most powerful faction

[Mitch the Mace]

I know they definitely do not fall under most powerful, but as anyone ever gotten very powerful with Numidia? I have done several campaigns, but never got too far. I know they are a challenging faction to play as; early on I basically relied on skirmishers to take care of Egypt's phalanx and chariots, and my Generals to take care of their cav. Then I had a family member die hitting a retreating phalanx in the back.

After that I kind of lost interest, due to the fact that you have to micromanage every facet of the campaign. With a poor economic base to start from, and very light units, they are probably the hardest campaign I have ever played.

[ReluctantSamurai]

I know they definitely do not fall under most powerful, but as anyone ever gotten very powerful with Numidia?

I've played them several times. Can't say it was enjoyable, but I stuck with it once just to see how far I could get.

One thing I learned fast...abandon Siwa on the very first turn, and burn it to the ground. Use the garrison to take Lepcis Magna. That accomplishes two things: avoids immediate conflict with Egypt, and nets you a port city that you can easily connect with other ports later. Stay on the fringe of the Carthage-Scipii conflict until you can recruit Long Shields. I used horse archer tactics with Numidian Cavalry...hit & run. Effective against both Carthage & Rome early on because Carthage has no archers and Rome has only a smattering. Get within javelin range and pepper the hell out of their infantry. Unlike horse archers, these guys come dirt cheap so losing a unit or two doesn't bite the bank account as badly.

You get no decent infantry until Numidian Legionnaires (which become your staple), but Desert Infantry is serviceable...barely. I made extensive use of Spanish Mercs once I crossed into Iberia. When I had enough denarii coming in, I recruited Merc Ellies to pound on the Romans once I headed for Sicily and then The Boot. Numidia gets Onagers so you can lay siege to, and assault Roman stone walls.

I had screenies at one time, but after two new computer rigs I can't seem to find them

IMHO, Numidia is much easier, economic-wise, to play than Parthia. You get a decent trade temple (Milqart), a good law & order temple (Baal), and a farming temple (Tanit) which comes in handy for those pi$$-ant Numidian holes of Dimmidi and Nepte

My vote goes to Parthia as the hardest faction to play, mostly for their precarious geographical position, and absolutely dreadful economics.

[Vincent Butler]

You get no decent infantry until Numidian Legionnaires (which become your staple), but Desert Infantry is serviceable...barely.

If you choose to stick it out with Egypt, DI are not bad. They do well against chariots, especially in a town where the chariots can't maneuver as well. The legionaries are only equivalent to Principes. That said, Principes (and therefore Numidian/Armenian legionaries) are decent, and will hold their own against most other infantry units in the game. Until you encounter Cohort. But if you mod out the unrealistic cohort, the unit Marius came up with (that we know as ELC) was based on the Principe, so you could manage there too. As a history point for those who don't know, the LC are only unrealistic for the time period, they came later, and PC was only a palace guard.

[ReluctantSamurai]

If you choose to stick it out with Egypt, DI are not bad.

Tried that. Unfortunately, the AI acts like a rabid dog and will suspend its' conflict with Seleucia to come after you. Siwa stands no chance being so close to the Nile Delta, and Numidia can't compete that early with the endless stacks of desert gold winding its' way through Libya. Better to let sleeping giants sleep....at least for awhile

As a history point for those who don't know, the LC are only unrealistic for the time period, they came later, and PC was only a palace guard.

Precisely.

[Vincent Butler]

Tried that. Unfortunately, the AI acts like a rabid dog and will suspend its' conflict with Seleucia to come after you.

That's for sure. That is the AI with anybody. If you are Parthia, Egypt, Armenia, and Seleucia will all ally to attack you, whereas normally everybody there gangs up on Seleucia.

When I am say, Brutii, Greece, Thrace, and Dacia all gang up on Macedon, with Thrace or Germania taking out Dacia, but they are not that friendly towards each other, one of them ends up in trouble and wanting an alliance with me. When I was Macedon, Greece, Thrace, Dacia, and the Gauls all allied together to fight me. It didn't work out so well for them. I let them against Bylazora while I took Byzantium and then Tylis (I was already dealing with Greece), I was lethargic in that campaign anyway. Thankfully, the AI doesn't realize they would be better off allying with me, because with the exception of attacking the Senate, I honour my alliances. But hey, then who would I fight?

[LordK9]

My vote goes to Parthia as the hardest faction to play, mostly for their precarious geographical position, and absolutely dreadful economics.

I am not disagreeing and I never bothered with Nubia but, doesn't the description at the kingdom selection phase at the very beginning describe Parthia as being rich due to sitting on the trade routes with China or something like that? Never could get their economy going so I never understood what that was about.

[Vincent Butler]

It is a sad situation when it is advantageous to build slingers (to deal with chariots). In a town, Eastern Infantry (aka cannon fodder) might be able to fend off chariots, but other than that... And against even Militia Hoplites? EI would get toasted, unless you just throw them at them and force your way through by weight of numbers (provided your first units don't rout).

[ReluctantSamurai]

doesn't the description at the kingdom selection phase at the very beginning describe Parthia as being rich due to sitting on the trade routes with China or something like that?

Well, they lied. While it's true that Armenia, Parthia, and Pontus get Trade Caravans/Spice Roads/Silk Roads (+2/+3/+4 to trade), they don't begin the game with them, and there are two issues at work.

The first is that a settlement needs to reach 12k population before you can even build a simple Trade Caravan. For Pontus, that's not a big problem because Sinope (and other port cities in Anatolia) can get there quickly. For Armenia, it's a problem at the start which is quickly remedied by eliminating Pontus and the Greek Cities and taking over Anatolia for themselves. For Parthia, only Seleucia is capable of getting to 12k in a reasonable amount of time, and horse archers are a very bad unit to be using to attack a walled city, which leaves only laying siege and waiting for the garrison to sally (or an outside stack coming to their relief). It's doable, but tough.

Problem two are the roads. Parthia (and Armenia) can only build dirt roads which is an oversight on the part of the devs. In a discussion 'long ago and far away' about the engineering capabilities of Eastern factions, I posted a picture of a paved road in Armenia built in BCE times that led to a stone bridge spanning a ravine. And simple logic will tell you that a faction that can build stone city walls complete with buttresses, crenelations, turrets, etc., could certainly lay stone pavers for a road (and both Armenia and Parthia can build stone city walls). Why is this important? A paved road doubles the trade income along that route, a highway triples the income.

IIRC, some simple modifications to the RTW\data\export_descr_building.txt, and RTW\data\text\export_buildings.txt, allows you give the capability to build paved roads to a faction.

Several quotes from this article---https://smartech.gatech.edu/bitstream/handle/1853/36216/jacobson_herbert_r_194005_ms_95034.pdf

Persia, recognized by all authorities as a builder of roads, displayed considerable ingenuity in the improvement of transport and communications, much more so than in industry. The empire, extending from the Aegean to the Indus River and from the Caspian to the Indian Ocean, was interlaced with a magnificent system of highways. In order to unite and efficiently control his widespread empire, Darius I (521-485 B.C.) instructed his engineers to construct great roads between the various capitals, and over these excellent roads was maintained a government-controlled postal service such as had not hereto-fore existed on so vast a scale. The Persians inherited from the Babylonians and Assyrians a considerable network of great roads over which traffic had flowed for thousands of years regardless of the rise and fall of great empires. The most famous of these was the Royal Road which ran from Susa, the capital of Persia, through Arbela, Guagamela, Nineveh, Amide., Comana, Ancyra, Oordium, and Sardis to Ephesus. Although this road is called the Ancient Royal Road of the Persians, it was already ancient long before the Persians gained control over it.

And an indication of how developed, and sophisticated these highways were...from Herodotus:

With respect to this road, the case is as follows: There are royal stations all along, and excellent inns, and the whole road is through an inhabited and safe country. There are 20 stations extending through Lydia and Phrygia, and the distance is 94 parasangs and a half. After Phrygia, the river Halys is met with, at which there are gates, through which it is absolutely necessary to pass and thus to cross the river: there is also a considerable fort on it. When you cross over into Cappadocia, and traverse that country to the border of Cilicia, there are eight and twenty stations, and 104 parasangs; and on the borders of these people you go through two gates, and pass by two forts. When you have gone through these and made the journey through Cilicia, there are three stations and 15 parasangs and a half. In Armenia there are 15 stations for resting places, and 56 parasangs and a half. As you enter from Armenia into the country of Matiene, there are four stations; and from thence as you proceed to the Cissian territory there are 11 stations, and 42 para-sangs and a half to the river Choaspes, on this Susa is built. Now if the royal road has been correctly measured in parasangs, and if the parasang is equal to 30 stades, as indeed it is, from Sardis to the royal palace is a distance of 13,500 stades (1550 miles), the parasangs being 450; and by those who travel 150 stades(17i miles) every day, just 90 days are spent on the journey.

The RTW devs would like you to believe that only the Hellenic cultures and Rome were road engineers. As you can see, that is simply not the case. Middle East cultures weren't just building simple paved roads, but highways....very sophisticated and well-designed highways.....long before Rome came along.

[Mitch the Mace]

I have never tried Parthia, mainly because of their infantry. Or lack thereof. Slingers probably would do just as well as EI. And it's not like Hillmen are putting any fear into people. I get that Parthia has good cav, I should probably try them out sometime just to see how it goes. I do prefer cavalry heavy army, but I like to have some infantry. At least to build a ram to knock a hole in the gate so my cav can wreak havoc.

And I love slingers against chariots, although I mainly use Rhodians or Baleric.

[edyzmedieval]

I had no clue the Parthians were unable to build anything other than dirt roads.

Learn something about the game after a decade.

[Vincent Butler]

Now it would be a simple modification to enable paved roads for Parthia, right? And they should get a decent melee cav other than Cataphracts.

Slingers probably would do just as well as EI

Defense is too low. According to export_descr_unit, defense for slingers is 4, while EI is ten. And EI are a spear unit, giving them a total +16 attack bonus vs cav, -4 attack penalty against other infantry. Which means that against other infantry, slingers would be more effective, both before and during melee. So they can wear light enemies (including EI) down, before engaging in hand to hand combat if necessary, against infantry, and have more attack than either EI or Hillmen. Slingers actually have better morale than EI as well.

Slingers actually get only two less attack than Hillmen before bonuses/penalties, same amount of men in unit, and Hillmen defense is actually lower than EI. Also spear, so same advantages/disadvantages as EI. So against cav, field EI or Hillmen, EI gain one defense, lose two attack, two lower morale, but extra forty men. If fighting infantry, you might as well be fielding slingers. Their attack is greater than EI vs infantry (who actually unupgraded get no attack vs infantry), and also than Hillmen, who unupgraded get only attack of one vs infantry. So vs Infantry, Slingers get 4 attack, EI get 0 (actually would be -1), and Hillmen get 1. So field Slingers as Parthia to deal with infantry/chariots, but protect them from cav with your infantry, and protect your infantry from their infantry.