Getting a desired RC

[Dante Silverfire]

Dirt cheap (calculated in gold/man) and top stats are the two things that realms should strive for.

Yes, as you said, many things only consider troop number. But in many wars, none of these things will be done. And if all you plan on doing is fighting, you are much better off with a small army of elite troops than a horde of cheap troops.

Frankly, from my experience what you choose for your units has less of an effect than the # of units you have. If you have more nobles you're more likely to win, period. This is less of an effect when the # of nobles in realms are very high for everyone. But whwen the noble counts are low (as they have been getting lower recently) then the difference is much higher.

If the realms are 60 nobles and 80 nobles, then it doesn't make as big of a difference if the realms are 30 and 40 nobles, or 20 and 30 nobles.

For a realm like the one I play in on Atamara, we are only limited in our military capacity by the # of nobles we have. We have enough gold and funding to make sure every noble in the realm has their maximum possible unit size. Thus, it is better for us to have more elite troops because we can afford the loss.

Unfortunately this is exactly how things will continue to be long term without massive more players in the game.
------------------

Back on Topic:

I was under the impression that your likilihood of getting a good recruitment center was reduced the more recruitment centers that you had. (More troops already working elsewhere, etc...)

[Chenier]

Frankly, from my experience what you choose for your units has less of an effect than the # of units you have. If you have more nobles you're more likely to win, period. This is less of an effect when the # of nobles in realms are very high for everyone. But whwen the noble counts are low (as they have been getting lower recently) then the difference is much higher.

If the realms are 60 nobles and 80 nobles, then it doesn't make as big of a difference if the realms are 30 and 40 nobles, or 20 and 30 nobles.

For a realm like the one I play in on Atamara, we are only limited in our military capacity by the # of nobles we have. We have enough gold and funding to make sure every noble in the realm has their maximum possible unit size. Thus, it is better for us to have more elite troops because we can afford the loss.

Unfortunately this is exactly how things will continue to be long term without massive more players in the game.
------------------

Back on Topic:

I was under the impression that your likilihood of getting a good recruitment center was reduced the more recruitment centers that you had. (More troops already working elsewhere, etc...)

Smaller units have more CS per man. You can improve your CS / man by splitting up the gold over a greater number of units (which is what happens when you have more nobles), or by splitting up the gold over a lower number of soldiers (which is what happens when you recruit from better RCs).

Ideally, if combat is all you care for, you want as many nobles as possible leading the best units as possible. This is how you optimize your CS/gold ratio.

[Anaris]

I was under the impression that your likilihood of getting a good recruitment center was reduced the more recruitment centers that you had. (More troops already working elsewhere, etc...)

Well, since Tom already came straight out and said that was not the case...

[JPierreD]

So if you get a long-range archer unit with very low armour, you just might want to suck it up and keep it, because who knows how long you have to try to get one with the same range an better armour.

Usually long-range low-armored archers are preferable than better armored ones since they are cheaper and perform very similarly, unless the enemy melee-soldiers catch you.

[fodder]

they (low armor) don't get shot up easier? only thing longer range has over shorter range is that they might get an extra shot in.. but they should perform the same at the same range

[Tom]

Yes, as you said, many things only consider troop number. But in many wars, none of these things will be done. And if all you plan on doing is fighting, you are much better off with a small army of elite troops than a horde of cheap troops.

That is not necessarily true. I can think of several reasons why a middle ground could provide benefits. One of them being that training improves with battles, so a well-equipped unit with low training, for example, will become more valuable over time. More bang for your bucks. And since you will likely face both kinds of situations - ones in which numbers count and ones where CS count - an average unit could be a good compromise.

[fodder]

i think his "elite" would be referring to really good equipment (whatever training)
the "middle ground" tends to be.... it's not too bad and we are desperate right now.... type.

[Chenier]

That is not necessarily true. I can think of several reasons why a middle ground could provide benefits. One of them being that training improves with battles, so a well-equipped unit with low training, for example, will become more valuable over time. More bang for your bucks. And since you will likely face both kinds of situations - ones in which numbers count and ones where CS count - an average unit could be a good compromise.

Indeed, I don't consider training much for determining an RC's worth. I actually preffer it to be low, for the troops to be cheaper.

What I was saying is that, training remaining the same, in most wars recruiting from 90/90 centers will yield more punch for your bucks than recruiting from 45/45 centers. Because most wars have few TOs, little looting, and focus mostly on battles. If the opposite is true, and you will loot much and perhaps do takeovers but few battles, then only recruiting from 10/30 centers, for example, can prove worth it despite a lower cs/man ratio.

[Solari]

My unsolicited advice:

If you have an RC with high weaponry and another with high armor, your General should exercise his or her last brain cell to update the General bulletin with suggested pairings of recruits to achieve a quality unit. There are many ways to honor the "battle" part of BattleMaster. In my experience, patient and deliberate planning is a pretty good way.

[Chenier]

My unsolicited advice:

If you have an RC with high weaponry and another with high armor, your General should exercise his or her last brain cell to update the General bulletin with suggested pairings of recruits to achieve a quality unit. There are many ways to honor the "battle" part of BattleMaster. In my experience, patient and deliberate planning is a pretty good way.

I.e, merging two specialized units to form an average one?

[Indirik]

Pretty much. It's a good way of stretching your recruits. Everyone can't recruit from the 90/90/90 RC. Some people have to take the 50/60/60 troops. So mix the 60/40/80 and the 40/80/40 ones.

Unless you've been successful in ridding your realm of all those wack RCs, and gotten some good middle of the road ones. Usually I find that no one really cares about fixing their RCs until they've had an army or two wiped out, and wonder why they have no good troops left.

[Chenier]

Pretty much. It's a good way of stretching your recruits. Everyone can't recruit from the 90/90/90 RC. Some people have to take the 50/60/60 troops. So mix the 60/40/80 and the 40/80/40 ones.

Unless you've been successful in ridding your realm of all those wack RCs, and gotten some good middle of the road ones. Usually I find that no one really cares about fixing their RCs until they've had an army or two wiped out, and wonder why they have no good troops left.

I'm a big fan of adequate military infrastructure. Back when Nicolas was general of Enweil, I put great efforts into organizing the construction, enlargement, and elimination of recruitment centres. It truly became a realm-wide effort, with everyone pitching in to help fellow lords accomplish my objectives.

I never really saw that happen elsewhere. Or since. It was worth the effort.

Mind you, you need sufficient peace time and productive regions for it to work. It wouldn't really work well if your regions are unproductive (your lords poor) or if you expect a war is about to happen and you need to hoard gold just in case. Because a LOT of gold is going to be dumped on centers that are to be destroyed.

[Indirik]

Darka did a *very* good job at it. Perdan did well with infantry, but poorly at most everything else. Eponllyn is trying, and getting a few good results.

You are right about the cost. It sucks up tons of gold.

[Velax]

...did you reply to a message of yours that Tom quoted from nearly six months ago?

[Bedwyr]

My unsolicited advice:

If you have an RC with high weaponry and another with high armor, your General should exercise his or her last brain cell to update the General bulletin with suggested pairings of recruits to achieve a quality unit. There are many ways to honor the "battle" part of BattleMaster. In my experience, patient and deliberate planning is a pretty good way.

Standard practice in Abington.  I believe I even remember my favorite RC combo.  Shieldmaidens of Suville (45 45/75, I think), and Veteran Swordmaidens of Suville (65 75/45, or something like that).  Averaged out nicely.