About retinue composistion and military organisation.

[Sard]

So, I have recently aquired Legacy of Rome, and being a bit new to the whole retinue thing I have two questions I would like to have answered.

1) Since the new retinue system makes it possible to customise one's flanks, I have been wondering how much this actually matters. Is there any good reason why I tend to put pikemen in the center and cavalry on the flanks?

2) Is the reduction in levies (or perhaps rather, conversion of levies into retinue capacity) that one gains from gaining levels in Military Organisation based on the tech level in the capitol of the sovereign, or the tech level in the capitol of each vassal one holds?

 

[Torakka]

I don't really know about your first question, but your total retinue size is based on the realm-wide average of Military Organisation tech. Therefore it is actually possible for your retinue limit to drop if you conquer large, low tech, wrong religion and wrong culture areas, as the average Military Organisation level of your (supposedly higher tech) realm will drop and recently conquered penalties mean raw manpower doesn't increase enough to offset that.

Vassals use the average Military Organisation within their own realm, so for example King of Cumania who has been vassalised by Seljuks has probably smaller retinue / levy ratio than his overlord and lone Sicilian count who has sworn fealty to HRE might have higher ratio than Emperor.

EDIT: If I wasn't clear enough, as far as I know every province in your realm matters, not just capitals.

 

[NosgothKingdom]

Theoretically your center column should not yield, so have high deffence, while the flanks should crush the enemy and then flank the center one, since it gets some bonus in doing so. Maybe the flanks are weak to a center flanking them as well if your center column fails, I do not know.

In practice, I just build only the most powerful retinue available and make the columns even or close to that (somethimes slightly reforcing the sides or the center). I don't know whether there are options so much better than this one, but it does work nice.

Oh, but I do use that theoretical rule (that I've seen somewhere in this forum) to select the leading commanders. I always put high deffence bonus in middle and high offensive bonus on flanks (both real and morale like). As I said, it sure works for me.

 

[MrWeRD]

I've tried a few ways to build my retinue. I've even done pure cavalry like Nosgothkingdom suggested, but I feel they're slow on sieges, takes too long to win a battle. One of the problems is that cavalries are really weak in skirmishes, which comes first in every battle and usually last longer than the other phases.

Since, I've come to favor pure archers + heavy infantry in the middle, but mass cavalry on both flanks. It's doing nicely so far. My mid decimate their opponent very quickly, then move on to help one of the flanks. I need some more game time to test it out in the late games though.

The only time I suggest pure cavalry is if you have the Byzantine cultural buildings.

Heavy cavalry + Horse Archers = GG.

 

[science4sail]

I've tried a few ways to build my retinue. I've even done pure cavalry like Nosgothkingdom suggested, but I feel they're slow on sieges, takes too long to win a battle. One of the problems is that cavalries are really weak in skirmishes, which comes first in every battle and usually last longer than the other phases.

Since, I've come to favor pure archers + heavy infantry in the middle, but mass cavalry on both flanks. It's doing nicely so far. My mid decimate their opponent very quickly, then move on to help one of the flanks. I need some more game time to test it out in the late games though.

The only time I suggest pure cavalry is if you have the Byzantine cultural buildings.

Heavy cavalry + Horse Archers = GG.

What about horse archers and normal archers? Altaic leaders, if they have 30% horse archers, can keep a battle running indefinitely in skirmish mode.