Arms”, I'm talking about my infantry, not the starter cavalry, Man at Arms being one of the armour upgrades for the infantry.
The best idea is to start with a solid core of light infantry and peasant archers. I suggest purchasing more peasant archers first, as winning the raid the countryside mission with 5 units of peasant archers is a piece of cake, and you probably won't lose a single soldier, as long as you use the superior range of your longbows to counter the peasant archer unit from a distance.
Completing the raid the countryside mission a lot at the start is a good way to get some cash to get you started. Of course, the challenge is to play the game without playing many side missions, but the game is probably challenging enough as is on harder difficulties not build a solid core early on.
In my game, the year is 1370 it seems and there's a battle at Lussac, and a siege at Perigord, as well as advanced raid missions.
My core:
Infantry:
Man at Arms:
Two Lvl 6:
Equipment: Cutting Sword, Large Shield. The equipment is the same for all Man at Arms units in my army.
Skills: Sword Mastery, Foyne.
These guys are the latest arrivals, so they're regulars compared to the rest of my veteran core.
Two Lvl 9:
Skills: As above and Hewing the Legs, Pommel Strike, Winding (very good skill to have).
Three Lvl 10:
Skills: As above and Forsetting, Ward.
I wanted to beef up their defences a bit, hence the defensive skills. I'll probably save up for Slipping the Point now. I might save the points of the lvl 9 Man at Arms when they reach lvl 10, so they can get Slipping the Point at lvl 11 instead of lvl 12.
Archers/Longbowmen:
Four lvl 10:
Equipment: Cutting Sword, Longbow, the same for all archers.
Skills: Bow Mastery, Nocking and Drawing, Ward.
Bow Mastery and Nocking and Drawing are essential for archers. I had a point to spare, which I spend on Ward.
All lvl 10 archers have 6 skill points left to spend. I might invest them in Firearms Mastery and in any firearms related skills that pop up if the firearms are good enough. Otherwise I'll put them all in defensive skills.
One lvl 11:
Same as above, but with 8 skill points to spend.
Mounted Knights in Mail and Plate:
Two lvl 8:
Equipment: Lance, Pointed Shield, the same for all cavalry. Prior to lances becoming available they used swords.
Skills: Lance Mastery, Foyne, Horsemanship, Slipping the Point.
One lvl 9:
Skills: As above and Trample.
For the French troops during a charge by my cavalry, the Trample skill is the difference between being hit by a large truck and being run over by a 50 wagon freight train.
Mounted General in Mail and Plate lvl 9:
Equipment: Same as cavalry.
Skills: Lance Proficiency, Leadership, Tactics.
For me, the key for the first few level ups is to go for the skills that give you a more room in your card deck during a battle.
The general has two skill points, but I'm saving up for Lance Mastery.
-
As to the defeat French raiders mission: do you mean the mission where you start with 4 deployment squares in the village and the rest at the lower portion of the map?
Took me a while to find a good strategy for that mission too.
I deployed 4 infantry units in the village, 3 to the "defensible" squares and one to the square to the right of the trees on the western part of the village. As I was using heavy infantry, I was guessing that they might get a penalty in the forests, as I read somewhere that light infantry are better for forested squares.
The key was to turn the French left wing, in other words: the French troops to the east of the village.
Your infantry unit in that area will be attacked only by a peasant unit, which will be butchered in due time. The main problem for me was holding the square to the north-east long enough, as there were two French crossbowmen units firing at my infantry whilst it was engaging French heavy infantry.
After plenty of frustration, I found a way to wreck the French left wing and circled around the village to the French archers.
Meanwhile, my infantry unit in the north-west would be beginning to rout its French heavy infantry opponent.
The dismounted knights in mail, however, would still be fighting my other blocking infantry unit and required a lot of effort to kill every time I played the scenario, even with troops of a higher level. If I did nothing, my infantry would eventually rout. Those dismounted knights are a bit like the Kensai units in Shogun: Total War when you face them with regular infantry I guess.
It always surprises me how, even if they're surrounded on all sides and are fighting 32 men with just 4 men on each side, it takes a long while to kill them. It could be that the swords are simply not good enough. I don't know if there's a better one handed sword than the cutting sword, but my troops will continue to use the cutting sword until something better appears. I'll try to compensate for the sometimes mediocre damage output with skills.
The swordsmen do have quite a bit of staying power, which is why all my infantry units are swordsmen. My infantry is there to hold out whilst the support units get to work, not to win battles by themselves.
1 unit vs 1 unit melee combat takes a lot of time in any case, and in most cases my infantry units don't lose more than 10 men. My kill to loss ratio is currently at about 3 to 1 or 4 to 1 for most regular battles and 4 to 1 to 5 to 1 for the raiding missions.
Personally, I'm not sold on the idea of using dismounted cavalry as infantry. Although they're powerful, there are only 16 of them so when they start to drop, the squad will soon lose most of its strength. The regular infantry has some room for losses. On the other hand, in a 1 vs 1 fight against infantry not primarily equipped to deal with armour, the dismounted cavalry is very strong.
I still suggest recruiting a few regular infantry units for your core, as they're quite versatile.
I could be wrong, but units wearing heavier armour, like the dismounted cavalry, also seem to tire faster which is quite logical. Many French dismounted knights are already fatiqued when my men are still more or less fresh.
I do like the fatique system by the way: if the bar becomes empty, the unit is so exhausted that it's fatiqued until it rests until the bar fills up again. On the other hand, as long as you allow your units to catch a breath in between the fighting, they won't be fatiqued.
Running/moving across the map without a pause and engaging stationary enemy units is a good way to lose a fight. Remember: Preparedness is all.
I deployed 4 infantry units in the village, 3 to the "defensible" squares and one to the square to the right of the trees on the western part of the village. As I was using heavy infantry, I was guessing that they might get a penalty in the forests, as I read somewhere that light infantry are better for forested squares.
The key was to turn the French left wing, in other words: the French troops to the east of the village.
Your infantry unit in that area will be attacked only by a peasant unit, which will be butchered in due time. The main problem for me was holding the square to the north-east long enough, as there were two French crossbowmen units firing at my infantry whilst it was engaging French heavy infantry.
After plenty of frustration, I found a way to wreck the French left wing and circled around the village to the French archers.
Meanwhile, my infantry unit in the north-west would be beginning to rout its French heavy infantry opponent.
The dismounted knights in mail, however, would still be fighting my other blocking infantry unit and required a lot of effort to kill every time I played the scenario, even with troops of a higher level. If I did nothing, my infantry would eventually rout. Those dismounted knights are a bit like the Kensai units in Shogun: Total War when you face them with regular infantry I guess.
It always surprises me how, even if they're surrounded on all sides and are fighting 32 men with just 4 men on each side, it takes a long while to kill them. It could be that the swords are simply not good enough. I don't know if there's a better one handed sword than the cutting sword, but my troops will continue to use the cutting sword until something better appears. I'll try to compensate for the sometimes mediocre damage output with skills.
The swordsmen do have quite a bit of staying power, which is why all my infantry units are swordsmen. My infantry is there to hold out whilst the support units get to work, not to win battles by themselves.
1 unit vs 1 unit melee combat takes a lot of time in any case, and in most cases my infantry units don't lose more than 10 men. My kill to loss ratio is currently at about 3 to 1 or 4 to 1 for most regular battles and 4 to 1 to 5 to 1 for the raiding missions.
Personally, I'm not sold on the idea of using dismounted cavalry as infantry. Although they're powerful, there are only 16 of them so when they start to drop, the squad will soon lose most of its strength. The regular infantry has some room for losses. On the other hand, in a 1 vs 1 fight against infantry not primarily equipped to deal with armour, the dismounted cavalry is very strong.
I still suggest recruiting a few regular infantry units for your core, as they're quite versatile.
I could be wrong, but units wearing heavier armour, like the dismounted cavalry, also seem to tire faster which is quite logical. Many French dismounted knights are already fatiqued when my men are still more or less fresh.
I do like the fatique system by the way: if the bar becomes empty, the unit is so exhausted that it's fatiqued until it rests until the bar fills up again. On the other hand, as long as you allow your units to catch a breath in between the fighting, they won't be fatiqued.
Running/moving across the map without a pause and engaging stationary enemy units is a good way to lose a fight. Remember: Preparedness is all.
If you do implement that in the game please make it an option, as I cannot stand games with limited ammo. May not be realistic, but this is a game, not reality and the micro-management takes some of the fun out of the game.direwolf wrote:Pip and Iain,
One other change to the realism aspect...limited ammo for archers.
thx,
DW
Working through the tutorials.
So far pretty cool game. It is like a miniatures (tabletop) environment. I have a question. Once you select a unit and right click a location(s) to move to, how do you cancel the movement or delete waypoints if you change your mind? I tried delete, backspace, left and right clicking. I checked the manual, but may have missed it. Basically, how do you take back the planned move (assuming you did not unpause the game yet).
So far pretty cool game. It is like a miniatures (tabletop) environment. I have a question. Once you select a unit and right click a location(s) to move to, how do you cancel the movement or delete waypoints if you change your mind? I tried delete, backspace, left and right clicking. I checked the manual, but may have missed it. Basically, how do you take back the planned move (assuming you did not unpause the game yet).
We had the same considerations as bssybeep. We tested with and without and in the end we liked no ammo limitation better. But maybe adding it like an option you can turn off/on is something for a future patch.One other change to the realism aspect...limited ammo for archers.
I also think we should work out the manual a bit more, explaining better the equipment, skills and weapon upgrades. But Iain hates writing manuals so much.
Good feedback guys and especially as we see you are enjoying the game.
Cheers,
Tim aka LZ
Tim van der Moer - CEO The Lordz Games Studio
http://www.thelordzgamesstudio.com
http://www.panzer-corps.com
http://www.commander-games.com
http://www.thelordzgamesstudio.com
http://www.panzer-corps.com
http://www.commander-games.com
-
IainMcNeil
- Site Admin
- Posts: 13558
- Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 10:19 am
I always hated how the archers in any Total War game were out of ammo in no time, as if they had no quiver.
In this case, although battles might have lasted hours historically, they don't last hours in the game and the average archer unit isn't going to fire all that often in a battle.
In this case, although battles might have lasted hours historically, they don't last hours in the game and the average archer unit isn't going to fire all that often in a battle.
Either select another unit, then select the unit you want to cancel the orders for and select a new order, or right click on the waypoints (on the squares with the waypoints) on the map.how do you cancel the movement or delete waypoints if you change your mind? I tried delete, backspace, left and right clicking.
-
Toten
- Private First Class - Wehrmacht Inf
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 5:07 pm
- Location: Phoenix AZ
More Realism
Hi All,
Really like the game. I would like to play the game where my casulties from a battle carry forward to the next game. You would have to purchase new troops or replacements for your existing troops during breaks between fights. Also, there would need to be a "retreat" button. Where your forces run for their lives....but the losses you have incurred would be counted. (of course kills would be counted also)
I believe this kind of campaign would be much more "RPG" like and more interesting.
Just my thoughts,
Toten
Really like the game. I would like to play the game where my casulties from a battle carry forward to the next game. You would have to purchase new troops or replacements for your existing troops during breaks between fights. Also, there would need to be a "retreat" button. Where your forces run for their lives....but the losses you have incurred would be counted. (of course kills would be counted also)
I believe this kind of campaign would be much more "RPG" like and more interesting.
Just my thoughts,
Toten
-
IainMcNeil
- Site Admin
- Posts: 13558
- Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 10:19 am
In Great Battles of Rome this is how it worked but we found it very hard to balance with the healing. Either you had enough cash to repair the damage and continue or you hit a wall and could not proceed due to cash shortages. We ended up having to make it easier than we wanted to avoid having people get stuck all the time.
It would require specially designed campaigns to work but maybe somethign modders could do if we put the basic functionality in there.
It would require specially designed campaigns to work but maybe somethign modders could do if we put the basic functionality in there.
Just some tips: archers don't tire when shooting - only when running. So they're a good unit to deploy in the back and rush forward toward the village right away. They can be deployed safely behind the village to cover any enemy units inside the village. I never tried to hold the village entry points, just the victory point itself. The rest of your reserve will tire if your rush them toward the village so cavalry is best. Avoiding fatigue is very important.Again, having said all that i am playing on Hard and completely stymied by the "Fight off the french raiders" mission...where you start off in a village with three other units. Have you done this mission yet? If so...HELP!! lol
Note that archers are a lot less effective against enemy units fighting one of your own units. This is a way to simulate friendly fire: they'd have a harder time hitting enemy units when trying to avoid hitting their own men. This means you always want to give as much firing time to your archers as possible before the enemy hits your h2h units. And always look for enemy units with poor shields, they make excellent targets.
The enemy has few anti-cavalry units on this map, so cavalry can be effective, especially when used in pairs & outflanking individual enemy units.
Adherbal,
thx for teh feedback bro...I completed the mission relatively easily once i made one very important realization...please try not to laugh when i tell you what i learnt. So, at the major choke points there are staked squares...so i'm thinking ok...stand behind the staked squares and you'll have an advantage because the enemy unit will probably take a morale hit for fighting in the staked square as well as maybe losses for hitting it...WRONG!!! I needed to be in the staked squares to get the defensive bonus...sigh...once i figured that out it all magically unfolded fo me...
cheers,
DW
thx for teh feedback bro...I completed the mission relatively easily once i made one very important realization...please try not to laugh when i tell you what i learnt. So, at the major choke points there are staked squares...so i'm thinking ok...stand behind the staked squares and you'll have an advantage because the enemy unit will probably take a morale hit for fighting in the staked square as well as maybe losses for hitting it...WRONG!!! I needed to be in the staked squares to get the defensive bonus...sigh...once i figured that out it all magically unfolded fo me...
cheers,
DW
That confused me too, direwolf, as the soldiers will rush out of the square when attacking (the unit is still on the square, but half the men are in the enemy square), so the enemy will not touch the actual stakes. I guess the defensive bonus still applied.
I don't think defending the actual victory location is a functional strategy without an experienced core, as your forces will be targeted by two units of enemy archers and will fight the enemy infantry without a defensive bonus. Having archers at the southern edge of the village probably helps, but they need support against the enemy infantry and cavalry when it comes for them. The archers are also practically useless against dismounted knights.
The French only have to touch the square once to gain a victory. My second loss was due to one of my units being too slow in carrying out its movement order so the French barely touched the hex.
-
I have some suggestions for more archer skills:
All for 2 points:
Skirmishers:
+2 attack with swords and one handed weapons (to represent being trained to use those weapons in a melee fight), +2 armour vs ranged attack (to represent a loose formation and greater mobility with which to evade part of an incoming volley)
Archery Tournament Champions:
+1 Ranged Attack, to represent being extremely skilled with a bow. Giving a +2 damage bonus vs everything might make the unit too powerful.
Pierce the weak spot:
+1 Ranged Attack vs dismounted cavalry and cavalry, to represent firing at the weaker side armour of horses and using bodkin arrows against enemy armour. The advantage would be mostly lost against regular infantry as they either had less armour or could use a shield to their advantage. The slow armoured dismounted knights would have to rely solely on their armour withstanding the volley, and even deflected hits would cause fatique.
The first skill could become available after Nocking and Drawing, the other two after getting Bow Mastery.
I don't think defending the actual victory location is a functional strategy without an experienced core, as your forces will be targeted by two units of enemy archers and will fight the enemy infantry without a defensive bonus. Having archers at the southern edge of the village probably helps, but they need support against the enemy infantry and cavalry when it comes for them. The archers are also practically useless against dismounted knights.
The French only have to touch the square once to gain a victory. My second loss was due to one of my units being too slow in carrying out its movement order so the French barely touched the hex.
-
I have some suggestions for more archer skills:
All for 2 points:
Skirmishers:
+2 attack with swords and one handed weapons (to represent being trained to use those weapons in a melee fight), +2 armour vs ranged attack (to represent a loose formation and greater mobility with which to evade part of an incoming volley)
Archery Tournament Champions:
+1 Ranged Attack, to represent being extremely skilled with a bow. Giving a +2 damage bonus vs everything might make the unit too powerful.
Pierce the weak spot:
+1 Ranged Attack vs dismounted cavalry and cavalry, to represent firing at the weaker side armour of horses and using bodkin arrows against enemy armour. The advantage would be mostly lost against regular infantry as they either had less armour or could use a shield to their advantage. The slow armoured dismounted knights would have to rely solely on their armour withstanding the volley, and even deflected hits would cause fatique.
The first skill could become available after Nocking and Drawing, the other two after getting Bow Mastery.
Com,
I forgot to tell you...remember all those excess xp points our archers had? heh...well...mine all had 7 skill points sitting around so i maxed out melee skill and gave them ward then armed them all with battle hammers = Death for dismounted Knights in plate armor!!
Surprisingly they seriously rocked it!!!
And once you upgrade them to archers they can hang for a while...it works great for me because it means i don't have to specialize any inf unit to do it.
Which brings up another change that should be implemented...FORCE MELEE for archers. There should be a way to for a melee attack not just have them go into melee when THEY are attacked.
thx!!
DW.
p.s. One serious downside to being registered...everyone can see how seriously addicted you are to the game...sigh...ahh for the good old days of cyber ambiguity.
I forgot to tell you...remember all those excess xp points our archers had? heh...well...mine all had 7 skill points sitting around so i maxed out melee skill and gave them ward then armed them all with battle hammers = Death for dismounted Knights in plate armor!!
Surprisingly they seriously rocked it!!!
And once you upgrade them to archers they can hang for a while...it works great for me because it means i don't have to specialize any inf unit to do it.
Which brings up another change that should be implemented...FORCE MELEE for archers. There should be a way to for a melee attack not just have them go into melee when THEY are attacked.
thx!!
DW.
p.s. One serious downside to being registered...everyone can see how seriously addicted you are to the game...sigh...ahh for the good old days of cyber ambiguity.
-
IainMcNeil
- Site Admin
- Posts: 13558
- Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 10:19 am