Question about shattered retreat

[Limbojack]

I really like the idea of shattered retreat in CK2, but the implementation is rather poor and makes warfare annoying.
There's a couple of issues I'd like to highlight:

The first issue is the fact that retreating armies replenish their loses even when retreating (running for their lives). It should simply be impossible to replenish soldiers during a retreat.

The second issue is that replenishment during warfare is too high. If a lose a battle I'll just let the AI siege down the vassal holdings on the border while my army replenishes to close to full numbers. Please reduce replenishment in periods of war to make us more reliant on mercs if we lose a big battle.

The third issue is that AI armies never gets disbanded during a war. If an army loses a vast majority of its soldiers in a single, or a couple of, battles - it should get disbanded as soldiers desert.

This often ends in a situation where the AI army gets beaten in battle, retreats and replenishes more soldiers than it lost in the battle (this is especially true with small armies being overwhelmed by superior numbers). I hate having to clean up the last 10 to 200 men of a 10 000 army, having to fight them maybe 15 times in order to kill them off.

Hopefully CK3 will do a better job at handling these problems with the combat system than CK2 does. Do anyone know if they've talked about this?

 

[Atalvyr]

I think mostly the issue with shattered retreat in CK2 vs. EU4 is that unless you build your army for it (eg. use retinues), the pursuit phase often doesn't really generate enough losses for the losing side that you can reliably eliminate the army. I have chased a ping-ponging enemy army around their realm, attacking them at their retreat destination over and over again, but since their low morale makes them break in the skirmish step, they don't actually take that many losses per engagement.

In EU4 you can stackwipe an army if you defeat it before the minimum engagement length required to initiate a retreat, so catching a broken army shortly after it stops retreating is a reliable way to clean up the threat and deal a significant blow to enemy manpower.

 

[Rockphed]

I really like the idea of shattered retreat in CK2, but the implementation is rather poor and makes warfare annoying.
There's a couple of issues I'd like to highlight:

The first issue is the fact that retreating armies replenish their loses even when retreating (running for their lives). It should simply be impossible to replenish soldiers during a retreat.

The second issue is that replenishment during warfare is too high. If a lose a battle I'll just let the AI siege down the vassal holdings on the border while my army replenishes to close to full numbers. Please reduce replenishment in periods of war to make us more reliant on mercs if we lose a big battle.

The third issue is that AI armies never gets disbanded during a war. If an army loses a vast majority of its soldiers in a single, or a couple of, battles - it should get disbanded as soldiers desert.

This often ends in a situation where the AI army gets beaten in battle, retreats and replenishes more soldiers than it lost in the battle (this is especially true with small armies being overwhelmed by superior numbers). I hate having to clean up the last 10 to 200 men of a 10 000 army, having to fight them maybe 15 times in order to kill them off.

Hopefully CK3 will do a better job at handling these problems with the combat system than CK2 does. Do anyone know if they've talked about this?

You and I have very different experiences of CKII warfare with shattered retreat. I like the system and hope they do something similar in CKIII.

 

[Limbojack]

You and I have very different experiences of CKII warfare with shattered retreat. I like the system and hope they do something similar in CKIII.

Oh, I want them to have shattered retreat too. I just want them to fix these issues.