What is your go-to army composition?

[Myth]

Rome

Early game army: 12-14 units of Praetorians, 4-6 units of veites. 2 units of light cav for routers (mandatory).

Mid game: reduce veite count for Socii Equites Extraordinarii

Late Game (haven't even played that yet due to deleting my saves constantly): Mass pretorian guard (10 minimum), and an even mix of Aux. Cretan Archers and Aux. Eastern Cataphracts.


Northern Barbarians (Gaul/Suebi/Iceni)

A core of the best spear units I can field. Between 6 and 8 units.
Heavy sword infantry on the rear flanks - things like Oathsworn, Swormasters etc. Between 4 and 6 units (used to chop up enemy spear/phalanx units from the side and rear, and to dispatch cav units that get bogged down in melee).
Masses of shock cav and 2 units of light cav for the remaining slots, with 2-4 skirmisher troops if I lack funds/time to recruit more cav and melee.

Early armies get a lot more skirmisher support and only 2 light cav units to rout enemy skirmishers and kill fleeing armies.

Hellenistic factions (true greeks and successor states)

If true greek:

Masses of pikes (8+) as a core, 4-6 heavy hoplites on the flanks. 2 light cav to kill routers/route enemy skirmishers. Peltasts for support since hellenistic slingers are somewhat meh.

If successor state:

Pike core of 6-8 units. 2-4 heavy hoplites on the flanks. 2-4 heavy infantry as rear flanks. Rest is shock cav and 1-2 units of light cav to kill routers.

If early game army, replace cav units with peltasts/eastern slingers

As a nomad barbarian: 12-16 units of the best HA I can field (migh tmix in jav-cav if available) the rest is shock cav.


It's important for the factions who have niche units to make use of them correctly. Don't try to hold a line with berserkers, naked fanatics or painted ones. Use them to butcher enemies from the side/back. Don't chase down routers with heavy cavalry unless i'ts past the victory screen. Etc.

[Bramborough]

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Image from the Pontus guide; it's pretty much the standard to which my Pontic army composition had evolved by end of the campaign. I've also been using this same composition and base formation as Egypt.

Pros:
- Open-field. Superb defensive strength. The BAI is sufficiently aggressive that one can set up in a defensive posture in any open-field battle, regardless of relative army strengths or who initiated the battle.
- Minor settlements. Confined approaches but lack of walls create excellent advance lanes (or defensive positions) for pike units, using structures to protect flanks.

Cons:
- Walled city assault. Pike units can certainly be effective in taking provincial capitals. But I usually find myself wishing I had a few more good-quality melee infantry for these battles.
- Not the greatest composition for outright killing power. The strength of this formation is its propensity to rout, rather than destroy, the enemy. And once they do start running, there's not much cavalry to chase them down.
- "One-trick pony". It's an extremely powerful method of beating the AI, who doesn't do very well against intelligently-used phalanxes. But with pikes, my take is that there is definitely a "right" and "wrong" way to use these units, and one cannot stray far from the proven formula. Top-quality melee infantry seem much more versatile...and forgiving.

I do think I've gone a bit overboard with the pikes, using 7x units (including general's guard). I think I'm probably going to drop to a 5-6 unit pike line in favor of increased melee infantry on the flanks. Something a little closer to the @Kamakazi composition above, which strikes me as quite flexible.

[Slaists]

That, or go more heavy on cavalry rather than infantry (Macedon style). For Pontus, I sometimes drop pikes altogether and use roman style setup. After all, Pontus was known for their imitation legionaries.

I am not sure if you have seen it happen, but whenever I try something similar against the AI to what you have in the pic, the AI would respond with something I call "dumbell formation". It would throw all it's melee and cavalry at my flanks (huge blob on the poor hoplites or whatever I have there), while the AI's missiles would focus on the pikes. Essentially this splits the AI's melee forces into 2, leaving my pikes in the middle unoccupied (well, I can reoccupy them, but that means breaking the line and attacking with individual units). That dumbbell formation attack is why I have started to lower the % of pikes in my hellenistic armies. I've experimented also with going with heavy cavalry in the middle, pikes being just a place holder for the cavalry to be able to hit the AI missiles and the two heads of the dumbbell in the rear.

As to those ballistae: I know they're tempting, but I tend to avoid them in my field setup. The ballistae is the reason why you see the "aggressive field AI". Unless, the AI has arty of its own it will charge you if your army has ballistae. I have seen much more tactical battles when I have to attack without any arty in my army. The AI knows how to hold a hill, etc (when it has missile superiority). Then the battle turns into more of a tactical play where you have to create local superiority over the AI, etc rather than managing a huge mush-pit when the AI charges in. Just more interesting for me to try to get some tactical scenarios going.

[Kamakazi]

My setup is the best ive found for flexibility. Even when totally out numbered I can generally win a battle with this. All I have to do it guard my pike flanks. That's where hoplites come in. If they are having trouble I can augment with swords for a buffer. Just enough cavs to throw out and kill enemy ranged units /chase down routers/and go for tactical kills on enemy ballista or general units.

[Bramborough]

I am not sure if you have seen it happen, but whenever I try something similar against the AI to what you have in the pic, the AI would respond with something I call "dumbell formation". It would throw all it's melee and cavalry at my flanks (huge blob on the poor hoplites or whatever I have there), while the AI's missiles would focus on the pikes

It's a mixed bag, sometimes the AI does try frontal assault, such as the Iudaea battle in Egypt AAR (Part 8). But yes, what you describe is also very common, as seen in quite a few other AAR battles. My flank Galatians, Nubian spears, and Thorax swords often get quite a workout. Main reason why I'm thinking of reducing the number of pikes and replacing with more melee infantry for the flanks. Also will probably drop one archer unit as well. I don't really mind the "dumbbell". Splits the enemy army, often leaves those missile troops exposed. Many times I can wheel a couple of phalanxes to the right/left and create a V-shaped vise surrounding the enemy blob. Sure, it breaks the integrity of the overall pike line...but the enemy center is empty as well, except for now-exposed missileers in the second echelon.

Never occurred to me about the ballistae being "aggression bait"...but yeah, I think you're right. This actually strikes me as a plus for a pike-centric army...one wants the AI to charge.

[Sp4]

It's a mixed bag, sometimes the AI does try frontal assault, such as the Iudaea battle in Egypt AAR (Part 8). But yes, what you describe is also very common, as seen in quite a few other AAR battles. My flank Galatians, Nubian spears, and Thorax swords often get quite a workout. Main reason why I'm thinking of reducing the number of pikes and replacing with more melee infantry for the flanks. Also will probably drop one archer unit as well. I don't really mind the "dumbbell". Splits the enemy army, often leaves those missile troops exposed. Many times I can wheel a couple of phalanxes to the right/left and create a V-shaped vise surrounding the enemy blob. Sure, it breaks the integrity of the overall pike line...but the enemy center is empty as well, except for now-exposed missileers in the second echelon.

Never occurred to me about the ballistae being "aggression bait"...but yeah, I think you're right. This actually strikes me as a plus for a pike-centric army...one wants the AI to charge.

I have never seen the AI do anything that didn't seem to amount to control A, right click behind enemy units.

[Slaists]

I have never seen the AI do anything that didn't seem to amount to control A, right click behind enemy units.

Try this Macedon move. Turn one, move your starting general from Pella towards border with Larissa. Train hoplites. On turn two: hire mercs to fill your army (not optional; this seems to trigger the city assault to be a field battle in this case and that's what we want) and ambush Pyrrhus' elephants next to Larissa. On the same turn, attack Larissa, which will have a garrison + the other Epirus starting army. Any time I try this, the AI sallies to the field. At this point, the AI will have missile superiority not you.

What will ensue will be a field battle against a defending AI. The AI won't rush you. It will defend a hill-top.

As to ballista: arty is definitely an aggression trigger. Any arty. The only time it is not a trigger in field battles is if the AI has similar arty to match.

Open Field Battle

Let them come. Usually I have 3 peltast units but in this I happened to have 2 ballista. Hid my cavs in the right flank trees and happened to split off half of the enemy force to try and stop those 3 units... Usually the Ai tries to find a weakness to the back and happens to just hit the sides. Then u pull the back ranks forward if the pikes get in trouble

Yup, I know we can win against the AI this way. But is it the fun way to win an attacking battle (where you are supposed to be attacking)? Surrounding your own ballista, with pikes and taking a walk to the bathroom. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with this: just questioning if it is interesting.

For one, it would never work if a human was controlling the defending AI (in an MP campaign). A human would just let the timer run out and you'd lose your attack.

[Kamakazi]

This is a defense actually. I had an Egyptian city sieged and they attacked with an outer army. Just throwing out a strength of the composition of my army....

[Myth]

Try this Macedon move. Turn one, move your starting general from Pella towards border with Larissa. Train hoplites. On turn two: hire mercs to fill your army (not optional; this seems to trigger the city assault to be a field battle in this case and that's what we want) and ambush Pyrrhus' elephants next to Larissa. On the same turn, attack Larissa, which will have a garrison + the other Epirus starting army. Any time I try this, the AI sallies to the field. At this point, the AI will have missile superiority not you.



What will ensue will be a field battle against a defending AI. The AI won't rush you. It will defend a hill-top.

As to ballista: arty is definitely an aggression trigger. Any arty. The only time it is not a trigger in field battles is if the AI has similar arty to match.



Yup, I know we can win against the AI this way. But is it the fun way to win an attacking battle (where you are supposed to be attacking)? Surrounding your own ballista, with pikes and taking a walk to the bathroom. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with this: just questioning if it is interesting.

For one, it would never work if a human was controlling the defending AI (in an MP campaign). A human would just let the timer run out and you'd lose your attack.

This is called a Noob Box in Rome 1 MP

[Kamakazi]

Open Field Battle

Let them come. Usually I have 3 peltast units but in this I happened to have 2 ballista. Hid my cavs in the right flank trees and happened to split off half of the enemy force to try and stop those 3 units... Usually the Ai tries to find a weakness to the back and happens to just hit the sides. Then u pull the back ranks forward if the pikes get in trouble

[Merak]

Rome

Early game army: 12-14 units of Praetorians, 4-6 units of veites. 2 units of light cav for routers (mandatory).

Mid game: reduce veite count for Socii Equites Extraordinarii

Late Game (haven't even played that yet due to deleting my saves constantly): Mass pretorian guard (10 minimum), and an even mix of Aux. Cretan Archers and Aux. Eastern Cataphracts.


Northern Barbarians (Gaul/Suebi/Iceni)

A core of the best spear units I can field. Between 6 and 8 units.
Heavy sword infantry on the rear flanks - things like Oathsworn, Swormasters etc. Between 4 and 6 units (used to chop up enemy spear/phalanx units from the side and rear, and to dispatch cav units that get bogged down in melee).
Masses of shock cav and 2 units of light cav for the remaining slots, with 2-4 skirmisher troops if I lack funds/time to recruit more cav and melee.

Early armies get a lot more skirmisher support and only 2 light cav units to rout enemy skirmishers and kill fleeing armies.

Hellenistic factions (true greeks and successor states)

If true greek:

Masses of pikes (8+) as a core, 4-6 heavy hoplites on the flanks. 2 light cav to kill routers/route enemy skirmishers. Peltasts for support since hellenistic slingers are somewhat meh.

If successor state:

Pike core of 6-8 units. 2-4 heavy hoplites on the flanks. 2-4 heavy infantry as rear flanks. Rest is shock cav and 1-2 units of light cav to kill routers.

If early game army, replace cav units with peltasts/eastern slingers

As a nomad barbarian: 12-16 units of the best HA I can field (migh tmix in jav-cav if available) the rest is shock cav.


It's important for the factions who have niche units to make use of them correctly. Don't try to hold a line with berserkers, naked fanatics or painted ones. Use them to butcher enemies from the side/back. Don't chase down routers with heavy cavalry unless i'ts past the victory screen. Etc.

What would you guys be using as a balanced army for egypt? is myth suggestion good now on patch 8? Would the lack of missile units hurt me going in to Eastern provinces? i am about mid game /beginning (have teir 2/3 Buildings for my armys)

now i only play at normal so i guess that it would not hurt me using "wrong" setup, but it never hurt to ask for a good army setup :)

[Myth]

Under the new patch you will need at least 4 skirmisher units to soak up the missiles from those eastern slings and javelins. Some of the tribes in the Arabian Peninusla will mass slingers which can be devastating for low and mid tier infantry. Basically you must either have sufficient skirmisher support to counter the enemy skirmishers OR you must have sufficient cavalry support to just massacre the enemy skirmishers after the melee lines have engaged. The second approach requires you to close the battle lines fast but even then be prepared to be 1 or 2 infantry units behind.

As Egypt you have good pikes and heavy infantry, chariots and elephants. I think you will need skirmishers and you can use your speciality units to make short work of the enemy once it comes to melee. Chariots will also massacre skirmishers but you have to be careful if you try to attack them with spears guarding their backs. The AI seems pretty diligent about sending in melee units to protect its ranged core.

[sodoff]

I'm playing the romans atm and I'm churning out identical stacks composed of

1 general
2 Cavalry
6 legionaires / hastatii
4 velites
3 ballistae
4 Auxiliary spearmen

With this one composition, anything can be broken, field armies, towns, cities. I've yet to deal with the Horde of the steppes and their massed missile cavalry, but otherwise it's been going like a warm knife through butter, rarely losing more than 10 - 20% of my starting force, even with 2-1 odds in favor of the defenders behind massive walls. Best of all, it does not cost an arm and a leg to keep them paid and fed.

In general, the legions advance in front of my velites to soak up incoming missile fire. The velites are in turn flanked by Auxiliary spearmen to ward off any cavalry and usually placed nearer the ballistae to stop the AI interfering with them. The legions supported by velites will break just about anything in front of them. The auxiliary spears have the fast advance ability to skirt around the edges. The cavalry is there to scout and to make charges from behind once I get all of the opfor to commit to battle.

The legionares and hastatii are really tough, so extending them out to a depth of 4 will usually cover the enemy front entirely, if kept in formation, otherwise the line will crack and stuff gets into your velites, not good. Managing the ballistae is key to plowing ahead. At long range I target their swords and spears, when the armies clash, I shift the fire to their missile troops so as not to cause friendly fire. The line of legionaires will not hold forever so speed is important, out in the field it usually ends when my cavalry charges in.

The sieges are won by poking a hole in the wall between 2 towers, flattening the towers and then inducing the defenders to sit in the gap while my velites make them into pincushions. If the ballistae have a few rounds left after knocking down the wall and towers, enjoy surprising the enemy with a massed volley or two of explosives as they are thronging to get at the men in the gap. Gruesome!

[Buzghush]

I love technological weapons such as ballistas, onagers etc. I never go to battle without siege weapons. (early battles are exception)

So, when playing as Scythia, my army;

1 Horse Archer general
11 Armored -or better- horse archers
8 Ballistas

as Scythia you can easily get "extra ammunition" so, all of your ranged unit have 23 ammunition and that makes your missile units very effective.

When playing Sarmatia or Massagetae replace horse archers with shock cavalry and replace horse archer general with shock cavalry general and rest same Ballistas!