Least Favourite Faction To Play...

[artaxerxes]

Hi, had this idea for a thread for a while. This is NOT supposed to be identical to the 'which faction do you hate' thread (or whatever its name was, can't remember now:dizzy2:). anyway, the one by Maion (i think). anyways, I got the impression his thread was about "which faction do you dislike the most when the AI plays it" -> obviously Yellow Death scores high.
This is SOLELY for which faction would you LEAST like to play YOURSELF. So whatever the AI usually does with it is irrelevant:clown:. Really, this is less about dynastic hatred and more about gameplay, starting position, etc. I'm really curious to find out which factions will "win":2thumbsup: (tho if Maions thread hadn't existed, I'd have made a twin to this thread dealing with that subject ;))

Made it multiple choice poll, so we can all have fun :D

EDIT: sorry for the failed first attempt at this thread, where no poll got included. I think my computer is on drugs. Hopefully mods will delete it, I have reported it, sorry, I always make a mess of these things ;).

[Shadowwalker]

I could vote for every nomadic faction - I choosed Pahlava.
To explain this:
It's not that I would not like the faction(s) itself - I'm just not nearly as smart in tactics as I had to to play a faction mainly relying on horsearchers and cataphracts.
I need line infantry, flanking infantry missile infantry and the like to win even one battle. :wall:
Furthermore I'm also not very good at playing Arverni/Aedui/Lusotanan/Sweboz/Casse/Getai/Saba.
To use the armies given there successfully on battlefield one has to be able to ambush, hit-and-run etc.

I'm not.

Therefore the factions I choose for playing EB are somewhat limited. :embarassed:
Romans (of course), Quart'Hadast, Koinon Hellenon, Epeiros, Macedonia, Ptolemaioi, Arche Seleucia and Bactria.

To clarify this once again: I like every single faction in the game but I'm just too dumb to play the most of them. :laugh4:

[Mister V]

I don't like unwashed barbarians in general (I do want to try at least one campaign though) but the faction I really don't see myself playing is Saba. Come one, they suck:inquisitive: I mean, of course I could manage to build up an army and wage a war against the Successors, but what's the fun, with retarded units like that. No offense to the person(s) who made them, I am absolutely sure that they are represented accurately, and that they did, in fact, suck like this (only thing that saved them was the desert, and other real life factors currently impossible to implement). In short, I like my army to be immensely powerful and look awesome, and they fulfill neither requirement.

[Lucio Domicio Aureliano]

My would be Casse. Until today i´ve played with Romani, KH and Phalava. As soon as i finish the Phalava, i´ll begin the seleucids. That reminds me, thx EB team for the best game ever:2thumbsup:

[Gabeed]

Aedui. A crappy faction with crappy aims to crappily conquer a crappy part of Europe. They're worse than the Arverni since the Arverni at least don't have one of their cities on the other side of the damn Alps. Plus, the Arverni get to have a god-king. If I'm to be a Celtic faction, I'd rather be the Casse or Galatians. :beam:

Other than that, I enjoy playing every other faction, though I have trouble sticking with a Romani or Makedonia campaign.

[artaxerxes]

I don't like unwashed barbarians in general (I do want to try at least one campaign though) but the faction I really don't see myself playing is Saba. Come one, they suck:inquisitive: I mean, of course I could manage to build up an army and wage a war against the Successors, but what's the fun, with retarded units like that. No offense to the person(s) who made them, I am absolutely sure that they are represented accurately, and that they did, in fact, suck like this (only thing that saved them was the desert, and other real life factors currently impossible to implement). In short, I like my army to be immensely powerful and look awesome, and they fulfill neither requirement.

I didn't vote for them, but they were like 2nd or something for me too, again, no offending anyone, they're prolly fun when you've expanded, but their starting position would make me fall asleep..:shame: Even as AS I rarely manage to take even their border settlements, cos going any more south than Petra and Homna just... I don't have the patience:shame:

[Matinius Brutus]

Come on! That's the beauty of the game. You get many different styles of gameplay with EB factions. That's what saves me from getting bored with the game. Once I get bored from fighting with HAs I switch to Romani, then Getai, than Macedonia and so on. I have played Romani, Pahlava, Carhage, Epeiros, Luso, Getai, Hay and it is quite a different feeling with all of them. I love it. I actually await playing Saba, and I will do it after I get bored with the Romani.

[Mister V]

Well if sucking someone else's xyston is a "different style of play", then Saba are sure different...~:rolleyes:

[Kromulan]

That's funny . . . Saba was the first faction I played in EB. I figured their start position would give me time to learn the economics and new units in peace for a while. Both true. The other thing I learned from Saba was how to take down phalanxes with (statistically) weaker units. Once I learned that, I was able to use those tactics in my Getai game and SMASH the dolts with sticks.

As much as I dislike fighting phalanxes, I find nothing more annoying than having to try to maneuver the dolts myself, so I voted for all the phalanx users. You lot can keep the dolts with sticks.

[Marcus Ulpius]

I've voted Saba. They are just too far away from anything, their roster is poorer than most other factions and on their expansion they will meet phalanxes, phalanxes, phalanxes. Because of that last reason the 2-nd place for me were the Ptolies.

[Faramir D'Andunie]

Romani for me. Campaign is horribly easy for my tastes.

[Tiberius Claudius Marcellus]

Looks like the Saba are taking their much deserved early lead. Their starting position makes them almost impossible to expand out of Arabia due to lack of boats. The only time I ever did anything remotely successful with this faction was when the southern most Egyptian province revolted to my side. Luckily they had enough units to repel the Ptolie force and buy me enough time to build up factional MIC's.

That lasted about 10 years when a 1 1/2 stacks broke my back. The next time I attempted to get into Egypt was the long hard route through the Sinai desert and Bedouin units just don't hold their own against Successor armies.

[HunGeneral]

I voted Audei, Casse and Koinon Helennon.
Reasons:

Aedui - bad starting position, don't support their Ideals, I like Arverni better:laugh4:
Casse - never liked any briton factions, "relatively" bad units, Chariot generals :furious3::furious3::furious3:
Koinon Helennon - I could play them succesfully if I wanted but I don't like their Ideals, they seem to outdated for me, they dare defy the true Diadochi and Ally with the Ptolies:whip:

For Casse and KH - Ussually I prefer useful cavalry or effective skirmishers (to suport the infantry or win battles alone) but most of the time they lack them - not really my fighting style:no:

[Olaf Blackeyes]

I picked Casse, Ptolomaioi Makedon and the Romani.
Casse because they have a HORRIBLE starting position and crappy units.
The rest because i dont like any of those factions.

[seienchin]

Saba is just hillarious. Theyre good at archery and skirmishing and neither is usefull in EB so they incredibly suck.
But its good to have them as an AI Faction and honeslty Hazastan has the least atractivity to me. Just nothing about them really interests me and playing them is a never ending fight against the seleuks and that sucks too...:furious3:

[Dayve]

Sauromatae... Boring cities, boring units, boring generals, boring part of the map.

Saba... honestly, why are they even there?

Armenia... Impossible to defeat Seleukids without some form of cheating, even when you get horse archer armies there is never good terrain to use them on, hillmen may be ferocious but they are nothing against lines of mercenary pezhetairoi, of which the Seleukids have a never ending supply.

[Gabeed]

Aww, I love the Saba . . .

[Ibrahim]

I don't like playing the sauromatae. just plain boring IMO.

[athanaric]

Perhaps Sauromatae as they have the least variable unit roster and because they, when controlled by the human player, cannot build auxiliary MIC in regions that offer good recruiting possibilities :no:.


I second Kromulan's comment. Can't understand why Saba draws so much hate. I am currently playing a Saba campaign and hugely enjoying it. And this despite the fact that I hate deserts in RL and that I am traditionally more drawn to Hellenic, Barbarian or Persian factions.

Plyaing Saba is much like playing Swêboz or Lusotannan. Ya gotta be flexible. No possibility to hide behind phalanxes, legionaries or über-cavalry. Still I love their units and yes, all of their units are useful and are beautifully done.

Really, unlike in vanilla RTW (or in many other commercial games), all factions in EB are great.

[Mjolnir]

I'm not a huge fan of the nomadic factions, but my least favorite would be the Saba or Hayasdan.

[Ibrahim]

why don't people like saba? they have a decent roster (granted not the best), they can develop without the trouble from outside, they have challenging eleutheroi neighbors, and, once a ship is built, one can get across Africa and get good Aithiopeian archers and (perhaps elephants?)

Sauropmatae have a bland roster, and they lack the economic potential compared to saba to be honest.

that said, I do agree, all EB factions rule.

[athanaric]

why don't people like saba? they have a decent roster (granted not the best), they can develop without the trouble from outside, they have challenging eleutheroi neighbors, and, once a ship is built, one can get across Africa and get good Aithiopeian archers and (perhaps elephants?)


Yes, they get Elephants. At least in the Recruitment viewer. Plus, they only need factional MIC level 4, as the highest level doesn't produce any additional troops (maybe it was for the left-out Aithiopikon Agema or perhaps we will see Sabaean heavy cavalry in EB2?). And you can actually train the Ethiopian archers even in your starting province.

Sauromatae have the weakest economy in the game, so it isn't hard to beat them there.

[A Very Super Market]

I tend to dislike the bigger empires. Especially the Ptolemaioi, with their ridiculous easyness (The only truly financially secure faction in the beginning) Their numerous cities with crappy troops in all of them, it all seems unhistoric. The AS are better, for their sheer number of enemies, but Carthage has little room to expand, and Rome begins to go insanely easy after Marian. I like the smaller nation, like Baktria, Sweboz, and Casse. The only one I dislike are Getai, for their position, directly above the hellenes, having to slog through phalanx after phalanx, with no archer spam to help them out, or particularily good cavalry.

[Kromulan]

Umm. . . Market?
Getai get easy access to cheap HA and they have really cheap meat grinders that rip through phalanxes incredibly easily. . .
Dolts with sticks don't stand a chance.

[Nachtmeister]

Qart-Hadast...
Not because they are a boring faction per se (in fact their unit roster gives me a slight itch in my fingers, wanting to try them), but because - what's the point?
You start your campaign, you have already almost won the game. Blitz Roma and lay back while comfortably chewing on AS and Ptolemaioi and maybe some Eleutheroi.
I suppose this is intended so in order to provide a Campaign for newbies that is not as tedious as trying to conquer the entire historical roman empire.

Saba-haters - try them for once, you will find that you actually have no use for a ship before you can build one yourself. Just blitz the two territories adjacent to your starting position, then conquer your way up to the cape in the northeast, leaving one province between yourself and AS - by the time you've done that, you can already have a naval bay if you choose to. My Saba campaign was reeealy yummy until it got crashed to the windows desktop (what a horrible operating system).
Same with OS as is with TW, really: The commercial ones get heroically beaten by the idealist ones.

[Shylence]

I disliked my pontus and Saka campaigns simply because it was so hard.

Ive have retried them a few times but still fail to get a safe holding in which to expand beyond "regional power"

others i havent even tried to play. Usally the larger empires. Tried rome and got bored Im a big What If man.

[BurningEGO]

Generally speaking i do not properly like to play with "unwashed barbarians" as a previous poster said. Exception being the Lusitanians. These guys rock.

I also dislike Parthia simply because i was never a big fan of horse archers in RTW.

[Novellus]

Personally, the only downside for me when playing as Saba was the lack of any powerful units that could stand toe-to-toe with the Ptolemaioi. The Red Sea Hoplitai are very good though.

My choice for my least favorite would have to be the Casse. Their chariots are very difficult to work with, and they need to be constantly monitored as many things tend to go wrong when you don't watch them. But they are so fragile in my opinion, and in the beginning of the Casse campaign, losing soldiers is not an option. That includes family members on....chariots.

[Potocello]

I would have to choose the Arche Seleukia. Every time i play as them i get soo fed up with Baktria always taking my stuff. I find the massive empires like that hard to manage, at least at the beginning. I guess that's why i prefer the Greek factions because they are all tiny when they first start off.

I also get annoyed with how no one is happy around Pahlav and Baktria. And on top of that, fighting horse archers with phalangites really grinds my gears...

[kekailoa]

I don't like the Seleucids. They start out wayyyy too stretched out, and thier unit roster isn't enough heavy infantry for me. I mean, there are those fancy fish boys, but that's about it except for the phalanxes, which I despise.

What's all this hating on the Aedui? They're super fun to play.

[A Terribly Harmful Name]

Saba: never tried them. Well mostly not.
Casse: At first I was enthusiastic about their secure position and their woad painting. They probably field one of the crappiest infantry on the game and have next to no cavalry. They are far better than Saba though.
Sweboz: Probably the living realm of backwardness.
Lusotannan: Listening to the Q-Celtic voicemod just hurts my ears. No offense intended.

EDIT - Oh and I would have to add Carthage to the list: destroying them is far better than leading them. Baby killers.

[Cute Wolf]

1. Makedonia.... Totally screwed starting position with terribly hard reform condition. I played them sometime, but i find that they must get the Hysteric Phalanx (Pezhetairoi with chainmails) if they want to get a good game, the problem is I end up killing the Romaioi too soon (so I can't get the reform), or end up fighting a large Roman Empire..... (the Roman ai tend to become a large empire, or crumble early (and trash many reform condition - the passage of time or what... I forgot).... Even if not fight a Gaint Roman empire, I still have to fight countless horsemen from the north, the Spartans, and even suicidal Phyrrhos sieging Pella in the very second turn....

2. Arche Seleukia...... Too stretched and must lost some major battle delibrately to get cataphract reform... Usually end up using massive Pantodapoi (and Akontistai, Hoplitai haploi, and many crap units) army on garrison to keep my cities from rebelling... while only have 2 or 3 stack quality army for campaigning on 4 fronts!!! The only upside I found is they are challenging, but simply too hard and boring...:laugh4: I still like them more than Makedonia though... their elites are simply too good when I can got them...

[Ibrahim]

Yes, they get Elephants. At least in the Recruitment viewer. Plus, they only need factional MIC level 4, as the highest level doesn't produce any additional troops (maybe it was for the left-out Aithiopikon Agema or perhaps we will see Sabaean heavy cavalry in EB2?). And you can actually train the Ethiopian archers even in your starting province.

Sauromatae have the weakest economy in the game, so it isn't hard to beat them there.

actually, there won't be heavy cavalry. that is certain.

@all: IMHO, sabaean units are meant to fight with their wits as much as with their weapons and armor. I was able to win the sabaean victories against AS and ptolemaian armies with clever and cunning tactics. it was only the arrival of EB 1.0 that ended the saba campaign in question, which was by then a success (I captured jerusalem, damashq, Bostra, charax, babylon, and get this: Sleukeia, against a larger army). I still try to imitate the battle of Sleukeia-that was just brilliant.

[athanaric]

(...) but i find that they must get the Hysteric Phalanx (...)

And I thought there were no Screeching Women in EB...



Regarding Saba... Well in 1.1 I had to defend the city of Petra for years against the combined armies of AS and the Ptolemaioi (Yes they actually allied against me, nice, isn't it? Gotta love to fight against two superpowers at the same time). I was able to beat off their full stacks (including elite units) with relatively crappy Sabaean troops. After more than ten battles on the same location it gets annoying, though.


I agree with the notion that it can be less interesting to play a faction like AS, Ptolemaioi or Qarthadastim, because they more or less already have their empire at the start of the game. Somehow it is more fun to start with only one small province.

[BurningEGO]

I agree with the notion that it can be less interesting to play a faction like AS, Ptolemaioi or Qarthadastim, because they more or less already have their empire at the start of the game. Somehow it is more fun to start with only one small province.

It takes more skill to hold an empire, then creating one, though. Specially with multiple enemies in every side.

[Cute Wolf]

@ Athanaric
Hysteroi Pezhetairoi (Makedonian Reformed Heavy Phalanx)

sorry for calling them Hysteric Phalanx....:oops:

[Dayve]

It takes more skill to hold an empire, then creating one, though. Specially with multiple enemies in every side.

I could start a VH/M game right now as any faction that starts with an empire and win in 20 turns with my eyes closed... it doesn't take more skill at all.

Carthage is the easiest faction in the game, no doubt. You start with no enemies and your allies never attack you first, leaving you time to build up and able to produce superior units when they finally do.

Ptolemaioi start with enemies but immediately gain huge sums of money on turn 2 AND have the capability of producing high end units.

Seleukia is a little more difficult than the other starting empires i will grant you that, but using the old noodle you will hold on to every single province from the very first turn. Pantodapoi defeat the heaviest and most skilled Pahlavan cavalry as long as they fight them in cities.

[Marcus Ulpius]

Seleukia is a little more difficult than the other starting empires i will grant you that, but using the old noodle you will hold on to every single province from the very first turn. Pantodapoi defeat the heaviest and most skilled Pahlavan cavalry as long as they fight them in cities.

Exactly. The AI simply doesn't know how to lay siege properly. I was able to defend Massilia against elite stacks of Aedui heavy swordsmen with mostly locally recruited troops of Hellenic slingers, Celtic spearmen and very few legionary reinforcements. AI simply likes to wonder aimlessly around the walls while being devastated by projectiles from towers and easily getting caught in traps when his units get to the walls only to be attacked from two sides. I think it would be even easier with cavalry based army which tends to push through the gate despite freely flowing boiling oil.

[seienchin]

Qart-Hadast...
Not because they are a boring faction per se (in fact their unit roster gives me a slight itch in my fingers, wanting to try them), but because - what's the point?
You start your campaign, you have already almost won the game. Blitz Roma and lay back while comfortably chewing on AS and Ptolemaioi and maybe some Eleutheroi.
I suppose this is intended so in order to provide a Campaign for newbies that is not as tedious as trying to conquer the entire historical roman empire.


No thats completly not true.
First of all:
You start with only crappy troops,
Yout economy isnt that strong cause there are nearly no ports or other trading buildings,
Getting better troops takes incredibly long,
Your campain goal is not to built an empire, only to conquer spain,italy and parts of gaul,but its not as easy as it seems, cause you can only built Level 3 or 4 Governments in most of the parts of your kingdom.
And last but not least, rushing rome has no point. The roman empire contains several huge cities you just cant take at the beginning and they are incredibly fast at stackspamming, when threatend AND most of your Troops you can get the first 30turns are rubbish compared to romans.
Carthagos campain is impossible to loose (Well okay with alexander exe the romans tend to actually invade your islands so it might be harder) but winning it is kind of fun, mainly because your enemies have no Phalanxes :juggle2:

[SwissBarbar]

I have an Idea. Why just DON'T you blitz rome? you'll see, the game will become much more interesting

[Macilrille]

Dayve wrote, "I could start a VH/M game right now as any faction that starts with an empire and win in 20 turns with my eyes closed... it doesn't take more skill at all."


I would very much like to see that. In fact I throw down the gauntlet, 20 turns to win the game as ANY empire, with no cheats. That is five years...

If you do that I will want to take lessons and worship you as RTW God till the day I stop playing, and I will very much want to read the AAR;-)

20 turns, I simply cannot believe that and must see it with my own eyes.

[Nachtmeister]

I have an Idea. Why just DON'T you blitz rome? you'll see, the game will become much more interesting

Of that I am well aware - but compare them to something like KH where you are faced with blitz or die... This thread is about which faction I'd want to play least, not which faction sucks. With carthage I know I have the option to win very quickly -- @seienchin: Yes, even with crappy units -- and deliberately not doing so would feel strange.
But you have just convinced me to actually start a Karthadastim campaign after my current one just to see my point proven or disproven. :smash:

[seienchin]

It is impossible with the Carthagenian starting unit to conquer rome.
MAybe if you get all your Leaders together then but still... Its kind of ultra hard.

[Andronikos]

I voted for Getai, just because they aren't attractive for me. I know very little about them and they are not challenging like Pontos, Hayasdan or Saba.

I used to dislike factions that start with too many provinces, but I used to them.

[Shadowwalker]

@Davye:
Want to see you win on VH/M too.
Even if you are right that playing Qart'Hadastim is the easiest campaign in EB I bet you can't win legally in 20 turns.

And it's simply not true that the AI never attacks you first when playing Qart'Hadast.
Played several campaigns as them (in many variations: H/M, M/E :laugh4:, Rome.exe, BI.exe, EB 0.8x, EB 1.0, EB 1.1, EB 1.2,...) and got everytime attacked by Romans (on the islands or when taking Messana), Lusotannan (the came after ~100 turns if not earlier) or even Ptolemaioi (I like the rivers just in front of Lepki :laugh4: )

Oh, maybe I'm just silly again:
what is the "old noodle"? *looks sceptical*

[Cybvep]

I've chosen Ptolemaioi, Arche Seleukia and Sweboz, as those are the factions I've never played for more than few turns.

Playing as AS you must fight many small to medium battles per turn and it gets boring VERY fast. Also, your faction seems so totally underdeveloped when compared with any player- or AI-made empire in medium game that it becomes quite repellent. It's just a mess and because of lack of advanced internal policy it's not even a fun mess.

Ptolemaioi are very rich from the start (no fun from struggling to develop your faction at the start) and they get to fight with AS, which is not entertaining at all. Lack of any real diplomacy in RTW makes it impossible to stop the ongoing wars and most of the time you must fight very small stacks of poorly equipped enemies (the worst type of battles IMO...) or full elite stacks of phalanxes, which is TERRIBLE, as elite or experienced phalanxes in EBI are too hard to rout with infantry (good cavalry is too expensive to maintain in amounts larger than 1-2 unit(s)). It's both not realistic and not fun.

Sweboz are boring just because of one reason - they have no real enemies nearby, so creating an empire is a piece of cake.

Personally, I hope that those faction will be more entertaining to play in EB2, as it allow both for introduction of internal policy (AS), better strategic AI (Ptolemaioi, AS) and new factions that could challenge the Sweboz.

[antisocialmunky]

Really guys? You haven't played EB until you play as Saba.

[Kromulan]

Well, ONE of the complaints about Saba I sort of share. . . you can play the whole campaign through to victory and never get away from grey and yellow deaths.
Personally, I spiced things up a bit by marching up the east side of the map, conquering baktria along the way till I got to. . . SAKA. You just thought the Saba unit roster was overmatched by the dolts with sticks! Light, skirmisher-type troops do NOT do well vs all-HA armies, just FYI.
I managed, but it sure hurt.

[Ibrahim]

Really guys? You haven't played EB until you play as Saba.

amen.

@lromulan: get them into a tight area unsuited to horsearchers, and attack there. stay away from open terrain, and try to ambush them up close. it would hurt less. :wink:

[Cute Wolf]

Hiring out HA mercs is more practical ways for me...

[A Very Super Market]

Ah, my beloved Baktria has the least votes!

I think Saba isn't too hard a faction, just repetitive after a while with the phalanx upon phalanx coming after you. The AS and ptolies have no sense of diversity.

[Cute Wolf]

The Ptolies attack saba with one full stack of proper phalangites, while the AS will throw two or three stacks of Pantodapoi:laugh4: that's the diffrence in most of my game

[Tolg]

Hiring out HA mercs is more practical ways for me...


QFT

But, the other way around, I've a lot of fun hunting down unarmoured Saba in my Pahlava campaign.


BTW, I voted Saba as well. I think you'll understand after I tell what I hate in EB (in general, not about the Saba alone):

1) Infantry FMs
2) Phalangitai
3) Fighting Phalangitai
4) Regions without recruitable generals (e.g. Hellenic Mercenary General, Celtae Volorix)
5) Weakly armoured units
6) Factions with weak cavalry
7) Long distances


Now how many of those applie to Saba?

[BurningEGO]

The AS have no sense of diversity.

Doesnt Baktria have less units to choose from?

[A Very Super Market]

Baktria? Of all factions, Baktria is possibly the most diverse. Course, I mean the AI of AS. It just tends to spam native spearmen or phalanx.

[Tolg]

Baktria? Of all factions, Baktria is possibly the most diverse.

It's like the description on the EB site (https://www.europabarbarorum.com/factions_baktria_units.html) says:


In fact, should India be subjugated and the Baktrian homelands be secured, the Baktrian king can have access to any unit type there is, except elite pikemen.


Edit: Can Bactria recruit chariots?

[A Terribly Harmful Name]

The least diverse faction is probably Aedui\Arverni: all they do is to spam Lugoae with the occasional Bataroas and the very rare Leuce Epos.

[antisocialmunky]

Baktria? Of all factions, Baktria is possibly the most diverse. Course, I mean the AI of AS. It just tends to spam native spearmen or phalanx.

Honestly I would argue Saka for diversity. Though Baktra comes close.

@BtE - I usually get stacks of Gaestae and short swordsmen.

[BurningEGO]

Baktria? Of all factions, Baktria is possibly the most diverse. Course, I mean the AI of AS. It just tends to spam native spearmen or phalanx.

Nevermind, i thought you were refering to the unique units available to each nation. Because if AS owns Baktria, they can recruit basically the same native troops...

[Olaf Blackeyes]

Sweboz are boring just because of one reason - they have no real enemies nearby, so creating an empire is a piece of cake.

Maybe so but in order to win u gotta take DOWN the only challenging AI in the game, the SUPOR-INDIES!!!! U know those fullstack, golden, elite unit celts with the 10 star generals that also respawn after u defeat them the NEXT turn?
Yea once u beat down one of the demon-stacks u can say the Sweboz r boring and too easy.:furious3::furious3::furious3::furious3:

[Mister V]

Actually I just played Sweboz and taking those settlements is a piece of cake. Just have a spy infiltrate the settlement and open the gates, take a large army with lots of archers and rush. I found Sweboz easy and relaxing (in the beginning at least, I didn't have to deal with any Roman stack spams or whatever).

[CaesarAugustus]

I voted Casse, I just did not find them fun to expand beyond the British Isles... I think it has something to do with my phobia of ahistorical expansion. The same goes for al lot of the barbarian factions... once out of their "homeland" where native troops can be recruited, I find them unrewarding to play. That being said, I appreciate the countless time and effort the EB team has put into all the factions... and few things are more fun than fighting the imperialist Gauls, Carthaginians, and Romans out of native Iberia in a Lusotana campaign! :charge:

[Fluvius Camillus]

I was considering an AS campaign, this really discourages me! Let's conquer the whole world with Pontos then:laugh4:

[BurningEGO]

Dont be fooled by that advise! AS is still one of the most challenging factions to play... War with Egypt, constant nuisance in the east, and Pontos/Greeks sneaking in anatolia, are just a few features you have to handle as the Seleucid Empire.

The only problem is the absurd lack of cash, which forces a person to fight with craptacular troops.

[soup_alex]

That's it, I'm afraid I'll have to vote Ptolemaiois after all (even though it looks like the Romani will attempt to twist the arm of the Lusotann into breaking the peace in Iberia; bring it on, says I) because they're the latest faction to stab me in the back (and how!). Not only have they landed in my territory with a large stack of phalangitai and heavy peltastai (which I should have anticipated far earlier, I suppose, but folornly hoped that they would respect the peace), they've managed to keep our (once mutual) allies on their side, so it looks as though their Triple Alliance (Epeiros, KH and Ptolemaioi) will stand for some time: I just hope that Makedon (restricted to Lesbos and one other island) and Seleukia (still large, but condending with a united league of the other diadochi, and for some reason the Arverni in Mikra Asia) ...can hold out.

Hamalcar, son of Hamalcar (the Shophet) is currently combing the desert in search of any mercenaries whatsoever while Nuraghi and Libyan spearmen hold the fort at Cyrene.

[edit: WHOOPS just realised that this isn't actually the "most irritating AI faction" thread. Good thing I didn't formally vote?]

[A Very Super Market]

The Arverni are in Mikra Asia for the Galatians. Search 'em up, they're basically Gauls in Turkey. If Ankyra revolts, it will go to the Arverni automatically. Speaking of that, I don't like the Arverni either. They're generally more reasonable than the Aedui, but they tend to do worse and overextend the Aedui, letting the Sweboz take over all of Gaul.

[soup_alex]

The Arverni are in Mikra Asia for the Galatians. Search 'em up, they're basically Gauls in Turkey. If Ankyra revolts, it will go to the Arverni automatically. Speaking of that, I don't like the Arverni either. They're generally more reasonable than the Aedui, but they tend to do worse and overextend the Aedui, letting the Sweboz take over all of Gaul.
Aye, I've been made aware of the Galatians, though I didn't know that Ankyra would revolt to Arverni control (to be honest, the concept of a settlement undergoing revolt returning to a "living faction's" control rather than going Rebel/Independent is new to me. I'd wondered why the Romani were always being kicked out of Taras by Epeiros while my spies could never get the Eleutheroi to take it, and I'd just guessed that Ankyra was just a weird instance of AI factions tributing odd regions to each other. Shame.)

Thanks for clearing that up, AVSM :book:

[A Very Super Market]

Yep, its grouped into cultural groups. Steppe towns will go to the steppe factions, a few of the present-day Jordanian towns go to Saba, Ankyra (Obviously) goes to Arverni, and you can guess most of the rest.

[BurningEGO]

Explains why the hell Saba got Sinai and attacked me with a full stack early in the game (i was playing with Seleucids), while they didnt even get out of their starting province!

[Nachtmeister]

It really depends on what sort of building the governor's house is - and with eleutheroi cities, the culture type will sometimes change: In Nikaia, Bithynia, north-western Mikra Asia, the governor's house at the start of the game is of western greek culture. This means that the city would, if conquered by pontus and then immediately swamped by a full stack of spies from assorted rival factions, revolt and join either Makedonia, Epeiros or the KH (it is actually a specific *one* of them but which one I do not know because it never actually happened in one of my games). But the eleutheroi MIC in Nikaia is not of western Greek culture: It is Thraikian. So if the city grows while remaining in the hands of the eleutheroi, it will at some point expand and become a barbarian city with the corresponding governor's residence and outer appearance...

[artaxerxes]

AS can be extremely challenging. I remember when I first played EB, I started with AS, cos they're my favourites from that part of history. And then when I later tried other factions, I couldn't believe how EASY they were - I mean, I suddenly had MONEY, I suddenly wasnt fighting FIVE other factions AT ONCE:oops: Actually, my biggest complaint against AS (which isn't something the EB team should correct since it's completely historically correct and the ancient Seleucids probably agree with me) is that as AS you never get a moment's peace ;) ... at least not at my level of ability:juggle2:

[BurningEGO]

You will get a moment of peace... when you kill all your neighbours. Teach em not to mess with the badies.

[artaxerxes]

Hehe, I always start by blizting Ptolemaioi. While I fight them, Pahlava usually invade me, but I manage to hold them off. Then, just as Ptolemaioi is destroyed, Pontus AND Baktria invade me. Then I can't afford to go on the offense in the east, so I try to slowly defeat Pontus. Then, JUST as I manage that, Hayasdan strike directly into the heart of Mesopotamia. Then I have to use so many resources getting them out again, that Baktria and Pahlava win some settlements in the east. Then, just as I've gotten Hayasdan out of Mesopotamia, and I've stopped the Baktria/Pahlava offensive - though without retaking the settlements, they just took - then Maks have only Mytilene left, so they besiege Sardes, while the KH take Halicarnassos and Pergamum and start a very aggressive war against me. And at this point, I still haven't gotten enough money to buy ANYTHING other than troops to use for defense.
Then I usually get exhausted and start playing the Getai, and fall off my chair in amazement, when it turns out how much peace and time for preparation I have there.

Btw I'm sure my AS strategy is faulty, no need to tell me:clown:. Of course it is, since it never goes very well:wall::laugh4:

[BurningEGO]

You have to get a solid front in the east first, before doing any real offensive against Egypt. I am playing VH/VH and i got the same problems. When i kill Egypt, Saba and Pontus attack me. And when i am almost killing Pontus... Armenia invades and Greece lands a full stack in anatolia... heh. The trick to the east is killing Pahlava at the start, and taking Baktra to deny Baktrian expansion to the south.

Getting 15000 a turn, with expenses being taken in consideration, and i have only managed to build mines and muster troops. I really wish i could move my capital to the mediterannean since it would really boost my income (lot of corruption there), but then my eastern-most provinces would start rebeliing.

Seleucids got a real interesting unit roster, but seriously, with such craptacular economy, and so many enemies, one has to fight with all crappy units. I really dislike the Ptolies because they are really easy to play, but since their unit roster is pretty similar to that of the Seleucids, i have been considerating such a campaign. Although i believe they do not posess the kickassing elephants that i love (the armored ones).

[Fluvius Camillus]

Everybody loves Baktria:beam:

I should probably start a Baktria campaign after this one.

[Ibrahim]

Everybody loves Baktria:beam:

I should probably start a Baktria campaign after this one.

4 people don't actually.

[soup_alex]

I should probably start a Baktria campaign after this one.
Same here, when I complete/get sick of my current campaign, I think I'm going to fix my install so that it actually uses the 1.2 patch, and play Baktria (or AS, I'm mostly keen on having access to Indian troops).

[Vasiliyi]

I voted Sarmatiou (something) just cuz i dont like horse archer factions.
On a second note, careful with flaming AS. Being my second favorite faction As has an extremely difficult position to start out with, but if you survive the first 3-5 years of non stop battles with tiny armies you CAN hold of Pahlava and Ptolemia. (on hard/med) Ive done it.

[Rilder]

Sauromotte, Saka, AS, and pahavla.

I don't like starting big and I hate using horses for anything except support.

[Onehandstan]

The Seleukids have never really appealled to me, the whole idea of RTW is to build up an empire from humble beginnings, what's the point if you start with a hug piece of land and mighty cities without earning them?

[A Very Super Market]

Mostly the fact that the majority of those great cities are unstable and under attack.

[BurningEGO]

Its just like playing Barbarian Invasion as the Romans, but in a much worse condition.

[Onehandstan]

I don't have much urge to play a europ0ean faction at the moment, in all my time playing RTW or EB I have never moved from near to the mediterranean and I will go for a change in my next campaign, maybe Saka...

[glouch]

actually, i found AS to be really easy because i gave up all of my provinces east of mesopotamia. after that i was easily able to build up my economy and amass a HUGE treasury (at one point, i had close to 2 million mnai). it's cheating, i know, but then after that i conquered alexandria and memphis and forced the ptolemaioi to accept protectorate status (offer them at least 1 million mnai, they'll give it back the next turn anyway), did the same to pontus (i left them only amaseia) and then conquered all of the aegean (protectorate status to koinon hellenon[left w/ sparta], epeiros[ambrakia], makedonia[serdike]). after that i imposed a protectorate on hayasdan to secure my northern border. then i assembled an army of 4 argyrapidai, 3 persian archers, 2 thorakitai, 1 hypaspistai, 2 hetairoi, 2 kataphraktoi, 4 prodromoi, and 2 lonchophoroi. then i embraked on a glorious reconquest of all the eastern provinces that i let go (i beat the crap out of the pahlava that took over nearly all of persia after i left), mowed through baktria and a southern city of saka, then went down to conquer through the eastern fringe of india to the sea. \:D/ then i boarded a fleet and sailed back to charax, and then to antiocheia. so i guess it's fair because i reconquered and added to the lost territories. :)

[soup_alex]

Just started a Casse campaign today after becoming too frustrated with Baktria (relentless attacks from AS, and those f***ing Saka Armoured Nobles which can't be killed, much less caught :furious3:)

...the frustration of staving off the regular attacks from TURBOCATAHORSEARCHERS and everything AS managed to bribe out of my own army is nothing compared to attempting to even survive two years as Casse (this fleet costs HOW much in upkeep? Field armies alone are sucking up more than double what our only settlement can make on maximum taxation, and we're faced on every side by sea or independent armies with better generals, troops, numbers and equipment (and that's before you take into account that the 3+ armies of this type that threaten you are essentially fighting for the same "team"), not to mention the inevitable randomly-spawning brigands. I'm surprised I even had the patience to wait long enough to see if my three crappy chariot-riding FMs could hope to defend against a few hundred Caledonian skirmishers (HAHA no)).

It can't be done.

[A Very Super Market]

Pffft. Casse have nothing against Hayasdan and Pontos. My advice would be to start over, and blitz the nearest town. Disband that navy. After you take it, disband any troops that don't have experience. Then wait a while, build roads, and after a few years, you will be able to support a big army without going into too much debt.

[Tollheit]

I did start various Casse campaigns in my EB career.

First time I did what A Very Super Market recommended above, and it worked well.
Second time I did not disband my army at all (I disbanded the navy though), and that approach worked as well.
In two campaigns I tried a pacifist approach and did not attack at all, but tried to build up my town and trade and bribe the Eleutheroi.
First time it worked fabulously, second time I got attacked by Caledonians just like soup_alex, and just like him I had nothing but 3 Casse FM's. Those "crappy" charioteers made Caledonian mincemeat. Results: see below.

https://i276.photobucket.com/albums/kk4/Tollheit/casseftw1.jpg?t=1235706340

https://i276.photobucket.com/albums/kk4/Tollheit/casseftw.jpg?t=1235705289

[Decimus]

Mine is Saba. They are stuck in a corner of the map and cant train heavy enough troops for my taste.

If only the Romani were difficult to play as.

[the man with no name]

Elutheroi.

[seienchin]

Its just like playing Barbarian Invasion as the Romans, but in a much worse condition.
:juggle2::juggle2:
I think they are both the easiest campains I ever played...:egypt:

[waydog98]

i nominate ptolemaioi cause i ve never played them because ive heard how easy it is nd i dont like empires but for the hardest to play it probably would be baktra or pontos or hayadan beacause of the same reason... the silver death nd there realentless stacks

[DeathFinger]

I vote for Khartadashim. I think they're really well placed, and can continue to extend themself very easily, and what I like is difficult positions and when your neighbours laugh on you like "hahaha do you want some sugars? Good dog ^^", like Hayasdan and Pontos. :sweatdrop:
In fact I think I will never really play with SPQR too, for the same reasons and because... well I'm pro-hellenistic ( my fault :laugh4:). Both are great empires, but I want to create mo own :p
And they both miss some good axes, oohh I like it :yes: