How do you conduct a war ?

[Kharn]

I'm not asking HOW to conduct a war here, just trying to get an idea of others peoples strats for fighting wars with the AI.

Do you simply train up stacks of armies and launch them at the nearest cities ? Or do you pick your targets carefully by going after the high star general or faction leader in the field ? Striking at the main income source of the AI is another, but can be a bit of a waste when you take into account some money scripts for the AI. Taking away a Citadel or major Fortress/Castle is another way of crippling your enemys source of strong troops. Also using Assassins to pick of major generals before strikes is a sneaky approach.

I tend to build at least two full stacks complete with Cav/Spear or pike/Heavy Inf and siege engines and take out cities and castles as I march. While i'm laying siege to castles or cities I usually try bring up a garrison force of cheap units to occupy the castle/city straight after the stack has left it. Then after my armies start to lose steam or get ground down, i retreat them for a refresh and see how the AI reacts before I get back into it.

How do you do it?

[htothehh]

I use a 3/4 stack or half stack, which usually should do the trick against anything. It's not how many soldiers you have, it's how you use them. When I'm fighting factions that control many regions, I just pick the closest one, and then move on to the next. But when I'm fighting factions that only have a few regions, I blockade their city's trade first, and then attacking the biggest castle/fortress/citadel; or sometimes when I don't really want the city to myself, but still want to wipe it out, I blockade the castles, and then wipe out the money-making cities, ransack it/exterminate it, destroy all buildings to get some extra allowance, and then give the region to someone completely random (or another enemy of the faction) just to stir things up a bit (like giving Angers to Egypt, or giving Moscow to the Pope).

[Nosocked]

and then give the region to someone completely random (or another enemy of the faction) just to stir things up a bit (like giving Angers to Egypt, or giving Moscow to the Pope).

Haha I wanna try that! haha,

I like to create buffer state kinda. Have nuetral or ally as ur border, cross over their land, attack, and retreat if neccessairy, what that does, if they attack, thjey have to face a nuetral, or ally of their enemy to get to your lands

[htothehh]

Haha I wanna try that! haha,

I like to create buffer state kinda. Have nuetral or ally as ur border, cross over their land, attack, and retreat if neccessairy, what that does, if they attack, thjey have to face a nuetral, or ally of their enemy to get to your lands

As long as you don't give anything in the West to the Mongols or Timurids, you'll be safe...

[Kharn]

That'd make for some interesting fights !

[aduellist]

Haha I wanna try that! haha,

I like to create buffer state kinda. Have nuetral or ally as ur border, cross over their land, attack, and retreat if neccessairy, what that does, if they attack, thjey have to face a nuetral, or ally of their enemy to get to your lands

Two problems.

1. You'll wreck your relations with other factions by marching armies across their territories unless you've negotiated a military access treaty. You'll turn a friend or a neutral into an enemy quickly that way.

2. Giving territory to the Papacy is a bad idea. It causes them to go hyperactive, at which point balance is out the window. You're likely to get to a point where you have to attack the Pope to meet your victory conditions, very bad if you're playing a Catholic faction.

[Nosocked]

Two problems.

1. You'll wreck your relations with other factions by marching armies across their territories unless you've negotiated a military access treaty. You'll turn a friend or a neutral into an enemy quickly that way.

2. Giving territory to the Papacy is a bad idea. It causes them to go hyperactive, at which point balance is out the window. You're likely to get to a point where you have to attack the Pope to meet your victory conditions, very bad if you're playing a Catholic faction.

Im genoa right now, and i always try for ally with miliary acess, if they dont accept, idc, I have very trustable, with every1 around me an ally w/ military acess. Very peacefull. Except the venitians, they backstabbed me when i allied ttheir enemy.. :p well i took their city and Its better than my top 3 cities, 7k income, wtf

And yeah, that'll be bad, be a muslim and give to the papal, call jihad and dont go for it, lol.

[SubRosa]

For me, I always tend to build one full stack of field army followed by half a stack of "specialists" such as siege engines & whatnot for capturing cities. Having those things with your armies just slows your movement to a crawl. I usually transport them via ships, then swap them out whenever I need them. Depending on what faction I'm fighting, I also have extra cavalry or archers kind of like luggage train following my main army around. Gives you the most flexibility when conducting a war & quickly replaces lost units when needed .

[Nosocked]

What i sometimes do, is send spies or priests to go up next to their cities to see what units are nearby, like to see if there wasnt 2 stacks next to a city... but what i do is send units, like if palermo had 5 units, send like 7 good melee, but what u do u include artiliary to take the walls down, you can auto-reseolve every time and win i think. But if thats if Im aggressive, i play good rep games, i useully send diplomats to ppl saying pay 100, or b attacked
they pay, and they start war. saving my perfict rep with every1 else. But yeah, i send multiple little stacks, cuz one big stack, besigining 1 city is fine, but idk, I send little stacks, to many pleaces, SACK them, DESTROY everything, and either hold on to them, letting the other team waste income like crazy, or give them back if the enimy is agressive asking for ceasefire w/ tribute, So they can re-build it up, and do the whole thing again...

I normally focus on one enemy first. Having multiple wars on multiple fronts is possible, but if ur weak, you might not suceed.

Yeah when they retaliate, and take ur city, i dont think AI know how to destroy ur buildings like you did to them :p

[htothehh]

Hahaha capture Rome, give it to the Mongols, and call a crusade on Rome, that would be funny.

[Nosocked]

Hahaha capture Rome, give it to the Mongols, and call a crusade on Rome, that would be funny.

haha lol, i wanna do that.

[Oddball_E8]

ive actually started giving all my captured citys from crusades to the papal states (or sometimes the templars, if the citys arent in the middle east)

other than that i usually play differently with each unit... just recently i played as the english and really pressed the longbow advantage... when i absolutely had to go into close combat (lie when i was taking a city or something like that) i used heavy infantry (templar infantry actually since i had a templar HQ in london) but other than that i just let death rain from the sky...

but now im playing as norway and im really spamming out the viking units... and charging the enemy en masse as soon as possible with everything ive got, and i get my generals to lead the charge (i have modded the game so that norway has dismounted huscarls for bodyguards).
the only time i dont charge in with all ive got is when i attack a city and use a ram... then ill most often use a mercenary unit to batter down the gates and then i charge with everything...
it works wonders actually hehehe (especially in cramped towns where its really man-to-man action that counts)

[Kharn]

I've seen the Papacy going a bit mad with expansion towards to rebel settlements, more often than not they end up in a war with Sicily. I've edited the income levels of citys and reduced corruption and squalor too, brings in loads of cash from one city which gives the AI the ability to pump out stack after stack, even the Pope.

Needless to say it can make for some very heavy going when trying to bring down someone !

[htothehh]

Needless to say it can make for some very heavy going when trying to bring down someone !

Which, inevitably, makes the game more challenging and thus more fun.

[Kharn]

Exactly ! But when you find your one stack attacked by three or four stacks, you find yourself doubting your changes a little..

In situations like that, conducting a war is a lot more straight forward. Simply gather up your forces and grind them down in major battles over and over again.

[aduellist]

but now im playing as norway and im really spamming out the viking units... and charging the enemy en masse as soon as possible with everything ive got, and i get my generals to lead the charge (i have modded the game so that norway has dismounted huscarls for bodyguards).
the only time i dont charge in with all ive got is when i attack a city and use a ram... then ill most often use a mercenary unit to batter down the gates and then i charge with everything...
it works wonders actually hehehe (especially in cramped towns where its really man-to-man action that counts)

Yeah, isn't that a blast? Completely different tactics than I've been used to playing and heaps of fun!.

[sirfiggin]

In the last campaign, every faction was so strong that the only feasible option was to pull them apart, build several armies led by decent generals, with escorting spies and with cannon, then blitzkrieg through a small area, to penetrate the centre of the enemy territory and cut them up

[Oddball_E8]

actually... one thing that i did when i was playing HRE was to use assassins to destroy the enemy towers before assaulting the town...
it works great since, if youre sieging, the enemy cannot rebuild so just use your assassin (keep him with the main army) to sabotage the towers (it has to be a larger town to be able to target towers) and then you can just walz in there without those pesky towers
this is especially valuable once the enemy starts building ballista and cannon towers...

[spartan117]

Well with supplies my strategy is completely different. I can keep an army in the field for any extensive amount of time. When planning I mainly keep account of the supplies of an army. I have to realize how many turns it can take to march across certain regions and whether or not I think it is worth it. Not to mention I have to account for how quickly I could reinforce a region if I do take it.

[Kharn]

Thats why most of the time I use armies without generals ! I find it way handier for fighting wars over a large area without having to worry about supplies.