|
AttitudeAdjuster posted:I wish the AI was more willing to assault walked towns/capitals. It feels like they'll only commit if they have overwhelming numerical superiority. This really is one of the worst problems in the game at this point. When the AI thinks that a four on one advantage are bad odds, you've got yourself some bad AI. Especially since siege defence is really fun. There should be a movement penalty for breaking siege. ditty bout my clitty fucked around with this message at 12:00 on Aug 3, 2016 |
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 11:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 00:10 |
|
|
Ilustforponydeath posted:This really is one of the worst problems in the game at this point. When the AI thinks that a four on one advantage are bad odds, you've got yourself some bad AI. Especially since siege defence is really fun. It'd make sense if this was a realistic medieval warfare sim rather than a game where I can fire goblins at goat men.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 12:07
|
|
|
WHAT A GOOD DOG posted:Oh boy so I'm supposed to redo it but confederate with nonsense tribes that I immediately disband anyways? UgghhhHHH Confederating AI hordes can be very OP however, just replace the lord in the horde with a fresh one(the AI almost always assign lovely skills) , you're saving a ton of growth depending on how many armies you already have, and often the AI hordes come with a ton of growth stashed up (I had one late campaign confederate which gave me a horde with 50 growth surplus). The bonus for confederation is also very nice, 5-6 turns of -25% upkeep for all armies, and even if you end up disbanding most of their units, a beast lord is well worth its upkeep by itself since they pretty drat good fighters(plus each horde is one more potential Gorebull you can recruit). In the end of my VH e4e campaign i had Kazrak at 20 stack and 5 more stacks with 17+ units in each, and was still making 50 per turn not raiding after upkeep calculations, including in each army with their own shaman and Gorebull, fun times!.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 12:11
|
|
|
I really hate the fact that all of my territories as dwarves are just filled with defensive buildings but any army is too chicken poo poo to attack them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 12:19
|
|
|
Does make getting that "win 25 defensive siege battles" achievement kind of tricky.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 12:31
|
|
|
Eh, I prefer an AI that conserves forces until it thinks it has a decent chance of victory over an AI that throws 4-5 unit stacks at me constantly. The latter is the path to getting me to mash the auto-resolve button reflexively every battle, and that's the death of fun in a TW game.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 12:50
|
|
|
Blinks77 posted:Does make getting that "win 25 defensive siege battles" achievement kind of tricky. I tried a few out in custom battle, maybe that counts for the achievement. I must have over 150 hours in the game at this point and think ive played maybe one siege battle in campaign mode.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 13:08
|
|
|
Thanqol posted:Defensive siege battles as empire vs chaos - how do people play it? The thing to keep in mind about defensive sieges is that your pound for pound strongest asset are the towers. The longer you can stall them somewhere where a siege tower is shooting them the better. Rather than parking all your calvary inside the gates like the AI does, let them out to let their freak flag fly. The longer the AI spends chasing or repositioning their forces in response to your cav the longer it's getting shot by both the towers and your own archers if they are in range. It's this same reason that offensive sieges generally don't auto resolve in your favor. The AI makes no attempt to stop you and you wind up just charging through the towers and snuggling up to the wall. I only wish you could park artillery cannons on your walls to shoot nonces as they approach.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 13:25
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:Eh, I prefer an AI that conserves forces until it thinks it has a decent chance of victory over an AI that throws 4-5 unit stacks at me constantly. If only there was some sort of middle ground between the scenario you describe and the status quo
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 13:27
|
|
|
Mr. Wookums posted:Any tips starting with Galt? I cannot kill lords and it seems that even killing everything else sometimes doesn't result in a lord route. Gotta use the molay magic mod His spells are too weak to make him worth it by default
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 13:28
|
|
|
I had some success last night starting off a legendary as him, although I feel I'm gaming the battles a bit; just completely ignoring the lords, using searing rain to break charges while hiding him to attack ranged once the engagement starts. Rushed to mortars and I'm close to pumping out two captains so I think I should be able to win this campaign now. I'll need a quick confederation to get Carl. Helps that I was able to get the whole province while not fighting any field battles to take out the initial empire lords for the traitors via routing. I'm trying not to mod the game, don't really think it needs it aside from a camera mod.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 14:27
|
|
|
To be fair to Gelt, while still the worst LL, his buffed Hounds of Ghenna is actually pretty devastating now when it works out. I've literally destroyed multiple units of infantry by dropping hounds in the middle of them. Also Searing Doom is definitely improved, having been using it for a while. It's not great, but it actually does appreciable damage now and the overcast version hits a massive area. OTOH, Gelt seems to have lost his starting earthing rod, which is straight bullshit.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 14:31
|
|
|
I used 45 winds of searing on some rebel mortars, mostly overcasted. Killed some units but wasn't able to actually take out the equipment. It's really only able to kill well when you're putting it into already engaged units. The AI will avoid it like the plague if they are not engaged, and usually run away from your line to dodge it. I just got Hounds but won't be able to try it out until tonight. I almost lost this amazing start by hiding my army in a forest, including my mortars. I did not expect the AI to be smart enough to just rush in while those were ineffective.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 14:37
|
|
|
The best way to fight defensive sieges is just to let a rebellion grow. Once the stack gets near max it will siege one of your cities and 4-5 turns later it will attack. Obviously this means you are limited to fighting single stack armies, but some of those late game rebel armies are pretty nasty.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 14:41
|
|
|
Mr. Wookums posted:I used 45 winds of searing on some rebel mortars, mostly overcasted. Killed some units but wasn't able to actually take out the equipment. It's really only able to kill well when you're putting it into already engaged units. The AI will avoid it like the plague if they are not engaged, and usually run away from your line to dodge it. I just got Hounds but won't be able to try it out until tonight. I almost lost this amazing start by hiding my army in a forest, including my mortars. I did not expect the AI to be smart enough to just rush in while those were ineffective. I don't generally think magic is a great way to counter enemy artillery. I can't really think of a single spell which can be effectively used for that. Indeed you might be better off putting Gelt on a pegasus or whatever and just charging the guns with him. (Hopefully assuming the AI doesn't have anyone defending the guns.)
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 14:47
|
|
|
Wafflecopper posted:If only there was some sort of middle ground between the scenario you describe and the status quo You are never going to see that though - even if comparative army strength weren't a largely subjective thing varying enormously on player skill, no AI would get it right every time. The best you can hope for is that it will mostly get it right and where it makes mistakes it makes them in the more fun direction.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 14:57
|
|
|
AttitudeAdjuster posted:It'd make sense if this was a realistic medieval warfare sim rather than a game where I can fire goblins at goat men. I'm hoping for the sake of basic reading comprehension that you've quoted the wrong post. Having chicken poo poo stacks stop and restart the attrition game with my settlements at no expense is not fun.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 15:42
|
|
|
Xeremides posted:I'm literally the only anything left on the map, but because I didn't raid enough money beforehand and only confederated with one tribe, absolutely nothing happened, and I can't complete the campaign. Good times. I was in the same situation, minus the raiding which I was mindful of throughout the campaign (always be raiding as Beastmen). The whole world burned...including the AI Beastmen tribes I was supposed to confederate. I can find them and win their respect in time but there's nothing I can do to keep them from wiping to an enemy faction before they feel like joining me. I really hope CA realizes that's not a terribly good victory condition and patches it somehow.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 16:11
|
|
|
I couldn't find a general total war thread, so I'll ask here instead Do either of the musket era TW games have an active multiplayer community?
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 16:47
|
|
|
Bitter Mushroom posted:I couldn't find a general total war thread, so I'll ask here instead The Total War Megathread: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3490183
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 16:55
|
|
|
Ilustforponydeath posted:I'm hoping for the sake of basic reading comprehension that you've quoted the wrong post. Having chicken poo poo stacks stop and restart the attrition game with my settlements at no expense is not fun. Nah it's just a shitpost. Once you reduce the game to 'firing goblins at goat men' you can claim nothing should be realistic. There definitely should be more assaults, but walls ate such a huge impediment to the AI. They don't use their towers to funnel more men on the walks, they don't use them to put archers on them. They just stand there, shooting up at the walls, and flooding through the gate in an easy choke point.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 16:59
|
|
|
Ilustforponydeath posted:I'm hoping for the sake of basic reading comprehension that you've quoted the wrong post. Having chicken poo poo stacks stop and restart the attrition game with my settlements at no expense is not fun. He's agreeing with you that it's silly for the AI to be so conservative in WTW.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 17:25
|
|
|
Deified Data posted:I was in the same situation, minus the raiding which I was mindful of throughout the campaign (always be raiding as Beastmen). The whole world burned...including the AI Beastmen tribes I was supposed to confederate. I can find them and win their respect in time but there's nothing I can do to keep them from wiping to an enemy faction before they feel like joining me. I really hope CA realizes that's not a terribly good victory condition and patches it somehow. I got my two confederations by doing the quest to impress the tribe, immediately military allying with them, and then waiting until they had been smashed in a battle but not destroyed. One army I picked up had a lord at 1 hp, a depleted unit of hounds, and a newly recruited ungor herd. Sure it died next round, but I got the confederation buff and count for the victory condition. The other I dragged into a roughly even battle, then pulled back when the enemy charged, let him take the brunt, then mopped up and confederated since they'd been so weakened.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 17:34
|
|
|
Ilustforponydeath posted:I'm hoping for the sake of basic reading comprehension that you've quoted the wrong post. Having chicken poo poo stacks stop and restart the attrition game with my settlements at no expense is not fun. I took it to mean 'overly-cautious armies make more sense in some sort of ultra medieval sim not in a game where occasionally I'd like to be the defender mowing down the enemy with my goblins and goat persons"
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 17:41
|
|
|
I understood it like he felt that a movement penalty for breaking siege and running away on the same turn would be "too realistic"
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 17:42
|
|
|
i think its a metaphor for post-war china
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 17:51
|
|
|
So when I've played and been attacked in a town by the AI not once was did I fight that battle from behind walls or did the AI have to siege me. Yes I had either walls or the other garrison option on. It would always toss my garrison into a regular map, I feel cheated  After restarting as Beastmen things got astronomically easier after I stopped looting/defiling towns and just raided the poo poo out of everyone. Headed straight for the extra raiding income and then just bounced around raiding and pulling armies out to crush them. Having my small Malagor horde sent in raiding with my main horde next to it in ambush works rather well. Then abusing their stances to run off or do whatever or raid somewhere else.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 19:13
|
|
|
Super 3 posted:So when I've played and been attacked in a town by the AI not once was did I fight that battle from behind walls or did the AI have to siege me. Yes I had either walls or the other garrison option on. It would always toss my garrison into a regular map, I feel cheated
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 21:47
|
|
|
Does anyone have the achievement for beating a CA employee? If so, could you PM me so I can
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 22:03
|
|
|
I've never tried this - can I build my second Beastmen horde with all the +growth investment on my lord, get all the growth I need out of it, and then swap that lord out for Kahzrak specced for leadership and combat since I don't need growth anymore?
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 23:08
|
|
|
No? Your buffs are tied to your specific lords, not the hordes themselves. You CAN, however, trade armies if you want Growth Army to have the good units and Kahzrak to be the actually good leader. You'd need to protect the growth army, though!
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 23:10
|
|
|
Spiros posted:No? Your buffs are tied to your specific lords, not the hordes themselves. You CAN, however, trade armies if you want Growth Army to have the good units and Kahzrak to be the actually good leader. You'd need to protect the growth army, though! I mean just swapping lords, so that the established horde with all the buildings I want on it can swap its growth-specced lord for a differently-specced lord once I no longer need the +growth bonus. Sorry, I could have worded that better. I'm at work otherwise I'd just try it myself. I'd like to have a ready-made horde for Kahzrak by the time I can recruit him without having to build up a new one.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 23:16
|
|
|
Nah, can't do that. You can however have a horde that makes the units, swap every good unit out for one eye's inferior units and achieve roughly the same thing but the buildings are tied to the leader
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 23:25
|
|
|
I feel like the beastmen lords both require a significant investment into the blue tree. I've been going with the upkeep reducing skill, the raiding and razing income bonus skill, the horde growth skill, and lightning strike (1 point wonder). The rest I've all put in yellow stuff.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 23:50
|
|
|
Spiros posted:Nah, can't do that. You can however have a horde that makes the units, swap every good unit out for one eye's inferior units and achieve roughly the same thing but the buildings are tied to the leader Okay, I'll settle for that then. I was hoping I could snag the high tier buildings with none of the growth investment, but the other method has worked fine for me before. What does happen when a lord dies in a horde, if you don't just replace them like other races? When I played the Chaos campaign I never had to think about it because Kholek and Sigvald were untouchable.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 23:54
|
|
|
No, you can totally do what you want to do as I understand it. You just mean you want a trashlord specced into the +horde growth until you max the horde out, right? Then you swap in another lord built with "don't need growth anymore" in mind? That works and is a good idea overall. The buildings are tied to the leader, but if you just meant you felt like the 3 points into +growth skills feel wasted once a horde is maxed swapping is a good solution. With Chaos it's a non-issue since you want to get to lightning strike anyway but with Beasts it's both after lightning strike and they have tons of other good things to spend on usually so saving points is good. If a lord dies you just replace them, yeah. If they were the only thing remaining in the stack the entire horde dies and you have to start from 0 on a new one.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 01:20
|
|
|
drat Dirty Ape posted:I feel like the beastmen lords both require a significant investment into the blue tree. I've been going with the upkeep reducing skill, the raiding and razing income bonus skill, the horde growth skill, and lightning strike (1 point wonder). The rest I've all put in yellow stuff. I actually really like the blue tree regardless of the faction I'm playing, lately. I feel like at least rank 1 lightning strike is a necessity on VH or Legendary, or at least it's become one for me, and at that point I feel like I might as well invest in some of the high tier blue skills. Overall your lord will be slightly less meaty, but you should be able to hit most of the important stuff+troop buffs. PS: Anyone else disappointed with AI Beastmen? They seem to get killed off really early and all the brayherds that spawn later on are easily dealt with. Even the warherd of chaos was a joke and died against a VC town in my latest empire playthrough. Jamwad Hilder fucked around with this message at 02:33 on Aug 4, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 02:29
|
|
|
Anyone done a fight all battles yourself game?
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 03:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 00:10 |
|
|
TipsyMcStagger posted:Anyone done a fight all battles yourself game? Like without autoresolve? I've done that for my last two Beastmen campaigns. E. Nevermind, I auto'd a siege where the defenders were nothing but mortars and handgunners. I am shamed. Deified Data fucked around with this message at 03:15 on Aug 4, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 03:11
|
|