The problem with scouting is that it cuts down on chit-chat! Nobody can talk about the overall situation for fear of giving something away.
It seems that the theory that you can seize a province by having a spy pop up out of hiding is incorrect. Two of my (countless) spies exposed themselves in an enemy province and achieved nothing, despite their collective 20CF. That sucks!
Originally posted by Bosse de NageIt'd be nice to if something you scout stays on your map when the scout moves on - the 'fog of war' would mean that any subsequent changes are unknown to you until the next time you (or an ally) scout the province ...
The problem with scouting is that it cuts down on chit-chat! Nobody can talk about the overall situation for fear of giving something away.
It seems that the theory that you can seize a province by having a spy pop up out of hiding is incorrect. Two of my (countless) spies exposed themselves in an enemy province and achieved nothing, despite their collective 20CF. That sucks!
Your maps would get out of date quickly, but still useful, I think.
Originally posted by treetalkIt's also be nice if there were a counter-intelligence feature ("subvert spies" or something) that you could use if you capture a spy, say. That could get pretty interesting!
It'd be nice to if something you scout stays on your map when the scout moves on - the 'fog of war' would mean that any subsequent changes are unknown to you until the next time you (or an ally) scout the province ...
Originally posted by Bosse de NageSpies only count for one tenth of their CS for the purposes of grabbing land. You need 100 CS of Spies to take a Province. Therefore to pull off that trick you need a band of 10 Spies.
The problem with scouting is that it cuts down on chit-chat! Nobody can talk about the overall situation for fear of giving something away.
It seems that the theory that you can seize a province by having a spy pop up out of hiding is incorrect. Two of my (countless) spies exposed themselves in an enemy province and achieved nothing, despite their collective 20CF. That sucks!
1 edit
I can't figure out how everyone always is so far advanced over my armies?? Both this game and Dragonlords.. i build as many and as fast as I can, let my armies are always not even half the size of others?
Once turn, like dragonlord, and suddenly I'm decimated.. surrounded by armies that even if I had stockpiled all my men, doesn't come close! What am I doing wrong?
Originally posted by MIODudeAre you annexing your provinces for more money?
I can't figure out how everyone always is so far advanced over my armies?? Both this game and Dragonlords.. i build as many and as fast as I can, let my armies are always not even half the size of others?
Once turn, like dragonlord, and suddenly I'm decimated.. surrounded by armies that even if I had stockpiled all my men, doesn't come close! What am I doing wrong?
Are you building the right type of troops?
Are you losing too many men when you do attack, meaning it takes longer to rebuild?
1 edit
Originally posted by StarrmanYes
Are you annexing your provinces for more money?
Are you building the right type of troops?
Are you losing too many men when you do attack, meaning it takes longer to rebuild?
In this, I was building all Samaria Horse Archers .. not sure if that is right or not? Chose that for the 4 moves, and was cheaper than the Heavy horse infantry
in this game, I did lose some to independent.. as they are very strong.. ( had to take down 6 heavy horse infantry.. and it ended up not even being worth it)
Originally posted by MIODudeMaybe your rankings need work. You took a hammering when you attacked Bida, right? That's because you had no cannon fodder. Say you had a rank of jizamurai in the front rank--they would take the hits first, so your horse archers could keep attacking without being hit until all the front-rankers died. Generally put something tough in front, followed by missile troops, then follow up with cavalry.
Yes
In this, I was building all Samaria Horse Archers .. not sure if that is right or not? Chose that for the 4 moves, and was cheaper than the Heavy horse infantry
Originally posted by MIODudeYou need a balanced force; all cavalry doesn't have sufficient hit points to survive combats against mixed forces of considerably less combat strength. And they are usually quite expensive per hit point gained. I tend towards a 50-25-25 division of units (infantry, archers, cavalry).
Yes
In this, I was building all Samaria Horse Archers .. not sure if that is right or not? Chose that for the 4 moves, and was cheaper than the Heavy horse infantry
in this game, I did lose some to independent.. as they are very strong.. ( had to take down 6 heavy horse infantry.. and it ended up not even being worth it)
1 edit
Originally posted by no1marauderI don't like cavalry. They're expensive and crappy for defending forts and naval/amphibious combat. I'm big on HP also. Something like a 75/25 mix of infantry/archers is my style.
You need a balanced force; all cavalry doesn't have sufficient hit points to survive combats against mixed forces of considerably less combat strength. And they are usually quite expensive per hit point gained. I tend towards a 50-25-25 division of units (infantry, archers, cavalry).
Cavalry do have their place, but I consider them a specialty unit and not a core unit.