Why is every battle in RSII so attritional? Patch Proposal for morale and maneuver warfare

[Promet]

This mod can be perfect. It has the most amazing skins, immersion, graphics etc, better than any other mod in my opinion.

But it is also my opinion that it is comparatively weak in battle mechanics. Literally every battle is a fight to the death, for every unit, unless I kill their enemy general. Manuever is but a mutation of its true purpose and weight in war, even if you surround your enemy it is merely a game of numbers, numerical superiority at a point....only ratios change. It is still costly, it doesn't give you the decisive morale advantage over your enemy, they almost route at the same time they would if they were just fighting a frontal battle. When in reality they would much sooner, you would take much less casualties and that in turn changes the entire dynamic of the fight for the remaining time.


Napoleon once said that in war the psychological is to the physical as 3 is to 1.

Since morale is so high in the game, it shuts out talent driven advantage, the most powerful weapon in war, capable of turning peasants into spartans, podrominoi into companion cavalry. You can't quickly destroy one army through crafty maneuvering and quick shift to the other, It just takes too long to route even low quality infantry. Your options are limited to what is actually feisible by the games laws. I cannot change my single army into two with maneuver! As the German army did at Tannenberg, Napoleon at Castigleone, shuting off a facet of the effectiveness of manuever in war.

Without proper morale, and the battle mechanics it creates which foster maneuver warfare, I really can't rely on command talent, it comes down too numbers too often, to sluging it out and staying power.

If combat was in real life as it is in RSII, we would have no Sun Tzu's, No Hannibals, No Caesars or Sertonious', Scipios or Napoleon...

If Caesar had to fight at Alesia with RSII mechanics against 200,000 Gauls, if he could not rely on the mathematical tactically sound punch in the rear done by his Germanic Cavalry, I assure you he could not have won.

If at Cannae, Hannibals 40,000 had to fight the 80,000 Romans with RSII mechanics, even surrounded, without the loss of military effectiveness that came with the envelopement's morale shock, the Roman heavy infantry would have carried the day.

And by morale shock I mean the complex specifics, units getting confused, some men losing heart, the effect of the mens certainty they the battle cannot be won or the certainty that it is being lost, low room to maneuver and in turn its effect on the military effectiveness...the complex specifics that can never truly be repersented in the game, but can be measured in with a change in unit stats and morale statistics in the game.

Also, it should be made that most casualties are made during routes, rather than during the actual battle.


For now, I am just going to change the character traits file and change the AI general traits to lower morale on a more broad range, I don't have the commitment to RSII to reshape the EDU. But I hope that if it is ever looked into again....say for a RS2.2...that the developers or mod leaders properly weigh more exactly the attack, defense and morale of each unit. RS2 has already made RTW history, but include better battle mechanics and a foundation in stone will change into a foundation in marble.

[Jezza93]

I completely agree with you,I also think soldiers have too many hitpoints,it constantly infuriates me how I see them get knocked down and then get back up again,several times.
This makes battles unnecessarily long.

[chris10]

I completely agree with you,I also think soldiers have too many hitpoints,it constantly infuriates me how I see them get knocked down and then get back up again,several times.
This makes battles unnecessarily long.

units/soldiers have only 1 hitpoint...
the thing is "lethality"...
anyway..there is years in balancing the units stats to get some nice battles who are not over in 1 a minute and to alow for some tactical movements to and then somebody comes along tryin to tell anybody else that he has "the solution" for something apparently messed up...sorry guys...thats weird stuff...
all depends on the dificulty level one is playing and on the generals and their traits/ancillarys of the own general and the AI general if there is one...
hard gives the AI +4 morale/attack/defense
very hard gives the AI +7morale/attack/defense
any star an AI general has gives +1morale/attack/defense in a radius of 35m + eventual traits/ancillarys giving morale..

on VH enemy infantry will rip to pieces the players heavy infantry and probaly will never rout cause of huge bonuses...
so please before making assumptions you should know the mechanic and actually fully understand it

[General Brittanicus]

The only time i have experienced enemy units taking overly long to break when surrounded was when i fought Hannibal, but thats because he give's some insane morale bonuses. Most of the time, it's just the elite enemy units that take a while for me to break, but i see no problem with that.

[chris10]

The only time i have experienced enemy units taking overly long to break when surrounded was when i fought Hannibal, but thats because he give's some insane morale bonuses. Most of the time, it's just the elite enemy units that take a while for me to break, but i see no problem with that.

I second this...there is no whatsoever need for a rebalance...all is as it should be

and Hanibal ...well...he is a 10 star..
that means +10 morale/attack/defense in a radius of 30m+(5x10m)= 80m radius around him
when play on H/H this means another +4 to all above...
its absolutely normal that the probably do never rout...

I can post a replay, even low tier units take 10-15 cavalry charges to route....and at a heavy cost on the cavalry.

then you either play on VH battles or you dont use the cav correctly (dont charge correct)..

[Promet]

I'm fine with them being long if the enemy lines up, I line up, and they just clash like that.

But if I am attacking vigoursly with cavalry , in the rear of the enemies weakest troops while also charging my heaviest at their front?

That should lead to a route that could be exploited to lead to many others. The battle should be a short a decisive affair, as we have seen throughout history when decisive tactics are used.
I think the attack/ defense is great, its just the morale!!!

[General Brittanicus]

My cimbri armies tend to break the enemy in about 5 seconds most fo the time, although i am only fighting other barbarian factions at the moment and i am using bear warriors.

[Promet]

My cimbri armies tend to break the enemy in about 5 seconds most fo the time, although i am only fighting other barbarian factions at the moment and i am using bear warriors.

[Promet]

Like I said, I like long battles.


Just not at the expense of truths of the science of war. Read some Clausewitz!

[Promet]

I can post a replay, even low tier units take 10-15 cavalry charges to route....and at a heavy cost on the cavalry.

[Kozmonavt]

Cavalry that also causes fear can still earily rip any enemy to pieces, even those pimped up spawned stacks. The only problem in my opinion is phalanxes. Those guys should either be running or dropping like flies the moment the enemy starts clawing at their flank, let alone both of them or even from the back. But since AI can't even form a line, I think everything is just fine as it is. Overall morale was lowered in the first patch if I remember correctly?

[♔Greek Strategos♔]

The balance of battles is perfect... H\H with huge units...these battles are the most interesting i have ever played..and i play total war games the last 8-9 years...be serious guys...for 2 years people who are more aware and knowlegable than the average total war player achieved amazing things according to battle mechanics...we should change nothing for battles...also im currently playing 5 good emperors(Roman campaings only) from chris10 which is the best mod ever....my suggestion is everyone should play this mod which has the best and most epic battles of all time...+amazing scripts for all of us who want a true hardcore game...

Regards...

[Promet]

I second this...there is no whatsoever need for a rebalance...all is as it should be

Your opinion, which reflects you take gameplay over realism. Because the way battles are now are not that historically accurate as I stipulated in my first post.

and i play total war games the last 8-9 years...be serious guys...for 2 years people who are more aware and knowlegable than the average total war player achieved amazing things according to battle mechanics

It could be 50, how can being a veteran player of a game give you any sort of edge in knowledge about the real mechanics of war? I am sure you are a great player, but great within the laws of the game. Of course real war is more different, in many many ways, I am making a proposal for more historical accuracy in the battle mechanics of the game, I don't see how 9 years of playing TW makes you more knowledgible in that area, especially since you are a supporter of the clearly errored status quo, of not just RSII but all vanilla TW games, most mods, save for a few.


Even if it were relevant, I am a 6 year TW player.

[♔Greek Strategos♔]

Your opinion, which reflects you take gameplay over realism. Because the way battles are now are not that historically accurate as I stipulated in my first post.

(Not only his but most's people here i believe)...also chris is a moder...he knows what he is talking about...show him some respect...he already improved the general gameplay vastly...

It could be 50, how can being a veteran player of a game give you any sort of edge in knowledge about the real mechanics of war? I am sure you are a great player, but great within the laws of the game. Of course real war is more different, in many many ways, I am making a proposal for more historical accuracy in the battle mechanics of the game, I don't see how 9 years of playing TW makes you more knowledgible in that area, especially since you are a supporter of the clearly errored status quo, of not just RSII but all vanilla TW games, most mods, save for a few.


Even if it were relevant, I am a 6 year TW player.

Ok mate...firstly are you serious??? so you as a minority you want to change our style and gameplay and we cant tell a word about it???... and you criticize like an expert the (errored status quo) as you said??? give me a break...also i never i said im more experienced or i have vast knowledge im matters of real warfare...im a player not a soldier...i just said that RS team Dvk,tone and others are the ones who created this mod and are real experts in matters like this one...modding..balance and battle mechanics..not real warfare...
Chris10 also said to you before about battle mechanics and he is more experienced than me and you...if you believe your style is better than ours make a poll and people will vote and give you their opinions...

The battles are almost perfect as the are now...
Just my friendly opinion about this matter...
im looking forward a reply from RS team and others about this matter also...
Cheers...

-- double posts merged (Brusilov) - please use the EDIT button

RTW game engine[/B] can't replicate real life tactics. Seriously, the engine has so many limitations and inflexible hard-code that it's actually an incredible accomplishment to have as many excellent for the RTW.

RSII isn't perfect is it's replication of war. But frankly, if it's possible for RTW to simulate real maneuver and psychological warfare, then it should have been done a very, very long time ago.

From the very little things i know about modding i totally agree with you...

[chris10]

Your opinion, which reflects you take gameplay over realism. Because the way battles are now are not that historically accurate as I stipulated in my first post.

...this is a freaking game and not a historical simulation...maybe you didnt realize that
the engine has been exploited in the most optimum way possible and there is nothing more to say about that matter...
but of course you are free to adjust the values in the EDU to your personal preferences or look for one of the submods NightEye mentioned or do something about it and do your own battlebalance submod...thats when you see if your concept is accepted by others or not...

The best solution is killing the general. The AI is stupid enough to let him unguarded most the time.

HERESY !

[Promet]

...this is a freaking game and not a historical simulation...maybe you didnt realize that
the engine has been exploited in the most optimum way possible and there is nothing more to say about that matter...
but of course you are free to adjust the values in the EDU to your personal preferences or look for one of the submods NightEye mentioned or do something about it and do your own battlebalance submod...thats when you see if your concept is accepted by others or not...


HERESY !

RSII is a historical simulation...within RTW's limitations. At least thats what I'm guessing given the level of historical detail in this mod compared to others.

well...I give in...sorry, I did not wanted to sound rude...
Its just frustrating that people who dont understand the mechanic and dont even use their forces correctly are moan about something apparently broken when only their way of playing is broken...
even with the actual balance the Player can rout and beat the crap out of any AI army at will...except the first roman battle against Hannibal of course...
others come along playing on VH where the AI gets insane bonuses and then make new topics about broken balance......errrrrr

Your very rude.

Why are you saying I dont understand how to use my force correctly? I have been playing for 6 years, I am undefeated in RTW multiplayer and NTW and almost undefeated in MTW2 and ETW


Pick any of those games and we will see who better understands the game in a multiplayer battle, we will post the replay on the forums and youtube for your rashness in judging others.

Which one? And when ?

[NightEye]

I tend to avoid these kinds of discussions, but reading this just makes make want to get something off my chest.
Several people including a former member of the RSII dev team already tried rebalance the mod's EDU. But you can only can only do so much tweaking if the problem is the RTW game engine can't replicate real life tactics. Seriously, the engine has so many limitations and inflexible hard-code that it's actually an incredible accomplishment to have as many excellent for the RTW.

RSII isn't perfect is it's replication of war. But frankly, if it's possible for RTW to simulate real maneuver and psychological warfare, then it should have been done a very, very long time ago.

[Promet]

Ok mate...firstly are you serious??? so you as a minority you want to change our style and gameplay and we cant tell a word about it???

Who said I am a minority? And I am not arguing for some change in gameplay, I am arguing for more REALISTIC battle mechanics. More factually based. What are you arguing? Why do you keep talking about modding experiance?

you criticize like an expert the (errored status quo) as you said??? give me a break...also i never i said im more experienced or i have vast knowledge im matters of real warfare

I graduated from the University of Wisconsin Madison with a degree in classical studies, and am pretty well read on the warfare of the era, as well as warfare in general. It's all I do really.

Exactly my point, your a player not a soldier or a historian. I'm sure your great at game related stuff. But I am talking about making it more realistic, I'm not arguing some abstract direction, I mean you can say "No I don't want it to be realistic", and thats fine. But why do you keep bringing up experiance in modding? It's not like modding increases your perspective on the tenets of the science of war.

I am clueless as to what exactly your talking about cause what your saying doesn't make sense tbh.


And for the record I don't think chris10's mod is all that great, I have tried it. I don't think it is good.

I tend to avoid these kinds of discussions, but reading this just makes make want to get something off my chest.
Several people including a former member of the RSII dev team already tried rebalance the mod's EDU. But you can only can only do so much tweaking if the problem is the RTW game engine can't replicate real life tactics. Seriously, the engine has so many limitations and inflexible hard-code that it's actually an incredible accomplishment to have as many excellent for the RTW.

RSII isn't perfect is it's replication of war. But frankly, if it's possible for RTW to simulate real maneuver and psychological warfare, then it should have been done a very, very long time ago.

All they have to do is lower the morale....

[NightEye]

All they have to do is lower the morale....

Do you think somebody hasn't done that yet? There's Tone's old Shorter Battles submods (newer variations of which come as optional extras in the RSII default install) and more recently NapoleonHeir's Vanilla length battles (Which is still longer than actual vanilla battles mind you.)

[C.Maximus]

This mod can be perfect. It has the most amazing skins, immersion, graphics etc, better than any other mod in my opinion.

But it is also my opinion that it is comparatively weak in battle mechanics. Literally every battle is a fight to the death, for every unit, unless I kill their enemy general. Manuever is but a mutation of its true purpose and weight in war, even if you surround your enemy it is merely a game of numbers, numerical superiority at a point.....

Really? what game are you playin, in my experience, the troops that you would think to hold the lines... do.. and the troops that you would think not to hold the lines... dont.. lol sometimes i think there is much scripting and my unit says *defeat is certain* or whatever but i tend to pull through if i know my unit can handle it.. its all about class and tactics.. if you wanna make em run you gotta divide and conquor... make em run.. get a mass route.. that is how i do it... use your cav better... i know the RSII devs made it so that the enemy DEFENDS their flanks but still, you can get around them. it'll be ok