vh/vh victory claims, and the scientific method...

[tallstark]

OK, so I have perhaps flipped a little too much crap at times when everyone keeps claiming they had an easy time with a vh/vh Gondor campaign, or that they turtled for 20 turns as Dale to make it more challenging etc....so I would like to issue an open challenge to the community.

The basis of the scientific method is that something that is true can be duplicated every time if you follow the same steps. For instance, other than winning the battles, I can tell you exactly what my first 20 moves of my Rohan campaign are, and you can go experiment and get the exact same results.

I can tell you that on turn one I built roads in all cities, I built 2 HA in Edoras, 2 Helmingas in Helms Deep and took the entire stack headed towards Isengard. If I tell you I got there in 3 turns, then you can do the same thing and see if I was telling the truth. Can you get to Isengard with that stack in 3 turns? Does building roads in all settlements leave me enough economy to build that stack?

Whether or not I can actually win the battle is dependant on my battle skills, but you will be able to see that its doable or not.

I will rep anyone who can show your move by move first 20 turns that can be duplicated and verified as real. Vh/Vh only, say if its 1.3 or 1.4, and RC/RR or not. Extra rep for Gondor, Dale or Rohan, as I see them as the hardest to win a VH/VH, in that order....

Now I know the AI uses a RNG and there will be slightly different conditions based on some uncontrollable events, but you get the idea...

[Dark_Enlighter]

A marvelous idea but may i suggest that everyone posts their "strategy" in a spoiler?
Will do my contribution after the exams.

[Xelathur]

You know, this is a forum. People don't always tell the truth.. especially if they can tell people that they own everything on the hardest settings with absurds handicaps for the AI

However, I do not doubt that most of the players actually manage VH/VH easily.
I will follow this topic

[Maverock]

Good topic, I'm getting tired of people saying how easy VH/VH is.
When iam NOT rushing it's even incredibly difficult, and I can say I'm a pretty experienced player

[tallstark]

Good topic, I'm getting tired of people saying how easy VH/VH is.
When iam NOT rushing it's even incredibly difficult, and I can say I'm a pretty experienced player

Agreed! The main challenge is for everyone who keeps saying vh/vh is too easy and you own it, then prove it. I have won several campaigns on vh/vh, and I have also completely given up a few when I was really getting my butt kicked. I have been playing since Rome and like most of you I can handle business and win a 2:1 battle or worse depending on the map, but vh gives sooooo much gold to AI that it really does challenge you to see it all the way thru.

I also think that people confuse having a good start with winning. I have been at turn 50 as Rohan and #1 in every category, only to see Mordor wipe out Gondor and Dale, and all the sudden I have Harad, Mordor, Rhun and OOTMM coming at me from all directions, and my good start doesn't hold up so well.

Next week I will practice what I preach and post moves for a vh/vh campaign that anyone can duplicate, should be interesting!

[Maverock]

Agreed! The main challenge is for everyone who keeps saying vh/vh is too easy and you own it, then prove it. I have won several campaigns on vh/vh, and I have also completely given up a few when I was really getting my butt kicked. I have been playing since Rome and like most of you I can handle business and win a 2:1 battle or worse depending on the map, but vh gives sooooo much gold to AI that it really does challenge you to see it all the way thru.

I also think that people confuse having a good start with winning. I have been at turn 50 as Rohan and #1 in every category, only to see Mordor wipe out Gondor and Dale, and all the sudden I have Harad, Mordor, Rhun and OOTMM coming at me from all directions, and my good start doesn't hold up so well.

Next week I will practice what I preach and post moves for a vh/vh campaign that anyone can duplicate, should be interesting!

Interesting, I look forward too it.

Today I had a little try of a Gondor campaign (vh/vh - RR/RC - 1.3) and got whooped, no.. WHOOPED.
Could hold the bridge without much trouble, but full stacks coming from Cair Andros. Had some difficulty to push them back.. then Harad came in with 1 1/2 stack and my economy couldn't hold it after I lost Lindir. Where in the economy part am I doing things wrong? Roads, farms, markets - barrack/arrow for Minas Tirith.

[Hieron]

However, requesting full proof of everything is a bit stupid too. Not everyone is remembering or writing down every single move they ever made from turn 0 to turn x just to "back up" their victory claims.

There are quite some battles where it is possible to lose <100 units vs 3k of early Mordor (or early Harad for that matter). All of those depended on some grey area of "cheating":

-Making use of insane height differences. Fighting vs fully exhausted men is easy. Ai can be tricked to give up high ground.
-While sieging with just horses and the enemy sallies out, just run them a lap around their own castle (they will follow running, at least for me) and then engage, again vs fully exhausted men. Horses will still be fresh.
-Bridge defenses with FG holding the line.
-Drawing the enemy to your gateway when they siege by opening gates. Then holding it with FG, while boiling oil helps.

Especially early game, I think Gondor can do well against them (no Mumakils, no Olog Hai, no masses of mounted archers or strong cavalry, yet already some Fountain Guard). Also, when you get a lucky streak of missions, you can get *alot* of FG. I'm sure I had about 5 units of FG from the 1 at the start and 2 missions before even the "advanced" buildings got unlocked. 5 FG used well can do so much damage.. especially early game.

So I think, some luck (FG's), some well placed uphill battles and a serious rush towards either Mordor or Harad while keeping the other at peace (both will accept peace in the first few turns) and things may go very well.

Personally I don't like both rushing, and carefully planning to get battles mostly uphill etc. Quite enjoying the turtling start.. But I would believe it very possible and then someone could call it "easy" I guess.. Would still require a serious amount of planning and management. 1.4 patch did not make it easier though, but still..

[Sponbo]

That the hell is FG ?

[Muffer Nl]

Fountain Guard.

[kelvintyk]

Well, 38 turns into the campaign and I've only managed to capture everything before Minas Morgul, can't gather enough resources to take Minas Morgul it seems. My upkeep already went above my economy and now I'm in the reds.

[hitokiri2486]

there will be slightly different conditions based on some uncontrollable events, but you get the idea...

And, amusingly enough, there goes the ability to reproduce results via the scientific method.

In experiments you have to control your variables, otherwise you can't be confidant in your results or the ability to reliably reproduce them. It is a basic principle of science.

There's no point in trying to be "scientific" in VH/VH victory claims when the AI will not act the same in each game, and the outcome of various turns and battles will be different no matter what the input of the player.

[Achilla]

And, amusingly enough, there goes the ability to reproduce results via the scientific method.

In experiments you have to control your variables, otherwise you can't be confidant in your results or the ability to reliably reproduce them. It is a basic principle of science.

There's no point in trying to be "scientific" in VH/VH victory claims when the AI will not act the same in each game, and the outcome of various turns and battles will be different no matter what the input of the player.

Exactly to the point.

Let alone, even if someone participated in the project, noting down every move would be impossible without launching dev console and writing down the x & y coordinates of units, e.g. general X with army of 2 a, 3 b and 1 c units moves from 72,191 to 66, 187 in turn 19. Not to mention noting down casualties taken in battle, acquired traits and other details seriously affecting the course of entire campaign would produce something in the size of a small book or lengthy game manual at best.

If the purpose of this thread is realising the scientific method of 'winning moves' like it was chess, then duh, this thread serves no purpose. There are no 'winning moves' and your enemy will adapt to what you do as well as do random stuff. Both from practical and theoretical standpoint, realisation of this idea is pointless.

The only kind of constructive feedback one can get are simply strategies which work more times than the others, but ultimately it will be down to tactics, small choices one makes everytime, be it on the field of battle or economical decisions.

[tallstark]

Exactly to the point.

Let alone, even if someone participated in the project, noting down every move would be impossible without launching dev console and writing down the x & y coordinates of units, e.g. general X with army of 2 a, 3 b and 1 c units moves from 72,191 to 66, 187 in turn 19. Not to mention noting down casualties taken in battle, acquired traits and other details seriously affecting the course of entire campaign would produce something in the size of a small book or lengthy game manual at best.

If the purpose of this thread is realising the scientific method of 'winning moves' like it was chess, then duh, this thread serves no purpose. There are no 'winning moves' and your enemy will adapt to what you do as well as do random stuff. Both from practical and theoretical standpoint, realisation of this idea is pointless.

The only kind of constructive feedback one can get are simply strategies which work more times than the others, but ultimately it will be down to tactics, small choices one makes everytime, be it on the field of battle or economical decisions.

You are missing the point; the purpose of the post is to say to all those people telling everyone that vh/vh as Gondor was too easy that it would be interesting to see how they did it.

Also I understand that random actions will change, in fact you will notice I brought it up in the original post. However, the main idea still stands, I have not played one campaign ever as Rohan that did not get an invasion called against Edoras for example. The basics of the game don't change that much, i.e. I would bet 80% of the outcomes are the same given the players actions, more than the AI's RNG...

[Achilla]

You are missing the point; the purpose of the post is to say to all those people telling everyone that vh/vh as Gondor was too easy that it would be interesting to see how they did it.

Also I understand that random actions will change, in fact you will notice I brought it up in the original post. However, the main idea still stands, I have not played one campaign ever as Rohan that did not get an invasion called against Edoras for example. The basics of the game don't change that much, i.e. I would bet 80% of the outcomes are the same given the players actions, more than the AI's RNG...

Rohan is special case. I also put a random guess 'Edoras' is marked as crusade_target so it's one of the first invasion targets when campaign progresses in a 'traditional' way. Rohan campaign is substantially harder for me than Gondor, this I admit. I was close to losing it once over RR/RC for 1.3 ... I can imagine similar balance to be in vanilla as well, since I heard Rohan and Gondor mentioned over and over on these boards.

[ashenhigh]

I would love to see how others did as Rohan on vh/vh settings as well. Anyone that claims vh/vh is easy is crazy...

Anyone have any mini-map screens as Rohan on vh/vh around turn 150? Ill post mine as soon as I get home later.

Although I dont think the scientific method really applies here. You have random variables such as invasions and I don't think the AI will do EXACTLY the same thing each set of turns. Plus battles cannot be duplicated, and the results of battles will greatly affect your generals and further battle outcomes...

[Black_ice_Spain]

ill try rohan, or isengard idk when i get my phenom 2 and go with it to 4ghz (in 2days )

as rohan idk, but as gondor the only thing you need to do (without any real scienfitic strategy) its hold cair andros, osgiliath and conquer that rebel-city which is under the harad-gondor bridge.

Also put your capital to... idk, that fort in the middle of the empire xD.

I conquer the city at the left of your empire too.

Then only make +income buildings and keep dol amroth, minas tirith and pelargir as recruiting zones (pelargir mostly for marines, gondor and dol amroth improving military buildings, and well... also lossarnach for axemen).

If you play every fight, you will win easily in cities, just make a square around the door and put your best infantry on the walls.

[Emme]

Interesting topic.. I think the claim to easy vh/vh has to do with the player's experience level and the strategies deployed i.e. conservative, aggressive, economy focused, expansion focused, etc. -- the last time I checked, this is still a strategy based game? besides, no one can duplicate turn by turn when the AI is not a fixed variable and behave differently every game.

I think everyone would agree though that are certain strategies that would be more effective thus changing the overall difficulty levels. For example, when I play Rohan, I tend to be super aggressive vs. Isengard because they are the key on how my mid games will go. I move all my units together and begin to assult Isengard and Duneard and keep doing so - setting the taxes to extra high on all my settlements to fund the attack. Once they are destroyed, usually around 20-25 turns, then I can focus on expansion and build up massive army to take down Mordor. so VH/VH does seem easy for this faction in my opinion, however for other factions may not be the case. It takes me twice as long to win or almost near impossible when playing faction like OOTMM.

[Emme]

I don't think screen shots will prove anything really since it can be made up, better to do the testing yourself and see whether it works or not

Computer AI is really easy to exploit - I think that's the main reason why it can be so much easier for some and the garrison script does not help them much either. Don't get my wrong, not saying VH/VH is easy overall, but for the overpowered factions (better units) then it is considerably more easier. I have finished the Rohan/Silvan Elves/Gondor campaign in less than 100 turns on vh/vh long campaign not because is extremely easy, but there are ways to get around and explot the stupity of the AI, you would need to command almost all battle yourself though.

Key Strategies used (exploit as much as you can lol):

* Siege battle - attacker: 90% of the time, the enemy will sally out when the odds favour them (2:1 or less) especially when you have a more calvary based army since they are less in numbers. I do not know how this is being calculated but we all know is not accurate and if micro'ed properly, you will dominate them when they sallied out, who need seige weapons? split your force and siege with less units against the enemy. (have archers fire with flaming arrows and calvary charge non-anti cav units - require quite a bit of micro'ing, but you can win almost all 2:1 odd battle without much casualties)
The most effective way is to use 4-5 generals in one stack, the units will replenish after each battle for free and are the best unit stats wise.
* Siege battle - defender: always sally out if you have archers - figure this out why yourself
* Trap the enemy to use army from settlement as reinforcement: do not attack right away, wait for a small stack unit to appear near their settlement then attack. They will retreat, then attack again which will bring out reinforcement from their settlement. Destroy both forces and you have yourself an empty city to take.
* Generals with "Night Fighter" traits: most time the enemy does not travel with full stack, the units will fight if they have reinforcement, use the "night figther" and you practically guranteed a win with minimum loss. keep doing it and cut down their armies. This will also acquire command and dread for the general really quick.
* Acquire dread traits: more fights = more dread, so much faster to route the enemies.
* Fight on higher grounds if possible.


That being said, I do not use any type of scientific method or template, just fast expansion using these strategies. Playing as Rohan, I have destroyed Isengard in 7 turns, exapanded all the way to the black gate and pretty much pushing into Mordor very early in the game. Just more ways to exploit the poor computer AI. You can try out these key strategies and see if this will help your gameplay.

[Twist of Cain]

The most effective way is to use 4-5 generals in one stack, the units will replenish after each battle for free and are the best unit stats wise.

Depends on what nation you're playing and against who, as OotMM your "elite" bodyguard can't even fend off silvan spearmen, while costing even more in upkeep and making the general slow as molasses to move around the field...

[Chyeaaaa111]

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

I don't think screen shots will prove anything really since it can be made up, better to do the testing yourself and see whether it works or not

Computer AI is really easy to exploit - I think that's the main reason why it can be so much easier for some and the garrison script does not help them much either. Don't get my wrong, not saying VH/VH is easy overall, but for the overpowered factions (better units) then it is considerably more easier. I have finished the Rohan/Silvan Elves/Gondor campaign in less than 100 turns on vh/vh long campaign not because is extremely easy, but there are ways to get around and explot the stupity of the AI, you would need to command almost all battle yourself though.

Key Strategies used (exploit as much as you can lol):

* Siege battle - attacker: 90% of the time, the enemy will sally out when the odds favour them (2:1 or less) especially when you have a more calvary based army since they are less in numbers. I do not know how this is being calculated but we all know is not accurate and if micro'ed properly, you will dominate them when they sallied out, who need seige weapons? split your force and siege with less units against the enemy. (have archers fire with flaming arrows and calvary charge non-anti cav units - require quite a bit of micro'ing, but you can win almost all 2:1 odd battle without much casualties)
The most effective way is to use 4-5 generals in one stack, the units will replenish after each battle for free and are the best unit stats wise.
* Siege battle - defender: always sally out if you have archers - figure this out why yourself
* Trap the enemy to use army from settlement as reinforcement: do not attack right away, wait for a small stack unit to appear near their settlement then attack. They will retreat, then attack again which will bring out reinforcement from their settlement. Destroy both forces and you have yourself an empty city to take.
* Generals with "Night Fighter" traits: most time the enemy does not travel with full stack, the units will fight if they have reinforcement, use the "night figther" and you practically guranteed a win with minimum loss. keep doing it and cut down their armies. This will also acquire command and dread for the general really quick.
* Acquire dread traits: more fights = more dread, so much faster to route the enemies.
* Fight on higher grounds if possible.


That being said, I do not use any type of scientific method or template, just fast expansion using these strategies. Playing as Rohan, I have destroyed Isengard in 7 turns, exapanded all the way to the black gate and pretty much pushing into Mordor very early in the game. Just more ways to exploit the poor computer AI. You can try out these key strategies and see if this will help your gameplay.

All very good exploits and they definately work. Especially the one where you attack the army next to the city or castle. This is crucial as it completely eliminates the garrison script.