Your choice of faction: a "rational" explanation

Hello there,

first let me thank all of you who posted in my previous question-thread. Again I'm curious how you players of EB take decisions. Here it goes:

"What are the 'rational' reasons/motives behind your choice of faction?"

E.g.: I like to play with Epiros because they have a relativly strong starting position.

- Pyrrhus and his army can conquer both Makedonia and Thessaloniki in turn one, thanks to the Elephantes Indikoi.
- After disbanding both the Elephantes and the Petekoterei (spelling ?), the budget is balanced. Both Pella and Dalminion have most valuable mines and more mines are in the vincinity. All modern-day Greece/Albania provinces have/can have ports, thus allowing the profitable sea trade.
- Makedonia and KH are at war with each other, giving Epiros some time to consolidate and to prepare for the complete conquest of Hellas.
- Taras can either be defended by building stone walls, by recruiting Archer/Slingers and by replacing the Hoplites units with Levy Phalanxes. Alternativly it can be abandoned by dispanding all the units and by destroying all the buildings, the later giving a lot of mnai to the budget.
- The gov-buildings provide nice boni with acceptable mali.

Thanks in advance,
Treverer

P.S. if your decision is made up by certain units, do explain why: are they stronger than your neighbours? Do you use them often and how do use them?

EB is so great than playing a faction is completely different than playing another one.
I'm playing the sauromatae right now and I'm having lot of fun killing those endless stacks of Seleukids armies while my economy is slowly growing.
On my next campaign I will play a completely different faction.
I don't know if I should decide on the KH, the AS or the Lusottannan.
I like the KH because it's a completely different way of fighting that with the Sauromatae.
I like the Lusotannan because.....well.. they are from Spain and I speak spanish...
I like the AS because you start with a big empire and have enemies at all your borders.

I really don't know. I should get back to work....

Right now, I'm enjoying a campaign as Carthage. Here's why:

1a) After games as Macedon, Epeiros, Pontos, Hayasdan, and Baktria, I'm freaking sick of dealing with phalangites. They're too clumsy to move around the battlefield in anything approaching an acceptable time frame. I've decided to trade them in for more mobile and utilitarian units.

1b) Carthage's Libyan Spearmen are probably the best Tier 2 unit in the game that I've encountered so far. They're of the same caliber as Camillan Principes and are available earlier than Thureophoroi. They're mobile, they're capable. By the same token, while mobile spearmen are probably the critical issue, Carthage also has access to some very nice mobile swordsmen heavy infantry (Elite African Infantry, Iberian Assault Infantry), as well as the Iberian non-assault troops, which are nothing to sneeze at.

2) Carthaginian units really don't get worse later in the game. Elite African Infantry are very appealing swordsmen (with armor-piercing swords) who come in good quantities and with very nice stats. They're as good as or better than Marian Legionaries (Cohors Reformata) in every attribute except morale and number. Sacred Band infantry are spectacular mobile spears. Elephants are good times. Iberian Assault Infantry is a blast. Iberian Heavy Cavalry, period.

3) Good map position. Don't have troublesome neighbors, don't face immediate debt. The African Eleutheroi aren't impossible, but they're aggressive, and you have to be on your toes to keep from losing a settlement or two in the early game. And once you consolidate your holdings, your neighbors aren't pushovers--especially if the Romani have been doing their job--nor are they immensly frustrating (I was so exasperated at the notion of facing a Ptolemaic army with ten units of Kleruchoi Phalangitai that I just quit my Macedonian campaign--not because it was unbeatable, but because it was just an annoying prospect to have to deal with).

4) If you desperately need phalangites, Elite African Pikemen are a very nice option.

5) Unlike Rome, you don't have to conquer nearly the whole map to win the game. There's enough there to keep you occupied, but you don't have to rush out willy-nilly in every direction.

6) Carthaginian Generals / Sacred Band Cavalry just look cool.

Cheers.

I'm playing Baktria for a few reasons, some are game related and some are not.
First I was always fascinated by this hellenistic kingdom so far away from mainland greece, that prospered so much for a (relatively) brief period of time and then disappeared from History, get in the middle of one of the countless huge population movement of central asia.
The game related ones are mainly the position on the map (never played anything that is centered in central asia), the peaceful initial situation, and the great variety of units (counting the indian and indo-greek units the baktrian one is the more variegated unit roster)

Playing KH purely for the Spartan agoge

I just cant wait to get a nice 16 year old spartan sharp/charismatic/vigorous kid in the agoge.

That kid is soo gonna lead my army in the future

KH gets a extremely challenging starting position. It got a lot more harder then 0.8. But I like their reasonably fast units. Its a shame that my cavarly are shamefully weak.

Might try Baktria next for the Indian units:2thumbsup:

Me AS. The units I don't get, I can face on the battlefield; or try in a CB anyway.

IMO AS is among the best/or is simply the best when it comes to Unit Line up; and apart from that it really offers a lot of nice traits & ancillaries to look for. What faction's general has got a pet tiger? What has got such an excellent mix of both Hellenic & 'Eastern' fighting style? What faction has such appealling objectives? The AS has got it all! :2thumbsup:

Plus they got Spartan agoge dont they:sweatdrop:

I never tried AS. Dont really like huge empire about to get attacked from all fronts. Reminds me of end of roman empire:no:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tellos Athenaios

Me AS. The units I don't get, I can face on the battlefield; or try in a CB anyway.

IMO AS is among the best/or is simply the best when it comes to Unit Line up; and apart from that it really offers a lot of nice traits & ancillaries to look for. What faction's general has got a pet tiger? What has got such an excellent mix of both Hellenic & 'Eastern' fighting style? What faction has such appealling objectives? The AS has got it all! :2thumbsup:

---

Why do you have a KH sig, if that is how you feel?

And incedentaly, I have to disagree on the lineup, Maks have the best.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pharnakes

Why do you have a KH sig, if that is how you feel?

---

I was wondering about that myself. But as for the faction, I'd go with Baktria. It just feels so exotic and different to be playing as a Hellenistic faction so far away from their homeland of Greece...

Baktria is of course also very good, and has the honour of being the only faction to have shock archers.

Yes, but Makedon is very good too. From the very start of the game, it's like I have this semi-divine holy mission to reconquer Alexander's empire, a feeling I never have with the other diadochi factions.

I also like the reformed phalanxes...

Yup, principes with pikes:laugh4:

I'm playing Pahlava right now

1. The starting position is tense but not impossible

1a. the economy has great potential...if you go after the right people (the Greeks with the Mines ;-\> )

2. I like to move a bit more quickly in my conquests, and the Pahlava seem to be custom made for blitzing the Arkhe Seleukeia

3. Horse Archers

4. Melee-capable Horse Archers

5. Armored Horse Archers

5a. relatively easy access to Indian Elephants- the Indian provinces lie geographically close to one of the Pahlav expansion directions, so it makes sense to pick them up right after knocking Baktria out of the match, and the armies, while large and apparently intimidating, fall very easily to the types of units available to the Pahlav in the general region (HA's, Saka Heavy Cav, Arachosian or Dahae skirmisher cav- counters lightly armored infantry, foot archers, and elephants, in that order, and the bodyguard units can take care of any cavalry)

6. I find the ancient Persian culture fascinating, and like the way the "Parthian Empire" is portrayed accurately, and really psyched about the 'nomadic culture shift to Imperialism' (from the little that I've read, the Arsacid Perso-Parthian Empire was the most tolerant and cosmopolitan large power in the classical world)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pharnakes

Why do you have a KH sig, if that is how you feel?

And incedentaly, I have to disagree on the lineup, Maks have the best.

---

Ah but the sig is there because:
a) Aesthetics;
b) I did not feel the need to change it;
c) My name.

I agree with the AS lineup is better simply because of the huge amounts of diversity and they're the Hellenes WITH cataphracts, who can beat that?

As far as them Cats go: Baktrians. Otherwise/in other areas: none, nowhere, never, noway! :2thumbsup:

Current campaign: Casse

1. Starting position means you can choose when you enter the continent, you could sit on Britain and let the world take care of itself for as many years as you like. Waiting for a crack young Brenn to lead the Casse to domination of Gaul.

2. They have access to Goidillic units, which I believe are the coolest in the game.

3. Being a "theoretical faction" there is a lot of leeway in army composition and role playing.

Future Campaign: Macedon

1.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Methuselah

From the very start of the game, it's like I have this semi-divine holy mission to reconquer Alexander's empire, a feeling I never have with the other diadochi factions.

---

2. Can defeat Romans early in game (I always love that feeling).

Parthia, the Hai, the KH, and Pontus because they are challenging.

Koinon Hellion:

1. Starting position is challenging, but not impossible.

2. I love the sea-borne expansion. I love being able to build an army, sail accross the Mediterrain, capture a former Greek colony, and build an overseas empire, grabbing strategic ports and wealthy cities. I like being able to appear out of no where, capture the coast, and defend it. I love being at war with half the factions in the game due to my raiding.

2. The units are well rounded, and the infantry is some of the best.

3. Spartan Hoplites

4. The faint hope that this campaign I'll get around to launching that expedition to India, or that expedition to Britain.

Hayasdan, then Pahlava then probably the Sweboz.

I love the ability to take Armenia and do well with them. They have been screwed over far too long.

They are located right in the middle of EVERYTHING, meaning you go all four directions and you can expand in any of them. You straddle the world.

I love horses, as do most who play this game, and the Cataphracts are a nice plus.

I want to take Babylon, and Armenia will do it.

I want to play with Pahlava so that I can take over the East, and then push back the Greeks.

I am ethnically German, and have never played a barbarian faction before, so I think it would be alot of fun.

.
I chose Lusatana for my first campaign because I don't like head-on conflict and expansion; would build up a strong and economically stable homeland first. They start with no enemies around. (The White Death is the southern neighbour with only lightly defended two provinces.) You are somewhat isolated from the rest of the world and can be left on your own, or let them on theirs for quite some time. (I think it was my third king, Ambon, who had punished the insolent Poeni daring to besiege my capital breaking a fruitful alliance.)

Iberia apparently received hardcore research and labour of love. Not that the rest didn't but they were one of the less lucky with fewer ready material to work on and more stuff to be dug out so to speak. The language was somewhat re-constructed from bits of whatever remained, Goidelic and Proto-IE (per Sarcasm), history thoroughly examined, unit/building tree shaped etc. I remember how stupid a treatment the vanilla Spanish received from the developers (Iberian Bull Warriors anyone?) and know how hard EB people such as Aymar de Bois Mauri, Sarcasm and others worked to make it such a fun and immersing faction.

On top of all that, it's intriguing to play a what if scenario, in which a western Mediterranean commune rising to power from tribal dominance carving upwards, instead of those barbaroi of the Appenines. ~;)
.

I always play Romans, simply because since I was a young boy ( and that is a long time ago), I always played Romans and Gladiators with my friends after seeing the old epic movies. And being so close to mainland Italy, makes me part of the greatest empires of the ancient world. But after my Roman conquest is over, I will try Pontos, Hyasdan or the Parthii, and try to kick the ass of the Hellenic Kingdoms.

Cheers.

Started to play a Pontus campaign and it's really really great:

- you really have no money in the beginning and have to be quick to take some towns around you in order to make money, shouldn't lose too many soldiers because you can't rebuild.


- great cultural mix of persian, greek, celtic and steppe features.

- you can create great armies with huge variety of troops including some of the best units of the area even in your factional buildings.

I have started a new campaign as Makedonia because,

- They are one of the few factions that really have a "mission" in the game.

- As soon as Greece is under controll the game will still be challanging but not difficult beyond frustration.

- The territories where "subjugation" is available is stretching from Italy to most of the former Persian empire.

Saba
They have a nice, quiet starting location where you can get your economy "up and running" without too much interference from AI powers. Interesting unit roster with infantry FM bodyguards and most of your units will be "lighter" than your adversaries, so you can't just bull rush them in battles.
Oh, and when you're ready to get involved in the world of international politics, RTW style, you get to hack through either Ptolies or AS (usually both).
Kind of a "Taking out Phalanxes 101" if you will.:sweatdrop:

My favourite factions are by far Casse/Aedui/Arverni (no specific order). My reasons for this are:

- The celtic hero system is highly appealing to me - so much that the Celtic units have actually become true heroes in my eyes. Stats be damned, I prefer them over anything else.

- If I'm playing as either the Aedui or the Arverni, the starting civil war is of course fun. Played "right" without blitzing and good role-playing, it's a great, great start.

- If it's Aedui/Arverni I'm playing as, an early clash with Rome is always good. I like them Cohort Kebabs.

- The Casse have an interesting starting position

- I like the Casse generals, and especially the kluddobro unit

- When playing as the Arverni, your faction leader is not just a king... he's a GOD!

- They're just Celtic, all right?!

- Gaesatae and Uirodusios...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Vicious Monkey

I like the Casse generals

---

:inquisitive:

1. Armenia, for an obvious reason.
2. Pontus. facsinating mix of Greek and local eastern cultures. also very challenging empire building.
3. Carthage. dont know, but there is something about them... maybe their unfortunate fate.
4. eastern successor states. same mix as Pontus and more! not so challenging however.
and im still to try a barbarian faction and Rome. not really feeling it though.

carthage.

1,hannibal

2,capable of recruiting Gaesatae,the best infantry and balearn slingers,the best missile units in the western world. and also have mighty own units such as african elites and sacred bands and elephants.

3,the economy and start position is perfect.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Vicious Monkey

I like the Casse generals

---

I think you're the only one, at least until they stop dying faster than you can keep up with it. Even without the dying, I hate trying to manipulate those awkward chariots around the battlefield, and the generals are really the reason I don't play Casse.

Cheers.

Just give 'em calawre and then rycalawre

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Landwalker

I think you're the only one, at least until they stop dying faster than you can keep up with it. Even without the dying, I hate trying to manipulate those awkward chariots around the battlefield, and the generals are really the reason I don't play Casse.

Cheers.

---

Did I not also say "stats be damned"? ~;) I like them for the aura around them - the mere fact that they're chariot just feels... right. It's not because I think they are good in any meaningful way. I guess I'm just a fanboy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Vicious Monkey

Did I not also say "stats be damned"? ~;)

---

Ah, I thought you were referring to the "regular" hero units, rather than the Casse as a whole.

I like the "Hero System". I just wish I could make the generals "dismount" before battle and fight on foot...

Cheers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Landwalker

Ah, I thought you were referring to the "regular" hero units, rather than the Casse as a whole.

---

Well, actually I was talking about the whole Celtic hero system, that includes those in Gaul too, in that their warriors were not just warriors, they were heroes. Not part-timers like the Romans...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Landwalker

I like the "Hero System". I just wish I could make the generals "dismount" before battle and fight on foot...

---

I think that's a wish you share with a whole lot of others, me included.

I'm pretty fascinated with Alexander, so I like Makedon. I'm also pretty fascinated with Rome, and Carthage. So I like to play as them too. That's pretty much the reason I play any faction.

:2cents:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Landwalker

I like the "Hero System". I just wish I could make the generals "dismount" before battle and fight on foot...

---

Well, if thats the case, why don't you just make them foot units?

You can always pretend that they rode to battle on chariots, and then dismounted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pharnakes

Well, if thats the case, why don't you just make them foot units?

---

If I knew how to do something like that, I would. But not everybody on these boards has l33t m0dd1ng sk1llz. Or whatever.

Of course, if a future version of EB... say, 1.1... were to incorporate this, I would be most happy. Were I able to do it myself, I certainly would, but alas, such is not the case.

Cheers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Landwalker

Were I able to do it myself, I certainly would, but alas, such is not the case.

---

5 mins in the scriptorium will do it.

I'd give you instructions myself, but I can't be bothered refrasing what others have already written.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pharnakes

5 mins in the scriptorium will do it.

---

The whosiwhat? I am unable to locate this scriptorium of which you speak. I tried looking in the Unofficial Modding Projects subforum to no avail, as well as the "Hosted Mods for RTW" in general. I literally have absolutely no idea what's going on here--I don't frequent (or even passingly glaze over) the vast majority of the forums, I don't know how to edit the EDUs to do... anything. I certainly don't know how to wave the magic modding wand and change the Casse generals from Cidainh to something like Calawre or Rycalawre, let alone how to change them to Calawre in the Time of Freeman and Time of Bondsmen, then Rycalawre (a sort of "late general's bodyguard" in the Time of Soldiers.

If anybody out there would be interested in helping, it would be greatly appreciated. Whether it's through a step-by-step "tutorial" instruction guide, a link to a thread that already address this question, or just by "Here's the proper forum to ask that question, get a good answer, and not get chewed up in the process".

Cheers.

For those who would be willing to help, but would like this thread to get back on track to Rational Reasons for Faction Selection, feel free to PM me. I'll take whatever I can get.

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/forumdisplay.php?f=77

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Landwalker

and the generals are really the reason I don't play Casse.

---

Me too.

I had started one campaign with them and had lost three FM in the first battle against outnumbered rebells. That was it for me and the Casse.

Watchman did a short tutorial. https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/archi...p/t-81687.html
But copied here for your convenience

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Right, here goes.

1) Backup your original export_descr_unit.txt.

2) Open export_descr_unit.txt.

3) Search for celtic chariot cidainh bodyguards. It should have ";18" above it.

4) Replace the entry with the following:
Code:
type celtic chariot cidainh bodyguards
dictionary celtic_infantry_rycalawre ; Rycalawre
category infantry
class spearmen
voice_type General_1
soldier celtic_infantry_arjos_rycalawre_solduros_kuarothoroi, 30, 0, 1.35
officer officer_celtic_standardbearer
officer officer_celtic_officer
mount_effect horse +1, camel +1, elephant -3
attributes sea_faring, hide_improved_forest, very_hardy, command, general_unit
formation 0.7, 1, 1.8, 2.6, 4, square
stat_health 1, 0
stat_pri 12, 6, no, 0, 0, melee, simple, piercing, sword, 0 ,0.225
stat_pri_attr no
stat_sec 13, 4, no, 0, 0, melee, simple, piercing, spear, 0 ,0.13
stat_sec_attr spear
stat_pri_armour 12, 10, 4, metal
stat_sec_armour 0, 0, flesh
stat_heat 5
stat_ground 0, 0, 0, -1
stat_mental 16, disciplined, highly_trained
stat_charge_dist 30
stat_fire_delay 0
stat_food 60, 300
stat_cost 1, 2720, 0, 80, 130, 2720
ownership britons, slave
I incidentally added the non-standardbearer unit officer, just 'cause generals are so cool they want to have one around.

4) Save the changes and exit. Presto. Although you might want to delete map.rwm, just in case.

Unless I got something wrong, the beauty in the above trick is that it changes the content of the celtic chariot cidainh bodyguards entry, and thus should both be savegame compatible and not require any changes to descr_strat.txt or some such malarky.

One possible issue is that the unit cards might still show the chariots - I don't know if the engine looks at the "type" or "dictionary" line for that. Although given that the bodyguard version doesn't have its own cards I'd guess the latter, in which case this shouldn't be a problem.

Currently playing a Casse campaign, I am planning, once I unite Gaul, to make the general cavalry either Brihentin (Gallic Noble Cavalry) or Remi Mairepos (Belgic Heavy Cavalry). I think of it like the catapract reforms, as I have had my chariots and light cavalry mercs mauled by Gallic generals and Germanic merc cav so many times and then lost crucial battles...:thumbsdown:, that I think the adoption of new tactics influenced by my new conquests is fair enough, especially if my faction leader is a Belgae or Carnute etc.

Word of the day: Malarky :balloon:

Iberius Victor is my new favoritest person. Thanks for the information. The fact that it's save-game compatible makes it even better, since it means you can "update" the generals over the course of the game (although Watchman's justification for Rycalawre instead of Calawre is convincing enough) and roleplay a Cassian parallel to the Seleucid cataphract reforms. Thank you again for the copy/paste and the link.

Malarky is an excellent word. People always look at me strangely when I use it, but I feel it needs more exposure and appreciation.

Cheers.

I'm about to start a Saka campaign. There's something attractive about the purity of the nomad lifestyle. A horse beneath you, the wind at your back, and nothing but rolling plains ahead...

I also feel like going on a migratory rampage, and these guys are going to give it to me:

• Fast-moving nomad generals.
• Fast-moving cavalry armies.
• Ranged troops that can kill without dying, which means I spend more time fighting and less time training new men in a barracks.
• Ability to recruit core troops from anywhere on the map.

I'm thinking we'll establish our new homeland in Thrace and Makedon - a nice, safe distance from the Yuezhi and Xiong Nu. Then we'll pour the resources of the rich Aegean into the efficient Saka military machine and see what happens next.

I'm also planning to use that leap turns mod. I'll be firmly ensconced in my new homeland by 250BCE, so I'll let the computer play on my behalf for a while and take up the cause again in 160BCE.

Let's see how the Yuezhi like their rematch.

(after the rematch, I don't know - maybe I'll see if I can use a hotseat mod and continue playing as a different faction)

I truly love Epeiros because of being clammered between Italy and mainland Greece. Not to mention you can go pretty much whatever direction you want with your campaign because Pyrrhus suffered from massive assault ADD. After you go a little crazy with Pyrrhus and he dies you can use his sons to consolidate an empire and then become king of Greece as Alexander did. Although this is the case I have played a Makedonian campaign and am currently undertaking Arche Seleukia which up to this point has been somewhat boring as I am just trying to develop all this scattered land and bouncing around rebels. The only conquering I've done is I blitzed Ptolemai off of Asia minor except for Side which I just took about 10 minutes ago. Despite building mines everywhere I could and 3 very large mines I can barely compensate for the corruption which is realisitc but sad! Also I haven't been partaking in much conquest because I hate marrying and adopting and naturally diluting the family tree so I had to wait about 60 turns to get some generals and governors. God bless EB.

Hmmm.... I followed Watchman's instructions, and they worked like a charm... until Mowg came of age. Although my starting generals (and the Eleutheroi counterparts) were all Rycalawre, all my generals who come of age are... African Generals...? Given that I didn't change anything (aside from the differences between Watchman's Rycalawre and the 1.0 version), this seems passing strange.

Aside from that, having decent generals, even of the infantry variety, has already made the Casse much more enjoyable.

Cheers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beefy187

Playing KH purely for the Spartan agoge

I just cant wait to get a nice 16 year old spartan sharp/charismatic/vigorous kid in the agoge.

That kid is soo gonna lead my army in the future

---

Can't any of the Helenic based factions train in the Spartan agoge, or is it all factions?
After 2 turns playing as the Maks, my young family members were in a position to enter it.
I'll find out real soon if AS can have the same honour.

When it comes to which faction I usually play I prefer AS, it's cultural & military diversity between East and West offer more depth.
You face a challenge from so many different enemies and you have perphaps the strongest & best looking troop line up going. I feel like the Persian king Xerces(spelling?) when I can draught troops from all over my provinces to make composite armies for Western invasion.

But it is a difficult campaign in terms of the work involved, particulary, if like me your fussy about detail and every thing has to be reasonably perfect. I rarely stick to just one campaign, I have the AS as my main one, but for a break from the heavy 'turns' a few simple campaigns are fun, like a Parthian, Mak and Baktrian one, and a Samation one beckons I feel.

Overall when it comes down to battles involving armies that are largely infantry based, I try 'free for all' armies(not tight formational) but find I keep coming back to the immaculate ordered battles that pike based armies offer. Where a line is usually held and doesn't bulge fit to burst(at times) and it's only the flanks that have a degree of organised chaos to them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Landwalker

Hmmm.... I followed Watchman's instructions, and they worked like a charm... until Mowg came of age. Although my starting generals (and the Eleutheroi counterparts) were all Rycalawre, all my generals who come of age are... African Generals...? Given that I didn't change anything (aside from the differences between Watchman's Rycalawre and the 1.0 version), this seems passing strange.

---

It looks like you have moved the entry down the list: FM that come of age always get the first bodyguard that is assigned to their faction, what would be the African General if there is no factional bodyguard assigned before.

I am sorry for bumping this old thread, but I wanted to do it myself and had search for the instruction.

Mostly, I like:
- A stiff challenge on the strategic/tactical map.
- Variety of opposition.
- Variety of tactics.
- A change from the previous faction I played.

I'm not fond of:
- Great big empires, where you roll into town and your 20 stack army can't keep order.
- Factions with a small factional recruiting zone and/or bad roads, who need 2 years to get troops from the nearest level 3 MIC to the battlefront.
- Fighting Seleucids, because once you've proved you can run rings round them it'll still take a hundred turns to finish them off.

So I tend to play short campaigns, and stop when the happiness/recruitment rules are giving me more trouble than the military opposition. I'd say my favourite factions playing this way are Pontos and the Getai.

In my current Pontos game I rule from the Aegean to Hayasdan and down to Sidon/Damamscus/Palmyra, I've had some fantastic battles and pulled strategic manoeuvres that made me giggle with glee. I've seen the "largest faction" and "most advanced faction" messages. But it strikes me that I now have to conquer the AS and the Ptolies, which will be a real grind through elite spam and ever-increasing distance penalties. So I might start a fresh faction soon.

I think next I want a faction with wide ranging government and recruitment, that neither uses nor faces phalanxes (much), and is a long way from the AS.

I play mainly Greek factions because I'm interested in the culture and history.

With 1.0 I started a Ptolemaioi campaign (not so popular, as it seems). Reasons:

1. I'm dreaming of hot sunny country.
2. I like the position, you have enemies but not on every side. When AS, Pontos, Saba and the treacherous Carthaginians attacked me at the same time, I had a difficult time nevertheless.
3. It's a shame to say, but for my armies more or less I only need some Psiloi, Klerouchoi phalangites, Thyreophoroi (or Thorakitai), Cretan Archers (it must be a fault that the Ptolemaioi cannot recruit them, I made them recruitable)and some light and heavy cavalry. So the beloved and very interesting special units of other factions would be wasted.
4 With one exception: Indian Armoured Elephants (all elephants in EB got 4 or 5 Hp from me and the units feel now a little bit like the historical beasts, still too weak perhaps), a very nice feature to fight against elite troops/phalanges; the Ptolemaioi can ship them in from their colony (to be erected) in south India.
5. I wanted to have Ethiopian Cavalry (which should be recruitable by the Ptolemaioi, but are not in EB 1.0, but I made them recruitable)
6. I like the Machimoi units and still use them in my weaker medium quality armies
7. I wished to recruit Garamantine Infantry (but I'm seemingly still not in the regions where it could be done).

For the next campaign I consider Koinon Hellenon or Epeiros. Epeiros is of course much stronger with good cavalry, elite phalangites and Indian elephants (unfortunately unarmoured) at the door. Baktria would be very nice indeed, but I like the Cretan Archers and am a bit addicted to the Mediterranean world. Let's wait and see.

I almost always play with a succesor state.... they just have the best unit roster for me.... to bad the romani and carthage are so easy... if they were more i probably wouldn't hesitate to try a little different style of combat.

Though i have played Carthage in 0.81:beam:

Rome: As a small child the Roman Empire has represented order and stability and glory. Now I am grown and have read Tacitus, Polybius, Gibbons and many others and I know better. However the seeds planted in childhood are still in my mind and I cannot help but admire the Romans. If one wants to admit it or not the Romans have been a large influence on the world. Also after the Polybian reforms the troops are better and one can start making the world Rome. This may not be the answer one would call rational but that is it
:book:

I'm playing as Saba just because they're very different from any other faction. They're remote and their units are mostly light and they're arabic!

After getting my ass whopped in my first campaign with them I started a second because I like the challenge of being against the 2 biggest empires.

Next campaign I'm thinking KH or Gauls, KH because they have variety and I've almost never played as a Hellenic faction and the Gauls because they're neglected and pose interesting challenges. Maybe even Lusonatia!

I like playing factions with historical achievements in that timeframe like the Romans or the Parthians or those I know pretty much nothing about, like the Saka or the Sarmatians, and achieving great conquest with them would look plausible. Factions that were in decline at that time period or did not achieve much in the way of conquest historically, I never touch. Also I wouldn't touch a faction if in order to win as them I would have to destroy Rome, that is an inviolable taboo for me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Landwalker

I think you're the only one, at least until they stop dying faster than you can keep up with it. Even without the dying, I hate trying to manipulate those awkward chariots around the battlefield, and the generals are really the reason I don't play Casse.

Cheers.

---

i hate charriots too.

it seems carthanage is pretty popular. i think they probably are the easiest fraction with the best units and starting position.

My choice for a faction was Aedui. I had to choose quickly because all the factions were to be tested and if I hesitated I would be left with..- ugh... Parthia, so I paniced and chose Aedui. I meant to choose Macedonia, but as I said, I paniced. I've been doing some betatesting for a few months now. I tried reporting the bugs I found in the final internal version, but bovi put me on ignore about a month ago, so no luck there. Nevertheless I won't give up. Eleutheroi Misteret Izrahim Tsorim has no UI card!

Thaatu, UI has always been Somebody Else's Problem. I've tried to fix it now, could you check if it's correct in the internal version (if you haven't updated in a while it will likely not be savegame compatible, but not for this change)?

I will never update!

I swear your alignment is Chaotic Neutral.