Turkish heavy armor upgrade is always nice

Yes, so they can rout in fashion.

Look the newer TWs don't have anything that updates your troops appearance so I want to appreciate it in the game that does...

@@isleofthecheetah cant like this comment enough, upgraded weapons changed seperately too, its so satisfying to see your investments realized like that I really wish they leaned more into that in the other games

True

Being able to take loans would be an interesting mechanic. Achieve a short term goal but be hit with interest and have a doom stack of mercs come your way if you renege on the payment

Funny fact about Poland. Medieval era began (almost) 500 years later. To be more accurate in 966

Dude is speed-running the partitions

@@witchking1918 Before Polans' rise to power there was only a bunch of slavic tribes in these lands

This is why I love the battle mechanics of Med II more than any other total war. The newer games are about getting kills, while med II was about driving them off the field, killing the enemy troops was secondary to this.

@@JakeBaldwin1And even if you fought a battle of annihilation it actually mattered. The recruitment and economic systems allowed you to cripple your enemies with decisive battles. Now you destroy one doom stack you get another one attacking you 5 turns later

You sir are not an uncultured swine and i am pleased by this fact.

I think you mean "morale" because "moral" is different.

@@LeftToWrite006 I believe that was the quotes' meaning, but anachronistically put. You'd have to find out what it originally was in French to be sure though.

I put cavalry in loose formation when they are being attacked by artillery or other missiles, until I'm ready to do melee with them, especially when they are generals bodyguard units.

That said, I do try to keep my cavalry out of range of artillery/missiles, or if in range, I try to keep my cavalry moving, to minimise my casualties.

@@SimonAshworthWood yeah your infantry should be the ones having fire focused and skirmishing with ranged. your horses shouldn't need to ever be put in loose formation if used correctly. i must add mistakes do happen and sometimes your horses can get caught once a battle starts becoming messy, but at that point, loose formation would never have been able to be used effectively.

@@cslantz4020 what if they are missle cav? in that case they might often be skirmishing while taking missle fire from other missle cav

@@midshipman8654 thats a good point if you are skirmishing with other missile cav. ideally though you want missile cav to be used against infantry or non ranged cav since foot ranged are a hardcounter to missle cav. let inf be targetted by missle cav and use your missile cav to flank them. if not and your cav skirmishers are superior then yeah you could use loose formation..

eventually you just camp some assassins in rome and take out the pope when they get in your way

That just makes the game more exciting and fun.

The goal is to put your own Pope in the Papal seat and call crusades on the other Christian kingdoms. Lol

@@NinjaSushi2the goal is to play Moors and stack cash

And this is great. I once played Poland and gathered all my units on first turn, then went down to conquer Rome as quickly as I could and started campain from there. That was fun.

Warhammer is shit literally.

You should keep a few castles strategically for recruiting though. Castles and cities give different units. Some factions like the Italians you can kind of get away with only cities cause a lot of their good units come from cities.

@@ihaveachihuahau of course places like Bern and Toulouse should be like recruitment hubs, your armies gotta come from somewhere. It's also the only buildings I invest in armour buildings

How did you find it later in game when you had almost conquered all the map, I used to never upgrade farms because city would eventually grow to big and rebel against you later in game

⁠@@s55558There’s a lot to consider in answering this question, but I will do my best to explain. Upgrading farms is *critical* in the early game because (1) they increase your population, (2) a larger population means more tax revenue, and (3) they provide revenue on their own, though I don’t know if it’s a flat rate or if it scales with population. They are the cheapest and most consistent forms of income early on (aside from mines) so you need to build them regardless of public order issues later on. Regarding the late-game when you own half the map (or even the whole map and are just fighting the Mongols and Timurids) rebellions from squalor are just part of the deal. However, at that point you should be wealthy enough and technologically advanced enough to quickly build large armies that can deal with rebellions. And the easiest way to deal with public order issues is to remove the garrison, let the settlement rebel, then retake it and exterminate the population. It’s a pain from a micromanagement standpoint but again, you’ll have the money and recruiting capabilities to do it. Another option, as you mentioned, is to not upgrade farms all the way. This is what I did back in the day when I played M2TW a lot more; I would only ever go up to the third (or sometimes fourth) level of farms, then raise or lower taxes depending on whether I wanted more money or more population growth. There are a lot of different income sources to juggle (farms, mines, merchants, sacking, trade, etc.) and you can tweak your builds as the game progresses. Hopefully that answers your question.

@Michael-on3ku thank you for the tips, I haven't played in a while but now talking about it I want to start playing again LOL I will be trying out the removing the army tip and then retaking settlement

He was 28 turns from the end of the game. Very little point in that situation.

Watch Legends Warhammer multiplayer videos.

Late game max armored knights and heavy infantry are very resistant even to high end archers. But even simple arquebusiers completely ignore hundreds of turns and 10ks of florins of development by simply bypassing armor. They are more unwieldy than archers but will decimate a far more expensive unit if placed correctly. For this reason I often stop investing into archers as the gunpowder event approaches. Things like mercenary pavise crossbows bridge the gap.

Even hand gunners have a devastating effect of morale. Merc Arquebusiers are great. Once facing the Mongols head on with Khan's Guard trotting towards my apprehensive Cossack Mussketeers and Dismounted Dvor I thought I was gonna be pasted. Under the Cossack's fire the Khan's Guard routed before they reached my lines.

@@SmokeyBCN You know crossbow exists, right? Gunners are cool, but kinda suck

i always 1 catapult. you plug the road to center square with spear milita, position the catapult behind them and fire away down the straight road. you can kill whole armies like this with little effort.

@@Rogdub Catapults feel so much riskier you shoot short and half your militia dies while the other half runs

@@Aetherion_ you position them right behind them. that way they never hit your units.

Seem*

It's not just militia units, it's any units that can be built in a town or City. You also don't pay for ship maintenance if the ship is in port

Rebaults on a defensive bridge-crossing battle are the best

@@lewiscarter1083 I'm going to have to argue against that. Bridge battles are very flat and if the enemy has artillery. They can and will counter your Rebaults. That's why i prefer fighting in the city. By the time their artillery catches up to the main force. Their army is already decimated.

@SGTvolcan Yes I do agree. However for the most part I've found that the AI generally is a bit slow to use its artillery effectively, and that they tend to send all of their inf/cav all at once across the bridge from the start. That is to say, with a little bit of luck, you can generally get a few rebault volleys off (which are devistating on tightly packed troops on the bridge) before the artillery takes out your rebaults. You are correct though they are more effective in cities where the AI really struggles to move their artillery into position.

It's also helpful against Eastern factions and Mongols/Timurids to upgrade armor. Any factions that lean heavily on missiles will cause less damage if you upgrade. Also, if your units lose men slower because of the armor upgrades, morale stays stable. Might be the one thing I disagree with Legend on. Armor is important in Med2. You can win without upgrades, but if you like to keep your men alive, it is essential.

Les retraining too especially when most of your armies are castle troops as well and it’s helpful in places you may not have a castle nearby to retrain and reinforce

I don't know about Medieval 2 but in Rome Total War naval trade is the best form of economy.

​@NinjaSushi2 a bit late to the party with the reply. But just from my own experiences, ocean based cities really are the best source of trade income.

@@skyrim654 You can easily build up coastal cities to over 6k income, while landlocked ones often fall in the 4k range. A coastal region with good trade goods is a gold mine...which gets cut off if your ports get blockaded (also, other factions will see you as weak if you have no navy but high port-based trade income, and declare war on you by blockading your ports.)

If you group your units in formation, then tell that group to move, they will maintain their formation, or at least end their movement in that formation. However this may cause infantry to run and get worn out more quickly.

Dope!

Its realistic

@@MD-yd8lh 300 arrows for one bro. He must have maxed his luck out.

Same. I remember when I was about 11 (24 now), a friend of mine always used to say; "yeah, RTW is great, but it's getting kinda boring, you should try M2TW". Never played it until half a year ago. I kind of like it (not so much as RTW or ETW though), but the pathfinding is the worst I've ever seen. I was in a siege battle, put all my troops in an alley, took a few to set up near the citysquare and they ran outside the walls on the other side of the city. I litterally had to take them one by one, placing them constantly a few steps forward to get there, otherwise they would get back outside the walls to some random spot. So yeah... I don't know.

@@kaanjel M2 pathing is better than R2 pathing by a wide margin though.

@@kaanjel it’s an old ass game with buggy AI, so yeah you’re gonna have to move individual units lol especially when you’re trying to run down units. Run ahead of them then attack them lol. Just janky old school PC game stuff

@@kaanjel the amount of archer units that have clipped into the walls for me

On the surface its simple, but many mechanics like managing settlement population are more complex than in later games. Population growth is percentage based and influenced by tax rate, buildings, governors. Recruiting units from a settlement takes them from the population, so if you want to level up a settlement you need to try to avoid recruiting units there. You can also get specific traits on generals in specific cases, for example if a general is in a town on a turn where a building finishes, and the public order is at 80%, you have a chance to get a trait that increases tax income. If you really want to optimize a playthrough you will need to have a spreadsheet and take notes every turn. Compared to that, Rome 2 and Warhammer have much simpler tax and population mechanics.

It's Total War not Total City Builder

They being children is enough for them to get in the College of Cardinals.

Virgin Chivalrous Catholic VS Chad Dread protestant

Do you enjoy the thumbnail bro😂? I mean the whole "mongol" "Constantinople" "Florins Florins"😂😂 irs the fastest way to patch your economy a bit. Everyone was a noob at the beginning, relax

I haven't used it since Rome1 where you wanted to be "poor" to keep your generals from accruing bad traits, so you stockpiled your economy in the build queue which 'each' reserved their cost actively instead of just the first building in queue. Also the recruited units did the same thing AND drew from the population pool. So if you wanted to delay upgrading the town/city, you just kept recruiting units. Also a great anti-squalor tactic. Whereas in M2TW you just drip feed one unit or one building at a time. It makes for a different experience. I do like having increasing recruitment slots though. That's a nifty addition.

If one's economy can't carry whatever he wants to build with queue in 15-20 turns, he is playing this game wrong way. Just spamming good militia units is broken part of this game.

Or just deliberate

I was thinking maybe the guy wanted to make a "historically accurate" Poland by keeping it generally within Poland's borders. It at least looks like that's what he was doing

Most family members come of age in your capital, and I think if your princess marries a random dude, the general spawns in the capital. Can be useful if you stack your capital with trait-providing buildings (like universities).

Turns out the HRE was just being ruled by a giga Chad and his subjects respect his grind

The AI was so bad when it was released, that I ended my first ever campaign after a few turns and never look at Medieval 2 ever again. Probably a mistake in hindsight.

@@TheGerudan if you play many total war titles, quitting because the AI is dumb must be a common occurrence for you. That was a mistake. You should definitely go back and play it.

@@ThePhillydon22 No, that AI back then was an outlier in stupidity even for TW AI. It was an AI offering me an alliance (which I took) and then attacking me with a single general unit in the span of 2 turns only 10 or so turns after the start of the game.

if you can get past finnicky siege pathfinding, larger unit sizes are actually ideal since public order depends on the number of soldiers in the settlement, not the number of units (though notably, peasants are coded to provide half the usual public order through the "is_peasant" trait in the EDU)

Large or huge unit scale are ideal but that’s just me

Small unit sizes make sieges a nightmare to fight. Overstates the power of the keep and towers for the defenders.

From my experience pope got mad at me breathing in any direction :D Not to mention him getting mad when I was attacked and dared to protect myself

@@zombbieslayerpl I never really understood the mechanic myself. Like I get it from trying to limit the player and provide challenge, but it just didn't really work. Since I never listened to the pope anyway 😅

If I ever got the pope on my side I could do pretty much anything I wanted without having war declared on me cause the other Christian factions wouldn't risk getting excommunicated.

Yes, the Pope will not stop you from defending your own territory. Still how often does it happen that a halfway decent player is on the defensive against the AI? Still his unilateral cease fire declaration does not stop you from putting an army in enemy territory just attacking with it. Also, the army wont tear up the countryside as much. Another interesting fact is that if the enemies city has no armies in it you can move in and take it without getting exocommunicated since thier is no battle to trigger it. SO if the city just had a general and you knock him off with an assasinn you can move in and the Pope can't do anything.

@@zombbieslayerplI know if I dare play as England and France attacks in Normandy and I defend my self I get the stick from the pope but not France it’s very annoying at times