View Full Version : Some Pahlava strategy thoughts.
palmtree
12-10-2008, 19:30
After having several Pahlava games that flat out didn't work, here is what I learned.
1) Do not mess with the Saka. They can do everything you can and they can most likely do it better, so to beat them you need overwhelming force. Which you can't afford, since your territories can't support any major armies and the Saka territories are too poor to be worth looting. Leave them alone.
2) Messing with Baktria? Well, unlike the Saka they make for nice looting and you use a minimum of horse archers to wear down them over several turns. On the other hand, this will take a lot of time and while Baktra itself is a prize, the neighbouring lands are not that great. The Baktrians tend to expand to the east and south so Baktria can be used as a nice bulwark against the Saka. Giving them Marakanda worked out well for me. It keeps the Saka boxed up. You need to keep an eye out so the Baktrians don't march an army over to Antiocheia-Margiane though, but even if they do declare war the Baktrians are much more manageable on the defense than the Saka. For the Saka you want stone walls. For the Baktrians all you need is two or three horse archers raiding their stacks every turn.
3) The AS. This is the target. You want their lands and wealth. What you don't want is to be tied up developing cities. You don't have time for that with the AS still sending armies after you, and while you're developing cities they're way ahead of you on the tech curve. The better phalanxes they have, the harder it will be for your horse archers to penetrate their armor. The way to do this is to strike as deep into their empire as possible. Take their cities, raze their barracks, and if it looks like they'll retake them, raze everything else. Hell, until you get to Persia it's barely worth keeping and garrisoning any of the AS cities. Take them, loot whatever you can, then turn up taxes and let them rebel while you're taking another city. You need the money so let the war feed itself.
Only garrison cities if it makes economic sense.
Don't bother with any foot troops. Spies should do the trick when it comes to opening gates, even if you might have to wait a turn or two extra. If you really need a ram, hire the cheapest mercs you can. Then you have an instant garrison force. But money will be tight and spies are cheaper.
Once you have taken their heartlands you suddenly have an income! Now you can do pretty much whatever you like
The Persian Cataphract
12-10-2008, 20:26
Actually, this is somewhat simplistic, albeit helpful from a strategical point of view. I personally found it much more effective to divide the Pahlavân armies using detachments as generals would have done in real life. Let me illustrate the essentials of this strategem.
Rear-guard
-
-
-
-
Main army
-
-
Foraging party
-
-
Scouting party
Legend: The distance between each contingent could theoretically be measured in "parasang"/schoenus or "throw of a stone", which measures between 3.25 or 3.5 miles. This is of course not possible in RTW terms due to the mechanics of reinforcements, so we have to measure it into tiles.
---
The rear-guard, foraging party and the scouting party don't need to consist of high-end troops or be particularly numerous. My minimum requirement is two units per contingent. They are just the shell covering the nucleus, the main-army. They are there to weaken and harass the enemy, luring them off, hit-and-run, inflict damage and retreat, rinse and repeat.
The scouting party should strictly be a few horse-archers and only horse-archers; you need the maximum available mobility. The foraging party is slightly more elaborate as I like to make it slightly larger than the scouting party and to include a unit of medium cavalry or two. Casualties are usually minimal because the intention is to inflict as much damage as possible and usually retreat once ammunition has depleted. It is important for all these contingents to consist purely of cavalry and to be of some distance from the main army in order to have a strategical advantage. This is the key in being able to defeat almost any army.
It is however absolutely rubbish against other nomadic factions; they will lead to losses of entire units. In cases of waging war against nomads, the bigger and badder the host with bows and arrows the better. Dominance of armour is another decisive factor. So thus I have two very different paradigms of warfare whenever playing as the Pahlavân.
Personally, I always go for Bactria first; traditional rushing mentality, but it is always more convenient and prudent in gameplay terms to eliminate the threat when it's still in its cradle. For role-playing purposes however, Bactria is indeed a potential bulwark against pesky Sakae, however due to how the diplomacy works, you can never trust another faction, making the role-playing a bit of an awkward matter.
palmtree
12-10-2008, 20:48
I'm well aware that the Baktria can and will backstab you at any time given the wacky diplomace, and taking them out of the game permanently from the start means less trouble digging them out of India later. But in my experience even for non-role-playing purposes it pays off to let the Baktrians be because the alternative is worse.
If you conquer Baktrian territory you'll have to garrison it against the Saka, who will be that much more likely to declare war on you early, and as the Pahlava there is just no way that you can effectively deal with the Saka until you've dealt with the AS. Your horse archers will be evenly matched against Saka horse archers and all the armored units cost too much in upkeep. By contrast, Baktria is just another AS and those phalanxes will all die on the field given enough turns of bowfire while rarely losing you even a single horse archer.
Money is extremely tight as the Pahlava early on and all losses need to be replaced. You can't afford war with the Saka, literally. They will grind you down.
LordCurlyton
12-10-2008, 22:12
Actually, the Saka will not betray you until you take Alexandreia-Eschate or they do. I used AS remnants in Marakanda and A-E as a useful buffer. They even made forays into the Saka lands, taking Sulek and threatening Saka homelands for a while. Baktria I eliminated post-haste as they can field lots of archers, both foot and horse, plus they have phalanxes, which is a combination I had no interest in facing.
Taking on the Saka is a bear in the early going mainly b/c with the AI money assistance they would/will easily out gun and overwhelm you. Same goes for the Sauromatae. Which I guess is why EB changed the diplo status to have all three allied to each other (I also presume that is to help force the nomads to go after settled peoples).
You will have also noted that the Pahlava get FMs which want to settle or stay nomadic. As most of your early FMs will be Daha they will almost exclusively be nomadic in nature and I saw no reason to break that trend. In fact I kept every single Daha FM nomadic throughout my campaign with the exception of two who wanted to settle. Combine these Nomad FMs into one or two armies backed by as many or as few HAs as desired. My ideal was an all-FM army of 10-14 FMS + a second with 3-4 FMs and around 10 HAs once you get going.
In the beginning, of course, you will have only one army but the 4-5 FMs + various HAs you start with will be plenty for the early struggles with the AS and Baktria. I recommend slicing the AS in two and looping around to mop up and take care of Baktria. Always lead with the FMs as they have the armor to absorb fire then circle with your normal HAs to get rear shots. The early Pahalva FMs are total beasts and their arrow fire alone can decimate almost any unit. I used my grand FM horde method to conquer all the to Mesopotamia before they changed to the Late Pahlav bodyguards (ie the Charax/Seleukia border).
If you can, ensure that the Baktrians are given ample reason to betray the AS before you turn on them. This way the splinter part of the AS will be too busy fighting two wars to bother with you. If you move quickly the AI doesn't quite seem to know how to respond and seems to try the other AI factions first before trying you again. To note, I conquered Persepolis before it became Huge (maybe even before it became Large) and managed the same trick with Seleukia/Babylon. Baktra was captured before it was Large also.
But definitely go for the AS. A lot of those eastern provinces will have mines when you conquer them or you will be able to build mines there. Once you can get an extra 6k per turn you might as well say game over since you can generally build or recruit as you please.
And definitely make a FM horde. I pounded the Saka with my FM horde, even after they became late bodyguards with no arrows. They just sat there and laughed at the missile fore then proceeded to demolish everything in their path.
antisocialmunky
12-16-2008, 20:21
Usually if you immediately ally up with the Saka, they stayed allied with you. This has been my experience. However the Baktrians and Seleucids usually will decide to kill you horribly after a while. You won't be able to take their fortresses until they strip most of the east bare sending hopeless stacks against your 1337 HA and FMs.
MerlinusCDXX
12-16-2008, 22:25
I pretty much play Pahlava the same way LordCurlyton does, with a few exceptions. I start with a quick strike into the heartlands of the AS, leaving the Baktrians alone, instead, I take those nomad FMs (with the exception of the King, and his 2 Ashkani sons) and whatever units I can afford into Gava-Mazsakata after getting some marriages/adoptions. I set up a watchtower system and watch the Baktrians and Saka fight it out, turning on Baktria when they gain ground- after getting a cease-fire with the AS. I take all Batrian territory except Marakanda (which they will usually get by now, it helps to use a spy to force a rebellion off the AS) and get a cease-fire. I take India with what remains of the Eastern Army group and then recruit a much improved army (I've been working up the reforms ceaselessly until now), finish off Baktria, and get ready for the Saka onslaught, recruiting supporting armies from Mazsakata, Khiva, and Nisa while getting a cheap stack of regionals for defense from Baktra. After that you can pick your next opponent, usually the AS, Armenia, or the Ptolemaioi. I usually go for Armenia, then Asia Minor, and then finish the AS in the Levant and take the few Ptolemaiaoi cities in the Levant for the VCs. By then I'm sporting fully reformed armies with Infantry and Elephants from India going to the Royal Army. Pahlava can be a very rich faction in a short amount of time if played smart, since the reformed gov't requirements have the side effect of making you filthy stinking rich.
Tristuskhan
12-16-2008, 22:44
I pretty much play Pahlava the same way LordCurlyton does, with a few exceptions. I start with a quick strike into the heartlands of the AS, leaving the Baktrians alone, instead, I take those nomad FMs (with the exception of the King, and his 2 Ashkani sons) and whatever units I can afford into Gava-Mazsakata after getting some marriages/adoptions. I set up a watchtower system and watch the Baktrians and Saka fight it out, turning on Baktria when they gain ground- after getting a cease-fire with the AS. I take all Batrian territory except Marakanda (which they will usually get by now, it helps to use a spy to force a rebellion off the AS) and get a cease-fire. I take India with what remains of the Eastern Army group and then recruit a much improved army (I've been working up the reforms ceaselessly until now), finish off Baktria, and get ready for the Saka onslaught, recruiting supporting armies from Mazsakata, Khiva, and Nisa while getting a cheap stack of regionals for defense from Baktra. After that you can pick your next opponent, usually the AS, Armenia, or the Ptolemaioi. I usually go for Armenia, then Asia Minor, and then finish the AS in the Levant and take the few Ptolemaiaoi cities in the Levant for the VCs. By then I'm sporting fully reformed armies with Infantry and Elephants from India going to the Royal Army. Pahlava can be a very rich faction in a short amount of time if played smart, since the reformed gov't requirements have the side effect of making you filthy stinking rich.
Rich enough to buy a protectorate on the Saka may them betray you sometimes (400000 denari + one or two provinces + 1000 tribute for 1000 turns + map info)
Atraphoenix
01-09-2009, 12:32
I use baktria as a buffer zone between me and Sakae, I mostly blitz AS lands after I got enough money from my settlements I just leave one city for sakae and baktria also I leave AS in asia minor as a buffer zone state then my egypt campaign starts.
For AS quickly to divide then conquer my best tactic.
I took the closest AS territory that had a port, on the southern shores of the Caspian, good income. I leave the city directly south seperated by mountains) of my capital for my spies to make rebel. Then I take the territory (I think it the city is called Hekatolympos) as a staging area into the territory south of the first territory taken (which has mines). AS sure loves to try to take Hekato and that third territory. Sometimes though they just pass through on their way to Bactria so I leave them be. I build Nomadism where I can and Pastoralism elsewhere followed sanitation and other growth buildings (cos I enslave all the captured cities).
I think I am hanging on by the skin of my teef but I love playing these guys! I think having my spies cause unhappiness may have slowed down the AS military response but I am not sure.
As far as troops...my armies outside the cities are composed of two horse archers and a FM while my cities have a token garrison of Hellenic Spearmen and Mardian archers, usually a 2 to 1 ratio.
I believe that AS are simply too busy in Asia Minor and Ioudaia to fight you yet. I didn't rush and built Pastoralism almost everywhere (and now building Reformed Government). AS started to send decent phalanxes only when I captured Babylon and Seleukeia.
Yeah it's pretty funny, the Pahlavi position improves almost immediately, you just spend a lot of time building. I have only just started to build a reform myself.
Also...aren't HA and FMs great for assassinating generals? killed a grip of AS generals with my archers. Sure it took a while but once he is by himself I just charge him with my horses.
I think I will play a Pahlava campaign as soon as I finished my Carthage one.
Back in 0.81 I sported an army full of very experienced HAs. They were the nightmare for AS-armies, b/c they were decimated by these guys even before they reached my territory.
Titus Marcellus Scato
01-16-2009, 14:26
So it's not possible to play an historically-based Pahlava campaign then?
With Pahlava doing nothing except fighting Rebels for the first 20 years, and only then going on the warpath?
Atraphoenix
01-16-2009, 15:35
I can confess that it is almost impossible to make an AAR for pahlava that is historically correct.
Can you imagine that I was fighting with ptolemies around 220 BC after I totally conquered mesopotamia, Syria, levants; historically They even conquered Mesopotamia around 100 BCs where the Mod is about to finish :dizzy2:
Still haven't wrapped my head around using small armies of HA to ambush and pick apart large armies. Will the generals begin to suffer when they flee battles? Should I forgo having generals leading these small ambush parties?
LordCurlyton
01-17-2009, 01:14
In all my campaigns if a force is on the move with 5 or less units than it does not warrant a FM. When I play Pahlava I leave the FMs in one big army destroyer and let the captains deal with the skirmishing.
13 HA FMs = joy.
Ouch that does sound scary. I will keep that in mind.
As suggested by many users I went for AS (without much rush though). In the meantime I back stabbed and destroyed Baktria :oops:
My generals have transformed to cataphracts recently, I built reformed governments and other cool stuff everywhere besides Armavir (owned by my Hai allies) and Edessa (it is my main unit training centre ATM).
Now I am in doubts what option to prefer as a primary one.
Follow AS to Asia Minor, they are spamming medium and elite phalanxes so it seems I have to use armoured HAs and Cataphracts instead of HAs and nobles. Alas Pahlava do not have access to good phalanxes and it is not possible to recruit HAs in Asia Minor.
Attack Hayasdan to finally unite Persia and occupy the remaining areas with HAs available. The bad thing I will have to meet my nomadic Sauromatae mates.
Attack Saka Rauka for no reason, I doubt they have anything worth.
Build an army of Indian units to capture outstanding Indian cities
Do nothing except building few outstanding mines and getting rid of rebels :laugh4:
What would you prefer?
https://i233.photobucket.com/albums/ee27/iamphet/pahlava_progress.png
Tristuskhan
01-23-2009, 16:21
Leave the Saka Rauka where they are: if they have expanded a bit destroying them would use much, much time and manpower (AT LEAST two armies plus garrisons and governors) for no profit. Moreover, if you're still allied with them they're likely to leave you in peace and expand to the western steppe.
You should already have one or two raiding parties chasing rebels all over your territory, gaining exp for your HA's.
About dealing with Seleucids, if you fell you need a standing army, just hire mercenary medium phalanx all around your empire. Then play the hammer and anvil game (you won't need Armoured horse-archers so much, Noble HA's should do the job efficiently).
Ask yourself if you really need to attack the Hayasdan, they are your allies and you make good trade with them...
About pushing in Asia Minor, why not but make sure the middle east is secured (meaning you took Hierosalyma to avoid having to fight the Ptollies on a broad front) and stabilised.
India is the cherry on the cake, you can take it when you want, but the campaign will be either long (if you wait for the cities to fall, plus distances are huge in india) and/or costly (if you assault settlements, garrisons have a good level).
Why the hell would you not build the mines? If you want to be able to train and feed costly high-end Pahlavan units you just can't do without them. A few units of Cataphracts or Elephants can suck once flourishing coofers dry in amazingly short times.
Titus Marcellus Scato
01-23-2009, 16:51
Definitely advance into Asia Minor and Syria-Judea. The Seleucids must be reduced to utter impotence - no more than two or three coastal cities left, so that they can never rise again.
Leave Hayasdan and Saka alone unless they attack you - hopefully they should be busy fighting each other.
Don't fight the Ptolies either until you must.
The Persian Cataphract
01-23-2009, 17:45
That is a fantastic expansion :2thumbsup:
In accordance to the two above entries, because there is a multitude of factions around the Mediterranean and the Black Sea basin, I would suggest consolidating your possessions first and embark towards an expedition of taking the rest of the Persian Gulf, and prepare another expedition towards India. This way, you will make more money, along with constructing mines which will be crucial for your economy (If you already haven't).
Because the Saka are unable to expand beyond their nomadic structure if you hold on to your north-eastern frontier, they will at best remain nothing more than fleeting nomadic invaders who to boot are poor at siege-craft. When they are weakened by Hayasdan and Sauromatae (Who are also mutually weakened), mount a surprise expedition to the Haomavarga, Tarim/Sulek and the Saka homelands where you can build pastoralist dwelling, and harness the advantages of the border-trading resource. If you are to embark on a war against the Saka, take at least one purely nomadic settlement and start churning out horse-archers.
Afterwards expand towards coastal Arabia; horse-archers will do absolutely wonders, and especially with your port at Charax, you can efficiently transport your troops across the waters; the Eastern ocean is now your playground.
Or you can try to eliminate the Seleucid rival in Anatolia; riskier, but potentially more lucrative. What you would want to avoid is bilateral or even trilateral war. When the time is right take a shot at becoming the master of the Black Sea and the Eastern Mediterranean. Against Seleucids and Ptolemaioi, I recommend using raids: Take the cities, raze any economical and military resources (Except for wonders), leave, move on to the next city, repeat. This will leave power-houses like the Ptolemaioi severely weakened.
You will want to get rid of the fragmented milieu in the Black Sea area as soon as possible though; if your economy allows for it, make four or five full stacks of mounted archers and prepare yourself for glory. Don't hold on to the cities; strip them off the valuable stuff, making for yourself money while severely weakening the concerned factions, and continue until all factions in Anatolia, Caucasus, and the Black Sea area have either been defeated or critically weakened. You will not only be filthy rich, but you will at the same time have caused the final decline of several factions now up for the grabs.
Fantastic ideas! It is difficult to see in the picture but Heirosolyma belongs to my another allies, Ptolemies. This is the reason why I left Bostra to AS: to keep Ptolemies busy with something :)
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.