Results 1 to 30 of 30

Thread: Use of tactical Vs. historic, role play armies

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Requin Member Vincent Butler's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Laniakea Supercluster
    Posts
    673

    Default Re: Use of tactical Vs. historic, role play armies

    Quote Originally Posted by williamsiddell View Post
    For instance Caesar with a smaller army beat Pompey by taking one in three men from his front line and concealing them on the flank to combat a cavalry attack he knew was about to happen. Can't do that in this game.
    No, the AI heads straight for your hidden units. I have won because I had units hidden (lost the captain, Roman Cav), but had my ELC hidden, and they just chased my cav around, somehow a unit of Greek Cav ended up wiping him out. They never found my ELC. Greek Cav seems like it will beat Roman Cav, which is strange, Greek Cav stinks, Roman Cav is a decent light cav unit, but both for and against me, Roman Cav loses to Greek Cav. And that was E/E, I would hate to see it on anything harder. On M/M I am already seeing a difference in my losses, even to Eastern Infantry.
    Last edited by Vincent Butler; 07-25-2014 at 17:24.
    Blessed be the LORD my strength, which teacheth my hands to war, and my fingers to fight: Psalm 144:1

    In peace there's nothing so becomes a man
    As modest stillness and humility:
    But when the blast of war blows in our ears,
    Then imitate the action of the tiger;
    -Henry V by William Shakespeare

  2. #2
    Senior Member Senior Member ReluctantSamurai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,483

    Default Re: Use of tactical Vs. historic, role play armies

    No, the AI heads straight for your hidden units.
    This I have not seen much Now of course the AI has to know where all of your units are, hidden or not, or the game would be unplayable, but I love my traps and 99 times out of 100 I get to spring them without the AI "cheating" by heading straight for my concealed units.

    Roman Cav loses to Greek Cav
    Are you referring to Equites or the post-Marian 'Roman Cavalry'? Agreed that Greek Cavalry is not all that great, which is why as the Greek Cities I hire as many Sarmatian Heavy Cav as I can. As Macedonia you get lots of nice cavalry so no need for mercs.

    On M/M I am already seeing a difference in my losses
    Which is going to force you to change your tactics a bit, and it makes having good (5-star+) generals leading your armies. Don't neglect even the slightest edge you can gain from inherent general bonuses or those from ancillaries. All those bonuses stack and become unit modifiers to your troops. That's why I stated earlier that when you get your "Military Genius" (usually comes in the second generation), don't ever let him see the inside of a city. When I play Armenia, that general will lead nothing but a Cataphract army...all Cats and Arab Cavalry, and not ever a single infantry unit. Of course that's just my preference, but it pays off when he reaches legendary status as a horseman, attacker, defender, and/or conqueror.
    High Plains Drifter

  3. #3
    Requin Member Vincent Butler's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Laniakea Supercluster
    Posts
    673

    Default Re: Use of tactical Vs. historic, role play armies

    Quote Originally Posted by ReluctantSamurai View Post
    This I have not seen much Now of course the AI has to know where all of your units are, hidden or not, or the game would be unplayable, but I love my traps and 99 times out of 100 I get to spring them without the AI "cheating" by heading straight for my concealed units.
    Seems to be mainly EB, not RTW, I think it could be just the enemy swinging wide by where my hidden units are, but just about every time?

    Are you referring to Equites or the post-Marian 'Roman Cavalry'? Agreed that Greek Cavalry is not all that great, which is why as the Greek Cities I hire as many Sarmatian Heavy Cav as I can. As Macedonia you get lots of nice cavalry so no need for mercs.
    Post-Marian Roman Cav. Right, I love the Macedonian cav selection.[/QUOTE]

    When I play Armenia, that general will lead nothing but a Cataphract army...all Cats and Arab Cavalry, and not ever a single infantry unit. Of course that's just my preference, but it pays off when he reaches legendary status as a horseman, attacker, defender, and/or conqueror.
    Armenia has good cav and only decent infantry, so the best use of your cav is not a combined operation, your infantry might not last long enough unless you use mainly Heavy Spearmen or Armenian Legionaries, who are line-holders at best. I guess you just need to hold long enough to bring your cav around, provided there is nobody that they first have to deal with, which is more the case the harder difficulties you play on. With Macedon or Seleucia it makes more sense to do a combined operation, because it is a different style of infantry. I am starting to think that archers are not really worth having, at least not with a phalanx, because then you are trying to protect the archers as well as fight the enemy. Probably depends on who you are fighting.
    Blessed be the LORD my strength, which teacheth my hands to war, and my fingers to fight: Psalm 144:1

    In peace there's nothing so becomes a man
    As modest stillness and humility:
    But when the blast of war blows in our ears,
    Then imitate the action of the tiger;
    -Henry V by William Shakespeare

  4. #4
    Senior Member Senior Member ReluctantSamurai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,483

    Default Re: Use of tactical Vs. historic, role play armies

    Armenia has good cav and only decent infantry, so the best use of your cav is not a combined operation, your infantry might not last long enough unless you use mainly Heavy Spearmen or Armenian Legionaries, who are line-holders at best.
    Probably a correct assessment of Armenia's infantry. They are certainly a serviceable bunch...the Heavy Spears roughly equivalent to Phalanx Pike (without the sarissa, of course), and the AL's being roughly equal to Roman Principes. When combined with Cretan Archers as a support unit, and 4-6 Cats, they form my basic city assault army and can be used as a defensive-style army in the field.

    I am starting to think that archers are not really worth having
    With my style of play, I couldn't live without them. It's one of the main ways to balance the battlefield bonuses the AI gets at the higher difficulty settings. When you can cause 10-20% casualties amongst enemy units before melee is joined, they are a good equalizer. Enemy cav rarely get to my archers, although it does happen on occasion. In defensive battles, archers are indispensable, IMHO. And if you happen to get a height advantage, a battle can be over before it ever gets to melee......
    High Plains Drifter

  5. #5
    Requin Member Vincent Butler's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Laniakea Supercluster
    Posts
    673

    Default Re: Use of tactical Vs. historic, role play armies

    Right, but with Greece, I don't have a cav unit capable of dealing with flanking cav, and I would rather have my hoplites engaged in the battle line. I don't want my armies too big. Right now I have 4 AH, 3 Hoplites, 2 Heavy Peltasts, 1 or 2 archers (depending on which army), three cav in a mix of Militia and Greek, one of one, two of the other, and my general. I usually do a horseshoe with my missile units on the inside, I have gone complete horseshoe because the enemy kept charging their cav into the gap into the back of my engaged phalanx.
    Blessed be the LORD my strength, which teacheth my hands to war, and my fingers to fight: Psalm 144:1

    In peace there's nothing so becomes a man
    As modest stillness and humility:
    But when the blast of war blows in our ears,
    Then imitate the action of the tiger;
    -Henry V by William Shakespeare

  6. #6
    Senior Member Senior Member ReluctantSamurai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,483

    Default Re: Use of tactical Vs. historic, role play armies

    with Greece, I don't have a cav unit capable of dealing with flanking cav
    Depends on who you are fighting. Greek Cavalry is evenly matched with Roman Equites, but need major upgrades to deal with post-Marian Roman Cavalry. Greek Cavalry trump Macedonian Light Lancers as long as you attack them before they can charge, where their large charge bonus gives them the advantage; but lose to Macedonian Cavalry and Companions. That's why you need to eliminate Macedonia before they get that far in development.

    I don't want my armies too big.
    Why? The Greek Cities are certainly capable of generating a very large income right from the start. Denarii in the bank is a waste if you are having trouble on the battlefield for lack of troops. You have 20 slots available...I'd use every one of them.

    I have gone complete horseshoe because the enemy kept charging their cav into the gap into the back of my engaged phalanx.
    In my experience, you need six Greek Cav units to get the job done. My standard GC army usually has 10 hoplites (mixed Armored, regular Hoplites, and two Spartans), 3 Cretan Archers, the general unit, and six Greek Cavalry. Later on, I replace two or three GC's with Sarmatian Heavy Cav, and the regular hoplites with Bastarnae Heavy Infantry. It's a flexible enough mix to deal with just about anyone, and once the Bastarnae get added, I use a modified manipular formation with the Bastarnae in the second line. With some armor/weapon upgrades, the Bastarnae become a fearsome weapon...maybe even better than the Spartans. Charge them into the flank of an engaged Cohort, and it's usually insta-rout. They also have a knack for killing enemy generals. Few of them who charge a unit of Bastarnae live to go home to kiss their wife and children

    The Heavy Peltasts can be a nice addition, now and then. They are murderous against chariots, and can act as light infantry when needed. Militia Cavalry only see a spot in my armies at the outset, while I'm upgrading my stables to get Greek Cavalry. Once that happens, I disband any that are still left and don't train them anymore.
    Last edited by ReluctantSamurai; 07-26-2014 at 04:21.
    High Plains Drifter

  7. #7

    Default Re: Use of tactical Vs. historic, role play armies

    It's extremely difficult to be historically accurate when playing this game. For instance, Athens' power depended on it's navy, but I find I don't need a navy when playing the GC. The effectiveness of a cavalry army was demonstrated by the mongols, but they had a solid saddle and stirrups - so Armenian all-cavalry armies would be very vulnerable to having riders knocked out of the saddle (especially if armoured). That's why Roman armies are better known for ground troops and why Caesar was able to rout Pompey's cavalry with a few spearmen.

    As far as changing difficulty levels is concerned - I've started playing GC VH/VH. Couple of immediate variations - I lost a general at sea for the first time and was asked for cash for trade rights for the first time. As suggested the economic penalty is not significant (for instance by 264bc I've already bribed Halicarnassus and the two rebel cities on the west coast of Greece, plus 2 generals building watchtowers in asia minor). Battles so far take a bit more winning but the outcome is the same. I destroyed the Brutii army that landed on the west coast with my starting units plus a merc phalanx, and outside Syracuse the AI still allowed my army to gain the high ground.
    Last edited by williamsiddell; 07-26-2014 at 15:23.

  8. #8
    Requin Member Vincent Butler's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Laniakea Supercluster
    Posts
    673

    Default Re: Use of tactical Vs. historic, role play armies

    Quote Originally Posted by ReluctantSamurai View Post
    I use a modified manipular formation with the Bastarnae in the second line. With some armor/weapon upgrades, the Bastarnae become a fearsome weapon...maybe even better than the Spartans. Charge them into the flank of an engaged Cohort, and it's usually insta-rout. They also have a knack for killing enemy generals. Few of them who charge a unit of Bastarnae live to go home to kiss their wife and children

    The Heavy Peltasts can be a nice addition, now and then. They are murderous against chariots, and can act as light infantry when needed. Militia Cavalry only see a spot in my armies at the outset, while I'm upgrading my stables to get Greek Cavalry. Once that happens, I disband any that are still left and don't train them anymore.
    Manipular involving phalanx? How does that work? Now the enemy flanks with cav, and actually charges them in at my battle line instead of my missile units, that is why I closed my horseshoe. I don't like the horseshoe, but can't see a better formation for the situation, I may discover something later. I am definitely open to ideas. The Bastarnae, I guess as long as you make sure you hire Bastarnae and not Thracians. My brother won't train Greek Cav, only Militia (or Light Lancers if Macedon), because the stats are almost identical except for charge bonus, and Militia Cav get a missile attack. I prefer Greek over Militia myself, though, because of how I use my cav. I happen to have a MC unit in an army in Italy because that army came from fighting Macedon, where MC can help bombard a phalanx. Also, my army in Turkey has MC, what with Egypt and Pontus. The Heavy Peltasts, once they gain some experience, will be nice,though you need a catapult range to build them. I do have a silver chevron/gold sword/bronze shield Peltast unit, that does pretty good.
    Blessed be the LORD my strength, which teacheth my hands to war, and my fingers to fight: Psalm 144:1

    In peace there's nothing so becomes a man
    As modest stillness and humility:
    But when the blast of war blows in our ears,
    Then imitate the action of the tiger;
    -Henry V by William Shakespeare

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO