Raising troops in provs w/o forts?

[SelfishGene]

Generally the AI is weaker than me, but a tactic it does employ that greatly hampers if not sometimes sets me back is its propensity to build large masses of junk troops in every province.

Now normally one doesn't need or want to raise militia or poorly equiped light infantry - in some instances perhaps a fort where a good heavy cavalry resided, an unusually well armed heavy inf, or maybe some unique units like the Onyx Amazons, but those instances are not dependable and very contingent on circumstances. Mainly because most provinces lack enough resources to build more thana handful per turn, and also because generally national troops are better.

But when the comp raises large armies of junk troops it generally sets me back a great deal. I defeat any army it sends at me easily - but there are two more behind it, and its capturing my provinces, not the other way around. Even if i recapture my lands i will have lost considerable income potential for some time because of turns lost to occupation and unrest reducing tax values. If im enduring enough of this death-by-paper-cut tactic, i can actually begin to decline in real measurable terms, with significant losses in income and position. Trading two or three provinces lost for every one i recapture can leave a good portion of my empire in ruins even after i manage to return to pre-hostility borders. This CAN, but does not always, pay for the huge losses the computer takes in building, payrolling, and losing its large masses of junk troops.

Can such distributed production be worked into a good strategy? Such as, for ex., taking 3 Productivity but a cheap fort. Is it useful or necessary at times vs human players?

[ April 15, 2004, 18:59: Message edited by: SelfishGene ]

[Cainehill]

So ... the AI building lots of cheap troops is actually one of the smart things it does, you're saying? Since if it manages to take 2 or 3 provinces in the time it takes you to recapture one, it whittles down your economy over time.

[HotNifeThruButr]

I always advance like a tidal wave, attacking many border provinces at once. The goal here is not to create an invincible army, but to make a couple fragments that are still able to trounce the AI from 25 - 50 men each. or 10-20 Heavy Cavs. Never let an enemy army into your succulent innards -think clam-!

Let me demonstrate here.

M = my provinces, they've got nothing but defense points if they're attacked.

mad face = my army, big and mean!

< = enemy border provinces

? = deeper enemy provinces, they won't know what hit 'em.

Figure A. Turn before attack

MMM < ???
MMM < ???
MMM < ???
MMM < ???

Figure B. Turn after attack, my armies are where their border provinces used to be.

MMMM ???
MMMM ???
MMMM ???
MMMM ???

Edits: Work, damnit!

Edit 4, I believe: It's also good to make sure you have spare commanders/armies so you can split forces when the enemy border has more provinces than yours, and you can reinforce armies with part of another army and not have completely neglect the latter army. Also remember to keep sending reinforcements into the front! Especially before sieges.

[ April 15, 2004, 20:37: Message edited by: HotNifeThruButr ]

[PhilD]

Originally posted by Cainehill:
So ... the AI building lots of cheap troops is actually one of the smart things it does, you're saying? Since if it manages to take 2 or 3 provinces in the time it takes you to recapture one, it whittles down your economy over time.

An AI beating a player, or making his life miserable, is not a smart move. Smart AIs lose gracefully, after putting up a fair fight that makes the player proud of themselves.

[love crime]

heh, the answer is that: yes attacking from many places at once/harassing is a very good general strategy. It wins economically, especially if you try to counter it by playing defensively (eg tracking down all the various attackers). The best defense against this kind of attack is to mass your troops, and march them straight for the enemy capitol (or nearest convieniant castle)... assuming you start with a comparable force of troops, you should be able to defeat his fragmented forces in any province of your choosing... eg his home, and this is usually enough to combat the economic losses of his pronged attack.

[SelfishGene]

Some of you guys must think im complaining by the tones of your responces. I was just relating that i find it much more difficult to deal with several medium sized crap armies than one or two large ones. If you divide your forces to counter properly you would also more than likely start to take proportionately higher casualties due to 'fragmentation' (to use the term as it was coined w/ regards to RTS games). I was just wondering whether or not this was an effective tactic vs. human players as well.

Oh and ...

Never let an enemy army into your succulent innards -think clam-!

I like that line . I'll have to remember that. Clam up! Or is it Clam down...

and also...

It's also good to make sure you have spare commanders/armies so you can split forces when the enemy border has more provinces than yours, and you can reinforce armies with part of another army and not have completely neglect the latter army.

Thats wise advice (though i tend to have lots of commanders in mustering the army anyway). I guess i need to move away from designing my armies from an top-down empire view and consider more the more subtle composition of grouping into differentiated, self contained fighing companies.

[ April 15, 2004, 20:55: Message edited by: SelfishGene ]

[HotNifeThruButr]

You'd be amazed at how well your armies fare against most AI troops/nat def... excluding Ulm who always manages to pick off my commander with a stray Arby shot.

BTW, that clam statement has nothing to do with the Clam of Pearls, it's about normal clams

Edit: Me no type good

[ April 15, 2004, 21:07: Message edited by: HotNifeThruButr ]

[Gandalf Parker]

No extreme is ever correct. I find that a balance works best. Yes its good to create elite armies and move them around. And yes it can be a good tactic to build junk armies. The smart thing is to use both.

I build "junk" armies in just about every province that has any resources. A mix of infantry and shooters if possible. They are ready to move fast wherever I need them, and they are expendable.

That way I dont need as many elite armies. They have time to get somewhere if the other guy shows up with an elite army.

[HotNifeThruButr]

Actually, the main problem for my strat is when an AI overpowers with one huge elite army. But it's solved when you have spare commanders able to deliver troops to potential targets for said army.

[Tris]

Could this tie in with the "light infantry really do suck, it isn't just another case of someone not realising how to use something in Dominions" thread?

If raiding bands of light infantry can fight a successful economic war against a nation focussed on one or two big armies, then Light Infantry can be really useful.

"You can walk right up to my castle and starve outside the gates, but by then you'll be cut off, provinceless, and I'll have used all your income to build the army you're just about to meet, marching out of that castle..."

At the very least this would force your opponent to guard each province, and spend more on PD. And if you can spend less on LI, you come out ahead.

I guess this depends on whether a small band of LI (powerful enough to overcome medium PD) will be more cost effective than equivalent HI. But if the LI get strat move 2 that makes them better for raiding, as they are more unpredictable......

It's a real shame there isn't a "Flee Threshold" in the game. I'd want my LI raiders to fight against 10 militia, but flee against 400 Niefel Giants. There isn't a way I can do that at the moment, is there?