Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Retinues in CM

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Crusader Kings II 69866 Bug Reports 19707 User Modifications 10587 Suggestions 5969 Tech Support 6361 After Action Reports
Evil Crusader said:
I've seen a few calculations, Archers are still the cream of the crop. And sadly, Heavy Infantry is at the bottom.
Also yes, AI is bad at managing generals, at least for major battles you want to at least have balanced flanks, competent generals and that they lead compatible troops. The AI is all to happy giving all the cavalry to an Heavy Foot leader.
Click to expand...

That isn't my issue, I always manually assign generals. My question is when I open the options for the army and hit the auto balance button for the flanks and troop composition, is the a.i. competent at doing this? It never seems like it's doing anything too stupid with that but then again I usually try to rely on overwhelming numbers and terrain modifiers.
 
Tesla2501 said:
That isn't my issue, I always manually assign generals. My question is when I open the options for the army and hit the auto balance button for the flanks and troop composition, is the a.i. competent at doing this? It never seems like it's doing anything too stupid with that but then again I usually try to rely on overwhelming numbers and terrain modifiers.
Click to expand...

Mixed troop types are pointless if you have sufficient troops to focus. Tactics don't reward balance.
 
Tesla2501 said:
That isn't my issue, I always manually assign generals. My question is when I open the options for the army and hit the auto balance button for the flanks and troop composition, is the a.i. competent at doing this? It never seems like it's doing anything too stupid with that but then again I usually try to rely on overwhelming numbers and terrain modifiers.
Click to expand...

Have you looked at this page? http://www.ckiiwiki.com/Combat_tactics

If you aim for flanks that suit a particular tactic with probably a slight bias towards the centre regarding numbers you'll probably do better. Autobalancing tends to do ok for general use, but for decisive battles you're probably better off tweaking it a bit.

Sometimes easier said than done though and not worth the hassle honestly. I find the tactics mechanic a little strange in that sometimes it can actually damage you tactically to build certain troop buildings (since they skew the troop type percentages of levies).
 
Jamoid said:
Not really sure I understand your point. I don't want the game to be easy, even for a genre savvy player - I want the game to stay a challenge into the lategame. My issue (that you seem to agree with I think) is the AI being able to keep up under those same restrictions. My point was that it's a hard balance to achieve without giving the AI unfair boosts à la Total War. Probably going a bit off-topic though.
Click to expand...

My point was more or less that. I've just added why I think it can't be truly done - because the game is stiff enough to work kind of historically, yet soft enough that a savvy player can do all nasty, ridiculously un-historical stuff. As long as that is in (and a few of these options will have to remain, as they make for a better game, believe it or not) getting to blob size is bound to be easy.

On Retinues, TLRD version (to honor beta checksum): go for triggering a specific tactic and only that. Craft your retinue around a single type, or a good combo. Then it's back to numbers, as unless you're pitting cataphracts versus heavy infantry a 2:1 ratio usually means you lose regardless.
 
Jamoid said:
Have you looked at this page? http://www.ckiiwiki.com/Combat_tactics

If you aim for flanks that suit a particular tactic with probably a slight bias towards the centre regarding numbers you'll probably do better. Autobalancing tends to do ok for general use, but for decisive battles you're probably better off tweaking it a bit.

Sometimes easier said than done though and not worth the hassle honestly. I find the tactics mechanic a little strange in that sometimes it can actually damage you tactically to build certain troop buildings (since they skew the troop type percentages of levies).
Click to expand...

Basically the general gist is that Paradox gave a vastly overcomplicated tactics system. When it was just levies or mercs, the idea was simply 'mercs are better because they're not random', but levy numbers used to be huge, so it wasn't as big a deal. Along came retinues, so you could game the system. That, though, wasn't a big issue outside of low supply limit areas, since levies were still enormous. But then SoA hacked levy numbers. Now retinues have been nerfed in every way.

Not addressed: the fact that the tactics system is horrifically overcomplicated for the amount you're expected to influence it. The best CKII tactics system I've seen was the 'clear tactics' mod: excellent, good, average, bad, very bad, no general. Nice. Clear. Better martial directly linked to better results.
 
Raineh Daze said:
Basically the general gist is that Paradox gave a vastly overcomplicated tactics system. When it was just levies or mercs, the idea was simply 'mercs are better because they're not random', but levy numbers used to be huge, so it wasn't as big a deal. Along came retinues, so you could game the system. That, though, wasn't a big issue outside of low supply limit areas, since levies were still enormous. But then SoA hacked levy numbers. Now retinues have been nerfed in every way.

Not addressed: the fact that the tactics system is horrifically overcomplicated for the amount you're expected to influence it. The best CKII tactics system I've seen was the 'clear tactics' mod: excellent, good, average, bad, very bad, no general. Nice. Clear. Better martial directly linked to better results.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it tends to be complicated to the point where most people just can't be bothered, therefore largely ignoring it and going for the numbers game. Going from overly complex to overly simplistic. Would be nice to have some of the depth without the overcomplicated hassle. Also, more troops should pretty much always be better. If I send a bunch of light infantry to fight alongside my horse archers it should really give me better odds, not worse. Although it does conjure some funny images of the light infantry wandering in wasted, scaring the horses and causing chaos through the ranks, I doubt that's what they were going for.
 
Jamoid said:
Yeah, it tends to be complicated to the point where most people just can't be bothered, therefore largely ignoring it and going for the numbers game. Going from overly complex to overly simplistic. Would be nice to have some of the depth without the overcomplicated hassle. Also, more troops should pretty much always be better. If I send a bunch of light infantry to fight alongside my horse archers it should really give me better odds, not worse. Although it does conjure some funny images of the light infantry wandering in wasted, scaring the horses and causing chaos through the ranks, I doubt that's what they were going for.
Click to expand...

Until the last beta patch, LI were totally tactics-agnostic. They affected nothing.
 
Raineh Daze said:
Until the last beta patch, LI were totally tactics-agnostic. They affected nothing.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I thought that example may be wrong but was too lazy to check. Regardless, you can definitely screw your tactics up simply by upgrading a building which is fairly odd and unintuitive.

No idea how they'd go about fixing it all though really.
 
Jamoid said:
Yeah, I thought that example may be wrong but was too lazy to check. Regardless, you can definitely screw your tactics up simply by upgrading a building which is fairly odd and unintuitive.

No idea how they'd go about fixing it all though really.
Click to expand...

Scrap the overcomplicated mess. Simplify tactics. Maybe, I guess, make it more terrain focused--nerf cavalry in forests and mountains, screw LI over in plains or the like. A 30+ Martial general should not pick worse tactics than a 1-martial drunkard purely as a result of levy compositions and the RNG.

e.g., make it something that the player can interact with without trying to break the game, but don't make it an overwhelming thing (see: the tendency of tactics to apply modifiers that make some units almost entirely irrelevant whilst others become gods)
 
Raineh Daze said:
Scrap the overcomplicated mess. Simplify tactics. Maybe, I guess, make it more terrain focused--nerf cavalry in forests and mountains, screw LI over in plains or the like. A 30+ Martial general should not pick worse tactics than a 1-martial drunkard purely as a result of levy compositions and the RNG.

e.g., make it something that the player can interact with without trying to break the game, but don't make it an overwhelming thing (see: the tendency of tactics to apply modifiers that make some units almost entirely irrelevant whilst others become gods)
Click to expand...

Yeah I think you may be right about scrapping it. Memorizing and keeping track of different percentages of troops just isn't fun, realistic or immersive really. I don't see how it can be adapted to become any of those things either.

Terrain bonuses and maluses to different troop types does sound much better. Not massive ones, but enough to decide an otherwise even battle. Far more realistic and intuitive. It also lends itself to more interesting stories which to me is part of what CK2 is about - tragically losing a decisive battle because you fought with a cavalry army in a forest is far more interesting to me than losing a decisive battle because you had 1% too many of a certain troop type and picked the wrong tactic. I like it.
 
I already did an ERE-Roman empire game under the beta patches. Vassal limit was actually a neat addition I think to make things interesting. First off throw any OCD border maintenance feelings out the door, secondly make some kings. It doesn't really matter as the ERE if you have kings. If they are misbehaving and in a faction and you dont like them anymore, simply revoke their dukes and give the dukes to someone else. That way if they do stay in a faction they add no strength. Theres no opinion penalties for revoking feudal vassals from your feudal vassals. Furthermore CM did break retinues. Basically for me the only value retinues are now is the reinforce rate they give to my army. I just spam all Light skirmish because they reinforce ALOT each month. I let the levies balance out the army composition. Although in all honesty against everyone but a Jihad, that light skirmish blob is unbeatable. Jihads only require more because of the constant fighting and the fact that the retinue can't reinforce as fast as its losing troops during the defense.
 
I'd advice the OP to roll back to 2.1.6 and finish yur game with it.

The changes in the patches since 2.2 won't fully work with your old game and it might be too frustrating anyway. (How to roll back , see the stickied thread)
You would have to use an old save file though.
 
I think the main use of retinues now is to make Empires (maybe Kingdoms) more stable. Just park them in your capital - only use them at times, since reinforcements are so costly. Those extra troops can reduce faction strength considerably.
 
Yxklyx said:
I think the main use of retinues now is to make Empires (maybe Kingdoms) more stable. Just park them in your capital - only use them at times, since reinforcements are so costly. Those extra troops can reduce faction strength considerably.
Click to expand...

They can be used alright, just not carelessly as they used to be. Before, you spammed them as soon as you had a bit of money. Now, unless you are sitting on a decent chunk of peace and money, you might want to wait. And rushing MO is useless because you'll never hit the cap, let alone support it.
 
This thread I made a little while ago may help, my rome game was seriously injured. I still lose 50% of my tax because of bloody revolt vassals who I can't touch.


You need to sparingly use your retinues and give as many city baronies as you can to a sole merchant republic vassal to help with tax income, as well as hiking feudal taxes if you still can. Retinues have had their numbers halved, so you can't replace those that are wiped out unless you've had more than half destroyed. They're fairly expensive to maintain, and you have to go for long period without them reinforcing. If you can, take a holy order title. Exceeding your vassal limit by 10 reduces your taxes by 100%. Kinda stupid.

If you're not a super-blob already, which can't disband their retinues enough to plausibly replace them without collapsing the empire, this probably wont help that much. If you're willing to revert your patch number, that also makes it less helpful. I'm going for a WC, so it's ironman for me, and I can't alter the checksum.
 
It's actually pretty easy to hit the retinue cap as a Tribal ruler. Recently I've taken to using my retinue more carelessly. If I'm faced with a Bogomilist revolt or a rebellious vassal raising my levies just wastes time and money. My retinue can stomp them in short order on its own. and I can always set it not to reinforce if I need the money for something.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back