Arche Seleukeia - A Guide by/with Hax

[Fluvius Camillus]

I'm having fun with my M/M Arche Seleukia campaign. I'm fighting every battle manually, plus micromanaging my huge empire, so I'm still at only 264 BC, but it's all good fun!

I've spent nearly all my money on town building thus far. I try to have something building in every settlement all the time. So my army is still very weak, composed of mainly cheap units like native spearmen, archers, and slingers. However, despite that, I've managed to hold Antiocheia-Margiane (just) and have actually retaken Hekatompylos and Asaak(!) after Pahlava took them early on due to their nearly-invincible FM's. I made peace with the Ptolemies first thing and they haven't been a problem since, being too busy fighting Elutheroi on their borders.

I always try that too!

I am around 248ish, I can finally afford that for about 3 years. I have 3 half stack- like armies who fight, and of course some garissons at the borders.

I also do every battle myself, stupid outresolve always screws up, which I cannot afford.

Im making preparations for the Cata reforms, where I have to lose...

~Fluvius

[Hax]

Yes, that is something I try to do as well. Especially when you have your first mines built in the eastern provinces, you will find that suddenly, you will have enough money to start developing your cities and soon, even Gabai will be more artistic and prominent than Athenai or Alexandreia ;D

[WinsingtonIII]

The problem is the medium inf are low in numbers, archers aren't as armoured as their Syrian and Bosphoran counterparts, and the fact that Persian Hoplites are pretty useless, for they've poor morale, stamina, and their swords suck. I've experienced they even lose to missile fire so easily.

I've found that the Georgian Medium Infantry may even be a better choice than the Armenian Medium Infantry. They have slightly lower stats, but they make up for it with higher numbers. The main problem with both units I think is that sword units like them simply aren't very effective in the east. They can't hold off cavalry, and they can't go head to head with phalanxes very well, meaning their main use is as flankers against phalanxes. But, since you're playing as the Hai, your cavalry perform this job much more effectively, so in the end, they just end up being underwhelming, which is really too bad. I guess if your enemies are fielding lots of Theurophoroi, Thorakitai, or Hoplitai they could be an effective counter to those units, but I've found that the AS tends to go very phalanx heavy in its infantry selection. The ironic thing is that the enemies that these units would actually be good against (the Romani and the Western "Barbarians") are enemies that you probably will not run into very much in the average Hai campaign (if you are only trying to achieve your victory conditions that is).

As for Persian Hoplites, they are so disappointing it's unreal. If you want an armored eastern spear unit, the Babylonian Heavy Spearmen are actually better than them (higher defense and an armor piercing mace as a secondary instead of a low-lethality sword) and can be trained without going through reforms. Of course Babylonian Spears have a very small AOR, but they are pretty widely available as mercs.

Sorry for the somewhat OT post, in regards to the actual thread, this is a really great guide, Hax. I've started an AS campaign because of it and I have to say there's something about it that I haven't really experienced playing EB before. I think it's the novelty of having this huge empire, but since it's at the beginning of the game, it isn't secure (as opposed to late game huge empires where you have so much money and troops that you really don't have to worry about much). Actually losing provinces and knowing that it's going to be years before you can retake them is a very refreshing feeling.

[Poulp']

Georgian Inf. are a niche; I found them essential when you need to storm walls. I used 2 units in my army which took Susa, Gadia and Persepolis and they cleaned up the walls efficiently. I still have 97 of them waiting in Persepolis.
Then, they are good to flank Native Spearmen or other spear units my FM (Hay) shouldn't charge. They did a good job pinning phalanxes but I won't rate their pinning abilities because I used anything and everything to pin them down and let heavy cavalry do its job. (half strength green slingers unit? Go!)

Overall, I'd say they should be used where your FM can't. On the walls or in the streets, anywhere you can't get a good charge.

Persian Hoplites are a disappointment. Native phalanxes do a better job at holding the line and are available sooner and if you need something in the assault department, you can just click on the "mercenary" button.

[WinsingtonIII]

Georgian Inf. are a niche; I found them essential when you need to storm walls. I used 2 units in my army which took Susa, Gadia and Persepolis and they cleaned up the walls efficiently. I still have 97 of them waiting in Persepolis.
Then, they are good to flank Native Spearmen or other spear units my FM (Hay) shouldn't charge. They did a good job pinning phalanxes but I won't rate their pinning abilities because I used anything and everything to pin them down and let heavy cavalry do its job. (half strength green slingers unit? Go!)

Overall, I'd say they should be used where your FM can't. On the walls or in the streets, anywhere you can't get a good charge.

The thing is, to me that isn't enough of a reason to pay for them and import them to armies that are not in the Caucusus. You can accomplish the same thing with Eastern Axemen (the AP secondary helps a lot) if you have to and they are much more widely available. You'll certainly take higher casualties because they are poorly armored, but those casualties are very easy to replace pretty much anywhere from Eastern Anatolia over to Baktria instead of only in the Caucusus. On walls and in streets I can see the advantage of the Medium Infantry, because they have better staying power due to more armor/morale. However, when used as flankers I would choose the Eastern Axemen because staying power does not matter as much and AP axes are a much more effective flanking weapon against phalanxes then a short sword. Hyrkanian Hillmen are an even better alternative due to their very high morale. They do have a small AOR, but they are widely available as mercs, so, as you said, when you need an assault unit you are far better served to hire some of them than to recruit and ship out the Georgian/Armenian Mediums.

I wish the Armenian/Georgian Medium Infantry were better, because I do like the idea of using them, but considering their relatively scarce availability in comparison to alternatives that perform some roles better than them and other roles worse (but still sufficiently to be used), they just don't make much sense to me from a campaign perspective. Which is really unfortunate, because in terms of historical accuracy I should be using them and they also have pretty sweet skins.

[gamegeek2]

Short swords as a whole are quite underpowered in EB - AtB intends to remedy this, and give them a decent edge against spear units.

[vartan]

WinsingtonIII, congrats on making Georgian and Armenian mediums sound like a complete waste of money and time. But really, good job. You succeeded. The thing is mate, it's not true. They don't actually suck as badly as you mentioned. Every unit has its use, and has a proper way of usage. I take Georgians and Armenians any day over eastern axemen. The swordsmen prove to be more useful in the long run.

[WinsingtonIII]

Oh I don't think they suck (that's reserved for Persian Hoplites), I just have always found other units that have pulled off what I would have done with them. Maybe not as well, but sufficiently enough for me to be satisfied with the result. I would use them in multiplayer/custom battle, and I do use them in campaign when I'm close enough to the Caucusus, I'm just not big on carting them over to attack Hektampylos when I have Hyrkanian Hillmen right there.

It may just be a matter of perception. I've always found the various Celtic short sword units to be rather decent, when they are clearly worse than Georgian or Armenian Medium Infantry. I think it may be because the Celtic short swords look like they are going to be terrible, and then they don't do half bad, so I'm like "oh look at that, that wasn't terrible at all, good for you." But the Medium Infantry look so cool, so I'm like "this is gonna be awesome," and then they do a pretty good job and I'm like "well that wasn't as awesome as I hoped." So I'm disappointed when I probably shouldn't be. I think it's the same phenomenon that we see when people complain that Hypastistai are underwhelming. It's not that they're bad units, they're just not as good as I was hoping. Does that make any sense?

[vartan]

I always expect the worst in life. That way, I'm always happy with the results =)

[Titus Marcellus Scato]

But the Medium Infantry look so cool, so I'm like "this is gonna be awesome," and then they do a pretty good job and I'm like "well that wasn't as awesome as I hoped." So I'm disappointed when I probably shouldn't be. I think it's the same phenomenon that we see when people complain that Hypastistai are underwhelming. It's not that they're bad units, they're just not as good as I was hoping. Does that make any sense?

Just because a unit of soldiers wear awesome uniforms, doesn't mean they are awesome....

A unit of Imperial Roman legionaries in the famous lorica segmentata might look awesome, but a unit of Gestatae would beat them one on one, despite having no uniform at all.... ;)

[WinsingtonIII]

I always expect the worst in life. That way, I'm always happy with the results =)

Haha I'll keep that in mind in the future

Just because a unit of soldiers wear awesome uniforms, doesn't mean they are awesome....

A unit of Imperial Roman legionaries in the famous lorica segmentata might look awesome, but a unit of Gestatae would beat them one on one, despite having no uniform at all.... ;)

Ah, but there you're assuming that Gaesatae don't look awesome....

Obviously appearance does not determine a unit's abilities, but I happened to have high expectations for the troops in question for a variety of reasons, and as such, when they underperformed those expectations, I was disappointed. It was as simple as that.

[vartan]

Obviously appearance does not determine a unit's abilities, but I happened to have high expectations for the troops in question for a variety of reasons, and as such, when they underperformed those expectations, I was disappointed. It was as simple as that.

I think it is not simple. I think it is a complicated set of psychological events that are triggered naturally that result in you expecting more of the better-looking troops. Think of it this way: If you are going to an interview for IBM, are you going to go wearing a T-shirt and jeans, or are you going to go dressed properly in business attire? I think we all know the answer to this. The same applies here in game. Expectations are something that I find must be consciously put down in importance if you want to reduce prejudice that has become almost inherent. First Impressions. Gotta love 'em =)

[Titus Marcellus Scato]

Think of it this way: If you are going to an interview for IBM, are you going to go wearing a T-shirt and jeans, or are you going to go dressed properly in business attire? I think we all know the answer to this.

I dare you to go for an interview wearing Gestatae attire....

If nothing else, you'll get the panel's attention!

[Grouchio]

Can you please continue this?

[Pavonis]

It is possible to save Asaak as the Seleucids - in fact, to not loose a single city. You have to hire a mercenary general there on the first turn. You won't start with enough money so scrap some building you don't need, like the temple to Marduk in Seleucia. Then reinforce your border cities with troops from the eastern half of the empire. But otherwise, you're free to focus on the wealthy cities of Asia Minor and Egypt without having to chase horse archers across the steppe.

[seleucid empire]

I think it's the same phenomenon that we see when people complain that Hypastistai are underwhelming. It's not that they're bad units, they're just not as good as I was hoping. Does that make any sense?

what??? who thinks hypastistai are bad??? they are good flankers and can hold the flank against anything. i had half a stack attacking my hypastistai and they held for the entire battle losing only 30 men. They can actually hold the line against elite cavalry charge with less than 10 casualties. Pelt-Maks are the underwhelming ones imo and people never complain about those