EB Online Faction Guide

I've created this thread so we can all post guides to the factions we have the most experience battling online with. First I'll group them into "faction" groups, then detail individual factions.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Hellenic Factions
Makedonia
Ptolemaioi (this may seem out of place, but their unit roster doesn't have too many Eastern levies)
Qart-Hadast (this may seem out of place, but their unit roster is very similar to that of a Hellenic faction)
Koinon Hellenon
Epeiros

The Hellenic factions prominently feature heavy infantry, especially pike phalanxes and other spearmen. They also feature strong heavy cavalry, and some decent but not particularly cost-efficient light cavalry. Most don't have very good missile troops, but mercenaries tend to make up for this.

Romani

The Romani are even more focused on heavy infantry than the Hellenes. Their cavalry is decent but somewhat lackluster, but their diverse and flexible infantry make up for this; like the barbarians, they feature both niche-filling units; like the Hellenes, they have strong mainline heavy infantry. Like the Hellenes, they often rely on mercenaries for missile troops.

"Barbarian" Factions
Aedui
Arverni
Casse
Lusotana
Sweboz
Getai

"Barbarian" factions tend to focus on heavy infantry with lower armour than those of "civilized" factions. However, their elite units tend to be savagely good, and they have strong niche-filling units as well. Their missile units aren't bad, and their cavalry, while nothing special, is capable of getting the job done.

Eastern Faction
Hayasadan

Their heavy infantry don't stack up to that of the Hellenes, but do a respectable job. They have plentiful cheap but effective levies, especially their archers. They also pack some of the finest cavalry in the game, heavy cataphracts that can bowl opponents over, as well as strong horse archers.

East Hellenic Factions
Pontos
Baktria
Arche Seleukeia

The East Hellenic factions are a hybrid between the Hellenes and Eastern factions - they feature the typical unit Hellenic roster, but they also have access to the cheap, cost-effective levies of Eastern factions. They also have cataphracts in addition to other types of Hellenic cavalry. While their heavy infantry aren't as strong, they have an overall more balanced roster and stronger cavalry.

Steppe Factions
Sauromatae
Saka Rauka

Together with Pahlava, they have the best cavalry in the game. Their mainstay units, horse archers, are invulnerable to heavy infantry except in rare circumstances. They have dual-role archer-lancers which can smash the enemy in a charge or pick them off at range. And they have cataphracts like the Eastern factions, able to bowl enemies over with a devastating charge. Their infantry tend to be poor and not very diverse, mostly levies, though their foot archers are easily on par with, if not better than, those of Eastern factions.

Eastern/Steppe Faction
Pahlava

Together with the steppe factions, they have the best cavalry in the game. They don't have quite the diverse selection of horse archers that their steppe counterparts have, but they have access to the large pool of cost-effective eastern levies. Pahlava actually has the best heavy cavalry in the game, namely the Grivpanvar but also a large number of powerful noble cataphract units. They, too have archer-lancers, which can perform the roles of both units devastatingly well.

Saba
It's certainly possible to win with the Saba, but their units are of poorer quality than those of other factions. Think of their army as being entirely composed of Eastern levies, with no cataphracts.

Qart-Hadast Guide

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

This is good, but shouldn't it be moved to the Guides/aars section of the forum?

Hayasdan, in a category of its own. :2thumbsup:

Saba
These guys suck, don't use them in custom battles.

Careful, that could offend someone.

Pahlava really must be considered a Steppe/Eastern Hybrid (or Transitional) faction. In the early game, they play just like the steppen nomads, but after their military reform, have the same access to capable, if not particularly good infantry. They also gain access to the multitude of levies that other Eastern factions gain, and some of those levies are surprisingly effective if used properly.

I'd consider Pontos more of a "Hellenized Eastern faction", as their factional units are mostly eastern. To gain their Hellenic units, some of their homelands must be "regionalized".

I totally agree with Merlinus, as Pontos is a persian empire run in an area of Anatolia known to be colonized by Greeks...I think it was Trapezous back in the day. Trebizond now. Nice place too.

Poor Epeiros. It even gets forgotten from a guide thread...

Kart-Hadast deserves its own category too. Their unit rooster is similar to Roman, as well as Hellene army rooster+ they have some hard-core barbarian troops from Iberia.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gamegeek2

These guys suck, don't use them in custom battles.

---

You just wait until AtB comes out and I'll conquer the whole world with my precious Sabaeans!

Anyway while I can't say they have the strongest rooster, it's also true that they lack a few units which would have made them stronger.

Either way, a good idea, hope to see some new information and new tips again.

Great idea, i've always wanted something like this!

Quote:

---

Saba
These guys suck, don't use them in custom battles.

---

While it's true that they have the weakest unit roster ATM, I wouldn't say they suck. You just gotta employ some different tactics with them, like with Casse or Swêboz (although the latter two are of course much stronger in woods and close combat).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moros

Anyway while I can't say they have the strongest rooster, it's also true that they lack a few units which would have made them stronger.

---

What, they fielded roosters? Are there some cultural ties to the French? :clown:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vasiliyi

Careful, that could offend someone.

---

Truth hurts. What he said is true. Only way he could change that is add some less-unflattering adjectives. Saba are like a handicap: you can still win, but with great difficulty. They are not unique. They are quite rotten. Employing "different tactics" is a euphemism for "they are lousy so I have to be very samrt and innovate greatly to win".

Added Epeiros, fixed Saba description.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moros

You just wait until AtB comes out and I'll conquer the whole world with my precious Sabaeans!

---

AtB...we'll certainly add Sabaean cities, I'll give you that ;) You're certainly invited to the team...

I would also change your description of horse archers as "invulnerable" to heavy infantry. They are very vulnerable if heavy infantry manage to engage. Perhaps you could say they are the nemesis of heavy infantry as they are almost impossible to catch or something similar.

This is a good idea - I migh try to make a Saka quide after I'm done with my exams.:book:

Horse archers are really not "invulnerable". As said by johnhughthom they are rather "Just" dangerous for infantry (exspecially light meele troopers who have no armor for protection:skull:)...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jebivjetar

Kart-Hadast deserves its own category too. Their unit rooster is similar to Roman, as well as Hellene army rooster+ they have some hard-core barbarian troops from Iberia.

---

I agree. Why didn't you just post this on my guide in EB game play
guides and AAR's? Like it any way.:2thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the man with no name

I agree. Why didn't you just post this on my guide in EB game play
guides and AAR's? Like it any way.:2thumbsup:

---

I missed that i guess. Anyway i can't found it even now. :sweatdrop:


O, and i think i've typed something wrong in my previous post (because of my bad english). I wanted to say that Charthaginian army rooster have some similarities with roman and Hellenic army rooster, and that's why i think that Carthage shouldn't be in "Hellene" category. They have their own hard coree troops though. So, put them in special category gamegeek2 :sweatdrop:

And... i can't resist: you can put romans together with other barbs as well. Would be nice :clown:

Created Pahlava's own category.

What does Qarthadast have more in common with Romans than Hellenes? Sure, the African Heavy Infantry are essentially legionnaires, but look at the following parallels

African Pikemen - Argyraspidai/Chaonion Agema/Klerouchon Agema
Sacred Band Cavalry - Hetairoi/Molosson Agema
Sacred Band Inf - Hypaspistai/Epilektoi Hoplitai
Libyan Spearmen - Thureophoroi
Heavy Libyans - Thorakitai
Liby-Phoenician Inf - Hoplitai
Iberian Assault Inf - Pheraspidai

The other, native Iberian units don't count, they're essentially foreign natives.

The first guide I'll write is for Qart-Hadast. Start posting info on them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gamegeek2

Created Pahlava's own category.

What does Qarthadast have more in common with Romans than Hellenes? Sure, the African Heavy Infantry are essentially legionnaires, but look at the following parallels

African Pikemen - Argyraspidai/Chaonion Agema/Klerouchon Agema
Sacred Band Cavalry - Hetairoi/Molosson Agema
Sacred Band Inf - Hypaspistai/Epilektoi Hoplitai
Libyan Spearmen - Thureophoroi
Heavy Libyans - Thorakitai
Liby-Phoenician Inf - Hoplitai
Iberian Assault Inf - Pheraspidai

The other, native Iberian units don't count, they're essentially foreign natives.

---

In that case, Kart-Hadast can be put together even with nomads because of their Iberian Lancers (something lke armoured h/a's without archers), and with barbs because of their hard-core ap troops like elite liby-phoenican infantry (barb: naked fanatics or wildmen) and so on.

Anyway, Carthaginian pikemen are elite, and strategy of Carthagian army on the field is supposed to be very different than Hellenic pike-phalanx-based field development. I know that in mp battles many users (including myself) are acting very similar as Hellenes with pikes as a core troops, but this is just an example of searching for best-suited strategy for Carthaginians, and not a definite Carthaginian strategy. If you take Hannibal as an example, you'll see what i'm talking about: their mix of various types of infantry makes them specific.

Because of that Carthage must be in its own category.

Carthage deserves that :yes:


EDIT: i have also developed mechanism for breaking phalanx line, but it works only with AI... tried that on Maion in mp , but it doesn't work. Damn :clown: And its not about encirclement: with some mix of Carthaginian troops one can beat any phalanx you like- from the front: without cheating (like running through phalanx).

I'll post a picture very soon. It may be useful for some players.


EDIT No2 (a picture)


https://img192.imageshack.us/img192/8898/strategy.jpg

Great thread - i'm keen to contribute.

Stupid question, but I better say it all the same:

What kind of information do you want in the guide? I was thinking of trying my hand at a Casse (or maybe Pontus) guide but wanted some clarification. I suppose the ideal guide would contain some of the following headings:

- Early game - first 12 turns or so - strategy for survival/initial conquest/economy management

- Family members - effective selection/training/what types of family members to expect and how best to use them

- Army composition - key troops/starting strategies/things to try out/cheap deals for troops

- Expansion - key points/what governments to install/routes to take/tips/ambush points/chokepoints

- Late(r) game - (i'm imagining after 20 years here) optimum army composition/effective expansion (not leaving things so that you are exposed/weakened/open to revolt)/training of FMs/supply lines / all important reforms - if these have not been covered already!

gamegeek2, i think it would be a good idea if you were to provide everyone with a structure for their guides, which each guide writer could fill in - that way, each guide will be comparable, and guide readers will know what to expect. of course my list in no way covered all the bases one could expect from a guide, but i hope that at least showed some of the options a guide writer might have. if there were to be some kind of recommended structure then we would avoid one guide that just covered turns 1-12, another that was just an army composition guide, and so on and so forth.

thoughts?

"Their cavalry is decent but somewhat lackluster" - a bit contradictory perhaps?

Also, i think Getai and Casse should be in different categories. Getai dont have chariots, Casse dont have decent archers, Hoplites or Horse archers. I think the only similarity is that they both wear trousers.

Apart from that, i think its a good idea

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jebivjetar

without cheating (like running through phalanx).

---

Why is this a cheat? Didn't soldiers move aside pikes or something? How did they historically go against pikes from the front?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vartan

Why is this a cheat? Didn't soldiers move aside pikes or something? How did they historically go against pikes from the front?

---

I was thinking about exploiting the phalanx, you know, when one sends his troops to run through the phalanx... In mp that is pure cheating.
I don't think that, historically, soldiers did actually run through spears to reach phalangites: i think that they should have to make their way through pikes first to engage soldiers later, and that is another story, and it takes much more time (read: fight). If you just run through pikes, you're actually cheating.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vartan

Why is this a cheat? Didn't soldiers move aside pikes or something? How did they historically go against pikes from the front?

---

Because phalanxes get ripped apart this way. It is an exploit, not a tactic that would have been used. Trying to run behind a pikewall would result in you getting impaled upon the speartips.

Occassional tactics to get past pikes, would be to try and shove aside the pikes with a shield, using wedge formations to "penetrate" the pikewall, or rolling uder it. All tactics may have caused some mayhem (especially against levied soldiers), but an experienced unit of pikemen would easily be able to counter such tactics, especially when they have former experience with them.

Maion

but your cowardly pikewalls would be broken eventually :beam:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jebivjetar

I was thinking about exploiting the phalanx, you know, when one sends his troops to run through the phalanx... In mp that is pure cheating.

If you just run through pikes, you're actually cheating.

---

Easy to say when the RTW engine favors you. Phalangites can magically pick up their 20+ foot sarissas after already being engaged, swing them around 180* in the air, and then impale flanking enemies upon them when they bring them back level to the ground (even if that ground is currently being covered with enemy troops).

What's even better is when they don't even bother raising their sarissas but simply swing them around like a giant scythe through enemies. :whip:

The only analogue to the run through would be for hoplites or other heavily armored close order infantry to simulate their push. Greek Hoplites pushing did manage to stop the Macedonian style phalanxes on atleast two occassions.

The EB engine is rather strange when it comes to any sort of formation warfare. You can actually put a unit in defense mode and order it to attack a phalanx. The effect is that the units will run past all the pikes and engage the front rank of pikemen befall stalling out and getting poked away.

That being said, you probably should keep in mind that its not that particularly hard to counter if you're expecting it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by antisocialmunky

The only analogue to the run through would be for hoplites or other heavily armored close order infantry to simulate their push. Greek Hoplites pushing did manage to stop the Macedonian style phalanxes on atleast two occassions.

The EB engine is rather strange when it comes to any sort of formation warfare. You can actually put a unit in defense mode and order it to attack a phalanx. The effect is that the units will run past all the pikes and engage the front rank of pikemen befall stalling out and getting poked away.

That being said, you probably should keep in mind that its not that particularly hard to counter if you're expecting it.

---

Beig able to efficiently "push" through a pikewall has to do with many things. First and foremost, armour and a decent shield. Hoplites could (theoretically, at least) break a pikewall by pushing enough. Bu that doesn't mean it could happen every time.

See, I had fought a battle once against ACS who played the Sweboz. He said he'd wipe me off the floor in less than 2 minutes. He did. He used swordsmen with silver chevrons and weapon upgrades and, after running behind my pikewall, started butchering my main line. While I was busy flanking him in earnest and managing to actually deliver several back charges with my Hetairoi, the morale bonuses plus the fact that my line was already routing gave him a (quite) easy victory.

What I want to say, is that people should stop complaining about ot being able to use the phalanx exlpoit. You already debate about lowering the mnai limit (which is going to cripple us enough), debating about doing something that is probably highly ahistorical would be nonsense. IMO, it was not the fact that other nations had superior infantry that they won over the Hellenes. It was theit stubborness (Romans) and refusal to surrender when beaten repeatedly (Pyrrhos). Not to forget that "hiding behind pikes" gave several men (Megas Alexandros, Pyrrhos) some wonderful victories to brag about.

Maion

Well, once i have played with one guy who smashed my phalanx in less than one minute by exploit, and i must say that wasn't a game. So i suggest that "phalanx exploiters" should warn their opponent before the battle about their intentions. I will never play with such players anymore. Amen.

Btw against AI is very easy to beat phalanxes without cheating. So i don't know why should one even try to exploit phalanx.

well if you want ahistorical facts forget phalanx exploit, what about hetarioi spawn???
their descripition says they were lower in number yet again i found myself using 3 heatrioi or 2 each companny with 50 units on then, i mean its not very acurrate too.
we have distinguised hoplites and other units with reduced numbers why not the hetarioi? well but i belive its EB engine fault. Historicaly the number of phalanx in a army varies but 6 is also to much, for instance the battle of magnesia Anthiocus only had 2 groups of phalanx, One native and other silver shields, of course they were like 4000, 6000 men each phalanx, maybe nerfing the phalanx numbers on EB?? yet again its Eb,or rome engine fault, or maybe not we just have to reach a consense. if we want to folow historical armies. they didnt use phalanx as we use it. maybe 3 or 2 groups of phalanx with inf on suport is how they use it.

phalanx exploit? f*** **f!!! That's not an exploit, that's a weak point they got, that's all. It's like to say : don't use archer against my naked fanas, it's using their weakness and so must be considered as exploit. Yeah, to toss a 21 foot sarrisa away to punch the guy in the face must have been difficult when facing a wall but certainly not impossible! I'm not encouraging to run threw phalanx, i don't do it myself (because my guys have no armors at all... so it'd kill too many of them) but to all hellenes lovers, stop crying that because your phalanx get smashed in a way that it's exploiting the system and damn, accept that even your pike elites have their weakness, wich, in war, is there to be EXPLOITED by your ennemy! yeah, that's the point of war... to exploit the weak points of your ennemy. so, if you don't like that, well, find a way to counter it! we call it : STRATEGY!