Roman: Julii

[Avicenna]

Krauser: You can check by clicking the management options button or something like that when you open the city browser. It's the button in the bottom left hand corner of the scroll. It shows that health actually does increase the population increase.

Garvanko: eradication of plagues just means squalor though, since the decreasing population due to plague decreases squalor, which seems to be your aim. They don't just decrease squalor, they also have a happiness bonus, so even if there isn't a squalor problem, you should build them.

[Krauser]

Should I exterminate or enslave, generally? I can't seem to figure out which one I should do, but the large amounts of Denarii from extermination is too tempting.

I think it depends on the location of the settlement and the situation. As the Julii, I exterminated Londinium because I couldn't seem to get the public order up any other way quickly. Enslavement is usually the best way to go, increasing public order in the new settlement and increasing the population of governed settlements, your troop centers. I think extermination should only be used in extreme cases like if you need to take a settlement right away but need that army to continue on. It will lower public order enough that you can create one or two units in the next few turns to garrison and it will be in the green. Extermination in small settlements is the worst option as that just slows down the growth of the settlement for a while when the population is low enough to be occupied or put into slavery. You want to balance public order with population. Try to get the most population with the highest public order. The more people you have, the more taxes you get. Extermination gets you a lot of initial cash but an enslaved settlement will get you more in the long run.

[Garvanko]

Exterminate populations higher than 6000.

Enslave populations higher than 2000, but less than 6000.

Occupy anything lower than that.

Garvanko: eradication of plagues just means squalor though, since the decreasing population due to plague decreases squalor, which seems to be your aim. They don't just decrease squalor, they also have a happiness bonus, so even if there isn't a squalor problem, you should build them.

I agree.

I build the upgrades as fast as needs and finances allow.

[Lorenzo_H]

I agree, but I think I should enslave a lot more than I am doing now. By the way, Marius Reforms just hit in my game! This is the first time I have done it! Yeah! Now I'm gonna show those Gauls...

[greywolf]

welcome to the club! i also find the denarii gained from extermination too tempting to resist. i guess its even more tempting for you since your having money problems.

i had the same problems with my first campaign. why? because i ignored everyone's advise to start the campaign by aggressively building roads, farms, ports, traders and other buildings that give you money in the long run. yes, even before you build military buildings or expand your army!

anyway, just junked the first campaign and startd a new one following the above-mentioned advice. guess what? i end up with a buffer fund of at least 8,000 denarii every turn.

if you haven't yet, read froggbeastegg's strategy guide (its in the downloads section of this site, i think). she'll teach you everything you need to know.you can also check out the smackus maximus guide at gamespy. just search for rome: total war guides. both these guides are excellent and best of all, free.

welcome to the org!

[Lorenzo_H]

Yes, thanks. Now my game has improved I am doing quite well: Marius Reforms have hit and I get about 7000 denarii every turn. It still isn't enough, in my opinion so I am going to start conquering Pontus and the rest of Gaul.

[gardibolt]

From your posts, it's hard to tell what you've done about economic buildings. Your first priority should always be sure to make sure you have roads, ports and traders if they're available. Except for larger army-building cities, those kinds of buildings should always be built first. Always target seacoast provinces as opposed to landlocked one. Farms can be useful, but don't put them in cities that grow fast already (like Patavium) or you'll have rebellions before you know it. Don't forget to build peasants to garrison interior and safe cities, using the more expensive-upkeep types to fight actual battles.

Conquering Gaul, except for the two cities on the Mediterranean, won't help your cash flow much. They're impoverished and generally worthless. You're much better off seizing any portion of Greece that the Brutii haven't devoured already.

[Lorenzo_H]

From your posts, it's hard to tell what you've done about economic buildings. Your first priority should always be sure to make sure you have roads, ports and traders if they're available. Except for larger army-building cities, those kinds of buildings should always be built first. Always target seacoast provinces as opposed to landlocked one. Farms can be useful, but don't put them in cities that grow fast already (like Patavium) or you'll have rebellions before you know it. Don't forget to build peasants to garrison interior and safe cities, using the more expensive-upkeep types to fight actual battles.

Conquering Gaul, except for the two cities on the Mediterranean, won't help your cash flow much. They're impoverished and generally worthless. You're much better off seizing any portion of Greece that the Brutii haven't devoured already.

Aaaahhh! I put some serious farming equipment in Patavium, and before I knew it they rebelled! It was good because I was able to get rewarded quite heavily by the senate for retaking it. I also was able to finally comply with my wishes - to put every man jack in that accursed city to the sword.

The next time I play, I will be more intelligent and have an economic focus instead of a random messed up one. By the way, could anyone tell me where Parthia is on the map in relation to the Julii? I am determined to show them some good cavalry - hehe.

[GeneralHankerchief]

Wow, that was extremely lucky with Patavium. I suppose you might quite a bit of denarii from the Senate plus the extermination. Hopefully that will be enough to get things rolling.

As for Parthia, they rarely ever meet the Julii. The Parthians are at the extreme east of the map (east of Seleucia, which is pretty far east). If you ever meet them be aware that things will be tough as the Parthians will probably be filthy rich, and have insane units such as Cataphracts and War Elephants, not to mention the always-deadly Horse Archers.

[Lorenzo_H]

Wow, that was extremely lucky with Patavium. I suppose you might quite a bit of denarii from the Senate plus the extermination. Hopefully that will be enough to get things rolling.

As for Parthia, they rarely ever meet the Julii. The Parthians are at the extreme east of the map (east of Seleucia, which is pretty far east). If you ever meet them be aware that things will be tough as the Parthians will probably be filthy rich, and have insane units such as Cataphracts and War Elephants, not to mention the always-deadly Horse Archers.

Yeah it was! Now I have just conquered Massila, and the Senate gave me some Rhodian Slingers for doing it. Are Rhodian Slingers good? I don't have my highest hopes for them...

Next I am going to take the city directly north of Massila (Lugdivum?), and also the first city I find in Pontus, down near Thessalonica (which I finally took).

[YAKOBU]

Hi diablodelmar

Rhodian and Baleiric slingers are the best slingers in the game and extremely effective under the right circumstances. My only problem is the amount of micro-management they need to keep them out of danger. If I put them on skirmish mode they will sometimes skirmish through my lines.

For missiles I prefer archers that I can leave off skirmish protected behind my heavy infantry. Now you have passed the Marius Reforms I recommend the auxiliary archers as they are a good long range archer unit. If you have them and any heavy artillery behind your heavy infantry with your slingers in front of your heavy infantry any enemy army is in for a shock!!

[Lorenzo_H]

Hi diablodelmar

Rhodian and Baleiric slingers are the best slingers in the game and extremely effective under the right circumstances. My only problem is the amount of micro-management they need to keep them out of danger. If I put them on skirmish mode they will sometimes skirmish through my lines.

For missiles I prefer archers that I can leave off skirmish protected behind my heavy infantry. Now you have passed the Marius Reforms I recommend the auxiliary archers as they are a good long range archer unit. If you have them and any heavy artillery behind your heavy infantry with your slingers in front of your heavy infantry any enemy army is in for a shock!!

Cool! I'll remember that... I too like archers a lot! They can be really effective in turning the tide of battles. I currently have a unit of Roman archers with a lot of experience.

I am afraid to say that I don't have a catapult range yet, because they are extremely costly and I have little money as it is. I am trying to give economic buildings the priority over military buildings, so I think it will have to wait. Are onagers that good that they are able to turn the tide of a battle with relative ease? They too are very expensive...

[Seamus Fermanagh]

The AI seems to feel a constant compulsion to attack Rhodian and Balearic slingers with a fervor that is almost manic. You will find that they take casualties pretty quickly when singled out by the enemy generals best cavalry.

Of course, if they just happen to be positioned among the weapon tips of your best spear-troops when the horses charge....

[Krauser]

Cool! I'll remember that... I too like archers a lot! They can be really effective in turning the tide of battles. I currently have a unit of Roman archers with a lot of experience.

I am afraid to say that I don't have a catapult range yet, because they are extremely costly and I have little money as it is. I am trying to give economic buildings the priority over military buildings, so I think it will have to wait. Are onagers that good that they are able to turn the tide of a battle with relative ease? They too are very expensive...

In regular battles onagers won't do a whole lot but they can soften up the enemy a little. They have really bad accuracy and sometimes don't target the same thing you click on. They just speed up conquest because you don't have to wait a turn to build rams. In siege battles archers and onagers are very effective because the computer just sits in town and takes the hits. They move their troops around but never go out and try to stop the arrows and flaming balls hitting them.

[gardibolt]

If you've upgraded farms in Patavium, you'll have trouble again with them before long because of their already-prodigious growth rate. Start building temples with order bonuses and anything else that gives public order bonuses (the market line is a good one since it gives order at the high end + a ton of money) ASAP so you can cope with them when they get to be enormous. City planning is important at the early stages if you want to successfully conquer in the later stages. Otherwise you'll spend all your time dealing with internal strife instead of conquering your enemies.

Onagers are most useful in fighting very large and tightly-ranked units: Greeks and Macedonians, Egyptians, all are vulnerable to onager fire. Looser groups, like Gauls and Germans, they're pretty ineffective. I wouldn't bother at this stage of the game, except possibly in a city that's going to be building armies to attack Greece/Macedon.

[Lorenzo_H]

If you've upgraded farms in Patavium, you'll have trouble again with them before long because of their already-prodigious growth rate. Start building temples with order bonuses and anything else that gives public order bonuses (the market line is a good one since it gives order at the high end + a ton of money) ASAP so you can cope with them when they get to be enormous. City planning is important at the early stages if you want to successfully conquer in the later stages. Otherwise you'll spend all your time dealing with internal strife instead of conquering your enemies.

Onagers are most useful in fighting very large and tightly-ranked units: Greeks and Macedonians, Egyptians, all are vulnerable to onager fire. Looser groups, like Gauls and Germans, they're pretty ineffective. I wouldn't bother at this stage of the game, except possibly in a city that's going to be building armies to attack Greece/Macedon.

Patavium started out with a decent growth rate when I first took it, but now it has an appaling rate. I don't know why, but anyway I built some farms. The unrest is gone now, and things have cooled down. It now contributes about 1600 denarii every turn to my treasury.

[Avicenna]

I wouldn't call the Germanic phalanx warband loose. I agree that it'd be useless against them though, since the Germans are mainly in Germany, where the onagers would be rendered useless due to the dense forests.

[Tellos Athenaios]

In regular battles onagers won't do a whole lot but they can soften up the enemy a little. They have really bad accuracy and sometimes don't target the same thing you click on. They just speed up conquest because you don't have to wait a turn to build rams. In siege battles archers and onagers are very effective because the computer just sits in town and takes the hits. They move their troops around but never go out and try to stop the arrows and flaming balls hitting them.

Onagers are usefull when:

the AI is on the defensive;
you are assaulting any fortification.

Onagers are pretty useless when:

you're attacked by any infantry that isn't a phalanx;
you're in a wooded area.

And then there is one major point: the way you use them.
Using flaming missiles, accuracy will be pretty low but impact will be more devastating. (Since a flaming missile doesn't simply hurt those who are hit, but also those who are near.)
Enabling fire at will, makes life much easier when you're in an open field battle and the AI simply sits there and takes it, but on the contrary: when you are assaulting a fort or settlement, your onagers don't seem to target their proper targets - as they simply won't attack walls, gates or towers.
So, in an assault you'll need to chose their targets manually, and, in order to make them shoot whatever you've selected for them, you'll need to switch off the fire at will mode.

[AwesomeArcher]

Onagers are usefull when:

the AI is on the defensive;
you are assaulting any fortification.

Onagers are pretty useless when:

you're attacked by any infantry that isn't a phalanx;
you're in a wooded area.

And then there is one major point: the way you use them.
Using flaming missiles, accuracy will be pretty low but impact will be more devastating. (Since a flaming missile doesn't simply hurt those who are hit, but also those who are near.)
Enabling fire at will, makes life much easier when you're in an open field battle and the AI simply sits there and takes it, but on the contrary: when you are assaulting a fort or settlement, your onagers don't seem to target their proper targets - as they simply won't attack walls, gates or towers.
So, in an assault you'll need to chose their targets manually, and, in order to make them shoot whatever you've selected for them, you'll need to switch off the fire at will mode.

I use flaming missles if i am playing on large or huge unit size. But if i am playing on normal or small i just use regular.

[Tellos Athenaios]

Onagers are pretty useless when:

you're attacked by any infantry that isn't a phalanx;
you're in a wooded area.

Made an error:

Off course don't try to use onagers against any attacking enemy that's faster than a phalanx! Phalanxes are so slow, onagers do hit them at times, and when they do... it hurts... so badly that it's worth the lost ammunition.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Onagers are also fun when holding a bridge. Nothing like lobbing rocks and flames into tightly packed masses.

Do not leave it on auto, or it will target the closest unit -- and usually hammer your troops instead of the target.

[Lorenzo_H]

I think I'll only get a maximum of 1 onager per good-sized army. They are too expenisive to use on a massed scale.

[Lorenzo_H]

Another question; after the conquest of Gaul, should I then proceed to take Spain or Brittania? What are the advantages and difficulties involved with attacking both countries? I am greatly tempted by Spain, since there are several cities on the mediteranean coast which look like they could give some serious sea trade.

What do you all suggest?

[Craterus]

I'd go for Spain but make sure to keep a full stack in Northern Gaul to protect from potential invasions from Britain or Germania.

[Krauser]

I say to do both. You should be able to take Spain and Germania at the same time. Build some Biremes at your ports. Kill off all of Britains ships and blockade their ports so they can't send any units to France. Then you can worry about the Spanish and the Germans. If the Germans haven't declared war with you, you could go take the Spanish but sooner or later they will and you need to be prepared for when that happens with extra armies up north. The Spanish cities are not super rich but better than the German towns. If Scipii have taken Numidia and Carthage by now you'll get okay trade.

[AwesomeArcher]

Also, onagers are a pain in campaign to move around on the campaign map, they reduce army movement horribly. I dont usually use them early on, but later when going Rome vs Rome they help alot.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Onagers combo well with ships though.

Sail up, unload, hammer down the walls, send in the sturmtruppen, enslave, raze buildings, re-embark and away! Who cares if it reverts back to the other guy and gives them gold-striped peasants? You are off to your next vacation spot!



Definitely head for Spain. Their infantry is a lot tougher, but you don't need to do anything unusual to fight them. Brit chariots are more of a pain and the minimally developed transit system leaves the conquest cumbersome. Other than the NW province and Portugal, Spain is reached pretty quickly.

Britain can be reasonably lucrative once developed, but Spain still edges it out for profitable ports.

[Lorenzo_H]

Yeah I'll do just that. As for Spanish having tough infantry, go into the custom battle section of the game and you'll find that Bull Warriors will beat any other infantry unit 1 on 1, inlcuding Urban Cohorts and Spartan Hoplites. Pretty interesting, huh? I even gave the UC some bronze chevrons to make up for the price difference but they still got whipped with hardly any casualties inflicted on the BW. The advantages of the UC are that they are more disciplined and can form testudo and have a formation.

[gardibolt]

I've fought and destroyed Spain in four campaigns now, and I don't believe I've ever seen a single Bull Warrior. Maybe I should let them live longer so they get them.

[Lorenzo_H]

I've fought and destroyed Spain in four campaigns now, and I don't believe I've ever seen a single Bull Warrior. Maybe I should let them live longer so they get them.

That is very welcome news! Just use them in the cutom battle and you'll know why.

On the other hand, I doubt you'd be able to distinguish them because they look very similiar to all the other units the Spanish get.