Why does everyone hates barbarian factions?

[HeirOfGreece]

I really do like the barbarian factions because they have very good morale! Got those Warbands that can Warcry and Beat everyone up!
Yeah Yeah... Weak Cavalary... But does it matter? If you have strong infantry it is good! Very good ambushers. But only Weakness is the Weak settlements... And financial...

[LordK9]

I like them because they're so easy to rip up by my forces

[Vincent Butler]

I really do like the barbarian factions because they have very good morale! Got those Warbands that can Warcry and Beat everyone up!
Yeah Yeah... Weak Cavalary... But does it matter? If you have strong infantry it is good! Very good ambushers. But only Weakness is the Weak settlements... And financial...

I take it you are being tongue-in-cheek. Money is the problem for me. Also weak units, outside of Chosen Swordsmen. I guess Bull Warriors, but I can't stand them, unrealistic, and why do they have two hit points? Swordsmen are only decent. Chosen Axemen awesome vs armoured units, but vulnerable to missiles. No good spearmen. I am an infantry general, so Noble Cav are fine for me. If you use Warband, just hope nobody brings Wardogs. Wardogs are ineffective at anything better than Warband.



I think I like Gaul the best, Germania would be good but is worst for money. But Germania is a lot of specialized units, and not much in the way of line infantry, so not really my style. If Britain had normal cav and/or archers, that would be better, as well.

I do wish they had stone walls. The Gauls did have them in real life. Also, no way to deal with unrest once you get above a city (I know, ZPG). I have not quite mastered that. Good temples, the Julii and I think all Romans can build over a Gallic Sacred Circle of Epona and build Awesome Temple/Pantheion to Horse, which at Pantheion level gives units trained there +5 experience. Nice, a unit starting out with two silver chevrons. Abnoba gives gold sword to missile units, I think something Scythian or Dacian gives a gold shield, at least when combined with blacksmith upgrades. Don't know which one, though.

[HeirOfGreece]

Vincent Butler And yeah sorry for asking What are Wardogs ment for? I like never Recruit them (only when fighting elephants) Should i Recruit them more? And yeah i like Gauls the most too! Just do very high tax rates + farming + trader/market and you should be good

[ReluctantSamurai]

Barbarian factions are a lot of fun to play, and offer a wide variety of units. If you are a cavalry man (like me), you'll love Germania (my favorite) . Gothic and Noble Cavalry are among the best outside of the Middle East. A wide selection of infantry with AP weapons (Chosen Axe, Bezerkers, etc), one of the top archer units in the Chosen Archers, and a spear unit that is serviceable early in a campaign. The biggest downside is no good sword unit (which is strange considering Germania historically had excellent weaponsmiths), and a difficult starting economy. Can't do anything about the former unless you edit some files, but the latter can be helped with Temples of Freya which boost population growth, thereby increasing tax income, and ports in the North Sea which increase trade income.

Gaul has a wider variety of infantry, better income possibilities, better temples, Forester Archers, but not so good cavalry. They also have a much more difficult starting position, and you can find yourself at war with not only Rome and Carthage, but Britannia, Germania, Spain, and Scythia. Definitely not a faction for a beginner

Scythia is also for cavalry (my second favorite). Vanilla Horse Archers to start with, but excellent Noble Cavalry (both for the men and the women), Chosen Archers, but limited infantry. Scythia's starting position is far-flung, which is a problem. I always abandon Campus Sarmatae and Campus Alanni very early, and concentrate on developing Tanais, Scythia, and Chersonesos. Take out Thrace ASAP, and you are headed for the riches of Greece

I detest Britannia mostly because general units are glorified donkey carts posing as chariots, no decent cavalry, and no archers. Chosen Swords are excellent infantry, however.

Spain is boring. The only thing going for that faction are the Scutari, and that you can build a decent economy with all the port cities.

Dacia is kind of a cross between Germania and Thrace. Play if you get bored with other barbarian factions.

Also, no way to deal with unrest once you get above a city (I know, ZPG)

[Vincent Butler]

Agreed, the Barbarians are fun, because they are challenging. My fiercest battle was probably with Britain against the Senate. I won, but it was very close. Riots killed that campaign, but I was into Turkey. The entire map was blue. The Scipii had Africa and most of Turkey and the east, and I had most everything else. I had a good Germania going, into Italy, but after defeating Rome suddenly my finances tanked for no reason.

Will probably start a barbarian when I get bored with Seleucia, or maybe start as Parthia. But I would mod for more realism before then, I think. Probably would be Gaul if barbarian. It is probably not a bad idea to hit Britain in Samarobriva quickly before going after Rome, because you do need to go after Rome quickly. Take Rome, then Greece, or perhaps Spain.

[ReluctantSamurai]

But I would mod for more realism before then, I think.

One of the biggest modding changes one could make for Parthia is to give them the capability for paved roads. And not just simple paving, but highways. The link I posted in another thread proves beyond doubt, that the Persians built a lavish highway system throughout Mesopotamia long before the Romans laid their first road paver. And make Susa the Parthian capital. From the Achaemenid period onwards (540 BCE>>), it was the capital. Even after throwing off Seleucid domination (around 247 BCE), it was one of two capitals (the other being Ctesiphon on the Tigris River). How the devs decided that Arsakia (improperly named as the Persian name was Rhagae) which was basically the spring residence for the kings, should be the capital is beyond me In-game, Susa starts with stone walls, Arsakia is a backwater town with no walls at all. Go figure

[Sorry for the rant But I just hate how the devs screwed up things like this when 10 min of Googling would've gotten it right]

you do need to go after Rome quickly

Exactly. As Gaul, one needs to move quickly, and decisively. Not a faction for those who like to turtle.

Edit: For some reason the original link doesn't work anymore, but Wiki has a bunch of them in this article:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Road

Or just Google "Persian Royal Road" for others.....

[LordK9]

The Bull Warriors are possibly the best infantry unit in the game but the cost is way high and, well, they are the figment of someone's imagination. Spain (for me) is fun to play - just wish the AI would allow land swaps so I could avoid war with the Gauls and concentrate on the Romans and Carthage as I should.

Vincent Butler said: I had a good Germania going, into Italy, but after defeating Rome suddenly my finances tanked for no reason.

That seems to happen with all factions. Always frustrating.

[Vincent Butler]

The Bull Warriors are possibly the best infantry unit in the game

I think they gave them for balancing purposes. I don't know that I would rank them among the best, though I don't remember their stats. The best is probably Spartan Hoplites (insane attack, both primary and secondary, and high defense). But by the time of Rome Total War, even the Spartans weren't anything special compared to other hoplites. Bull Warriors absolutely should not have two hit points. Again, probably a balancing thing. I would imagine that the primary barbarian weapon was a spear, so the barbarians should have more spear units than just Warband. Then again, that is probably a decent representation of the standard barbarian unit. They had good swordsmen too, but the Warband would probably make up a vast majority of a barbarian army.

[LordK9]

Agreed. As far as swords vs spears, likely the same reason most vikings used axes - most couldn't afford to buy a sword.

[ReluctantSamurai]

Probably some truth to that. Only Vikings of high status could afford a well-made sword. But I suspect that the armor-piercing capability of an axe also played a role, and that the light, single-handed axe could be thrown. The poorest soldiers probably used a spear.

[Vincent Butler]

Probably some truth to that. Only Vikings of high status could afford a well-made sword. But I suspect that the armor-piercing capability of an axe also played a role, and that the light, single-handed axe could be thrown. The poorest soldiers probably used a spear.

I forget where I read it, but I have read that even Gallic nobles did not scorn to use a spear. Even though it was a poor man's weapon, it was still an effective weapon.

[Ludens]

Vincent Butler And yeah sorry for asking What are Wardogs ment for? I like never Recruit them (only when fighting elephants) Should i Recruit them more?

Personally, I used them against light skirmishers and archers and the like. Units that don't have great attack or defence ratings, but are hard to catch if you don't have cavalry (or if you want to use the cavalry for more important targets). They are also somewhat useful as a fodder unit for blunting enemy charges or (briefly) pinning enemy infantry. But I don't really like them: it's a gimmicky unit, not realistic and very gamey in its implementation.

Also, why use them against elephants? Other than for blunting the charge?

I would imagine that the primary barbarian weapon was a spear, so the barbarians should have more spear units than just Warband. Then again, that is probably a decent representation of the standard barbarian unit. They had good swordsmen too, but the Warband would probably make up a vast majority of a barbarian army.

It depends. When defending their homeland, the majority of a barbarian army would be made up of "militia" units with limited training and equipment. These would indeed look like the warband units of R:TW. But the name "warband" is misleading, since these units were not warriors, but farmers and craftsmen defending their homes. The real warbands (groups of warriors around a local strongman) were only a minority in such armies.

On the other hand, a raiding army would consists mostly consist of warbands, supplemented with mercenary groups. These would be professional warriors, and would have better equipment than the militia (much better, if their leader was important or wealthy).

I forget where I read it, but I have read that even Gallic nobles did not scorn to use a spear. Even though it was a poor man's weapon, it was still an effective weapon.

Nor did the Samurai, who would own much better swords. IIRC Samurai duels could be fought with spear, polearm or even bow. Swords were important, but they were definitely not considered as some sort ultimate weapon. In fact, one of the great virtues of a sword is that it is a good back-up weapon: easy to carry, can be quickly drawn when your primary weapon fails, but still has enough reach and weight to counter an armed, armoured opponent (unlike, say, a dagger, which can't be used to counter enemy weapons).

The whole sword-beats-spear thing has more to do with balancing reasons than historical accuracy. The sword is more flexible, but the spear has a far greater reach. The swordsman will have to break or bat the spear away in order to be able to hit the spearman; and all the while he is within the spearman's killing range. Also, batting the spear away isn't as easy as you think: if the spearman is any good, he will constantly keep the point moving.

[Vincent Butler]

The thing to remember, is that Warband are trained out of the same level barracks as Town Watch and Militia Hoplites, though one on one they own Town Watch. 120 men vs 80, I guess. The barbarians should have gotten a better spear unit, say at the Swordsmen level.

Also, there should be a better Gallic-style cav mercenary. I would say Gaul should get a better cav unit, but I guess the Noble Cav are fine. It is the Roman cav (meaning Legionary and Praetorian, not the unit Roman Cavalry) that are unrealistically good. Frankly, if you like melee cav, be Macedon or Seleucia. Macedonian Cavalry, awesome unit. "Cavalry, Macedon's Finest!"

Some will say be Armenia or Scythia, which works too, especially if you like missile cav. Scythia has regular melee cav as well (their infantry is the problem), whereas Armenia's only real melee cav is Cataphracts (but they get the Cataphract Archers, who do just fine if they get caught). Parthia...well, good luck in getting enough money to afford cavalry.

[HeirOfGreece]

1 question Ludens,How do you write that Originally Posted By? I looked on how to do it and i did not realise how... And yeah aren't wardogs good against Elephants?

And what does Quote do?

[Vincent Butler]

1 question Ludens,How do you write that Originally Posted By? I looked on how to do it and i did not realise how... And yeah aren't wardogs good against Elephants?

I know I am not Ludens, but the "originally posted by" comes from the Reply with Quote feature, there is also something you can do with multiquote, I am not sure what that does. It seems you have found out what Quote does.


As to the Wardogs vs Elephants



Elephants are best handled with pikemen (hoplites are OK, but the pikemen have longer spears, so the elephants don't land on your troops as much). Skirmishers (not javelin cavalry) also get a bonus against elephants. Archers can possibly get them to go amok if you use flaming missiles. War Ellies or Armoured Ellies almost never go amok due to flaming missiles. I may have posted my Royal Pikemen vs Armoured Ellies video, I don't remember. I also do have different siege weapons vs Armoured Ellies as well. Ballista and Scorpions don't do very well against AE. Incendiary Pigs get elephants routing immediately, once they hit. That is the only use for IP.

I have a video of the IP, and if the thread continues that way I will post it, don't want to be overwhelming with the videos. I did a bunch of one-on-ones. The default Window 10 in-game DVR gets choppy after a couple of minutes, so you can't really do a full battle.

[weejonnie]

So far I have played Brittania, Germanica and am playing Spain. (All Vanilla M/M)

Brittanica - once you get heavy chariots then you can go to sleep and let the game win itself. I headed South to the Mediterranean to get a warm-water port as quickly as possible. One key tactic is to get the cross-channel trade going.
Germanica - Basically I won the game with spear warbands - watching British Chariots die as they threw themselves on the Phalanx was very enjoyable. At least you start off with a good number of provinces and scope for expansion. I actually won the short-campaign criteria when I knocked out the last Scythian province as my 50th.
Spain - early days yet - have taken over the peninsula/ Palma and expanding into Italy - Patavium is still Gaulish. May take Corsica/ Sardinia (whatever it is called) as weakly defended and I have a pretty useful fleet. Palma/ Corduba sea income is very lucrative tradewise. Economy strong enough to buy Bull warriors and Long-shield cavalry.

My 'algorithm'

Build up the economy by building roads/ ports/ markets
Build up population by keeping taxes low in towns/ large towns that are getting close to City Status (then hit them with very high). There is a VERY big difference over 10 turns between a 4% and a 2% growth. (nearly 50% Vs just over 21%)

Using the Financial forecast area is very useful.
Although there is general advice against it, I build both land clearance AND also communal farming in areas where the natural productivity is low - 3.5 - 4.5% - since you can't build high-ended buildings that give a big boost to population explosions then I think it is worth it. Cordoba has a natural farming value of 6.5 - so it is possible to exceed the recommended maximum of 8.
The population growth also enables more rapid recruitment.
Take any population centre that is poorly defended, even if this means jumping in with the navy. When I declare war on the Brits Londinium will be the first to go.
Unless you are miles away from the capital and in an unfamilair culture, enslave rather than exterminate. Barbarians are helped by the fact that Western Europe is the same culture-wise. (Except for Cordoba), so you can move the Capital well over to the East as you expand.

(If you fill up your recruiting queue with peasants, you can still force the next unit to be trained to be the one you want.)

[ReluctantSamurai]

Cordoba has a natural farming value of 6.5 - so it is possible to exceed the recommended maximum of 8

I wouldn't recommend it. Corduba is a pain in the a$$ to keep under control even for its' founding faction of Carthage. It's one of those cities that has a built-in 35% unrest (Patavium, Jerusalem, Tarsus being the others). Put your best Law & Order temple there, and if you have a governor, choose one with a lot of influence laureates...management skill will do you no good for keeping the population under control.

Unless you are miles away from the capital and in an unfamiliar culture, enslave rather than exterminate.

Bear in mind that any settlement/town/city with a governor, gets a share of the refugees, which may...or may not be a good thing With certain cities, I break my rule of not exterminating upon occupation; any Nile Delta city, Jerusalem, Patavium, Corduba, Tarsus, Carthage, and any starting Roman city. All of these cities gain population back quickly, especially the ones with grain-driven population growth like Carthage or Alexandria. Those particular cities are a real pain to keep under control, and some time is needed to convert the indigenous temple and establish ZPG. Better to take a temporary hit to the city's income than to lose it to rebellion.

[Vincent Butler]

Egyptians are always exterminated, unless it is only a town or large town. Romans pretty much same way. Usually I look at happiness before deciding with others. I usually make my determination about temples at that time as well. Corduba, Londinium, Tanais, Tarsus, Patavium (usually), and Dimmidi will always get the public order temple. Not a bad idea to build it in Corinth as well if you are not Greek, to make sure you maintain the temple of Zeus at Olympus. That will help your public order with all other cities. However, I consider the upgrade to missile units from Artemis (or a Pantheion to Zeus, if I am that late) worth keeping. I have only gotten into Greece once as a barbarian. By that time, riots were killing my campaign.

[weejonnie]

Well my Spanish campaign (M/M) is about to enter Greece - have taken Appolonia (or whatever the city opposite Tarentum is called), my armies of Bull warriers/ long-shield cavalry are kicking Brutii butt and the Mediterranean Sea is Spanish controlled. Basically I put in Temples of ESUS everywhere there isn't already a temple of public order, since not only does it give you Bull Warriors, it maximises public order. It is about 225BC, so not sure if Marius reforms have kicked in. 33 provinces including Spain, Gaul (1 Province Left in Greece), Great Britain (they are down to a few ex-Germania towns), Italy, Carthage (not yet secure). I have no problems with rioting -most of my towns are now developed as much as I want, so expenditure has gone down (the smaller towns are on low tax rate to speed up development). (The Scipii control Sparta but as that is the only city they do control in Greece I'll probably take that next.) Have done some bribing - I think that the bribery rates are set by your budget at the start of each turn - so you have to bribe early.
---------------------------------------
End of campaign: Scipii didn't attack Carthage until I got some reinforcements there - and then started wandering off to Egypt (So I took Tharsis). Got rid of Britannia but didn't invade Dacia. Cleared out the Greek City Areas. Numidia attacked Carthage - bad mistake as 4 turns later I had wiped them out, and took Byzantium as my 50th. The Brutii were a pain as their black-sea ports were churning out quinquiremes. I have a rule that whenever a navy dock for re-training, I always add another vesssel. It is amazing how quickly the navy builds up.

Basically once I had Carthago Novo and Corduba churning out bull warriers and my forces arraigned to stop the Gauls/ Julii this was a cakewalk - it did take until 200bc or so, so it was one of the longer campaigns.

[Vincent Butler]

My brother likes the Spanish, the Scutarii are decent. I personally don't like the use of Bull Warriors for my own because I question their historical reality. But that is just me, I try to factor realism in instead of just playing for fun. I don't use Druids, despite the fact that I have seen firsthand how useful they can be (I used to use them).

It seems Dacia does not get much mention, probably in part because you have to mod to get them, same as Spanish. It seems to myself and my brother that Dacian Warband seem to fight better than standard Warband, though I doubt that is actually the case. Then again, maybe since they are supplemented by Falxmen instead of Swordsmen, the battle goes better for them, so they don't rout as quickly. But Chosen Swordsmen and Chosen Archer Warband? That would make for a tough force, especially because they also get Barbarian Noble Cav, who are decent as well.

[weejonnie]

My brother likes the Spanish, the Scutarii are decent. I personally don't like the use of Bull Warriors for my own because I question their historical reality. But that is just me, I try to factor realism in instead of just playing for fun. I don't use Druids, despite the fact that I have seen firsthand how useful they can be (I used to use them).

It seems Dacia does not get much mention, probably in part because you have to mod to get them, same as Spanish. It seems to myself and my brother that Dacian Warband seem to fight better than standard Warband, though I doubt that is actually the case. Then again, maybe since they are supplemented by Falxmen instead of Swordsmen, the battle goes better for them, so they don't rout as quickly. But Chosen Swordsmen and Chosen Archer Warband? That would make for a tough force, especially because they also get Barbarian Noble Cav, who are decent as well.

I am doing Dacia at the moment - inspired by this comment. Headed south and then over to take Byzantium. Thrace was a doddle but Macedon took a long time (during which Germania kept asking me to become a protectorate.). When I eventually killed them off (and the Greek cities) there was virtually no one left alive in Corinth, Sparta or Athens - which is affecting my recruitment as I build the population back up (I didn't have anything to do with that). Have had various Julii stacks wander over. As I write the Brutii are down to Tarentum and Crete (under seige). Will leave one army up north to deal with German warbands and then concentrate on the Italian campaign. The overall campaign has taken a long time (for me) as I am only up to 16 or so territories and we are nearly into the 190s BC. I don't really want to open up a third front (Scythia) although the city is ripe for plucking.

[Vincent Butler]

I am doing Dacia at the moment

Dacia could be tough as a campaign, at least in my experience, though it seems not as tough as Thrace. With me, I attacked Macedon, Thrace attacked me. Right now I am doing OK, I took Bylazora and Thessalonica. Right now I am at a battle for Thessalonica, but both times I have tried to fight it the computer crashed during the battle. Too bad, the second time I destroyed both their ram and siege tower, leaving only two ladders. My Falxmen should then own their Phalanx Pikemen on the walls.

I also have a good Germania going. I wiped out Britain, and Spain and Julii combined to take out Gaul. I was allied with both Spain and Julii. Julii betrayed me quickly, as I expected. Spain just recently did. Right now I am at an impasse with Rome. Right now I only have one main army, for financial reasons, but I can't really deal with all the Roman armies who are around northern Italy (I have Patavium and Massilia). Dacia is a buffer between me and the Brutii, but I don't like letting them just sit in Greece uncontested. However, Spain can be lucrative. I think I will try to take Italy, I think my units can easily deal with Spain so I can probably take them slowly, maybe create an army and just not move them as quickly, to save money. I think my main focus should be dealing with Rome.

[weejonnie]

Dacia could be tough as a campaign, at least in my experience, though it seems not as tough as Thrace. With me, I attacked Macedon, Thrace attacked me. Right now I am doing OK, I took Bylazora and Thessalonica. Right now I am at a battle for Thessalonica, but both times I have tried to fight it the computer crashed during the battle. Too bad, the second time I destroyed both their ram and siege tower, leaving only two ladders. My Falxmen should then own their Phalanx Pikemen on the walls.

I also have a good Germania going. I wiped out Britain, and Spain and Julii combined to take out Gaul. I was allied with both Spain and Julii. Julii betrayed me quickly, as I expected. Spain just recently did. Right now I am at an impasse with Rome. Right now I only have one main army, for financial reasons, but I can't really deal with all the Roman armies who are around northern Italy (I have Patavium and Massilia). Dacia is a buffer between me and the Brutii, but I don't like letting them just sit in Greece uncontested. However, Spain can be lucrative. I think I will try to take Italy, I think my units can easily deal with Spain so I can probably take them slowly, maybe create an army and just not move them as quickly, to save money. I think my main focus should be dealing with Rome.

The funny thing about my Germania campaign is that I never really got to use beserkers - it was mainly spear warbands. Put them in phalanx mode and you would kill just about everything (on M/M). (Great fun watching the british chariots become horse kebab). Off-hand I would suggest you leapfrog italy and hit the Greek cities or the Brutii in Southern Italy - the Brutii army is probably a long way away and if you can take 4 or 5 cities very quickly i.e. in 3 or 4 turns then you have sufficient money and quality troops to rapidly expand your military capacity. You will need to create a couple of armies on the Greek mainland and consistently retrain depleted ones, but you can afford to do that and wear out the Brutii there. Be prepared to slice off weakly defended cities wherever you find them (often you can use your navy to get a good idea of the garrison without risking a spy) - especially Palma and Corsica. And Blockade, blockade, blockade. Kill that Mediterranean trade to hurt the Brutii, blockade Sicily and Africa to prevent the Scipii from bringing back troops to Italy (Also watch out for a chance to take carthage as the Scipii move their forces haphazardly around the African coast). In all my games the onset of the naval battle marks the middle game - at the end of it your opponents are seriously weakened. Patavium is a good port city (boats/ large boats), but is some way away from the Mediterranean Sea conflict - one good reason why taking out the Brutii down there is a good idea (another advantage is that I don't think SPQR can break a seige in one turn - so you should be able to take them out in two turns.)

I am not sure why you are having financial problems - yes Germania isn't exactly the strongest economically but once you take the rebel provinces you start earning some money. The best income generator in NW Europe is the sea trade across the English Channel, so if you haven't the town opposite Londinium I suggest you take it. Similarly if you can hit Cordoba - it may be weakly defended as it is some distance from the front lines (I know it can be rebellious, but it can be controlled by switching temples and gradually replacing all the eastern facilities you have there). I didn't find Spain that rewarding (other than Cordoba) when I played them - it depends on how well developed the Eastern Ports are.

It will pay to have some towns/ large towns on low taxation for a while - the compound interest of population explosion really kicks in. Look for towns relatively close to upgrade - it may be worthwhile moving peasants to them - and ensure you have governors in them so when you do hit a large town in Greece/ Italy you get the big population boost. Obviously once you have minor cities you hit them with as much taxation as you can.

You can always try and bribe the armies I suppose - With Spain I had D210000 available and one army asked for D169000!, but small armies can go for D2000 - D5000. (I lost a town to bribery in my Dacia game - fortunately I had the only army nearby and was able to re-occupy it).

[Vincent Butler]

The Romans in my Germania just have a bunch of small armies running around, but the Scipii, Julii, and Brutii are all running around there. None attacking me, but enough to where I don't want to attempt to besiege Patavium or Segesta, which are full. Also, since Rome can make siege weaponry and I can't, I am not using my standard phalanx tactic of goading an attack at a bridge. Realistically, I could probably get away with it, as once they engage my troops their siege weaponry stop using flame, and stand just as good a chance of hitting their guys as mine.

I really think I will strike Italy, but I may have to launch an amphibious invasion so their troops can't get there in time. Now, in one campaign I besieged Ariminum, but the Senate came to their aid and I was forced to withdraw. The Senate left their army there, so I promptly sent my army to Rome and took it while the Senate's army sat by their ally's city. I may try that tactic again, but first need to see what kind of armies are actually in Italy who could reinforce them. My Spanish conquest will be slow.

I do not like letting the Brutii sit in Greece, and really want to attack Patavium as a springboard, but will have to wait for the right moment.

[ReluctantSamurai]

The best income generator in NW Europe is the sea trade across the English Channel

Exactly! When playing Germania, I even forgo troop recruitment to get all those North Sea ports up and running. Pays off in the long run.

You can always try and bribe the armies I suppose

I found bribing armies to be too expensive, and most of the units you cannot use anyway. Bribing rebel armies, though, can be very helpful at times, if you pick stacks that contain troops you can use. In my Armenian campaigns, I bribe rebel armies that contain archers and horse archers. The horse archers immediately go to a field army, the archers to city walls.

it was mainly spear warbands. Put them in phalanx mode and you would kill just about everything (on M/M)

They are a pretty good spear unit up to about mid-game, but once advanced troops like Roman cohorts, Chosen Swords, or some of the better phalanx units like Armored Hoplites start showing up on the battlefield, the below average attk/def (for a phalanx unit) begins to hurt. That's when the switch to Chosen Ax, Night Raiders, and Bezerkers begins. Of course being a cavalryman, I usually have several cavalry armies of Gothic/Noble Cavalry running around to smash up any enemy armies I catch in the open

I really think I will strike Italy

I do not like letting the Brutii sit in Greece

Ahhh, the voice of experience. Never, ever, let a Roman faction get comfortable and developed. Eliminate as many of them as possible before Uncle Marius shows up If you can eliminate the SPQR, the Julii, and the Brutii, that leaves only the Scipii stranded in N Africa to deal with.

[weejonnie]

Exactly! When playing Germania, I even forgo troop recruitment to get all those North Sea ports up and running. Pays off in the long run.



I found bribing armies to be too expensive, and most of the units you cannot use anyway. Bribing rebel armies, though, can be very helpful at times, if you pick stacks that contain troops you can use. In my Armenian campaigns, I bribe rebel armies that contain archers and horse archers. The horse archers immediately go to a field army, the archers to city walls.



They are a pretty good spear unit up to about mid-game, but once advanced troops like Roman cohorts, Chosen Swords, or some of the better phalanx units like Armored Hoplites start showing up on the battlefield, the below average attk/def (for a phalanx unit) begins to hurt. That's when the switch to Chosen Ax, Night Raiders, and Bezerkers begins. Of course being a cavalryman, I usually have several cavalry armies of Gothic/Noble Cavalry running around to smash up any enemy armies I catch in the open




Ahhh, the voice of experience. Never, ever, let a Roman faction get comfortable and developed. Eliminate as many of them as possible before Uncle Marius shows up If you can eliminate the SPQR, the Julii, and the Brutii, that leaves only the Scipii stranded in N Africa to deal with.

I am now in a bit of a stalemate - which is bad news since the Romans can develop further.

I took Patavium and Segesta? (the coastal town at the top left of Italy). The British (Allies) have taken Medolavium (the Town to the left of Patavium) and thus there is a gap between them and the Julii. I also cleared out the Brutii (and took Rhodes as a sideline). So I have Germania and Scythia to the North/ North West. Germania is fighting Brittania and I would prefer them to weaken each other (Brittania has all of Gaul and, it looks like, Spain) and Scythia is basically a barren wilderness, which would take ages to kill.

The problem is that there are large numbers of Scipii around Capua (4/5 stacks) and the Julii have substantial forces in Northern Italy. Worse still, of course SPQR is there, and in Italy you can go anywhere on those highways. No one has been interested in Bribary unfortunately.

Should I try and clear out Italy, expand into Asia Minor (Armenia seem to be the dominant power there), or try and do something rash like take over the Nile?

[ReluctantSamurai]

Should I try and clear out Italy, expand into Asia Minor (Armenia seem to be the dominant power there), or try and do something rash like take over the Nile?

The longer you leave Roman factions on the map, the worse it will get. Four to five stacks will become 6-8 or more. Deal with them now or they will become a huge problem.

So I have Germania and Scythia to the North/ North West.

I take it you are talking being Dacia here? If so, do you have Chosen Archers yet? If you don't, get them ASAP! Good tactic for whittling down Roman stacks is to have 6-8 Chosen Archers (they are excellent in melee so don't worry about having so many shooters), front them with infantry, move the line just far enough forward to bring Roman troops into range (but not close enough to precipitate a charge), and shoot them to pieces. Once the archers are out of arrows, rest them a bit (so they can participate in clean-up), and send in the infantry/cavalry to finish off what's left.

This tactic works for Germania, as well, though with Zerkers, Chosen Ax, and the best cavalry outside the Middle East, you can be more aggressive.

[Vincent Butler]

Ahhh, the voice of experience. Never, ever, let a Roman faction get comfortable and developed. Eliminate as many of them as possible before Uncle Marius shows up If you can eliminate the SPQR, the Julii, and the Brutii, that leaves only the Scipii stranded in N Africa to deal with.

Yes, definitely. Spain I can deal with with smaller armies, and not move as quickly. I could care less if Spain gets comfortable. Part of my thing against Rome is laziness, I don't want to actually deal with a battle where I have to think. I did enough thinking in my last two semesters of college. I don't want to have to deal with siege weapons. However, I need to deal with Rome, so I will analyze the Roman armies' positions, and then strike for Patavium. I actually think I should strike for Greece heavily, I can contain the Julii in Italy but the Brutii will only grow stronger if I don't deal with them, and then they can hit me in the rear if they strike through Dacia, who at the moment is a nice buffer.

My armies right now consist of four Spear Warband, two Axemen (I should have chosen Night Raiders for my army, but my Axemen are getting experience, so I will not make a big deal of it, if they get wiped out I will replace them with NR), two Chosen Axemen, one Noble Cav, one Barbarian Cav, two Chosen Archers, and one Skirmisher Warband, plus a general. The CA are on the very flanks, the Axemen just inside, both forming angles to my Spear Warband, so that my missile units are protected by the axe units to the flanks and the Spear Warband to the front. The cav sit behind the missile units.

[ReluctantSamurai]

The Chosen Archer "creep" as described works well for Germania...a bit pricey, but arrows are free, infantry replacements are not so you spend less money in the end. It does require a bit of micro-managing to position everyone properly, but you can sit back and watch your archers make pincushions out of pretty much anyone. And yes, the pathetic AI will just sit there and take it I've destroyed the entire front manipular formations of post-Marian Roman armies this way before my cavalry has to even so much as twitch

Your Germania armies are more "balanced" than what I use For an army designed to destroy the enemy in the field, a general + six cavalry or more (mix of Gothic and Noble), six Chosen Archers at least, and the balance in infantry. I keep any Spear Warband that have high experience and upgrades, but after mid-game I rarely purchase them preferring a more aggressive stance with Zerkers, Chosen Ax, and the occasional Night Raider.