Every battle in DeI is won by a rear attack....

[Armageddonn]

Every battle in DeI is won by a rear attack. That's the only occasion serious enough (absent some unit taking mass missile fire casualties) to induce a cascade of waverings. Which is also, the only time it's worth using war cry.

Battles seemed challenging at first in DeI, but eventually, when I learned that almost any number of enemy troops could be held for a very long time by an 'anvil' unit, each battle, whatever the odds, becomes an elaborate setup to the rear attack.

That is what stops me from playing Rome 2, i have won battles when greatly outnumbered with this tactic, its really not that hard , i wish i had afterwards image but i forgot to screenshot it, anyways i think only 700 of my man died in that battle(I i still have that army with the same soldiers 4 battles afterwards lol) so you get my point...

[Kambe]

I agree. No matter which faction I play, it always comes to hammer and anvil tactic. And don't get me wrong, this is a totally legitimate tactic and it was used a lot during that period and a lot during the Punic Wars but there needs to be some other valid options.

[EpicFrench]

You can also use the tactic use on Cannae battle dunno how to call it in English tho.

(Sorry for the poor reference but here it is : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Cannae)

As you can see the tactic used is a bit different than the regular hammer & anvil !

You can use unconventionnal tactics if you want to !

[suras333]

The problem I think is that the AI never counters hammer and anvil tactic. Or use it efficiently..

[Mark of Calth]

What other options would you want? I've found outlasting the enemy and then sending in fresh reserves towards the end of the battle quite effective as well, it just takes a lot of patience.

[Damocles]

What other options would you want? I've found outlasting the enemy and then sending in fresh reserves towards the end of the battle quite effective as well, it just takes a lot of patience.

The main issue is that DeI lacks a real 'shock' mechanic, whereby an exceptionally lethal or numerous swarm of units, could by sheer momentum, cause a flank to crumble.

In DeI, units are so resilient, that any kind of upgrades on deadliness or melee attack skill doesn't really matter. Provided it's not a hard-coded mismatch, then they will hold the line for at least long enough to set up a rear attack.

By contrast, in vanilla, elite units are deadly enough to cut through cannon fodder, and not be tied down too long.

(and btw, the OP quoted me nearly verbatim from another thread, but I don't mind. It needed its own thread. )

[filmfixed]

This is especially painful in Rome 2 I believe, compared to other total wars at least. I wish you could order some units to push forward or to hold ground or to slowly move backwards, would vastly expand what you could do tactics wise.

[Cambion]

I have to say that this is correct. Because of the longer battle times medium inf, even light (especially pikes of course) can hold elite troops long enough for that to be possible. The AI cant counter. I think the problem is the arcade style battle speed of vanilla. I would be much better if inf could beat inf head on in a reasonably fashion, but I certainly dont want to have the 5-min battles back. The only option I see are house rules, just dont do it all the time and let them slog it out. A warning so: Due to the initiative and deadlyness stats the outcome might be a surprise especially against long sword units or high-tier spear. Thats the next conundrum of course, because these stats make good sense for other reasons as well.

[Armageddonn]

The problem I think is that the AI never counters hammer and anvil tactic. Or use it efficiently..

Sadly that is 100% true, even if the enemy have some troops in the back they just attack random units, really really bad AI decision making.

I have to say that this is correct. Because of the longer battle times medium inf, even light (especially pikes of course) can hold elite troops long enough for that to be possible. The AI cant counter. I think the problem is the arcade style battle speed of vanilla. I would be much better if inf could beat inf head on in a reasonably fashion, but I certainly dont want to have the 5-min battles back. The only option I see are house rules, just dont do it all the time and let them slog it out. A warning so: Due to the initiative and deadlyness stats the outcome might be a surprise especially against long sword units or high-tier spear. Thats the next conundrum of course, because these stats make good sense for other reasons as well.

Another huge problem, at this point its much better tactic to invest your money into some shock cavalry with humongous amounts of charge dmg rather than some infantry because like you said and i agree, even some cheap infantry can hold elite infantry by the time you smash them from the rear and rout them.

Honestly every battle fells the same and i cannot play rome 2 for more than 1-2 hrs because of this, there is 0 challenge involved ,its really easy like you saw in the screenshot even with 4 cavalry wich are not that good to win a battle vs double the forces, plus even if you don't have cavalry you can still do the hammer and anvil if you smash the enemy with your reserve infantry from your back, very disappointed by the AI in Rome 2



Now all of the above would have been fixed if the units had an actual "MASS" to push through lighter,cheaper, infatry and make holes and inflict casualties while pushing through their lines, it would have been much harder to flank those but sadly that doesn't work nearly as good as CA advertised it, there really is no significant pushing at all....

[rjacko10]

Now all of the above would have been fixed if the units had an actual "MASS" to push through lighter,cheaper, infatry and make holes and inflict casualties while pushing through their lines, it would have been much harder to flank those but sadly that doesn't work nearly as good as CA advertised it, there really is no significant pushing at all....

I don't think "MASS" is 100% necessary. DeI just need to make it so elite units can carve through weaker units much more quickly, but to still have the same slow death rate when up against equal opposition.

Also to perhaps lower the "attacked in rear" morale penalty and put more morale emphasis on "unit currently winning/losing combat"

[rjacko10]

Why can't elite melee make quick work of light melee? With this you'd be able to punch holes right through the enemy line. It would also give the AI a boost as it doesn't use tactics with melee infantry (no flanking). With potential holes in your line you wouldn't be able to commit all your troops to flanking, a risk/benefit approach would need to be adopted.

So:

light unit vs light unit = slow death rate
elite unit vs elite unit = slow death rate
elite unit vs light unit = fast death rate (this includes pikes!!)

[Ganossa]

I think introducing more distinct elite units for each faction will help with that problem. From my experience (especially in Shogun 2) tactics changed with faction choice since each faction had its strength and weaknesses also when it comes to units. Most of the time specific units become cheaper and stronger (or better attributes) at the same time so you try to build your strategies around that unit type.
Of course with more diversity one can imagine more than one unit type for each faction in the future to allow even further individual strategies.
This also goes well with history since strategies are always build around your own strength and weaknesses and those of the enemy (plus battlefield specifics but we might wait for another TW title to have that really count).

[Noone likes Thebes:(]

I feel that it is too easy to hold enemies in place. Any crappy low tier spearmen can hold off an elite sword infantry long enough for anything to get around them and start the pain. Hammer and anvil is fine, but it needs to be an ANVIL not a plastic fork.

[suras333]

Yes, maybe the solution is to lower the "attacked in rear" morale penalty and the kill rate..

If I think right, all my armies have 2-3 cavalry units for this tactic and 90% of my battles are the same.

[Armageddonn]

Yes, maybe the solution is to lower the "attacked in rear" morale penalty and the kill rate..

If I think right, all my armies have 2-3 cavalry units for this tactic and 90% of my battles are the same.

You mean increase the infantry kill rates? Especially elite vs cheap one. Otherwise same tactic remains hammer and anvil > every other tactic.

[suras333]

No, I mean to lower the efficiency (morale penalty and the kill rate) of the cavalry rear attack (maybe by half?) - to force the playar not to rely sole on this tactic.

[rjacko10]

No, I mean to lower the efficiency (morale penalty and the kill rate) of the cavalry rear attack (maybe by half?) - to force the playar not to rely sole on this tactic.

I like the kill rate of charging cav. Landing a charge is one of the most satisfying parts of a battle.

But I would definitely recommend the team to experiment the morale system for the release of 1.0. Just so the users of this excellent mod will more readily engage with alternative tactics.

[jo the greek]

i think the battle is realistic all the battle in that time were won from that way it was a long pushing mactch takle alla the battels of the time all were won cause one flanked the other the same happens even now this is REALISM i will dissappointed if i see Elite units massecering lighter units t THEY WERENT SUPERHUMANS JUST MORE DISCPLINED WITH A BIT MORE GOOD STAMINA.
Plz dei team do not take in credit mindless critisism.

[m_1512]

I am not sure the problem can be resolved with anything suggested here. The main design of the AI is flawed and unfortunately, also hardcoded - meaning it cannot be changed without breaking into source code.

However, I'll take this up with the team.

[Armageddonn]

I am not sure the problem can be resolved with anything suggested here. The main design of the AI is flawed and unfortunately, also hardcoded - meaning it cannot be changed without breaking into source code.

However, I'll take this up with the team.

Definitely the biggest issue is the AI, but so far the charges either from cavalry or some shock infantry are too good, i am thinking of getting 5 anvil units and everything else for flanking, since there is no point in letting units fight when i can win a battle with constant charging and smashing the enemy's no meter how outnumbered i am, i cannot remember when i lost a battle...