Printable View
Thing is, the Brutii have senate missions that focus largely on taking Greece ealry on. Unless you stop them, they will keep coming for you.
Im still debating whether to attack Italy, especially as like your, I have trouble in the north with Dacia and Thrace.
Its funny though, I never seem to have so many factions working against me when I play the Greek Cities, yet they are pretty much in the same position as Macedon.
Strange indeed, maybe because the Greek Cities never get a chance to get up north without killing the Brutii and Macedon first, so by the time they do get to Thrace and Dacia, its not as bad.
Thank god I haven't had to deal with chosen archer warbands yet, but I am shipping some Cretan Archers to assist my invading army in Italy. I'm in trouble, my general died, leaving only hordes of levies and phalanxes in Tarentum. In the meantime, I think I'm gonna go with the Teyls strategy and get thrace and Dacia as my protectorates, thus effectively forcing them to expand west, while I take over Turkey and Rhodes, along with all those beautiful wonders.
Do you think it is possible to get the other romans to call of the war once I eliminate the Brutii?
In my experience as Macedonia or Greek Cities the Romans never called off war with me. Instead, once I land in Italy and take Croton and Tarentum and kill off the Brutii, the remaining Roman factions gang up on me and I become their primary target. That keeps the Julii expanding into Gaul and the Scipii rarely get to Africa - which makes for interesting games because then one has to deal with a strong Gaul and/or Carthage after slugging it out with the Romans.Quote:
Originally Posted by Glaucus
I'm not sure there's much benefit from getting Dacia and Thrace as protectorates. Outright occupation seems more useful, especially to get more cities to train troops to throw at the Romans.
Getting Dacia might be a strategic necessity because the Julii sometimes send armies down both sides of the Adriatic. Containing the Julii is important - fighting Romans with scrappy macedonian phalanx pikemen is NOT fun at all, especially on more than one front.
A side remark on the Greek Cities: I recently played a Brutii H/H campaign and the Greek Cities wiped out the Macedonians, going all the way to Bylazora. I guess that only happened because I left them alone for a while.
Interesting, and as you said the the Julii will advance into Illyria as well as Italia, thats why I thought getting thrace and Dacia as my protectorates would be better, then I have a shield between myself and the Julii who are up in Gaul and Aquinicum.
Yes, you will have a shield, but it is only a temporary one. Both Dacia and Trace will fold quickly, even if the lowly AI is in charge of the Julii.Quote:
Originally Posted by Glaucus
Many others stated this in the past: protectorates are pretty much useless because you cannot control the protectorate diplomacy and military actions.
Dealing with the Julii:
I find it very effective to put together a fleet and move a big army (with siege weapons) up the Adriatic to take Patavium. That fleet needs to be big enough to survive pirates and multiple Julii attacks! Without Patavium the Julii economy falters quickly, especially if you can also take Mediolanium and then block the bridges. This should relieve some of the Julii pressure on Croton and Tarentum.
building my Invasion-Julii fleet right now...
Im starting to hate my Macedon campaign. Keep getting attacked, especially by Allies.
Yeah I'm starting to agree with that. Though it does make it a bit more interesting. If my allies want to start a war, then I shall smite their capitals to the ground beneath my calvary and pikes!
Dont forget your ongaers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Glaucus
How do I unlock Macedon? Could someone give me in-depth instructions as to which folder i need to infiltrate?
Go to Data\world\maps\campaign\imperial_campaign\Descr_stat.txt and move Macedon from unplayable to playable-list. You can do that with other unplayable factions as well, but I recommend not doing it with the slaves and the Senate. These factions were never meant to be played and chrashes can occur when playing them.Quote:
Originally Posted by diablodelmar
Fellow Org-sters, a little help please. :gah2:
I am in the endgame of a Macedonian campaign. It's actually an interesting one since the Scipii, which own everything South and West of Carthage (including Carthage itself) have decided to break their alliance with me and assault Lilybaeum, pretty much catching me with my pants down.
The bulk of my forces are in the East (Nile, Sidon, Antioch, etc.) finishing off Egypt. They are obviously en route to North Africa now but it will be some time before they arrive. Here is the situation:
-Carthage is their capital. Large stone walls, full-stack garrison inside, another full-stack standing nearby. Thapsus is well-defended too.
-Their armies are in the Marius transition phase. Mostly the archers are Marian, infantry leans slightly towards pre-Marian. Lots of Triarii.
-A full-stack is heading toward Siwa, which will not be able to hold. I have an army en route to intercept, but it might not make it in time.
-I have around 3 high-tech armies heading towards the action, and am close to completing a fourth in Greece.
-They took Lilybaeum and may go for the other two settlements in Sicily. I'm beefing up the defenses and am fairly confident that I can repulse an assault.
If you kind souls could give me some battle tactics for dealing with the Roman threat it would be much appreciated. My armies have 1-2 generals, 5 Royal Pikemen, 3 gold-weapon archers, 4 Macedonian/Companion Cavalry, and 1-2 Onagers. I've dealt with Romans before but not this many.
Thanks in advance. :charge:
Your basic army is pretty solid, but you have two disadvantages against early Marian romans -- the range of the AAs and the mix of legionary swords and triarii.
Pikes hold the infantry off pretty well, but must be in dense blocks to do so, leaving you prone to being flanked. If you have the transport, you might grab 2-3 units of Bastarnae to add as a second line with your pikes. That way, you can put the pikes in 4-5 row lines but feed the Bastarnae into the melee once the legionaries start breaking up the front of the Phalanx. Their armor is crap, but if the pikes take the rush, they can feed in nicely.
Cretans lose to AA, so I'd stick with your gold archers, but back them up a notch. Drop the onagers except for siege trains, add a couple more cav to hammer the AA's.
You know the tactics already, this is just to add a bit of robustness to your field force.
Hey, i am playing macedonian and i realised a few things.
1) A good economy is important, most of my campaigns against greece involves bribing. Greece and Macedonian share a few units.
Peasants (duh)
Milltia Hoplites (ok..)
Greek Calvary (something)
Peltast (not sure with this)
2) Kill of the Romans, Never let them Expand into Greece
3) Watch your back at the start, Thrace isnt exactlly a nice neighbour.
4) My most important point, Time. In battles, Light Lancers are very important, I have tested the speed and it is around three times faster than roman equites.
Also roman post marius is quite a pain. Anyone have good strategies against it ?
In my Macedon Campaign I didn't encounter many Post-Marian armies but against the few I did I just used the usual tactics...pinned their infantry with Royal Pikemen while having Macedonian or Companion Cavalry go around a flank and hit the Romans from the rear. I always used some archers for support as well, either 2 Cretans or 3 standard. You can upgrade your standard archers to gold weapons if you retrain them in a Large Temple of Artemis which makes them very good.
Basic rule with Marian Romans is:
Use the same approach but have better troops.
Marian armies field well-armored swordsmen with pila all of whom have a 10 morale v. the 4 of your standard phalangite.
ANYTHING but a frontal assault that stays at spear range is going to turn against you. Their morale means that they'll take the casualties coming in and then cut you up and your sarissa boys will run. If you have a 2-4 chevron advantage in quality, however, your lads will be able to hold on long enough to allow you cav to hammer them from the sides/rear.
Remember to hit their cav hard as you begin your flank sweep, and use your best. Roman Cav and Legio Cav are high morale and decently armored, so you have to hit them hard to make them route out of your way. They aren't great attackers -- but then again your lancers arent' well armored so...
Don't bother fielding generic archers against the Marian Romans except as:
a) sacrificial lambs to draw his cav onto your pikes.
b) flank attack support who start well behind the line.
Regular archers against AA only serve as a way to get them to target your archers instead of your spears.
In general, you can beat them the same way you did the Republican Romans -- but you are going to take casualties. Marian armies have too high a morale to just melt away. So have your replacement forces coming up to fill the gaps in your ranks.
Seamus,
Your advice sounds very reasonable to me. I'm assuming you usually play RTW on vh/vh and h/h? (not my favorite levels) May I impose on you for a couple questions? Which, in your opinion, is the faction that handles the Marian Romans the best? Do you have any special tactics of your own that you use? The reason I ask is - the Marian Romans scare the crap out of me when I'm taking Seleucia or Egypt. When I'm taking a faction that's geographically close to Italy, I usually HAVE to deal with the Romans early, which means I'll knock them out before Marius. So far, I've had almost no experience fighting Marian armies with non-Roman factions.
In my own games, I tend to finish off the Romans before they get to Marian stages. But, I live in fear and trembling that I won't get to them before they start producing these "super" units. To me, the best strategy against Marian Romans is - kill them before they get to Marius. :)
Sounds to me like this would be a good subject for some experiments in the Custom Game option -- trying a few 'Marian heavy' armies against the best Macedonian units available. Macdonia's strength/depth in RTW is its cavalry. But even its best falls short against Marian cav units. The Mac phalanx units are adequate against most standard opponents, but they are not quite as good as the Greek's best. And I would think that for the most part they're going to be inadequate against the Marian Romans except in a nose-to-nose encounter, as you say. And even then, you'd better handle them judiciously - guard their flanks, probably with cavalry swarms. The trick is to get close enough to allow for the close encounter face off. The Marian Romans have so much depth that generally a Roman army doesn't meet a serious opponent (tech-wise) until they start having to fight each other in the Civil War phase of the game.
Just curious about your battlefield approach, Seamus. Again, forgive me if I'm imposing.
Varies depending on faction, of course, but I "turtle" my games so its fairly common for 1 or more Roman factions to survive to Marian levels -- often all 4 if I'm starting way out East.
Some basics:
Let them lay siege, but then sally from the stone walls. Only, don't sally with much -- just a unit or two that they can't resist coming after. Of course, atop the walls, you have your entrenched missile units to greet them. Do not let any significant hand-to-hand develop. When you run out of ammo, stop the battle. Repeat. This is one type of attrition that you can almost always win, and you have a great chance to deal out casualties regardless of experience level. I've broken the fighting strength of whole factions this way.
Set up on a narrow front. You can't envelop the computer unless you have
a lot more units. Crazy AI will set up one line 16 units long just dreaming of you matching it and creating a one-on-one unit engagement against its swords. Keep you cav/flankers behind the line and spring sideways as they close. If you start out to the flanks you will be met head on out at the flanks -- waste of good cav.
Use lots of cavalry -- though be careful not to use light cav frontally against marians. Creates a lot of steaks with plenty of Romans left to eat them. Remember, your "anvil" units will be taking a beating, so don't delay your flank strike for long. If they route and the Romani turn-to-face in time, all you do is make steaks.
Use Elephants (war+) to break their formations -- and then quickly add in some cav and/or light infantry. Keeps the hefalump casualties down and takes advantage of their shredded formations. Careful with the ele's, when tired, Romani cut them down pretty quick.
If spears are your primary infantry, have a thin screen of peltasts or cheap slingers in front of them, formation loose/no skirmish, to absorb the worst of the leader cav charges and pila shots. They'll break, but this usually leaves your Roman opponent at pike range with most of the steam off the charge.
Use cavalry against archer auxilia -- they'll be shooting your line, but that's the price you pay -- strike after they've stopped in a firing position. Sometimes, if there's only one or two, a jav-cav unit can lure them out of the fight for a while.
DON'T chase Roman routers until most of them are routing. They often return to discipline just as you catch them up again, and they you're in a fight in their rear with your flanks unguarded and no support -- risky position. However, feel free to chase with surviving missile at range, a few backshots and they may keep on running.
On siege assaults, always group towers together for firepower and hammer the wall defenders. Use ladders (if possible) on other undefended points to steal towers and gates that they're not actively defending. Slingers and such that shoot well from walls are a good tool here.
...so much more, but mostly type specific to nations/units...
Sounds like Carthage is a favorite of yours for a Marian Roman opponent.
I have definitely noticed how the AI likes to spread it's infantry (and sometimes even its skirmishers) into one long line. If it's skirmishers holding up the ends of the line, I sick the doggies on them. It distracts the edges of the line enough that I can slip the cav by them or simply run the cav over top of them. That weakness usually costs the AI the battle as once the cav gets behind the line, I'm going to get the AI infantry in the rear.
I will have to do some practice runs in the Custom game on some of the siege tower tactics you mention.
I tend to favor Cretan archers as a main support behind my frontline, (when I can get them), whereas I move Balearic or Rhodian slingers onto the frontline with cav just behind them to move forward if the AI tries to run them down in a frontal charge. My guess is - against Marian Romans the slingers will have a limited effectiveness.
I've noticed that if the AI has it's best infantry on the walls, it's going to be tough sledding - lots of casualties. Once I get a section of wall though, I rush archers or peltasts up the siege towers and onto the walls. They can clear out the units just below the walls, then I can rush cavalry through the gates (assuming I've secured the gateway.)
"Turtling" - sounds like you're very methodical and deliberate in your campaign taking a slow pace. At vh/vh or h/h I think that's probably a good choice.
I took my own advice from my previous email and tried a Mac attack against a Marian Roman army. Gave both sides two units of archers and two units of javelin skirmishers. Gave Romans 3 Praetorians, 2 legionary cohorts, 2 infantry aux, 2 legion cav and two Roman cav. Macs had 5 Royal phalanx and one militia hoplite, 2 companion cav, 2 of the better Mac cav. Both armies had generals. I let the AI have Rome, set the difficulty on medium and I took the Macedonians. It wasn't easy, but I pulled off the win. the Roman AI tried to swarm my right with their cavalry. So I had to meet them with three of my cav plus my general. I didn't wait on them to attack me but hit one of the Roman cav units with all four of my cav units on the right. Then I sent my phalanx units one on one against the Roman infantry. My Cretan archers were a big aid.
I lost control of the battle from time to time. Had one phalanx rout. I lost about half my archers. (I think the Roman archers were concentrating on my Cretans.) Once I decimated the first Roman cav unit on the right, I started swarming the remaining cav with my cavalry force. (I think the AI was confused about my concentrating my cav force on one unit at a time.) I have tried as a rule when I'm dealing with a formidable AI cav enemy unit to swarm attack with 2-3 cav units. It cuts down on casualties and prevents my own units from routing as easily. I can usually pull it off even if my cav units are inferior to the AI opponent's cav.
Once I got most of the Romani cavalry out of the way, I could slowly turn the tide on the infantry battle. The royal phalanx units can hold the praetorians in place as long as the Praetorians don't get around their sides too much. (Where I had the most trouble on the line was where there were gaps between the royals. the preatorians and legionairies could pour around the side.) I'm not sure it would be wise as a rule to force the royals to hold for too long, especially if you play at the harder levels. Once I got the Roman cav out of the way, (and not without moderate casualties), I sent two units of cav to hit the archers and javelin skirmishers. I grouped two cav units to hit the Praetorians from behind. Even without cavalry support, the Praetorians have to be respected. Not so, necessarily, with the Royals, as phalanx are slower moving and can easily be maneuvered around to get hit in the "behind."
In the end, my royals had about 50% casualties. My cav about 40%. My archers 55% roughly. It was bloody. I was lucky, too, I didn't lose my general.
I have to call it an evening, but I shall reread your post and ponder on some of your counsel. I want to experiment with some tactics some more. And you all have motivated me to maybe try a Mac campaign here for my next RTW round.
Thanks for the return post, Seamus.
I love Cretans too -- especially as Mac has no choice for LR firepower otherwise. Have to set them to "counter-battery" the AA of a Roman force to keep them from getting chopped up too badly, though.
Never field 1 or 2 Cretans, always use 3-4 in squares, and take them off fire at will after the first 2-3 shots. You choose their targets -- and those targets should generally be one unit at a time to maximize the smackdown effect. Do not set up a fire group and assign targets that way, they'll simply go to fire at will regardless of what the gauge reads. The computer's goal is to have you kill your own phalanx line from the rear -- by targeting the closest romans and shooting through their backs (pet peeve).
Running Macs I try to field:
5 Phalanx, 2 Peltast/Illyrian/Sling, 2 Flanker (Bastarnae, Thracian, Spanish), 4 Cretan, 1 General, 4 Heavy Cav, 2 Lancer.
---Pelt(4 lines, loose, no skirm)----Pelt(4 lines, loose, no skirm)-----
Phalx (5 lin)--Phalx (3 lin)--Phalx (3 lin)--Phalx (3 lin)--Phalx (5 lin)--
Flanker (square)------------------------------------Flanker (square)
-------Cretan (sq)---Cretan (sq)---Cretan (sq)--Cretan (sq)-------
-------------------------------Gen-------------------------------
-HC---LC-----------------------------------------------LC----HC-
-HC----------------------------------------------------------HC-
Heavy Cavalry comes out wide to either side as Romans commit, pushes forward as they do, comes in double-envelopment style. LC follows, going wider and deeper to handle routers/kill archers/support the heavies. General acts as reserve and chases routers in the general chase phase. Peltasts take one for the team, route, hopefully return to discipline and then support the infantry flankers to either side.
A tactic I have long wanted to try with a Phalanx-based army is the following:
Have at least six Phalanx units, preferably pikes. Set up two groups of three each, have these form a half-hexagon. Keep a gap in between them. Have the two middlemost units not yet engage Phalanx mode. Keep skirmishers, slingers etc. up front, tending to the middle. When the enemy approaches them, run them to the centre of your formation and through the gap between the two Phalanx half-hexagons. The AI, already committed to chase them, will end up between your two mini-formations.
.....................ssssssssssssssss..........................
......................................................................
............PPPPPPP.................PPPPPPP..................
.........PPP........PPP..........PPP........PPP................
.......PPP.............PPP....PPP..............PPP.............
Like this at the beginning. Once the enemy runs into the gap, advance your Phalanx from both sides, keeping the outermost Phalanx units facing more or less forward still, in case the enemy inf line is long and not all committed. Skirmishers and slingers can duck behind the two buckles of your Phalanx and be drawn out to the flanks. Cavalry protects flanks and comes around to take the enemy from behind. Enemy troops should by this point be either in the meat grinder between two Phalanges or congested in a clump in front of them, so they're easy pickings for cavalry. For this to work the enemy must be drawn out by slinger/skirmisher fire, and you can expect to lose some of these, but they're cheap. The Macedon army would be perfect for this kind of trap, as their Pikemen can hold out long and have tough morale, so they will stay in formation even when separated into two mini-formation-blocks.
Even if the enemy overloads on one flank and tries to get in behind your Phalanx half-hexes, they can hold out until relieved. I have found mini-formations of three Phalanx units in half-hex to be a very durable, and, what is more, self-sustaining, compound, especially when supported by one or two archer (Cretan) unit inside.
Thanks Seamus and Empirate. I printed your posts for future reference.
I tried a couple experiments last night in the custom game. I took five Praetorians and had them face off with five royal pikemen, and another match of 4 vs 4 units. Medium difficulty setting. Without support, the pikemen just can't stand alone against the prateorians. In only one situation did I get a prateorian unit to rout and that was because I had the pikemen facing downhill and the praetorians were trying to charge uphill into the sarissas. It's the gaps! If the Praetorians get around the sides, they win every time. Amazingly, however, the royals show very good stamina against their opponents. The fights did not end quickly. So, the royals can "hold" if you can just get something around the Roman line to flank or hit them from the rear.
I usually try to grab 2 cretans for my standard army formations. But in one recent game (can't remember which faction I was playing) I had an army with four Cretan archer units. The Cretans just showered the enemy armies from long range. It was butchery. :skull: I decided from that moment that in future games I would try to make 3-4 Cretans a standard for future formations. You can't do it for every army in your faction, just not enough opportunities to buy so many archers. But they are very, very effective. So, I concur, Seamus, with your Mac formation content.
Thank you, guys, for your posts.
Seamus,
Interesting last few posts.
Am rereading Empirate's post now. There are some nuances to combat tactics possible in RTW that I am still discovering. I'm rather "thick" at times in my thinking. It's been helpful to contrast my tactics and impressions with the experiences of other Guild members.
I definitely need to get back to a Mac campaign.
Phalanx troops, especially Pikemen, can hold out much better if you don't leave any gaps between the units...in my Macedonian campaign the Royal Pikemen could hold their own against Praetorians since I didn't leave any gaps between them. While this reduces their frontage I didn't find that to be a problem since I would fold back one or both flanks and always had the advantage in cavalry.
P -
Very true. In my staged trial in the custom game the AI showed a little cleverness. It shifted the praetorian units around so that they didn't approach my line in a straight line. One unit broke out alone to my right, two units approached my center and one unit broke off to my left. The one on my left was the one that had to approach my royal phalnx uphill. That was the one that routed that I mentioned in a previous post. The AI held one praetorian in reserve. My right posted royal pikemen broke first. The center held and I tried to bring my victorious left wing in to support the center. But the "victorious" praetorian hit my right. In spite of that, the center held for a long time before it finally routed. Praetorians do not have to hold formation with the same discipline as a phalanx unit, so they do tend to flow out around your pikemen. Definitely my line discipline could stand improvement.
It's wise, even with phalanx armies, to hold a reserve so as to plug gaps or press an advantage. A tactic that I have tried to employ more in my own combats.
I can only second Phoenix! You must not leave gaps in your Phalanx line. Rather, deploy them so they overlap slightly. This way, even gentle bends and corners in your formation don't matter. If I use a Phalanx-heavy army, meaning at least six P units, I like to have them in one huge, continuous Phalanx, all abreast of each other, leaving absolutely no gaps. The two outmost units are bent back a little, so they're less easily flanked. Cavalry or whatever mobile units I have are deployed either a bit back or far out on one or both flanks. The center right behind the Phalanx is taken by archers.
Slingers, if I have them, pose a problem: They can't stand out in front because getting back through the Phalanx is tricky. I've had some success with putting a unit of slingers right before a unit of Pikemen that was not in Phalanx mode. When the enemy approached, the slingers retreated (with time to spare), and the Pikemen were put in Phalanx mode as soon as the last slingers had passed their front rank, nicely spitting the unsuspecting enemy on six yards of spear. But timing is tricky with this scheme. Deploying slingers out on the flanks, on the other hand, can draw the enemy there and lead to them flanking your Phalanx more easily. So normally I try to take archers/Onagers for missile troops and skip slingers, saving these for armies that are built around a more mobile infantry core.
Empirate,
you can use more efficiently with a little more patience; I use this tactic playing as Carthagenians but Macs can do do it with Rhodians slingers.
Place your slingers on the flank behind your phalanx line (usually near the cav), and wait for the opposing army to engage your line, then have your slingers run and place them in the back of the opposing melee units. From there on , you can:
1) "gunsling" the shield-less melee ennemies
2) draw the opposing archers' attention until the cav arrives (loose formation)
3) if the enemy general is not in combat already, slingers make the perfect bait to hold him and have your cav trample him
... of course, switch skirmsih mode off (I forgot and learned the hard way)
Yes, they'll take heavy casualties, but that's their job; drawing the attention of free-to-move enemy units so that your more precious units make it.
Slingers are easily refit in any practice range, Rhodians are more problematic but I don't mind sacrificing them... (unlike Cretians archers; those guys are just too valuable to have one of them die)
Placing slingers in the outflanking force solves the problem of having them run to safety behind your own line. However, I don't use this tactic for my campaigning army; it is usually too far from my cities to retrain immediately after battle, every man counts when you're 2 turns or more from home.
Thanks for the tip. Slingers as flanking infantry might work well. However, I don't tend to use any units as bait. I just don't like my men dying on me in the worst way. Besides, whenever I use slingers at all, it will be Rhodians or Balearics, not generic ones. Generics are not worth building at all imo. And Rhodians / Balearics are hard to resupply after taking casualties.
Rhodians have actually performed well for me in my recent Seleucid campaign. But they're for more specialized duty, not easily incorporated into my main field armies. They can be killers whenever they have a height advantage, meaning they're good on city walls (shooting inside, so a great unit when attacking cities!) and in the mountains. If the enemy have no cavalry, they're also very good against melee infantry. THE job for slingers is taking out Thracian Mercenaries, Bastarnae, all kinds of Gladiators, and Falxmen - dangerous melee infantry without much of a shield. Slingers can totally devastate them in mere moments.
Still, these troops don't pose much of a challenge to a decent Phalanx, so I'll go without slingers with Macedon, Greece and so on.
Emp & Poulp -
Actually when I think about it, I don't use a lot of slingers in my phalanx armies. I have used Balearics a great deal when I'm playing Carthage. But, in the early Carth game, you aren't managing phalanx armies as much as infantry armies - Iberians, Libyans, etc. Then, I do station slingers on the front line, but to one side. I usually bring the two from Palma and combine them with the one in Corduba to make three. When I station them on the line, I place them all together as if they were one unit. I always have them backed-up by a cavalry unit in case the AI decides to go after them. My general is in support too. Balearics embedded three deep are devastating and give similar results as having 3-4 Cretan archers. Unarmored infantry are decimated against them. I've not found slingers very useful storming inside cities. I can use them on stone walls to good effect. But I never drag them through city streets. They're just too vulnerable. Truly, slingers are a specialized tool. They can't be used in every circumstance.
Poulp's tactical suggestion on slingers has merit. And, I have actually done that a couple times. But it's not a regular tactic. My phalanx armies are never without cav support, except in rare circumstances when they are simply replacement armies hanging behind my General's spearhead army ready to feed replacement units after a combat. I tend not to commit unsupported phalanx armies unless the enemy is also unsupported. Thankfully, I haven't been ambushed much. [Spies, spies, spies!]
I agree - Rhodians & Balearics are the only truly good slingers. I, too, avoid building the generic slingers for Carthage. They just aren't worth the waste of money to me. And, too, I hate sacrificing my guys as "cannon fodder" or sacrificial lambs to an enemy army. It spoils part of my fantasy as being an ancient army general. [In truth, if I really was an ancient army general, my soldiers would probably cut me up for kabobs for the war dogs for my incompetence. :) ]
I get into ruts in my tactics and troop handling. So, I've appreciated the independent observations. I shall tighten up my phalanx discipline. One of the reasons I like the bowed line idea that Emp mentioned earlier and showed in his diagram is that it curves the edges of the phalanx line giving added flank protection. The units in a concave line, once they make contact with the enemy, collapse together making the gaps disappear. Excellent idea.
I experimented with a one-on-one in the custom game pitting a royal pikeman vs. praetorian. Without upgraded weapons or experience differences, the praetorian won the mano-a-mano. But if I gave the royal two experience chevrons, they kicked butt decisively. Chances are in the late game, the Romans will be cranking out praetorians with upgraded weapons and/or experience chevrons. But it's nice to know the royals can perform against the Roman's best. And if you give them some kind of edge, they might be able to win on their own. With the Macs, [and I started a game yesterday], it's getting the city populations up so I can crank out the Macedonian and Companion cav units.
All-in-all I've successfully managed my phalanx armies in past games, but I have not been happy with my line discipline in some combats. I get in a hurry, and then suffer more casualties than needed. If these were real men I was mishandling, I would weep instead of sleeping at night.
Good posts.
Yep, taking casualties because of your mistakes is vexing -- but it also represents some of the game's fun. It does hammer you for some mistakes.
Don't dismiss generic slingers too quickly. The have too little range to do well in the open field, and the low morale/armor typical of 1st level missile troops, but they have LOTS of ammo, outrange peltasts, and do surprisingly well as firepower from a stone wall defense. In the field, I use them as my expendables -- they sit with skirmish off, in loose formation, just in front of the spears. Adds some firepower to the line, draws enemy missile fire away from my main line, and sometimes the enemy cav will go after them -- crashing all the way through their formation and arriving at slow speed right on the points of my phalanx.:2thumbsup:
I have to say - I am amazed at times how the AI looks at your slingers, standing out there in front or to the side of your main line, and cannot apparently resist the temptation to charge a cavalry unit (often the AI general himself) straight at them regardless of the consequences to the cavalry unit or, for that matter, the "whole" battle. The AI has even done that to my wardog handlers (even AFTER the dogs were released.) It's like holding red meat in front of a starving lion.
Needless to say, the AI cav may kill a few helpless handlers or slingers, but it doesn't let them off a death sentence. :no: In consequence, I've learned to be very protective of my dog handlers after release. When the AI wastes its general going after a few helpless slingers, the tide has turned in my favor right there. They are, indeed, good bait.
I'm in the full throes of a Mac attack. Started a campaign two nights ago. It's going well "Gyras the Conqueror" has secured Tarentum and Croton. The Brutii are toast, Thrace is on the ropes. I possess Rhodes and Pergamum and Halicarnassus. Pontus is eyeing me suspiciously. And the Scipii and Rome are my next targets. The Greeks have only Syracuse left to them. At the moment I'm allied to Carthage and Scythia.
Have taken more care in phalanx formations. But the AI will try to disturb the continuity of your formation by dancing around a lot, moving its units around to get you to break formation. Am adjusting the formation to erase gaps before marching forward. After studying the point assignments for Macedonian cavalry, I noticed that the light lancers actually have a slightly better offensive capability than the Greek cavalry. Greek cav are stronger defensively. So a good early Mac cav contingent should have a mixture of both, probably. Gaining experience chevrons has been a big help for the cav. Phalnx pikemen are my mainstay infantry at the moment.
I want to slow down my expansion to give my tech development a chance to catch up. My two most formidable future adversaries will undoubtedly be Carthage and Egypt. And after pondering Master Fermanagh's posts, I feel there is great wisdom in "turtling" one's campaign. At the moment, I'm having to do a lot of troop shuttling to replace unit losses. I don't like using up units completely if they have experience chevrons. I prefer to retain them as they are more effective in battle. I try to keep a replacement army just behind my spearhead army that is about half the size to keep fresh troops supplied to the leading general. They occasionally become handy in a pinch if a new threat develops. Throw a couple extra units in a replacement army and you have a new army that might be a "shield and sword" to protect a new flank vulnerability. My fleets are kept busy keeping the sealanes open and shuttling troops back and forth between Sparta, Thessalonica, and Larisima (sp). Athens is showing a 4000+ denarii figure, so it's pulling its weight and thensome.
I'm buying Cretan archers at every opportunity. Trade income is about to take off and I may be able to bribe Sardis into the fold.
Need to vary my use of siege towers a bit. Once Rome is out of the way, I want to move toward Egypt, taking a page from Alexander's book.
Money, profits, SLAVES, WOMEN!! :laugh4: yeeehah!
. . . guess I'm getting carried away, what?
About gaps in the phalanx line:
How do you organize your units on the field? Do you run a single group of 9 units, 3 groups of 3 units or, (what I'm doing now) 4 groups of 2 and a unit in reserve?
I used to group all my phalanxes into one long line. One group of 9 made my phalanxes easier to move and rotate but I had to micromanage to adapt my line to the opponent's move.
Then, I began to organize my line into 3 groups of 3; that way I could bend my line more easily and order my units to enter into phalanx mode more accurately (with just a quick look at my radar map). At the same time, the other pikemen remained mobile enough to fill or exploit gaps in my line.
Now I run tag teams; 4 groups of 2 phalanxes each. One unit is deployed as a long line while the other is deployed in a square. The wide phalanx is usually the one engaged by the opponent, and I flank the opponent's unit with the other phalanx; it is a mini version of the hammer and anvil.
Also, having 4 groups is the same as having 3 groups of 3; my line is more mobile and adaptive than a single group.
https://img116.imageshack.us/img116/2881/mac05oa2.jpg
This deployment leaves me with gaps in the line, but gaps don't matter that much since my line can curve and envelop the opposing army. I also use those gaps to have a heavy cavalry unit deployed in wedge formation engage the opponent directly from the front, the opposing unit usually breaks on impact, is overrun by the cav who is now behind the enemy line. (it doesn't work against other phalanx army though)
A short note about slingers:
In the long run, using slingers aggressively has an unexcepted consequence; even a few survivors can chase routing units and keep on the run. In my Carthagenian campaign, my slingers units were the first to reach the golden chevrons, along with my round shield cavalry... They're some kind of un-mounted militia cav.
Just remember to tell your slingers that the unit they're facing shouted "Jehova"
Poulp'
For my part, I think you're technique sounds just fine. Perhaps Empirate could chime in here to offer some thoughts. His posts have shown some creativity on phalanx use, and Seamus handles his army deftly from the impression I've gained from his posts. My phalanx dispositions are very simple and are usually one long line. But admittedly, it's not proving flexible enough for all my circumstances. In fact, I like your idea of the tag teams, even 3x3x3 or 4x4/1 seems to have more flexibility then my method. But, I usually don't have that many phalnx units in one army. My typical disposition is 5 or 6 abreast, front-and-center. I have supplemented sometimes with Thracian mercenaries on a flank. (I'm still playing too fast and being too inflexible.) My armies are cav heavy with 5-6 units, not counting the general, and I'm not sure I want to change that. I try to keep 2-3 skirmishers and 2-3 archers behind. Perhaps if I went to 7 units, one facing line of 3 with two tag teams of 2, it would give me more capability. Much, of course, depends on the enemy army you're facing.
Your tag teams should give you enough flexibility to make gaps a superfluous issue in most situations. Sounds good to me. I think you've found a good technique that works for you.
To get rid of line gaps in my initial disposition, I put the phalanx units in standard formation and then press the '=' key to get the line to widen. Each '=' keystroke widens your unit's formation, and makes it more shallow at the same time. Each '-' keystroke, thickens your unit's position narrowing the unit's facing while increasing its depth. I'm not sure if those two keystroke functions are widely known by RTW players. But they've been very useful to me.
My formation above assumed this. Never thin your phalanx below three lines though -- and 4 is usually better. 5+ lines gives you a reserve, but narrows your front.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guyus Germanicus
I rarely manuever my phalanx in groups, preferring individual commands as things get hairy. Remember, if they are out of phalanx formation, they move just as well as any other med/hvy infantry. The trick is to arrive at the key point with 0.5 seconds left to go into formation for the killing.
Reserve armies following on are a good tool.
Try a garrison army following that:
3 milhop/levpike, 4 peasant, 1 milcav/grkcav, 1 peltast. Your strike army pulls out one turn after taking the place and this group plops in to subjugate. Costs about 1k upkeep to field.
Excellent point about line depth. You don't want to make the line too thin, otherwise the AI will punch a whole through it and get in your rear. Watching my custom combats with phalanx one notices that as the phalnx takes casualties the back soldiers filter toward the front and replace the casualties. You want some reserves in depth for attrition.Quote:
Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh
. . . which is pretty much what I've been doing, but I've wondered if there wasn't a better way of doing business. As it is, I'm not taking a lot of casualties doing what I've always done. The phalanx seems to have a great deal of potential in spite of the Roman cohort as an "improvement." Our colleagues in the Guild have shown quite a diversity in the way they use it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh
Interesting . . . especially the cost you mention, which seems very economical. It would bring more order to the campaign as well. I had thought about doing something similar but just hadn't worked it through. I usually garrison more lightly. But a modified concept to your idea - a running garrison army that bleeds off units with each city conquered sounds appealing to me. What I've been doing: as I conquer a new city I prime the local garrison with units from the conquering army that are growing obsolete with the advances in my tech tree. Then I replace the units I've used as garrison with more up-to-date units or fresh mercenaries. Partially used up merc units can be used as garrison fodder, and then act as replacements as newer mercenary units take casualties in subsequent combats. Ahhh logistics.Quote:
Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh
Speaking of cannon fodder . . . I was reading Adrian Goldsworthy's book "The Punic Wars" on the battle of Zama. Scipio had positioned his line with Hastatii in front followed by Principes, followed by Triarii. His laned columns allowed Hannibal's ellies to pass through. Hannibal placed all his lower grade infantry up front keeping his elite with him at the back of the line. Had the Roman cavalry force not returned to the field after chasing off the Carthaginian cavalry, Hannibal's cannon fodder troops might have worn down the Roman troops enough so that his elite force could carry the day. Some of his fodder troops rallied retreating through his lines. The Hastatii were definitely worn out. However, the Numidian cavalry returned to the field and hit Hannibal's elite troops in the rear. Interesting account. So, I guess the moral is - even ancient generals did what they thought they had to to win even if it meant sacrificing human lives.
Regrettably, in real life, that is the calculus of combat. Sometimes you spend lives simply to buy time (Leonidas and company), other times you spend lives to divert attention (Italian 10th corps at Gazala). Back in Scipio's day, you couldn't use firepower to suppress either -- tough stuff.
I often base the broken merc units at a city near the fighting so that they act as a sort of repple-depple. Another fine use, after combining the fragments, is to send the 3 leftover peltasts to garrison a fort.
Further thoughts on Phalanx usage:
Actually, I don't use Phalanx units as the killing power of my armies. They're there to support battlefield domination, not rout and kill the enemy troops. I see it this way: Where your Phalanx stands, the enemy cannot go without suffering a lot of casualties, fast. If you can lure or force them to go there, the battle is won. Tougher units that cannot be killed by Phalanx are held at bay and take a loooong time to work their way through them even if they manage to get past the sarissas. This gives your mobile arm time and space to deploy and mow them down. I've never fielded an army with more than nine Phalanx units, leaving ample space in my stack for missile support and cavalry killing power. Usually, I use six Phalanx units, four missile, and all the rest cavalry (or equivalent, e. g. Chariots or Elephants). Six Phalanx units with missile support is sufficient to draw the enemy to you, and command the best part of the battlefield. The enemy can either try to pass them by, all the while whittled down by missiles they can't get at, or engage them directly. If the enemy hopes to attack my mobile forces on the flanks first, fine: Those can easily evade combat if it looks like trouble locally, withdrawing behind the Phalanx.
So Phalanx troops are like a solid, unsurmountable (or at least, not easily surmountable) obstacle. The obstacle is mobile, and has one side that can kill, and kill quickly. This gives you power over the battlefield. If the enemy has Phalanx, too, I can stop this using my Phalanx, then use my mobile forces to quickly destroy them. If the enemy relies on cavalry, you can take shelter behind your mobile obstacle and pepper them with missiles, then engage when and where favorable.
Having two or more batches of Phalanx is a minor nuance on this theme: You now have more and smaller obstacles. The basic idea stays the same: Force the enemy to hit the spearwall, or use it to create opportunities to strike out with mobile troops.
EDIT: A further reason not to use Phalanx units as the killing power of your armies is the following: Phalanx troops, especially Pikemen, are large units. This means they have to kill a lot of men before earning any experience chevrons. It's much easier for your cavalry to achieve valor in the triple-silver range than for your Phalanx units, making them ever so much more devastating. If you see Phalanx units as a mobile, deadly obstacle that can shape the battlefield for you, they don't need additional levels of experience to perform well.
Once again, some interesting thoughts in your posts, gentlemen. I must have printed the last couple pages of this thread 4 or 5 times now just to save the dialogue. (Is quadrologue a word?) :)
I'm starving for lunch so I will try to make this brief,(HA!) but I wanted to share an update. Borrowing on a couple recent ideas shared in this thread, I staggered the end units of my phalanx line in my most recent Mac campaign. I have been fielding 7 phlanx units now, consisting mainly of phalanx pikemen, the level just below the royals. My dispositions generally have taken on the form below.
-------- ----------------- pp pp pp pp pp
--------- gc gc ll ------ pp - mj mp mp -- pp ----- ll gc gc
----------------------------- ca ca
------------------------------ gen
(The armies I'm marching on Egypt have the Greek cav replaced by mac cav. And 3 or 4 of the pikers are royals.)
The indented phalanx units (pp) are only set back about 3/4 of their full length, and the pikemen in the five unit facing I have overlapped so that there are no gaps. The number of Cretan Archers I employ has unfortunately depended on their availabilility. So I have either substitued extra peltasts, ballistas, or Mac archers. Phalanx pikemen are the highest quality of pikers I can recruit in large numbers. I'm producing the royals now in my game (I'm 12 cities away from victory condition.) But even with three cities producing, I'm not getting the royals out in sufficient numbers to replace the phlanx pikers. And I need units that I can feed replacements to.
This small change in my phalanx disposition has made a great deal of difference in my line discipline. I'm dominating the field more even against large armies. I think increasing the number of pikers in my standard army along with the line adjustments was equally important. One thing that I may try as an addition to this plan is to have one militia hoplite stationed close to my general for flank and rear protection. Then, using him for garrison "fodder" when a city falls, replacing him in the army at convenience.
I'm marching these seven unit fronts straight into the teeth of the enemy line. They are holding up well, and with the large cav contigent, I'm able to take advantage of their hold to get units behind the enemy line. But I AM letting them carry some of the load in the combat.
In city streets, 5-7 pikers stacked as one unit are devastating to charging cav. War dogs become kabobs, and the hastatii don't like it too much either. Small rebel bands get ground to hamburger as I am able to fold the phlanx line around them from both flanks. Egyptian chariots are not faring well against the line either. My heaviest casualties have come on stone walls against principes.
I am managing to get my pikers some experience chevrons along the way. But the cav are the ones that usually acquire this "glory" more frequently as Empirate has noted.
The Romans are caput now. Carthage and Scythia are still allied to me but they're wary. I tried giving Scythia their capital city back after taking it from the Dacians, but the Scyths refused the gift. Amazing! I've bribed three provinces away from the Pontids. And the Egyptians did me the favor of attacking me. Salamis is lightly garrisoned and my navy is strong, so it's going to be an early target.
No sign of the companions yet. I need to check the tech tree to see how they're produced. Wish the Greek Cities produced better cavalry. It's chow time. Have really enjoyed the exchanges. More later . . .
First, I have a question:
What does "mj" and "mp" stand for?
I guess "pp" mean phalanx pikemen, "gc" greek cav, "ll" light lancers", and "ca" cretan archers.
Are "mj" and "mp" mercenaries or macedonians?
If it is mercenary peltasts, then I think they are a fine choice; mercenaries or Illyrians are better suited to stand in the second line than regular ones since they are better in hand to hand.
This leads me to the second part of my thoughts. You said you considered taking militia hoplites as a reserve. In my experience, they make a bad reserve. Strange as it may seem, "mh" are better in the front line; as long as they are wielding their pike, they can hold the line well enough but their ability with a sword is way too low.
The royal pikemen you consider fielding shall make a good reserve; their number is too low to field an army of them and more importantly, reserves sometimes have to rush into melee and engage their opponent with their sword.
This is why I think royals are more suited to do the rear guard duty than mere militia.
After all, who would you trust to protect your army? The best men of Macedon or untrained troops you recruted in one of your conquered province?
About Egypt: if you have both Salamis and Cyrene, you can ship troops into Egypt really easily. Logistics goes more smoothly when you have two supply lines.
Sorry about the abbreviations, Poulp.
'MJ' is for Macedonian javelin throwers and 'MP,' as you guessed, is mercenary peltasts. When the money is available and speed of deployment of a field army is crucial, I concentrate my recruiting on cav and pikemen and then buy some peltasts because they are of slightly better quality than Macedonia's home grown variety.
Also, at the moment I do have Salamis and Cyrene, AND Tarsis. Memphis and Thebes are under siege. I literally bribed two Egyptian armies out of existance. I have three armies and a small reserve contingent en rout to the Egyptian theatre. Besides the two armies carrying out siege duty on the Nile, I have one more army guarding the bridge over the Nile just south of Memphis. A small reserve army is building watch towers in the desert between Cyrene and Siwa. So only five more cities to take to reach the victory condition. They will probably be Lovice in Central Europe, Tanais (Rostov) on the Don River, Memphis, Alexandria and Thebes.
I may have all this done before I build a royal palace to enable royal stables for Companion cavalry. So, I guess I didn't turtle my game enough.
I shall probably try another game with Mac after this one, but slow things down a bit and try some variations on my formations. I may try to go with 1 or 2 more pike units in my standard army. I've had a boatload of good generals in this game. Did have a couple of wastrels. They're good for babysitting reserve armies and building watchtowers and forts - kind of like fence riders on a cattle ranch. They're not top hands, and you wouldn't want them doing the bookkeeping (governing cities), but they can still do some essentials.
Well it seems your campaign is going great.
Do you have Siwa? If not, you should conquer it as your last and 50th province.
It is a fine last step to end your campaign; finishing it where Alexander met the oracle.
Finished my Mac campaign. Had one awful battle at the bridge just south of Alexandria. The Egyptians tried to force a crossing and it was a bloodbath. Four of my pike units held the bridge backed up by skirmishers and camel archers. I wouldn't wish such slaughter on my worst enemy. But they just kept coming. Alexandria fell, and I had Antioch under siege at the end. But I stopped the game at 50 cities. I will probably start another game soon, but want to put off a few days before starting another so I don't burn out.
I did appreciate all the feedback from my fellow guilders. A tip 'a the hat to you all.
I may activate Armenia just for grins and take them for a test drive. I like some of their units.
Hello
I need some help with upgrading the generals' bodyguards. I have v1.0 and i can't upgrade any generals' bodyguards. I've been looking the different desc_texts and I can't find how to tweak everything to make this feature appear. by the way I just love being able to use bribing!!!! Perhaps some can give me and answer or it's just a bug from thegame only to be solved by downloading a patch...???
Upgraded bodyguards should become available after the Marian reforms. Incidentally, it is highly recommended that you play with the latest patch (R:TW 1.5 of BI 1.6) installed, as they solve many problems with the engine.
I tried unlocking the factions with the edit example but it doesnt seem to be working? What am I doing wrong? Should I expect to see the factions imediatley available in the new campaign screen or do I have to conquer that faction first? Anything helps thanks!
If you placed it under playable then it should be playable immediately. I think you also need to have the factions lined up directly under each other.
:help:
I made all the factions (exept slave) playable like you said but Macedon and Pontus are the only ones that work, when I select any other faction in the imperial campaign the whole game turns off. What can i do?
No other factions except Macedon and Pontus work for you? Never heard of that problem before but I think you need to leave 2 factions unplayable. Try moving the Senate to nonplayable and see if that helps.
As Phoenix suggests, but uninstall and reinstall to give it a clean start.
The most interestig nations. I had found very good strategy to play with Macedonians. At the beggining create only money buildings and no army. With levy pikeman and lancers conquer Greek towns in Motherland and aly with Thracians, Romans, Pontus, Selucia, Scynthia and Dacia. When you have conquered Motherland and Kydonia without messing with Romans and Thracians(they are very loyal aly) and you get the towns In Asia minor and Rhodos. When you finished war with greeks who luckily occupy whole Greece you should protect all paths thro mountains and all brifges you should develop your citys and do not mess with anybody for 2-3 years. A lot of money I was gathered in my empire(100,000). I started building three stacks of army(royal pikeman, macedonias cavalary) and two fleets full of trirerm. After all preparation I attacked Italy and conquered all brutiai and scipiai towns. Only to show about the whealt of Macedonia, Athene(4235 per turn), Sparta(3500), Kydonia(3125), Thessalonika(2800), Rhodos(3150), appolonia(3000)... Advice - Create your army with falang units and Macedonians. Do not EVER attack, wait to be attacked, the defence ist best attack. Also before going on east you must create solid and wealthi main kingdom in Greece, ilyricum and Italy, and also be in very good relations with Gauls.
Everybody. sorry for bad english in post above, that happen when you play RTW on one copmuter and post here in the other comp. I also wanted to start a discussion about combination of troops that each players prefer for Slucids, Greeks, Macedonians, Thracians and Pontus.
Field Fighting forces for Selkies, Greeks, Macs are all pretty well the same for me.
Line of spears in phalanx, but not stacked more than 5 deep. (6)
Fronted by loose thin belt of peltasts/cheap slingers to slow charges & (sometimes) draw cav to spears. (2)
Backed by best archers available. (3-4)
Tucked in flanker infantry ready to go around the sides or prevent a flanking. (2). Selkies use legio, Greeksor Macs use Illyrians/Bast'nae.
1 Commanding officer -- usually not a combatant save during route or moment of crisis.
6 Cavalry, usually 4 heavy (general, companion, sarmatian) 1 Lt (lancer or greek) to chase routers, & 1 skirmisher (javcav or scythian) used to annoy, harass or draw a unit or two out of the fight.
Thracians are different. Missile component weak, so I try to use phalanx on the flanks and have the middle full of falx or bast'nae. Some archers for support (Cretans if I can for the range) and a little light cav/general cav for quick punch. Key with them is to minimize time under missile fire -- they drop way too fast so you conserve energy, keep the flanks solid, and then burst rapidly on your target.
I have few friends that are huge fans of RTW and alll the rest of TW series. We dont like to use peltast and skirmishers(very small range of fire) so I wanted to know why do you all on internet use them. I also wanted to know how do you resolve friendly fire casulties from archers. Archers doesnt obey very well, I order to shout at the hastati while I am fighting their cavalary with my general but they constantly(in every battle) fire all over the place and several times they killed my general. I think that the best formation for falang is to put them in circle whit one unit coverig the rest and just wait for them to run on your spear and with your cavalary massacre their archers, this especially work pretty well against romans.
I have interesting tactic for romans and gauls, i play only with phalanx and create 4 line circle on the battlefield. I wait them to attack me and then I massacre
Hey all, I just started playing as the Macedonians just last night and I was very amazed at how far I got! I started out by taking Byzantium, which is very lucrative in trade. Then I took Sparta and Thermon, afterwards signing a cease-fire with the Greeks, I just wanted them off the Greecian peninsula, with a very high cost of 17495 denarii, :furious3: which I felt was a bit insane! Next Brutii attacked me, predictable, so I began a campaign against the Romans, which went REALLY well because I had taken Appolina and Salona, pushing them back to Italy, then I gathered quite an impressive army of Pikemen, or hypaspists, and sent them to Tarentum and... Croton... I think? :inquisitive: Well that effectively wiped out Brutii. Then came Scipii... quite a difficult seige happened at Tarentum, I could tell from their 1134 massed stack that they really wanted the town, but I showed them!! Then I took Capua then Rome!! :2thumbsup: I then created a watchtower border with Julii. No attack from them yet so I sent my Faction heir with an army of... I think 976 men, which included Greek Cavalry, Royal Pikemen and Archers over too Massila which gives me an effective landing area to wipe out the Scipii on Sicily. The year I decided to call it quits was 237 BC. This was the furthest I've ever been with a non-roman faction and I felt quite proud.
Oh words of advise I found that placing, if you have enough, your Phalanx troops in a box formation with your general in the middle, ofcourse, you really can hold out against a massive army. The Senate's army had extremely skilled velities, hestati, principes and 4 roman generals. The funny thing was right at the start all they did was charge head long into the huge spear wall... quite daft if you ask me... It just solidified my win. they lost all thier men whereas I lost I think about 150-200 of my men. Sometimes the AI can be silly but it helped!!!:2thumbsup: :2thumbsup:
Right now ive destroyed Thrace, at war w/ Brutii, greeks, and Scythians. The Romans and Greeks actually made an alliance with each other! Has this ever happened to any of you playing against AI??? The Scythians were already allied w/ Thrace and felt threatend by my presence. The Dacians were my allies till they broke alliance since Scythia was also their allies. So ill probably have the Dacians attack me next. But the war is going alright. I had a heroic victory against and full sized Greek army and I have captured Thermon from the Greeks so they are out of my way for now.
Just need to focus on Romans, kick them out of balkans and then take on the Scythians and maybe Dacians.
Ooh, I liked this campaign. 's still going, but so far:
First off, I nabbed Athens with the Crown Prince, Gyras, and his army. Stuffing it full of archers, pikemen, and cavalry, I marched south, past Corinth, and met the Greeks' main army in the field. It was a bit hairy at first as their better-trained hoplites punished my pikemen, but then my longer line got in on the flanks, and the cavalry won the battles on the flanks, before turning and ramming the hoplites from behind.
So, after about five years of warfare, most of the Balkans was united under me. I'll just follow the fortunes of Gyras, the one who fought the Romans, as the other front isn't too interesting.
After kicking the Greeks out of Greece, my main field army had no one left to fight. I noticed a full-stack Brutii army near the border of Thermon, however, so I moved Gyras out there and kept an eye on them. They decided not to try my defenses, and made for Salona instead. However, a Roman fleet, perhaps under the commnad of an insane admiral, blockaded Thermon that winter! I brushed it aside with ease (Macedonia had been building a powerful navy, both to win control of the Aegean and to push across the Adriatic), and Gyras immediately pursued the Brutii northwards. I quickly stormed Apollonia, forcing the Roman force to turn around. In the first of 4 great field battles, the Romans were crushed against the wall of pikes and powerful cavarly.
As the war escalated, the Macedonian navy was able to clear a corridor across the Adriatic, sinking or driving out all enemy ships in the area. Gyras and another, less-well trained army were shuttled across. Tarentum and Croton both fell to brief sieges, the cream of the Brutiii military having perished across the sea.
Gyras marched north. The Scipii were waiting for him, with another full-stack army. In a confused fight in the middle of a forest just outside Capua, the blue-clad troops were eventually broken and annhiliated. Capua fell without a fight in the aftermath of this, the second of Gyras's 4 battles.
The two Macedonian armies did not wait, but pushed on to Rome itself. Gyras was attacked by the powerful Senate army there. As the Macedonians fought to hold the line, the second army appeared on the flank of the SPQR troops, and they were crushed between hammer and anvil. Gyras, now known as the conqueror, owned Rome.
The losses incurred in hese battles with the Romans had been heavy. In scarcely 5 years, the Crown Prince had destroyed 3 seperate Roman armies, scattered numerous small detachments, taken 5 towns, and killed dozens of Roman family members. Also, he was no longer the crown prince: The old king had died back in the capital city of Athens, leaving his eldest son, the war hero Gyras, to rule the empire.
Gyras would not be bound in a throne room, however. He stayed in Rome long enough to consolidate his rule, replenish his losses, and repair the city. Then he marched north again, towards the Julii, a family of Roman die-hards occupying most of Northern Italy.
The Julii, on the approach of the black-clad soldiers, hastily concluded their war with Gaul, and concentrated most of their troops into one great army to try to destroy the oncoming Macedonian one. The two sides were fairly evenly matched in numbers - Gyras's second army had been folded into his original, due to losses to combat and garrisons.
The two forces met in the plains below Arretium. A powerful Julii attack ploughed right into the Macedonian center, breaking up the phalanx, slaughtering pikemen by the dozens. On the flanks, the lethal lancers had engaged the ill-disciplined noblemen of the equites class, and would soon be able to help.
That might not be in time, however - the Macedonian center was bowing dangerously under the pressure. Gyras rode forth personally, charging towards the danger point, his bodyguard around him. The horsemen stopped the Romans cold, throwing them back in disorder. The pikemen rallied around the general's unit, reforming the line, while at last the cavalry won on the flnaks and closed in from behind. The Julii broke, and their army was destroyed.
However, Gyras the Conqueror, King of Macedonia, lay dead on the field. He had fallen in the inital moments of the charge into the fray, perhaps on a friendly spear, or perhaps to a lucky pila.
I stopped the campaign there, because it seemed like a good ending. Gyras won 5 major field battles against armies at least equal to his own, each one receiving the "famous battle" marker. He only ever won one against each faction - the Greeks, the Brutii, the Scipii, SPQR, and the Julii, but he only needed to win one. After that, resistance collapsed, usually.
I'm still not sure what killed him, though, when I charged him to stabilize my line at Arretium. Guess I was just unlucky that time.
Right now ive secured the Balkans by kicking the Brutii out. I captured Apollonia and the Brutii lost 4 family members at Apollonia!!! (One of them was the faction heir along with a 5 star general.) The Balkans is is secured and im starting to get money in.
The Dacians attacked but they are weak.
Right now, my greatest threat is Scythia. There armies are full of cavalry and they captured Campus Getae from me. I only have infantry and a few Cavalry. I dont think im prepared to fight them. Lack of missile troops and cavalry prevent me from going on the offensive. I pulled my northern army back onto a bridge to defend my settlement. (cant think of name.) Im going to recruit more cavalry and start getting some archers out there so i can fight back.
The Greek cities are building a new empire in Asia minor. I though pontus would destroy them but they are advancing rapidly against the easterners. My ally Seleciud empire is on the brink of defeat but they are holding out pretty well.
So thats my Macedon campaign right now. Ill build up my navy to attack the Romans and may send some armies into the Italian peninsula. But ill probably focus more to fighting the barbarians since they are the greatest threat right now to my empire. Scythians are tough troops. Their the only ones ive truly lost battles to. Ive also had some Phyrric victories against them.
I played as Macedonia once. I dont have much to say here, just that I kicked the Bruttians from Apollonia. But I am weak. I dont have how to be much stronger. Could you give me some tricks?
Kill the Greeks before you go for the Brutii. You'll get cash, command stars, and good recruiting centers. You won't have much of a problem because usually the Brutes focus on the eastern Adriatic coast before they push inland.
And so what if they get a little stronger while you're off beating up Athens and Sparta? That way it's more of a challenge. :yes:
Agreed as to the fun of the challenge.
Economically, securing Rhodes, Pergamum, Halicarnassus, and Cyprus would be a big boon for you (Cyprus is optional if its still Eggy and you don't want a war there yet).
Delay against Scythia and/or force them to go after you in forts or across bridges.
Odd tactic I heard discussed once. Atack on square, not on the diagonal. Get 16 reg phalanx together. Form them into phalanxes of two ranks of 60 each. Put all 16 into a line stretching across the entire map (most of it at least). March forward to opposite side. All horses, pinned by the unbreakable red force field, will be pinned and chummed. Have 4 cavalry available to plug gaps or help against any infantry that's seemingly successful.
I've got recently re-started a macedonian campaign that was suposed to be a swap game with a buddy of mine, but it fell through.
On the first turn I took all the troops I had in corinth, plus all the merc's I could get, and attacked sparta befor there was walls. the huge generals BG and the Spartans are tough, but you should have missle superiority, which makes it a bit easier. That same turn I took all avaiable troops from Larissa and Thessalonica to attack thermon.
Once Thermon and Sparta were mine I managed get a ceasfire and trade rights with the greeks. I then worked on consolidating, taking Athens, byzantium, crete and cyrene. About this time, the Brutii attacked, which allowed me to broker an alliance with the greeks who were getting beaten badly by the Scippii. At the same time I was betrayed by the thracians, I eliminated them (they only held thier 2 starting provinces), keeping tylis for my self, and giving campus Getae to the Dacians for an alliance.
By this time I had an army of 6 phalanx pikemen(way better than levies), 4 archers, 2 samnite mercs(flanks of line) and various cav which has started the counter attack on rome, it has taken Apollonia and Tarentum, and defeated a HUGE scipii army (18 hastii, 1 princepes, 1 equites) in the northern part of the Tarentum province, and am trying to decide what to do. I'm thinking capua>croton>sicily or croton>capua>rome, it's hard to cover all of your fronts with just one army in italy. At the same time I have a 'regional defence force' (5 levy pikemen/3illyrian mercs) stationed at solona. the general is waiting for a newly built army (mostly the same as the first roman invasion army) heading up through Dalmatia targeting Segestica, and the Julii (by far the most powerful roman faction.
I also have a large missle based army slowly heading towards Siwa from Cyrene, I had to break a numidian seige cyrene to take it, and they won't accept peace. The only problem is that I'm not sure if I want to have a boarder with egypt like that, especailly with only one army in the area. I'll see if I can get some pics up.
The problem in zama was that hannibal, in my opinion, didn't adapt well to the fact that now he was the one in superiority in the infantry section by quite inferior in the cavalry section, his strength for over 18 years. Some say he tried to create a bait to take scipio's cavalry out of the battle. If he did it, he was not very smart, he had the prove in Cannae that cavalry can destroy the cavalry's army, chase the rooters and return when the infantry is about to lose. In zama he was beat in the same way he beat the romans in cannae... Yet, he did have something that may had give him the victory: his 80 war elephants. If i was hannibal, i would have used the war elephants together with his cavalry for a frontal attack. Scipios' cavalry couldn't prevent such and if he tried hannibal could have trapped his cavalry with his infantry in a dead trap. After make the break with the frontal charge, which he would surely do, his infantry would push over the breach and break the roman's will. To protect his flank he could have the same as alexander in gaugamela, left a reserve on the back to protec it and avance in a inverse semicircle to avoid flanking, but i believe that it wouldn't be necessary, with the frontal charge followed by infantry pressure, it was most probably that he could actually pass through the roman's ranks, thus appearing in rear of the enemy. Scipio could have only send his cavalry help in the roman's rear unless he wanted to lose the battle, and by this time the battle would be pretty much doomed, since the the inversed semicircle would turn in a true semicircle, with the infantry on flanks to march faster creating a double envelopment, whilke the reserves left behind, without the task of protecting hannibal's flank, could have push through the break in the lines. Well, but it's easy to talk after the battle is over, isn't it :sweatdrop:?Quote:
Speaking of cannon fodder . . . I was reading Adrian Goldsworthy's book "The Punic Wars" on the battle of Zama. Scipio had positioned his line with Hastatii in front followed by Principes, followed by Triarii. His laned columns allowed Hannibal's ellies to pass through. Hannibal placed all his lower grade infantry up front keeping his elite with him at the back of the line. Had the Roman cavalry force not returned to the field after chasing off the Carthaginian cavalry, Hannibal's cannon fodder troops might have worn down the Roman troops enough so that his elite force could carry the day. Some of his fodder troops rallied retreating through his lines. The Hastatii were definitely worn out. However, the Numidian cavalry returned to the field and hit Hannibal's elite troops in the rear. Interesting account. So, I guess the moral is - even ancient generals did what they thought they had to to win even if it meant sacrificing human lives.
Anyway, macedonian: the tactic is quite simple, take athenas, then take both greek settlements. Use the diplomat to bribe any greek army around to weak them even more, and better then that, use the bribed greeks against, guess what, the greeks cities. After that it's better to get a temporary ceasefire, it will be very profitable to you, believe me. Also, protect Bylazora since this town will be target for both Dacia and Tracia VERY soon. Build 2 forts in the nort and east narrowed valeys close to the city (just lefting 1 unit of milita hoplites there is enough) will give you SEVERAL turns, believe me. Meanwhile get extra troops and mercenaries if you really need them, and bring some cavalry from tessalonica. Then i usually follow 2 routs: conquer rhodes and kydonia (I spend some times rebuilding my navy since the greeks will most probably destroy yours, that's why i cease fire meanwhile) and attacking brutti while there are no walls in Apollinia. After that it depends in which is your stance but, really, macedonia is easy to play. Why? You not only have one of the most profitable bases of all factions (money is rarely a problem) and a very good tech tree, you also have incredible troops to use and temples to power them up. You have great phalanx units and, on contrary of the greeks, you have very good cavalry to help in your flanks and with deadly charge. Even that light lancers are great, i mean, light fast moving cavalry with 16 charge bonus? Are you kidding me? Ah, and you can even get some nice archers. Your are regular ones have 7 missile attack, a normal attack, but with artemis' temples and armourer you can rise this number to 14, which basicly means pharaoh's bowmen at your command. So, with the proper focus in militar buldings in strategically cities, you can have an army full of very strong phalanxes, very strong heavy cavalry (and even a couple of very good light cavalry), plus very destructive and long range archers that will make your foes coming after you very quickly unless they want to be devasted before then even start the melee.
Only if you survived.Quote:
Originally Posted by ixidor
is that anyone know why my macedonian diplomat never success make an alliance with thrace ? :dizzy2:
It's semi-scripted, particularly on some difficulty settings, that certain neighbors are always ready to go to war with you on the slightest pretext. The game's AI is always seeking a way to get you in a 3 front war when you have resources for two armies, a 4 front war when you have resources for 3 full stacks etc. The goal is to force you to do the heroic "Napoleon defeats 3 separate armiesin one campaign" thing to up the challenge factor.Quote:
Originally Posted by silverhand
Given the AI's tactical "prowess" it barely creates enough of a challenge as is.
SO....
take the trade rights, assume war starts w/ Thrace within 5 turns and plan accordingly.
thanks for the info Seamus FermanaghQuote:
Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh
I need help and I'm looking forward to playing as this faction, but where do I insert file directory the second poster posted?
You must edit the file he noted to read as he suggests (actually, I'd say leave the Senate as unplayable as it malfs up things quite a lot). This is why he suggests you save a backup copy of the file in another area of your hard drive (with a modified extension notation such as .bkp). That way if your editing of the base file hurts things, you can go back to square one simply by moving the backup back in place and changing the extension code.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shogun
I've attempted to do that but the "imperial_campaign" file is empty...
It might be because I'm accessing it in another way (which I'm sure I'm doing since I'm searching for it).
Go to the imperial campaign folder and edit the descr_strat.txt file. Cut and past Macedon to the playable section
Yes, I know that's what I'm supposed to do, but I don't know where to access this file to begin with. I kept looking for it and ended up searching for it and using a setup wizard to locate it.
Mine is in this folder: D:\Program Files\total War\data\world\maps\campaign\imperial_campaign. I have mine on my second hard disk (D:) in my own created folder total war. Go to your total war folder and than follow the path: data => world => maps => campaign => imperial campaign.
Good luck
If you are using Vista it is probable a little different
Ah, I see.
Well, first, I am using Vista. I also forgot to mention that I have the Gold Edition, so I don't have more than one disc here. Help would be appreciated, thank you in advance.
in vista there should be a "show compatibility files", button like thing just below the address bar. I need to click it if I'm doing anyhitng in the save directory of M2TW for KotR
Macedon is an easy faction to play with. arly on hold the line with pike levvies or w/e they are called with general and archers behind them and flank with cav (which sets macedon apart from Greece). Plus loads of money. Easy.
You make it sound easy, but it isn't. dealing with the Brutii is a problem.
I've been seeing some people saying that a plague would always be occurring in your capital, it doesn't. I changed my capital and the plague never appeared, even after 30 turns...
It is hardcoded, it must happen. In Thessalonica. Anyone have anything to say on this matter?