Experience sharing: the deconstructivist school of raiding

[Septentrionalis]

I am playing a Roman campaign and have been mainly staying out of conflicts with other factions, including Carthage. At some point, however, I started getting a reoccurring message every turn that the Ptolemaics feel more negatively about us than before. The only thing I had ever approached them with was trade rights which they accepted. Okay, I discovered they had declared a war against two of my allies, so that might contribute.

Nevertheless, I decided it is time to abandon a couple of decades of relative peace (my generals have become grade A paper pushers) and just put a stop to their constant whining. Maybe my allies would appreciate a bit of contribution to their war efforts for a change as well. I decided to send an army their way without doing any intelligence work such as sending in agents to map their realm (I don't use the charts because they seem like an exploit). My stack landed on their doorstep at Halikarnassos and I send in the diplomat to declare war, which turned out to be impossible. So I attacked and was ultimately victorious, although I found out in a painful way that hoplites in the central plaza with unlimited morale are no joke.

Once the revolting city was occupied and my agent had done a little tour around the neighborhood, I realized that I had made a grave mistake. First of all, the Ptolemaics seemed like a big-ass faction and they had plenty more hoplites on their way to relieve the city. My banged-up crew of missile spearmen and horsemen far away from supply lines would be no match for another encounter. Distraught over having started a war and fought a costly victory over a city that I was going to able to keep for like two seconds, I started thinking about an exit plan. Then I realized that the rather large and wealthy city was technically mine, and there were a lot of fancy buildings I could demolish. What's even better, my army had a lot of movement points and a fleet parked right outside by the curb.

So I deconstructed 13,000 minai worth of goodies, including their port and public lavatories, and made a run for it all the way to Athens. It will take dozens upon dozens of turns for them to reconstruct it all, and it will cost a lot more than 13,000 to do so. Now they are stuck with a large settlement with hardly any infrastructure, and they still have many more coastal cities with meager defenses in case I decide to welcome myself for another visit. At this point I do not know if they will pursue and make me pay dearly, but raiding and demolishing now seems like a viable way of fighting a war that perhaps should never have been started.

I have personally never thought of this strategy before in a TW game; it has all been about conquering to me. Any thoughts, criticism, or similar experiences are welcome!

[rhavviepoodle]

Not only do I do this in provinces I know I won't be able to occupy, I sometimes do this before gifting a province to another faction. I just can't -quite- bring myself to commit to full-blown charity, in most cases. That, and I'm not sure whether the AI even distinguishes between how developed a provinces infrastructure is, when it is used as a gift.

To be honest, it does seem like something of an exploit. It's the big brother version of sacking a city, but without a built-in hit to population.

[Septentrionalis]

Not only do I do this in provinces I know I won't be able to occupy, I sometimes do this before gifting a province to another faction.

What are you trying to accomplish when you gift a province? You do not gift it to the same faction that you took it from, are you? Does it work so that gifting a province will make them view you more positively and not as weaker, as it would in real life with some rare exceptions?

Having raided the province and then carrying on playing now, I realize that it wasn't that wealthy after all (I kind of assumed so from previous playhthroughs in the original Rome: Total War). In addition to that, I lost money when the Ptolemaics conquered back the unguarded province and decided to sack. From a role-playing point of view, they did that to their own population as we spent less than a turn there.

But so far it seems like a viable option in warfare when one cannot hold the area. Whether demolishing everything without gifting is an exploit too I cannot say, but perhaps some more experienced player have feedback on that.

[QuintusSertorius]

The problem with demolishing everything is that it may permanently handicap that province for the AI. While they get a steep discount on construction costs, they prefer to spend all their money on recruitment, rather than building. If lots of order-granting buildings were destroyed, you may have made that settlement impossible to hold if it's a larger one.

[Septentrionalis]

The problem with demolishing everything is that it may permanently handicap that province for the AI. While they get a steep discount on construction costs, they prefer to spend all their money on recruitment, rather than building. If lots of order-granting buildings were destroyed, you may have made that settlement impossible to hold if it's a larger one.

Are you saying that over the course of the campaign, the AI does not really develop their cities that much? If I decide to invade something now or in fifty years, I will most likely find the place in a relatively similar condition? Will population increase make it impossible to hold for a human player as well?

[BailianSteel]

As Sun Tzu once said, "a picul of the enemy's provender is worth twenty of your own." To some extent it's historically accurate too, plenty of temples got dismantled to provide funding for a ruler or occupying army. The issue is that it's too quick and easy in Medieval 2's system, later on you need to wait for a turn to pass in order to dismantle a building, but in this game you can tear down damn near everything in an instant for a small fortune. Too quick, too easy.


As for the Ptolemaioi, the biggest thing you need to worry about is their fleet. In my own Ptolemaic playthrough, I've got 15,000+ invested in fleets to ward off Carthage's constant interference, Naval Warfare is expensive . You will need to ward off stacks but it shouldn't be too bad as long as they have to deal with the Seleukides.

Are you saying that over the course of the campaign, the AI does not really develop their cities that much? If I decide to invade something now or in fifty years, I will most likely find the place in a relatively similar condition? Will population increase make it impossible to hold for a human player as well?

In my experience it depends on the size of the faction, small factions concentrate on developing their capital and can go surprisingly (and irritatingly, since there's no rolling back,) far in developing them. In my Boioi campaign Epeiros was pushed to have Epidamnos as their capital and developed it to a Large City with Hellenistic Metropolis over the course of 200 turns. By turn 400, the capital of Pontus was a Huge City, the capital of Armenia was a Large City. Athens and Corinth were both Large Cities. Yet Egypt, Italy, and the Seleukid Empire were largely the same as they were when I started.

It sounds like the Ptolemaioi are doing well in your game, so it's likely you'll only find basic infrastructure rebuilt. It'll hardly be impossible to hold, but I'd wager it'd be inconvenient, what with the different culture and all. You'd probably need a Governor with boni to Law and Popularity.

[Ivir Baggins]

In my experience it depends on the size of the faction, small factions concentrate on developing their capital and can go surprisingly (and irritatingly, since there's no rolling back,) far in developing them. In my Boioi campaign Epeiros was pushed to have Epidamnos as their capital and developed it to a Large City with Hellenistic Metropolis over the course of 200 turns. By turn 400, the capital of Pontus was a Huge City, the capital of Armenia was a Large City. Athens and Corinth were both Large Cities. Yet Egypt, Italy, and the Seleukid Empire were largely the same as they were when I started.

It sounds like the Ptolemaioi are doing well in your game, so it's likely you'll only find basic infrastructure rebuilt. It'll hardly be impossible to hold, but I'd wager it'd be inconvenient, what with the different culture and all. You'd probably need a Governor with boni to Law and Popularity.

I think the issue is that the larger factions get much less bonus from money scripts proportionally so have to make up the difference by taxing their cities to death, thus cratering population growth. It's a noticeable trend on the in-game stats, especially since I run taxes as low as possible for that sweet pop growth.

[Septentrionalis]

As Sun Tzu once said, "a picul of the enemy's provender is worth twenty of your own." To some extent it's historically accurate too, plenty of temples got dismantled to provide funding for a ruler or occupying army. The issue is that it's too quick and easy in Medieval 2's system, later on you need to wait for a turn to pass in order to dismantle a building, but in this game you can tear down damn near everything in an instant for a small fortune. Too quick, too easy.

A really nice quote and to the point! I actually had to google "picul" I agree about the quick and easy part, and that was the first thing I thought about. I tried to roleplay it as just carrying off everything of value instead of actually dismantling all those buildings and hauling away the marble, but that does not really cut it, to be honest.

As for the Ptolemaioi, the biggest thing you need to worry about is their fleet. In my own Ptolemaic playthrough, I've got 15,000+ invested in fleets to ward off Carthage's constant interference, Naval Warfare is expensive .

I just noticed that. Right after fleeing Ptolemaic lands, like the very next turn, I got blind sided by Carthage declaring war. I had been hoping to ahistorically stay in good terms with them. I've learned that even a highly successful naval battle costs a fortune to recover from. Cannot afford many victories like that. But there is nothing quite as outrageously gratifying than sinking a fleet carrying a full stack of your enemy's invading force.

As far as the rest of your post (and other contributors to the thread), thank you for the insight. I find the game more enjoyable now that I understand a little better how things work. I'll lay off wrecking places offshore as a pre-emptive measure and instead develop both naval defenses and mobile land forces (within the reach of friendly navies and not dispersed in different garrisons) to be able to ward off an invasion more quickly.

[Rosbjerg]

For the player, if you enslave every time they rebel, eventually the development will catch up to the discontent. But yeah I do it too out of spite, if it's a province that's hotly contestet and I'm forced out - the AI does take much longer than you to develop an area though. They generally loose so many troops due to idiotic small skirmishes, so they have to recruit a lot more units than the player.

It's a shame, but CA never really made a competent AI, that can handle both the campaign and battles, for any of their titles - if you install some of the second hand AI code from modders, you might get a semi-competent opponent.. but I don't know if they are compatible with EBII. In Third Age and Stainless Steel though, they can be quite though.

[Seimour]

For the player, if you enslave every time they rebel, eventually the development will catch up to the discontent. But yeah I do it too out of spite, if it's a province that's hotly contestet and I'm forced out - the AI does take much longer than you to develop an area though. They generally loose so many troops due to idiotic small skirmishes, so they have to recruit a lot more units than the player.

It's a shame, but CA never really made a competent AI, that can handle both the campaign and battles, for any of their titles - if you install some of the second hand AI code from modders, you might get a semi-competent opponent.. but I don't know if they are compatible with EBII. In Third Age and Stainless Steel though, they can be quite though.

Pretty sure the AI in those mods basically just gets money to spam constant full stacks. That's not exactly a smart AI. Just a massively cheating one.

[tentaku]

Pretty sure the AI in those mods basically just gets money to spam constant full stacks. That's not exactly a smart AI. Just a massively cheating one.

yeah i hate cheating AI. Same reason I didn't really like siege scripts where A.I. defenders get auto generated units. Sometimes I like playing economic warfare, and like to see enemy starved of supply/money/units because of my "ingenuous" plays. I rather see the pronounced effect of my economic warfare on enemy, then decide to let them off the hook later, than to find all my efforts futile and enemy just auto generate units and money like nothing happened.

[Jurand of Cracow]

It's a shame, but CA never really made a competent AI, that can handle both the campaign and battles, for any of their titles - if you install some of the second hand AI code from modders, you might get a semi-competent opponent.. but I don't know if they are compatible with EBII. In Third Age and Stainless Steel though, they can be quite though.

The BAI is indeed the problem with the historical battles - I've tried to play some in RTW, M2TW, R2TW and ATW, but the AI from went nuts from the outset.
On the AI in the mods: in my experience (some is described in the links to this entry) the modded AIs do make huge differences in the M2TW and R2TW. But this is a complex issue, encompassing not only script and parameters, but also such things like distances between the settlements (it's why the WotN AI cannot cope - they're too big).
The scripts in the EBII do much for a better AI behavior - eg. the maximum money script, the non-bankrupt script. Some say (errr, me included) that it's not aggressive enough but it's the choice of the team. You may end up with some strange situations, like Papal States invading Poland in the 13th century.

[QuintusSertorius]

Navies are a good place to sink money if you're awash with it, especially if you leave "marine complements" permanently on board with your fleets. That also gives you a rapid-reaction force you can put an FM in charge of in an emergency.

[tentaku]

Navies are a good place to sink money if you're awash with it, especially if you leave "marine complements" permanently on board with your fleets. That also gives you a rapid-reaction force you can put an FM in charge of in an emergency.

The Ptolemy start with some really huge fancy ships, even though I was deep in debt ( opposite of awash with cash), I still didn't want to disband them, they look so shiny...