Apologies for the long newbie question, but land combat results in my current DW 5.1 games (as England, starting 1399, on hard, currently 1496) are really puzzling me. I have played a lot of EU II and some EU III 5.0, and have not seen this before.
Background: I have had three wars, principally against Burgundy, in the last 50 years. My Land Tech has been either equal, or 1 less than Burgundy's over that period (currently 10 v 11). Currently,
Burgundy's Morale, at full maintenance, is 2-star, 3.748
England's, also at full, is 2-star, 4.119
Burgundy has the Glorious Arms and National Conscripts ideas
England has Church Attendance and Military Drill
Burgundy's Quality position is -3 (favouring Quality by 3)
England's is the same
Burgundy's ruler has a two-star military rating
England's (Henry V) has a four-star rating
Neither England nor Burgundy have any special Military Court Advisors.
I have England, Scotland, Ireland and half of France, only 3.5 infamy and 65% legitimacy. Burgundy has half the provinces I do, 17,5 infamy and 100% legitimacy
Burgundy's Generals in War #1 were marginally better (typically 3-3-1-2 vs 2-1-0-2) and in wars #2 and #3 about the same (eg 4-5-1-3 v 4-3-1-6)
War #1, 1450-1457. The Morale War. Each combat, initially between roughly equal stacks, numerically, started with England's morale bar about 60% green, and Burgundy's 95% green. The only way England could win a battle, was by starting numerically superior by 200-250%, or by feeding in reinforcements during the fight to approximately the same numbers. If England won such a battle, they could expect to lose 50% casualties, 12,000 men. Burgundy would also lose 50%, 4-6,000 men.
If the Burgundians lost, they would retreat. Even if immediately pursued, they would fight again in their next province at around 33% morale, for a month or more. Unless reinforced, they would usually lose, but the English would lose as many men finishing them off. Occasionally, they might win!
If the English lost, they would retreat. The Burgundians always pursued (smart AI) and as soon as everyone reached the new province, the English had 0 morale, and promptly lost all of their men without inflicting a single casualty.
War #3, 1495-current. The Quality War. Each combat, initially between roughly equal stacks, numerically, started with England's morale bar about 90% green, and Burgundy's 95% green. The only way England could win a battle, was by starting numerically superior by 200-250%, or by feeding in reinforcements during the fight to approximately the same numbers. If England won such a battle, they could expect to lose 60% casualties, 18,000 men. Burgundy would lose 30%-50%, 5-8,000 men. (Stacks were bigger)
If Burgundy won, the English were usually wiped out, or nearly, and the Bugundians lost 1-2,000 men.
War #2 (1470-ish) was a mixture of behaviours between positions #1 and #3, almost as if progressing between them.
So, my question is, is this an AI advantage gained from the Hard difficulty setting, or am I doing something wrong? It is dispiriting to keep (marginally) losing each war, and seeing Burgundy advance relentlessly, with no-one apart from me standing up to them, and no apparent costs other than a very bad rep (which nevertheless doesn't seem to cause the other AI countries to DoW them) and 11% inflation (which will hurt them eventually, maybe).
When I have wars with other countries with the same Land Tech and force mixes as Burgundy (eg France or Sweden, 50% Latin Knights, 50% Men at Arms) I usually beat them comfortably, using just the same tactics that seem totally ineffective against Burgundy. My armies are 60% Longbows, 10% Men at Arms, 20% Chevauchee and 10% Latin Knights).
Any answers or even informed speculation, gratefully received!
Background: I have had three wars, principally against Burgundy, in the last 50 years. My Land Tech has been either equal, or 1 less than Burgundy's over that period (currently 10 v 11). Currently,
Burgundy's Morale, at full maintenance, is 2-star, 3.748
England's, also at full, is 2-star, 4.119
Burgundy has the Glorious Arms and National Conscripts ideas
England has Church Attendance and Military Drill
Burgundy's Quality position is -3 (favouring Quality by 3)
England's is the same
Burgundy's ruler has a two-star military rating
England's (Henry V) has a four-star rating
Neither England nor Burgundy have any special Military Court Advisors.
I have England, Scotland, Ireland and half of France, only 3.5 infamy and 65% legitimacy. Burgundy has half the provinces I do, 17,5 infamy and 100% legitimacy
Burgundy's Generals in War #1 were marginally better (typically 3-3-1-2 vs 2-1-0-2) and in wars #2 and #3 about the same (eg 4-5-1-3 v 4-3-1-6)
War #1, 1450-1457. The Morale War. Each combat, initially between roughly equal stacks, numerically, started with England's morale bar about 60% green, and Burgundy's 95% green. The only way England could win a battle, was by starting numerically superior by 200-250%, or by feeding in reinforcements during the fight to approximately the same numbers. If England won such a battle, they could expect to lose 50% casualties, 12,000 men. Burgundy would also lose 50%, 4-6,000 men.
If the Burgundians lost, they would retreat. Even if immediately pursued, they would fight again in their next province at around 33% morale, for a month or more. Unless reinforced, they would usually lose, but the English would lose as many men finishing them off. Occasionally, they might win!
If the English lost, they would retreat. The Burgundians always pursued (smart AI) and as soon as everyone reached the new province, the English had 0 morale, and promptly lost all of their men without inflicting a single casualty.
War #3, 1495-current. The Quality War. Each combat, initially between roughly equal stacks, numerically, started with England's morale bar about 90% green, and Burgundy's 95% green. The only way England could win a battle, was by starting numerically superior by 200-250%, or by feeding in reinforcements during the fight to approximately the same numbers. If England won such a battle, they could expect to lose 60% casualties, 18,000 men. Burgundy would lose 30%-50%, 5-8,000 men. (Stacks were bigger)
If Burgundy won, the English were usually wiped out, or nearly, and the Bugundians lost 1-2,000 men.
War #2 (1470-ish) was a mixture of behaviours between positions #1 and #3, almost as if progressing between them.
So, my question is, is this an AI advantage gained from the Hard difficulty setting, or am I doing something wrong? It is dispiriting to keep (marginally) losing each war, and seeing Burgundy advance relentlessly, with no-one apart from me standing up to them, and no apparent costs other than a very bad rep (which nevertheless doesn't seem to cause the other AI countries to DoW them) and 11% inflation (which will hurt them eventually, maybe).
When I have wars with other countries with the same Land Tech and force mixes as Burgundy (eg France or Sweden, 50% Latin Knights, 50% Men at Arms) I usually beat them comfortably, using just the same tactics that seem totally ineffective against Burgundy. My armies are 60% Longbows, 10% Men at Arms, 20% Chevauchee and 10% Latin Knights).
Any answers or even informed speculation, gratefully received!
Last edited:
