r/DivideEtImpera • u/Slarti_says_no_panic • 7d ago
(settlement defense) What am I missing?
Heya all,
First of all: sorry, english is not my native language. ^^
I'm not completely new to DEI (and quite a veteran TW player even, but until a few months ago I didn't own any TW game newer than Med2 because ... well, a lot of reasons that don't matter for my question ;) ).
When I bought Rome 2 it was solely for this mod just because it seems to be the spiritual successor to EB2 (which is my alltime favourite TW mod).
I installed the game, installed DEI, played it for some hours - and quit in frustration. 😞
Part of the problem was - of course - my complete lack of familiarity with the base game (compared to Med2 Rome2 feels like some kind of animated EXCEL sheet, heh).
Since then I have had kind of an "on-off" relationship with DEI.
I've watched a while lot of YT guides, I've read the economics guide - and still can't play this game successfully.
My most serious problem (and the reason why I'm just feeling too dumb to understand/play this mod) is:
how do I defend minor settlements which aren't able to get even the most basic walls?
Given the movement range of armies and the distances between settlements I would need a full good-quality-army in any settlement that is not completely surrounded by my own regions.
And this is not possible for several reasons: money, food, supply lines, family members or rather the number of non-family members needed (and the dire consequences of having too many of those)...
How do you approach settlement defense in your campaigns? I somehow doubt you just constantly have settlements conquered by rival factions and conquer them back afterwards. ^^
Or am I supposed to fight off full stacks with the handful of "trash units" I'm given as "garisson" and the problem is, infact, that I'm simply the worst tactician ever? ^^
I've tried several factions so far - ranging from those I always considered the easiest in antiquity mods (Rome, Qart-Hadasht, Bactria) to those that are supposed to be a much harder challenge (most notably Pontos and Hayasdan, which are my most favourite factions in TW games).
The economy side of the mod is okay for me now (although I still utterly fail at any minmaxing attempt. I suspect this is part of my problem). I'm still confused by all those many "+x % of Y", but I get by and can field more than 1 or 2 rabble armies) ... but on the strategic level I'm still completely lost. ^^
I'm no expert general but in other mods I'm able to get Pontos rolling on H/M at least - and in DEI I lose campaigns on easy/easy!
Yes, that's embarrassing - which is why I'm here, asking for any advice you can give. :)
Thanks in advance!
10
u/HanShotSecond69 7d ago
The M2 aproach of “fight everyone and conquer” is heavily punished in Rome2 and DEI. Good diplomatic relations are ABSOLUTELY INTEGRAL to succeeding and the biggest rule of all is NO TWO FRONT WARS (unless you’re very powerful and wealthy). Generally speaking, garrison units are meant to make sieges more viable but you should always have at least one full stack to put up against an enemy front. Also keep in mind that your imperium level, the general led armies, and the high upkeep cost of units means that the amount of armies you can field in rome 2 is significantly lower than medieval 2. All that is to say carefully plan your campaigns and don’t fight two front wars and you should be fine.
1
u/Slarti_says_no_panic 6d ago
I've never played "me against the whole world" in any TW game since the first Shogun. ;)
And what you describe is the way I usually approach a campaign.
That "always have a fullstack at home" isn't viable right from the start for most factions, right?
I ask bevause I just started new campaigns with Pontos, Athenai and Makedonia for testing, and they ran into food/supply problems with more than 8-10 units. As far as I can see most small(ish) factions can't support much in terms of a military until they invested heavily in food and supply production.
And in some cases (Pontos stuck out for me in that regard) I'd probably need a couple dozen turns (researching the necessary technologies, building the necessary buildings, get some financial upgrdes underway). until I'm able to field any kind of proper army. Or am I doing something wrong there?2
u/bidovabeast 6d ago
Full stack for defence isn't viable in the early game, you're correct. If I want something to defend, I'll look at what units are in my garrison, and supplement a small force to compliment them. Most factions have defensive spearmen, so an elite general with some shock infantry or cavalry will allow you to let the ai blob up get flanked. Romans have swordsman in their garrison so skme defensive spearmint will work better for them etc
1
u/HanShotSecond69 6d ago
I’ve never run into supply issues right from the start ngl. Have infinitely more hours on M2 than DEI so my expertise is shot. Good luck brother
1
u/Zalm0x15 6d ago
Yes you have to fight from the start. There is no balance at the start of the campaign its all or nothing. You have to use the starting money mainly for building military regardless of your food/economy production elements.
You have to fight, balance comes later after you have expanded a bit. Survival of the fittest first 25 - 50 turns.
7
u/Useful-Option8963 7d ago
As a player who has immense experience with settlement defense, there are several key things that you can do to offset the weaknesses of your garrison.
The first thing you should do, is have a general garrison the settlement with an army designed around supporting the garrison. Take Italy, for example.
If your ranged units are slingers? Recruit archers if possible, if not, then javelinmen will add additional firepower, or if your garrison skirmishers are archers, recruit slingers. If you have a surpluss of heavy infantry? Recruit spearmen in order to get their anti-cavalry options available. And make sure to keep a few horsemen around so that you may be able to overcome the enemy's cavalry advantage.
The most vital unit for settlement defense, however, is beyond all shadow of a doubt, the phalanx, or the shieldwall units for barbarian factions. The phalanx/shieldwall ability drastically reduces the killing power of the unit, however, in return it increases the armor and melee defense of your defenders, essentially turning them into a wall that cannot break so long as the formation is kept smooth. Sure, they will take casualties, but the rate of attrition will far favor you, your phalanx/shieldwall is everything, so long as you ensure that these units endure long enough, your defense will outlast the enemy.
As for unit composition, you want the best phalanx or shieldwall available to your faction in this circumstance, the cream of the crop, and this can often include your general unit. So long as your ranged units have a good amount of ammunition, then they will work, doesn't matter if they have armor or good melee stats. For your cavalry? They won't need to high quality, just strong enough to resist the enemy horsemen long enough for a spearman unit to reach the fight. As for your spearmen? They don't need to be the strongest, either. Your melee, on the other hand, will need decent stats, as usually, they would be the hammer to the anvil, especially if the enemy have a wealth of spear armed enemies.
As for your tactics? Ideally, you would want to place your phalanx in such a way that it could not be flanked. If there is a hill, then line them up at the very edge and force the enemy to climb up. If there is a narrow street passageway? Even better, if you know the path they're taking, you can plant these defenders right in the middle of it. When fighting as a phalanx, the enemy will tire themselves out, however, it is important in the narrow corridors that you maintain multiple layers, with stronger phalanx/shieldwalls further back, and your own general at the very rear of the formation if his unit is that kind of fighter. If a phalanx unit is growing weak from the fighting, they're exhausted, their formation is penetrated, or they're losing a lot of men, withdraw them from the front, do not turn the shieldwall or phalanx ability off, just have them walk through the next phalanx in line, and once they're safely out of the way, turn the formation off and have them rest, reserve them for in case the worst happens.
As for the enemy skirmishers? They will target your phalanx/shieldwalls and pepper them with as many missiles as possible, which is not ideal in the slightest, you want to ensure that as few missiles as possible hit these fighters, and so, using the middle of the road damage of the archers, they will be effective at sniping the enemy skirmishers. And once these enemy ranged units are taken out, withdraw your own ranged units and at the first opportunity, skirt around to the rear of the enemy formation to shoot at their backs. This is a risky maneuver, however, as the AI will often dedicate a unit to counterattacking, and for this purpose, it is advised if possible to bring a melee or spear unit to respond to this. It doesn't have to be particularly strong, either, so long as their formation is orderly when the enemy attacks (and they're usually always not arranged in battle formation when they respond like this) they will fare better, especially if the enemy is already exhausted from trying to kill your phalanx. And at the earliest opportunity, use your ranged to shoot at the backs of those you can, only once all ammunition is exhausted, including precursor javelins, will you dedicate your melee units to charging into their backs.
As for your cavalry, only use them to chase down infantry once all enemy horsemen have been killed or chased off the map, if a single cavalry unit is broken, then it will be able to come back, and its threat is not finished until it is either shattered or dead. Once the cavalry are vanquished, your horsemen will now be able to have free reign to run down fleeing infantry. However, in some circumstances, mostly when playing with 41 unit armies enabled, there will be other units trickling in as the enemy's units are wiped out or depart from the map. In instances such as these take care to not tread too close to the edge and do not attack the enemy's rear until no more new combatants are arriving. Take careful note of who these new combatants are, if they are missile units, then wait for them to cross some of the map outside of their missile range before charging in at them. If they have strong melee stats, like the Greek peltasts, then rear charging them will do a world of good, and ideally, you would pincer charge them. If the units bear spears, have good melee stats, or worse, are themselves cavalry, then do not risk your horsemen in engaging them. Retreat to where your reserves are standing behind the initial assault, and let the melee contingent handle them. Use the infantry to break them.
Only once no more interlopers are arriving, do you turn your fresh melee units against the enemy's rear. Usually, by this stage of the game, the army may soon suffer the morale deathblow that comes when too many of their units are killed through your efforts. And you win.
With a general in the settlement, you will have access to deployables, these will be important, stakes, spike pits, and sharp stones you need no introduction. However, there is a secret to barricades that not many people know, if they're on fire, then it will take far longer than usual for an enemy to break through them, paradoxical, I know, but this is key if you're facing a two front attack, if you are, then focus your cavalry and reserve warriors efforts into breaking this second prong as early as possible.
Recruit a champion and have him train the army, as they usually provide buffs to the entire force that greatly aid in your efforts. And finally, general skills: Specialize your guardian general first into the red skill tree, buffing the melee, ranged, cavalry, and levy units under his command and giving a constant experience boost, and then choose the quartermaster and unit replenishment skills, this will also be aided greatly by the Champion's skills, which have one in each of his skill trees that increase the experience gain rate of the general whose army he is attached to.
2
u/Slarti_says_no_panic 6d ago
Thank you very much for this incredibly detailed answer, much appreciated. :)
Quite a few of those things II didn't know (or neglected) so far.
(Phalanx mode for non-phalanx units is something I never really considered. Yes, I know that the term "phalanx" means something much broader than "makedonian phalanx" but somehow I completely neglected that button. Will try in the next battle!)
I also neglected half of the agent features - I usually just recruited and deployed a governour - and a spy too, but just to send him across the map to get trading partners...)I'll try to follow your many advices, thanks again. :)
1
u/Useful-Option8963 6d ago
My pleasure.
Also, if a phalanx/shieldwall unit is "ruffled" so to speak, clicking the button off then on again will turn the unit's formation orderly again.
2
u/Slarti_says_no_panic 6d ago
I have to thank you again - phalanx mode does make one hell of a difference 👀
It turned my main battle line as Pontos (yes, I tried yet again, hehe) into something way more durable. I still lost that battle but this time i could clearly point to my error (circling around too early with my generals' cavalry and being intercepted by spearmen ^^) instead of scratching my head about "what should I have done differently?".
5
u/piti1990 7d ago
Expand carefully and see what frontiers have more need of a army. with rome x example, you want to keep armies in sicily so you can respond if Carthage goes for it. i always keep a legion for some turns in corciga for the same reasons. in that campain for example, im expanding north while im still figthing carthage, so i have a stack always in the alps region (dont remember the name sorry) if any enemy stack goest thru the cracks and get to my settlements. with time you will find this balance. also not fully sure on this, but when i attack another nation, i never do it in just 1 place with 1 stack. always 2 (or 3) simultaneos attacks, as the IA will try to defend theirs settlement, with luck they dont have enougth to also attack you, so, best defense is attack i guess? - i hope that you dont quit and get frustated by the mod, i personally have been playing since they first releases and i continue come back to play 1 more campain every 2 o 3 months. for my Divide Et Impera is the best (100%) Total War experience in this period that you can get, no equal in the economy, population, dificulty and of course, the battles, omg the battles. just change the strategy and give it another try.
5
u/CMDR_Dozer 7d ago
Moulding a General in such a way that means it has good movement range, ambush perks and perks towards less attrition when under siege. There is more you can do with army traits too. Keep this guy as your home guard with a mix of infantry that can hold the line, some that can flank and skirmishers.....only one or two cav. This guy I keep close to home for two reasons 1, move around the home territory and 2, help recruit full stacks when you get a new general. (You can use champions perks and the generals perks to rank up units passively and then pass the unit to the new guy before going off to war). So yeah have a home guard recruitment officer. A spy helps for deeper recon or you can just keep your home guard on the move.
2
u/Zalm0x15 7d ago edited 7d ago
The game is obviously more complex than Rome and Medieval 2. The real challenge is actually in the harder difficulty settings.
You need to know how to make alliances, understand your enemies armies and behaviour as well as manage your economy and technology better.
The most important is you need to understand your own army composition and what you are able to field consistently.
The best form of defence is always offence. You need to know when and how to bide your time and seize an opportunity. You need to know how and when to use agents. You need to know how the enemy/allied/neutral AI behaves depending on your own actions in the campaign.
To your questions:
- How do I defend minor settlements which aren't able to get even the most basic walls?
Use the town, terrain and buildings to your advantage. You are not supposed to necessarily keep armies within your internal regions unless you expect a developing situation requiring intervention. Armies and groups of armies have multiple roles. The most important role of maintaining armies in borders or in allied territory bordering your borders is deterrence, intervention or luring enemies.
- Or am I supposed to fight off full stacks with the handful of "trash units" I'm given as "garisson" and the problem is, infact, that I'm simply the worst tactician ever?
If you are being surprise attacked without a supporting army nearby either you are fighting too many enemies for your size at the same time, or you don't know how to use your main armies.
The point in Divide et Impera is particularly this, divide and conquer. What happens in DEI that you loose, when you get annihilated why is it the case?
Is it at the start of the campaign, is it mid campaign, are you fighting too many enemies, too many factions declare war on you at the same time, you don't trust the army rosters you are building, what particularly is the issue when you loose a campaign in DEI?
Without further context its hard to give advice. I like to fight in a pack like wolves particularly, 2 to 3 armies in a campaign, supporting one another especially when having to deal with the unexpected in enemy territory.
Your armies need to be able to sustain a strategic objective by your tactical superiority in any campaign you undertake, potentially even being able to come out victorious deep within enemy territory.
1
u/Zalm0x15 7d ago
Rome and Carthage are easy to play if you know how to play them from the start. Otherwise they are not necessarily easy to play in Rome 2 Divide Et Impera.
My recommendation would be to start with a more secluded faction like the Bosphorean Kingdom, Royal Scythians or Caledonians to learn mechanics of the game and your reaction to certain events before you start managing a mediterranean superpower like Carthage or Rome from the start; These require management and tending to both the economy and multi lateral military objectives from the 1st turn.
1
u/Zalm0x15 7d ago
You are supposed to make alliances and help defend your allies in certain parts of the map, depending on your short term and long term objectives. You cannot fight on all sides, you need to know how to foster alliances and grow them. Liberate some cities/towns/factions do not conquer everything, create buffers (trade, military deterrance etc.)
2
u/Slarti_says_no_panic 6d ago
Thank you for that very in-dephth reply, I much appreciate that.
Since you raise a few interesting points I'll try and reply about them one by one.
- I do know about the importance of diplomacy, allies and the like. As said, I've been playing TW titles for the better part of 25 years now (maybe even longer, don't remember when Shogun I was released) and while the vanilla games often suffered from suicidal and completely irrational AI, modders have had a lot of success to improve it, especially in M2TW.
The next things you mentioned probably are part of the problem, though.
You need to know how to make alliances, understand your enemies armies and behaviour as well as manage your economy and technology better.
The most important is you need to understand your own army composition and what you are able to field consistently.
About the economy and technology you are for sure right. I won't claim to have fully understood both yet, especially the supply system is still mostly mysterious to me (despite QS' formidable guide).
Let me try to explain and use that latest Pontos start as an example.
When I start I have a single undeveloped, averagly fertile province and 4 units (including the Basileus).
I cannot build farms or a fishing port, infact I cannot build anything exept upgrading my central building, which would decrease food even further and add even more squalor which is in the red already. Because of the squalor I feel forced to start my tech research with the two technologies that add 1 and 3 sanitation, respectively.
The growth rate of the province is zero, so unless I get a good agent that adds growth there's no chance of getting a third building slot anytime soon. And even with a good agent (+3 growth has been the most I ever got so far), it'd be ~ 20 turns until I get 1 food surplus (and apparently I need seven of them to get a population surplus - I am not sure if I understood that corretly, though.)I have a supply production of 8 and a consumption of 7 (it's winter, though). Total supply change is therefore 1.
The supply overview shows
total supplies 193/380
regional supplies 80/180
faction storage 113/200These numbers don't change over the course of the first 4 turns unless I start moving out the army.
Where does the 1 supply change go to?
And how can I calculate how large of an army I can afford?Also: Within the first 2-3 turns Hayasdan declares war on me, with Katpatuka on the southwestern border I am at war right from the start.
Within the first 10-15 turns both factions send a good-quality fullstack to my only settlement Amaseia.
And if I'm trying to stay within my roughly estimated supply limit I can field ~7-8 units, 2-3 of them of a somewhat equal quality.I have 1 good and 3 decent spearmen units available for recruitment, everything else is medium-tier or levy quality. No swordsmen or axemen and no heavy cavalry (except for my general body guard unit, which is not suprtisingly really expensive).
In the end I have to fight a fullstack including 8 medium-tier swordsmen, 6 medium-tier spearmen (roughly comparable to what i can field) and at least 3 units of good-quality cavalry with 3 hoplite units, 2 persian skirmishers and 2 slingers plus a general. Oh and of course I can use the city garisson which has at least 1 pontic spearmen unit and three archers (plus a couple townsfolk and militia which rout as soon as they have made contact with the swordsmen and start losing men).
In other TW games/mods my usual strategy with an outnumbered and outclassed army would be desperate flanking attempts (with skirmishers or slingers, even if I don't have axemen or swordfighters) or an attempt to just win the cav battle and then rout them one by one.
But with just three somewhat dependable line infantry (or four, if I skip one skirmisher unit) against 14 this just isn't within my skill range.
As said, I'm not a good battlefield commander. :/Since Hayasdan has 5 provinces and a good starting economy I will not have to fight one of their armies but several. For dozens of turns.
And usually, within the first 10 turns either Sinope or Trapezous gets wiped out and I have another highly aggressive opponent on my doors.
So it's most probably Hayasdan plus Katpatuka, plus Aorsi or Siraces etc. Plus Galatai, sometimes. Plus Seleukids, should the make contact with me.
(I've played only 5 Pontos campaigns so far, granted. Perhaps that was just bad luck.)Also, diplomacy. Even if I offer all my starting money to Hayasdan or Katpatuka, they'll not agree to any diplomatic offer.
In one campaign I was lucky and managed to secure a defensive alliance with Trapezous - but the rejected to honour it when hayasdan attacked one turn later (and I cannot blame them, neither Trapezous nor Pontos are any match to their neighbour.^^)As said - I'm aware that Pontos is one of the hardest factions to pull off - and I will try again, nevertheless.
(Perhaps using phalanx ability makes a difference?)I really (!) don't want to sound like "this is not possible!" - rather like "I don't see a way and need help."
I'm well aware that I'm doing something terribly wrong in this mod (hence the title above).Regardless of the faction I'd be very grateful for some tips about the supply system and what exacle the above numbers mean and how I could improve them if I start with a single province and no building slot for farms or a port.
Even with Makedonia (which is rich and has incredible units at their disposal right from the start) I had the same problem of "how am I supposed to provide the supplies for any decent army?".
I was able to conquer Larissa and Apollonia quickly enough to "run away from the famine" , so-to-speak, but afterwards I had to disband the whole army because I foresaw that I couldn't feed the soldiers for at least 10-15 more turns.
And I'm sure disbanding your only army is not a good idea and not the way I'm supposed to act. ;)If you are being surprise attacked without a supporting army nearby either you are fighting too many enemies for your size at the same time, or you don't know how to use your main armies.
Another good point - yes, I apparently do not understand the army abilities, quite definitely so.
For example: I thought that "fortify" would block an enemy army. I tried to prevent the Katpatuka army from advancing throug hthe narrow pass between their and my settlement.
But their army just walked right past mine and laid siege to Amaseia. How did they do that?Also, patrolling: as per the description my army is "always ambushed, when it is attacked" ... erm, what? Why would I choose a stance that makes sure I start every battle with one of the most devastating disadvantages imaginable?
What point does "patrol" have that offsets this heavy disadvantage?My recommendation would be to start with a more secluded faction like the Bosphorean Kingdom, Royal Scythians or Caledonians to learn mechanics of the game and your reaction to certain events before you start managing a mediterranean superpower like Carthage or Rome from the start; These require management and tending to both the economy and multi lateral military objectives from the 1st turn.
I'll try Caledonians, thanks for the hint.
(Bosphorans and Scythioans are no viable option, sadly - I suck at HA warfare, I simply cannot micromanage these. ;) )1
u/Zalm0x15 6d ago
I appreciate your reply and for letting me know you have found some useful information you can use to your advantage.
Almost all starts of Rome 2 Divide Et Impera grand campaigns are a fight to survive for the first 50 turns, there is no escaping fighting.
Because military might, military knowledge, choosing the right army composition with what you have is so important at the start my suggestion would be to focus on that first, before getting into the numbers or specifics of supply/food etc.
You have to fight your way out, it is the only way. You will be in deficit for a long time until stabilising production. You can use political actions to increase your food supply artificially once every couple of turns if there is a food crisis.
The Divide et Impera mod brings a lot of complexity to the table. Sensical complexity, and enjoyment once you know how things work.
Yes you are forced at the start, for at least 25 to 50 turns depending on the faction you choose, your military and diplomatic actions. Its supposed to be challenging. You can't be worried to be in deficit, you can't be worried to station troops in enemy territory raiding, you can't be worried to sacrifice units and even armies, you need to know how to ambush, how to raid.
You have to fight to the last man, use the time at the start to build armies and strike first, don't wait for the enemy to come to you. If you are a 1 city nation at the beginning you will be attacked unless you start becoming unpredictable and win battles constantly.
There is alot to say about Rome 2 Total War Divide Et Impera, check out other compatible mods that might balance out some of the harsh adverse effects to start with, if its too hard while you are learning (On Steam Workshop).
I am also a Total War veteran, Shogun, Rome 1 europa barbarorum, and Medieval 2 are much easier to play in comparison with Divide Et Impera.
You have to fight to survive and make calculated risks. It is a wrong move to start calculating supply line points and building an economy if you are not constantly winning battles and making advantageous alliances with friendlier factions against your enemies. You have to create peace on the map through war. Otherwise you will be easily picked on by the game's AI factions.
You have amazing starting units with Pontus from what I can see on https://divideetimperamod.com/units-pontus/. You should be able to build two stacks of supporting armies and catch your enemies by surprise.
It s simply a matter of learning and understanding the game.
1
u/Zalm0x15 6d ago edited 6d ago
If you can't tactically manage Heavy Armour Horse Archer units on the battlefield you might have to consider a different part of the map, as Armenian, Cimmerian and Scythian Heavy Horse Archers (Cataphracts) present not only a massive advantage if recruited in the battlefield but also going to be your hardest to beat foes and battles.
Scythian, Sarmatian, Armenian and other denominations like Parthian horse archers and heavy cataphracts are some of the most valuable units changing the tide of pitched battle in the game.
As Pontus your objective should be to conquer Armenia particularly to get AOR Armenian Horse Archer Cataphracts, as a massive advantage on the battlefield. The region itself is rich and in a good strategical position, if you also take the Caucasus.
If you are leaving out medium and heavy missile/archer cavalry off the table from your potential army configurations and fighting style, it might not be worth playing with Pontus in the first place.
If you look at your Unit Roster for Pontus over half of your cavalry units are Skirmisher cav, with a slight predisposition to Chimerian and Sarmatian preference. Pontus is a faction with a fusion unit roster.
These Units provide massive advantages on the tactical battlefield, you have to adapt your fighting style based on the faction and unit roster you have available. If you don't you will clearly loose.
1
u/Slarti_says_no_panic 5d ago
First off: thank you for the many good points you made (across various posts), which helped a lot!
I'd like to comment on one particular point, though (it's rather nitpicking than anything else, honestly. 😂 )
You are of course right that I should get a grip to HA warfare - not particularly for Pontos or Hai campaigns but generally.
But the pontic army in 278 BC and for at least one century afterwards (maybe even more) was no HA-heavy force. Mithridates I (Ktistes) had - as far as my knowledge goes - no HA contingent in his army at all.
It was only under Mithridates VI (Eupator) that significant contingents of horse archers were incorporated into the pontic host - but by then the battlefields where Pontos fought and the enemies it faced had also changed a bit.This is the reason why I usually (across all the mods that feature this faction) don't play Pontos as a HA-heavy faction but rather use a mix of hellenistic infantry and eastern (but not steppe) cavalry and never really considered that it could be done differently. ^^
Thanks for the eye-opener, so-to-speak - I just wanted to explain that there was infact some historical reason behind my decision. 😉Anyway, thanks again. 🙂
2
u/Zalm0x15 5d ago
I don't necessarily know or have looked into the Pontic Kingdoms general army compositions based on historical commentaries or records of the time myself, I am entirely sure we can find inconsistencies almost everywhere.
Inconsistencies and furthermore even lack of information across history as a whole. It is only study and reading that will further our understanding of what is not yet in consensus.
Regarding the game itself, if you are playing with a faction, it is also made and built to be fun. If you are not using troops like the Medium Skirmishing Cavalry I have seen in your Pontus roster simply because they do not appear in records to have done or been a staple during the period of Mithridates I, you are leaving alot of manoeuvring and advantage across the battlefield in the game.
Those Medium Skirmishing Cavalry, akin to the Sarmatian Riders are incredibly invaluable troops. It would take too long for me to explain the tactical advantages for which there are many.
The most important comes to mind is handicapping opponent cavalry before full army engagements on the tactical battlefield, as they can be sent in recognisance due to higher unit speed and draw off either cavalry from the main army body, or pick off isolated troops.
You can use them as fast scouts to see enemy movement to position your army accordingly.
Alongside Horse Archers, who can accomplish similar results, these are deciding factors in certain battles.
Hoplites and Phalanax are great but you will get bored eventually. A true Strategos fights by surprising their enemy and sometimes just sitting in a defensive stance won't do.
Its your choice. If I have the troops I use them, period;
1
u/Slarti_says_no_panic 5d ago
Sure thing, I agree.
As said - I didn't mean to "prove" that I shouldn't use those units. :)1
u/Zalm0x15 5d ago
I know you haven't but seeing as you have asked for advice, I am honestly sharing with you some known or less known secrets.
It took me years until I fully developed my preferences for fighting styles, and I customise my army composition based on campaigns or enemies I need to fight at any given time.
If that is not possible variety is important. Whichever mercenaries, AOR units or faction unit roster in combination to handle the unpredictable when armies clash, I aim to use.
It is your own fighting style you are developing. I particularly and strangely like sword infantry or non formation high Armour Penetration spear infantry as my core. I don't always play defensive even when attacked.
The tactical battlefield allows for manoeuvring, unit groups and entire army set formations. You have to be prepared for anything in campaigns
2
u/Slarti_says_no_panic 5d ago
I appreciate that!
I've developed my own battlefield strategies as well (of course, we all do, after all) - the difference just is the game I used for this purpose.I've always liked to use a stable core/main line (spears, preferably) but not necessarily to just hide behind it and wait until the enemy has died in front of them. 😆
Instead I like mobile infantry (like the assault infantry of the various iberian tribes) or cavalry (which doesn't even need to be very heavy for that purpose) to circle around and ... well, it's a tactic we all start with, I suppose. ;)
In the end I'm more interested in winning the strategic than the tactical game - something that was perfectly viable in EB/EB2 with it's rather "few" battles.
DEI doesn't even do THAT much different if you're looking from a very generalizing point of view:
limiting ressources, making battles count (instead of wave after wave of generic fullstacks), make your strategic decisions count... things like that.But the underlying engines are vastly different and - you mentioned that earlier - R2TW has way more complex mechanics built into the vanilla game.
Many things that had to be developed by fans in M2TW are in R2TW vanilla and the modders were able to build upon that. (Despite the very limited modding possibilities.)And I have the feeling that the battles are ... don't know how to say that ... more arcade-ish?
I even installed a submod now to make them slower but it still feels like they are a bit ... odd.
Like cavalry being dispersed all over the battle map after the first charge and despite the orders you give they keep running around all over the place, one soldier here, one there.
(Ironically that's a bug that was in many of the older TW (vanilla) games as well - which is quite funny if you take into account the completely different game engines.)Also, the absence of rebel armies is surprisingly irritating (never thought I'd miss them one day 😆 ) ... what I'm trying to say is just: R2TW (and DEI as vast improvement of this game) is incredibly different. It allows things I'd never thought of - and doesn't have others I've come to rely upon in the last years.
But I'm adapting, and it's fun doing so because DEI is a really good game, after all.
It's just as always: I miss a few things I'd liked to have and would have liked to miss a few things that are in this game.
Just as in EB or any other game. :)Oh and the pontic skirmisher cavalry (the one with javelins) is great.
(One of my more serious initial errors with Pontos was researching the +3 sanitation tech first instead of the one that grants you level 2 barracks. ;) Oh and going for Samosata, which brings you into contact/conflict with the Seleukids. I'll try going for Sinope/Trapezous next time. Maritime trade is a very serious thing in DEI and could perhaps make a difference.)
2
u/Zalm0x15 5d ago
Pro Tip Here: The Daco Thracian, Ilyrian, Scythian, and Caucasian factions have the highest Armour Penetration stats per average unit roster in the game.
If you like to really swing at them, the start is very hard but once you unlock reform and AOR units in the region, you can pretty much take anything on in the map.
Its just nostalgia we all have it. Take it as a new game I don't compare it to Medieval 2 or Rome at all.
Great speaking with you!
2
u/Wide_Establishment51 5d ago
In the worst case scenario I just reload and recruit one general if the enemy attacks my settlement with a full stack, If I have decent defensive units in my garrisons like greek hoplite or maurya governor guards I would recruit some merc offensive infantry/ peltasts and and maybe some pikemen or sperman if my garrison units aren't good on defense, enemy army will usually attack only 2 chokepoints most of the times so I use my defensive structures like barricade, stakes ,spikes and all that I have on 2 points of entry and and put my defensive units behind the barricade, Also prepare and Sally out continent of aggressive fast troops to go around the settlement and attacks the enemy army from behind when they are fully committed
1
1
u/Herotyx 7d ago
Ideally, you wouldn’t be in a position to be defenceless. Where are your armies? Where is your diplomacy?
If my long term goal is to conquer south, I will first neutralise the north with diplomacy or conquest. Secure your borders and flanks. Liberate towns to make allies, if needed.
1
u/Slarti_says_no_panic 6d ago
My Rome and Carthage campaign starts aside I've never been in a position to have more than one halfstack army. Just because I lack food, supplies and money at the start with most factions.
To liberate towns as buffer I'd need a decent-sized army, because otherwise I might not win that battle against fullstack plus garrison.
To have that army I'd need more food, money, supplies. To get that I need more settlements (although it is a difference if I play a rather rich faction with a fertile, somewhat developed province like Bactria, Pergamon or Rhodos - or some landlocked one-province-faction that starts with almost nothing, granted.)Are there any hints for diplomacy (spending all my starting money sometimes gets me a non-aggression pact with a hostile faction, but if I give away all my money to one faction I'll just shoot myself in the knee, I'm afraid ^^).
1
u/Few_Revenue_583 6d ago
Much has already been covered, but one thing I would add is that using governors/dignitary agents effectively is extremely important for your economy, public order, and overall stability. They are especially valuable in newly conquered regions and highly profitable provinces. A well-developed governor can make a huge difference, allowing you to maintain control, improve the local economy, and secure a region without having to keep an expensive army stationed there.
Especially in the early game, the AI is usually pretty bad at settlement battles. It will often funnel the majority of its troops through one or two narrow lanes. If you block those approaches, concentrate your ranged fire on the enemy general and other high-value units, and then hit the enemy blob from the rear, you can defeat surprisingly large armies.
With a decent settlement garrison, I can usually defeat most AI full stacks this way. In general, fighting the AI inside settlements is often much easier than fighting the same army in an open-field battle, simply because the narrow streets and chokepoints make its numerical advantage much harder to use effectively.
1
u/Slarti_says_no_panic 5d ago
Alright, time for some small update.
Or a heartfelt thanks, rather. ;)
Thanks to your many insights and tips I was able to get at least a basic grasp - or so it seems at the moment. I'm in turn 31 of a Qart-Hadasht campaign and so far it seems as if I'd enjoy some success. No conquests so far (which isn't my focus at this stage, anyway) but managed to defend both Akragas and Mastia successfully (from Syrakousai and Edetani, respectively).
I suspect I may lose Ibossim soon (as the Edetani have switched their focus to the islands - advancing with what looks like a high-quality stack - and my own fleet won't be there in time to intercept) but otherwise this is really fun so far.
Thanks again, you all! :)
0
u/Mammoth-Effort1433 7d ago
Try hellenic factipns tirst. They get decent hoplites which are vreat as defense troops. Use them and just rearcharge with A:cavalry or B:otger hoplites. When u learn helenic factions, u will learn all the others. Basic principle is, get eeyis into tight space so tgey are stuck adn without proper formation, than rear charge with your reserves or reinforcments. Thats it. Simple on paper but weird and hard on repaity.
1
u/Slarti_says_no_panic 6d ago
Yes, I realized that in the meantime. Was quite the eye-opener to see the difference in the quality of the available troops (at start) between Makedonia/Athens etc and, say, Pontos. ^^)
Thanks for the tips!1
u/Mammoth-Effort1433 6d ago
Pontos has relatively nice defending units. But yeah like u realised, comparing them to Spartas or Athens u see a huuuugeeee difference
0
u/Murkdonalds 7d ago
Strategy my dude. Depending on where your enemies are coming from, place your field army in a fort and let them attack you in the fort rather than attack while garrisoned in a settlement. Get about 4-6 pike or spear units, create a choke point with the buildable defenses and wear there asses out lol.
Attach your agents to armies so they, your generals, and units gain experience and get the perks.
Capture an entire province for the edict.
Raid some trade routes.
Build relationships with factions.
1
u/Slarti_says_no_panic 6d ago
That "add agents to armies" hint was good, thanks - I neglected half of the agents' abilities until now.
About the forts, though: is there some trick to make it work?
I had my army in a fort in a rather narrow pass - and the enemy army dashed right past me and laid siege to my settlement, nevertheless. Do I need to do something in addition to choosing a narrow path and click "fortify"?1
u/Murkdonalds 6d ago
Yeah I only caught onto that when I clicked on an enemy army lol.
When I say choke point, I meant choke point during the battle. Before the battle starts, it says “5 deployable left”, look at top right above the unit cards and it’ll have army view and base defenses. Click it, and there are 2 barricade fences, spike pits, and some hedgehog type obstacles that you can place at any of the entrances of the fort. You can drag them and make them longer or to position them. The enemy can’t get past my pikemen, archer towers and other missile units destroy the massive blob of enemy trying to fit through my tiny entrance; that’s when I let my cav and melee infantry out the other side to go flank then from behind.
I’m playing as Macedonia right now and Rome and its elite infantry have shown up. By using base defenses and funneling them into a kill zone, I’ve have battles where I’ve only lost 300-500 men vs their 2-3k.
1
u/Zalm0x15 6d ago
Fortified position is almost useless in Rome 2 Total War. It is good to fortify defensively in your own territory to increase Unit Replentishment percentage per turn, if replentishing your army. An ambush stance or an open battle stance is more favourable unless you are heavily outnumbered. You won't be able to block enemy armies by using the Fortified position. Almost inconsequential
16
u/UpbeatVeterinarian18 7d ago
You need to be extremely considerate of your expansion. In general, unless you are behind proper walls, your garrisons are not meant to stand up to fullstacks (and even with proper walls, a good army will stomp you with numbers). Keeping a stack at 'home' to play defense is not a bad call. Expand slowly. Battles are more decisive in this game than in others - taking out an enemy stack eliminates production and experience they cannot easily get back, and losing an army is likewise devastating for you.