Do you sometimes get sick of doing battles?

[henyo10]

Sometimes all I want to do is build stuff, is this normal since I consider battles like siege assaults extremely boring since it takes too long?

[Caesar Clivus]

That is why the auto-resolve button exists my friend

[CrossSide]

That is why the auto-resolve button exists my friend

Yeah, were my army can't even defeat a little rebel army

I'm getting sick of it sometimes too, espacially when the AI continue attacks a settlement with a small army who have no chance.

[SoulBlade]

If you play on a harder difficulity, you might lose 90% of the auto-resolved battles .
Just avoid battles and wars.

[KittySN]

If the experience system were like RTW, I'd enjoy battles more because there's a stronger emphasis on the intimate development of individual units. I get sick of them too, especially once I start getting trebuchets/mangonels in all my settlements. (Instant destruction of ANY army that strolls up to my gates.)

[Samariten]

What! you get tired of battles blood, death and corpses

[Erwin Rommel]

Actually, I wanted to get out of the campaign map as fast as possible and strike at the nearest enemy stack, just to get me that excuse to battle now, especially those against the odds.

[Mega Tortas de Bodemloze]

Sometimes all I want to do is build stuff, is this normal since I consider battles like siege assaults extremely boring since it takes too long?

I hear ya...I also enjoy seeing the campaign map grow and unfold, watching the politics and empire building way better than constant battles. so Auto-calc 80%-90% of the time. Here's a few things that might help...

1. sieging {you play it} with a second half/full stack composed of 100% melle troops. They really do a great job and you don't have to suffer thru the massive friendly fire episodes the AI has made an art form. Having this help makes make fight and enjoy battles I would ordinarily just auto-calc.

2. troop composition - when I'm just gonna auto-calc battles I tend to fill the stacks with auto-calc favorable units such as crossbows and such.

3. ally engagements - whenever i can fight with an ally it's always fun and interesting to see them go at it. Since I heavily favor range troops I usually do most of the softening up stuff for my ally. Once again w/o the ally it's usually Auto-calc time.

4. important battles - If it's important for me or the enemy I usually try to fight it myself.

Hope some of that might help.

[Tricky557]

I tend to auto-resolve siege assaults, since I honestly suck at them. Get more causualties than the auto-resolve lol.

If it's a field battle that I've got a shot at winning(not a me 100 men the enemy 2000 men scenario) I'll usually fight it.

[TheBromgrev]

I tend to auto-resolve siege assaults, since I honestly suck at them. Get more causualties than the auto-resolve lol.

If it's a field battle that I've got a shot at winning(not a me 100 men the enemy 2000 men scenario) I'll usually fight it.

Same here, although I typically wait for the siege to end. Let a captain control the army and move a general in at the last minute, so if the enemy sallies forth after they run out of supplies the general gets credit for the win

EDIT: I usually am bad at sieges because the pathfinding AI is crap-tastic. I typically lose more men trying to take the central square than the walls because of the poor pathfinding AI. Unless I'm playing as the dwarves in TATW

[JiangZiya]

You could remove armies from the game entirely. Then it'd be Medieval 2: Total Architect.
The Pope could be replaced by Bob the Builder. ^_^

[Mega Tortas de Bodemloze]

You could remove armies from the game entirely. Then it'd be Medieval 2: Total Architect.
The Pope could be replaced by Bob the Builder. ^_^

Excellent notion...I'll pay triple price for a 1st edition and promise to give the Fed Ex* man a twenty spot for overnight delivery...

* Federal Express{courier service in the states}

[meese]

Yeah, I do get sick of doing battles. That's usually when I save and quit

[Wadey]

I only auto-resolve battles when I'm certain my losses will be minimal, although as my empire grows and there is more fighting each turn I'll do it more often.

I've been managing to avoid siege attacks recently by attacking with a sufficiently weak force that they will either sally or re-inforce, which often leads to a heroic victory and small losses!

On the whole, battles are what I enjoy most about the game, so I try engineer the best battles (Skilled generals, Elite units and odds against me) rather than 'win' my campaigns.

Slightly off topic, but I dont really get how the pathfinding AI is so much of a problem. Perhaps I just micro-manage more than most but by setting the odd way point marker and just generally keeping an eye on my troops they seem to end up where I want them! I dont consider pausing to be a crime either as my laptop can think quite a lot faster than me!

[Tyrenia]

I agree, siege assaults stink! Pathfinding IN cities may be bad, but I find wall pathfinding to be a NIGHTMARE! In siege defense however, I can often acheive Heroic Victory by holding the enemy at the gate and letting the boiling oil do it's work

Despite being a poor field commander, I tend to RT battles where the odds are even (lol), because I can usually get a better result than Auto Calc, everything else is Auto Resolved.

[Krisz87]

I love to build and take care of my economi.

But in MTW1 i likte the battles, they where so huge!

In Rome TW i lovde the battles, it was really cool to see the corpses after the battle, see the shildes of the dead soldiers pointing up and som legion egeal staffs pointing up and see the cavlary flying of the horse when the get hitt by arrows. In MTW2 the units die on there back or on the stomach and it always lookt so 2D. But in Empire it looks better, really like the battles there to, but the campin map and the AI suck to mutch.

MTW2 was big - when the corpese die so boringly

i know i am sick

[JiangZiya]

i know i am sick

,he says to the doctor, in waits in the padded white room.

[cedric37]

I never plays the battles on the battle map, because:
1 - i have not so many time to spend on the game and i prefer the economic / diplomatic / strategic aspect of the game (stupid me, i know, but i don't like Civ2+ either because i like the simplicity of M2TW).
2 - i achieve to kill more soldiers when i play the battle myself than when i let the autocalc do it (yes i know it's bad to know when you sucks ^^).
3 - read point 1, i definitely needs another life without a wife and 2 young childrens...
:p

PS: i find than in SS6.2 result for autocalc is not that bad, sometimes i even win battles where the indicator give me 'looser'.

[smitty]

I get very sick of battles, especially petty skirmishes with general-less armies that are only 1/2 full and other similar armies. This is where the console became my friend.

I prefer to use the auto_win attacker/defender console command to rule in favor of myself when I knew I would overwhelm an enemy force, for example my full-stack elite units vs. a 1/3 stack of enemy militia... However harder difficulties rule the autoresolve higher in their favor whereas the auto_win command tends to minimize your losses (which I have found to be a realistic depiction of when I actually fight out these fights). I prefer to save my battle maps for the epic full stack vs full stack encounters or for siege sallies where I know I might actually have a hard time overcoming my enemy, or when I know I'll only win by a small margin.

[dragonsign]

Yes sometimes i get enough of battles.. the Auto-solve is a real trator sometimes, better to do the fighting yourself, but ah.. it can be really monotone.

When i'm really bored of Total War i pick up my AK-47 and go on a killingspree in Counter strike

Get some variation, that will keep it fun longer