How do you pick your faction?

**Meneldil** · 10-19-2007, 23:57

I'm currently playing as the romani.
Before 1.0, I started a lot of campaigns with a lot of factions, but most of them didn't last long, as I kept thinking "Why bothering playing that faction if it gets a major improvement at the next release ?".

Thing is, EB now really feels like a polished game. I've been playing for years (currently in 229BC) without any single major bug. Sure, there are typos here and there, and sometimes weird trait combos, but other than that, everything looks, sounds and feels so great.

So, since I never ever tried the romans, I thought 1.0 would be the good time to have a look at them. I'm currently trying to figure how to trigger the polybian reforms while slowly conquering Carthago lands in Africa, and I deeply enjoy it :)

If I ever get bored before winning the game (though I'd like to get to the marian reforms), I'll likely have a look at one either the AS or the Ptolemies, because they have great unit rosters, and I somehow want to reunite Alexandros' lands, though I doubt I'll enjoy having huge empire right from start.

And then, either Aedui or Arverni : I want to try out a barbarian faction, and I feel like playing in my own country.

**konny** · 10-20-2007, 01:49

I started my first EB campaign ever with the Romani and therefore did again with the EB 1.0. It has been my favorite faction all the time for several reasons:

It's the EB faction of whom I know the most about, what makes roleplaying them much easyer. I also ilke the concept of the very much limited factional recruitment in the early game, what forces me to stick much more to regional natives than with any of the Hellenic factions. It is also the only faction in which a "conquer most of the map" victory condition is historical. And the Roman voice mods, last but not least!

I also love to play Pontos. I had a very exciting campaing with Pontos in RTW vanilla, but needed six attempts to get a well running campaign with Pontos in EB without cheating money. But that one was much fun, too. The starting position is one of the most interessting of all factions. Armenia is very much alike.

Another faction that I can only recommend is Epiros. That is first of all the choice you have to make from the start: Italy or Greece. And it is the faction with the most action right from the start. Even with Makedonia I didn't had to fight so many battles in the first 20 years of the game. But that is also a faction with that I never play very long. Once Rome, Makedonia and KH are defeated, I feel that I have done all that there is to do.

And there are of course factions that I don't like. Karthago and the Ptolemaians have quite awfull starting positions with lands spread across the map. Even though they are interessting as a faction, I have never played them for than a handfull of turns.

Another one is AS. There is not much left to do. Controlled by a human player, the Ptolemees are not much of a match for AS, leave alone the lesser factions around. On the other hand you have a lot of management to do right from the first turn. But managing an empire that you have not built is no real fun.

Then there are also the factions with which I don't realy know what to do, from the role playing point of view. For example, conquering much more than the homelands around with the Sweboz somehow 'feels wrong'. I love to play them, but only for the first 10 or some years.

The same is with Saba: Very exotic and very attractive to start a campaign with. But then, what? Rise from the desert to start the Arabian Storm 600 years to early?

So, when picking a faction for a campaign I first look for someone with an aim in the game. Next is the starting position inclusive political situation. Third factor would be the possibilties to role play the faction and their characters (BTW, a reason why I never play the Nomads). Factors that I hardly take into account:

Nice units. For house rule reasons, I always have a lot of Gov IV and local units around.

Challange. When the campaign turns out to be to easy, I use house rules to restrict myself to a lesser effective way of playing. When the campaign turns out to become nasty beyond fun I still have forced diplomacy, or if nothing else helps, the cheat console plus mecanery pool to get me out of the worst trouble.

**tapanojum** · 10-20-2007, 02:44

I first played Hayasdan since I'm Armenian, after 20 or so successful years and 250,000g I decided to play something else because M/M was too easy.

I also played KH because I wanted a tough professional army. After Conquering the Maks and part of Getai and realizing the recommonded for EB 1 is VH/M and not H/H like I had, I rolled Pontus, but had a bad start. I also just enjoyed a quick game as Saka where I did nothing but pillage and destroy everything while I blitzed south and fell into 50,000g+ debt. Needless to say that campaign is OVER =]

I really like to roleplay, thats what makes this game fun. I am thinking of starting a VH/M campaign as Pontus and take over the Black Sea early on.

**MarcusAureliusAntoninus** · 10-20-2007, 04:21

I always play factions that have a future (in my mind). Playing as the Romans, you can build an empire. Playing as a successor, you can rebuild Alexander's empire or create a new Alexander style empire. Playing as someone like Arverni, once Gaul is conquered, I can't really play the campaign anymore. So I rarely start one of these factions, since they are doomed to have a short campaign (for me).

**d'Arthez** · 10-20-2007, 07:09

Have to agree with Marcus. I did play only 2 games with "barbarian" factions (Luso + Getai), but their victory conditions were too limited. For some reason, fighting the Gallic Civil War does not seem too appealing for me.

Variation is key - it is boring to fight with phalanx based armies, again and again, in succesive campaigns.

**johnhughthom** · 10-20-2007, 07:22

I have a similar problem, I love the KH but every time I have beaten the Maks and Epirotes I think to myself "this alliance wouldn't last." I know it's been debated here a lot and there isn't a better way to simulate the greek cities, I still can't stop myself from starting and stopping Greek games...

**tapanojum** · 10-20-2007, 07:42

Originally Posted by d'Arthez

Variation is key - it is boring to fight with phalanx based armies, again and again, in succesive campaigns.

I thought Phalanx were the coolest thing, after a while it got annoying.

**Samurai Waki** · 10-20-2007, 08:43

I enjoy playing the Underdog factions, especially ones that start small, and you have to expand quickly or

. Saba have to be favorite, I love their unit Roster + Tactics, which come more natural to me, as opposed to the Barbarian or even Romani. But, I've tried to switch things up, and have been having a blast playing as Pahlavi... a slow game admittedly compared to the Frustrating Quick pace that you have to have as the Saba (expand quickly or die), whereas the Pahlavi you really have to be patient and choose the right time to strike. I'm enjoying the Steppe Factions thoroughly.