I suspect script conflicts

[AndariusHaliusScipio]

As of late in my Kingdoms campaigns, I've been finding that just about all the units are killing/dying far more quickly than they used to. I boosted the morale for all units in the base game and expansion, so they tend to die before they have a chance to fully break and rout.

I haven't fully put this to the test in the base game, but I suspect it is happening there as well, because I had gone through an arduous process of adding +1 to all armor values in every unit, and even that doesn't seem to be enough.

I get really irritated to see the enemy throw cavalry onto my spearmen, and then within two seconds have HALF of my spearmen die before the cavalry onslaught. And yet I squeal with joy when my crossbowmen lay utter waste to enemy heavy cavalry within just a few waves of missiles.

Is the base game just naturally this wanton with speedy deaths, or is this the result of a battle script I downloaded?


The script in question I've been using is Ultimate AI Pack 1.6 by GrandViZ.

[Kundich]

Check the battle_config.xml and look for the <melee-hit-rate> tag. I think vanilla defaulted to 1.75. The higher that number, the quicker you will see deaths; while the lower that float-number, the slower you will see deaths. It could be that this value is adjusted upwards of your usual play settings. You could adjust it downward to suit your taste. Having not opened the referenced files, I can guess that the scripting calls for bonuses to command for your opponent, which might have the consequence you mentioned. But first, I would take a look at that tag.


Thanks,
ADM

[AndariusHaliusScipio]

Goodness gracious jesus christ. The numbers are the same in vanilla and the script version.

So what would be an ideal level to lower this to if I wanted it to be more realistic?

Or better yet, I went through the EDU and strenuously went and added +5 to all units' armor ratings, as well as adding the "hardy" trait to all of them, and "very_hardy" to the ones with hardy already, and adding another armor point to those that already have "very_hardy".

Should I keep it this way and hope the units don't get overly exhausted or should I revert, and lower the kill rate by 1.0 or so?

[alhoon]

lower the kill rate, but this will lead to long battles.

It is quite realistic for charging cavalry to pulverize half the spearmen in front of them. Just see a German horse. You'd think that it, alone, can kill 2-3 people if it ran on them with closed eyes and barding.

[AndariusHaliusScipio]

Right now my main concern is the fatigue levels. I've lowered the melee-hit-rate to "1.0" and it's done a rather effective job of balancing the realism and deaths. However, I'm worried that the troops would get overly exhausted in just one bout, because when I fight wars, I take an Alexandrian approach in micromanaging everything I can, and re-using fagged out units as much as possible until they're not needed anymore.

Should I raise the fatigue tolerance for all the basic infantry units? How would I do that? Or is that just "hardy" and "very_hardy" settings?

[alhoon]

If you go for realism think this:

Generals used fractions of their army at a time so that the rest of the army could rest.
Also killing would be quite slower so your battles could be long enough for winded/tired units to rest a bit.

I mean: Keep those 2 spear militias nearby in schiltrom. Once your heavy killers start to get tired, throw the schiltroms in the battle so the others could disengage and rest for a bit. With such a low kill rate, 2 schiltroms should be able to keep a whole army at bay long enough.

And remember that it's not just your units that get tired. It's also the enemy's units.

Question: How do you manage large sieges? Do you have enough time to kill all the enemies or you lose because you can't kill them all in the time available?

[AndariusHaliusScipio]

I do realize that; however, I'd like to think that all our soldiers are capable of being more well-trained and physically fit to fight for five minutes without going from Fresh to Tired. Even considering that the game battles are insanely more fast-progressing than historical battles (several days) would have been. Which is why I figure it should be decent to give all normal units the "hardy" trait, and all hardy units "very_hardy". Pre-existing very hardy's could get an armor boost or a heat reduction or something shmizzy.

The unfortunate part about unit reserves is that while the enemy AI almost never does this, my strategies don't allow for reserves because I need to have a line capable of shutting on itself once one enemy unit breaks and runs.

1)
----------------
------------------

2) ''
| ---------------
-----------------


Does that make sense? ^



Answer: That depends on which sort of siege you mean. I will answer for both:

Offensive: I do my best to make sure I have some artillery, from which I bring down towers first (I hate tower casualties), and if I have the power/ammo, I bring down multiple sections of the front wall, rush in, and push in with a huge mass of infantry into the town square with all my heaviest infantry, then perform a flanking maneuver with my cavalry. It usually doesn't work, but my infantry are mostly successful if they push through a single street like a guillotine.

Defensive: The easiest. I require a heavy dose of crossbowmen/archers, which I flood on the walls as close as possible. If the enemy has ladders, I put heavy infantry in between missile units, because ladders are invinicble. Siege towers are usually easily destroyed if I have ballista/cannon towers. Same with rams, though they're more likely to survive.

If and when a ram comes and breaks my gate, I have a line of heavy infantry to meet the onrush of units. The computer usually rushes everything they have for the breach, so I push in with some infantry, and throw cavalry at the sides. I keep my archers/crossbowmen on the walls and have them pour into the bulge made by enemy infantry. It takes a long while, and sometimes they end up breaking through anyway, but most of the time I manage to cause them to break and run, even if my membrane-coated-bulge is down to a one-man-thick line.

Missile units are essential to just about all of my strategies. Except city sieges and heavy infantry bouts.

[alhoon]

Offensive: I do my best to make sure I have some artillery, from which I bring down towers first (I hate tower casualties), and if I have the power/ammo, I bring down multiple sections of the front wall, rush in, and push in with a huge mass of infantry into the town square with all my heaviest infantry, then perform a flanking maneuver with my cavalry. It usually doesn't work, but my infantry are mostly successful if they push through a single street like a guillotine.

Yes, I use similar tactics. So the 30 mins for the battle are enough to capture the settlement, right?

[AndariusHaliusScipio]

That is variable. I'm incredibly stingy with unit numbers. I hate seeing them die just from tower arrows, so if I have artillery, I take a long time just blowing between four to six towers, two holes in the walls, and the gates. At best, I could have that done in ten minutes or so.

If I don't have artillery, I rush all my siege equipment at the walls first, in which case 30 minutes is an insanely tight fit. But I haven't had an offensive siege on the battle as of yet with a 1.0 kill rate.

[alhoon]

OK. Could you be so kind and post here the time you need for an offensive siege without artillery once you have one?

[AndariusHaliusScipio]

Aah.. I can't.

33 minutes, Holy Roman Empire vs Kingdom of France. Failed. Evenly matched armies, I had two ladders, one siege tower, one ram. Siege tower and ram were destroyed. They beat back my ladder assaults, featuring units such as Dismounted Feudal Knights, Dismounted Gothic Knights, Zweihanders, Armoured Sergeants, and Landsnekt Spearmen. And in that time I got nowhere near inside the city.

Situations like these is where I let the computer auto-resolve. I'm a horrible city besieger.

[alhoon]

Aah.. I can't.

33 minutes, Holy Roman Empire vs Kingdom of France. Failed. Evenly matched armies, I had two ladders, one siege tower, one ram. Siege tower and ram were destroyed. They beat back my ladder assaults, featuring units such as Dismounted Feudal Knights, Dismounted Gothic Knights, Zweihanders, Armoured Sergeants, and Landsnekt Spearmen. And in that time I got nowhere near inside the city.

However, the siege neede 33 minutes for you to fail? I think the time limit is 30 mins if you enable it...
So it seems that even if you were about to win... you wouldn't have the time with the slow killing ratio.

Which in fact may be interesting in some times, as you kill and kill and kill... lose some soldiers in the way.
Repeat next turn.

On the other hand, when you "lose" battle, you break off the siege. It's not a draw.


Also, may I suggest the following for sieges:
drop the ram.
Create 2 ladders and 2 siege towers. Attack from 2 points, near a gate and try to capture the gate so the army can march in.