u/boringexistinggamer2

Image 1 — Is this good? (Vanilla battle)
Image 2 — Is this good? (Vanilla battle)
Image 3 — Is this good? (Vanilla battle)

Is this good? (Vanilla battle)

To give context, I am playing as Poland for the first time in a while. The HRE was not happy at me for some reason, probably because I may have hurt their ego or something that I wasn't aware of, and they sent 1145 men to siege Prague, which I own. They then sent a diplomat to demand that I become their vassal, which was insulting to me, so I declined and demand that they become my vassal, and obviously it didn't work out. I sent my best general, Boleslaw Herman, to deal with the huge stack of soldiers. I decided to send Mieszko, who has never seen a battle in his life but is a good commander, as a way to train him. Either way, I thought I was going to lose a losing battle, and I decided to just go for it. I marked the option to fight in the night, and get the high ground as my starting position, luckily. I hid most of my soldiers in the treelines and made my spearmen charge at the oncoming enemies, then I used my cavalrymen to flank them, and things just got crazy there. In the midst of the battle, I was winning, and I only had a few of my men killed and half of the HRE army killed. Nonetheless, I won the battle and chased down the routing army, and now posting this, this is probably my most favorite battle, and I felt amazing seeing this. I won with 11% casualties while they won with 93% casualties

u/boringexistinggamer2 — 3 days ago

What makes a chivalrous general and a dreadful general different?

I know that chivalrous generals are generally morally better with better settlement stats and dreadful generals are battle-ly better and can make enemy armies rout faster (correct me if I'm wrong), but like what else is there to them?

I would also appreciate some tips and tricks for having a higher chance of winning battles, since I think I mainly get Pyrrhic victories

reddit.com
u/boringexistinggamer2 — 5 days ago