Areas of expansion: your choices?

[Treverer]

Hello,

I mainly play with three factions of EB: Baktria, Epiros & Pontos. Epiros is IMHO a rather easy game, posing a dude like myself no bigger problems. Baktria has one major "weakness": no ports. But lots of mines. And Pontos, ... ah Pontos. I love them. Easy on M/E & M/M, but frustrating on H/M. And I have the deepest respect for those playing them on VH/M+.

But here the question(s):

"In what directions do you expand with your faction(s)?"

- Baktria: well, they don't have much choice, do they? India & the AS territories are lucrative targets. But what about the Phalava & Saka lands? Do you take these ennemies out before or after you go south/south-east/south-west?

- Epiros: do you go for the V.C. regions (= east) or do you go west? I read somewhere on the Guild (not EB), that Phyrrus might have had the idea of becoming kinda "Alexander of the West", going for Italy, Sicily (& Sardinia, Corsica) & maybe Spain.

-Pontos: the old "antagonism" between V.C. & gov2 regions. Meaning: either creating kinda "Byzantine/Turkish empire" some 1,200-1,500 years before those Empires existed or recreating the Achaemenid Empire?

Well, these are (some of) the possibilities for only three of the X factions of EB (lol, I never counted them). But I'm curious how YOU expand with your choice of faction. Why do you go in the direction of your choice: House-rule? Rich provinces? Favoured Ennemies? Or what? Tell me (and the readers of this thread)!

Yours,
Treverer

[Centurion Crastinus]

I try to expand the way in which the actual faction expanded.

[anubis88]

I always play on VH/VH with pontos... I always secure sinope first, then trapezous. it stabilises my economy a little... then the seleucids usually betray you, so i conquer mazaka and then i continue with nicaia and ankyra. From then on, i try to secure the rest of Asia Minor, but it's not an easy task

[palmtree]

As Baktria, the AS seem hellbent on backstabbing you no matter what. Might as well keep the peace with the Pahlava and Saka for as long as possbile or you'll find yourself fighting a three-front war.

Though taking them out early would mean not having to hunt them down all across the steppes later.

[Danest]

Athens and Pella (it seems to make a lot of money with the mines and be a good base for conquering the rest of the area) are seriously valuable targets for anyone playing in that area and looking for a, well, valuable target. Valuable enough to put a "hit me" sign and a large bullseye on them. ;)

[bovi]

I expand in whatever direction I have an enemy, and raid whoever needs a smack to not get too powerful. I see no reason to follow historical expansion when the world in general doesn't. If Pahlava is expanding into western africa at a time when Qarthadast historically was busy with the romans but are at peace now, I believe they would rather turn their eyes to the new threat in the east. Generally, the world does work more or less as it historically happened since we strive to make the AI behave that way, but at some point there will be some wild things happening.

[MarcusAureliusAntoninus]

I like to expand historically, as the faction would have done. And I like factions that sort of have a large goal to seek. It usually ends up one of these three: rebuilding the Persian Empire, rebuilding Alexandros' empire, or building the historic Roman empire.

[Decimus Attius Arbiter]

Historically seems to work for the Selukids on paper. I am planning to try them next. I was thinking of securing the eastern side of the map before going west and I just read that the Selukids hit Parthia and Baktria before moving on the Ptolemies.

[konny]

- Baktria: well, they don't have much choice, do they? India & the AS territories are lucrative targets. But what about the Phalava & Saka lands? Do you take these ennemies out before or after you go south/south-east/south-west?

I wouldn't go for those lands. I belive for anyone from the Hindukush Vallies the lands to the North are just an endless steppe not worth conquering it.

In some games I volunteray do not destroy an enemy faction to create some kind of "burning border" with a little raid and some battles from time to time. OK, Baktria is not short of action either with AS sitting in her neck; but that would also be a reason for leaving the nomads alone as much as possible.

- Epiros: do you go for the V.C. regions (= east) or do you go west? I read somewhere on the Guild (not EB), that Phyrrus might have had the idea of becoming kinda "Alexander of the West", going for Italy, Sicily (& Sardinia, Corsica) & maybe Spain.

Yes, Italy (and even Northern Africa) was the traditional goal for expansion of the Epeirote Kings in the Hellenistic periode. Phrryos made it to Sicily and into the Campania before he was distracted by his Greek adventure. So, both ways are historical correct: In the moment Prryhos is more interessted in becoming King of Makedonia but his overall interests were more in the Italian affairs.


For gameplay reason I would always go for Italy. You get all your basic units in Taras and can make tons of money on your conquest (and the later possesion) of Italy. Epeiros is, due to the mountains, a little aside of the main action in Greece; so it is not much likely that there will be a Makedon army coming around to take your homelands to soon. And even if that happens, with Italy in your hands you'll have all the means to take everything back across the Adriatic - and even more.

Vice versa, it is a little more difficult: the Makedon army is much stronger than the Roman army at this point. You can only take Pella and Demetrias without starting a war with KH as well. That means the Makedons will still have two strongpoints in the south. You can make profit only of your conquests by building mines in Pella, for what you won't have the money for a longer time. Meanwhile Rome is getting stronger and stronger every turn...

-Pontos: the old "antagonism" between V.C. & gov2 regions. Meaning: either creating kinda "Byzantine/Turkish empire" some 1,200-1,500 years before those Empires existed or recreating the Achaemenid Empire?

Yes, the VCs for Pontos are a little strange. Re-establishing the Achaemenid Empire would be a better goal. This faction has in fact a more Persian set up than a Greek one:

The factional units are by majority Arian locals while you get the better Hellenic units by regional MICs only. On the other hand you need a Level II Gov. to build more than a Level I factional MIC. That means you'll have to stick to allied or client governements when you want to become the fourth successor faction (fifth, if we count Epeiros in).

But I prefer to play them as a Hellenic faction because I always expand west first, for a simple reason: money. The mines in Pergamon and the trade on the Bosperos are desperatly needed to survive economicly the first years until you are strong enough to take on AS.

In these years my army will have become a typical Greek one with a lot of Hoplites as the backbone, my younger FM are all born in cities like Pergamon or Byzantion and the court has moved to Nikomedia. After that, changing linothorax for woolen shirts, learning to ride smaller horses and throwing spears instead of stabbing with them, somehow doesn't feel right. So my Pontics remain Ionians and do not become Persians.

[tapanojum]

I play Pontus on VH/M Huge settings. I've actually ignored Sinope (Its 243bc) and went directly for Ankyra. When AS back stabbed me, I took all their cities in the region and even captured Antioch and all the Ptolie cities on Anatolia. Currently I have a large enough force to hold off any AS/Ptolie stack in Antioch while I build up all my mines. I recently captured both Athens and Pella when some troops from both of them landed and attacked my coast.

Fun game!

[Mouzafphaerre]

.
I loath pointless expansion and blitzing, so it's still my very first EB campaign as Lusotana that I've been playing since 1.0 is out.

I pursue the victory conditions as part of my house rules, so I unified Iberia firstly and got a foothold in immediately neighbouring Gallia. Then I decided to play on the Mediterranean trade and saw the rebellion in Massalia as an opportunity. Slowly yet steadily I have advanced inwards the realm of SPQR. After kicking them off Iberia, I've maintained good relations with SSbQ and had them attack SPQR but fostered a rebellion in Bocchoris (Baleares). Made an excuse to attack the Casse meanwhile and conquered Ireland.

Despite destroying or outlasting SPQR & SSbQ is my victory condition, I'll spare that to the end, unless somebody does it first, and keep them (now Roma, somewhat later Kart-Hadast) radically weakened client kingdoms. May contend whoever owns eastern Mediterranean (presently AS but KH is promising for the posterity) later. Why shouldn't the IMPERIVM spring from Iberia instead of the Appenines?

Somewhat bending the history towards dark ages, I might role-play the Irish exodus to Britannia, thus found Alba. To shorten the sea route from homeland to the islands, claiming the Atlantic coast of Gallia would be of my interest.

Shortly, I try to expand logically and quasi-historically as possible.
.