View Full Version : Question about Ptolemaic Kingdom and the Seleucids
Hi!
In all my games Carthage and the Seleucids are beating the Ptolemaic Kingdom into oblivion. As it is now Carthage sends 4-5 full stacks (about half elite infantry) roaming about Cyrene and in the moment it revolts to Egypt, they are attacking full force. Egypt simply can't deal with both Carthage and the Sele.
I think it would be better that the region between the borders of Cyrene and of Lepcis Magna (to split actually Africa in two) to be impossible to pass. The main problem I think is Carthage. Since they do not have any enemy in Africa so they are building big armies and sending them against Egypt.
From what I know the desert between the two fraction was near impossible to pass for big armies, and never Carthage fought Egypt. My opinion.
What do you think?
Tx
"Carthage never fought Egypt" - this is quite possibly because they never really had the time. They were always busy in Sicily historically (since their founding). I'm not saying I believe that they necessarily would have if they did have the time, but if they had a string of anti-Barcid leaders, they may have conquered enough areas of Africa to bring them into conflict with the only other real power there.
I've seen the Ptolemies pulpify Seleukeia, so they don't always lose :D
Kralizec
01-28-2007, 13:20
I haven't played EB in a while, but I distinctly remember that in one campaign the Ptolemaioi had conquered the entire Levant, including Antiochia. The Seleucids were busy elsewhere, stomping the Pahlava and Baktrians into oblivion.
Some years later (6-10 years I think) the Pahlava and Baktrians were still alive, albeit decimated. The Seleukids hadn't only conquered their old possesions and Judea, but also possessed Alexandria!
Hi!
In all my games Carthage and the Seleucids are beating the Ptolemaic Kingdom into oblivion. As it is now Carthage sends 4-5 full stacks (about half elite infantry) roaming about Cyrene and in the moment it revolts to Egypt, they are attacking full force. Egypt simply can't deal with both Carthage and the Sele.
I think it would be better that the region between the borders of Cyrene and of Lepcis Magna (to split actually Africa in two) to be impossible to pass. The main problem I think is Carthage. Since they do not have any enemy in Africa so they are building big armies and sending them against Egypt.
From what I know the desert between the two fraction was near impossible to pass for big armies, and never Carthage fought Egypt. My opinion.
What do you think?
Tx
In my games its the seleucids that get beat up by the Ptolemies, not the other way around. (4 campaigns 0.80). The Ptolemies usually can fight the multitude of Carthaginian stacks back as well.
In my games Seleukids get kicked by Ptolies and Baktria. Everytime. But I have to agree with Cezarip on the African land block issue. If Carthage had invaded Egypt, there's no way they would have marched across the desert and there's no way they could have. It's hard enough journey for a bedouin caravan, let alone an army. If one wants to invade Egypt as Carthage, he should have to do it by sea. At the moment it's easier to do it by land, because logistical problems only kick in outside your territory (or at sea), and the Leptis Magna province streches out almost to Cyrene. Marching is slower but it's more reliable.
AI builds fleets if they have a need for them. Sometimes when there are too many pirates, AI factions just give up and stop building fleets. It's a little random.
Zaknafien
01-28-2007, 16:58
they do not march across the desert anymore, they marcha cross the very fertile coastline.
Was it fertile? I admit that I have no idea about this, but why were there no notable cities between Leptis and Cyrene? The march would have been just over a thousand kilometers (I checked from Google Earth, I'm pretty bored) and I'm mostly wondering about fresh water in the area.
Zaknafien
01-28-2007, 18:04
The Saraha desert in our time period had not encroached so far as it has in the 2000 or so years since.
I know it wasn't desert at the time, that much I know, but I have no idea on its fertility. I'm just wondering if it truly was fertile, why were there no significant settlements, at least I haven't heard of them (which isn't saying much).
Watchman
01-28-2007, 21:48
An army moving along the coastline could be supplied by a supporting fleet to a fair degree, couldn't it ? 'Course, I don't really know how hostile the coastal geography in the region is for shipping...
Spectral
01-28-2007, 23:53
Well, given the size of the fleets and of the armies in question, it would be probably much more convenient to directly ship the whole army to its destiny ;)
Well, given the size of the fleets and of the armies in question, it would be probably much more convenient to directly ship the whole army to its destiny ;)
Unless, of course, you had sufficient ships to bring supplies to the army but insufficient ships to ferry it all there ;)
Watchman
01-29-2007, 02:07
To ship the army over you'd after all need not only enough floating thingies to actually haul the troops, you'd also need enough to haul enough food and stuff for the whole lot - soldiers, animals, sailors... Plus of course enough warhips to escort the merry bunch, as drowned soldiers are kinda useless.
Seaborne supplies, on the other hand, ought to be carryable just by conscripting the peacetime merchant shipping - those things are designed to haul stuff over distance economically after all - with enough warship patrols to keep raiders away. Basically, the naval equivalent of the land supply lines you never see either in-game. ~;)
From the point of view of realism I think a land block between Carthage and Egypt would be acceptable. Sending armies over the desert (even if a fertile coast-line existed, it was narrow) would be highly difficult. However it is incredibly unrealistic (for me) to see Carthage attack Egypt (or the other way around) and conquering the Nile Delta (which until now, they did every time). Both of the superpowers were focused at that time on two different parts of the world.
From the gameplay point of view, I do not know.
QwertyMIDX
01-29-2007, 16:26
It's really not that unrealistic. Both Carthage and the Ptols sent forces by land to Kyrene at times.
antiochus epiphanes
01-29-2007, 17:09
in my game the ptolomies always ass rape the seleucids, i mean they go to babylon and farther!
From the point of view of realism I think a land block between Carthage and Egypt would be acceptable. Sending armies over the desert (even if a fertile coast-line existed, it was narrow) would be highly difficult. However it is incredibly unrealistic (for me) to see Carthage attack Egypt (or the other way around) and conquering the Nile Delta (which until now, they did every time). Both of the superpowers were focused at that time on two different parts of the world.
From the gameplay point of view, I do not know.
At that time they definitely were because they both had more immediate things to do Carthage was permanently involved with the Sicilian Greeks, then Spanish, then Romans, and never had the opportunity to threaten Egypt. Also remember that sending your stacks across the desert does tend to result in starving traits so you lose some morale as a player if you do that (I'm not sure the autocalc includes morale bonuses anyway for the AI). Similarly, the Ptolemies had a hard fight with the Seleucids, neither empire historically had time to do this.
However, if the Carthaginians went completely anti-Barcid, leaving Sicily, they may have had both opportunity and internal pressure to expand towards the Ptolemies. Similarly, if the Ptolemies concluded a favourable peace with the Seleucids, they would have had opportunity to launch an attack.
A land block would probably result in neither side ever expanding into the other's territory with a 1.5 exe so I don't think that's a good thing.
kalkwerk
01-29-2007, 18:02
A land block would probably result in neither side ever expanding into the other's territory with a 1.5 exe so I don't think that's a good thing.
Well that would exactly BE the good thing.
A land block would probably result in neither side ever expanding into the other's territory with a 1.5 exe so I don't think that's a good thing.
I think a land block would force both Carthage and Egypt to focus on Spain/Sicily, Syria respectively. As they did in reality. Would that not be a plus for realism?
Aymar de Bois Mauri
01-29-2007, 21:03
I think a land block would force both Carthage and Egypt to focus on Spain/Sicily, Syria respectively. As they did in reality. Would that not be a plus for realism?We have said this time and again. What we are trying in EB is to make starting conditions similar to the real historical situation in 272, not to stop an alternative version of historical events to be achieveable in the campaign by any of the factions. Therefore, there will NEVER be a land block of any sort in north africa or anywhere in the map.
Conqueror
01-29-2007, 21:27
Meh, I actually used naval transport in my invasion of Egypt. It still took me several years of in-game building up, planning and making preparations to get all the necessary troops ready. All that time I had to fight back Ptolemaic armies that were trying to retake Kyrene. And the invasion itself was pure hell, I was risking a serious overextension and for a long time I couldn't afford the tiniest mistake or I'd lose my weak grip on the lower Egypt as all my achievements could grumble to dust with Ptollies steamrolling my holdings all the way to Kyrene. Now I've finally kicked all Ptolemaic loyalists out of Egypt and can breathe a bit easier. Ironically, the Ptolemies have pretty much replaced the Seleukids in this game, as they now hold most of the Seleukid starting provinces but don't have Egypt anymore :laugh4:
I must admit, my first thought is historical AI expansion. Carthage still sometimes goes for the nile run, though it's more unlikely now, but I guess it's good enough.
VandalCarthage
01-31-2007, 05:19
Was it fertile? I admit that I have no idea about this, but why were there no notable cities between Leptis and Cyrene? The march would have been just over a thousand kilometers (I checked from Google Earth, I'm pretty bored) and I'm mostly wondering about fresh water in the area.
There were plenty of Libyan settlements and even a few Greek foundations, but any invasions, realistically, wouldn't have been launched over land.
DeathEmperor
01-31-2007, 06:05
Speaking of the Seleukids does anyone know if they'll have Hypaspistai and Thorakitai Argyrspidai in .81 or .85 as its been nicknamed? :book:
I see them as part of the Arche Seleukeia roster at the EB website, but so far I can't recruit them even in my homeland regions. I'm playing .80 so is this just a bug with it, or were they taken out of the Seleukid roster a long time ago?
Fondor_Yards
01-31-2007, 21:16
Speaking of the Seleukids does anyone know if they'll have Hypaspistai and Thorakitai Argyrspidai in .81 or .85 as its been nicknamed? :book:
I see them as part of the Arche Seleukeia roster at the EB website, but so far I can't recruit them even in my homeland regions. I'm playing .80 so is this just a bug with it, or were they taken out of the Seleukid roster a long time ago?
As the AS in my campain, I was able to get Thorakitai Argyrspidai in Seleucia and Antioch, but didn't find any hypaspistai.
Tellos Athenaios
01-31-2007, 22:04
About the AS hypaspistai: sure is a bug. (You can't recruit them with 0.8, somehow they were sort of lost.)
DeathEmperor
02-03-2007, 09:10
About the AS hypaspistai: sure is a bug. (You can't recruit them with 0.8, somehow they were sort of lost.)
No wonder I couln't find them. :embarassed:
Will they be fixed to be recruitable in .81 aka .85? I'd really like to see what they can do against the Roman legionarries (pre-Polybian and straight to Augustan), and have my phalangites have some kickass guys watching their flanks. :smash:
L.C.Cinna
02-03-2007, 13:12
I think the way between Leptis and Cyrene should not be blocked. I mean as others already said, the problem was that Carthies and Ptolies were busy elsewhere and so history went as it did. however it would be impossible and stupid imho to limit factions to ONLY do what they did historically. I mean in the game it's all hypothetical and if the ptoly AI wants peace with AS and invade Carth lands, or defeats the Seleukies why not?
It would have been a posibility that the Ptolies went west after winning a decisive victory in Syria.
Just some examples>
Taken from Hoelbl:
Ptolemaios I expanded his territory beyond Cyrene along the Coast to Euphrantas Pyrgos to control the trade routs coming from Africa.
in 309 the Ptoly governor of Cyrene Ophellas marched against Carthago to support Agathokles of Syracus. He was murdered near Carthago. Hoelbl thinks that the size of the army he took with him might indicate that he was planning to conquer the Carthaginian lands.
Just 2 examples but it shows that the Polies did operate in this area until they had too many problems at home. There were several towns along the coastline with important traderoutes and very fertile lands.
keravnos
02-04-2007, 12:54
I think the way between Leptis and Cyrene should not be blocked. I mean as others already said, the problem was that Carthies and Ptolies were busy elsewhere and so history went as it did. however it would be impossible and stupid imho to limit factions to ONLY do what they did historically. I mean in the game it's all hypothetical and if the ptoly AI wants peace with AS and invade Carth lands, or defeats the Seleukies why not?
It would have been a posibility that the Ptolies went west after winning a decisive victory in Syria.
Just some examples>
Taken from Hoelbl:
Ptolemaios I expanded his territory beyond Cyrene along the Coast to Euphrantas Pyrgos to control the trade routs coming from Africa.
in 309 the Ptoly governor of Cyrene Ophellas marched against Carthago to support Agathokles of Syracus. He was murdered near Carthago. Hoelbl thinks that the size of the army he took with him might indicate that he was planning to conquer the Carthaginian lands.
Just 2 examples but it shows that the Polies did operate in this area until they had too many problems at home. There were several towns along the coastline with important traderoutes and very fertile lands.
Agreed.
An acceptable compromise would be to put some more hilly terrain in the deeper desert (to simulate the difficulty of a march over such terrain) in order to limit AI line of sight, which hopefully should help into keeping operations mainly around the coast... Not a full block but some strategic spots so that AI pathfinding weakness for 90° turns can be exploited.
Not 100% historically accurate but then neither is having full stack marching in deep desert...
CaesarAugustus
02-05-2007, 01:13
Sorry of this is a bit off topic but is it possible to conquer the huge province that comprises most of Africa? Using the toggle_fow cheat i noticed that ther was a city in the southwest corner of the map that even had its own general, but I wasn't sure if armies can reach it due to the impassible desert terrain.
MarcusAureliusAntoninus
02-05-2007, 02:18
Sorry of this is a bit off topic but is it possible to conquer the huge province that comprises most of Africa? Using the toggle_fow cheat i noticed that ther was a city in the southwest corner of the map that even had its own general, but I wasn't sure if armies can reach it due to the impassible desert terrain.
Nope, it is currently impossible to get to that city. Which I think is a very good thing.
Tellos Athenaios
02-05-2007, 23:46
Not 100% historically accurate but then neither is having full stack marching in deep desert...
Well, playing as the Ptolemaioi I couldn't get my diplomat to move through the deep desert... So I suppose neither can the AI have armies crossing that area.
in my game the ptolomies are steamrolling the selukids. I love how varied the 'global' strategic situation is amoungst us players.
Omanes Alexandrapolites
02-06-2007, 18:39
in my game the ptolomies are steamrolling the selukids. I love how varied the 'global' strategic situation is amoungst us players.
Lol, same here. Just in my campaign I am the Selucids :grin:
Well they are kicking Seleucid in about 50% of the cases! But wait for Carthage to join the show! Sure thing they are not be able to resist once they loose Cyrene and then the Nile Delta to the hooooge armies the carthies send against them !
Schatten
02-07-2007, 14:41
in all, reall all camapignes its the same thing..played at h/m or vh/m Bactria and Potolemaic destroy Selucids so that around year 200 seleucid is history or has max. 1-2 city´s as protectorate of Bactria or Potolemaic.
After that Carthago, mostly if/after they pushed away of Iberia destroys Potolemaic and Bactria paint the whole Map between Sweboz,Getai and Antiochia blue.
Not one time it was not so if those 3 were played by AI.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.