VH is not the toughest?

[caralampio]

I always play VH/VH, but recently I reinstalled everything and played some Kingdoms. As those campaigns are kind of difficult, I tackled them on medium difficulty. However I noticed something: Battles using medium difficulty are tougher than on VH! I went on to play SS using medium battle diff and it's the same. Those battles are bloodbaths. I was able to compare my usual opening battle in an English campaign in both difficulties and although I won both, in Medium my troops were decimated.

I think the issue is that at VH fatigue and morale have increased effects. Usually you go into battle with a nice general while the AI sends captains. Your general causes the enemy to have worse morale, and the friendlies to have better. The enemy routs before you have suffered many casualties.

With medium, the enemy holds longer and routs only after it has sustained serious losses, causing the same to you in the process. So maybe the most challenging game is VH/M?

[henyo10]

Would not make sense really if medium was more difficult. Don't get the part where you have a general because won't a general have the same effects on both VH and M?

[Calamarain]

I do understand what you mean, caralampio. It would be a very interesting 'feature' though, and it would surprise me if it would have gone unnoticed for this long (still, I suppose it's possible, reminds me of the Wi flag).
Although, the only reason it would be an advantage to the ai would be because it has more troops to waste, right?

[caralampio]

The thing is, suppose you have a general with 2 dread. He scares the enemy at two dread in medium, but this is increased in VH (I'm not sure by what amount but let's say double). In VH, the general is scaring the enemy as if he had 4 dread.

Now let's suppose you have a general with 4 chivalry. In VH morale effects are doubled and he cheers your troops as if he had 8 chivalry.

Just a theory but worth checking it out no?

[muffinhead]

sorry, but i don't quite follow, but i know that if the ai is on hard, it tends to be a lot more stable with the diplomacy, etc. than on very hard. try the same battle on hard and if you get beat up more than you did on medium, than i think i will understand a little better.

[Cleitanious]

On Medium Fatigue and Morale is normal, but on Hard units tire faster and rout easier, on very hard it's even worse. So the general's bonuses are much more beneficial on very hard then they are on Medium. So if your strategy focuses on causing the enemy to rout, it will be much easier to achieve on very hard, since units rout easier in general.

This is battle difficulty, not campaign difficulty.

I prefer to play on M/M anyway.

[caralampio]

sorry, but i don't quite follow, but i know that if the ai is on hard, it tends to be a lot more stable with the diplomacy, etc. than on very hard. try the same battle on hard and if you get beat up more than you did on medium, than i think i will understand a little better.

I'm not talking about the campaign, only battles. And I feel that I suffer more casualties at medium than at VH in an otherwise similar battle. That's what I said in the OP.

[lordextra0]

also depends on what submods you use
example RR/Rc newest version +BYGIV gives higher morale so units don't rout as easily anyway

[BruceAlmighty]

So battles are harder on medium? im not very techy but based on what Cleitanious said it would make sense if battles were harder on medium...bummer.

[Lulian]

I think the AI gets a BONUS depending on the difficulty. Not you.

[Staffen]

Just tried something to test this.

Lined up a bunch of musketeers against a pack of mailed knights on the grassy field battle map.

Medium: knights get through and butcher them all.

Very Hard: knights get through and butcher them all, but not before half of them flee in panic.

Only had time for 1 test run, need to do multiple to verify anything definitive though.

[Alexios Komnenos]

I always play in M/M because I noticed that units routed very easily in VH and in campaign diplomacy is much more stable. Of course, I usually recieve backstabs from the Turks, or Genoa (classical one, Milanese unfaithfulness' heir), or Hungary, etc. But allies are more allies and enemies are actually able to negociate peace.

I find that the game is funnier in M/M than in VH/VH. This is not like Imperium or Dawn of War, games that are ridiculouslty easy in Normal and extremely hard in Hard, with no medium stance (I don't want to imagine how's DoW's Very Hard difficulty...). This game's difficulty range is not that abysmal, and Very Hard is challenging, but I prefer stable alliances and, what is more, long and bloody battles. I enjoy putting the camera at soldiers range and looking at the chaos of the close combat. Simply lovely.

Take care!

[muffinhead]

Alexios: do you know for a fact if the hard ai is as stable as the medium or is it just harder with more backstabbing?

[Alexios Komnenos]

Alexios: do you know for a fact if the hard ai is as stable as the medium or is it just harder with more backstabbing?

My experience is that very hard AI uses to declare war upon you at the same time. Then comes the classical Vanilla situation about you against the world, and little conflicts away from yours exist in the whole Europe. AI uses to consider the human player as the prime menace, and as long as you share frontier with some of your allies, give them some turns to declare war against you or broking the alliance.

Perhaps other players don't have this impression, but I have, and I prefer a more slow and calmed gameplay.

Besides, an attractive characteristic of most of the mods around here is that they try to avoid precisely this situation of war between you and the rest of Europe, to make a more realistic gameplay. Rome was not at war with every nation in Europe, Africa and Asia. It is true that great empires use to be at war with many at the same time, but this is not always this way. Byzantines were fighting a defensive was during almost all of its existence (parenthesis with Justinian, Heraclius and the two Basils). Spanish empire went almost the same.

I am looking for a mod that recreates the true problems of Medieval territorial government and expansion. SS gives me a little bit of this, but I think that Dominion of the Sworf will be the most close experience that we can achieve by now of the inconvenients of feudalism.

Take care!

[Arithian]

WOW, this explains so much its not even funny.

My biggest problem with this game in general is that every fight ends when the enemy general or my general is killed. Even when I manually increase the units moral by 50%. The enemy AI always charges the general into my spearmen and BOOM fight over, enemy routs.

This explains SOOOOO much as to why on VH (which is what I play on all the time looking for a challenge) absolutly sucks.

Wow man, I cant wait to try this out, thanks a ton!

[TheLastPrivate]

With battles, medium is actually harder. In VH you can not only abuse AI's lack of generals, but also harass them to a point where they're out of stamina and are easily killed/routed in fatigue.

In medium morale/fatigue is higher, allowing the AI to perform better even under harassment/lack of generals. However, I find VH battle settings harder against multiple stacks due to lost stamina.

I would still play VH for challenge.

[gracul]

Yes what Cleitanious said was right, units rout quicker on vh then on medium without a general.
However you must all first think what difference does that make on the campaign map.
Since enemies rout faster, you capture more prisoners, since you capture prisoners you can either ransom, execute or release them.
If you release them, then the AI is actually on a + considering they have lost less men, and since their army routed it has to mean that they had little chance of actual victory. So the released army will join with new recruits and attack you again.
If you ransom, or execute however, your global standing falls, and other factions won't want an alliance with you. What more because your a butcher, they should make an alliance against you, and back stab your factions weakly defended cities.

[Calamarain]

I'm not sure yet what this means for overall difficultie, Gracul. Would the battle difficultie be moddable?

[gracul]

That means that its overall more difficult then playing vh/m.

Im not a battle modder, so i don't really know.

[Cleitanious]

On VH Battle Difficult to defend your settlement just have a ballista fire a flaming bolt through the doorway when they batter down the gate and it usually routs their whole army. lol.