The Romans

[Selifator]

Depends, if he has chariots of any sort he can still kick your cataphracts all the way over the Styx. If he uses spearmen on the flanks, he might hold long enough for a flank charge. But I'd prefer normal heavy cav over cataphracts due to their speed, which allows me to manouver more. A combo of both is also viable.

[Lord Thesaurian]

Congratulations. You have completed the achievement "Rush Attack", and have now joined the ranks of just about every player out there! Rush attack works against a lot of players, but only if you can get them on the back foot. If you can't take out their cav quickly, or their infantry holds. They will still be able to react thus nullifying your strategy.
Also, a rush attack is immediately recognized and can be countered simply by countering your cavalry, firing away with missile troops and holding the line.

yep, thats why a rush attack wont work vs any1 but a noob

[Lord Thesaurian]

hey! as a test i just hosted a game. I was the greek cities at the nile bridge. it was a 2 vs 1 with no artillery and no elite missile at 40k. My two opponents were: Carthage, with a full stack of sacred band inf and cav w/ armored eles and gens. The other was SPQR with a full stack of urbans, praetorian cav, archer auxilla, and armored gens. But heres where it gets really crazy. I defended the bridge with 2 spartan hoplites w/ 2 greek cav, 2 archers, 1 heavy peltasts and 1 armored gen - might as well try to be fair, i thought. After all, all my units had gold weapons and 3 exp. each. Little did i know that my theory about the romans being waaaay too strong would prove painfully true. The crazy thing was that the retarded Carthage player didnt understand 2vs1, so there were three seperate teams.

Hannibal quit when he saw urbans to his rear and spartans to his front, and SPQR guy routed CPU Carthage, but exhausted his men and took some casualties. So i thought: awe shucks, this'll be too easy! WRONG! My missiles used up all their ammo, so SPQR got to start crossing the bridge unscathed. He was exhausted and undermanned, and both of us expected me to win. But his friggin urbans and uber-cav broke through BOTH my spartans easily and killed them all.

I then surrounded the head of his column in the hopes to rout his men through fear, but the stupid invincible romans killed all my troops in seconds, yes SECONDS! I congratulated the lucky bastard on his victory of course, but I almost puked when I saw the kill count. SPQR killed all but 76 of Carthage, and all of my men - several thousand kills - and took only 300-some kills himself! no lie! So yes, yes, and yes again! Rome is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too strong on MP. I know now from personal exp

[darthbane7]

I'm inclined to think that the Greeks couldn't win anyways. As said before, Urbans beat Spartans. Not to mention Praetorian Cavalry will eat Greek Cavalry for breakfast. (ouch)

No, they are NOT overpowered. (Play against the Seleucids as the Romans in a 40k match and see what happens , Catas/Chariots anyone?)

Yes, for infantry factions, YOU ARE SCREWED! Make no mistake, Spartans/Sacred Band, Royal Pikemen, Chosen Swordsmen are good and all, but they WILL LOSE! (Seeing as Spartans cost 1.2k denarii and Urbans only cost 860)

The one exception to this is the Germans. In a forest map, a good player can do alot against the Romans with Germania. (Teutoberg Forest anyone?) Beserkers/Chosen Axemen hold their own against roman infantry as long as they are not whacked by pila. And Screeching Women? A god-send.

If my opponent is Roman, I never go as a phalanx faction. (Germania's warband is a very crude, and weaker version or the phalanx, so I discount it).

Instead, go as a faction that has HAs, CAs, or heavy cav. (Or go as Germania). HAs/CAs work wonders.

[Lord Thesaurian]

I'm inclined to think that the Greeks couldn't win anyways. As said before, Urbans beat Spartans. Not to mention Praetorian Cavalry will eat Greek Cavalry for breakfast. (ouch)

No, they are NOT overpowered. (Play against the Seleucids as the Romans in a 40k match and see what happens , Catas/Chariots anyone?)

Yes, for infantry factions, YOU ARE SCREWED! Make no mistake, Spartans/Sacred Band, Royal Pikemen, Chosen Swordsmen are good and all, but they WILL LOSE! (Seeing as Spartans cost 1.2k denarii and Urbans only cost 860)

The one exception to this is the Germans. In a forest map, a good player can do alot against the Romans with Germania. (Teutoberg Forest anyone?) Beserkers/Chosen Axemen hold their own against roman infantry as long as they are not whacked by pila. And Screeching Women? A god-send.

If my opponent is Roman, I never go as a phalanx faction. (Germania's warband is a very crude, and weaker version or the phalanx, so I discount it).

Instead, go as a faction that has HAs, CAs, or heavy cav. (Or go as Germania). HAs/CAs work wonders.

The Germans only win because theyre big, hairy, smelly, beastly barbarians who make the effeminate roman boys crap their pants.

And yes, cav-based factions kick the crap out of rome, but only on a 20k or less match, and chariots only trump cause theyre wild and scary and have scythes on the sides (which most chariots in fact didnt have)

Im not saying rome cant be beaten, im just saying the pregame conditions have to be heavily against them, and only certain factions can beat them anyway. What other faction is this tough?

[MaceMan]

Keep in mind that the game is called Rome: Total War, and that it's therefore supposed to revolve around the Romans. It's no surprise that they're the strongest faction in the game. If you really find it impossible to beat them with any non-Roman faction, then fight fire with fire and pick another Roman faction to fight them; it's not like there are four Roman factions with virtually identical rosters or anything.

[Lord Thesaurian]

Keep in mind that the game is called Rome: Total War, and that it's therefore supposed to revolve around the Romans. It's no surprise that they're the strongest faction in the game. If you really find it impossible to beat them with any non-Roman faction, then fight fire with fire and pick another Roman faction to fight them; it's not like there are four Roman factions with virtually identical rosters or anything.

Yeah, but ive fought rome in custom battles and campaign under similar circumstances 2 MP, and theyre never anywhere close to how strong they r on MP. Ive fought romans w/ romans on MP too and i usually win() buti dont like to see romans fight romans -- its such a waste. Anyway, every time i fight rome on MP with anything but another rome, i lose unless the balance (terrain, money, etc.) are heavily in my favor. its really starting to piss me off

[MaceMan]

Yeah, but ive fought rome in custom battles and campaign under similar circumstances 2 MP, and theyre never anywhere close to how strong they r on MP. Ive fought romans w/ romans on MP too and i usually win() buti dont like to see romans fight romans -- its such a waste. Anyway, every time i fight rome on MP with anything but another rome, i lose unless the balance (terrain, money, etc.) are heavily in my favor. its really starting to piss me off

Then make sure the balance is always in your favor.

[darthbane7]

Err, if multiple faction can beat Rome, I wouldn't call it the strongest faction. My opinion of strongest is Seleucia because of its variety in units, and Egypt/Germania tie for second.

[Lord Thesaurian]

Then make sure the balance is always in your favor.

Yeah sure, that'd b easy to do if there were players who liked fighting battles that are obviously rigged against them

[MaceMan]

Yeah sure, that'd b easy to do if there were players who liked fighting battles that are obviously rigged against them

Well, things like setting lower money levels and obtaining hill advantages are easy to do and can tip the scales in your favor, and they don't put your Roman opponent at an insurmountable disadvantage, either.

[Seleucid king]

a combo of urbans and praetorian cav is impossible 2 beat.

no, just eliminate the Praetorian cav with Cataphract Maces or Elephants.

[Lord Thesaurian]

ok ive changed my theory slightly. I just played an SPQR guy as Macedon. He pounded my center with archers, then went all in and charged all his units into my center, apparently trying to break it then wreak havoc on my rear. But all this did was cause me to double envelope him ala Cannae w/ royal pikemen and companion cav - with deadly results of course. his army was utterly destroyed and then i proceeded to cut down his archers w/ my cav. There was not a single roman left alive that day. So i recant, sort of: Rome can be beaten, but only if she is controlled by a less-than-intelligent player.

[MaceMan]

ok ive changed my theory slightly. I just played an SPQR guy as Macedon. He pounded my center with archers, then went all in and charged all his units into my center, apparently trying to break it then wreak havoc on my rear. But all this did was cause me to double envelope him ala Cannae w/ royal pikemen and companion cav - with deadly results of course. his army was utterly destroyed and then i proceeded to cut down his archers w/ my cav. There was not a single roman left alive that day. So i recant, sort of: Rome can be beaten, but only if she is controlled by a less-than-intelligent player.

Well, even though that was poor strategy on your opponent's part, I still think it's a bit unfair to say that a victory against Rome can only be achieved with a non-Roman faction if your opponent is completely incompetent.

Someone playing as a non-Roman faction can defeat a Roman opponent of equal skill simply by using the right counters: phalanxes to pin down the Romans, cavalry that can defeat praetorians (cataphracts anyone? or perhaps chariots?), and hammer-and-anvil strikes by said cavalry. As I mentioned earlier, getting a terrain advantage helps too. Although there are multiple ways to defeat Romans, this basic one works well.

As a last-ditch resort, if losing to Romans over and over again is starting to get on your nerves, you can also host games with "no Romans allowed" as one of the rules. I wouldn't recommend doing this, though; the only good way to learn how to defeat Roman factions on a regular basis is to play against them often, and thus learn for yourself what works and what doesn't.

[Lord Thesaurian]

u have a point, but you dont seem to realize that praetorian cav beats all other cav, and usually even beats chariots unless the enemy have waaay higher stats. And yes, phalanxes can pin the roman infantry, but unless u can beat the roman cav in time (which u usually cant) the roman infantry will break ur phalanxes, resulting in a chain rout and defeat (not to mention the fact that archer auxilla will be pounding u the whole time). But i am getting better at countering romans, and perhaps the day wil come when i can soundly beat them at last.

[Xantrip]

EDIT: my post was in response to Selifator, but that's rather irrelevant now.

Here's what I was thinking.

Scythia: HHM, HA will destroy Urbans and Praets, and you should easily win the archer war
Parthia: CataCamels for the Praets, Catas and Archers to win the archer war and beat the Urbans
Pontus: Scythed Chariots beat Praets, but that's playing with fire. Chariot Archers might help. Don't use Cappadocians.
Seleukia: You need to win with the Cataphracts, or it's game over.
Armenia: Ditto. HA's might help.
Egypt: Rome has serious trouble with chariots, because it lacks pikes.
Britons: Ditto, but Egypt is a superior choice.

No one else really stands a chance against an equal opponent.

I'd give the best chances to
1) Scythia
2) Parthia
3) Egypt

Legio-Italica: maybe we can play each other a bit. I usually go by Phylactery on RTW.

[MaceMan]

u have a point, but you dont seem to realize that praetorian cav beats all other cav, and usually even beats chariots unless the enemy have waaay higher stats. And yes, phalanxes can pin the roman infantry, but unless u can beat the roman cav in time (which u usually cant) the roman infantry will break ur phalanxes, resulting in a chain rout and defeat (not to mention the fact that archer auxilla will be pounding u the whole time). But i am getting better at countering romans, and perhaps the day wil come when i can soundly beat them at last.

Not true. Praetorians are not gods, and they're certainly not the best cavalry in the game, either. Cataphracts destroy praetorians (unless you forget to switch to your maces), and chariots also destroy praetorians (unless they're severely outnumbered). It goes without saying, then, that cataphracts used in conjunction with chariots will utterly decimate praetorians. As for the phalanxes, you don't have to engage the enemy infantry until the cavalry engagement is over; just deploy your phalanx troops further back (not too far back, though, or your cav might break out of fear of being separated from the main body of the army).

At any rate, the strategy I suggested was just a possibility that's worked for me that you could try out. At no point did I say that it's infallible. And I'm glad you're getting better at it; the experience will pay off in the end. Then you can move on to beating Romans with barbarians.

[|Sith|viX]

Legio italica you have absolutely no knowledge whatsoever about multiplayer and i dont know why noone has the balls to tell you that.
Romans are quite beatable and are far away from perfect as you call them. These are some of the factions they lose to easily: Seleucia, Parthia, Armenia, Egypt, Pontus and the Brits.

[Njord]

Frankly there isn't a nation in the game that I haven't beaten Rome with online. While there is an imbalance in urban and praetorian cavalry forces, they are far from unstoppable.

Truly the hardest one is Spain, or Gaul. As they lack the correct anti cavalry or heavy cavalry to deal with Rome.

Then again, I'd rather play Spain vs Rome than any of my barbarians against Egypt.

[Lord Thesaurian]

Legio italica you have absolutely no knowledge whatsoever about multiplayer and i dont know why noone has the balls to tell you that.
Romans are quite beatable and are far away from perfect as you call them. These are some of the factions they lose to easily: Seleucia, Parthia, Armenia, Egypt, Pontus and the Brits.

they dont have 2 tell me im a noob because i know i am

heres my test results:

Seleucia: only wins with higher stats. most people say no ele, and ur looking at a 60k minimum to have enough for numerical similarity and higher stats.

Parthia: Well, the roman infantry is so well-armored that, when even slightly upgraded, they are practically immune to missile fire, even when not in testudo. Parthian infantry is a joke. Most people say no eles, so there goes that. and catas/cata camels cannot win entirely unsupported. Conclusion: Parthia's toast.

Armenia: same problem as Parthia

Egypt: has a chance, but will lose in the hands of anyone but an expert as romans will break through pharaoh's guards and easily rout axmen. Pharaoh's bowmen give egypt a slight edge, but will be easily routed after their infantry protection is broken. So, egypt's only chance is to engage rome quickly enough to let their chariots/nile cav get behind roman lines (that is, if they can get past archer auxilla, light auxilla, and praetorian cav) and this is assuming that rome charged in at once and has no infantry reserves. Conclusion: egypt can win, but almost certainly at a pyrrhic cost.

Pontus: A mixture of the problems that parthia and seleucia have. their infantry is a joke. their cav other than cappodocian cav sucks. rome can break any phalanx eventually and scythed chariots run amok far too easily to even be considered in this equation. Like egypt, they could win with an upgraded army of bronzes, catas and a crapload of missile troops, bu this again, is assuming that the roman cav is beaten early and rome has no infantry reserves. Conclusion: Pontus can win but must have at least 60k and have the luck of the gods on their side.

The brits: With chariots, druids, and head hurlers, the brits have the best chance of beating rome. But their morale is notoriously crappy and roman steel, not to mention superior missile troops (head hurlers discounted) will win the day. Any brit knows that to beat rome he needs chariots to kill roman cav (which is still a close bet), and head hurlers to kill the infantry (and some light chariots for back-up). But this requires a higher amount of money, say 40k, to do and in a low-money match they will most certainly lose. Their infantry is only worth anything massed, and even then will rout after a pilae/charge combo. So basically you are left with chariots and head hurlers (maybe druids to try and scare them a bit), bu it is very risky to base a normally infantry-based army on cav and missiles (what the hell do you think this is? Parthia?) Conclusion: The brits have the best shot but are looking for an average victory at best, and this is betting solely on, as i said, chariots and head hurlers.

And besides all that, why does beating rome have to be such a science?? any other non-roman match is up for grabs, but when facing rome u have to have just the right counters, and have very precise timing. Why isnt it possible for any faction to face rome man to man and beat her simply through superior tactics? despite ur arguments, a significant majority still agrees with me so it appears that i am correct in saying it once again: ROME IS WAAAY TOO STRONG ON MULTIPLAYER!