View Full Version : The faction you could never handle
Gilrandir
02-10-2016, 10:22
In all my years of campaigning I have tried almost all factions in MTW proper and VI (not the Polish though, but they are on my to-do list one of these days). The only faction that I never could see through is Northumbrians. Started playing them 4 or 5 times - lost all of them. Sometimes the neighbors strangled me, other times neigbors and a civil war did me in; in my last campaign it was two civil wars combined with encroaching Saxons and Irish. The faction seems cursed.
Others are welcome to share their bitter experience and offer (and hope to get) advice on how to break the spell.
Trapped in Samsara
02-10-2016, 14:27
Hi
I never manged to get anywhere with Aragon in Early. Too small and too many predatory neighbours.
Best regards
V
Sapere aude
Horace
Gilrandir
02-10-2016, 16:36
Hi
I never manged to get anywhere with Aragon in Early. Too small and too many predatory neighbours.
Best regards
V
Sapere aude
Horace
Playing Aragon I usually tried to capture Navarra at once, and then Valencia with El Cid. It is true, though, that I started in High.
The Welsh,Scottish,French,Polish and Egypt.
In VI, for me, it was the Mercians. The Saxons have better units at the beginning and they'd snuff me out in the first few turns.
In MTW, Aragon and the HRE gave me fits.
In RTW, I could never win with the Gauls.
The Welsh,Scottish,French,Polish and Egypt.
Egypt!? Really!? It has one of the best place to start and a lot of rich provinces around. One of the easiest factions for me.
Gilrandir
02-11-2016, 13:50
The Welsh,Scottish,French,Polish and Egypt.
I found Scottish surprisingly easy. The most difficult time was when I played tug of war with Picts. By the time I moved down to deal with huscarl-rich southern factions I had teched up to have titles that give stars and - very importantly - captured Reget - its governor receives two stars. Then handling Saxons and Mercians doesn't seem so hard - pin the huscarls with armored spearmen and flank them with clansmen. Northumbrians are even easier to subdue - in all my VI campaigns they teched up to training huscarles only once - too poor to afford them.
Stazi .I kept on getting disloyal generals who would turn and the Turks would move in on one of my lands.I do enjoy playing them
Gilrandir .The same as a above and using highlanders vs the Picts I found them not be great.I found with Scots you need mounted units.There could be a better tactics in the strat form but never read it yet.
@Stazi (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/member.php?u=30016) .I kept on getting disloyal generals who would turn and the Turks would move in on one of my lands.I do enjoy playing them
.
Just put your low loyalty generals into the stacks of better ones or into your king's stack. Only general commanding a stack can be disloyal and behave improperly. ;)
Gilrandir
02-13-2016, 18:15
[MENTION=59831]Gilrandir .The same as a above and using highlanders vs the Picts I found them not be great.I found with Scots you need mounted units.There could be a better tactics in the strat form but never read it yet.
Improtant thing is to have generals (or princes) with 4 or more stars to give more valor to the troops. Without it I'm afraid the best army can't fight long and will rout.
Just put your low loyalty generals into the stacks of better ones or into your king's stack. Only general commanding a stack can be disloyal and behave improperly. ;)
Or keep the generals separately from the stack or disband the general's unit.
Learned that the hard way when my seemingly decent army was annihilated by a rebel mainly highlander army with a many-starred general. For the longest time, I was afraid to fight them with my Northumbrian armies because they tore up my cavalry and armored troops so badly (I think it took something like four or five battles until they were finally defeated). Then I played as the Scots and had a WTF moment the first time I used them and they were cut to pieces.
I do like playing Egypt as i like the music reminds me of Xena when she traveled to the mid east.
Cyprian2
02-24-2016, 05:03
I agree with OP Gilrandir. Playing as the darn Northumbrians is the equivalent of self-flagellation. Even if you manage to conquer a decent amount of provinces, it takes so long to tech up properly (as compared to Saxons and Mercians), you are forever prey to the Vikings raiding your coastal provinces, and your treasury is in constant deficit. For me, the Northumbrians are the campaign that got away -- the one I aspire to win, but fear I never will...
Gilrandir
02-24-2016, 09:24
I agree with OP Gilrandir. Playing as the darn Northumbrians is the equivalent of self-flagellation. Even if you manage to conquer a decent amount of provinces, it takes so long to tech up properly (as compared to Saxons and Mercians), you are forever prey to the Vikings raiding your coastal provinces, and your treasury is in constant deficit. For me, the Northumbrians are the campaign that got away -- the one I aspire to win, but fear I never will...
Vikings were never a problem for me. Since the Northumbrians have a bishop I send him in the first three turns of the campaign to get an alliance with Vikings. Usually they accept and they are good at keeping their word. In fact, I noticed that factions of VI are better at keeping their alliances - I mean they seldom attack their ally. And Viking are a paragon of an ally in this respect.
As for impecunity of the Northumbrians - well, it is bothersome, but my last campaign was a disaster when I was pretty well off. One just has to start producing ships and the trade income would become a steady inflow. Besides, having ships along your coasts is a protection if Viking suddenly decide to go berserk.
In the main campaign, it's the Turks that I've always particularly struggled with. (Note: I start my games in the Early period.) Starting as a landlocked faction means you're pretty much forced to go to war early on, and both the Byz nor the Eggies are fairly tough customers (albeit for slightly different reasons). In addition, I've admittedly never been the most adept at handling mounted missile cavalry in battle, which makes up a good percentage of the Turks' unit roster -- more so than any other faction in the game.
In the VI campaign, the Scots and Picts have both always been difficult for me. Poor starting lands, neither faction has a great unit roster (although Clansmen make for nice, cheap flankers early on), and both factions have to worry about the other one -- it's only a matter of time before they end up having to duke it out for supremacy of northern Britain.
Playing Aragon I usually tried to capture Navarra at once, and then Valencia with El Cid. It is true, though, that I started in High.
Yep, grabbing Navarre early and bribing Cid (when possible) and using him to take Valencia is key when playing as Aragon. If you can accomplish this, however, you'll have a decent base from which to to build on for further expansion.
In VI, for me, it was the Mercians. The Saxons have better units at the beginning and they'd snuff me out in the first few turns.
Really?? Astonishing. The Mercians have long been my favorite faction in the VI campaign (with the Irish being a strong second). Their starting lands are rich enough to allow me to maintain a decent-sized army early on (which helps in discouraging aggressive neighbors), whilst still developing my provinces. As for the Saxons, they're generally too busy fending off Viking raids to bother me much.
I've been able to win with the Mercians, quite easily once (if) pass the beginning of the game, but for some reason, by turn three, the Saxons are always on me, diplomacy or not.
Trapped in Samsara
04-07-2016, 15:16
Hi
I'm currently at around 1330 in my vanilla VI, Polish, Hard, Early, Glorious Achievements campaign, and it's been a SLOG, I can tell you. I've only recently gotten 'round to building my first citadel. Money has been tighter than a falsetto's y-fronts! Every florin has had to be coaxed into my treasury, husbanded attentively, and I practically wept as I had to sign the 4K florin cheque to upgrade Krakow castle to a fortress. (Required for the Jagiellonian Cathedral GA.)
My empire consists of Scandinavia, modern Poland and eastern Germany, the Baltic states, western-most Russia, and a corridor of Balkan provinces down to the Black Sea. I do have a 'hinterland' of lightly garrisoned provinces which produce a surplus to support the large armies in my border provinces, and allow for some slow and carefully considered development outlays. I also have some sea trade from my Baltic provinces: Sweden and Lithuania are quite decent cash cows.
However, there hasn't been a decade when I haven't been at war with one or two AI factions big enough and well-resourced enough to smash me. So far I have seen off the English, the French, HRE, Byzantium, Hungary, the Danes, and the Peeps of Novgorod. The biggest threats were the English and, predictably, the Mongols.
Re the latter, I rough counted the invasion force at 20K troops. They still hold a couple of provinces in Russia and are trading blows with the Egyptians. I proudly claim to be the Sword and Shield of Christendom: I did not lose a single province for even a single year to them heathen baskets! That said, my companies of Armoured Spearmen, Crossbowmen and Mounted Sergeants suffered horrific casualties in a couple of seriously near run thing battles in Volhynia.
My current strategic quandary is this: if I can just hold onto what I've got I'll *probably* finish the campaign with more GA points than any other faction. BUT, and it's a big but, either the Almohads or the Egyptians could conceivably overtake me. Practically all my sea trade is with Almo ports along the Atlantic and north western coast of Europe, and the Almos own all of Iberia, the three western provinces on the African coast, all of modern France and the Low Countries. They are at war with what's left of the Spanish in England, and they've recently invaded Italy and discomforted the Pope.
Bottom line: the Almos are currently too big for me to go to war with, and my finances would be wrecked if I lost the trade income. As it is I’m making a profit of, say, 600 florins a year. I.e., barely in the black.
As for the Eggies, they own all of the rest of North Africa, the Levant, practically all of Turkey including Constantinople, and quite a few of the Russian Steppe and Caucasus provinces. They have two four-stack armies on my southern border and much better generals than me. I could probably take out one or other of these armies, but I have no confidence I can defeat them both.
So my dilemma is: do I sit tight, behave passively, hold to my existing borders, and hope that neither the Almos nor the Eggies rack up so many conquest points that they overtake me? (And maybe they'll suffer the imperial overstretch syndrome and implode, which seems unlikely.) Or do I try to roll one of them - probably the Egyptians - back to a more easily defended frontier (from my point of view), and then focus all my energies on the other. I dunno the answer to that question. The Council of State is vacillating. I have, however, sent a couple of barque flotillas on a decade-long cruise to the Black Sea. Once there they'll join up with flotillas to be produced in Moldavia and I hope to be able to interdict Egyptian troop movements across the Black Sea. That should give me a fighting chance of out-producing them in the Balkan theatre if we do come to blows.
One other thing: my kings have been crap. I mean real dregs of the gene pool rubbish. Not one of them up to snuff. We're talking wouldn't-be-allowed-out-unaccompanied retards.
I reckon I've played at least a couple of dozen MTW campaigns (various mods, as well as vanilla, always from Early). And I know that I've lost two. But in terms of 'still tough 250-odd years in' this one takes the biscuit.
MTW: such a great game!
Best regards
V
Sapere aude
Horace
hmmm. interesting. could u share images?
how many ship u have, how many Eggy and Almo?
I guess they attack u probly first with ships.
Do u have any island in Mediterrenean?
The bigger the empire, the more likely it goes into revolution. Many a game looked like I was stuck then, boom, chaos in the neighboring empire. Waiting might be key but going after Egypt probably more fun.
PS - currently playing Med II - a few things like movement, fighting on the walls, and how the Pope is handled I like better but they truly dumbed it down; I miss revolutions, six month turns (each season is two years! - give me a break!), returning kingdoms when a "lost" heir returns, and new AI kingdoms (Switzerland, Burgendy, etc.). The Mongols still follow you all over the map though - would have been nice to fix that.
Gilrandir
04-09-2016, 04:57
Before taking a choice who to attack you should take into account other factors:
- vices and virtues of the generals who lead the armies you are likely to fight (what if you are luky and some of them have "a good runner" vice);
- the quality of troops in the respective armies (what if they contain lots of peasants);
- the valor of navies you are likely to fight (what if yours have more);
- whether those two factions are allies (if yes one of them can attack you after you attack the other).
Moreover, you can try to create a decent general (at least one) in the prospective theater: take the one with the most command and make him a governor of a province which gives stars (preferably two) plus give him titles which also incur stars (preferably two).
Hope those pieces of advice will be helpful.
Gilrandir
04-09-2016, 04:58
I miss revolutions, six month turns (each season is two years! - give me a break!), returning kingdoms when a "lost" heir returns, and new AI kingdoms (Switzerland, Burgendy, etc.).
Classical MTW also has Switzerland - but only in Late.
Burgendy can appear in (very) late too.
Exactly! As far as I can tell, MTW-II lacks both of them.
Gilrandir
04-10-2016, 06:03
Burgendy can appear in (very) late too.
Never saw it happen. What should be done to see it?
Never saw it happen. What should be done to see it?
AFAIK Burgundy and/or surrounding provinces have to be independent or low happiness if controlled by a faction. The same conditions as for reappearing of any other faction but probability is much lower. It happened once or twice for me but I rarely play in late.
In order for Burgundy or Switzerland to appear, loyalty in those provinces needs to be under 120%. (And of course, it must be the right period; if memory serves, Burgundy can't show up until High, and Switzerland not until Late.)
For any dead faction to re-emerge, there are two conditions that must be met:
1.) Similar to above, there has to be a loyalty rating below 120% in a province once owned by that faction. (Those of you have played MTW long enough will know this can occasionally cause factions to reemerge in strange locations at times -- I could tell you tales of the French being reborn in Antioch, the Byzantines in Sicily, and the Almos showing up in England!)
2.) At the time of the faction's original destruction, there must be a male heir who had not yet come of age (so he'd have to be under 16 when his faction was destroyed), and could still be alive at the time of the faction's reemergence. So if 90+ years has passed without a faction reemerging, you can pretty much guarantee it's not going to, as I don't think I've ever heard of a faction leader living past his 70's (maybe early 80's?).
So my dilemma is: do I sit tight, behave passively, hold to my existing borders, and hope that neither the Almos nor the Eggies rack up so many conquest points that they overtake me? (And maybe they'll suffer the imperial overstretch syndrome and implode, which seems unlikely.) Or do I try to roll one of them - probably the Egyptians - back to a more easily defended frontier (from my point of view), and then focus all my energies on the other. I dunno the answer to that question. The Council of State is vacillating. I have, however, sent a couple of barque flotillas on a decade-long cruise to the Black Sea. Once there they'll join up with flotillas to be produced in Moldavia and I hope to be able to interdict Egyptian troop movements across the Black Sea. That should give me a fighting chance of out-producing them in the Balkan theatre if we do come to blows.
Just to muddy the advice waters a little further ( :rolleyes: )...
One other thing I'd point out is that rather like the Byzantines, the Almos' have a strong unit roster in the Early period, but they gradually become outclassed by most of the other factions' as the game progresses. Given you're now in the campaign's Late period, it's highly likely that you can produce better-quality army units than the Almos at this point.
I don't know if that's enough of a factor for you to consider going after them instead of the Eggies, but I would've been remiss if I hadn't at least pointed it out.
One other thing: my kings have been crap. I mean real dregs of the gene pool rubbish. Not one of them up to snuff. We're talking wouldn't-be-allowed-out-unaccompanied retards.
Do you have any princes who are even halfway-decent? After all, even kings suffer accidents now and then -- or (failing that) they sometimes launch an overseas attack, but the rest of the army/fleet somehow gets separated from him and/or never leaves port... ~D
I reckon I've played at least a couple of dozen MTW campaigns (various mods, as well as vanilla, always from Early). And I know that I've lost two. But in terms of 'still tough 250-odd years in' this one takes the biscuit.
MTW: such a great game!
Best regards
V
Sapere aude
Horace
Great to see you're enjoying it so much. :2thumbsup: There's no question the Polish are one of the more difficult factions to play; it's definitely one worth checking out for those that enjoy a long-term challenge (as you've discovered)!
With the Mongols, I've found them rather easy to defeat with time. They can't replace their best units so one just has to wear them down and that is easy if you fight in woods. Their cavalry can be defeated there and their arrows do little damage. The woodsmen are a cheap way to cut down the heavy Mongol horse in the woods (with high losses but that the cheap part). Come to think of it, THAT's another thing I miss since moving to II - the woods in II seem to have little affect. Well, I already owned it so had to try it. I hear III is being worked on - maybe it'll be more (1)-like.
Yeah, woods are definitely your friend when it comes to fighting the Mongols (or against any other cavalry-heavy faction for that matter). I always feel for the poor Woodsmen I send to the slaughter, but there's no denying they're a cost-effective way of dealing with the GH's heavy horse.
Similarly, river battles are your friend when going up against the Mongols, especially when there's only one crossing to defend. When the Horde appears, I'll often abandon a province or two if I'm able to retreat to a river province (Kiev is well situated for this), just because it makes for that much better a line of defense.
Trapped in Samsara
04-12-2016, 09:59
I hear III is being worked on - maybe it'll be more (1)-like.
Really!? Can you provide a link, please?
Best regards
V
Sapere aude
Horace
Trapped in Samsara
04-12-2016, 10:30
Hi
Re combating cavalry-heavy armies 'on the cheap', I find that Militia Sergeants are reasonably effective when deployed in woods, even against MHC. They need to be under the command of a decent, say four-star general, or e.g. a 'natural leader' or some such, for the morale uplift, however. Otherwise they're just too flaky to be relied upon, even when you micromanage them tactically to safeguard their flanks, etc.
Re how to handle the Mongols strategically, yes, rivers and attrition are the MTW player's best friends. That said, even several decades after 1232 (I think that's the year the Mongols show up) in my current Polish campaign I was coming up against multi-stack Mongol armies that were able to field 6/8/10 full strength MHC companies which made withstanding the first wave's shock assault a bit of a crapshoot. Will my Armoured Spearmen hold back the ferocious onslaught before the casualty count makes one or more of my companies break? Will I be able to plug any gaps? You know what I mean: if your finances are perennially tight, so your troop class and upgrades development have been heavily restricted, you're always going to be vulnerable when facing an opponent with a strong shock and melee capability.
Best regards
V
Sapere aude
Horace
Really!? Can you provide a link, please?
Best regards
V
Sapere aude
Horace
Nothing's been confirmed; at this point, all we have are rumors. A month or two ago I read that supposedly the (quite enjoyable) Age of Charlemagne DLC for Attila served as a sort of test-bed/precursor for Medieval III, but that's the extent of my "knowledge".
Personally, I won't believe Med3 is the next TW title in development unless/until it's officially announced by CA/Sega (although it would be very welcome news). Until then, I'm prepared for the next game (after Warhammer) to still be anything.
Glad you replied; I couldn't remember where I read it (although, in that thread, I got the impression that it was in development). I'll look around a bit - I'm even more curious now; had to be here or the official site as they're the only ones possible for me.
EDIT: No luck; I think it was in the Rome section because I remember stating something like, "MTW-III!!? - I haven't even played II yet :) ).
I would love to go try some but can't play it anymore miss it.
Hi
I never manged to get anywhere with Aragon in Early. Too small and too many predatory neighbours.
Best regards
V
Sapere aude
Horace
They're one of my favorites. Actually its not so difficult. The English and French will eventually be too busy with themselves to bother with Aragon. So your northern border is pretty secure.
Your choice is Either go after the Spanish or the Almohads. Go after the Spanish is easier as they only have two provinces but, you will hear from the Pope. Excommunication means your Northern flank/eastern coast becomes vulnerable because even the Genoans (I play Viking horde mod ) can invade and make things very complicated.
So you take Navarre, then Valencia and the Almohads. Always take axe troops to bridge battles. So you should have halbs in your mix. Hopefully the Spanish will take Cordoba and help you eradicate the Moors from the peninsula. Another problem is , the Spanish can stab you in the back and invade Aragon, or if you ally with them, you won't be able to attack them to get the rest of the peninsula. Its like a chess match, I stay neutral to them.
Against the Almohads, I use only CMAA's and Halbs. You only need Spears for heavy cavalry and the Moors cavalry isn't really that heavy. Not made for western battles. Usually I end up shoving them back to Morocco and then its a long protracted naval war while I improve my new provinces. Against the Spanish, its CSgts and Halbs. A couple archers for the Jinettes , I don't use too many cavalry, too easy to lose.
Just curious; why can't you attack them if allied? Dog-gone AI did it to me practically every time.
Trapped in Samsara
04-18-2016, 10:04
They're one of my favorites. Actually its not so difficult.
Hmmm... Are you sure you are talking about Aragon in Early? (The troop types you are referencing do not 'fit' with the early game. And my 'problem' with Aragon is surviving and developing satisfactorily during the first five decades or so.)
Also, my Aragon experiences were in vanilla VI. The faction could be faced with a significantly different situation in the mod you play.
Best regards
V
Sapere aude
Horace
Gilrandir
04-18-2016, 10:23
Just curious; why can't you attack them if allied? Dog-gone AI did it to me practically every time.
Kind of code of honor. I also try to follow it most of the time. Plus they say your king may lose some of his influence and consequently your generals may become less loyal and more prone to rebel.
Just curious; why can't you attack them if allied? Dog-gone AI did it to me practically every time.
I wondered why can't cross their territory instead of going around them.
Against the Almohads, I use only CMAA's and Halbs. You only need Spears for heavy cavalry and the Moors cavalry isn't really that heavy. Not made for western battles. Usually I end up shoving them back to Morocco and then its a long protracted naval war while I improve my new provinces. Against the Spanish, its CSgts and Halbs. A couple archers for the Jinettes , I don't use too many cavalry, too easy to lose.
Except for archers and Jinettes, none of those units are available in the early part of the game...
Kind of code of honor. I also try to follow it most of the time.
Same here. I typically don't agree to many alliances in MTW (or even strategy games in general, for that matter), but the ones I do, I adhere to pretty steadfastly.
Plus they say your king may lose some of his influence and consequently your generals may become less loyal and more prone to rebel.
This is absolutely correct. Break an alliance, and your faction leader loses Influence.
Ok; actually, I do the same and, in addition, I rarely attack any kingdom but instead wait for the AI to attack me. That really might be a problem with Aragon - France, Spain, and the Alms really like to attack you often two at once.
On a different note - wish the game had Burgundy even if unplayable as they were a big factor in early and the following time span. Savoy would have been nice too (but then, the fakey "Italy" that didn't exist would have to go :) ).
That's a sore area with me; they're minor kingdoms, etc and the game treating them as some sort of confederation makes them weak in the wrong places. I think they can be made strong enough to be a real deterrent using their own resources - kind of like Denmark as a PC kingdom.
A ways up, Gilrandir mentioned "influence". That is yet ANOTHER good thing that I don't believe II has. I'll be back; once I play all the factions in II to my satisfaction. I STILL haven't played the rebels in "I" for one thing.
Trapped in Samsara
05-16-2016, 13:02
Hi
I think it's worth bearing in mind that the Rebel 'confederation' acts in unison when it comes to trade. Attack one and you lose all your trade with all the rebel provinces as they boycott you in solidarity. This can be quite a deterrent if your finances are parlous.
Best regards
V
Saper aude
Horace
Aren't you at war with them from the get go?
Aren't you at war with them from the get go?
No, but they are usually the targets of your first expansion (since it's easier and diplomatically less damaging) so it just seems that way.
edyzmedieval
05-31-2016, 08:14
I'm going to be honest and say that I only played with big empires, particularly the Byzantines, but I did play once as the Welsh in the Viking Invasions expansion pack and it was rather tough.
Also as the Vikings, out of curiosity to see how it is. Those drakkars made things quite nice.
Hi
I think it's worth bearing in mind that the Rebel 'confederation' acts in unison when it comes to trade. Attack one and you lose all your trade with all the rebel provinces as they boycott you in solidarity. This can be quite a deterrent if your finances are parlous.
Best regards
V
Saper aude
HoraceI thought you attacked them first the rebels.
macsen rufus
08-05-2016, 12:07
I've been playing MTW long enough to have taken every faction in every era to victory - though some are much harder than others :clown:
In VI, I always play for the 110% victory, and take over the Viking lands as well, by intense use of agents. Getting those two provinces can be almost as much struggle as conquering the whole of Britain, what with rebellions and re-emergences and no connection to your king... but it is fun. It does mean you have to leave one British province unconquered until later so the game doesn't end.
In VI I find the Welsh and Northumbrians hardest, but they are both doable. As others have noted, the Vikings are VERY loyal allies, so the first thing is to get that alliance ASAP, throw every available bishop, emissary or preferably princess at them and hope they get the deal done before the Vikings spot Lindisfarne, or get into the Irish Sea, as appropriate.
In Northumbrian campaigns, you need to keep a big stack in Elmet, and SMALL armies in the outer provinces - I've tested this many times - the AI will more often attack a sizable army than a small one (try it sometime - save a year when your one of the 'outer' provinces is attacked, then reload it and reduce the garrison - no attack....)
By having a big stack in Elmet you can always retreat to stronghold in the outer ones, then counterattack next turn. It takes a while but Elmet has iron, so you can eventually tech up nicely - let's face it, you aren't going to waste time and money building farms there.... though this does mean you'll have to get your cavalry elsewhere.
With the Welsh, it's a touch and go turtle strategy - make nice with the neighbours as long as you can. Unlike the Vikings, the Mercians can't be trusted, but if you can hold out until they and the Saxons go at each other, one or other of them will finally erupt into civil war, and it's your job to seize the opportunity created. The Welsh have iron - lots of it - and good missile options. The alternative is to go for the Irish first, before they come your way.
In the Mediaeval campaign, I think my least favourite is HRE - classic overstretch starting position, surrounded by chancers who like the look of your territory...
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.