Barbarians, ho!

[A7777777]

First off, I've gotta say I'm really enjoying this mod. The painstaking attention to detail that the team have done is incredible, and as someone who has a deep love and appreciation for ancient history, the little tidbits I glean from the descriptions and such only adds to the fun of crushing my enemies underfoot (or being crushed in turn)!

That being said, I have very little interest in giving the Romans a shot at the moment, and am more intrigued by the Barbarian factions. There's quite a few, though, and even though I've dabbled in a couple, I haven't had the time to really delve into them to learn their respective strengths and weaknesses. So I'm curious, do you have a favorite Barbarian faction? Why do you enjoy them? What strengths / weaknesses have you found you bring to the table?

Thus far, the only real attempt I've made has been with the Dacians, and I'm only about 20 turns in or so. I've learned that they have a fairly diverse range of options, even if those options aren't all that varied - they have half naked hard hitters, more armored 'hold the line' anvils, some quick and heavy calvary, and no shortage of 'bring the pain' can opening, armor piercing fools.

The biggest problem? Those $#!@ing horse lords to the north! Nothing is more frustrating than watching them prance about on their horses flinging arrowy death into my half naked armies faces while I cower behind what shields I have and hope they run out of arrows before I run out of enough men to withhold a charge. I've decided that expanding north just isn't worth the pain at the moment, which means those poor Greeks are feeling the brunt of my troop movements.

[SD_Man]

I guess that once the Greeks have been put down you can recruit their heavy inf to deal with those pony archers. Let the AI get distracted with your infantry while you double prong them with your cavalry units. The AI cant deal with this double threat and will lose. Some archers would help but not an absolute necessity.

[BrokenLantern]

I'm falling on love with the Belgae. They're in a nice position to seize Britain, and use it as a base of power. I'm still wrapping my head around the incredible detail, and number of units available. The Blegae are just... Fun. Their units are nice. Whilst not all of them are well armored (and thus, susceptible to missile fire), their melee stats are fantastic.

[FeralBlueBird]

My favorite are the Galleaci, followed by the Scythians and the Dacians. Galleaci have such interesting and well designed units, they are just awesome. However I can't really bring myself to play campaigns with barbarians, the notion that they could conquer huge territories and behave like an empire is unrealistic. It kills my immersion

[the man, the myth, the legend]

My favorite are the Galleaci, followed by the Scythians and the Dacians. Galleaci have such interesting and well designed units, they are just awesome. However I can't really bring myself to play campaigns with barbarians, the notion that they could conquer huge territories and behave like an empire is unrealistic. It kills my immersion

Isn't that the whole point of Total War games, to create empires? What does immersion even mean, is there ever a point during playing that you actually forget it's a video game? Do you mean your only able to play as Rome and conquer only the territories when they did historically, because anything else isn't "realistic", and reminds you its a game? I don't mean to seem like I'm picking on you or anything, I'm just curious as to what "immersion" means to you. Everyone talks about immersion, "oh, it needs to be mor immersive", or "it kills my immersion", or whatever, but it seems no one can really describe immersion or people have completely different ideas or definitions of what immersion is. I guess I'm just curious as to what this "immersion" thing is to you that is preventing you from playing some great campaigns with all these most interesting cultures.

[FeralBlueBird]

Isn't that the whole point of Total War games, to create empires? What does immersion even mean, is there ever a point during playing that you actually forget it's a video game? Do you mean your only able to play as Rome and conquer only the territories when they did historically, because anything else isn't "realistic", and reminds you its a game? I don't mean to seem like I'm picking on you or anything, I'm just curious as to what "immersion" means to you. Everyone talks about immersion, "oh, it needs to be mor immersive", or "it kills my immersion", or whatever, but it seems no one can really describe immersion or people have completely different ideas or definitions of what immersion is. I guess I'm just curious as to what this "immersion" thing is to you that is preventing you from playing some great campaigns with all these most interesting cultures.

Don't worry, those questions are totally valid. Immersion for me is not strictly about realism, I enjoy many "unrealistic" games, shows and movies very much. It is more precisely the measure to which I can be captivated or fascinated by any particular play session or prolonged campaign. That said, verisimilitude IS an important part of those experiences, and running a Galleaci campaign with professional-style armies (an RS habit of mine, making legion stacks with other empires) simply makes me get a nagging sensation that I should stop. Maybe that seems vague or ridiculous to you, and in a certain sense it is, but I just can't help it.

[ur-Lord Tedric]

If those 'barbarian' cultures had ever indeed expanded that much and grown large - then you would have seen regularised armies form, let alone the accompanying bureaucracy!

If you want a good example - look no further than Genghis Khan and what came after.

[High Fist]

Belgae are fun - I love the chariots, once you get used to them. When the infantry lines clash and the enemy cav are chased off, send your chariots behind the enemy infantry. Instead of charging, hold down shift and click to one side of the army, back to where you started, and again, and again until the infantry a brick and leggit.

Fun times.

[SD_Man]

Shift click? I never heard of such a thing, what does it do?

[High Fist]

If you hold shift while selecting a unit, a red marker appears at their destination. If, then, you right click on where you want to go you can set "waypoints". Like in Age of Empires or Starcraft.

This can be useful, for example, with cavalry. you can send them around the flanks and in for a charge immediately, without you having to babysit them. Or you can send cavalry chasing after all routing units, one after another.

[FeralBlueBird]

If those 'barbarian' cultures had ever indeed expanded that much and grown large - then you would have seen regularised armies form, let alone the accompanying bureaucracy!

If you want a good example - look no further than Genghis Khan and what came after.

You're right, I arrived at a similar conclusion last night and started Galleaci.

If you hold shift while selecting a unit, a red marker appears at their destination. If, then, you right click on where you want to go you can set "waypoints". Like in Age of Empires or Starcraft.

This can be useful, for example, with cavalry. you can send them around the flanks and in for a charge immediately, without you having to babysit them. Or you can send cavalry chasing after all routing units, one after another.

Thanks for that great tip, I had no idea!

[dvk901]

All of the Celtic-based cultures, as well as the Dacians, were far more advanced than a lot of people may think. Vanilla RTW sorta painted them as stinking dummies who really just lived in the woods and ate raw meat. But seriously, Celtic government and society was very well organized, and the technological differences could be said to be only in that they built more with wood and stone rather than marble and concrete. Had the Celts or the Dacians conquered all of Europe, I'm sure that their society would've been as 'adaptive' as was the Roman. The main problem...which was also the problem with the very 'civilized' Greeks...was a total lack of political unity and 'vision'. Of all Classical societies, only the Romans believed they were destined to rule the world....and they largely carried out their vision. They were united in this 'vision' even if they weren't always politically united. One can note that even after civil wars and rather vicious assassinations, the new rulers simply continued with the 'social vision' of Pax Romana.

[SD_Man]

All of the Celtic-based cultures, as well as the Dacians, were far more advanced than a lot of people may think.

Im just glad that the Britons werent included. Let it be known that the "Britains" and the "Britons" were not of the same descent...

[the man, the myth, the legend]

Awesome I'm really glad I posted in here, I never knew about the shift-click waypoint thing. I'm also glad that Feral now playing a Galleaci campaign.

[High Fist]

There are still things to be learned about Rome.

[Primative1]

Playing Rome and just had my first battle with the Dacians.

Sheeeeeeit!

[High Fist]

Playing Rome and just had my first battle with the Dacians.

Sheeeeeeit!

I'll never be able to fight them.



Think Macedon and Scythia tore them apart. Map info ain't quite up to date, few years old.

[Primative1]

I had to take on about 5000 in 2 stacks with one legion, approx 3000 troops including aux.

I deploy my aux cohorts as a front line to soak up the initial charge and tire the opposition before I counter-attack with my cohorts.

Both Dacian stacks were mostly elite heavies and they chopped thru my Aux Hvy like a knife thru butter. Nasty.

Luckily my legion was a Late segmentata with gold upgrades so, with the help of continuous charges from my 3 hvy cav into their engaged rear I got them running.

First time I really thought I might lose. Scary.

[High Fist]

Isn't it just? Refreshing though.

Biggest and scariest battle I was in was the one against the Cimbrii invasion stacks. Nasty things, those.

Speaking of which, the invasion didn't trigger in this campaign yet. What are the requirements for it to trigger, does anyone know?