Why do Austrian troops suck so much compared to Serbian?

[1alexey]

My difficulty is Lieutenant.
Playing before, on Sergeant, I didn`t had troubles to break even or even trade favorably on casualties with Sebs.
Here is how my troops look like a turn before, my stack also has level 1 entrenchment:

And here is what happens to them next turn:

Really?
The result is very consistent, at least around 5 attempts, get me same thing. So What am I doing wrong? Any advises?

The end result, of course is that I did managed to encircle Belgrade, but I really cant take such one-sided battles more.

[Lord Nelson]

Well, historically, the Habsburg army did fail dismally one on one with the Serbs. If you'll recall it took a full year and then some, and German and Bulgarian assistance, to finish the job.

Plus Potiorek's record as field commander can be described in one rude word.

[bob.]

From your first screenshot it looks like you are attacking across a river with unactivated troops led by a bad general against more experienced, entrenched troops led by a great general. Your entrenchment doesn't matter if you are the one attacking.

That said, the Serbians are indeed extremely strong if they can defend across that river line. However, as far as I know they historically also completely defeated the first Austro-Hungarian invasion, so perhaps that is how it should be?
You can always try to outflank their positions, even if that will take until Winter. The Serbians don't have the numbers to defend everywhere.

[PJJ]

Historically speaking, Austria-Hungary was a dying empire in 1914. Of all the great powers of Europe, they had probably the worst army, and they were also burdened by a frightfully incompetent high command. However, like all armies, they did also have units and commanders that performed well. But on the whole, the Austro-Hungarian war effort was nothing but stumbling from one disaster to the next.

I think that General Potiorek may even have too high stats in EAW, because his performance in the real Serbian campaign of 1914 was abysmal. The Serbian army inflicted several humiliating defeats on the Austrians in late 1914, largely thanks to the utter incompetence of Potiorek and his staff.

[James D Burns]

From your first screenshot it looks like you are attacking across a river with unactivated troops led by a bad general against more experienced, entrenched troops led by a great general. Your entrenchment doesn't matter if you are the one attacking.

That said, the Serbians are indeed extremely strong if they can defend across that river line. However, as far as I know they historically also completely defeated the first Austro-Hungarian invasion, so perhaps that is how it should be?
You can always try to outflank their positions, even if that will take until Winter. The Serbians don't have the numbers to defend everywhere.

He also has what looks to be less than 50% cohesion in one of his corps. My guess is they decided to retreat on day one round one given how low just the cohesion is. I'd recommend sitting in passive (green/green) stance for a turn to recover cohesion and attacking a turn later.

Jim

[1alexey]

From your first screenshot it looks like you are attacking across a river with unactivated troops led by a bad general against more experienced, entrenched troops led by a great general. Your entrenchment doesn't matter if you are the one attacking.

I`m pretty sure the SS and my explanations makes it clear, but I will explain again:
My corps in province Ralia is already set, and has level 1 entrenchment.
I`m attacked by Serbs(Putnic`s army seem to be railed in), and my troops MTTSG to reinforce.
I actually have far more man, and their cohesion is mostly good, except for one core.

Attacker, taking 1/4 of casualties of defender seems far too much, don`t you think? Or is the problem that since I don`t have full control of the province, and thus, technically, I`m attacking the army that is railed in during the turn?

River-crossing into Belgrade was a separate fight, and perfectly "successful", as in, I did took casualties, but I now besiege Belgrade.

That said, the Serbians are indeed extremely strong if they can defend across that river line. However, as far as I know they historically also completely defeated the first Austro-Hungarian invasion, so perhaps that is how it should be?
You can always try to outflank their positions, even if that will take until Winter. The Serbians don't have the numbers to defend everywhere.

Well, that`s the thing, I did win my first campaign rather easily as CP, and thus upped the difficulty. The battle seem like an enormous abnomaly, thus I`m asking for advice, as it seems like my army is far less successful this time.

Is it because of Difficulty, bad general, my stupid mistake, or is it because Austrian troops pre- tech 2 are so bad?

He also has what looks to be less than 50% cohesion in one of his corps. My guess is they decided to retreat on day one round one given how low just the cohesion is. I'd recommend sitting in passive (green/green) stance for a turn to recover cohesion and attacking a turn later.

Jim

I`m not attacking, my troops are sitting in the province to which they arrived a turn or 2 ago, thus the cohesion drop of travel.

[BBBD316]

Are they the original troops on this front (Serbian A-H troops)?

I believe that they get an additional penalty as they basically refuse to fight their brethren.

[1alexey]

Are they the original troops on this front (Serbian A-H troops)?

I believe that they get an additional penalty as they basically refuse to fight their brethren.

Yes, they are, new divisions only formed 1 turn ago, and I didn`t get them formed up with leaders and to to front lines yet.

[James D Burns]

I`m not attacking, my troops are sitting in the province to which they arrived a turn or 2 ago, thus the cohesion drop of travel.

Look at the stance icons in the first battle. You are the attacker (orange) and the Serbs are set to defend (blue). You need 50%+ military control in a region otherwise your troops will auto-switch to attack mode as the game automatically tries to gain more MC. The only way to avoid that happening is to set your troops green/green, units with green/green orders will not try and automatically gain more MC. But looking at the first screenshot, your corp is set orange/orange, so it appears to me you ordered the attack deliberately. Perhaps an oversight?

Were I you I'd set the corp and the army marching in to green/green orders and have them both attack together in the next turn with better cohesion. But if you already have 51% or greater MC just give them defend orders and you should be fine until the next turn.

Jim

[1alexey]

Look at the stance icons in the first battle. You are the attacker (orange) and the Serbs are set to defend (blue). You need 50%+ military control in a region otherwise your troops will auto-switch to attack mode as the game automatically tries to gain more MC. The only way to avoid that happening is to set your troops green/green, units with green/green orders will not try and automatically gain more MC. But looking at the first screenshot, your corp is set orange/orange, so it appears to me you ordered the attack deliberately. Perhaps an oversight?

Jim

Don`t troops have to be in offensive posture to gain military control?
Yes, one of my cores is set to offensive, to gain MC. If that makes me attacker, well, I guess that should solve my question.

[James D Burns]

Don`t troops have to be in offensive posture to gain military control?
Yes, one of my cores is set to offensive, to gain MC. If that makes me attacker, well, I guess that should solve my question.

Edited my above post while you were responding, read the new text.

MC can change without going into attack mode, it's just slower and is based on a comparison of the two occupying armies. Attack mode simply speeds up the process, but you are risking a battle and if you get a battle you are the attacker and lose any terrain benefits or entrenchments.

Jim

[Kensai]

You need 50%+ military control in a region otherwise your troops will auto-switch to attack mode as the game automatically tries to gain more MC.

Shouldn't that be 5%? I thought it was as much as in earlier PON and other games. If it is 50% then the only stabilising possibility (i.e. to have rival troops in the same region without actually fighting) is when they are at 50-50%. Instead, if it is only 5% they simply need a foothold and then the attacker is in the new region.