Selucids

[aem91]

Hi, I was thinking of starting a new seleucid campaign but with a twist. Ive seen this somewhere before so I wanted to try it. I was going to disband units/pillage all buildings in all regions except syria, iraq, the holy land the the southern/western coastline of turkey. My goal is to have huge amounts of starting treasury, and a better reconsolidated position, and I always like to build an empire rather than maintain a dying one. My question is, has anyone done this and has it worked, will pahalava and other become too powerful? Comments welcomed too. Thank you

[/Bean\]

I've never tried this but it's an interesting idea to vary the campaign a bit. Basically yo want to get rid of everything past Mesopotamia? As long as you disband the units as well then you shouldnt have a problem economically. I'd suggest keeping the begininnings of an army though, to fight the Ptolies and such.

Would you leave all your eastern provinces to the Eleutheroi?

[aem91]

I plan to keep all the units and buildings west of the Tigris, however I would also level the northern turkey cities as well. I would probably also destroy all of the persian wonders to boost my cash considerably. House rule is to never destroy hellenic wonders no matter the finacial situation. All the cities would go eleutheroi hopefully. It should also be more interesting as Baktria, Parthia, Armenia, Pontus, and Saka will all grab about the same, leading to interesting powerstruggles. I would fight mostly Ptolemies, slowy, and I would develop all my remaining cities alot.

I was thinking of fielding relatively few armies, but made up mostly of elites (hopefully I get some Thermoplay-esc like battles). Do you think I should do that or go with more traditional composition? Thanks

[V.T. Marvin]

Your idea seems to me as offering excellent possibilities for role-playing. You can pretend that the empire was overwhelmed by massive rebellions and disloyalty of its satraps so that only the Syrian and Babylonian core remained. Now it woud be task for new Great Kings to retake it back (preferably starting the reconquista with a new leader once Antiochos dies). Now, I woud avoid to spam too much elites (it will get boring quickly) rather try to stick to more plausible army composition coherent with the overall situation of your empire at given time

Elites are like spice - it certainly needs some, but too much of it makes the resut disqusting

[/Bean\]

Yeah, I would keep the core of the empire, but also Antioch and Ipsos, maybe something in the east or Damaskos, to represent those isolated cities still loyal to the Basilius, but cut off from the main empire. Could add a little spice to the game.

(I feel we may begin to overuse the spice analogy if we're not careful )

[A Very Super Market]

Hm... sounds interesting as an AAR, but.....

I use this strategy all the the time, but not as well thought out and planned. Mostly out of neccesity.

[aem91]

Good tips guys, I'm almost going for a byzantine type empire, with a few very well developed cities (Babylon, Antioch, Seleucia). I believe your right, too many elites will get boring, ill keep just a few then.