Medieval 2 Discussion

[dusematic]

There is an option to put a time limit on the batles but when I check it, it doesn't seem to have any effect.

[Big Gulp]

There is an option to put a time limit on the batles but when I check it, it doesn't seem to have any effect.

Drawn out battles can get annoying, but I find the battle time limits even more annoying.  I always turn that off.

[stray]

I knew about the time limits, but I don't like them either.

=========

Pretty sad, considering I didn't even step outside of my castle at this point:

[dusematic]

Damn.  I've been playing on medium battle difficulty and I seldom lose, might need to bump it up.  However, then I'd probably get my ass kicked left and right because the only thing keeping my empire alive in the early goings is brilliant military victories and campaigns.  In the beginning when times are thin, it can get ugly in a hurry.  That's the best time though because after you cross that threshold of size and power, and you have the money rolling in, nobody can really mess with you. 

I haven't really had any drawn out battles.  The only time I was in danger of that happening was when an army attacked me but strangely sat outside the castle walls , I had to bait them to crash the gates.  Barely won, It was a desperate struggle to fend off a General's body guard with some peasants and archers. 


Anyone want to get some multiplay going? I'm aching to get my shit stoved in.

[WindupAtheist]

I'm aching to get my shit stoved in.

Thank you for sharing?

[Yoru]

Goddamn, that screenie looks vidcard-meltingly delicious. If the reports of MP go well, I may well have to pick this one up. It sounds like an improved version of Knights of Honor, without the irritating issue of 100 years of work going to waste because the tart your third-generation heir ends up marrying turns out barren.

[Big Gulp]

Goddamn, that screenie looks vidcard-meltingly delicious.

It really isn't all that much of a resource hog.  I've got an AGP version ATI X850 and only a 2GHz processor (but with 2 GB of RAM, which helps) and I"ve got every single bell and whistle turned up to max.  Not even a hint of slowdown.  It seems to be a pretty forgiving game, hardware-wise.

[Strazos]

Stray, that shot isn't that sad considering that real armies attempting to take a castled location by brute force historically have taken heavy losses.

It really doesn't take That many people to defend a closed castle; it's all about access points.

[stray]

It really isn't all that much of a resource hog.  I've got an AGP version ATI X850 and only a 2GHz processor (but with 2 GB of RAM, which helps) and I"ve got every single bell and whistle turned up to max.  Not even a hint of slowdown.  It seems to be a pretty forgiving game, hardware-wise.

Agreed. Just running with a 6600GT here, Barton, and 1.5 ram.

This game is amazingly stabile for a new PC game. It's very odd. It launches as quickly as a web browser, runs smooth for long periods of time, doesn't choke and hiccup when quitting. Only problem I'm having right now is with Alt-Tabbing.

Stray, that shot isn't that sad considering that real armies attempting to take a castled location by brute force historically have taken heavy losses.

It really doesn't take That many people to defend a closed castle; it's all about access points.

Yeah, but I think they died more from stupid AI and exploiting more than any intelligent strategy on my part. 

Look at those guys still at my gates (heavy calvary, so it took awhile for them to fall...they can resist arrows a little better). They're still standing there, despite me wiping out the bulk of their army. They finally moved when I started shifting my units inside...But at that point, the opposing force had been reduced to 10% of what it was.

[dusematic]

Actually, a castle isn't a very big advantage in this game.  For starters, with a decent sized army it will only take you two turns to build a crapload of rams and ladders and towers.  Yes, you do need more men than the opposing force, but if you're attacking from multiple points, you'e basically going to get over the walls or through the gates.  And if it's raining, the defenders are basically fucked as they have no hope of burning your towers or rams.  Once gunpowder is invented, even the most primitive cannonry will punch a breachable hole in the walls in a couple shots.  You usally get primitive bombards early 14th century, and then castles are practically useless.  Before that, I've found that ladders are the most useful seige implements, as they don't burn, and you just attach them to your cheapest units and zerg multiple spots along a wall.


Also, the Islamic factions are pretty much overpowered.  You canc all your own jihad.  All you need is an Imam (priest equivalent) with a high enough piety rating, and if you're pumping them out like you should be (they're cheap and you want to either preserve public order or sow dissention) then you will quickly and easily develop an Imam with a high enough piety rating.  Then you simply call a jihad on your enemy, and march there with a huge zerg army or cheap yet rabid believers who will almost NEVER rout.  You can easily daisy chain your conquests all the way to your ultimate goal, and other Islamic factions may even join you in your efforts.  Justapose this with the extremely difficult method of getting one of your priests elected from the college of cardinals, and you begin to see the problem.  A crusade is a powerful tool and the Moslems can gio around calling them willy nilly on whoever they like whenever they like (although there is a cooldown).



Nobody wants to give multiplay a shot? 

[Yoru]

It really isn't all that much of a resource hog.  I've got an AGP version ATI X850 and only a 2GHz processor (but with 2 GB of RAM, which helps) and I"ve got every single bell and whistle turned up to max.  Not even a hint of slowdown.  It seems to be a pretty forgiving game, hardware-wise.

Agreed. Just running with a 6600GT here, Barton, and 1.5 ram.

This game is amazingly stabile for a new PC game. It's very odd. It launches as quickly as a web browser, runs smooth for long periods of time, doesn't choke and hiccup when quitting. Only problem I'm having right now is with Alt-Tabbing.

I hate you guys so much. Now I have to go buy a new distraction game. :)

[stray]

Thought I'd post this if you want to play something other than the starting 5 factions right off the bat:


Unlock All Factions

Find your way to the Medieval II Total War\data\world\maps\campaign\imperial_campaign directory and youll see a file called descr_strat. Cut and Paste the unlockable section into the playable section. Now just save and close and youll have all your factions unlocked.

[edit]

Remember to remove the original unlock listing though.

[stray]

I'm aching to get my shit stoved in.

Thank you for sharing?

Stats for my new Byzantine Spy:

Kyriakos Loukites

Retinue: Catamite

Not all men find the opposite sex to be the most distracting. +1 Agent's skill

[dusematic]

All you have to do in order to unlock all the factions is win one single short campaign.  It's pretty easy, can't imagine feeling the need to go into the game and get all technical just to bypass such an easy task.


I'm glad you all enjoyed my homosensual turn of phrase.  I try and live up to the grief title, and it's not always easy.

[NiX]

But you manage, don't you?

I'm tempted to pick this up based just on the talk that happens here. Damn you all! I also have to buy R6 Vegas.

[stray]

All you have to do in order to unlock all the factions is win one single short campaign.  It's pretty easy, can't imagine feeling the need to go into the game and get all technical just to bypass such an easy task.


I'm glad you all enjoyed my homosensual turn of phrase.  I try and live up to the grief title, and it's not always easy.

Yeah, but I got started on a long campaign already. Didn't feel like playing one of those 5 nations again.

Anyhow, it's not technical. Just a little copy and pasting.

I'm tempted to pick this up based just on the talk that happens here. Damn you all! I also have to buy R6 Vegas.

It's a good game to get. It's shiny. Has lots of replay value. Runs well. Has all the bells, whistles, and presentation of Rome, but with the larger setting of the first Medieval game. Awesome battle play, and it can almost function as a decent turn based strategy game as well.

The only thing they could improve upon at this point is to include some of Civ's culture and technology focused elements. Civ with Total War combat. That'd be perfect imo.

[dusematic]

It's already a fairly deep turn based strategy, almost up there with Civ.  I actually like it more than Civ because there is so much variety with the units and the settings and the flavor and the buildings that each faction has access to.  Civ 4 is so fucking homogenous I can't play it anymore.  It's definitely a must buy.  I'm about to start a long campaign, I haven't gone far enough in the short campaigns to see how the New World interplay goes.  So far I've beaten it on short campaigns with England and the Moors.  I just need to decide what faction to play with, I'm leaning towards Denmark, Russia or Byzantium.

[stray]

I'm Byzantium atm, but might restart as Denmark. Less early hassles to deal with, I think.

The territory you're given is either secluded on islands, or your surrounded by a lot of mountains. Makes moving around a bit of a pain.

I also have to deal with Catholic priests in my lands a lot....And you can't cast them out as heretics. There's no recourse except to recruit a lot of Orthodox priests....Something you don't have to do as much with other civilizations.

That's on top of dealing with heretics and Muslims (who you'll being seeing a lot more of in Byzantine lands for some reason).

Turks to the East, Egypt to the South, Hungary to the North, Venice to the West. Probably best if you take out the Turks as quickly as possible.

The units are cool, but footmounted archers take a few more steps than Western armies (you're given horse archers earlier instead).

[dusematic]

I started a long campaign on hard/hard difficulty with Milan.  What I've come to realize is that Infantry is king.  Fuck cavalry.  Fuck archers.  Archers are only good if they are on a wall, otherwise, the footspeed of armies is way too fast in this game to get enough shots off to make wasting gold and a coveted spot in the army on an archer.  Cavalry is good, however, 90% of the battles I am fighting are sieges for control or defense of a city.  This means cavalry isn't very sueful, you need open space, and their advantage with charging is almost moot in the tight confines of a city.

Another rad thing I've noticed is that the battlefields mimic the campaign map 1:1.  If you attack across a river, there will be a river between you and the opposing army.  If you're standing on a bridge and you get attacked, you'll wind up on a bridge, or behind one.  If you're in a forest, etc.  Pretty cool.


Anyway, the Italian factions suit my playstyle best.  I make all my settlements cities, rake in the trade, have a strong navy, and just make a lot of militia men.  This works great with Milan or Venice because they have the best militiamen in the game, so no need really to waste shitloads of money on castles (both as lost income and building up stables and archery ranges).  You can get decent range units from the militias as well, and cities are where you make siege units, so they have everything.  Also, Milan has the best X-bow units in the game, and they are really pretty sick because their melee is so strong.

Seems like every time you play a new faction you have all kinds of new units and buildings to play with.  A cool Milanese unit is some kind of standard bearing unit, who wheel this huge wooden contraption around that holds a Milanese standard that inspires the troops around it, and is guarded by an elite cadre of troops.  Neat.
 

I'm just really not feeling the value of castles. I might have one just to make some top end cavalry and archers, but its completely just for fun and because I can.  At least, that's the plan from now on, since I just figured it out.  It just doesn't make any sense, cities have walls too, and why invest so heavily in these huge castles when once you max them out they're obsolete from gunpowder anyway, and really aren't that much more formidable than a city wall anyway. 


Basically I'm kicking ass even on hard/hard, and I've already secured nothern Italy, Corsica, and Sardinia whilst simultaneously fending off a league of Venice and Holy Roman Empire.  Raped Bologna and Venice, almost too easy. You guys noticing the AI leave very important cities (VENICE) with paltry garrisons even when you're in extreme proximity to them? 

By the way, if you want to see some real religious struggle, play on the Iberian peninsula.  I was the Moors and had Potuguese and Spanish Cardinals in my provinces, I had to have 5 Imams and the best mosques I could make at the time just to maintain the staus quo.  It was extreme, and it hindered me in the early going because I had to foucus on training Imams and shelling out money for temples that early.

[Big Gulp]

What I've come to realize is that Infantry is king. 

For regular troops, yeah.  Rome had cavalry way overpowered, so I think they hit it just right with infantry being so important in this game.  That said, I'm still a firm believer in artillery.  No matter how great your troops are, they aren't as good as a dozen giant flaming projectiles streaking the sky.  Furthermore, I don't like wasting my troops on ladder zerg rushes when I could just as easily destroy static fortifications with my trebuchets and catapults.

"God fights on the side with the best artillery." - Napoleon Bonaparte

"I do not have to tell you who won the war. You know, the artillery did." - Gen George S. Patton

"Ultima Ratio Regum." -- Translation: the final argument of kings. -- Motto engraved on French cannons at the direction of Louis XIV

"Artillery is the god of war." - Stalin

"Contrary to popular belief, we at artillery command do not believe we're God. We merely borrowed His "Smite" button." - Anonymous

"The Mission of the Artillery is to give some class to what would otherwise be merely a vulgar brawl." - Frederick the Great

"An artillery barrage is a terrifying thing." - Erich Maria Remarque

[Strazos]

Heh, ever play Field Ops in Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory?

[Big Gulp]

Heh, ever play Field Ops in Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory?

Nope.  I don't really like run 'n gun shooters, and I also don't like too many team based shooters (BF series, Day of Defeat, etc).  If I play a shooter, I play single player.

[dusematic]

What I've come to realize is that Infantry is king. 

For regular troops, yeah.  Rome had cavalry way overpowered, so I think they hit it just right with infantry being so important in this game.  That said, I'm still a firm believer in artillery.  No matter how great your troops are, they aren't as good as a dozen giant flaming projectiles streaking the sky.  Furthermore, I don't like wasting my troops on ladder zerg rushes when I could just as easily destroy static fortifications with my trebuchets and catapults.

"God fights on the side with the best artillery." - Napoleon Bonaparte

"I do not have to tell you who won the war. You know, the artillery did." - Gen George S. Patton

"Ultima Ratio Regum." -- Translation: the final argument of kings. -- Motto engraved on French cannons at the direction of Louis XIV

"Artillery is the god of war." - Stalin

"Contrary to popular belief, we at artillery command do not believe we're God. We merely borrowed His "Smite" button." - Anonymous

"The Mission of the Artillery is to give some class to what would otherwise be merely a vulgar brawl." - Frederick the Great

"An artillery barrage is a terrifying thing." - Erich Maria Remarque

I was commenting that ladder zerging combined with a ram is the best option of siege equipment that is constructed on site.  Of course artillery is much better, then you don't have to wait to assault a settlement either.  I think it's a little overpowered that with one catapult you can bring down even the thickest walls though. Alsd, while artillery is awesome for sieges, I find it has limited value for open field combat, if any at all.  You get what, one wildly imprecise barrage before the enemy engages you.  I've had my cats misfire on spearmen positioned directly in front of them.  Not cool.  Cannons are somewhat better but the real culprit the way I see it lay in the fact that combat speed is way too damn fast.  Basically you just load up on powerful infantry and zerg.  I win every fight with that straegy.  Sure, I'll make sure I have spearmen as part of the infantry corps to ward off enemy cavalry, and maybe I'll have a couple divisions of my own cavalrly, but everything else is extraneous. 

[dusematic]

One thing that does piss me off to no end is that even if the enemy attacks you it will NEVER attack you from a position of strength.  It's sort of like ok, what the fuck is the point of deploying my troops intelligently, or using defensive units like archers if I have to engage them?  Look I'm not saying In want the AI to be stupid, I'm just saying it gets a little ridiculous when their army attacks you and then just sits there and won't move until you expose yourself.  Then you can get into these queer little cat and mouse games with feints that feel more like exploiting the AI then strategy.

[Big Gulp]

I find it has limited value for open field combat, if any at all. 

Use your wings.  I tend to concentrate my heavy infantry units on the left and right wings, and I try to envelop the enemy (I'll wheel them outward so I sort of have a "U" formation once the enemy engages, prior to engagement my formation looks like an inverted "U".  Yes, this is sort of the Cannae tactic).  This has the benefit of keeping the enemy boxed into a nice, tight little kill zone.  My center will gradually get wiped out, but I usually have enough time to really put a hurting on them from the catapults that are positioned just behind the weak center.  Oh, I also set my general and another cavalry unit next to my artillery for, A: protecting the artillery if the center breaks, and B: keeping my general from getting killed.

I do get some friendly fire deaths, but nothing like the amount of enemy I kill.  The trick is to always target a unit that is center mass of the enemy formation, and to never, ever put your artillery into "fire at will" mode.

[dusematic]

No firre at will.  Good call.  I'll try that.  I have been noticing that I need to length my lines for envelopage instead of just having so much backup.

[Big Gulp]

No firre at will.  Good call.  I'll try that.  I have been noticing that I need to length my lines for envelopage instead of just having so much backup.

Yeah, the thing of it is, though, that some people don't like playing like this because it really is an inflexible way of fighting.  You're relying on your troops to keep the enemy bottled up; you don't really care how many people they kill, because that's the artillery's job anyway.  A buddy of mine can't fathom how I play like this, because he's a cavalry/archer fanatic, which I admit is a lot more flexible.

Also, you can't half-ass relying on artillery.  Your armies are always going to move dirt slow, and you have to go thin on the other types of troops you'd usually use because so many of your available slots are taken up by artillery.  For instance, my minimum is 6 catapult units to an army.  Sometimes I go heavier than that.  That's a lot of men you're losing just to be able to bring the big gun.  The problem is that you have to bring a lot of firepower because the whole objective behind this tactic is to kill as many people as you can fast, fast, fast.  In a prolonged battle you've lost simply because you'll probably have less hand to hand units than the other guy.  Time is not on your side using this tactic.

[eldaec]

Some observations

 - Changes in the AI seem to mean a far higher proportion of battles occur at towns and castles - I think my first campaign has only had one major engagement on an open field.

 - I hate bloom. If you don't wish to develop headaches and eyesight problems, remember to turn bloom off in the video options.

 - Assassins and spies seem far more useful than in previous versions, playing the British in the short game (objectives are to kill Scotland and France) I had decent success by fighting Scotland openly, while softening up the French by continually destroying +Public Order buildings with my assassins, by the time I got around to fighting the French they were too weak from all the riot quelling and repair work to put up much resistance.

 - What the hell is the point of merchants? I can get them returning up to 11 florins a turn, but that's a RoI of around 100 years. They don't live that long. Anyone know what I'm supposed to do with merchants?

[dusematic]

Merchants are worthless.  It's possible to get much more than 11 gold per turn, I've gotten 97 on a silver resource (merchant acuity helps some, remember) but the thing is, resource valuation seems to be based partially off proximity.  I'm playing Milan right now and I was all over the silver and gold to the east of my position.  However, once I expanded a bit, instead of making 97//37 with my merchants, I was only making 23/10/.  I don't know if you're supposed to fucking move on in search of more exotic shit at that point or what, but count me out.  It's a pain in the ass because rival merchants can run you out of biz and you lose the income and the merchant.  Such frailty I can't even believe what the hell they were thinking with merchants, such a half baked idea.  I'm just not going to waste my time with chump change.  Sure I recouped my investment and then some initially, but since then I've lost a couple merchants and at 550 a pop, how much can you really be making even if your average ROI is 20 (it isn't)? 


Big Gulp--

You strategy is insane.  Haven't tried that specifically.  What I meant is, I drew out my line much longer than usual, and held back my general and another cavalry in reserve to plug gaps.  I brough xbows, 2 cats, and a ballista, and peppered the enemy.  After about 4 direct hits with the cats, their troops were shaken, and they charged me.


Basically, I figured out how to get those assholes off their hilltops and into a battle without charging up the mountainside into their lances.  Still pisses me off that I always have to engage them, I think they should have made it so if they attack you they are the aggressor, I don't have a problem if I attack them and they sit back and wait.


With six cats, do you usually rout the enemy pretty quickly? I mean that's what you're banking on right?

[dusematic]

Also, I might restart my game on very hard/very hard.  What is the shittiest faction to play?  This shit is getting too easy on hard/hard.  The fucking Venetians allied with the Holy Roman Empire, Sicily, and France.  They all attacked me and I beat them back, took Bologna from the Germans, and then took Venice.  As far as I can tell the only thing that got harder from medium-->hard difficulty is the  computer gangrape.  Didn't notice anything else.



edit:  could just be that Milan is really fucking good.    but i doubt it

[Big Gulp]

What I meant is, I drew out my line much longer than usual, and held back my general and another cavalry in reserve to plug gaps.  I brough xbows, 2 cats, and a ballista, and peppered the enemy.  After about 4 direct hits with the cats, their troops were shaken, and they charged me.

Drawing out your line is always good in this game.  Depth isn't much of an issue since the guys in the back really don't do much other than stand around with their dicks in their hands.  Much better to string them out 2 deep and enable those really broad, wheeling maneuvers.  What I usually do is this...  I create three groupings of infantry.  Three spearmen units make up my center, which I designate group 1.  Then I create 2 more groups of 3 melee units, which usually consist of armored sergeants.  Those are groups 2 and 3, and they compose my wings.  Then the 6 (or more, depending on what I've got available) catapults are group 4, they go behind my center.  Right there we're already up to a minimum of 15 units.  Then my general and a unit of knights round out the mix.  I don't use archers at all.  They really don't rack up that many casualties, and even their flaming shots don't do much to destroy morale.  I also don't use ballistae since they need a clear arc of fire, whereas catapults can be launched over my troops.

With six cats, do you usually rout the enemy pretty quickly? I mean that's what you're banking on right?

I wouldn't say I rout them, but they do go to shaken pretty damned quickly.  I'd say about 60% of the time I'm able to kill their general really quickly, which also helps immeasurably.  When they do run they don't have much success since they're already in the pocket.  As soon as most of their units break I make the 'pults cease fire (or I redesignate targets, since the AI likes to leave it's archers in the rear) and any stragglers that escape the pocket get run down by my 2 cavalry units.

[stray]

What is the shittiest faction to play?  This shit is getting too easy on hard/hard.

Seems like Scotland could be a challenge. And Byzantium.

As for the value of castles and calvary, perhaps there's too much legacy code from Rome: TW in that respect?? Medieval warfare should be a slightly different beast. Castles and calvary were far more decisive and employed than in ancient battles.

[edit]

Another thing about the Scots...

I never realized just how bad these guys had it until observing their positioning in this game. It's amazing that they're still around. 

[dusematic]

Scotland only has to stave off England.  I was thinking Poland would be the hardest, because you're surrounded ona ll sides and you have the Mongols to deal with eventually.


But do you see what I'm saying about the uselessness of castles?  You said so yourself you don't use archers, you just use a lot of infantry and artillery.  Cities can do that and then some, and they can also pump out archers and cavalry eventually.  Sure it's not top shelf but who cares when you're making triple the amount from your city anyway?  Not to mention the other benefits like being able to build agents etc.

[dusematic]

They need a patch and an expansion to perfect the game, it's stil awesome but it could be nearly perfect.

[stray]

Never said I didn't like archers. I like them, especially mounted ones. I just hate that they run out of ammo so quickly.

As for artillery, has anyone here played Egypt? Their artillery hurls giant fireballs.