Real Recruitment 1.0?

[guck]

just wondering what the overall feeling is for RR1.0. I personally don't like fighting the first 100 years with pitch forks and sticks while waiting for more advanced units. i know it's not "historical", but i don't care. i usually don't make it past 1300 anyway. now i'm forced to unless i reinstall without the MOD. what is the general consensus?:hmmm:

[Brewskii]

I don't use it,it annoys me

[Point Blank]

If you don't want it, just reinstall the 6.1 patch.

[guck]

If you don't want it, just reinstall the 6.1 patch.

I'm not knocking it, brother. Just don't think it's for me. It's not so much the slower pace (I enjoy that), it's the lack of units that make the game interesting (such as knights).

[aduellist]

just wondering what the overall feeling is for RR1.0.

I wouldn't play without it or something like it. Slows down the campaign pace a little and makes me be more cautious about committing my best units. Makes battles feel more important to me.

[HAMandCHEESE]

I like it a whole lot. It makes the game seem more like a historical simulation as opposed to games like AOE that are based solely on a tech tree system.

[guck]

does the AI have the same recruiting limitations with RR 1.0?

[Brewskii]

I think so

[y2day]

Play the late era if you want advance units. I like the feel of backwater settlements being defended by the men that work the land and call it thier home. If you want to bring an army to the door of your neighbor hire mercs. Thats what they mostly did back then and its what i do. Atleast until later when i have developed my backwater settlements into high tech settlements that has the populace and income to support a standing army for my people.

Usually i'm pretty quiet. Ok i will go back to my corner now....

[Caesar Clivus]

I love RR and wouldn't play without it. It not only makes for more realistic army composition, it also makes victories and defeats much more important as you can't just replenish your army in 2 turns.

And yes, the AI has the same restrictions under RR as the player.

[guck]

yeah, but 2 turns is 2 years. so did it really take 9 years to build a single unit a one hundred twenty men? maybe some aspects of the game are improved, but unless the TPY are increased, it seems to be totally unrealistic. i think it's realistic for a nation to reform a 2500 man unit in two years even though it still takes longer than that even under the original recruiting rules.

[Twfan55]

yeah, but 2 turns is 2 years. so did it really take 9 years to build a single unit a one hundred twenty men? maybe some aspects of the game are improved, but unless the TPY are increased, it seems to be totally unrealistic. i think it's realistic for a nation to reform a 2500 man unit in two years even though it still takes longer than that even under the original recruiting rules.

I agree, I havent been able to recruit Latinkon since my campaign started 50 turns ago.

[gurachn]

yeah, but 2 turns is 2 years. so did it really take 9 years to build a single unit a one hundred twenty men? maybe some aspects of the game are improved, but unless the TPY are increased, it seems to be totally unrealistic. i think it's realistic for a nation to reform a 2500 man unit in two years even though it still takes longer than that even under the original recruiting rules.

While this is true, I have to say that I think it enhances the overall experience, by making army compositions 'feel' more realistic, and making your good units much more valuable.
I have to say I had never much used mercenaries before RR, but now they are an essential part of any offensive (or even defensive) operation.
It can be a bit frustrating at times, but without RR the experience is just a bit too arcady for me.

[Point Blank]

yeah, but 2 turns is 2 years. so did it really take 9 years to build a single unit a one hundred twenty men? maybe some aspects of the game are improved, but unless the TPY are increased, it seems to be totally unrealistic. i think it's realistic for a nation to reform a 2500 man unit in two years even though it still takes longer than that even under the original recruiting rules.

With Feudal units, knights etc, taking 10 turns to replenish, its not that the faction is 'training' them as such, but rather that either sons are coming of age in a hereditary position of nobility, or others are joining the nobility or achieving knighthood by some means. The number of knights available was very much a function of social conditions and the health and wealth of the nobility, and this is not something that the player can directly influence, except in the game by the building of castles with their nearby estates/fiefs etc. The nobility were the only section of society, before standing armies, that had the time and inclination to become expert in the practice of arms as a part of their social position, but even so the training of a knight would begin in childhood and last for more than 10 years. The loss of a large number of knights in battle would often be a catastrophe that would take many years to recover from.

[guck]

With Feudal units, knights etc, taking 10 turns to replenish, its not that the faction is 'training' them as such, but rather that either sons are coming of age in a hereditary position of nobility, or others are joining the nobility or achieving knighthood by some means. The number of knights available was very much a function of social conditions and the health and wealth of the nobility, and this is not something that the player can directly influence, except in the game by the building of castles with their nearby estates/fiefs etc. The nobility were the only section of society, before standing armies, that had the time and inclination to become expert in the practice of arms as a part of their social position, but even so the training of a knight would begin in childhood and last for more than 10 years. The loss of a large number of knights in battle would often be a catastrophe that would take many years to recover from.

then what percentage of the medieval army was actually knights?

[TheSavage]

Just started playing RR and like it a lot.

I agree, the pools could be larger, though, so after a long period of peace you could raise a more substantial army faster.

I especially like how it increases the importance of the barracks upgrades. Rather than just get better units, you also get faster replenishment of the units you already had. This makes a big difference.

[aduellist]

then what percentage of the medieval army was actually knights?

Well, first you have to take into account that there was no such thing as "the medieval army" as a standing entity. Armies were put together for a limited time and a specific purpose.

The percentage of "knights" (by which I mean heavy cavalry providing military service as a condition of their land grants) would be dictated by circumstances and available prep time and forces. If you're talking about a little set-to with the neighboring Lord, the percentage was likely to be quite high. They're the only readily available troops you've got.

Something like a Crusade is another matter altogether and also varied from crusade to crusade. Sometimes the call-out was general, meaning anyone who wanted and was able could join in. Other times it was specific to "professional warriors". All others would be asked to simply provide money to hire and pay for those warriors.

Unfortunately we can't simulate the way "recruitment" actually worked over the period and in various cultures. Now if we could have, say, 20 recruitment slots in a city and set upkeep equal to recruitment cost, you'd have incentive to recruit armies when you needed them and disband when you didn't. There are other issues of game mechanics that prevent that from being feasible, like the fact that, should you actually disband a full stack, you wouldn't see a like rise in units available for recruitment.

[YD23]

I love RR, also i'm using Byg's Grim reality mod. Makes the game a whole lot better. Like y2day siad, play the late era, there is plenty of advanced units.

[Schweizergarde]

I think its amazing. It adds difficulty, simulate realism, and makes AI army composition better.

[Iscariott]

Without RR, the game quickly, quickly, becomes spawn more knights. Every problem can be solved with more knights, except negative finances, those can however be solved by the application of said knights.

With RR, each unit of knights is of importance, often even after they have stopped being all that effective. I cite huscarls for norway. One of the weakest 'knight' level unit out there. If any have survived past their timeframe however, they are still possibly the baddest ass in whatever far off useless province i have them defending. They are still cav. They still have a chance to kill a general if you use em right.


My point is, with vanilla recruit rules, you can easily and quickly form a grand army of destruction. Continuously upgrade that army as you cakewalk across whatever region of the world you choose. And generally have the game in the bag around the time you've got your first taste of power with RR.

If you dont want your game to take a while, rr is definitely not for you. But even with it, late era starts you off with a good spread of units. You're a few turns from the start of gunpowder.