Which Faction to play for an AAR?

[OverKnight]

I was thinking of starting up a new campaign and doing an AAR similar to Didz's excellent Scottish blog.

Since most of my experience has been with Western Catholic factions, I'm thinking of playing the Turks, the ERE or the Egyptians. This way I'll stretch myself by using HAs and still have a fun time fighting off Crusades and Steppe Horsemen.

So I'm leaving it up to you guys, which faction should I play?

[Warluster]

I'd say the Byz's, it'd ne a intresting thing!

[StoneCold]

Same here, Byz, enemies on all side, the only possible ally with no reason in game to attack you is the Russian.

[OverKnight]

Warluster, the Byzzies were my favorite faction in BI, I remember many bridge battles against the various hordes along the Danube.

I also read John Julius Norwich's trilogy on the Byzantines, so I would have some historical background on them. It'd be fun to see if I could avert the decay and downfall of the ERE after Manzikert. Have my own Komnenian restoration.

Of course those books did give me some background on the Seljuks and the Muslim invasion of the Empire. So Egypt and the Turks would be interesting in their own ways.

[TinCow]

I'm planning on doing Byzantines with LTC 3.0 when it is released, plus a few house rules and possibly General View camera. That's about as tough a game as I think can be had from M2TW. So, I vote Byz.

[Lt. Pinard]

Didz's AAR is great I've been waiting for him to update.

If you do one too then We can have two great AARs to follow. Meaning less wait till the next great installment.

I would vote for ERE but says I can vote...
Think its cause I'm still a newbie

[AussieGiant]

Hey OK.

I'd give the Byzantines a shot too.

You're in the middle of it all.

[TinCow]

If you're open to using mods, I would take a look at this one (http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=80174). I haven't tried it yet, but the feedback is positive and I'm definitely going to give it a whirl myself. In short, the mod auto-generates decent garrisons in AI settlements that you are attacking to deal with the AI's relative inability to defend itself. No more assaulting citadels defended by 1 unit of cavalry. The larger the city/castle, the better the defenders generated. The mod also generates moderate sized armies in the AI's homelands when it has lots of cash to spare. All in all, it looks like the only workable solution I've seen to the blitz problem that plagues the TW games.

[Northnovas]

I would go for the Byz that was my vote. I played them in MTW VI. They have an interesting spot and the rules are different being orthodox. I am partial to the LTC mod though I am currently trying the BBB with the titles and it's interesting. I will post shortly in the AAR thread.
I see Klink's garrison script will work with LTC interesting.

[OverKnight]

Wow, as of this writing, 11 votes are in and the Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantine Empire being a later historical moniker, I think) is the victor by a landslide.

Thanks for the suggestions on mods. I am undecided which ones I should use, if any. I tried out LTC, I was impressed by the smooth installation and the work Lusted put into it, but I got nowhere. I was defending Durazzo with militia spearmen against wave upon wave of Venetians for 20ish turns. It was a struggle just to build up settlements much less expand. As for the Garrison mod, that might be useful.

I am leaning toward vanilla, but with double or triple King's Purse for AI factions. I'm going to be a relative noob with the ERE troop roster. To be honest, I suck at HAs. Part of the reason I'm doing this is to go outside my comfort zone as a player and see what happens.

[Ignoramus]

You've read John Julius Norwich's History of Byzantium? That's great! I've got his A Short History of Byzantium.

I would definitely go for the ERE. It was my favourite faction in MTW.

[OverKnight]

@ TC, Klink's mod looks interesting. With that and his army spam script, I won't have to monkey with King's Purse. Of course my AAR might die a bloody death, guess we'll find out.

Here are some House Rules I'm thinking of adopting:

--Only battles with a noble in charge can be played, all others auto calced.

--No sacking, only occupy or exterminate.

--No adoptions or MOH.

--No declarations of War unless there is a Casus Belli (trespassing, which includes Crusades :evilgrin: , assassinations, things like that).

--No betraying alliances.

--Accept reasonable peace offers.

Any suggestions for House Rules from people?

[Warluster]

That seems fine, are you going to do a heavily role played one, or a Campaign overview?

Also, I'd suggest the Deus lo Vult mod, it is nesccary for a good game, as it has titles like from MTW, new units, new factions, harder, heaps more stuff!

[flyd]

I don't think you'll have a problem with the Romans. Just don't forget that their horse archers also make for excellent light to medium cavalry, of which they have three levels. Don't be afraid to charge them in from an appropriate direction. They also have lancers, which I've never found much use for, and, of course, M1A1(HA) main battle tanks. I don't know if you're morally opposed to cavalry-heavy armies (they might not be too ahistorical in this case), but if not, field battles against the AI should be trivial. Just don't make the mistake I did, and think you can bring your mighty, all-conquering horse army to the holy land, and slug your way from city to city. They do have good close quarters infantry too, though, as long as you remember to bring them. The only thing they really lack are good spears or polearms, so, oddly enough, you have no low-causalty way to counter cavalry.

[Warluster]

Also, OK, do you mind if I also start up a AAR about a week after yours is started, I am gonna do one on the Mongols.

[OverKnight]

The Mongols?! Have at it. Are you using a mod to play them?

As long as your AAR isn't about the Mongols pillaging and burning my AAR to the ground, I won't mind. :laugh4:

As for the AAR format. . .I don't know, it'll probably look like Didz's with a mix of the life of the Emperor and campaign overview. Econ21's sadly defunct English AAR will also serve as an inspiration. Though his use of pretty battle summary tables and such is beyond my parsing abilities.

Edit: @FLYdude I'm too enamored of Infantry lines to go all cav, we'll see where the campaign takes me though. I'm assuming the M1A1 Horse Archers are the Vardariotai?

[TinCow]

Two other House Rule suggestions which have worked well in the PBMs:

1) Some kind of limits on the number of units ships can transport. No 20 unit armies on a single galley.

2) Army composition limits. Since you're playing Byz, I think the most important thing is to keep from falling back on the horse archer crutch to win battles, so maybe no more than 1/3 of the army can be HA?

[OverKnight]

Yup, those sound good. Two units a fleet and common sense armies (I'm not going to codify it, but I won't deploy 20 units of Vards or anything).

I'll probably start all this in a few days on my time off.

[Ignoramus]

A few other suggestions:

1.) No recruiting Trebizond Archers outside of Trebizond.

2.) Varangian Guards can only accompany the Emperor or reside in Constantinople.

3.) Don't expand outside the bounds of the Roman Empire.

4.) No more than 2 units of Naffatun allowed in one army.

[OverKnight]

Since the Byzzies start with some Treb archers and don't hold Trebizond itself, I'm not going to do that. There's a line between creating a challenge and masochism that I'm not going to cross.

Varangians and Naffatuns (aren't they Muslim?) are a long way off, so I'm not worried about that.

As for not expanding outside Roman Empire, one of the goals of the AAR, besides not being squished like a bug, will be a Justinian like reconquest of the "Classic" Empire, but hopefully more permanent.

[Warmaster Horus]

In that case, disband the Trebizond Archers; act like they never existed, until you reclaim Trebizond.
Or, you can immediately go and conquer Trebizond, and then follow that rule.

[Gimli]

Byzantines!!! Reason? Well....... I like Orthodox factions! :2cents: :grin: