Re-loading save games

[tono4850]

Do you use reloading like when you make a wrong turn or you get attacked unprepared ?

I try to play with auto-saves only (each 20 turns I make a save in case of crash) and its definately harder.

[Lord of Shadows]

I never use reloading except for crashes.I think reloading is kind of cheating.

[Vissewalde rex de Gerzika]

I always reload if something stupid happens I sometimes feel like I am addicted to saving.

[Andytheplatypus]

When I was playing the campaign I would save pretty often. The only time I would reload if the game did something I wouldnt intend. Especially in a battle when the stupid units wouldn't listen after clicking in a certain spot 100 times and they go the opposite direction

[Larkin]

Only if something happens that is no fault of my own. Like if I misclick and attack something I didn't want to or move an army the wrong way etc. Other than that it's no better than cheating.

[Duck of Death]

I save every 10 turns or so in case of a crash. I also always save before I play out a battle.
Nothing worse then winning a hard fought battle then it carshes when returning to the campaign map.
When that rarely happens, I just reload and auto-resolve (auto_win attacker/defender), reasoning that I already legitimitly won the battle.

But if I make a mistake or get struck by bad luck (highly skilled general or King killed in freak act of god, ect...) I dont reload.

[Vissewalde rex de Gerzika]

carshes when returning to the campaign map.

Install the latest G5RBAI, you can find it in the submod section, it is stickied.

[Efstratios]

Well I re-load really often but just for once reason:tactics...

You know that this game requires various tactics to win and I try never to win a campaign that has a single defeat (land or battle) in it. I try to be victorious all the time and never lose just for the sake of the hardness. I am playing on the hardest options with the Byzantines and I never found my self defeated in a single battle only after 25 turns. I mostly reload then to watch my enemy and learn his tactics,how he leads his men,what does he do when I ambush him etc. And if defeat is inevitable I try to make a new game just for the sake of the faction's pride and the ultimate cause---> Only Victory.

Also I had found my self in a really bad situation against Venice for the battle of Serbia...about 1 to 4 odds against me. I was victorious after 3-4 game re-loads after I learnt to use my forces effectively and never let the bloody mountain capture point withouth soldiers.​

[Kaidonni]

Well I re-load really often but just for once reason:tactics...

You know that this game requires various tactics to win and I try never to win a campaign that has a single defeat (land or battle) in it. I try to be victorious all the time and never lose just for the sake of the hardness. I am playing on the hardest options with the Byzantines and I never found my self defeated in a single battle only after 25 turns. I mostly reload then to watch my enemy and learn his tactics,how he leads his men,what does he do when I ambush him etc. And if defeat is inevitable I try to make a new game just for the sake of the faction's pride and the ultimate cause---> Only Victory.

Also I had found my self in a really bad situation against Venice for the battle of Serbia...about 1 to 4 odds against me. I was victorious after 3-4 game re-loads after I learnt to use my forces effectively and never let the bloody mountain capture point withouth soldiers.​

No one ever loses for the sake of difficulty, they try to win. However, it's satisfying to pick oneself up from a defeat - especially a major one. Reloads like that just seem to me like they are taking something away from what could be a very interesting game. I like to think of the Total War games as the stories of the various countries and those leading them, and if they suffer a terrible setback then that's part of their story, part of their history. It defines their next move.

Also...are you saying that if you lose even one battle, you start a completely new campaign? Each to their own, but I think you're missing out on a lot by learning from your mistakes within that campaign and turning things around. If you find yourself in a quandry, it could be quite the ride getting yourself out of it.

[Efstratios]

No one ever loses for the sake of difficulty, they try to win. However, it's satisfying to pick oneself up from a defeat - especially a major one. Reloads like that just seem to me like they are taking something away from what could be a very interesting game. I like to think of the Total War games as the stories of the various countries and those leading them, and if they suffer a terrible setback then that's part of their story, part of their history. It defines their next move.

Also...are you saying that if you lose even one battle, you start a completely new campaign? Each to their own, but I think you're missing out on a lot by learning from your mistakes within that campaign and turning things around. If you find yourself in a quandry, it could be quite the ride getting yourself out of it.

Well...I am a shame for the Empire if I lose a single battle...I am forced to kill myself in order not to shame myself...my family...my honour!

Nah just kidding but yes it is annoying when I lose,and then I try to make a new-game in order to prevent that from happening and secure a STABLE position that will be kept the same for the rest of the game with soldiers,buildings and stuff.But IF I lose a single battle,that might cause the crumble of the empire...just like the butterfly effect even if after that defeat I re-gain the city or win the enemy army. I will show weakness to my enemy and my starting position will not be as powerful as it would be. That's my logic of this game and it is the same for the other Total War series...For example I took Greek Makedonia from 3 provinces,and ended up conquering whole Italy withouth a defeat...and then destroying full stacks of enemy forces with just 2-3 levy phalanx pikemen. I nearly had 120 victories with no defeats at all at 30 turns.So on I am trying to copy and paste that tactic onto new games,but with Medieval 2 Total War this can't happen because...BYZANTIUM doesn't have PHALANXES and this just ruins me...it slowly kills me and takes a piece away from myself by not having phalanxes into M2:TW

[Kaidonni]

Well...I am a shame for the Empire if I lose a single battle...I am forced to kill myself in order not to shame myself...my family...my honour!

Nah just kidding but yes it is annoying when I lose,and then I try to make a new-game in order to prevent that from happening and secure a STABLE position that will be kept the same for the rest of the game with soldiers,buildings and stuff.But IF I lose a single battle,that might cause the crumble of the empire...just like the butterfly effect even if after that defeat I re-gain the city or win the enemy army. I will show weakness to my enemy and my starting position will not be as powerful as it would be. That's my logic of this game and it is the same for the other Total War series...For example I took Greek Makedonia from 3 provinces,and ended up conquering whole Italy withouth a defeat...and then destroying full stacks of enemy forces with just 2-3 levy phalanx pikemen. I nearly had 120 victories with no defeats at all at 30 turns.So on I am trying to copy and paste that tactic onto new games,but with Medieval 2 Total War this can't happen because...BYZANTIUM doesn't have PHALANXES and this just ruins me...it slowly kills me and takes a piece away from myself by not having phalanxes into M2:TW

Well, if it's any consolation, in Empire Total War using Darthmod Empire I suffered a major defeat but kept it anyway because it was more exciting. War had gone on for years between my Bavarian forces and both Prussia and Westphalia, and I finally managed to reach Cologne. Unfortunately, my general decided to skip offering the city a chance to surrender and gave them a fighting chance. Next turn, with depleted forces, I faced a large army of Hannover and lost my best general and a majority of my military forces. It was an epic last stand, and I would never reload that battle. Now, I reloaded a later battle that saw me completely destroyed, and that's because I wanted to continue the campaign (the battle never happened though after I moved another unit), just I wanted to continue without eliminating my past mistakes and still having to contend with those.

[Efstratios]

Well, if it's any consolation, in Empire Total War using Darthmod Empire I suffered a major defeat but kept it anyway because it was more exciting. War had gone on for years between my Bavarian forces and both Prussia and Westphalia, and I finally managed to reach Cologne. Unfortunately, my general decided to skip offering the city a chance to surrender and gave them a fighting chance. Next turn, with depleted forces, I faced a large army of Hannover and lost my best general and a majority of my military forces. It was an epic last stand, and I would never reload that battle. Now, I reloaded a later battle that saw me completely destroyed, and that's because I wanted to continue the campaign (the battle never happened though after I moved another unit), just I wanted to continue without eliminating my past mistakes and still having to contend with those.

What I am trying to tell you is simple...just imagine the unbeatable force that you can make just by planning the BEGINING of your game...The first 20 turns withouth defeats and only with victories,can grant you the victory conditions even after 400 turns...let me explain you how this is done.

Well if you face a major defeat as you said in your campaign,you might won't be able to withstand another,and with BYG's mod I would say that you would be totally screwed.BUT if you build a major force,destroy your enemies and build your economy along with your army and place them in order not to be defeated again in battle(making sure your near-the-border cities are fully garrisoned) then you 'll keep the same borders you have,plus the economy you 'll get each turn withouth recruiting any more units.There is another BUT,when you play with Byzantium,one thing is sure : You are SCREWED...Whatever you do you 'll be constantly in war due to your geographical position but also because anyone near you wants the Queen of the Cities...Constantinople.As I said before,winning early will ensure your nation's future.

Let me give you an example...I started a new campaign (with Byzantium as always duh ) and took my scoutati,my faction leader and the general in Nicaea to face the mighty Seljuk army near my city. After a victorious battle,IT ENSURED ME the conquest of ANATOLIA...you know why?

It was like Manzikert,after I pushed all their forces,they just had almost none soldiers in their cities or even 3-4 units with their generals.The same scenario,but this time done by the Byzantine Forces. I of course couldn't capture the provinces due to the religious unrest and I had to sadly exterminate the populace and with it the city's buildings. After I pushed and captured the 3 major Anatolia's cities,the Seljuks wouldn't attack me anymore and they would expand at Bagdhad and Russia(on the Caspian Sea). Then they decided to sign a peace with the cost of 10k(Really good money for meh ) and the war ended. I had ensured my borders for that time,and then I could push for other cities away from these desert regions.

[❋ Flavius Belisarius ❋]

I used it when I juste lauched a new campaign that really turn sour. But strangely is when I was playing with Third Age that I overused re-loading.

[philipjd]

I tend to manually save if I'm going to autoresolve a battle (battle fatigue at times! ) - if the AI loses then I'll reload and fight it manually. Mostly happens with the Byzantine and Engllish factions as their units do not seem to be capable of winning autoresolve battles

[Efstratios]

I agree...sometimes even having bigger forces and better soldiers,autoresolve can just bring destruction to your army and ruin your economy. BUT sometimes even having a crappy army,autoresolve can bring you victory even though you would had lost the battle if you had played it on the map. That was done with my brother for example when he was playing Rome:TW. He had a little army in greece(green romans...I think Scipians?)and the greek states had enormous stacks of Armoured hoplites. He knew he would lose the city,rather than fighting though,he autoresolved it and won...I don't know how did this happen,but if he had played the battle manually,he would had lost. Sometimes the AI doesn't only count the troops and their qualities you and your enemy has,but also the general stars and the city walls.

That's why sometimes I even lose an autoresolve battle,and that's why I hate it so much because I have to fight each battle manually if I want to have victory near by my side and not many loses.

I can also give you a last example of the autoresolve battles...I had a general and some peasant archers (Byzantium) in the siege of Arta (they had 3 units of mourtati and 4 contaratii I think?). I autoresolved the siege and LOST terribly,both my army and general. I re-loaded my save game though because I wanted to win,and this time I did it manually. In the end I had 16 routing archers and only 5 cavarly from my general left along with the center of the city and the bodies of my dead enemies. Sometimes it favours you to use autoresolve,sometimes though it doesn't