Antioch or Jerusalem for my first campaign?

[wipo]

hi,

I'm about to play my very first KGCM campaign, and this is pretty much my first MII:TW campaign too

well I played a campaign as England, but I didn't finish it...at least I learned the basics


I would like to play as either Jerusalem or Antioch, to have these famous knights templar/hospitalier, who seem to be pretty awesome

also Jerusalem and Antioch are allied, so it will probably make things a bit easier to have another nation give me a hand from time to time


so which one do you consider is the easiest faction to play?

cheers!

[Frunk]

Well, Jerusalem will have the advantage of crusades more often than not being targeted at Cairo, but I've not played either so I can't say for sure.

[The Holy Pilgrim]

It all depends on who you feel like fighting first. As Jerusalem, you'll start off at war with Egypt, which happens to be a powerful nation (and not to mention they have Sultan Saladin on their side), but as Reece J said, you'll have the benefit of Crusades. As Antioch, you'll probably have a tougher time as you first have to fight your way through the Turks and their Horse Archers (which can easily outrun your units) and eventually the Byzantines. The Byzantines have a very powerful Early era army, and seeing how you won't get anymore gunpowder than they do, you'll have a tough time (as long as they aren't busy fighting Turkey and Hungary). Try and get the Italians to help you. They don't like the Byzantines anyway.

[chris7ian]

i just started one with jerusalem and have egypt on the ropes out of the gate. seems they dont have many castles on the east side so take the few they have and its smooth sailing... although i messed up when i had the pope call a crusade on cairo and i didnt realize how the garrison scripts were. City was empty then i seige and then a terrible army appears. I simulated the battle and got only 70+ kills with my full stack...

[The Holy Pilgrim]

Never under-estimate the garrison scripts.