Attila: Total War

[mikeck]

Possibly, but I don't think units fought on the battlefield in organized formations until the Swiss. There were units for organizational purposes but armies lacked drill and dicipline. I know nothing about the Mongols though so I defer. It is just a little off-putting watching my Iceni army marching in 25x4 fornations across the battlefield

[GDS_Starfury]

Question for the experts...one thing that has always driven me crazy is trying to move a formation around and your troops don't stay together.  If I have a multi line formation and in the front I have some infantry while in the back I have Calvary and attempt to move them all at once, the Calvary always moves so fast that it walks over the infantry in front of them, versus adjusting their speed to stay behind them in formation.  I have tried all the various formation moves and such, but still always happens.  Am I missing a trick in order to keep the horses in formation while moving groups?  I certainly can micro manage it, but defeats the purpose of moving formations around.

Nope, you cavalry will always walk faster.  Even when you've locked the formation with the 'G' key.  Give your formation shorter move orders and issue new ones when the infantry catch up.

I tend to give my first move order or two with the whole army locked in formation, and then put my cavalry into separate groups before the enemy gets close so I can move them separately.  Eventually do the same with the skirmishers & archers too once the melee has begun.

That's too bad....seems to happen in every version of total war, wish they could have addressed at some point.

seems fine to me.  at 6'2" it can hurt to walk as slow as shorter people so I dont.  but if you order a formation to move it does so at its best speed.  just unit tag the cav and hit R and slow them down.

[GDS_Starfury]

or....

set up your spacing pre battle to take the difference into account.   ;)

[Nefaro]

Possibly, but I don't think units fought on the battlefield in organized formations until the Swiss. There were units for organizational purposes but armies lacked drill and dicipline. I know nothing about the Mongols though so I defer. It is just a little off-putting watching my Iceni army marching in 25x4 fornations across the battlefield

Sure they did. 

One example is how the Saxons fought at what is considered the beginning of the medieval era.  An organized shield wall at Hastings being a well known one.  The surely didn't just come up with it on the spot.

The line tactics generally implemented up until the late 19th century were pretty standard for any sizable army.  It just made sense.  The biggest variable being just how much training/practice those soldiers had doing so beforehand and, therefore, how well they could implement those tactics.

I would think most armies of any respectable size used line tactics in the middle ages unless they were just some relatively tiny raiding party or some small lord's retinue doing same. 

[Nefaro]

Sweet Alexander's Screaming Ghost, I'm getting DOW'd by two factions on a regular basis.  Don't even have to DOW anyone to expand right now. 

I'm sure this is due to the immense "Great Power" diplomatic penalty from the Imperium scale shooting up so quickly in Attila.  Dev said he/she would check it out after the weekend.

I now have between -40 and -100 diplo penalty with all other factions.   :o   Trying to gobble up Britain before the whole world DOWs me.

[Jarhead0331]

I'm finally in the mood to play Samurai 2, start a new game, making good progress, CTD at the same point every time I try to continue now. This has never happened to me in a Total War game, or in Samurai 2, which I have 26 hours in. What the flock?

Edit: I verified the file integrity which downloaded an 11mb file and that seemed to get me passed the point I was stuck at.

[mikeck]

Yes, but a shield wall is an immobile line. There is a big difference between standing in a line with interlocking shields and actually "maneuvering" on the battlefield in drill or even attacking in a formation. I haven't seen anything to indicate that between the romans (excepting the Byzantines) and the Swiss, there was an infantry force that maneuvered on the battlefield in any formation approaching what you see in total war. Makes no difference to me as I feel if you play total war because if it's realism, your missing the boat. It's real enough

[besilarius]

I cannot think of any great, organzied military like the legions during the early and middle medieval period.  (Except for the Byzantines.)
Charlemagne had such strong cavalry, that his infantry were primarily used as light troops for the forested areas that could shelter his various tribal enemies.
Richard the Lionhearted created a cohesive force of mixed spearmen and crossbowmen during the crusades.  The Swiss and Flemish militias were both pike armed forces, and so needed drill to keep formation with their cumbersome weapons.
They were designed to stand in the face of mounted troops, and only go on the offensive when the enemy was exhausted after the mounted charges failed.  These troops did not have the flexibility or maneuver of the Legions.  In many ways, this period could be thought of as very similar to the time of Marathon and the Greco-Persian Wars.
After the crusades there was a conscious movement to use the infantry as a solid base, using combined polearms and missile weapons.  Surprisingly, one of the last great militia victories was in Scotland at the battle of Flodden.  The Scots were trying out the pike tactics of the Swiss and were badly beaten by the english, armed with "bow and bill".

[Yskonyn]

I am going to take this for a good spin when my son takes his afternoon nap.  O0
From what I have gathered so far, I think I would like the setting of Rome 2 with the interface and dynasty additions of Atilla. :P

[Shelldrake]

From what I have gathered so far, I think I would like the setting of Rome 2 with the interface and dynasty additions of Atilla. :P

Sounds like something the modding community will come up with...eventually.

[Gusington]

The AI here is definitley evolved. After another beat down as the Huns, I launched the campaign for a third time last night. Took everything slow and steady and acfually listened to my advisor and went for subduing to unruly barbarian rabble to the north of the Hun starting positions. Slow and steady wins the race here in the beginning, which is counter to how I thought the Huns woukd operate. Razed a few cities and knocked out a few tribes, and advanced to the second phase of both civic and military tech. Sustained some casualties and am down to two armies, but my economy is stable. Made it to the year 400 (for the first time, finally) and Attila was born. Approaching the winter of 402, and making a pushe to eliminate the Venendi, then go further south towards both the Eastern and Western Romans. Looks like this is the end of the beginning, as Churchill said.

Got some lag and some hanging at the end of turns, but no crashes yet.

[MengJiao]

I cannot think of any great, organzied military like the legions during the early and middle medieval period.  (Except for the Byzantines.)
Charlemagne had such strong cavalry, that his infantry were primarily used as light troops for the forested areas that could shelter his various tribal enemies.
Richard the Lionhearted created a cohesive force of mixed spearmen and crossbowmen during the crusades.  The Swiss and Flemish militias were both pike armed forces, and so needed drill to keep formation with their cumbersome weapons.
They were designed to stand in the face of mounted troops, and only go on the offensive when the enemy was exhausted after the mounted charges failed.  These troops did not have the flexibility or maneuver of the Legions.  In many ways, this period could be thought of as very similar to the time of Marathon and the Greco-Persian Wars.
After the crusades there was a conscious movement to use the infantry as a solid base, using combined polearms and missile weapons.  Surprisingly, one of the last great militia victories was in Scotland at the battle of Flodden.  The Scots were trying out the pike tactics of the Swiss and were badly beaten by the english, armed with "bow and bill".

I haven't been playing Attila, but I have played lots of pre-modern games.  It seems to me that for any battle for which there are decent sources, you will find that there are formations and command control and so on.  For example, at Bouvines (a pretty well documented battle in 1214), the lighter-armed horse under the command of the Templars, systematically delayed the deployment of the Imperial forces until the French could bring up their infantry.  The Imperial infantry was deployed to make dense shock attacks, but arrived piecemeal and were held off by the more loosely formed French infantry until the heavier cavalry around the King counterattacked and began the rout of the Imperial forces.  So there were probably a lot of formations and moves and countermoves available -- we just generally don't have the sources to know exactly what they were.

[Sir Slash]

I agree with the AI being different from Rome 1. I don't know what it's agenda is, whether it's just more aggressive, smarter or more devious but it will keep you on your toes for sure. I really like the new Family Tree options but they are a little overwhelming at first with so many choices about positions to fill and skills to assign. It's got me cross-checking the Tech Tree all the time to try to decide which techs will best go with which skills, or interfere with them. You really have to be careful not to increase disloyalty in certain characters with your choices. It's kind of a lot at first.

[Gusington]

Yeah...does the family tree auto-fill? It seems a lot of features are automated if they are too overehelming at first. I do like the random political events that occur too. I wonder if I am missing out on a lot of new features by playing the nomadic Huns...

[Sir Slash]

I'm not sure if new candidates automatically show-up or if you can adopt new members or both. And how long do they live? So far early game I'm seeing a lot less Agents on screen, probably intentional. I kind of get the feel playing that the world was in great shape when I left it in Rome 2, but now it's gone to hell and who's responsible for this damned mess?