Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: When you've got an army without a head...

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1

    Default When you've got an army without a head...

    Alright, I'm playing as Makedon right now (M/M[Yeah, I'm a wuss]) and my campaign's gone pretty smoothly: I've crushed the KH, unified greece, driven Epiros out to their Italian settlement (from where they proceeded to suprise bum-rape the Romani. I'm guessing that dying factions get substantial money boosts or something?) gained total control of the Aegean (which, combined with several T2 mines, has me swimming in money.) and made substantial inroads in Asia minor against the Selukids, having finally gained a good eastern base in Antioch. I've also begun a campaign against Pontus, which (combined with the ptolemies declaring war) leads into my current problem: my current standing army should be enough to hold what I have for the time being, but I need (in my estimate) two more full stacks to keep my campagin rolling without getting bogged down trying to hold cities. Now, money's no object, so getting the armies up and running won't be a problem: The problem is I have no generals to trust them to: My main campaigners are bogged down holding my new gains (and one of them's getting long in the tooth), and almost all my other generals are either langorous (they'll have to stop for breath every mile! Hard to fight a war like that.) or disloyal. (which has me petrified of ending the turn to find that my main army's been replaced with a huge rebel stack.) Anyway, my question, and the point of this whole ramble, is: Can I trust an army to perform competently under a captain? As an aside, are my fears of Disloyal FMs overblown?
    I do hereby resolve to stay out of any debates in the political mudpit and the Ethos and Mores thread! ...What? I suck at arguing my point!

    War
    You know you wanna do it.

  2. #2

    Default Re: When you've got an army without a head...

    I wouldn't worry about disloyal FM, if you are playing M/M. I have 2 Qarthadistim campaigns, one H/M and the other VH/M and I have yet to be bribed. So I wouldn't worry about that i was you.

  3. #3

    Icon3 Re: When you've got an army without a head...

    Disloyal generals won't defect to the rebels, fortunately. There is however a chance that they will develop traits that make them easier to bribe. However, the buyer would have to bribe the general's army as well, and since this armies are very expensive in EB this is unlikely to happen. Disloyal generals are more problematic because they develop traits that reduce your income.

    If you are afraid of bribery, you can station them in cities with a diplomat: the diplomat will develop the ambassador trait, which seriously increases the cost to bribe.

    You can lead armies with captains, however this is a bit of an exploit as captains are not effected by season, logistics or morale traits. They are also easier to bribe.

  4. #4

    Default Re: When you've got an army without a head...

    Armies under captains perform poorly, generally.

    Did you not build any typeIV governments anywhere? I ask because with the top tier regional barracks you can recruit mercenary generals, who are extremely useful.

  5. #5
    delra's Avatar Praepositus
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Warsaw, Poland
    Posts
    5,590

    Default Re: When you've got an army without a head...

    Sending an army under a captain is a great way to get rid of it. Send it with a Family Member. Even least competent FMs are better than captains.

  6. #6

    Default Re: When you've got an army without a head...

    I see. Thanks very much, I'll just keep a diplomat on my Disloyal general (because he looks to be a great commander aside from his Loyalty issues.) and set up a few Type 4s... probably someplace inconsequential like Sparte or something.
    I do hereby resolve to stay out of any debates in the political mudpit and the Ethos and Mores thread! ...What? I suck at arguing my point!

    War
    You know you wanna do it.

  7. #7

    Icon3 Re: When you've got an army without a head...

    Diplomats will only keep their ambassador trait if they stay in their city. Sending an diplomat with an army will only marginally increase the cost to bribe (that is: it will add the cost of bribing the diplomat to it, but they aren't very expensive). Sorry if that wasn't clear.

    Client ruler are useful, but remember their bodyguard costs a mite. I think they are also somewhat less loyal than ordinary FMs, but I maybe wrong about that. However, establishing an type IV in Sparta will allow young FMs to follow the Spartan agoge.

  8. #8

    Default Re: When you've got an army without a head...

    And more importantly allow you to recruit Hellenistic Mercenary Generals, who are rather useful. Either as leaders or stop-gap governors.

  9. #9
    johnhughthom's Avatar Vicarius
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Northern Ireland
    Posts
    2,754

    Default Re: When you've got an army without a head...

    I've just fought an army that would have been better headless, the general's traits gave them -6 to morale. Even the Gaesatae routed pretty easily.

  10. #10
    delra's Avatar Praepositus
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Warsaw, Poland
    Posts
    5,590

    Default Re: When you've got an army without a head...

    If they had a general, you would be as screwed without yours. Get a mercenary general. I like Greek ones since their Lonchophoroi bodyguards are useful in the battlefield (almost equal to Liby-Phoenicians).

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •