Poll: What region do hate the most to conquer?

Results 1 to 30 of 69

Thread: Most Difficult to Conquer

Threaded View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #12
    Member Member Irishmafia2020's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Navajo Nation - Dine'tah Arizona, USA
    Posts
    256

    Default Re: Most Difficult to Conquer

    Quote Originally Posted by ARCHIPPOS View Post
    I would like to hear from people that have actually invaded the Sakas or the Sauros... how did the AI behave??? Playing as Baktria against the Sakas my current strategy is a never ending war of attrition on the borderline with my troops occasionally raiding Chach (which is back into stone age after 20 years of war)...

    i see a lot of people here keep repeating "the Saba,the Saba!!!" ... Undoubtedly the desert waist lands add a lot of frustration on conquering them but at least their armies are not cavalry oriented or made of horse archers, right??? Also their homeland is exposed to sea... capturing any port of the Persian gulf or the Suez area and building a fleet would enable by-passing all the Saba deserts, right???

    Baktria is my favorite faction, so i have several campaigns worth of experience fighting Saka. The key is to capture Chach, and use it as a true base to repel nomad invasions. Combined with Marakanda and Alexandreia-Eschate (is that right?) you have three cities that can maintain a self sufficient group of soldiers, about four units apiece, which can be combined when spies in the north see an invasion coming. Additionaly you should have a QRF (quick reaction force) of cavalry that can speed to wherever they are needed in the North. I use Dahae riders myself because of their wide recruitment area. If you want to get serious about eliminating rather than merely containing the Saka, you have to mount two separate campaigns. First send a force to the North East to capture the two cities in the Tarim Basin area and near the Saka mountains. Second send a force north from Chach to capture the town way up on the steppes there. If you can keep these areas in the face of revolts AS backstabbing to the South, and counterattack, you have a decent chance, assuming you ship troops to the region, of continuing your campaign to the 2-3 towns that the Saka control to the west of your position. The downside is that the campaign will require at least 10 years (40 turns) and any minor setback will be in such a remote location, that you will not be able to reinforce your position without mercenaries. I have never succeeded in destroying the Saka as Baktria - only containing them...

    For the Saba haters - I conquered Iran, India, Saba, and Egypt (skipped Syria) in my Baktria campaign, but i could never destroy Saka. If I made peace with them, they regained the steppes within five years like some sort of red algae bloom. Saba is comparatively easy to beat if you can get large forces into south Arabia to capture their four main cities. My campaign against them was bloody and epic, but not impossible. They control a region with a cluster of cities. No such clusters exist on the steppes...

    Also, the only port on the red sea from which shipbuilding is possible is controlled by by the Saba. Other ports that allow ships to be built on that ocean are in India and Susa, so a player coming from the west would have to face a bottleneck along the Arabian coast without hope of naval resupply. Coming from the East however (as AS or Baktria can) is much easier. There are three cities on the coast that can be occupied to provide bases on the way to Saba's heartland and ships are available from both India and Susa which can be used to ferry your troops and provide reinforcements. No such backdoor exists on the steppes.
    Last edited by Irishmafia2020; 07-11-2009 at 07:06.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO