deciding on what provinces to take, keep and build on

[gaijinalways]

Interesting, I was reading through the guides again, thinking about which provinces are best to get on the map.Some of the better provinces are harder to keep (more rebellious) or are in tougher locations (abetting many provinces). Shamefully, in my current campaign some of the better provinces for overall income I gave up as I pulled back to defend my overstretched empire (Anitoch, Tripoli, whereas Kazar I gave up when the Horde came). I still hold Constanople, Venice, Flanders, and just recently picked up Sicily and Naples (after a necessary Pope cleaning).

But since in my current GA campaign I have a lot of enemies, trade is minimal. So holding more of my home provinces, provinces for building units, and good farming provinces are more useful.

As to building, I have some rebellions internally, one a reemergence in Aquitaine (the Argonese 3X), and the Germans bribing Provance. In some cases some provinces that are more likely to be lost I don't build on too much, Croatia and Greece are good examples. I have heavy troops nearby in Venice and Constanople, both of which are more built up. The Polish are just getting strong enough maybe to attack (from Hungary and Austria). So often areas that are good for farming, can build fairly good troops with a special bonus are good to have. Switzerland and Tyrolia are good for troops later (and now, still teching up), but they are not good income producers.

I was wondering, what provinces do you most like to hold, and why, and what do you tend to build there. Of course, getting some provinces may be the luck of the draw in certain campaigns (and of course your starting faction), but I asume people have their favorites. By the way I tend to build balanced armies (both good for attack and defense), so I like some long and short range missile troops, some cav, and spears and perhaps a few swords. Usually I tend to have more spears and missile types, with the scattered missile units and cavs. Of course, gaining Wales helps, as well as the earlier mentioned Switzerland and Tyrolia for good spears. Also of course, often it easier to defend provinces closer to each other, though I know it can be possible to gain provinces spread out from each other to increase trading in various areas (though defense of these provinces can be tougher).

[Ciaran]

There are basically three types of regions that are worth taking:
1) Trade provinces. It should be obvious that holding rich provinces (Flanders and Venice come to mind immediately) is desireable for the cash they generate.
2) Military provinces. That means those that provide either valor boni to units you´re likely to use a lot (Toulouse for Chivalric Knights, Switzerland, Mercia and Wales[if you´re English]) or that provide you with iron.
3) defensible provinces. Defensible provinces are characterised by the fact that they can be taken without need to build up an additional army. Sooner or later you will come to a point where you can´t take any new province without stripping one of yours of it´s defences. It´s hard to give any examples, as this depends a lot on which provinces you already own, but typical examples - from my experience - are Hungary or Burgundy, as well as Egypt (if you´re playing a Western European faction)

[gaijinalways]

Good points, as some combination makes for provinces you're more likley to take depending on;

your starting position
what happens during the progress of the game
your style of play
what provinces you already have obtained in various stages of the game
what troops you wish to build
where you wish to defend your borders
who attacks you
who allies with you
who is an enemy
trading rich areas you can take
farming rich areas you can take
where the stronger AI factions are relative to your provinces
which areas are better to crusade to
type of campaign one is playing
(related with that)
keeping home provinces
making other GA goals
rebel actions
reemerging faction occurences (where and when)


I currently own Britany, Constanople, Flanders, Lorraine, Champagne, Aragon, Toulouse, Milan, Tuscany, Naples, Sicily, Croatia, Venice, Switzerland, Tryolia, Burgandy, Northumbria, Wales, Mercia, Wessex, Genoa, Nicea, Anjou, Armenia or lesser armenia (which ever is father west), Trebizond, Greece, Navarre, Serbia and Anatolia.

Of course, I'd like to take Aquitaine back and Provence as well, sews up my inner lands. Since it is a GA campaign, I don't feel like I need to take more territory, except when it is to punish trangressors or to force a peace process (see, things really haven't changed that much in 700 plus years). You can see I am spread thinly from West to East, with a thin strand through Venice, Serbia, Croatia, greece, and Constanople. Beleive it or not, it was more of an accident. I wanted Constanople, and the other provinces were just part of the lifeline prior to putting in harbors. In 1263 now, I am not sure I will take anymore property, though the recently acquired Sicily and Naples might make nice trading ports if I can develop them enough (though that trade is just not coming now).

Actually part of my development had to do with crusades I did as I was wiping out the BYZ and Eggy. I actually went further west into Kazar, but as mentioned earlier, gave it back to the horde and later retreated further east allowing the Spanish and the horde to duke it out (worked, both are weaker now).

I think provinces you take are definately important, and was wondering what bloc of provinces most players like to hold at various stages.

[Matador]

Like you said it really depends on who your playing. Right now I am playing the Turks on GA and I think two of the best provinces for that game are Constaintonople (however you spell it) and Egypt. They both have excellent income, and provide great defensive positions. Since I have my coast protected with ships, all crusades have to go through Const. So I put a defensive army of about 2500 men, under the command of a 7 star general, and crusades no longer bother me. Also because of the constant fighting in Const. I can use it as a training ground to get high valour units that I can put in offensive armies. Eygpt works pretty much the same way, but it is mainly a protection from the Almohads.

If any of you play the Danes, then take Sweden right away. It is very easy to protect and if you build a large fleet, has trade income to rival venice or flanders.

I could go on all day but I will stop here. ~:)

[Agent Miles]

Trade is great, but fickle. Agriculture should be the backbone of your faction. If you repeatedly build and then destroy a 20% increase to agriculture in a province, your ruler will eventually get the Steward line of VnV’s. I know that at hard setting, after you do this eight times your ruler is a Steward, after fifteen times a Great Steward and after twenty three times a Magnificent Steward (MS). Now all of my agriculture in every province gets a 30% increase, even ones that I conquer later. When my ruler dies, the increase stays and the next ruler can start the process over to become a MS too.
So let’s say that as Egypt I devote Sinai and Arabia to agricultural “research” (you should use provinces where farming income sucks). I stagger my build so that each turn one of the provinces builds the 20% improvement, which I destroy and rebuild. Twenty three turns (and 7500 florins) later, my ruler is a MS. I then send him off to die in single combat at overwhelming odds, and I do the same with his heir (He must have an heir for this to work!). In about a century, all of my agriculture will be 120% more productive. Along the way, you are going to get governors in these provinces that also are MS. If you started with a four acumen general to begin with, then this is an additional 70% increase to the agriculture in a given province. Have an emissary strip them of their governorship of the research province and make them governor of your most productive agricultural provinces (Egypt, Antioch, Flanders, etc). Better yet, building farm improvements counts toward the Magnificent Builder VnV!

As for what to conquer, I go for choke points. Again, as Egypt (or the Turks or Byz) take everything south of Khazar-Bulgaria-Serbia and west to Morocco. You must only defend four border provinces then. Then take all of Spain up to Navarre-Aragon (or Aquitaine-Toulouse), all the islands, Flanders-England and Saxony-Scandinavia. Crush the Golden Horde and conquer everything north and east of Lithuania-Kiev. You now have eight border provinces and more than enough total provinces to win the short game.

[gaijinalways]

I personally chickened out of trying to hold provinces where the horde arrived, though perhaps I could have held. I notice often, after the horde loses 250-350 in a battle, it tends to give up (on expert, no less). But, to be honest I was stretched thin:juggle2: , so I felt it was better to pull back a few provinces and let the Spanish do my dirty work:idea2: (thinning the horde).

[caravel]

When facing the horde, fortifications are the key. You can pull out and go under siege allowing them to divide and spread out, besieging a few of your provinces. Those should be defended by 1 or 2 units of high valour chivalric knights (dismounted), and nothing more. This will give them more time to hold out in a siege. If you can beat off their siege breaking attempts (which I find that I can, 90% of the time) the following year you should get a loyalist revolt (if you've got your spies in there and didn't build border forts! ~;) ) and be able to back this up with a counter attack to drive them out. This is better than pulling out and razing.

[Agent Miles]

With the Egyptians its too easy. General Shahinshah is usually 8-9 star by the time they show up. Valour 2 AHC are better than horde cav, v2 Mamluk HA's beat horde HA's and Nizari beat their infantry. Back them up with a crapload of Jihad units and its a battle royale. I usually spank them in Armenia and then march through Georgia into Khazar, where they get pounded into dog food.

[gaijinalways]

Thanx caravel. unforunately at that time, I didn't have many spies to afford to go over there, and I was weak on troops to defend　in that area:help: . The horde did attack me, but after letting the Spanish in to some provinces I vacated, they have whittleed each other down, making life easier for me. The Spanish finally held to a cease fire, now the HRE seems almost suicidal:wall: , and the Polish who attacked me, are having rebellions everywhere:laugh4: .

It's about 1774 or so, I am not interested in taking more territory, but I do plan to get rid of some loyalists I picked up, by having them attack the HRE. Did increase my farming, and trade went up, but still a hard row. some money in the bank, maybe will push the Polish and HRE around and pick up some cash.

In this game. sometimes you have to give a little to get a little:2thumbsup: .

[Jxrc]

It really depends on my starting location.

For instance, if I play:

the Danes: my aim is to get Denmark, Norway and Sweden. Then, depending on how things evolve, the whole of England or Russia. It means that once this is done I only need a garrison in Denmark (or Saxony) and Wessex (English option) or in Denmark and Lithuania, Kiev and Khazar (Russian option - you could get Georgia but it is safer to wait for the horde in Khazar).

the English or the French: my aim is to get all of the initial English and French holdings + Friesland (to avoid any risk of an attack on Flanders) + Lorraine (one garrison instead of one in Flanders, Champagne and Ile de France - obliges the HRE to keep troops in at least Swabia, Franconia) + Burgundy (one garrison instead of one in Anjou and Champagne - gives you the option to attack Swabia, Tyrol, Milan) + Provence (obliges the Ai to split troops between Genoa and Milan) + Wales + Scotland + Ireland (no border with the AI).

the Spaniards or Aragonese: my aim is to get the whole north sector (Arragon or Toulouse, Navarre or Aquitaine, Valence, Castille, Leon, Portugal) + either of Cordoba or Morocco (taking Granada). Then it is just a matter of getting to the middle east by taking Algeria, Tunisia, Cyrenaiqua, Egypt and Sinai) with only three region to garrison if you have ships.

the Egyptian, Turks or Byzantine: my aim is to get Egypt, Constantinople, Khazar (or Georgia but risker to wait for the horde there) and all the provinces between those. In the process getting Syria is a big advantage (it saves you the troubles of defending many provinces in any event - whether you come from the North or South and gives you the +2 Assassins)

the Sicilian: taking Naples, Sicily, Malta, all the island in the Mediterranea + the middle east (same as above)

the HRE: the most difficult one since securing your border as I tend to do can give me more enemies than I can deal with so that there is no clear path to follow (especially since you do not have the luxury to decide when and whom) to fight. I usually try to take (1) Poland and Silesia (save garrison in Franconia, Brandenburg, Pomerania, Prussia - if Lithuania remains rebel as it usually does) (2) Milan Venice Genoa and Tuscany from the Italian (good money rather safer border with the Papacy), then (3) Flanders, Champagne and Ile the France from the French (but usually they attack me before anyway).

Using chokepoints provinces usually is enough to solve your financial problems since you only have to maintain a few solid armies while the rest is only guarded by 200 peasants.

Of course all of this only really works if you have ships guarding your coasts. Having ships is not a problem if you play as the Danes or the Sicilian but it can be difficult for a while if you play as any other faction and if a naval oriented factions (Italians, etc) wants a piece of your land ... It can even be impossible to get a ship in the Med if you play as the HRE and you face the Italian navy that immediately sinks any ship that you manage to produce ...

I seen some people advocate that some provinces (Venice,Flanders, Antioch) are worth taking even if you have to put a full scale army as garrison. This is correct financially but I usually do not do it unless I feel I am capable send reinforcement to take the whole area if need be. Moreover those provinces are usually targeted by the IA so that you can for instance grab Venice but lose quite a lot of money because it pushes the Hungarian to attack you (no longer any trade with new enemy, additional garrison and if you are unlucky the invincible AI ship...) ....

Of course many people probably have a good time playing a more adventurous game than the one I suggest and blitzkrieging everyone asap ... Fair enough but I am just not good enough on the battlemap to do that (and I have also probably plaid too long at Civilization ....)

[Duke Malcolm]

I conquer lands depending on how they make my empire look. I don't like bits sticking out, so I try to conquer in such a way that it is rounded out...

[gaijinalways]

I conquer lands depending on how they make my empire look. I don't like bits sticking out, so I try to conquer in such a way that it is rounded out...
:oops:
But sometimes this can lead to a good looking corpse!:dizzy2:

[Quietus]

Always go through North Africa and churn out ships (2 ships per space) to cover the sea lanes and trade with AI that can't attack you (ie. Italians, English, Sweden etc).

Don't expand in mainland Europe until the end.

[Digital]

For me, I choose the rich provinces followed by provinces with a valour bonus, and then provinces which are easiliy guarded with a small garrison. I may even sacrifice a poor province for a rich one if the conditions are ripe.

[gaijinalways]

I often like to go after rich provinces too, but I often have to consider if I can hold them (their positions relative to my other provinces for defensive purposes) as sometimes its not worth the effort if my borders collapse due to insufficent troops. I try not to get too greedy about territory, it sometimes brings on those rebellions.