Europa Barbarorum AAR?

[Queequeg]

I'm thinking about doing one as I have a bit of free time and want to do something (reasonably) constructive and creative with it. 

The two usual suspects are out (Parthians and Romans) as I've played them both to death.  Armenia and Baktria I've also played a lot, and in the latter case their strategic position just isn't that interesting on the EB map. So my top candidates are the Saka (far eastern Scythians, in like modern Kyrgyzstan), the Macedonians, the Carthaginians, Pontos, Saba (South Arabs), or Armenia or Baktria again.   

Anyone have any preference? I'm thinking Carthage, Macedonia, Saba or Armenia right now. 

http://www.europabarbarorum.com/factions_pahlava.html

A list of factions.

[Agelastus]

Do the Saba - they look to be the toughest of the options you have listed (Armenia could be tougher, but depends a bit too much on luck in my opinion - if the Seleucids attack immediately, you are toast, if they wait twenty or so turns you are OK.)

[Faeelin]

In Europa can the Barbarians "civilize?" Can the Aedui, say, modernize and develop viable high end units and cities?

[Queequeg]

In Europa can the Barbarians "civilize?" Can the Aedui, say, modernize and develop viable high end units and cities?

Short answer, yes.

Long answer: they can build fairly big cities and economies, but they are usually better off if they wait for civilized societies to build up huge cities and then "harvest" them.  In terms of technology it is quite a bit different; all the barbarian factions have various levels of progression with different triggers, some simply time modified, others by conquering civilized areas, and a lot of them both. I know that the Sweboz, the Germans, start off with a bunch of unarmored men with clubs and spears and move up to pretty lethal swordsmen and heavy cavalry, and that the Saka can include advanced cataphracts and Indo-Hellenic phalanxmen after they conquer Bactria, but I'm not sure about the Celtic factions.  Probably something similar. That said, the only "barbaric" faction to become almost entirely subsumed into a civilized society during this period was the Parthains, and this is modeled by the Parthians having two completely different building tables, one for nomadic settlements and one for civilized settlements.

Worth keeping in mind that EB is its own creature, and while there are some trace Total War elements in it there are far more differences between EB and RTW than between RTW and any of the other TW games.

[Jaron]

Do Armenia.

Piles of Armenian corpses and the smoldering ruins of their cities brings great pleasure to my life.

[Faeelin]

No love for the Hellenic League? They look like they could be fun.

[Queequeg]

Do the Saba - they look to be the toughest of the options you have listed (Armenia could be tougher, but depends a bit too much on luck in my opinion - if the Seleucids attack immediately, you are toast, if they wait twenty or so turns you are OK.)

This is pretty accurate.

The Saba are a pretty interesting faction.  They have a very strong starting position, with an entire sub-continent practically to themselves and good oppurtunities for expansion in modern Sudan (Kush) and SW India.  But their roster is fantastically limited.  Their infantry is actually rather good; fantastic stamina, desert bonuses, fantastic speed, some impressive and surprising lethality and good morale.  Their light cavalry is superb, if all javelin oriented.  But they don't have anything that could really qualify as heavy infantry capable of going toe-to-toe with a Phalange or, even worse, some advanced Theurophoroi (somewhere between an old-skool Hoplite and a Legionary).  They don't have anything to counter heavy cavalry far as I can tell.  No siege weapons.

The Armenians are kind of the opposite.  Their starting position is kind of awkward, in that they are surrounded by the Seleucids and the Ponitians, and the Sarmatians are often aggressive.  But I think their difficulty is usually overstated.  Even in the early game where you don't have access to the full roster due to the unique Armenian reform system, you are up in really high mountains and have some of the best archers in the game, as well as decent melee infantry and missile cav.  The Seleucids send Phalanges up the hill, your archers get 30-60% of them, and then your Roman-style infantry comes out of the trees, completely fresh, and slaughters them.  Later on their unit roster is almost uniquely strong, and could reasonably claim near-Bactrian or Carthaginian universal strength, and together with Bactria (and maybe Saka) they are the only faction with great cataphracts, great horse archers and very , very good infantry.    Also, once you get some mines up in the greater Caucasus you will never have to worry about money again. 

I'm leaning towards Armenia.  Near-Complete reconquest of the Archaemenid Empire.

[Queequeg]

No love for the Hellenic League? They look like they could be fun.

Very hoplite centered, with no strong light cavalry or Roman style infantry.  Fun, but challenging, slightly ahistorical (the league would break up after the destruction of Epirus and Macedonia) and none of my favorite types of units (namely fast shock cavalry or missile cavalry, combined in the Parthian Dehbed Asavara, my favorite unit in the game by a long shot).  Whenever I play as them, I can't find a way for Hoplites to beat Phalangists without taking near 1 to 1 casualties, which to me is very annoying. 

EDIT: I guess they have Thorakitai, but not of the elite Seleucid variety, and even that can't reasonably hope to stand up to a good Roman force. 

Macedonia is simultaneously more plausible and has a fuller unit roster, and has some of the best cavalry and infantry in the game. 

[Faeelin]

Then I suppose Macedonia, though I suspect the Hellenic Leagues would have been more viable than you give them credit for.

[Queequeg]

Then I suppose Macedonia, though I suspect the Hellenic Leagues would have been more viable than you give them credit for.

Hmm.  Probably, but I'm just not that great with Hoplites, though the Armenian Royal Guard are pretty good.  I don't even use Hyspatists as Makedonia.

I started playing as Hayasdan, and beat a rebel army with 90 casualties to their 3,000.  It is too easy; maybe the archers, probably cause I've played it too much and just know it well.

I started a game as Macedonia a little while back, I've only conquered the Peloponnese and part of Epirus.  I'll bring that up again.

[Queequeg]

Fae, have you ever played EB?  I can't recommend it enough.  There is enough history in it for a couple of books, the art direction is brilliant, and though the learning curve is steep it is a uniquely rewarding.

[grumbler]

Fae, have you ever played EB?  I can't recommend it enough.  There is enough history in it for a couple of books, the art direction is brilliant, and though the learning curve is steep it is a uniquely rewarding.

What I liked about it is that you don't know the rewards of various decisions until you make them and then time passes.  I am not very good at it, but agree that it is a completely different and better beast than RTW, though a bastard to get running right.

[Faeelin]

Alright queequeeg, it's $10 on Steam so you've persuaded me.

[Queequeg]

Fae, have you ever played EB?  I can't recommend it enough.  There is enough history in it for a couple of books, the art direction is brilliant, and though the learning curve is steep it is a uniquely rewarding.

What I liked about it is that you don't know the rewards of various decisions until you make them and then time passes.  I am not very good at it, but agree that it is a completely different and better beast than RTW, though a bastard to get running right.

It takes a long time to get right, and there are a lot of patches and submods needed for it.

The Agead Dynasty has a long history.  Macedonia may be a relative newcomer to Greek politics, and the great Rhetoricians of Theseus may call us effeminate easterners, but our great family may lay claim to a lineage no less noble than any in Greece, stretching all the way back to the Peloponnese and mighty Heracles.  When the Persians came we did not put up such 'heroic' resistance, as the Persians respected our traditions and our rights as nobility.  While Philip conquered our Greek cousins, Alexander conquered our Persian masters, and Alexander's familiarity with and love of Persian custom greatly eased his conquest.

But Alexander is dead, and our eldest citizens no longer remember a time when Macedonia was a simple Satrapy.    With Alexander, Greece became the center of the world, and Macedonia its beating heart.  The poorest free farmer in the Macedonian countryside could move to Bactria and become a great lord. 

But for all the wealth these conquests have brought to their mother country, they have stolen most of Macedonia's finest men.  Where once we conquered Persia, today we have difficulty finding the men to beat back the Galatians, and Antigonus I Monophthalmus' attempt to bring unity to Alexander's cost us more men, and proved fleeting on the field of Ipsus.  The Epirotes attempted to make up for this shortage of manpower by hiring the newly arrived Galatians as mercenaries, while the Koinon Hellenon appear set in their ways, and we fight much the same army as Darius.

After the death of One-Eye there was a long period of chaos, as various claimants, including a son of Ptolomey, claimed the throne of Macedon.  But Antiogonus II Gonatas, grandson of Antigonus I, has brought stability to Macedonia, and in his first year managed to beat back the invasion of the Epirotes and take Athens.  The Koinon attempted to take our city of Corinth, but in a great battle before the gates of Corinth we beat them back, and soon took the great town of Sparte.   Where previous conquerors would ruin the taken cities, Antigonus's mission in Greece is one of unification, and Hellas has lost too many sons already. 

Alexandros, one of the youngest sons of Antigonus, has proved himself an able general, having conquered the great cities of Sparte, Theron and Ambrakia.  However, (in my first battle of the AAR), the Epirotes handed us a great defeat in the hills of southern Illyria.  The Epirotes chose a sturdy hill for their last great defense, and upon it died many of our greatest Companions and Phalangites, though our siege weapons proved more than a match for their elephants.

So it is approx 260 BC.  Antigonus II has semi-retired to take up the governing of Attica, Alexandros is attempting to prove his right to succession by conquest, and after the great loss in Epirus I am very seriously considering a near total reformation of my standard army configuration. 

I have cheated twice: once I gave 1,00,000 mnai to the Romans to make sure they are a reasonably strong enemy, and once to build an Academy, a Marketplace and a Mine in Athens, as I thought it silly that Athens was so underdeveloped.  I am playing the Alexander submod, which allows me to play EB with the Alexander engine and with some extra units. 

Anyone know a good image hosting service?  Or how to changes files from .tga?

[Queequeg]

Alright queequeeg, it's $10 on Steam so you've persuaded me.

You bought the Gold Pack? That's what I have.  I'd consider playing it on BI first, with the BI mod, as the Alexander mod is not advised for those who are not already steeped in EB.  The AI is a lot harder, so are the rebels, and there are a lot of building restrictions.  A ton.  And the economic model is a little fucked up.