Battles or Sieges?

[unmerged(53166)]

I was reading the various strategies that people have for fighting their wars so I wanted to get everyone's input for this. Generally, when I fight a war I immediately head for all of the enemies units. My navy hunts theirs down and my armies try to engage theirs in battle. That is, of course, unless I'm fighting a large country and some of their armies are way across the board. Cause then I'll just live and let live until they come to me...

Apparently a lot of the people here go straight for sieges and try to avoid the enemy. But why? When I play, the AI has a nasty habit of grouping their units together and then attacking you when they have a numerical advantage. I hate leaving armies alive because the AI re-groups them into one massive army and attacks my medium-sized ones.

Which brings me to another point about army size. I generally have numerous 20.000 man armies. Sometimes I increase it to 30.000 but most of the provinces in EU2 won't really support larger armies than that (if you are invading the enemy that is). Once my armies are done defeating theirs, I siege all (or most) of their provinces so that they can't build troops anymore.

Am I the only one here who goes straight for battles and not sieges? It just seems like the logical thing to do because it provides for easy war score points and once you are done defeating the enemy's field army, you can concentrate on taking their cities.

Anyone else?

 

[Jomini]

There are several problems with your strategy.

First and foremost you don't let attrition work for you. As you correctly note, few provinces can sustain massive armies without attrition; if the AI piles all his troops togethor he will he hit just as hard, if not harder. Letting the Poles into your territory as Russia can easily decimate their troops through attrition alone.

Second the longer you leave the AI in control of his provinces, the more reinforcements he will raise, and the longer/harder a massive victory becomes.

Third and most importantly you way is costly; unless you are destroying an all infantry army on the plains, you will take casualties. The more battles you fight the more troops you have to replace. It is not uncommon for me to fight multiple wars back to back without replenishing my forces, certainly without racking up unmanagable WE.

Lastly what do you do for those battles you just can't win? If the enemy has an Alba, Gustov, or Murad while you have generic leaders and outnumbers you heavily and you have no hope of killer terrain bonus do you still run to the fight? Further by letting the AI roam you can wait to strike until the timing is optimal - when his massive infantry stack is on the plains, when he is crossing a river, when he is in the midst of an assault.

Letting the AI go find a province to seige wipes out his army through attrition, allows you to curtail his recruitment abilities, lets you win with low(er) casualties, and lets you wait for optimal conditions to strike. None of this applies to compotent opposition.

 

[unmerged(49521)]

Third and most importantly you way is costly;

I find this one most important, too.

What i would add is:
- it is hard to have groups of 20.000 if you are a small state which can supprt e g 11 000 without extra cost. It is just as much as to siege 2x min or 1x small fortress
- i let my allies do the battles, why should I loose men? why not just pillage and siege?
- i find it usually easier to defend than to attack
- in the beginning of the game CPU has usually better land tech than me

 

[Duke of Wellington]

I typically take a mixture of the two strategies. Against an average size country I build around 4 armies. One is usually around 20 to 30 K cavalry. I use this to hunt down and kill all the small 5k armies the ai has stationed before they can regroup them. One of the other armies is entirely infantry and normally the largest. I use this to assault minimal and possiby small fortresses, these guys typically avoid all battle. The other two armies are composed of a mix of the three types and used for sieging larger fortresses and engaging bigger armies.

 

[beezneez]

if my army is numerically superior and the terrain is fitting for my army, ie. plains for large cav army and such, then i fight the enemy army to wear him down through attrition over time. i defend with infantry in mountainous terrian and defend river crossings and such that give me a good defensible bonus. i also prefer to build a 5k army of cav that just pilages the enemies countryside, never engaing the enemy if i can help it. that way my enemy loses out on cash to build armies and i get extra cash to build more troops. if i know my navy is more powerfull, i am always very aggressive and hunt down the enemy navies. annihilate your enemies navies and pillage his provinces. take away his means (money) to wage war.

 

[unmerged(53166)]

Can someone briefly explain how looting works - basically by sending troops into an enemy province you get a small amount of money? Does it matter what time of the month that you loot the province?

 

[unmerged(53166)]

There are several problems with your strategy.

First and foremost you don't let attrition work for you. As you correctly note, few provinces can sustain massive armies without attrition; if the AI piles all his troops togethor he will he hit just as hard, if not harder. Letting the Poles into your territory as Russia can easily decimate their troops through attrition alone.

Second the longer you leave the AI in control of his provinces, the more reinforcements he will raise, and the longer/harder a massive victory becomes.

Third and most importantly you way is costly; unless you are destroying an all infantry army on the plains, you will take casualties. The more battles you fight the more troops you have to replace. It is not uncommon for me to fight multiple wars back to back without replenishing my forces, certainly without racking up unmanagable WE.

Lastly what do you do for those battles you just can't win? If the enemy has an Alba, Gustov, or Murad while you have generic leaders and outnumbers you heavily and you have no hope of killer terrain bonus do you still run to the fight? Further by letting the AI roam you can wait to strike until the timing is optimal - when his massive infantry stack is on the plains, when he is crossing a river, when he is in the midst of an assault.

Letting the AI go find a province to seige wipes out his army through attrition, allows you to curtail his recruitment abilities, lets you win with low(er) casualties, and lets you wait for optimal conditions to strike. None of this applies to compotent opposition.

Well I may have to try your strategy the next time I play (which is right now )

I'm just so used to attacking the enemy's armies. This time I'll try going after the enemy's provinces instead of his armies.

As for letting attrition work for you, that's only in a defensive war. I'm talking more about an offensive war where you are trying to capture enemy territory.

 

[Thistletooth]

Unless I have a large tech/morale advantage, I'd wager that I lose about 75% of all the sizable battles I fight against the AI. Usually, any tie goes to them, and they'd be far more likely to get a freak morale win. Regardless of my DP settings, maintenance, and taking the terrain fully into account.

Because of this, my strategy in war is typically to stay in my territory, where I'll at least have attrition on my side, and try to keep from losing more than a couple of provinces. By this point, I'll eventually scrape together a sizable victory on my territory, retake my provinces and maybe one more, then I'll have to fight off a new AI army. If I win, I'll start seiging several provinces while they're defenseless. Once I take a couple of provinces, if they lose another major battle to me, the war is all but over, as they'll never get another chance (unless they're Russia). If I lose, I drop back to my territory and the process will repeat until it finally goes my way.

My wars almost never go any other way.

So, if your experiences are anything like mine, I'd recommend that you keep the war in your territory and try not to lose too much of your army until you get that one big victory (preferably in a plains province). The enemy's treasury will eventually run out, at which point you should go for one last major victory, then ride that wave all the way onto the offensive.

Screw seiges, all I care about is winning the battles. If I win those, I'll win the war. Attempting to seize any enemy provinces before their army is taken care of just never has worked for me, and I've been playing for at least three years.

 

[Ceorl]

Unless I have a large tech/morale advantage, I'd wager that I lose about 75% of all the sizable battles I fight against the AI. Usually, any tie goes to them, and they'd be far more likely to get a freak morale win. Regardless of my DP settings, maintenance, and taking the terrain fully into account.

Ain't that the sad sorry truth.

I end fighting my battles in much the same fashion. The enemy AI is generally horrible as a stragetist, but the game compenstates somewhat by allowing computer huge stack armies. If only I, as a a small country, could build the thirty k stack armies that computer minors regularly field.

 

[Duke of Wellington]

if my army is numerically superior and the terrain is fitting for my army, ie. plains for large cav army and such, then i fight the enemy army to wear him down through attrition over time. i defend with infantry in mountainous terrian and defend river crossings and such that give me a good defensible bonus. i also prefer to build a 5k army of cav that just pilages the enemies countryside, never engaing the enemy if i can help it. that way my enemy loses out on cash to build armies and i get extra cash to build more troops. if i know my navy is more powerfull, i am always very aggressive and hunt down the enemy navies. annihilate your enemies navies and pillage his provinces. take away his means (money) to wage war.

Are you playing MP? The ai doesn't lose any money when it's provinces are looted.

 

[Stolen Rutters]

Early game I have the all Cav Hunter/Killers and the balanced siege armies. If I start as a medium or larger size country, I do admit to adding a smaller Cav army for looting (twice the annual tax value of the province or something to that effect). I normally win more battles thank I lose against the AI, early or otherwise, but I have found that they do pile on an attack more effectively now if I try to fight in their chosen target province. I figure out which one they pick pretty quickly anyway, so I move the battle field to suit my advantage and take them out.

Mid game, Cavalry/Infantry in a mix of up to 50% cavalry, with small infantry/artillery armies to speed up the sieges that I can't get large armies in fast enough to avoid attrition. The cav/inf armies attack provinces in waves to kill the defenders on the walls quick. I have normally developed a tech advantage by now so I don't lose against battlefield armies so much.

Late game, you can't beat artillery but they move so slowly in comparison. Mix inf/art armies for punch through, inf/cav armies for selective-terrain troop killers and advancing faster through the combat field when it opens up. The downside to late game is that you have, more or less, already won if you started playing in the earlier century scenarios so there is no real reason for tactical play except for role-play.

Ooh, I am so going to move to MP as soon as I can make some time this year. I just got a major promotion at my Engineering job so the work load is fairly intense learning my new responsibilities, so MP will probably have to wait. It's still on my list for the year, though.

 

[ForzaA]

all depends on circumstances, really (relative size of countries; geography, ie. a long narrow country will require a different tactic than a "round" country; tech levels etc)

But I'll *generally* harass smaller enemy armies (that aren't yet in the "killer" stack) to prevent too much of an enemy buildup, while at the same time sieging a few provinces. Usually, the AI will either just stand there waiting for it's big stack to grow until that's the only province he has, or he'll venture out and I'll be able to meet that army under favourable circumstances.

 

[unmerged(7792)]

While I was plying Poland in the early stages of the game, waiting for "Nieszawa Provilanges" (1450+? I planned to get an option with -6 stability) I used tactic with pure cavalry fast killing force with quite good effects. I didn't want to take any province becouse of badboy-incresed stability costs for the event so I was destroing any enemy army on-sight just to take my warscore better for better peace.

And with 25k of cav in the beginning of the war I destroyed about 80k-100k maybe even more than 120k, loosing most of the cav but winning 70% warscore without any province. War was with Baltic Alliance (Prusia, Teutonians, Meklemburg, Breme, Holstein, Pommerania) and most of looses were in the triangle Breme-Maklemburg-Holstein on plains - after some hard battles I was destroing every newly produced unit with poor morale in one deadly charge
With small enemy stacks it also works well in marsh or trees...

But remember that in early stages cavalry RULEZ! Shouldn't try it with plutocracy in XVIII century But before that I'll prepare for positional war

 

[unmerged(49508)]

While I was plying Poland in the early stages of the game, waiting for "Nieszawa Provilanges" (1450+? I planned to get an option with -6 stability)

A bit of oftopic, but is not that choice the only one that does not give you a COT in Danzig? Why would you want to go with that one?

 

[unmerged(52332)]

I just play bouth and battles and seige that you gives a more war points!! I once beat enemys army but dont take any province and they offer me for peace one province so I acept and win war!!!

 

[unmerged(15337)]

In my experience usually both battles and sieges are needed, in some combination, in order to win a decisive victory. But the exact breakdown depends so heavily on the particular situation that I wouldn't even try to give a general rule.

 

[unmerged(3931)]

Generally, when I fight a war I immediately head for all of the enemies units. My navy hunts theirs down and my armies try to engage theirs in battle.

That works well if the nation you are at war with is weaker, vulnerable in the plains, and somewhat easily completely covered (depends on size of your army, size of enemy country, size of their fortresses, winter/tropical conditions, etc.).

That is, of course, unless I'm fighting a large country and some of their armies are way across the board. Cause then I'll just live and let live until they come to me...

The advice on outsieging your opponent generally applies to large countries that border yours. Let the AI come into your territory. Harrass tiny or vulnerable AI armies. Besiege enemy territory far away from the province of yours the enemy targets (you may need some ships or military access to move armies without battle).

Apparently a lot of the people here go straight for sieges and try to avoid the enemy. But why? When I play, the AI has a nasty habit of grouping their units together and then attacking you when they have a numerical advantage. I hate leaving armies alive because the AI re-groups them into one massive army and attacks my medium-sized ones.

First, you need some patience in allowing the AI into your territory. If you enter AI territory too soon, then AI does not target your province and lock an army into place. If you besiege a province bordering the province where the AI besieges, the AI may attack you. If you invade the AI capital, the AI may attack you. If you invade a gold producing province, the AI may attack you. The AI is not as smart about defending CoTs.

Which brings me to another point about army size. I generally have numerous 20.000 man armies. Sometimes I increase it to 30.000 but most of the provinces in EU2 won't really support larger armies than that (if you are invading the enemy that is). Once my armies are done defeating theirs, I siege all (or most) of their provinces so that they can't build troops anymore.

That is great if you can fight and still have enough men remaining to cover everything and besiege. The "outsieging" strategy is not needed in such cases. Just walk all over your enemy. Usually you will want to fight with large amounts of cavalry in the plains to quickly annihilate your enemy. Otherwise, the enemy builds and regroups recruits as you slowly whittle down the AI army. There are not always plains/desert provinces for this purpose.

See my Xhosa AAR (link is in my signature) where Xhosa first fights Spain for another take on the "outsieging" strategy. Spain was much bigger, had a much larger army, had good leaders, had lots of mountainous provinces, and Xhosa was very slow at replenishing an army (2 years from build to transport). Sometimes the enemy does not border you. The AI is slow to transport men by ship; what they do transport often get stuck in place if you defeat AI fleets; however it is not enough to cause attrition faster than enemy troop building. It is better not to just collide with the enemy; they rebuild more aggressively when they are quickly defeated.

The idea is to start mutiple sieges and abandon sieges without battle. Some sieges are only for distracting the AI. Eventually, one siege completes. The AI will try to siege it back at which time you outsiege the AI with many sieges.

 

[EvilSanta]

I tend to mostly siege but I try not to avoid battles but engage when ever I have chance to win.

 

[unmerged(20077)]

Battles work on small to medium size countries. One province minors are always best taken by siege, of course - once you have their one province you can annex them - and big empires can't really be defeated with battles, unless your aim is simply to get a few percent advantage in warscore and offer peace as soon as possible... trying to hurt Austria, for instance, by winning battles simply doesn't work because they have the money and manpower to build back everything you destroyed: you must take key provinces (usually Austria itself, Bohemia and Steiermark) and cripple them as quickly as you can. The largest countries also tend to be likeliest to have generals who can beat you.

 

[unmerged(49521)]

Can someone briefly explain how looting works - basically by sending troops into an enemy province you get a small amount of money? Does it matter what time of the month that you loot the province?

If you station your troops in enemy unlooted province on last day of a month (or is it the first day?) they will loot it adding 2x base tax value to your income last month. You can take it to treasury for a price of inflation or you can leave it as it is - it will go to research then. Just like ordinary monthly income. It may be therefore worth to take the money for a little inflation if BTV is high.
After a province is looted (fires are seen on the map) it cannot be looted for another year. Then - go for it again.

EDIT: actually your troops do not have to be stationed in this prov - they may also be engaged in a combat and I believe also just passing though it.