What civilization has the worst unit roster in your opinion.

[Catmand0]

I am going to put my vote in for the saba. They have no effective heavy cav, extremely limited heavy infantry, and only native hellenic pikemen. Their whole unit roster has not one apparent strength. I will admit that I have only played with them in the multiplayer battles and never their campaign, so I do not know if their short comings are made up for other ways. However, I have fought them in my Macedonian campaign and my roman campaign, where they preformed horribly.

[mikepettyrtw]

I am going to put my vote in for the saba. They have no effective heavy cav, extremely limited heavy infantry, and only native hellenic pikemen. Their whole unit roster has not one apparent strength. I will admit that I have only played with them in the multiplayer battles and never their campaign, so I do not know if their short comings are made up for other ways. However, I have fought them in my Macedonian campaign and my roman campaign, where they preformed horribly.

If you want to play as Saba, master this man:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khalid_ibn_al-Walid

Khalid turned those skirmishing tactics into something that could be used anywhere. Thus he would skirmish the enemy to death: he would bring his army in front of his enemies and wait until the whole battle degenerated into a skirmishing affair between small units. Then, after exhausting the enemy units, he would launch his cavalry at their flanks employing Hammer and Anvil tactics.[116]
Much of Khalid's strategic and tactical genius lies in his use of extreme methods. He apparently put more emphasis on annihilating enemy troops, rather than achieving victory by simply defeating them. For instance his employment of the double envelopment maneuver against the numerically superior Persian army at the Battle of Walaja,[117] and his brilliant maneuver at the Battle of Yarmouk where he virtually trapped the Byzantine army between three steep ravines by stealthily capturing their only escape route, a bridge, at their rear.
Khalid utilized his better understanding of terrain in every possible way to gain strategic superiority over his enemies. During his Persian campaigns, he initially never entered deep into Persian territory and always kept the Arabian desert at his rear, allowing his forces to retreat there in case of a defeat.[118] It was only after all the strong Persian and Persian-allied forces were routed that he penetrated deep into Euphrates region and captured the regional capital of Iraq, Al-Hira. Again, at Yarmouk, the terrain would help him in executing his grand strategy of annihilating the Byzantines.
In their mobility, Khalid's troops had no match until the Mongol hordes of the 13th century.[119] In fact the tactics of the desert Arabs and steppe Mongols were somewhat identical. Entire troops of Khalid would ride on camels while on march, whereas the Mongols used horses, with the difference that the Arabs did not make use of mounted archers.[120] His most commonly used maneuver was surprise attack, also apparently his favorite one. Some of the most brilliant surprise attacks of Khalid were his night attacks from three different sides on Persian camps at Zumail, Muzayyah and Saniyy, his highly mobile army successfully maneuvering in a 100 km area, quickly destroying encampments of the Persians and their Arab allies. The Battle of Maraj-al-Debaj being no exception, where once again his highly mobile army maneuvered around a Byzantine army, appearing from four directions and opening several fronts at a time, a maneuver which later in 13th century became one of the Mongol armies' principal maneuvers.[121]
An example of Khalid's strategic maneuverability was his advance into Roman Syria.[122] Emperor Heraclius had sent all his available garrisoned troops into Syria, towards Ajnadayn, to hold the Muslim troops at the Syria-Arabia border region. The possible route of any Muslim reinforcement was expected to be the conventional Syria-Arabia road in the south, but Khalid, who was then in Iraq, took the most unexpected route: marching through the waterless Syrian desert, to the surprise of the Byzantines, he appeared in northern Syria. Catching the Byzantines off guard, he quickly captured several towns, virtually cutting off the communications of the Byzantine army at Ajnadayn with its high command at Emesa, where emperor Heraclius himself resided.[123]
Khalid's elite light cavalry, the Mobile guard, acted as the core of the Muslim cavalry during the invasion of Syria. It was composed of highly trained and seasoned soldiers, the majority of whom had been under Khalid's standard during his Arabian and Persian campaigns.[124] Muslim cavalry was a light cavalry force armed with 5 meter long lances. They could charge at an incredible speed and would usually employ a common tactic of Kar wa far literary meaning "engage-disengage", or in modern term: “hit-and-run.” They would charge on enemy flanks and rear, their maneuverability making them very effective against heavily armored Byzantine and Sassanid cataphracts.[116] Khalid's famous flanking charge on the final day of the Battle of Yarmouk stands as testimony to just how well he understood the potentials and strengths of his mounted troops.

PLUS....I believe Saba can recruit both Indian and African Elephants as well. I have Sweboz game going now, and in comparison, I would say Sweboz has a weaker roster IF you let Arverni and Aedui sit and grow massive. BUT, as Sweboz you need 6 or 7 FM per army, who have fantastic infantry BG to make up for limited roster. Sweboz economy in VH camp is horrible bad, which is why, I have a rule that if your starting position has 3 cities or fewer, then H camp. As Sweboz you can send any army running because of the monstrous charisma of your FM. One problem is if the enemy has Gesaitai (sp), which I have never successfully routed in my entire EB history.

[Marcus Darkstar]

I have Sweboz game going now, and in comparison, I would say Sweboz has a weaker roster

i would agree with that. In my current romani game the Sweboz died not due to war but due to their own ineptitude, all their family died. it was thanks to the habit of my EB game rebels venturing out of their cities leaving mostly the rebel FM in place but having rebel stacks roam the countryside.

Now i have no Germanic faction to worry about in the late game or a threat to my entire northern flank unless some gaulish faction ventures into germania.

[seleucid empire]

The Sweboz roster is not "weaker". I think its just more limited. Sweboz armies are very strong and In forests its like impossible to completely rout them

[mikepettyrtw]

The Sweboz roster is not "weaker". I think its just more limited. Sweboz armies are very strong and In forests its like impossible to completely rout them

I respectfully disagree, I just attempted Khalid Ibn al-Walid's tactics in a custom battle against Pontus that included their Chalkaspides, Pantodapoi Phalangitai, Thureophoroi, Pontic Thorakitai, Persian Hoplites and their BG Cav. I was outnumbered badly as well; I think it was something like 1700 (me) vs 2500 (Pontus). I used only Arabian Light Cav(3 units), Arabian light Inf(4 units IIRC), Sabean Medium Cav (1 unit), I BG and 2 Sabean noble inf plus 2 slingers. No units started the battle with chevrons. I only took roughly 600 casualties. The map was the same for both sides. I used no Elephants even though that's Saba's coup de main.
As Sweboz, such a thing would be impossible without plenty of FM BG or gold chevrons and possibly limited recruitment zone fright Inf and loads of clubbmen. I know so because I have tried it before in custom battles. If one brings lots of clubbmen amd chevron'd FM BG, then all but those on the steppe need to take notice. But that's it for Sweboz. No ele's, no monster cav, no superior skirmisher troops; almost everything Sweboz has can be matched or exceeded by their Gallic Neighbors. Gaesatae and Botaroas/Botraos along with the plethora of other Heavy Infantry the Gauls have, in combo with Brihentin FM BG will destroy a Sweboz army, even with clubbman and FM.
However, Sweboz army's with lots of FM, or post Reform (reform is VERY late game IMO), with lots of EXP could do the defeat an identical Pontic army with similar post battle stats. Indeed those clubbmen are monster anti-roman battering rams. But that's at enormous cost: if you loose a major battle with all those FM in it, one risks their entire campaign, no matter how many chevrons you get. But that amongst other things, makes the Sweboz campaign exilerating fun.
In conclusion, I did not say their army's fighting ability was weak, but rather their roster was weakest considering context (Saba, Arverni, Aedui)

[seleucid empire]

I respectfully disagree, I just attempted Khalid Ibn al-Walid's tactics in a custom battle against Pontus that included their Chalkaspides, Pantodapoi Phalangitai, Thureophoroi, Pontic Thorakitai, Persian Hoplites and their BG Cav. I was outnumbered badly as well; I think it was something like 1700 (me) vs 2500 (Pontus). I used only Arabian Light Cav(3 units), Arabian light Inf(4 units IIRC), Sabean Medium Cav (1 unit), I BG and 2 Sabean noble inf plus 2 slingers. No units started the battle with chevrons. I only took roughly 600 casualties. The map was the same for both sides. I used no Elephants even though that's Saba's coup de main.
As Sweboz, such a thing would be impossible without plenty of FM BG or gold chevrons and possibly limited recruitment zone fright Inf and loads of clubbmen. I know so because I have tried it before in custom battles. If one brings lots of clubbmen amd chevron'd FM BG, then all but those on the steppe need to take notice. But that's it for Sweboz. No ele's, no monster cav, no superior skirmisher troops; almost everything Sweboz has can be matched or exceeded by their Gallic Neighbors. Gaesatae and Botaroas/Botraos along with the plethora of other Heavy Infantry the Gauls have, in combo with Brihentin FM BG will destroy a Sweboz army, even with clubbman and FM.
However, Sweboz army's with lots of FM, or post Reform (reform is VERY late game IMO), with lots of EXP could do the defeat an identical Pontic army with similar post battle stats. Indeed those clubbmen are monster anti-roman battering rams. But that's at enormous cost: if you loose a major battle with all those FM in it, one risks their entire campaign, no matter how many chevrons you get. But that amongst other things, makes the Sweboz campaign exilerating fun.
In conclusion, I did not say their army's fighting ability was weak, but rather their roster was weakest considering context (Saba, Arverni, Aedui)

I disagree, the sweboz army have huge morale advantage compared to saba. I notice in your battle that you gave yourself 4 units of cavalry while the enemy only had a bg unit. If you look at it that way, of course it will not be too hard since your infantry units are faster and have more stamina.

I will attempt to do the same thing as you except with Sweboz and this time i will give the pontics more cavalry. You gave yourself 2 units of Sabaen nobles so I will give myself a unit of germanic heavy infantry since in campaigns they are available before the reforms as mercenaries.

[athanaric]

However, Sweboz army's with lots of FM, or post Reform (reform is VERY late game IMO), with lots of EXP could do the defeat an identical Pontic army with similar post battle stats. Indeed those clubbmen are monster anti-roman battering rams. But that's at enormous cost: if you loose a major battle with all those FM in it, one risks their entire campaign, no matter how many chevrons you get. But that amongst other things, makes the Sweboz campaign exilerating fun.
In conclusion, I did not say their army's fighting ability was weak, but rather their roster was weakest considering context (Saba, Arverni, Aedui)

Eh, Sweboz have "fear" infantry and better heavy cavalry than Saba. Indeed, the two factions are a bit similar in that they both rely a lot on mobile infantry, usually lightly armoured, and put a lot of emphasis on hit and run tactics. In short, asymmetrical warfare. If you approach them like a Hellenistic faction, you'll likely lose against Romans, Parthians, Seleukids etc. (at least against a reasonably skilled human player in MP).
The difference of course is that one of the two factions is strong in deserts and in ranged combat, while the other is better in forests and close combat. Both factions are "pro" factions IMO, both in terms of strategy and tactics (meaning they're difficult to play, especially when facing the more advanced Mediterranean factions or the steppe armies).
And spamming FMs is very lame IMO, regardless of the faction. For Suebi, there are cheaper alternatives that are almost as good.

[kidpacific]

I have finished all faction campaigns at least once and i am going to prefer Swboz；
The sweboz units get bonus in forest and can access to high exp units, but the roster is rather limited.Compared to Saba( can recurit Arabian archer-spearmen, a very good low-tier multifunctional ranged unit, which has a longer range than sabean archer), Sweboz factional units is lack of good ranged units(long range/large ammo archer). In my experience, the ranged units are more reliable assault force in battle H/VH campaign( ai receive attack/defencer bonus), for the reason that the ranged unit is not influenced by the defence skill. And in foreign MIC, the saba can recuirit Hellenic native phalanx which is the highest PPR(Performance to Price Ratio) line infantry in my opinion.

[seleucid empire]

i think we're talking about faction rosters only.

And consider that Sweboz is surrounded by factions that suit its fighting style. Saba is surrounded by two factions which have a completely different fighting style and loads of better infantry and cavalry. Saba's roster doesn't really counter its neighbours all that well unless you do an Arabian light cavalry spam (which in campaign, you wont be able to afford)

[kidpacific]

i think we're talking about faction rosters only.

And consider that Sweboz is surrounded by factions that suit its fighting style. Saba is surrounded by two factions which have a completely different fighting style and loads of better infantry and cavalry. Saba's roster doesn't really counter its neighbours all that well unless you do an Arabian light cavalry spam (which in campaign, you wont be able to afford)

Ok, focus on factional unit roster. I think , compared to the sweboz one, the sabean one has an evident ranged unit advantage, and a little stamina advantage ( most of sabean factional units have very_hardy attribute, while little sweboz units have this attribute), a little disadvantage on support infantry, a little disadvantage on heavy cavalry because of 190BC sweboz reform.
Consider the neighbors, the sweboz is surronded by galic factions, romani. I think the difference between the galic style(high attack/low defence infantry) and the roman style(low attack/high defence infantry) is much more larger than the style difference between two diadochi kindoms, the AS and the Ptolemy.

[seleucid empire]

Saba( can recurit Arabian archer-spearmen, a very good low-tier multifunctional ranged unit, which has a longer range than sabean archer), Sweboz factional units is lack of good ranged units(long range/large ammo archer). In my experience, the ranged units are more reliable assault force in battle H/VH campaign( ai receive attack/defencer bonus), for the reason that the ranged unit is not influenced by the defence skill..

you probably didn't use all of the units then. sweboz have archer spearmen: Medjīnīkōs (Baltic Frontiersmen), the best archer spearmen in the game with the longest range i believe

[kidpacific]

Yes , Baltic one is also good, but it's not a factional unit, most factions in EB can recruit it, including saba. And the arabian one is a saba factional unit, only saba can recruit it. no other faction can recruit it.
Moreover, the saba can recruit arabian one in the 1st turn of the campain, and the sweboz can't access to the region which can recruit Baltic one at least near 20 turns.
And the range of Baltic Frontiersmen is shorter than arabian archer-spearmen, you can check it in edu.
The range of the arabian one is 196 , while range of Baltic one is 187.

[seleucid empire]

Yes , Baltic one is also good, but it's not a factional unit, most factions in EB can recruit it, including saba. And the arabian one is a saba factional unit, only saba can recruit it. no other faction can recruit it.
Moreover, the saba can recruit arabian one in the 1st turn of the campain, and the sweboz can't access to the region which can recruit Baltic one at least near 20 turns.
And the range of Baltic Frontiersmen is shorter than arabian archer-spearmen, you can check it in edu.
The range of the arabian one is 196 , while range of Baltic one is 187.

I was not aware that it had a shorter range. In any case, the baltics have the hardy trait and the Arabians dont. It also has higher attack attack and defence and a morale value of 11 compared to the Arabians who only have 9. That means it actually has a chance to hold the enemy in melee for a while. Whenever I use Arabians in melee they don't buy me much time at all.

Also the twenty turn thing doesn't matter as much since the first few years of a sweboz campaign, you're fighting in the densist forests in the whole map where archers aren't worth squat.

[kidpacific]

The Arabians dont have hardy attribute but have a very_hardy attribute.
Let's focus on the factional unit. The arabian one is a factional unit, and the baltic is not.
I don't think the twenty turn thing doesn't matter. In a sweboz campaign , because the poor economy fall in debt from the 2nd turn, the troops recruited in the recurit line in the 1st turn is quiet important. In the first few years of a sweboz campaign, we're assaulting cities in most time. Considering the low-armor/high melee attack slave units in the near reigions, the ranged units is really useful, especially in VH/VH campaigns. In my VH/VH huge scale campaignes, i lost no more than 100 men( most time near 50 men) per slave city in sabean campaign because of the long range of arabian archer-spearmen, while in sweboz campaign lost nearly 200-300 men per slave city because of the lack of good ranged unit. I think if i can recurit a good archer in 1st turn( i can only recurit 4 skirmisheres to instead), i can highly reduce the lost .