Jump to content

Welcome to TrollGame Community
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. This message will be removed once you have signed in.
Login to Account Create an Account
Photo

Lessons from History


  • Please log in to reply
19 replies to this topic

#1
Iceqatius

Iceqatius

    Captain

  • Senior Admin
  • 150 posts

I was looking for stuff on youtube, and came across this excellent history teacher who teaches about historical battles in a competent and engaging way (imho). I thought it might be interesting to others also.

 

Battle of Hastings in the year 1066.

 

Battle of Arsuf in the year 1191.

 

 


  • yrod, MoB_Griff, Umbuz and 1 other like this

#2
TheHunterMikiPL

TheHunterMikiPL

    Elite Member

  • Banned
  • 123 posts

Is it really related to captain battle



#3
mumbuz

mumbuz

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • 40 posts

Is it really related to captain battle

You can use these tactics in captain battle, until the one cav left on the enemy team runs around until the time runs out. 


  • Ayna and Iceqatius like this

#4
WingedEggJuice

WingedEggJuice

    Elite Member

  • Member
  • 177 posts
  • LocationNigeria

You can use these tactics in captain battle, until the one cav left on the enemy team runs around until the time runs out. 

Can't use these tactics in Captain battle in regards to vanilla game imbalance. You can literally cheese the game with Rhodok Sergeants / even worse is Norse Huscarls.

I go on TG_Battle as cav sometimes tell my troops to stop and literally pick at the A.I solo and make insane K/D denars in the first round and am unstoppable with inf next round. Games broken.

But yes Huscarls / Sergeants 4 lyf.


  • TheHunterMikiPL likes this

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      :strawberry:


#5
mumbuz

mumbuz

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • 40 posts

NW commander battles better and has better rules.  



#6
TheHunterMikiPL

TheHunterMikiPL

    Elite Member

  • Banned
  • 123 posts

You can use these tactics in captain battle, until the one cav left on the enemy team runs around until the time runs out. 

Haven't watched it, maybe I will do it later, but this is not strategic game. AI sucks in M&B and is not realistic. AI is really retarded in a lot of ways, but it is also overpowered in some other ways (troops seeing you through walls, or suddenly turning around, when you are trying to sneak up on an unit).
So I don't really think real life strategy will work in Mount&Blade.
+what EggJuice said
AI is literally so dumb. It can't use it's advantages, and one unit of bots can die to one player if there is no commander babysitting them (some of them will die anyway if it's a horseman).
Also some aspects of Mount&Blade combat are not really that realistic (like spears being shitty, while irl they were OP).
And I would say captain battle is too fast paced for real strategy, maps are too small, terrain does not matter that much, there is no stamina, morale, and also some players don't give a shit, and just mindlessly charge with their whole unit, and after they die, they keep spawning as your troops and again charging alone, wasting your troops. And even if there is no such noobs, still players don't cooperate as good as historic armies.
EDIT: Also commanding options are not very good.

So yeah, in conclusion I would say Mount&Blade is not a realistic strategy game, and best M&B strategies often are not the same as best real life strategies.

 

NW commander battles better and has better rules.  

Honestly I think it's even worse. I played it once.
During fighting I strayed a bit from my unit. I wasn't really that far from them and I think I was even fighting same unit as them, but the game decided I am too far, and I am rambo, so I can't deal damage at all, and I died to a few bots -_-
Ramboing is not cool, but neither is this "fix".


  • Iceqatius likes this

#7
TheHunterMikiPL

TheHunterMikiPL

    Elite Member

  • Banned
  • 123 posts

Ok, I have watched the first video, and what I learned from that (not really learned) is: infantry together in good position strong, infantry scattered over open field weak, good target for cav.
And it does work in M&B, but basically every decent Mount&Blade commander knows that.
The dude also talks about false retreat, to trick people into breaking formation, and chasing you in open field.
This does not really work in M&B. If you are too weak to break enemy formation your unit will probably be gone very quickly and before you even start retreating most of your army will be dead (maybe not most, but rather big % for sure).
You could sacrifice your unit to draw enemy into open field, but probably enemy commanders would be rather careful with cav around, and in M&B if commander says hold this position, they won't chase retreating unit.
Maybe this could be used to your advantage, but situations where this is useful in M&B are rather rare imo.



#8
Iceqatius

Iceqatius

    Captain

  • Senior Admin
  • 150 posts

Is it rare to see real and serious tactics on the CB server? Yes it is but when you do see them or play them it is beautiful and they do work sometimes. Even if the game options are limited in regards to formations, priorities and AI.

 

I have seen the tactics used in those videos on the server several times. Curiously more often when there are fewer people on the server (around 5vs5). Of course the most commonly used tactic in the game is the simple flanking manoeuvre where a cavalry unit (usually) strikes the side or the back of a enemy unit engaged in battle. But other tactics works also sometimes.

 

Might be interesting to see what would happen if there were two teams (clans with voice-comms) facing each other instead of the normal non communicating players. Could be a boring stalemate or a very interesting display of tactics and manoeuvring.


  • Ayna likes this

#9
TheHunterMikiPL

TheHunterMikiPL

    Elite Member

  • Banned
  • 123 posts

and they do work sometimes

Well said.

And other times enemy team just goes 100% cav, instantly charges and beats the shit out of you.



#10
WingedEggJuice

WingedEggJuice

    Elite Member

  • Member
  • 177 posts
  • LocationNigeria

Is it rare to see real and serious tactics on the CB server? Yes it is but when you do see them or play them it is beautiful and they do work sometimes. Even if the game options are limited in regards to formations, priorities and AI.

 

I have seen the tactics used in those videos on the server several times. Curiously more often when there are fewer people on the server (around 5vs5). Of course the most commonly used tactic in the game is the simple flanking manoeuvre where a cavalry unit (usually) strikes the side or the back of a enemy unit engaged in battle. But other tactics works also sometimes.

 

Might be interesting to see what would happen if there were two teams (clans with voice-comms) facing each other instead of the normal non communicating players. Could be a boring stalemate or a very interesting display of tactics and manoeuvring.

Can happen if there are a large amount of players per faction, other than that not really.

You also really notice the imbalance between factions in CB regardless of how many people play, like Sarranids vs Rhodoks etc. If you play as Sarranids may aswell RQ in CB.


  • Iceqatius likes this

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      :strawberry:


#11
TheHunterMikiPL

TheHunterMikiPL

    Elite Member

  • Banned
  • 123 posts

Can happen if there are a large amount of players per faction, other than that not really.

You also really notice the imbalance between factions in CB regardless of how many people play, like Sarranids vs Rhodoks etc. If you play as Sarranids may aswell RQ in CB.

I wanted to argue, but after thinking for a while - you can win as sarranids against rhodoks, but rhodoks have to be very bad xdd



#12
mumbuz

mumbuz

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • 40 posts

Basically Bannerlord needs custom servers so there can be custom commander battles on that. 



#13
Iceqatius

Iceqatius

    Captain

  • Senior Admin
  • 150 posts

"If you play as Sarranids may aswell RQ in CB."

 

Sad but true, but the Sarranids can win against anyone if they have competent captains that use teamwork and some tactics. Of course it only takes one or two players being archers to ruin everyone's day. I have considered removing the faction completely but left them in for varieties sake.

 

"Basically Bannerlord needs custom servers so there can be custom commander battles on that."

 

Bannerlord in mp is a sad affair, very unstable servers and very low population (much lower then Warband). Can custom servers hosted by the players save it? Maybe, but if mp is to be saved it will be modders that do the saving i think.


  • Ayna likes this

#14
TheHunterMikiPL

TheHunterMikiPL

    Elite Member

  • Banned
  • 123 posts

"If you play as Sarranids may aswell RQ in CB."

 

Sad but true, but the Sarranids can win against anyone if they have competent captains that use teamwork and some tactics. Of course it only takes one or two players being archers to ruin everyone's day. I have considered removing the faction completely but left them in for varieties sake.

Maybe just limit archers for sarranids to 0 then?



#15
Ayna

Ayna

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • 30 posts

Isnt it better to just increase their power draw from 0 to 5, like for all other archers? ^_^ Lol i have read about Arsuf battle, arabian chronicler writes how crusders had 10 arrows in their shields and were ok. So guys, sarranid archers are historically accurate! :D


  • Iceqatius likes this

#16
Iceqatius

Iceqatius

    Captain

  • Senior Admin
  • 150 posts

"Maybe just limit archers for sarranids to 0 then?"

 

We are limited in our options when it comes to that. It's all or nothing. Any changes we do impacts every nation. So if we put 0 archers in the config then nobody would have archers.

 

"Isnt it better to just increase their power draw from 0 to 5, like for all other archers?"

 

That can't be done without breaking compatibility with native. If it could have been done, it would have happened long ago. We can only work around the edges so to speak.



#17
TheHunterMikiPL

TheHunterMikiPL

    Elite Member

  • Banned
  • 123 posts

"Maybe just limit archers for sarranids to 0 then?"

 

We are limited in our options when it comes to that. It's all or nothing. Any changes we do impacts every nation. So if we put 0 archers in the config then nobody would have archers.

That's even better



#18
Ayna

Ayna

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • 30 posts

Is it rare to see real and serious tactics on the CB server? Yes it is but when you do see them or play them it is beautiful and they do work sometimes. Even if the game options are limited in regards to formations, priorities and AI.

 

I have seen the tactics used in those videos on the server several times. Curiously more often when there are fewer people on the server (around 5vs5). Of course the most commonly used tactic in the game is the simple flanking manoeuvre where a cavalry unit (usually) strikes the side or the back of a enemy unit engaged in battle. But other tactics works also sometimes.

 

Might be interesting to see what would happen if there were two teams (clans with voice-comms) facing each other instead of the normal non communicating players. Could be a boring stalemate or a very interesting display of tactics and manoeuvring.

I agree that 5 vs 5 is perfect for tactics. Enough for variability and not enough for unrulable chaos :lol: Though and battles with many players have seen some simple team tactics like 'full cav' or 'lets camp on that hill', usually in last rounds after several defeats :D

I really enjoy it when both teams are good in tactics. It makes battle very exciting with many maneuvres, like false attacks, taking better positions, retreats, and of course chatting ^_^ . Special case is when i meet enemy cavalry who is not just charging or ramboing :wub:  From my experience, archers(all but nord) are the most team-dependent class, its rly awful to play them with trash team. Infantry sometimes needs cavalry to charge together, and cavalry may need protection from enemy cavalry.

Team tactics that i see in game:

Camping. Used by noobs, works against noobs. Best way to lose by flag or get draw instead of victory.

Defense on good position. Works nice if position is good enough ;) I said 'is', not 'was good minute ago' :P

Defense and countercharge. Strong tactics, but very hard to organize for entire team. At least u can take cav and hide it behind defending teammates, thats it.

Mobile defense. Idea is if your position was ok but became bad, you... charge it! Its awesome but so rare!..

Defense with reserve. You defend, enemies are winning, but then reserved cavalry comes and turns the tide of battle! Was rare, but becomes popular.

And attacking ones:

Suicide charge. Old but gold tactics. Cavalry dies even faster than everyone spawns, archers meet enemy, do 2 shots and die, infantry lags behind and gets rekt by arrows and rambos.

Massive charge. Proper charge where you kill enemies before they got idea what to do.

Advance/Besieging. Like charge, but you mostly shoot from good position, find vulnerble places, kill lonely squads, and do maneuvres.  Thats what we enjoy when there are many good players online.

Wave charge. Special case of besieging made by cavalry. You waste some squads, wave after wave, enemies lose commanders and order, and you finish them with final strike. Also gaining popularity.

Waiting flag. Option when you see no way to attack and win. Unreal with 10+ players in team.

And the special one.

Delaying. Hated by everyone but me :D  It is believed to be used only for trolling, but really to win next round.


  • Aratar, Dacket and Iceqatius like this

#19
Ayna

Ayna

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • 30 posts

And finally to our historical battles ^_^

So, Hastings. Thats exactly how good swadians/rhodoks  beat weak nords! And i find it awesome that this scenario is often played on Hastings map! With nords having few archers and no cav and holding hill and inevitably losing :D  (even in same way, some commanders get headshot, their squads charge, get crossfired and rekt by cavs) It happenes because nords cant into defence, and nord infantry is trash.

And false retreat works awesome in the game, here i disagree with Miki. False retreat always works against squad with lost commander. And it works against many players, either because they dont know how to retreat, dont feel that its a trap, or just dont care. In game, retreat maneuvre is even stronger, because here is no morale, and bots always hear you. When i started to play teamwork, and realised that team will need my squad later, i started to use false retreat (got it from books about mongols, who were very good in using false retreat), and suddenly became one of strongest players :lol:

Imagine, you play cavalry, show that you are attacking enemy cavalry, but run and lead them to allied infantry, who easily kill enemy cav and you dont lose bots. Or another case, you play archers, enemy infantry attacks you, but you retreat, allied archers shoot them from sides, cavalry harasses from behind, and that infantry just dies before approaching you.

How can nords counter such tactics? With infantry team there is no way, but its a game and we can choose any class and equipment, so i suggest massive charge, or better hiding behind hill and masive countercharge, with shield infantry charging in first row, archers charging with axes(not shooting!) in second row, one heavy cav supporting charge and/or one light lancers just maneuvring.


  • Iceqatius likes this

#20
Ayna

Ayna

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • 30 posts

And Arsuf. Yet another good example what happens in game!! :blink:

Sarranid archers are same trash, swadian shields are same op, and swadia has same power of classes combination.

Sarranid cavalry can beat swadian in cav-only battle. But it can do nothing to swadian cavalry supported by infantry and crossbowmen. (oh, these powerful swadian combined charges! you think these lancers will be easy for your elite melee cavalry/heavy archers, but then swadian infantry suddenly appears and exterminates you even faster than you notice it :crazy: )

As i understood here we have light cavalry helping archers. Since i start teamplaying i always try to save allied archers. But there is one exception. NEVER HELP SARRANID ARCHERS :D They are just not worth of wasting precious cavalry ^_^

Sarranid heavy cavalry is awesome against enemies who have lost order. Many times me and teammates who respawned into my squad killed kinda 2-5 enemy squads with such final charge, turning battle tides.

But if enemies do no mistakes and all teammates died, you only have to take your heavy cavs and walk away looking how enemies capture the flag, and hearing 'delayer', 'stop wasting our time' and so on. Yeah, so familiar... ^_^


  • Iceqatius likes this


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users