How to keep the enemy off your back.

[Slim_Ghost]

This is a tactic I have learned as Pontus in order to keep Arche Selukeia off my back. This works well if your empire borders with a large or huge city that is distant from the enemy's capital.

First, attack the city. Then after killing the enemy inside do NOT enslave or extrerminate. You must click occupy. You are not there to loot money, and you need to have a lot of people in the city in order for the tactic to work.
And then, destroy all military structures, followed by anything that improves health, happiness or law. You may destroy the economic buildings too if you want. This ensures that the city gets maximum unrest. Then put at least 5 spies in the city. Finally, pack all of your units out of the city and then GIVE THE CITY TO YOUR ALLY!

If you did this, the city will be then instantly filled with allied garrison. You can then sit back and focus on improving the economy of the empire.

In my Pontus campaign I captured Antiocheia from the Selukids and then gave it to the Ptolemies. Then I just retreat to Tarsus and see them butcher one another for the worthless city.

I don't need to worry about my ally attacking me either. Antioch is so full of unrest that Ptolemaics have to fully garrison the city. But even with their full garrison the city still suffers from riots, thanks to my spies.

[Thaatu]

Beware, this man is evil.

[Musopticon?]

Only minus to that tactic is that you need to rebuild the city once you conquer it.

Better idea would be to just use those spies to set off riots in and sow discord in faraway cities of Seleuceia and the poor bastards will send some forces to stow those rebellions effectively giving you a big break. Not to mention, some cities tend to riot to for example Pahlava and Sa'byn, which will further add to the chaos.

The whole burn-down-tactic worked a lot better in regular RTW, where you didn't have so much cityworks and economy issues to worry about. Not to mention, destroying everything in a city you are evetually going to conquer anyway hurts you more then the AI, since they get money assistance and you don't. Also, their government types get build immediately after conquest, unlike the player who has to wait for years to get good MIC buildings in place.

[LordCurlyton]

Ah but the AI factions will use those healthy money bonuses to rebuild the city slowly. As long as you don't feel pressured to blitz the city should be moderately well rebuilt by the time you get around to conquering it. Though if you are giving a Seleucid city to the Ptolies I would recommend keeping the military buildings in place unless you want to watch the Ptolies get slaughtered by AS stacks of useful troops. I found that by capturing all the Syrian possesions of the AS and giving them to the Ptolies after selectively destroying buildings can keep the AS at bay for much longer.

[Musopticon?]

If you capture all Syrian AS provinces, why not keep them? I mean, that's a boatload of money to you and another boatload money away from AS. Not to mention you have a huge foothold.

Sorry, this is hard to undestand.

[Conqueror]

If you tried to keep those cities, you'd likely soon find them under siege, rebellious and tying up your resources by necessitating large garrisons. All the while the seleukids use their free scripted money to produce massive armies in the provinces that surround your newly-aquired territories. It's a very nasty form of over-extension. Instead, you can make it the ptolemies' problem and direct your armies to attack other seleukid cities while their troops are busy trying to kick the ptolemaic occupiers out.

[Musopticon?]

I know all that. Pontus is my favorite faction.

What I mean is, if you have got far enough to be able to destroy the(most likely insane thanks to being continuoysly bounded on by Ptolemaics) garrisons from Syrian provinces, fought your way through the passes as well, I don't understand why not go further. Follow it through - go burn Seleuceia and it's sister cities - even if they have the money(and they will thanks to the scripts), no more Argyraspidai. A worthy goal.

Unless you are insane and play Pontus on VH/VH.


I kept using this tactic in RTR, but in EB, you are just hurting yourselft in the long run. Consolidation is a lot better idea.
Not to mention, aren't these kinds of punitive raids going against the whole historical playing aspect? I know Rome did this at it's height, but a meagre Anatolian mini-empire...

[LordCurlyton]

Hardly. In fact its a very viable and useful tactic. Just because you can do something doesn't nescessarily mean you should. In fact, I did it more than once as the Maks and by the time that was necessary I was already a big deal, so its not like I could not have. Its just that I didn't want to suffer from battle fatigue and I wanted a slower pace to my overall expansion, so I could consolidate and remove some of those lovely culture penalties. As long as you give the cities to an erstwhile ally you can have a lot of peace. In fact, since the AS in my Mak campaign was still friendly, if not allied, to Pahlava I just took some eatern provinces after I had expanded as far east as I wanted and gave it to them. Voila! Now I've had a peaceful eastern border for over 25 years.

[Musopticon?]

Wait, so why not just use spies to incite a rebellion, if you want a respite? You don't even have to move any troops.

[LordCurlyton]

Because the Syrian provinces are not prone to rebellion. At some point they eventually just stick a quality FM in and can basically leave him alone. Its not like all the AS is a raging inferno of angry, rebellious locals. There will be zero culture penalty on them and likely next to none distance penalty. The Syrian and Babylonian possessions are the heart of the AS, after all.

[Musopticon?]

Ah, sorry. I wasn't clear. I didn't mean the Syria region especially.

I meant my method of sending spies to distant cities so the AS has to send forces to hold down the rebels.

Heh, to me it often seems like most of AS is a raging inferno of rebellious locals.

[NeoSpartan]

You.... my friend..... are one SMART MO'FO'!!!!!!


THANKS FOR THE TIP MAN!!!!

[LordCurlyton]

Ah, sorry. I wasn't clear. I didn't mean the Syria region especially.

I meant my method of sending spies to distant cities so the AS has to send forces to hold down the rebels.

Heh, to me it often seems like most of AS is a raging inferno of rebellious locals.

Well anything east of Babylonia is, fo shure. My Pahlava campaign is proof of that.

[Musopticon?]

I tend to play factions that are east of Babylonia, as well. It's...exotic, afterall RTW had so few factions there.

[darkangel87]

In my Macedonian campaign I´ve tested this “trick”, as I tried to hold the front between Antiochia , Edessa and Seleukeia against the Seleucids. I occupied the Seleucid town of Arbella and sent a 5-star-diplomat to a Pontic city (my allies) in order to make Arbella a gift to Pontos. They dismissed my offer because they could not countervail this gift. The same happened when I offered Arbella to the K.H. (also my allies). Have you any proposal to impose Arbella to my allies?

Regards Marcel

[Slim_Ghost]

You have to also give the ally 10K minai along with the city. Making the gift more attractive for him to risk taking it.

And BTW, the AI tends to be disinterested in towns compared to large cities like Antiochia.

[darkangel87]

Ok, I´ll try this! Thank you very much...