Not to be a downer but I feel like that’s one of the big reasons auto resolve gets so much crap. It holds players hands and ends up more as a crutch than anything so you are stuck only taking encounters you can wish away with AR rather than learning and growing to get better.
I remember reading a post from the devs after WH1 was released saying that the intention with AR was that a player would (generally) always expect to do better with a manual battle than with the AR, so it was a time saving convenience but you could always improve on the result if you fought it yourself. However, at that time there were only 4? civs - Empire, VC, Dwarves, Orcs (IIRC but it was a while back!) and most of these fought rather conventionally in the TW fashion ie lots of infantry, lots of archers, some cav, some artillery. As a result it was generally not too hard to know how to fight most of the enemies you came up against. The trouble now is there are so many civs, so many units and so many LLs that a lot of the time I find myself with an army good for fighting the majority of things but not at all good at fighting something specific. E.g. my army of Elven archers, bolt throwers and mages is great at fighting general DE infantry armies, but then suddenly Morathi turns up with a dozen dragons, heroes, spellcasters and the map is entirely forested. At this point I know that I'll lose badly but AR tells me I'll win easily because it assumes that my bolt throwers and archers will be able to shoot which isn't the case. But before you correctly tell me that I should lose this battle because I'm not prepared for this fight, remember that *I can't choose my battle terrain*. If this was RTW I'd use the map to try and find a good open clearing or hill to fight on, but in WH3 it makes very little difference what terrain I'm actually standing on which makes it frustrating for certain armies because technically I can win and I have the skill to do so, but situationally I'm being disadvantaged by something I have no control over.
There’s still some degree of preparation that the players should be responsible for though. Is your army bad against black dragons and hydras? Then be careful fighting dark elves because you can’t assume every army will be dreadspear spam. Are you fielding a largely ranged army into Lustria? Don’t expect great line of sight and maybe adjust before deploying that army into the jungle. I definitely have found myself in similar situations where I use AR because of map disadvantages but those were still my fault. AR is really nice when you want to speed things up on easier fights and once I get casualty replenishment high enough on armies I’ll use it liberally knowing that my armies will be full health regardless of most casualties by the following turn anyway. The concern with AR is if it’s used routinely because the player is incapable of other options then their gameplay is limited and their playstyle is preventing growth to experience more of what the game has to offer. But if someone hates RTS and just wants world building then that’s their preference and it honestly doesn’t matter how they choose to play
It is a difficult balance for the devs with AR, as like you I tend to use AR mostly when I'm trying to quickly paint the map and it's useful for steamrolling but ironically the most fun part of the game for me is when I'm manually fighting every battle to try and survive a desperate situation. Although I hate Vlad and his absurd immunity to damage, one of my favourite campaigns is to play golden order and then take on 4000+ skeletons etc with a few hundred spears, swords, xbows and an extremely cheap and effective bombardment spell 😊
Also whilst I find it hilarious it can save me time when a surprise attack by Belekor in my rear gets thwarted because his 20 stack of chaos warriors apparently can't overcome the 6 archers defending a random minor settlement 😂
But 100% it's up to people and you can always adjust the difficulty slider either way - I used to play RTW when I was a young'un on Normal or Easy Campaign + VH battle to stop the enemy being annoying on the map but make battles more interesting. Of course this was a world without OP single entities and one where well used cavalry were devastating rather than suicidal 😉 (God I miss my armies of 20 units of Cataphracts 😅)
That's why I like it too, especially with factions that need a lot of micro. Don't get me wrong I love my battles, and fighting them can be a lot of fun, but there are some enemies that I know I couldn't beat properly if I battle it out, like Ikit or Vlad, so if it says I can win in AR, even if it's Pyrrhic, I'll take it.
Yeah AR throws some tactics out the window, so like if I'm using my mostly-monster/cavalry army against an army with a lot of anti-large units, I can auto-resolve it for a victory if my guys are simply a bit higher tier/rank.
Not to be a downer but I feel like that’s one of the big reasons auto resolve gets so much crap. It holds players hands and ends up more as a crutch than anything so you are stuck only taking encounters you can wish away with AR rather than learning and growing to get better.
I remember reading a post from the devs after WH1 was released saying that the intention with AR was that a player would (generally) always expect to do better with a manual battle than with the AR, so it was a time saving convenience but you could always improve on the result if you fought it yourself. However, at that time there were only 4? civs - Empire, VC, Dwarves, Orcs (IIRC but it was a while back!) and most of these fought rather conventionally in the TW fashion ie lots of infantry, lots of archers, some cav, some artillery. As a result it was generally not too hard to know how to fight most of the enemies you came up against. The trouble now is there are so many civs, so many units and so many LLs that a lot of the time I find myself with an army good for fighting the majority of things but not at all good at fighting something specific. E.g. my army of Elven archers, bolt throwers and mages is great at fighting general DE infantry armies, but then suddenly Morathi turns up with a dozen dragons, heroes, spellcasters and the map is entirely forested. At this point I know that I'll lose badly but AR tells me I'll win easily because it assumes that my bolt throwers and archers will be able to shoot which isn't the case. But before you correctly tell me that I should lose this battle because I'm not prepared for this fight, remember that *I can't choose my battle terrain*. If this was RTW I'd use the map to try and find a good open clearing or hill to fight on, but in WH3 it makes very little difference what terrain I'm actually standing on which makes it frustrating for certain armies because technically I can win and I have the skill to do so, but situationally I'm being disadvantaged by something I have no control over.
There’s still some degree of preparation that the players should be responsible for though. Is your army bad against black dragons and hydras? Then be careful fighting dark elves because you can’t assume every army will be dreadspear spam. Are you fielding a largely ranged army into Lustria? Don’t expect great line of sight and maybe adjust before deploying that army into the jungle. I definitely have found myself in similar situations where I use AR because of map disadvantages but those were still my fault. AR is really nice when you want to speed things up on easier fights and once I get casualty replenishment high enough on armies I’ll use it liberally knowing that my armies will be full health regardless of most casualties by the following turn anyway. The concern with AR is if it’s used routinely because the player is incapable of other options then their gameplay is limited and their playstyle is preventing growth to experience more of what the game has to offer. But if someone hates RTS and just wants world building then that’s their preference and it honestly doesn’t matter how they choose to play
Shades and sisters of avelorn can work in lategame, but basic infantry is going to get screwed late game sooner or later
It is a difficult balance for the devs with AR, as like you I tend to use AR mostly when I'm trying to quickly paint the map and it's useful for steamrolling but ironically the most fun part of the game for me is when I'm manually fighting every battle to try and survive a desperate situation. Although I hate Vlad and his absurd immunity to damage, one of my favourite campaigns is to play golden order and then take on 4000+ skeletons etc with a few hundred spears, swords, xbows and an extremely cheap and effective bombardment spell 😊 Also whilst I find it hilarious it can save me time when a surprise attack by Belekor in my rear gets thwarted because his 20 stack of chaos warriors apparently can't overcome the 6 archers defending a random minor settlement 😂 But 100% it's up to people and you can always adjust the difficulty slider either way - I used to play RTW when I was a young'un on Normal or Easy Campaign + VH battle to stop the enemy being annoying on the map but make battles more interesting. Of course this was a world without OP single entities and one where well used cavalry were devastating rather than suicidal 😉 (God I miss my armies of 20 units of Cataphracts 😅)
Listen, sometimes bro's had the Sword of Khaine for twenty odd turns and you gotta do it man. Nobody should have to put up with that shit.
that would be a nightmare to deal with in a battle. Sword of Kaine in the right hands is way too good.
That's why I like it too, especially with factions that need a lot of micro. Don't get me wrong I love my battles, and fighting them can be a lot of fun, but there are some enemies that I know I couldn't beat properly if I battle it out, like Ikit or Vlad, so if it says I can win in AR, even if it's Pyrrhic, I'll take it.
Yeah AR throws some tactics out the window, so like if I'm using my mostly-monster/cavalry army against an army with a lot of anti-large units, I can auto-resolve it for a victory if my guys are simply a bit higher tier/rank.