Huge battles are still chores

[Madeloc]

RTS Camera and Command Mods improves them a lot, but some of the maps are still just too small for maneuvering such large forces. I think TW should consider down sizing the max forces that will be fighting to fit on the maps better and of course ad an actual consequence to the looser of a huge battle, but that's another topic.

Yes, like most of the villages, really too small for large battles.

 

[Taveren]

If our computers cannot yet handle 2000vs2000 battles, stop designing the game mechanics for 2000vs2000 battles. Maybe have the "Battle size" dictate how big armies can be, or make the cost to call parties grow exponentially?

+1
Yes, at present it is really more a series of staggered skirmishes as troop units are piecemeal added to the mix, have to move to the conflict zone and engage.
It also means any numerical advantage you may have is lost, as it only seems to count at the back end, i.e. you can never 'overwhelm' or 'overrun' an enemy line with shear numbers (which should be possible when you outnumber them 3 or 4:1). And you (the player/army marshal) also get no say in what troops are selected when for battle - I have battles where my elite troops (e.g. Vlandian Banner Knights were not deployed AT ALL during the conflict, so their shock troop value is lost utterly).
Perhaps they should program it so that a 'representative' army size is created for the battle (given that quality of troops seem to little to no impact on outcomes, at least in my experience through numerous campaigns and wars) - so if your army is 1000, and their army is 800, then only spawn a 500 v 400 scenario and let the losers be captured (they will be anyway)

 

[mortache]

+1
Yes, at present it is really more a series of staggered skirmishes as troop units are piecemeal added to the mix, have to move to the conflict zone and engage.
It also means any numerical advantage you may have is lost, as it only seems to count at the back end, i.e. you can never 'overwhelm' or 'overrun' an enemy line with shear numbers (which should be possible when you outnumber them 3 or 4:1). And you (the player/army marshal) also get no say in what troops are selected when for battle - I have battles where my elite troops (e.g. Vlandian Banner Knights were not deployed AT ALL during the conflict, so their shock troop value is lost utterly).
Perhaps they should program it so that a 'representative' army size is created for the battle (given that quality of troops seem to little to no impact on outcomes, at least in my experience through numerous campaigns and wars) - so if your army is 1000, and their army is 800, then only spawn a 500 v 400 scenario and let the losers be captured (they will be anyway)

They did add troop level priority setting in the "gameplay" menu, but I doubt it actually works for armies. It only seems to work when I move all of my clan's troops to a single party

 

[sabogas]

Perhaps a possible not perfect solution to make interesting battles would be to create separate rounds/flanks, like we have in siegies when the enemies retreat into a keep. For example when you decide to ingage you get a promt saying: I want to command right flank/center/left flank. The begining should depend on the amount of soldiers in both armies like at 500 size you only would have a center (250vs250 battle, maybe up to 1 reinforcment that would come once one of the side lost 40% of the soldiers). Lets say you decide to command the center. After the victorious battle you get to chose to help other flanks or push towards their camp, maybe do nothing(wait to). Camp would allow you to capture enemy nobles, soldiers, most of their loot, while the enemy army could get some sort of last stand momment with higher morale/no morale damage taken for some time.

Now other flanks would also be like battles but auto resolved if you didin't get yourself directly involved. However depending on how you did in your side they could get a boost (like if you crushed the center, they could get reduced cassualties and incresed damage against the other side by maybe 30-50%, maybe higher if you did befero a specified time like 2-3mins).
In these battles you could also add some other specific momments like while helping flanks there could be an event the center reforms forcing you to fight higher number maybe additional 3+ waves while you get none. This could depend on quality and type of enemy troops.

The options in this system could depend on your/companion tactics/scouting/leadership. High scouting could allow to see what kind of soldiers on which flanks the ai deployed allowing you to counter them. The system could allow you to decide what kind of forces you want on the flanks ae cav, inf. More quality, less.

After the battle if they still had some forces left the army would basically split into smaller parties (with mobility boost) which would run away. Their type would heavilly depend on your actions in the battle. These smaller parties would consist of deserters, dispanding parties, shattered noble parties running towards the closest fortified settlement and maybe some lord parties who would be fine but not in an army, or if the battle results in a draw a full normal army which would disengage with both sides gaining a boost to movement speed while runing away from the battle for like half a day (if you came from south you would get a boost runing towards south, but not north or northwest etc.)

This idea is very similar to a table battle game in ck2, just you play out your decisions. Imo this would make battles more fun and not completely demolished by the players influance as it is now. Like you are almost always (unless outnumbered or with recruits) beat ai in a fight.

 

[xdj1nn]

Seriously, fighting 500-700 man armies is fun but 1500-2000 man armies are just pure slogs. Even the split up smaller battles of Warband would be much better than this. Maybe use the Troop Deployment system to simulate "multiple days of fighting". Other than retreat spamming, which afaik makes the loot and prisoners vanish, fighting is STILL boring zombie hoard tower defense after the initial phase.

If our computers cannot yet handle 2000vs2000 battles, stop designing the game mechanics for 2000vs2000 battles. Maybe have the "Battle size" dictate how big armies can be, or make the cost to call parties grow exponentially?

I have to agree - there are three specially annoying instances of this, one was mentioned by you, one by a reply (5 troops reinforcements) and the third's for smaller mobilel parties (full HA or full cav) that instantly flee once the battle started making it impossible to take them out unless you auto-resolve...