King Harlaus is a complete loser

[Mike_B20]

I don't know what you guys have against King Harlaus, but the results aren't pretty.
The guy is a wuss.
Ever since he went up against the Rhodoks at the start of the campaign and charged their crossbowmen with his knights and all his knights were slaughtered, he's been very reticent about doing anything at all, apart from riding back and forth around Praven.
Swaden knights invincibility is  a lie.
They are complete pussies.

Wth have you guys done to this game?

 

[Positros]

Charge is still better than going 10 paces then stopping then going again and so on untill they all die because no one attacked.

Anyway, you are talking about the best units of a faction against another's best units, but also depends on the terrain. The highlands are hard to conquer with knights because of the mountains in most battlefields. And knights are made for charges, and the AI doesn't have many tactical approaches. Swadia would've been more of a threath if Harlaus didn't hold feasts all the time, intrerupting all campaigns.

 

[Xenomion]

Harlaus is a complete loser... Nothing new here.
In all my games swadians got crushed.

 

[coolchucky]

Harlaus is a complete loser... Nothing new here.
In all my games swadians got crushed.

Then I am changing the history of Swadia in my last game.
We nearly finished off Nords in my marshalship. They have just one castle left..
And I love Harlaus following me with his 600+ party.. 

 

[tomkele]

Don't be so mean for Harlaus, he needs to constantly increase his lords morale and disposition towards him because of their location of constant war with everyone.

 

[Falkner92]

Hey now, Harlaus and Marius Imperator from PoP are my homies. Don't badmouth them...

 

[Hsuan]

rhodok is just overpowered in general
try comparing the tier 7 swadian archer with the tier 7 rhodok crossbows
the swadian archer is trash and in melee, they're pretty much screwed if any thing like a tier 5 infantry reaches them

in comparison, lets consider different scenerios:
Rhodok vs swadia
-Field battle, anything that is not a plain - crossbow kills half your troop by the time you get on the hill they're on, then you have to deal with their spearman which will rape your knights.
-Field battle, plain - 50% of the knight either off or horse or dead by the time it reaches their spearman...
-Siege, defense - rhodok crossbow will simply kill anything that is exposed on the wall while their infantry mass-murder your dismounted knights
-Siege offense - you don't even have a chance against crossbows on the wall

not to mention those crossbowman having 10 point in iron flesh and 6 in power strike

 

[Stalwart_Defender]

I think the Rhodok troop tree plays right into the AI's conservative tactics. Also, for Swadia being a cavalry faction, they're reinforcement templates don't have a lot of cavalry in them (except the top one that most lords only get 1 of). None of them even have the C6 Swadian Lancer. Not to mention, lore wise, the Rhodoks separated from Swadia and their entire military doctrine is designed to fight Swadians. 

 

[tomkele]

@Hsuan:
It's like comparing monkey and fish in contest of tree climbing. Every faction has something better than other. Also you get some weird "calculations" with field battles. With my Swadian Rape Train I never had much loses by spearmens, it all depends on how you play your battle. For expample: I would hold my cavalry for a moment, charge all by myself and get all the attention. By having good horse, shield in hand and shield in back I could make that most bolts will be fired towards me. Yet the speed of horse will make almost all bolts miss and when I get enough of their attention I would make a charge order for Swadian Rape Train, ergo if I would survive long enough loses would be minimal. Of course that does not apply when fighting in mountains. Too many factors depends on army strength in specific battles, so Rhodoks aren't as much OP as you may think.

 

[deftech]

I don't have much pity for Swadia.  Maybe it's poetic justice considering how blatantly OP their knights were in native.  That being said, they do tend to get slapped around pretty bad in Floris.  Honestly though I think it's more about location rather than having a faulty troop tree.

 

[Mike_B20]

I started a new game as a Khergit after Swadia was destroyed.
Swadia was destroyed again this game in a new record time of 180 days.
Go King Harlaus!

I think it's more about location rather than having a faulty troop tree.

Yes, that's probably true.
Given open level ground the Swadian knights would do very well.
Unfortunately for Swadia, they are bordered by the Rhodoks and Nords, so any aggressive move is into either mountains or swamps and forests.
They are doomed without a lot of luck it seems.

I must say that the open ground around the Khergits/Sarranids is a relief.

And who's idea was it to turn all the tournament venues into crazy-bumpy-foresty tourney venues?
How can the spectators see anything with all those forests in the way?

 

[Hsuan]

I started a new game as a Khergit after Swadia was destroyed.
Swadia was destroyed again this game in a new record time of 180 days.
Go King Harlaus!

I think it's more about location rather than having a faulty troop tree.

Yes, that's probably true.
Given open level ground the Swadian knights would do very well.
Unfortunately for Swadia, they are bordered by the Rhodoks and Nords, so any aggressive move is into either mountains or swamps and forests.
They are doomed without a lot of luck it seems.

I must say that the open ground around the Khergits/Sarranids is a relief.

And who's idea was it to turn all the tournament venues into crazy-bumpy-foresty tourney venues?
How can the spectators see anything with all those forests in the way?

not only that, their top tiers synergy is terrible along with vaegirs

archer and cavalry is a terrible combination to be used together

 

[thomasNL01]

You guys are aware that troop tree has almost nothing to do with wether a kingdom gets destroyed or not right?
Because in auto-calc they take skill levels and attributes and numbers to check who wins. Specific troops dont matter.
The reason they lose are:
1. bad location, they are sharing borders with every single country, yes, even the sarranids.
2. Dhirim, almost all countries will try to take it, before any other city. It's isolated, and centered.
3. Due to above, lord morale and relations are low, which is why Harlaus gives many many parties, which in turn leads to easy captures because the swadians don't defend. Then all lords start defecting to other countries, where they will get bad raltions because nobody is there friend.

 

[wakeforce139]

I've seen Swadians get dicked around a lot but in my current play as a lord for Swadia we are taking on Nords, Khergits, and Rhodoks at once. I've taken 2 towns (plus re-conquered Uxkhal cuz the Swadians are idiots) and 4 castles. I only stopped conquering because ******* Harlaus gave away both of the towns I conquered to other lords.

This brings me to a side question and hopefully someone can help me - I conquered Narra and Halmar from the Khergits and requested both of them. Harlaus gave away to others... and I don't get an option to revolt... wtf is up with what?? Was so pissed.

 

[thomasNL01]

if they were both being processed at the same time, you cant revolt
just capture 1 town, ask it to be given to you, and when that doesnt happen you can rebel.,

 

[wakeforce139]

Thanks for the heads up on that Thomas.

Just wanted to throw out I am train wrecking the Rhodoks right now using mostly Swadian archers and cav. I only have 3 C7 knights. I actually like the Swadian archers and they destroy in sieges. I think someone pointed out how effective it is to use your character as bait to get the enemies in poor position and give yourself the advantage. If you take out a couple with your bow they will charge you.

 

[Hsuan]

activate cheat menu and boost your renoun to like 4K like me and go affilate with a family, they'll give you support almost all the time if you have anyone at 100 relationship

the thing is that, the deciding factor is of the following:

1. Is the estate you owned capped by your renown?
- yes, then lords will say "you're already awarded with things that fits you properly" or something along the line, NOTE THAT THIS CAP OVERRULES EVERYTHING ELSE SO YOU WON"T RECEIVE ANY MORE CASTLE/TOWN/VILLAGE IF YOU ARE RENOWN CAPPED (calculated by points so you can give up a town to have the chance of getting 3 villages before being renown capped)
example: I have 2000 renown and owns 3 town (9 points) 3 castle (6 points) and 4 villages (4 points) totalling up 19 points. the general rule is every 100 renown past 100, you will get one "estate point" enabling you to get more stuff without being renown capped. Since i already have 19 points capped for my 2000 renown, I cant get any more estate what-so-ever until i gain more renown.
- no, then lords will say something else
2. Did you capture the castle?
- yes, then lord will say "since xxxxx captured the castle he deserves it"  it gives a big boost to deciding factor but can be overcome by persuasion (ai lord will never persuade others)
3. Are you popular amongst the lords, can you  persuade them?)
- If you capture the castle + have 100 relationship with lord, have 10 in persuasion : only renown cap can stop you from making him support you (they will most likely defaultly support you)
- if you captured the castle + have 100 relationship with lord : you mostly won't have to try to persuade them as they will support you already
- if you didnt capture castle but have 100 relationship + 10 persuasion : you will most likely have to persuade him because his default will be someone else (most likely the capturer) persuasion difficulty depends on his relation with his supporting lord (if 100 like his daddy its gonna be hard)
- if  you didnt capture castle, is below 70 relationship, but has 10 persuasion: its like a 50/50 chance
-if you didnt capture castle , is below 40 relationship, but has 10 persuasion: its not going to suceed.
-persuading a king gives a bigger bonus (always suck his **** as a rule)

-Sadistic and those bad personalities will support themself much more often, even if they didnt capture the castle
-Cunning and those neutral personalities will support themself if they capture the castle, and when they have no estate (first joined)
-martial and those good persnalitie will almost always support others even if they did capture the castle, and will often support others even if they dont have an estate
-you can't convince thoose that supports themself to support you

my general rule is to have a group of good natured etc personality lord at 100 in your kingdom and being at 100 with your king will almost gaurentee the castle be granted to you.

 

[Xenomion]

A bit off-topic, but I love how the eternal doom of Swadians raised passions on this board. I'm not such a long-timer, but I've seen debates like this pretty much every month!
Mh... Maybe an even funnier debate would be: If let un-heroed (no intervention from the player), who wins? I oftenly saw Saranids get a great chunk of Calradia when I was crushing the last resisting swadian castle...

 

[Stalwart_Defender]

I ran several simulations using the infinite camp cheat to see how the factions would interact without player intervention, and most of them came down to the Nords and Rhodoks being the major powers. Swadia, Vaegirs, and Khergits almost always get munched, and Sarranids usually stay in their desert.

 

[thomasNL01]

thats the power of placement.
Nord: 2 borders
Rhodok: 2 borders
Sultanate: 3 borders
Vaegir: 3 borders
Khergit: 3 borders
Swadia: 5 borders(even with the sultanate)