Printable View
I cant see any reason to play as byzantium or russia because they don't have that many cool units... they can't call jihads or crusades... So do they have any positives to them? They don't have cool siege equipment either. Is there any way to change what units a faction is capable of making? Or are these factions just good for a challenge?
Byzantines have some incredible archers and horse archers. Guard Archers and Vardariotai come to mind. Besides that there's the wonderful feeling of crushing European knights with cataphracts.
i dread fighting the Byzantines in my HRE game. Those horse archers just chew me up (particularly the Varda-whatever). they also have outstanding infantry archers as the previous poster stated.
And i would actually see the lack of governing religious faction as a positive. Having the pope tell me what to do else face civil uprising pisses me right off.
(as an aside, being that i haven't played as a islamic faction yet i was wondering if they have to answer to a caliphate like the catholics do with the pope)
they don't answer to anyone. you can call a crusade on anyone you like, no one to please but themselves. :D
It makes no sense that they're completely independent of the Pope. The major breach (which was later reversed shortly thereafter) came just years before the game starts, and the Emperor sent emissaries to the Pope constantly.
If we had "zeal" back from MTW, then they should be Catholic but with consistently low zeal ratings. But whatever.
Orthodox factions cannot call Crusades.
In reply to metatron i would like to say that there is every reason to be independent from the pope as they r orthodox and seperated from the catholic church since the great schism in 1054.The seperation of the 2 churches never ended and stands until now.only in the years 1277-1280 emperor michael accepted for political reasons the unification under popes leadership but nobody else from the byzantines ever accepted that
I havent personally faced the Russians yet so I don't know how they would fare...but those Byzantines are a pesky bunch. They have a ridiculously strong cavalry that can plow through your infantry...as a matter of fact, i'm curious to know what strategies do you guys take against Byzantium??? The one time I won against them (I've fought 3 battles so far as Venice), I won because I was hiding behind my walls.
Quote:
Originally Posted by metatron
In truth, the 1054 schism was only official recognition granted to the fact that the two churches had long since drifted apart. The pope certainly shouldn't be able to boss the Orthodox around like they were Western Catholics (not even if the game was set to begin before 1054!). It makes perfect sense that the emperor (& the patriarch) and the pope aren't dependent on each other in the simplified world of the game. :juggle2:
pansoiatr: actually, the schism was again officially reversed in the middle of the 15th century, shortly before the Fall of Constantinople, when the emperor John VII negotiated the reconciliation of the churches in return for military aid against the Ottomans. However, the imperial decision was never popular with the Orthodox people, and when Constantinople was captured in spite of a crusade, and the need for the church union ceased to exist, the whole thing was basically forgotten and the two churches went their own way as before.
You kidding me? The Russians have some of the best looking units in the game, and a really nice variety of them. Definitely fun to play as.Quote:
russia because they don't have that many cool units
If you plays as the Byzantines it is hard to find an enemy who can match your armies in field. Sure true slightly difficult to seige castles but one can get over that with some good tactics. So far I have only lost 2 out of 23 battles with the Venicians at DIFFICULT LEVEL. The bizs are a great bunch to play with. Things get bad when a crusade is declared against Constantinople, however your bite and run technic with the Vardariotai and your archers can end off most of your enemies. Quite indefeatable the Byzantines, - well yes one could say so. However infantry is not great. Your economy never fails. Only problem, the muslims and the catholics attacking you at the same time. :furious3:
I was close to leaving my campaign when the catholics and the muslims simultaneoulsy declared a jihad and crusade againts Constantinople :no: . However they ended up fighting each other outside Nicaea, HAHaha. :laugh4:
Great fun playing as the Byzantines. You can rely on the Russians for help since they are bearly always loyal in their alliances :yes: . Convert the Magyars, and there you are: the whole Balcans are togehter with you in the struggle against the other religions. Poland is quite feeble :whip: and always got engulfed by the other balcan nations.
I would encourage playing as the Rus: :smash:
3 reasons:
- Might not have the best,but certainly efficient and good.looking armies.:yes:
- Gain the Byzantines as an ally and have fundeclaring wars at Turks and Venicians while they are struggling with your fellow orthodox. :yes:
- Great fun with Mongols, just great. :clown:
I hope you are all having as much fun as me , while playing the best game ever! :2thumbsup:
So far, Vardariotai have been a very important part of my Byz armies (cutting through Catholic and Muslim armies alike, supported by Byz Cav and Skythikons to make up numbers). I'm just about to bring out some Byz Guard Archers, and the first Byz Inf have just been trained, so the foot troops aren't looking quite as bad as before (Byz spears! Ugh...).
I'm hoping that Vars (in the open) and BGAs\BI (in castles) can bear the brunt of the Mongol forces when they arrive.
How did you manage to get a crusade called on constantinople?
As a catholic nation I can only call crusades on certain towns and only if they are rebel or owned by a muslim faction, but not if they are orthodox. Ie. you can call crusades on rebel towns in russia but once russia takes em you can't crusade there anymore. I couldn't crusade to antioch for example because it was held by byzantines.
I don't think you understood my point.Quote:
Originally Posted by Basilakes En Strategoisin
At all.
If the game still had zeal, they could be treated as Catholics, but nobody would bat an eye if they were excommunicated. Which is reasonably as it should be, because the Emperor always had a voice in Rome and more often than not, influenced church decisions until the streets ran rampant with Turkish soldiers.
This game is about changing history, it stands to reason that things shouldn't be set in stone. On the same note, I don't understand why the Romans don't get more gunpowder units. They'd have been very quick to adopt them, were they not on the verge of collapse during their introduction and adoption.
That's actually a good point... Byzantium was always open to new technologies, and their armies were still run largely on the roman model of professional soldiers, so they would have been the perfect environment for firearms to flourish.
Yes, I agree with that one. I feel the Byzantines are shafted slightly in this game by history in regards to gunpowder weapons. Ships and bombards are all you get. Granted, their archers are very good, but they were a pale shade of their former self by the time gunpowder became widespread, and then get conquered by the Ottomons before the date this game's campaign ends. It's hard to make a case for them having basilisks when they don't exist when basilisks are first developed. However, as stated, this game is about changing history, and I personally feel they should gain access to gunpowder troops. I might mod that in once we get the unpacker. In fact, I'm tempted to mod in most of the gunpowder troops for almost all the factions. Wouldn't other people have adopted the things that work?
I'll definitely be modding hand Gunners, Arquebusier, and Musketeers for Byzantium... That argument is very compelling, I mean, if Byzantium had not suffered the sack of the Fourth Crusade, and had been flourishing in the 15th century, I believe they would have been an early adopter of firearms, and honestly probably would have been a major force in refining the weapons.
The Orthodox church in Byzantium was never quite the intellectually repressive force that the Catholic church was in the west, and Byzantium still respected the philosophical and scientific traditions of Greece and Rome... It really does seem likely to me that progress in the development of firearms would have been notably swifter had Byzantium been in any kind of position to pursue such things.
Completely agree...CA has this historical determinism thing goin on where just because the B.E didnt develop guns in RL, doesnt mean they wouldnt have!Quote:
Originally Posted by Quillan
I recall reading somewhere that the guy who developed the guns that broke the walls of constantinople in 1453 were originally offered to the Byzantine Emperor first, but he backed it...although my memory may be playing tricks on me. :inquisitive:
Yes i remember that too. But if i remember rightly didn't comnenus ask pope urban to call the crusade to retrieve lands he lost in anatolia and the levant? surely then, if the empire is on good terms with the pope, it should be able to aply for a crusade.Quote:
Originally Posted by lancelot
byzantines have a good unit roster. they are a good faction if you enjoy horse archer armies but cant stomach playing as a muslim.
russias units are so-so but they are a fun faction to play with because they are a bit more challenging than most.
the towns/cities in their "sphere of influence" are all extremely undeveloped at the beggining, it takes ages to expand becasue of the distances and lack of roads, and of course they miss out on the crusades.
Russia has some excellent units. Boyar sons are excellent "medium" cavalry. Quite good when fighting heavy infantry because their javelins can actually pierce heavy armour. After weaking them with a few salvos, order charge, and let the fun begin. Kazaks are not the best HA but they can do the job.
Dvor, Druzhina, Tsars guard and cossack are also very powerful.
Infantry units are a bit of a problem in the beggining but when you get dismounted dvor, druzhina and boyar sons all your problems are solved.
Also, their selection of troops is quite colourful and interesting, and very well balanced. Only in early period there is a bit of a problem with infantry but later in the game you can't find a weak unit.
Byzantium has some very powerful units. There only problem is lack of gunpowder units and siege equipment, but by that time I was too powerful for anyone to stop me.
So far I've only played russia and byzantium, now I am playing scots.
It is really sad that CA didn't make orthodox factions a bit more interesting. The patriarch didn't have the authority of the pope, but they could have added some extra features. At least that Byzantium and Russian king have higher authority, because their will is automatically the will of patriarch. They didn't even bother to try to implement something that would make orthodox factions a bit more colorful, which is a shame, really.
I haven't played any muslim faction yet, but it seems they are the same as orthodox with the exception that they can call jihad.
yeah the lack of crusade/jihad is a significant, so its a shame they didnt try and do something extra for the orthodoxQuote:
Originally Posted by Sarmatian
I see no positives for the Byzantines aside from the Vardarwhatnot. Those are the best horse archers in the game that I've come across.
Let's see, how's the Byzantine unit roster look?
1. Varangian Guard. So hyped they are paraded as the "special" unit for the faction on the campaign screen. Yet, they lose to most militia units. Their use mid to late game is impractical because they lose to every infantry unit, nevermind cavalry.
2. Kataphraktoi. They are weakest of the heavy cavalry units. Qapakulu, Gothic Knights, Chivalric Knights, Tsar's Guard, Khan's Guard, Famiglia Ducale, Mongol Heavy Lancers...every type of heavy cavalry will beat them.
3. Guard archers. Nice, but nothing special. France gets them too. And they will always lose to a cavalry flanking attack, or to any type of armored horse archers, such as Polish Nobles, Sipahis, or Mongol Heavy Horse Archers.
4. Vardaraaosacoaksaca3jta?aoi. A great horse archer unit that is extremely versatile in all conditions, but certainly cannot win a battle on its own. Without any proper spear or anti-cavalry units, (the only spear unit they get is militia) the Var can only do so much.
5. Cannons and gunpowder units. Their gunpowder units leave much to be desired....because they don't frickin' exist!
So what advantage do the Byz get? Their starting position is good, but nothing special. The Turks, Poles, Hungarians and Egyptians can unseat them quickly. I'm curious - do people use the Byz in multiplayer and win?
i believe the varangian guard are currently suffering from the two-handed animation bug - when that is fixed they shoud be as intended = an awesome unit.
katephracts in reality wouldnt have been an offensive match to western knights as they werernt used in a similar fashion- didnt really charge in etc but maybe for balance it would be nice if they had better armour.
the byz foot soldiers are gnerally dissapointing, but i think the best strategy with them is to wipe out your opponents armies in open battle and then use footsoldiers mainly for seiges.
Thus far I've played as the Scots, French, Turks, and now I'm in my Russian campaign, and next to the Scots, it's been the funnest. An army of Boyar's Sons and Kazakhs, backed up by a couple Druzhina and a general, can beat any other early to mid period army. It's extremely mobile, mostly armor piercing, well armored, and packing better charge values than any infantry based army. Later on, Boyar's Sons with Tzars Guards and Cossack cavalry is quiet fierce. Also, they get Cossack Musketeers, who, in my opinion, are the best gunners in the game. If you prefer infantry, there are better factions to play as, but dismounted boyars and druzhina aren't bad early infantry, and berdiche axeman are very effective. Couple this with a relatively easy starting position that becomes very difficult by mid game, the ability to expand anywhere, and the great value of some Russian cities, and the ease of taking the rich Balkan cities make it my favorite faction thus far.~:thumb:
Nope... He asked for help. There is a whole world of difference.Quote:
Originally Posted by Riadach
While crusades per se weren't unknown (William was on a crusade to England when he took, mind you crusades before 1095 are often just wars backed by the Pope rather than named crusades), it wasn't until the 1st crusade that it bacame what we think of it.
Also the Popes weren't the power we think of them until after the fights with the HRE Emperors. Before then a lot of bishops, kings etc didn't really care much for some fool in Rome. However the Pope was more than a simple bishop as well, meaning rather important... but just not as powerful and almighty as he is sometimes considered. That was to come in the next couple hundred years.
What the Byzantime emp did was ask the Pope to ask the kings nad princes to help the Byzantines (and fellow christians) to recover the lands. Later such actions by a Pope was considered a crusade. At that time the concept just weren't made up yet, but the Byzantines knew the Pope held a good deal of sway in catholic lands. Hence it was much easier to ask him once, than than all the princes, kings, dukes ect a couple times each. For what did they care about some far-away lands they had never heard of? Brilliant political and military consideration by the Byzantines in my book.
So the orthodox and the catholics should never be combined in a game. They were simply too radically different.
I understand that your point was about somehow tying the byzantines in with the catholic world, which is a good idea. My point was that zeal would be a very cheap solution indeed, as the orthodox were no less zealous than the catholics. The way I understood it, zeal in mtw1 represented the population's enthusiasm for their religion, and therefore their likelihood of joining crusades et cetera. I agree that the emperor "had a voice in Rome" - I never said he didn't - but the Pope certainly had no voice whatsoever in Constantinople. Giving papal missions to the byzantine emperor would be ridiculous, and any papal attempt to excommunicate would just lead to - well, 1054. Instead, there should be a new system that somehow made the orthodox closer to catholics than to muslims - for example, you shouldn't be able to crusade against them.Quote:
Originally Posted by metatron
(The debacle of 1204 was not a question of the pope calling for a crusade against Constantinople, but of the venetians managing to redirect an existing crusader army in there instead of the Holy Land. Still, in game terms this would probably be too difficult to manage (can you bribe crusader armies to join your side???) so I don't object if CA allowed crusading against the orthodox)
Or maybe a new unlockable event in the campaign - in the same way as the Americas - called Church Union. This would make the byzantines and russians catholic, but they would have to face some nasty revolts before the ex-orthodox population calmed down.
About the gunpowder troops, I agree. If the game got far enough, there should be at least a few native gunpowder units (I trust you can still recruit mercenary arquebus/muskets/whatever as the byzantines? I haven't tried it yet).
Think about Varangian Guards carrying arquebuses with big axe blades as bayonets on them :help:
I'm having great fun with the Byz in my second campaign (H/H modded to 1 turn = 1 year). I have the 2nd strongest military after the Mongols, but as a result, my income is mostly going on upkeep, so I can't afford to upgrade cities and build better barracks etc, meaning a lot of economic juggling and trouble with unrest and squalor.
I have managed to expand West and East, am at war with the Turks, the Egyptians and the Moors, and have just managed to sign a peace deal with the Venetians after 100 years of war (thanks to them suffering at the hands of Sicily), and I have just eliminated the pesky Hungarians.
There is currently a jihad called against Constantinople, and the Mongols have arrived outside Baghdad, but I'm hoping the Turks will act as a speed bump for them before they get to my modest Eastern holdings. The Pope hates me for destroying Hungary and I'm sure I'll be the next destination of a crusade.
So all things told, this is an excellent campaign.
So far, I've made do with a combination of the various horse archers, foot archers, militia and a sprinkling of mercs, but my newly trained dismounted Byz lancers and Byz Infantry are proving very useful in sieges. I'm just about to get my first unit of Varangian Guard from Constantinople, but there are 3 jihad stacks on their way and I have no field army to deploy against them. I am a bit concerned that the Vans will be hampered by an animation bug, but I'll try and keep them away from cavalry until the patch is released!
Don't bother with the Varangian guard. They aren't nearly as good as their stats would indicate, even against other infantry. Their attack, while powerful, is incredibly slow. I've zoomed in and watched them in melee with dismounted feudal knights. The knights will get 2-3 swings for each one the axeman makes, and often while the knight attack won't kill a guardsman, it will stagger him and prevent the attack he was about to make. On the charge, they cause lots of casualties, but they are like knights, they can't handle a protracted melee fight. Use them to flank if you have them, they work well in that role, but 520 florins to recruit a unit that can only flank and can't attack mounted troops at all is a bit of a waste. I built 5-6 units in the Byzantine campaign, switched over to exclusively Byzantine infantry and dismounted lancers/latinkon, and never regretted it afterwards.
Why one should play as Byzantium:
- Difficult (and therefore fun) faction to play with because of
1) Catholics (Venice) attacking you
2) Muslims constanlty declaring jihads at your capitol and not only
3) No annoying Pope or inquisitors
4) You are on your own (try to play of Very Hard/ Very Hard). Your only task is survival. And thats a lot for most players
One against all odds!!!
Have fun.
Variungian guard are great.
Archery is not bad, great at defending the castles you get in the Middle-East.
I play Byzantines online and I have won.
That's all.
Kataphrati can beat GOthic Cavalry. I've done it, next time I'll get a screenshot for you.
The Byz have a lot in common with the Selecids. Surrounded by enemies on the eastern fringe of the map. With the added bonus of being squarely in the crosshairs of Hun squared (Mongols and Timurids). The Russians are slow building but can become very rich and strong.
Apart from the vardariotai there is another good unit that the byzantines heve.The byzantine cavalry is a good all around unit that can turn a battle in your favor if u use it wisely,timely and in groups of 2-3 units together(they have descent armour and can stand in melee)
GAH!
No self-respecting Russian wannabe would play as the Russians without taking at least a swig or two of icy vodka each turn. Do that, and playing as the Russians will be a lot of fun. GAH! Vanya surrounds Himself with polka dancers, vodka vats, loony pseudo-religious visionaries, and the plundered wives of His neighborhood just to add a little flavor to each turn. And when things don't go right? He fires His wet musket--soaked in a tub of vodka, no less--at a random passer-by for kicks.
A jolly good time, young chaps!
GAH!
I think the Russians are great. A bit more boring than the catholic factions due to lack of crusades and popes missions, but I guess you dont have to deal with inquisitors (even though I never did) The units look cool, and theyre really actually very good units. Particularly the fact that they practically all shoot arrows, like the Dvor, they are excellent heavy infantry, and they shoot arrows, then there are the Dvor cavalry, same thing, and very well armoured. The Tsars guard look awesome, the Berdiche axemen tear ppl up, and the cossack musketeers you should have everything you need to recruit them by the time gunpowder comes up (just a huge stone wall in a city) and theyre alot better than arquebusiers, they can even fight in melee!
All in all a very good faction to play, am having a breeze dealing with my neighbors, and am pretty safe from attacks seeing as how im isolated in the corner of the map. The only thing is the lack of heavy charging cavalry (meaning no lances) but they still do well on the charge against infantry, and theyre charge isnt bugged!! But you will have to be ready for whichever of the Hordes decides to show up in your eastern border!
A cool faction, I was always looking forward to opening up the game by playing as the HRE first, then as the Russians. Not sure what Im going to do next, could be practically anyone, thinking about Hungary, Denmark, France, England or Byzantium.
Please do :yes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexander: The hellenic empire
Also, in accordance with the other posts here, I think the Romans SHOULD get the chance to train gunpowder units. This IS a game of changing history (come on now, the Moors vs. Aztecs!?!), so most definitely the Romans should get gunpowder units in their roster. And from what I've been reading, a patch IS definitely needed for the Varangians and some of their troops (i.e. infantry) need to be beefed up. Are you telling me that an empire thats been around for way over 1000 years, cant get any good spearmen units!?!?!?!
THAT has to be changed.
The medieval aged Romans are an interesting faction to play. I hope CA doesnt ignore these calls of reforms, so the Romans don't carry this view of decadence around that most people seem to believe.
:2thumbsup:
Regarding crusades being called on Constantinople, read the first post in this thread: Diplomacy thread
I'm playing as Byzantium and saw my relations with the Papacy drop from Reasonable to Terrible in a very short time while fighting the Hungarians and Venice. The sacking/extermination of catholic cities and castles combined with demanding ransom for prisoners didn't help I'm sure.
Now, following the very useful advice given in the thread linked above I've got the Papacy on a 100 florin per turn for 15 turns which has rapidly increased my standing with the Pope. I also gift them some map information and occasional 500 florins every now and then. In just four turns I'm up to Reasonable again! That should save me from any crusades right? I've also decided to bribe the HRE hoping that they will maintain our alliance so that I don't have to deal with them at the same time as the Mongols are going to start appearing...
byzantium units looks awful id rather play the turks or egypt.
It is true, such an empire should have better armies.
Its a pity.
I hope CA do something about it.
Anyway can you please specify whats wrong with the Varingian guard because I have never got them yet. How can I get them?
And why are they not well done? Whats wrong with them?
:duel:
Yeah, Byzantium is basically a watered down version of the Turks, only without muskets.
You build them in the highest level barracks in a huge city. What's wrong with them is two things, a minor problem and a major problem. Both problems are related to their attack animations. The minor problem is that their attack animation is vvvvveeeerrrrrryyyyy sssssllllloooooooowwwwwwww. As a result, while they kill a lot of enemy infantry on contact during a charge, the enemy kill about 2-3:1 after the contact because they attack faster. The major problem is they don't attack mounted troops AT ALL after the initial charge. The unit leader model will attack, but the rest of the unit won't. They aren't the only one with these problems. Pretty much all 2-handed weapon units that don't use swords, pikes, voulges, swordstaves or halberds have this issue. I had a Varangian Guard unit vs a mongol horse archer unit while defending a bridge crossing in my Byzantine campaign. I lost 76 out of 90 in the unit, and killed zero...Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexander: The hellenic empire
I think it makes sense that the Byzantine infantry arn't up to much. From what i've read, although there were a lot of them, they were basically support troops for the cavalry, and then they were mainly archers.
Anyone else get a bug where some Latikon don't have arms? for me, some have the full set, some seem to get one, and some don't get any. Regardless of how many arms they have, they still all have hands though, like Rayman. It happens with mounted and dismounted, and is most distressing.
Also, who else wants to see a special Byzantine Snatch Squad unit? Works like an assassin or a spy, but you get to kidnap the Pope and brainwash him/ransom him/force him to convert to Orthodoxy! That would be awesome, AND historically accurate!
Got a screenshot of that? I too am playing the Byzantines on VH/VH. Its a tough one. Ive managed to buy off Venice to secure my west front while I deal with the Turks. Its already Turn 69 so the Mongols are not far away. I am pretty much screwed when that happens since I dont really have an army to match theirs. All I can do is capture some of the Turk fortresses as quickly as possible and prepare for the worst. And my economy seems to finally be moving again. So yeah, in the course of history, my Byzantium isnt going to last very long.
M2TW is not Civ4 so you don't have an equal chance to makeover every faction you play. You can't, for example, play as Aztecs and make them discover gunpowder first, like you can in a Civilization game; M2TW is primarily a war game and limited in this respect. Thus most factions fit into set "types", based on what CA felt was most "characterful" of their military systems, borrowing a bit from RTS concepts of "boomer" and "rusher" armies. Some, like the Spanish, start with weak infantry and get strong professional armies later. You can cover for this some with merc spearmen and dismounted knights but the main idea is that you play to your strengths and use Jinetes and knights until you get pikes, muskets and swordsmen. Byzantium is pictured as an empire in decline and will stay that way even if you conquer the entire map. You cannot combat your units' gradual slide towards obsolescence because it would go against the faction's established "type" as a fading power in the world. Byzantium in MTW was a rusher too. You had to win early game before your enemies got their late game units and you lost the ability to produce your more powerful units (Varangians disappeared in the Late Period), using your superior early-game units. And while CA is known for taking certain, err, liberties with historical accuracy, even they must be hard-pressed to invent musketeers for a faction that never had a chance to employ them in battle, hence the whole nonsense about the "ancient military lineage" of the Byzantines keeping them from adopting gunpowder.
Ah well, at least I can build carracks from Constantinople now.
Don't know if its historically accurate though. Did they really??Quote:
Originally Posted by Joshwa
But it would definitely be interesting to use such a group. ~D
That pope is frontin' too much. :yes:
The russians are great. No stupid pope telling you what to do. No threat of excommunication. No inquisitors. And armour piercing boyar sons to boot.
BoyarSon! Show me, shoot the troops!
BoyarSon! Show me, charge the Flank!
Russia is pretty great. Dismounted Boyar sons/Druhzina take out feudal foot knights one on one, and dismounted dvor take out chivalric foot knights one on one. Berdiche axemen are extremely cheap, a militia unit, and pack one heck of a punch without any upgrades, not to mention with some armor and experience. One of my favorite parts about russia is the cavalry, especially cossack cav and dvor cav. Tsar guard are also about on par with gothic knights, only cheaper and upgradable. When gunpowder hits, you'll have Cossack musketeers and cannon all the way up to basilisk.
Just about the only things I don't like about russia is the lack of any good archer in between peasant archer and dismounted dvor (made at fortress), and the fact that priests feel nearly useless after converting population because you don't have a papacy to steal.
Some people might be put off by the small unit roster for Russia, but the difference between russia and most western catholic factions is that you'll end up using most of the units on your roster with a smile, as where catholic units tend to replace each other (leaving you with overall about 3-4 units in the end anyways).
If that isn't cool enough, you wont be bored as russia either. Poland will attack you, the mongols are on the way, and not being roman catholic will guarantee yourself quite a bit of fun on the western front. Plus, their color is awesome and all of their units look great.
I'm playing as Russians right now and would echo what Paulta says. My only problem is the uselessness of dismounted druzhina. Since you get dismounted boyar sons first, there's no reason almost to build the dismounted druzhina, since it's a lot easier to manage stacks using only dismounted boyar sons (can combine depleted ones, etc.). I never lack dismounted boyar sons when I want to build them.
I'd also like to add that I love boyar sons. They're there from the start and I've used them the entire game. They're one of the few cavalry units that don't become weak in sieges, since their missile weapon is still very good in city battles, unlike the archer units. Not to mention that the javelins are very, very good against bodyguard units.
I captured Stockholm early so I didn't have that much money problems midway through the game. It's turn 111 and Stockholm is generating 8710 per turn for me. Venice only hit 6k or so during my Venice game and Constantinople, Nicaea and Thessalonica were below 6k (Thessalonica might've hit 6k).
I had a little over 7000 per turn in Constantinople playing Byzantium, so that's a REALLY good money generator there. I had a merchants quarter, docklands, and merchant guild HQ built in the city, too. Must be proximity of other trading ports up there in the Baltic.
When I played Venice, both Nicaea and Thessalonica were better than Constantinople.
I have a merchants' guild hq in Stockholm as well. It's still not at full population. It's at around 30k with 1% growth still. I have 2 farm upgrades and maybe 1-2 public health upgrades left. The extra population will probably add a bit more. I'm upgrading the 2nd to the last merchant upgrade right now and that's probably going to push me above 9k. Stockholm is exporting for around 1900 to Thorn (citadel), 1800 to Stettin (large city, i think) and 1700 to I think Riga (huge city).
Considering people are saying the Russians arnt that bad is there AI retarded or something because in every single campaign ive played as england there always the first or second faction to be eliminated. And there only second because i eliminate scotland so its normally a race to see who dies first. Another reason im asking is the Russian AI thick as ***k is because in my latest campaign i wanted to get a good battle going against Russia (ive never fought them before so i dont even know what there units look like). So i though i know to keep them alive ill give them some money, so basically i cheated and gave myself the maximum amount of money possible 9999999. As soon as i got the money i sent a diplomat over to the russians and got them to allie with me and i gave them all that money. Thing is the stupid russians in the whole game only ever owned 8 to 10 provionces and in the end got there selfs wiped out by the venetians. I just couldnt understand it why with maximum money would the russians do sod all and get there selfs wiped out, is there AI that bad ?.
p.s. Has anyone actually seen the Russians doing anything in a campagin when controlled by the AI.
ive never seen the russians do that badly - they always seem to possess the aproximate borders of modern russia
I overexpanded as the Russians and had to fight Hungary, Poland and Denmark at the same time. I only lost Iasi and was able to retake it later. I barely pulled it off as well. Also, Russia starts only with 1 province so the AI might be taking over the wrong provinces and losing money. At least for Denmark, taking Stockholm is a no brainer and it's very, very rich so the AI does well as Denmark.
The autocalc also underestimates missile cav in field battles. I build missile cav heavy armies with Russia and send my missile cav over and have them shoot up the enemy and cause casualties before having the bulk of my force attack. I bring a lot of them to shoot the AI army from behind. The AI either sits tight and absorbs casualties or chases them around and gets tired.
In my first game as Venice, the Russians were actually doing well at the start and had Poland as a vassal kingdom at one point. They were slowly getting conquered by Hungary when the game ended, though.
Been replaying Russia from the start with two turns a year. I enjoy it a LOT. Nice accents too :)
Those archer units are pretty good, and I agree about the melee/missile combination. It's like you got a two-in-one unit.
It'll be a long time before I get to gunpowder, lol. But I can't wait :)
Speeches are very short as expected, but still they sound quite fun, and emotional.
What I don't like about the Russian campaign is that the regions are big, like in North Africa. This has advantages and disadvantages.
So anyway I had to build watchtowers everywhere along those borders in the rights spots to make sure somebody - whoever(!) - can't make a sneak attack on me :P
Very fun faction to play. I'd recommend it.
Yeah, you end up spending a lot of money on watchtowers to detect rebels and enemy armies... but you also have big territories to "bleed" enemy armies in before they can reach a settlement.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bijo
And you have lots and lots of horse archers :D
Are the rebel units from one of the Eastern Russian Territories still available to bribe or marry in MTW2?
I can't remember what territory or what the unit name was, but I saw them in MTW 1. I do remember that they were similar to Katatanks, were some type of Royal Bodyguard and were followers of Judaism prior to bribery.
Of course I found it odd that a band of Royal Bodyguards were living out in the middle of nowhere in a rebel territory though. :inquisitive:
I tried playing as the Byzantines, and I thought they should have had an annoying Patriarch as a thorn in their side.
Here are three Emperors particularly attacked by the Church.
Leo the Wise got a warning of excommunication from the Patriarch for trying to remarry after his wife died.
Nicephorus Phocas got told point blank while on military campaign against Jihadist forces that he and his men still shed blood, and therefore could never be considered martyrs and that the best they could hope for is being forgiven, and when the campaigns ended and Nicephorus Phocas returned home to ask for the Church to change it's position he was refused, and shortly got killed by an angry pro-Church mob.
Constantine Paleologus while trying to organize a defence of Constantinople by luring Western Soldiers to defend the city by appeals to christian solidarity and offering to begin talks of reconciliation if the siege was won had to deal with Gennadios who caused some riots and very high unrest.
The full list is much longer, but as you can see the Patriarchate was a very annoying thing Byzantine Emperors had to deal with, and it would be fun if Byzantines had to deal with it in the game.
Yeah, true. Oh, and how I'm gonna bleed 'em :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Musashi
Horse archers are nice, unless the enemy has 'em too. Poland is bugging me with those Polish Nobles who are VERY ANNOYING. I hate it when the enemy uses missile cavalry. So I just group two or three units of my own missile cav and have 'em charge and overwhelm theirs. Pretty nice how they shoot while charging at them. Or is it: pretty nice how they charge while shooting at them? lol :)
I'll toss in a quick note about the Russians.
Personally, I'm having trouble seeing ANY weakness in them, apart from the starting position. They have good line infantry (Spearmen, granted they aren't spectacular, but still), good shock troops (Berdiche Axemen), good backbone infantry (D Druzhina, D Boyar Sons), quality ranged units (Crossbow Militia, Dismounted Dvor) and one of the best gunpowder infantry units in the game, Cossack Musketeers.
Combine solid infantry with a frightening selection of cavalry types (4 types of HA's, quality melee cav) and cannons (Basilisks), you have a devastating selection of troops. The only thing Russia lacks are Serpentines imo. Even the campaign starting position can be overcome by aggressively expaning to Scandinavia.
I actually consider their starting position rather good, because if you expand fast enough you can end up with 6-8 territories without having to fight another faction. Being surrounded by rebels = good.
I was just looking at stats in the custom battle setup, and I felt the need to point out that while many people have been talking about how Vardaratoi are immensely powerful, Russian Dvor are actually even scarier. The same defense, but one point better in melee attack and ranged attack.
And Russia has other good units to back them up, as opposed to Byzantium's lackluster lineup...
What's it take to get the Dvor though?
Vards are avaliable from very early in the game, and that's part of what makes them so good.
Yeah, not sure when, but I heard it in my Early Medieval Europe lecture last semester. They tried to kidnap popes a couple of times i think, don't know how successful they were though!Quote:
Originally Posted by SCRIBE