Help!!! Tips for Rome faction - How do i stop

[Malazan]

getting crushed between the Carths, and either Greece or Macedon after about 40-50 years - this happens as the Carths inevitably crush the Gauls, and the Greeks/Maka's destroy the Illyrians and Getai.

I'm playing with MNM and landblocks, ie the Carths don't get tied up with the Ptoly's in the desert.

M/M.

Also is there any way to make diplomacy have any point whatsoever? any time and non barbarian faction gets a border with Rome they automatically attack, and will not make peace.

My last game ended about 240BC after finally beating back stack after stack after stack from the very powerful Greeks around the Illyrians home regions, and i was finally in a position to hold them at bay while still being able to pay for buildings etc - you know a holding pattern, then the Carths just sent unlimited stacks over my Northern borders and attacked the "heel" from Libybaeum etc

This game began with the obvious open war with Greece, which i won to satisfaction ie leaving them one province between Rome and the Carths in Southern Italy. However this time the Greeks had beaten back the Maka's into 5-6 provinces in and around Pella, and were eventually allied.

I then decided to build up my home provinces and eventually had to attack the Illyrians who had taken the Gaul's southern provinces, this was achieved very quickly as you can imagine with Roman legions. To may horror though i then saw the Greeks sat with about 8 stacks around "lower" Ilyria (allied with Illyria).

After 10 years or so, with no internal investment i beat them back, and almost Iradicated Illryia, when the invitable Carth onslaught came - GAME OVER.

What was my mistake?

Looking back should i have sided with the Maka's and crushed Greece?

Should i have kicked the Greeks and Carths off the toe and heel? and gone to war with the Carth's? (with Greeks kept at bay by the lack of sea invasion?)

Should i have slammed into the barbs to the North as soon as Greece was subdued in Southern Italy?

Got creative? Maybe attacked the Carths in Iberia? or have taken Narbo and Massilia?

Any comments appreciated.

[joerd9]

Well, that's difficult. Concerning the south, it may have been wise to secure Sicily completely, maybe including Corsica, Sardinia and Malta to reduce the Carths to their mainland and spain.
As for Greece, there simply is too much money around there imho. Whoever wins the war for Greece, be it Macedonia, Free Greeks, or very rarely Thrace/Illyria, turns juggernaut. The only working prevention to this is to blitz Greece and run amok there. Hold your northern front early and commit whatever resources you can spare to Greece to take them all out.

[Malazan]

Thanks.

It does seem that it's impossible to not get crushed unless you take out the Carths or Greece. I did think about taking the regions you suggested, that would have reduced the Carths income considerably - and increased mine.

By "run amok" do you mean take the settlements in Greece and loot and burn them, thereby lessening the "juggernaut" effect you spoke of, whoever takes Greece? thereby lessening the game spoiling effects of that uber economy?

I did think about that too.

The Northrn front can be held with one well equipped legion methinks, trouble is if you head North there's hardly any settlements worth having...

[joerd9]

Indeed. If you can pull off a conquest of Gallia Cisalpina successfully and obtain a ceasefire with the Gauls afterwards that can help greatly. Padus valley is good to hold with one legion, gets you some income and you can send the rest of your men overseas.
Running amok means either scorched earth if you can't hold it or - if you can - conquer everything in sight until you reach Byzantion. Although that's a logistical nightmare regarding the replacement train. On the other hand, every greek city that you take and hold helps greatly, since in the long run you'll need all your might for whoever wins the east (TSE or Ptolemies).

[Malazan]

Sounds like a plan.

I'm going to try and do this - "it may have been wise to secure Sicily completely, maybe including Corsica, Sardinia and Malta to reduce the Carths to their mainland and spain"

That should i imagine also slow them down in Iberia to and also against the Gauls. Giving me more on the Northern front.

I have to either dominate the Carths and take thier rich provinces, or take Greece, or smash it's economy to pieces to prevent getting crushed later.

I had actually started off being 4.5 - 1 down in military strength against Greece and had reduced that to something like 3.5-2.5 but then the Carths intevened and i had no hope.

Yes i can imagine trying to resupply all the way to Byzantion without risking getting sunk at sea in those shark infested waters....!

[SuleymanGroznii]

The Northrn front can be held with one well equipped legion methinks, trouble is if you head North there's hardly any settlements worth having...

This just reminded me about this really, really, REALLY stupid idea I had during a Roman campaign, where I had all of Italy and Sicily, a lot of Gaul, all of Macedonia, all of llyria, most of Greece (I didn't have the heart to take Athens, Byzantium, Crete, Rhodes, or Nicomedia, so I let them get off by being a protectorate, which was way stupid...those are all the money cities, whereas the rest are just a pain public order wise), and most of West Asia Minor by the early second century BC, with Gaul, Thrace, Pontus, and the Ptolemies as allies.

Thrace had asked me to help them attack Sarmatia decades before, which ended up with me taking all of the Black Sea cities , and then being totally stuck with Thrace as allies, while they just sat on all those sweet, sweet, sweet mines without doing anything while I was in this awful, drawn out war with the Seleucids that sucked the life out of me. I thought it'd be real cool, since I already had the land to their west, east, and south, to take this Sarmatian city to the north of Thrace, surround Thrace, and THEN do away with their lazy arses. (C'mon! You guys are just gonna let all that good stuff go to waste? NO MINES!!?? You DESERVE to be enslaved!!! Your culture and ways should not live on! )

Taking that stupid city took about 15-20 game years in planning and recruiting, and I couldn't get those idiots to attack me no matter what. So I attacked them, most of my allies broke their treaties with me, and I slowly but surely lost interest in the game. (I had already won the Imperator title anyways, so THERE )

It just turned into this mess where Greece, Pontus, and the Ptolemies had a zillion troops on all of our collective borders in Asia Minor, so we were all getting screwed viz-a-viz the loss to income from all the foreign armies hanging out like vultures, and nobody had the cajones to attack anybody. Same thing with Iberia in Gaul, too. It was like the last part in Reservoir Dogs, with no finale! Not to mention Pontus had taken a few cities in east Asia Minor that cut me off from Seleucid lands, so I had to build a new fleet in order to attack (Oy g'velt...).

I should try a new Roman campaign, now that I have a clue and all...:hmmm:

[morteduzionism]

getting crushed between the Carths, and either Greece or Macedon after about 40-50 years - this happens as the Carths inevitably crush the Gauls, and the Greeks/Maka's destroy the Illyrians and Getai.

How? Do they come up from Iberia? I've never seen that before.

Also is there any way to make diplomacy have any point whatsoever?

Yes, but because of other...missteps...you made it harder for yourself. I'll try to explain in another answer.

any time and non barbarian faction gets a border with Rome they automatically attack, and will not make peace.

Oh, they'll make peace under certain conditions...but it won't last. This'll be explained in another part of my responses.

My last game ended about 240BC after finally beating back stack after stack after stack from the very powerful Greeks around the Illyrians home regions,

This may be my own personal philosophy towards the game but: what the hell're you doing in the Balkans in 240BC!? In my experiences I've discovered that regardless of the game(RTW; RTR; RTRPE) slower expansion is the better choice. Even if you don't try to play historically accurate, especially when playing as the Romans with a mod with scripted events, using the benchmark dates can be a good way to pace your development.

All this is to say that you may be overextending yourself, logistically speaking you may not be in a position to operate comfortably that far from Rome.

and i was finally in a position to hold them at bay while still being able to pay for buildings etc - you know a holding pattern, then the Carths just sent unlimited stacks over my Northern borders and attacked the "heel" from Libybaeum etc

That implies that you're scrambling to stay afloat. That's what I meant. You weren't in a position militarily/logistically to operate comfortably very far from Rome.

This game began with the obvious open war with Greece, which i won to satisfaction ie leaving them one province between Rome and the Carths in Southern Italy.

This was a boo-boo in-my-opinion. As you deduced already sharing a border with a faction(barbarian or non barbarian) is a sure fire way to instigate hostilities. This is another reason why you should expand slowly. You should be aware of who you will be coming into contact with when you take (x) province. If it's going to be a new faction you have to understand that (x) province will become a border province and there will be conflict.

I then decided to build up my home provinces

This probably should've been done before you went around starting fights with everyone...lol

eventually had to attack the Illyrians who had taken the Gaul's southern provinces

Why? Why did you "have" to attack them?

After 10 years or so, with no internal investment i beat them back, and almost Iradicated Illryia, when the invitable Carth onslaught came - GAME OVER.

What was my mistake?

Operating and wasting resources in the Balkans when it appears to have been completely unnecessary while completely ignoring your own homeland security<-there's a joke there somewhere

Looking back should i have sided with the Maka's and crushed Greece?

... that's a good one. If anything you should've modded some aliens to invade and crush both of them.

Should i have kicked the Greeks and Carths off the toe and heel?

YES! In 99.99% of Roman campaigns this will gain a cease fire from those factions. You may want to hold off on getting it from Carthage because you might(it would be extremely wise) want to remove them from Sardinia/Corsica* soon after getting them out of Sicily...but that's up to you.

Here is how diplomacy can be made benificial to you. After kicking Greece/Carthage off of Sicily send a diplomat(it be better to have one already near one of their cities) to ask for: cease fire, trade rights and MONEY...I've gotten up to 10K denarii from both Carthage and Greece at this point(right after kicking them off Sicily)

With Carthage, if done right, they can finance the development of Italy. DO NOT GET TRIBUTES OVER MULTIPLE TURNS, GET A SINGLE PAYMENT OF 5-10K. The AI, as it's been well noted, doesn't respect anything. In some instances they'll break these deals that's why it's best to get all the money up front.(IMO)

and gone to war with the Carth's? (with Greeks kept at bay by the lack of sea invasion?)

If you didn't go to war with them they'd go to war with you.

Should i have slammed into the barbs to the North as soon as Greece was subdued in Southern Italy?

If by "subdued" you mean left with one province in your sphere-of-influence then no. After getting Carthage/Greece from in/around Italy you should try to develop your infrastructure as much as possible during the lull in constant fighting(because it will start again)

Basically what you're doing is taking your already insufficient infrastructure and stretching it to the max in funding the wars with Carthage/Greece. You're then trying to completely snap it by starting more conflicts in the north.

You have to realize something, you don't trade with factions you're at war with. No trade means less denarii. Less denarii means no soldiers. No soldiers means it's harder to prosecute wars. As Rome you're surrounded by Gaul, Illyria, Carthage and Greece/Makedonia. See where this is going?

Got creative? Maybe attacked the Carths in Iberia? or have taken Narbo and Massilia?

Wouldn't trying to operate farther away from your capital have been harder?
*From what I've noticed Carthage will attack almost non-stop up until @246(whenever Hamilicar arrives) where they attack depends on what you have. If you only have Lilybaeum then that's where they'll come(over-and-over-and-over) if you manage to take Corsica then it'll be there.

This can be handled in two ways.

1. Halt your expansion to only the eastern half of Sicily. Blockade Lilybaeum and repeatedly lay siege to it but don't take the city(you're only trying to keep the garrison low). Defend Messana from the occasional half hearted(a couple of depleted units) attack from Carthage and wait for Hamilicar...kill him take the city. Move that army to Corsica/Sardinia and take them. After this you should be able to get a cease fire/trade rights/tribute with Carthage and get a couple of years of peace...until Hannibal arrives.-the time frame for all of this almost coincides exactly with the timeframe of the First Punic War

2. Take Lilybaeum/Sardinia/Corsica as soon as you can garrison them. Defend them from the constant attacks from Carthage only this time after almost every skirmish ask Carthage for cease fire/trade rights/tribute(more often than not they'll give it to you...I think they think they're being sneaky)...wash/rinse/repeat...the income gained should finance the development of the Italian infrastructure(roads/ports/etc) and put you in a better position to operate in the north and in the Balkans

Here is some thoughts on handling your other neighbors...

Gaul:
You start off at peace with Gaul, you should try to maintain this relationship as long as possible. If you haven't taken Umbria by @265BC they'll probably do it and then attack you, if you do have it they'll attack that province. I'd just defend the border and not expand into the Po Valley until you were completely done with Carthage(as in controlling Sardina/Corsica and have a cease fire with them)

Illyria:
They can be handled similiar to Carthage. They seem to attack every so often or put some forces in a place they don't belong and need to be moved often enough that you can repeatedly ask for cease fire/trade rights/tribute from them too, just for not as much as Carthage. Just don't take any of their territory too soon. You run the risk of going to war with the Maks or Greeks...whichever it is, in all likelihood, controls the Peloponneses, you want to keep the trade lanes open from here as long as possible. You'd be interested to know that most of the Roman cities along the Adriatic trade with two cities the most; Singdidium(sp) and Apollonia so going to war with these cities masters would really be a big hit to your economy.

Makedonia/Greeks:
Basically get trade rights with both factions. Whichever one takes over it shouldn't matter to Rome. Since factions are less likely to grant cease fires when you border them that's why it's important to completely remove Greece from Sicily. Let them do whatever they want to do while you settle with Carthage and possibly Gaul. The main point is to adequately prepare your faction for war with Maks/Greeks/Germans(they've been known to make it into the south) who for the most part are not no-armor wearing barbarians. After settling Carthage in the Mediterranean and Gaul in the north you can then turn your attention to the east.

[Malazan]

Mort:

1. Yes, up through Iberia. I thought that was commonplace?

2. Diplomacy - Ah i made earlier mistakes.

3. Balkans - Well, where am i going to go? Maybe i should have stopped at the Northern edges and defended there until those small village provinces had been built up.

4. I wasn't already at War with Greece and the Carth's when i pushed North, i was allied to Carth and trading with them and had been since the start of the game, that's why i left a Greek province as a buffer between myself and the Carths. I was at war with the Greeks and had been sinnce the game began.

I didnlt attack Illyria while trying to deal with Greece and the Carth's that would have been idiocy.

The problem came the Carths defeated the Gauls and forced a border with me, not the other way around. Around this time, i had managed while fighting in the balkans to almost wipeout Illyria and at least hold the Greeks at bay in The Balkans.

The Carths at this time had wiped out the Gauls and had bordering provinces next to all the mountain passes.

I figured that sooner or later the Carths would crush the Iberians and Gauls and would be knocking on my door anyway and decided to grab some territories first - that was a mistake.

My other mistake was not keeping a buffer - Illyria - Between myself and the juggernaut Greeks who they were allied too.


Obvious now my mistakes came with mishandling the toe and heel, especially not realizing that booting the Greeks off completely could have gotten me trade rights and a ceasefire.

Thanks some very interesting thoughts there regarding other factions.


Q. What are your thoughts about Syracuse?

[morteduzionism]

1. Yes, up through Iberia. I thought that was commonplace?

Usually, in my universes, Carthage is kicked out of Iberia by the Iberians I've never seen them anywhere near the Alps. Ever!

3. Balkans - Well, where am i going to go? Maybe i should have stopped at the Northern edges and defended there until those small village provinces had been built up.

I only meant you might not should have been there as early as you were.

4. I wasn't already at War with Greece and the Carth's when i pushed North, i was allied to Carth and trading with them and had been since the start of the game, that's why i left a Greek province as a buffer between myself and the Carths. I was at war with the Greeks and had been sinnce the game began.

Wow! That's interesting! Carthage didn't betray you after the first/second turn!? Amazing! I don't think I've ever had a campaign when they didn't betray me within the first three turns. I just took it for granted...you know what is said about assuming...

Ahh! the incomes from Sicily/Sardinia/Corsica coupled with the lack of war with Rome(decades of trade income) financed their expansion into Gaul...wow!

Does this happen often in your campaigns? I'm willing to bet if you started 10 campaigns you'd never see these events again.

I didnlt attack Illyria while trying to deal with Greece and the Carth's that would have been idiocy.

But you were at war with Greece right? Let me see if I understand the situation: you were allied with Carthage and had a Sicilian Greek city sandwiched between you and Carthage? Instead of taking that one city you moved north/east to an area that avoided complications with an ally[Carthage]? Doing this stretched/strained your logistics train?

Would taking the Greek city on Sicily have brought you into contact with Carthage? If so, you should've finished off Greece in Sicily Carthage would've betrayed you(because you would then share borders) and given you the excuse/justification for seizing Sicily/Corsica/Sardinia/Melite. I know that's hindsight but...

Are you role-playing? Do you have house rules? If not you might want to think up an identity for your faction. Obviously you're a trusting faction(you left Carthage alone, allies or not, eventhough they were off the coast of your capital) so you might have to accept the fate of a trusting faction...

For future campaigns always assume to be betrayed at some point.

The problem came the Carths defeated the Gauls and forced a border with me, not the other way around. Around this time, i had managed while fighting in the balkans to almost wipeout Illyria and at least hold the Greeks at bay in The Balkans.

This is all because you didn't take one city in Sicily......I'm not laughing at you it's just...that's why I love this game...one small little decision can have serious ripple effects...

The Carths at this time had wiped out the Gauls and had bordering provinces next to all the mountain passes.

Dang! That just makes you want to say: Now aint this some ****/crap!

I figured that sooner or later the Carths would crush the Iberians and Gauls and would be knocking on my door anyway and decided to grab some territories first - that was a mistake.

I know this isn't much to go on but...weren't any of your family born with the trait: Hates Grasping Carthaginians; I know it's not much but...it could've been a sign.

My other mistake was not keeping a buffer - Illyria - Between myself and the juggernaut Greeks who they were allied too.

Yes and No. The Illyrians are destined for damnation so if it wasn't you it'd be some other faction. Then again, in this crazy campaign who knows what would've happen.

Obvious now my mistakes came with mishandling the toe and heel, especially not realizing that booting the Greeks off completely could have gotten me trade rights and a ceasefire.

Wait-a-sec! I might've missed that the first time. You left Greece control of Tarentum!? Please say that's not what you did!?

Regardless, one of the biggest income making cities in Italy, outside of Rome, is Tarentum. The others are: Croton, Arretium and Corfinium. It would be good to have Tarentum.

As a general...philosophy...you should want, as Rome, to be the master of your sphere. This would include: Italy south of the Rubicon; Corsica/Sardinia; Sicily...regardless of what happens with other factions, or where, this should be yours and should stay that way.

Q. What are your thoughts about Syracuse?

In what regard? Handling Syracuse can be easy or difficult. If you attempt to play historically accurate then you wouldn't exterminate or enslave factions of the Graecoroman culture. That means you'd have to occupy and garrison a behemoth of a city, it can be done. If you don't play historically accurate, what's the problem...

If you mean when should you take the city then that depends on some other factors mainly if you're able to recruit naval warships(Quinmarines-sp/etc) in another province or not. If you can you can then leave Syracuse temporarily, depending on your policy towards the western half of the island you could take over there then come back to Syracuse, letting the Greeks pay for all the infrastructure(use a spy to keep tabs on their progress) then take the city when they've built almost everything. But under no circumstances should you leave any factions on Sicily for any indefinite period of time.
__________________________________________
It's a balancing act. The income produced by Italy/Sicily should be enough to field two legions and a navy task force(1 Corvus Q. and 4 Q's). Use one legion to defend the northern border and the other to expand(Sardinia/Corsica), after this use the income from the new acquisitions to field another army(depending on your policy with Sicily/Corsica you may need a permanent military presence in these areas to protect against Carthaginian attacks). One army for the northern border. Another, if needed, for either Sicily/Corsica and the last as a reserve to relieve the other armies when they need retraining.

Allow some time to pass and your economy to grow without expanding. When capable field a 4th army, by this time you should be able to bring the army back from Sicily/Corsica. You will now have: 1 army to guard the northern border; 1 army as the reserves; 2 armies of expansion. Also at this time you should've probably spent any surpluses you had and now you have to expand or begin reducing your military forces. The difference is you have adequate forces/resources to operate farther away from Rome.

[phoebusapollon]

hmm - i guess if you leave the carthaginians alone and focus on the east they just polish off the numidians and the iberians one by one - in my campaign i was forced into a war with the carthaginians (they attacked me ) and even after i had taken sicily and sardinia they still refused a treaty - so i invaded north africa and took carthage and a few surrounding cities -

what i did after that was pull out my legions and just use native troops to garrison the area - carthage was sufficiently weakened by this - and with my incessant border raids - so that they were in a sort of balance against the numidians and the iberians -

i like using native troops for defensive purposes - they are a lot cheaper - and in most cases you get them a lot earlier (libyan spearmen after phase II auxilia) so you can focus on economic development - also you can retrain them locally without having to transport troops over the sea -

so i had two 'native' armies - libyan spearmen in north africa and gallic auxilia in northern italy - holding the fort against the gauls and carthaginians - they managed very well - also using local cavalry (gallic and libyan) - so this freed up my legions to take out the greeks -

i can imagine what it must be like facing the carthaginians if they have already taken spain, gaul and the whole of north africe - good luck!!

ps. syracuse - i love it - i didnt demolish any of the temples when i took it - also it had an academy and an odeon - so i ended up using it as my training centre for new leaders - dumped them there for a few turns and they all ended with multiple priests and scholars and influence of 5 or 6

[Malazan]

Mort:

1. I've seen the Carth's up though the Alps numerous times.

2. Yes. I went into the Balkans too early. Though the Greeks had numerous stacks all over the Illyrians provinces (Ill's were client kingdom) - as i inched down the balkns and took a settlement, then the Greek stacks usually all moved back a province leaving a Illyrian region with no Greek armies between Greece and Rome.

3. No, as i said i was allied with them right up until they landed on my Northern border, i would not have expanded North while already at war with Greence and the Carths! opening up another front was suicide, i was not allied too but trading with the Illyrians.

4. Some confusion here, i had taken Tarentum and Croton and left then with Rhegium and Syracuse,that was my buffer to the Carths. The Greeks demanded Croton and Tarentum and for me to be a potectorate numerous times. I refused obv.

"Toe and heel" my mistake, i added the Sicily into the "toe and heel"

Basically i had everything on the t and h apart from Rhegium (Greek), the Carths had every Sicilian settlement except Syracuse (Greek). This situation held up for 20 years or so. Only when i got a Nothern border with Carthage, did they then plough into Croton....


You're right, the lack of a Roman war, OR a desert Ptoly war ( i'm using landblocks) allowed the Carths to build up massive forces thru Iberia and into Gaul.


"But you were at war with Greece right? Let me see if I understand the situation: you were allied with Carthage and had a Sicilian Greek city sandwiched between you and Carthage? Instead of taking that one city you moved north/east to an area that avoided complications with an ally[Carthage]? Doing this stretched/strained your logistics train?"

Yes, at war from the get go. Yes, correct, i kept the buffer and went North and took Illi holdings, it was around that time i noticed 6-8 Greek stacks milling around Northern Greece and Illyria...

I knew that it was obly a matter of time before theCarths ssmashed thru Gaul, so i decided i would try and do something about the Illi/Greek axis before the Carts lnaded on my doorstep, i couldn't quite manage i fougt on for a while but as southern and northern privunces fell to the Carths i relaised it was hopeless.

It wasn't really that much a case of being strecthed, although that was a factor, there were just inumeberable Greek stacks getting replinished time after time, like i said i had reduced thier army, but not enough.

5. Yes i had a reli with the grasping Carths trait.

Thanks some more interesting ideas there.

I think you can see that while i did push North too early, i couldn;t just wait for the Carths (who by then wouyld be a 40 province 8 stack behemoth to pile in through my Northern border, while at the same time being at war with juggernaut Greece.

I think by the time i had let the Carths and Greeks get so powerful by being allied to one, and being at war with the other (Greece) and fighting skirmishes with them over Croton i was already done for.

[morteduzionism]

If Carthage is constantly in the Alps are you repeatedly leaving them territory in the Mediterranean and Sicily? If so, you might want to stop that.

4. Some confusion here, i had taken Tarentum and Croton and left then with Rhegium and Syracuse,that was my buffer to the Carths. The Greeks demanded Croton and Tarentum and for me to be a potectorate numerous times. I refused obv.

Next time clear everyone out from around you. Send the Greeks back to the Peloponneses and Carthage back to N. Africa.

Basically i had everything on the t and h apart from Rhegium (Greek), the Carths had every Sicilian settlement except Syracuse (Greek).

You were denying yourself alot of income and complicating your campaign. Syracuse = trade/tax income(even if you exterminate it, it would rebound quickly and be compteting with Rome for your largest city); Rhegium does some OK trade; Messana(Sicily) has good trade numbers too

The real...mistake(for lack of a better word) you made is ignoring easily controlled, more importantly they were close to you, Graecoroman cities(Sicily/Rhegium) and picking up the harder to manage, and more distant, barbarian cities.

This situation held up for 20 years or so. Only when i got a Nothern border with Carthage, did they then plough into Croton....

You mean the Greeks right? In all likelihood they turned Rhegium into a factory and would've been pressuring you until you cracked. That's the benifits of slower expansion if that was Carthage/Gaul then they would've turned Rhegium into a barbarian culture city making it even more difficult for you to annex later...

Yeah, kick Greece/Carthage out of Italy/Sicily so that your only land border will be in the north with Gaul.

You're right, the lack of a Roman war, OR a desert Ptoly war ( i'm using landblocks) allowed the Carths to build up massive forces thru Iberia and into Gaul.

I don't know what your feelings are on starting wars but...I'm pretty sure if you would've taken Sicily from Greece Carthage would've started something with you.

I knew that it was obly a matter of time before theCarths ssmashed thru Gaul, so i decided i would try and do something about the Illi/Greek axis before the Carts lnaded on my doorstep...i couldn't quite manage i fougt on for a while but as southern and northern privunces fell to the Carths i relaised it was hopeless.

Here's another thing you could've done: quit the Balkans; destroy every building in all your Balkan holdings; bring forces back to Italy; whatever your border is in the north simply defend it; use your forces that were in the Balkans to clear out southern Italy and Sicily; defend the north; use the forces from southern Italy to take Corsica/Sardinia from Carthage; defend the north; consolidate all forces in north and begin pushing Carthage back across the Alps

If/when you're able to take Cisalpine Gaul...exhale. Strengthen borders and make sure you never get in that predicament again...

It wasn't really that much a case of being strecthed, although that was a factor, there were just inumeberable Greek stacks getting replinished time after time, like i said i had reduced thier army, but not enough.

A war of attrition. That's the AI's style. I don't think it's possible for human players to win that way.

5. Yes i had a reli with the grasping Carths trait.

...and I bet you thought he was just paranoid!?

I think you can see that while i did push North too early, i couldn;t just wait for the Carths (who by then wouyld be a 40 province 8 stack behemoth to pile in through my Northern border, while at the same time being at war with juggernaut Greece.

If you weren't ready to fight them you could've waited. The benifit of defending only Umbria is that it has the ford, Carthage/Gaul mainly use lightly armored troops and against Roman legions where they're forced to come in one narrow path...you could slaughter Carthaginians/Gauls by the thousands(literally you could wipe out 5K+ soldiers) before you would need to retrain your army. If you put some scorpions/ballistas in the army guarding the ford......It wouldn't matter if Carthage had 150 territories

I think by the time i had let the Carths and Greeks get so powerful by being allied to one, and being at war with the other (Greece) and fighting skirmishes with them over Croton i was already done for.

Probably not. Like I said you could've quit the Balkans and concentrated on securing Italy. If you would've waited on Carthage to come to you it would've given you more time to settle with Greece in the south...

...should be overwhelming and disproportionate to the force used by the enemy

That's a portion of the Powell Doctrine describing military actions. That's the philosophy you should've taken to southern Italy. Overwhelmed Rhegium and kept rolling...

Role playing? No, i would win the game simply by taking the provinces listed within the 50 needed for victory. I 'm not playing historically.

They're really two different things. What I meant by RP'ing is...hmmm...are you playing the faction according to a personality type(are you a schemer, conqueror, etc) Would a conqueror allow foreign factions to exist so close to their own territory? Probably not. That sort of thing

I asked about the House Rules to figure out if you were restricting yourself from doing certain things and could that have been the cause to your situation.

[Malazan]

Mort:

Role playing? No, i would win the game simply by taking the provinces listed within the 50 needed for victory. I 'm not playing historically.

House rules?

No re-training UNLESS it's troops in garrison when a blaksmith etc is built, then i re-train. I don't attack unless attacked, apart from the obvious "no choice" atacks like Rome on Greece. I try to keep slash and burn to minimum, and in any case it really hampers you later on when you have to rebuild.

[Malazan]

phoebus:

Yeah, with the landblock in the desert and no war with Rome the Carths are unstoppable up the left hand side of the map. Smart play to get into N.Africa. But i basically decided to keep the Carts sweet, and it killed me in the end, you can't defeat two juggernauts when you have no trading partners.

My first instinct was to kick them both of the toe and heel and then grab the islands later on, but i sat tight, and then went North instead...

[Malazan]

mort:

Yes i pretty much understand and agree with everything you've said, i just for some reason did not do the obvious and kick the Carths and Greeks out.

I could have retreated as you said and held Northern Italy - possibly, i had defended the ford easily and the next pass along i had a legion in a camp sat on top of hill that just obliterated stack after stack - i sallied and assembled they were on a huge slope looking up at a full legion and got massacred time after time, i still had two passes to guard as the Carths had "wrapped around" all the way to the little strip of land that links Italy to the Balkans.

So they had four "entrances" and i also had that little strip to the balkans to defend.

But maybe, i could have held the North AND had enough top kick the Greeks and Carth's off the toe, heel, and islands.


As for role playing, it depnds on the faction, i have often played the Carths as a passive trading empire, trying to establish a huge maritime trading empire, and mostly just defending and trying to take islands for example.

I do sometimes play carahcter types though, such as conquerors, and i sometimes play by giving a new faction leader specific goals.

As for the "no attack" rule, that's essentially a bust as you can't stop war coming to you by diplomacy.

[morteduzionism]

I could have retreated as you said and held Northern Italy - possibly...i still had two passes to guard as the Carths had "wrapped around" all the way to the little strip of land that links Italy to the Balkans...So they had four "entrances" and i also had that little strip to the balkans to defend.

Or you could've retreated to south of the Po and held the one bridge easier. They would probably send someone to flank you but that is still an easier spot to defend than all those mountain passes.

Also, what was Carthages relationship with Germania? Had Gaul been destroyed as a faction? Where I'm going with this is that you might've been able to get Germania/Gaul to attack Carthage, hopefully distracting them to give you some breathing room.

Another tactic you could've employed was to take the cities immediately on the otherside of the Alps. Not to keep them but to let them go into Senatorial Revolt(do they still do that?) this way you: deprive Carthage of the income; since Senatorial rebels are Graecoroman they build infrastructure that will help if/when you get around to taking the cities; sometimes they're willing to give cease fires and become your proctorate quicker/easier(from my experiences); establish a buffer between you and the rest of Europe

But maybe, i could have held the North AND had enough top kick the Greeks and Carth's off the toe, heel, and islands.

How many armies did you have defending the north? Did you build forts in all the passes? Forts would momentarily slow enemies up and allow you some heads up as to where they're coming from.

As for role playing, it depnds on the faction, i have often played the Carths as a passive trading empire, trying to establish a huge maritime trading empire, and mostly just defending and trying to take islands for example.

So what's your role as a Roman?

As for the "no attack" rule, that's essentially a bust as you can't stop war coming to you by diplomacy.

True. Unless you manage to bribe the approaching army...lol

[Malazan]

1. I've never been able to get any faction to attack an enemy of mine, even ones i was allied too...

How do you do it?

2. The Gauls destroyed, the Germans allied to Carth.

3. In my game, i get a rebel Roman faction if i abandon provinces, so yes that might have been a help.

4. In total i could afford to run three legions without losing a ton of money every turn, i donlt usually allow myself to go into much debt.

5. I didn't have a role with this particular campaign, in any case you're forced to conquer or die as Rome, unlike Carthage.

[morteduzionism]

1. I've never been able to get any faction to attack an enemy of mine, even ones i was allied too...How do you do it?

It usually helps if they're at war with the faction too or have recently been at war with the faction. Other than that offer them money, that should do it.

This is why it's sometimes a good idea to send diplomats to the surrounding factions(Iberia, Gaul, Germania, Thrace, Illyria, Macedon, Greece and Sarmatia) in order to make deals immediately.

Treaties between factions that don't share borders last longer, that you already know. Another aspect to this is that it keeps your enemies from making deals with them.

If you would've had a long lasting alliance with Germania that would've prevented Carthage from ever allying themselves with them. This probably would've made it harder for them to crush Gaul. Even if they did, they may have come into contact with Germania, if they[Carthage/Germania] had a skirmish(declaring war against each other) you could've used that oportunity to get Germania to attack Carthage.

There's also the tactic of isolation. If you can manage to become the ally of a potential enemies ally(i.e. you manage a brief cease fire with Carthage, during the time you get an alliance with Germania) what you should do is immediately attack Carthage before they can attack you again, this way their alliance with Germania is broken. Then you begin asking for assistance.

3. In my game, i get a rebel Roman faction if i abandon provinces, so yes that might have been a help.

Don't rely on that strategy. The rebels are as likely to attack you as any other faction. What makes them even more bothersome is that they cross borders and siege cities, so be careful in creating them.

4. In total i could afford to run three legions without losing a ton of money every turn, i donlt usually allow myself to go into much debt.

For me, that's not enough to be fighting on 3 fronts. You have no margin for error. You take a big risk removing one from the border. Well, you already know that.

Yeah, keep one legion stationed in Latium as a mobile reserve. Your ability to successfully field/finance armies should dictate your rate of expansion. Call this a house rule or whatever but I think if you were following it you would've never gone to the Balkans. Doing this, since you only had 3 armies, would've forced you to settle southern Italy.

[Malazan]

Thanks Mort, some worthwhile advice there - no doubt.

I had disregarded the diplomacy part of the game to some extent as it's not great, and i've never had a lot of success with it.

I am probably also to eager to conquer new territory without realizing the logistics and the fact that i have to hold the new settlements too.

[binTravkin]

Malazan, follow my lead:
A: use all the armies possible to advance, leave only governors in cities, even if that means lowering tax (unless you're at low already)
B: use governors in accordance to their rank - the best managers go in the richest/biggest cities
C: optimize your characters by swapping retinue around

1. besiege both rebel cities to the south in 280.1
2. kill them both in 280.2, combine armies and advance towards
3. kill Pyrrhus in 280.3, besiege Tarentum and Croton
4. kill Tarentum and Croton, besiege Rhegium,
5. kill Rhegium, advance into Sicily
6. besiege Messana
and so on...

If you can keep this pace, you'll win in 50 yrs, not be crushed.
I play so on VH/VH

Ah, and btw - only use 1 general for an army, never engage army without a general unless superior numbers/defensive engagement.

And the most important point - never build troops before all your cities are not set up to build an improvement and you're not sure you have enough money to order more improvements next turn where needed.

Good Luck!