Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 96

Thread: Rank factions by how hard they are to play in 2.0

Hybrid View

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

    Default Rank factions by how hard they are to play in 2.0

    The natural selection for my first game in 2.0 would be eriador but I am worried they are too easy to win with.

    So which factions are the hardest and the easiset to play with. Thanks in advance.

  2. #2
    kaiser1993's Avatar Senator
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    West Yorkshire
    Posts
    1,191

    Default Re: Rank factions by how hard they are to play in 2.0

    I find the orcs of the misty mountains the most difficult, the easiest i think are the elves ( I cant remember the name so il call them the blue ones)

  3. #3

    Default Re: Rank factions by how hard they are to play in 2.0

    1.Gondor (little money,Mordor Spam +Harad spam, very slow unit production)

    2.Eriador (Bad starting units, little money,)

    3.OOMM (surrounded, must fight elves and dwarfs who get the best units in the game,lacks early counters for elves and dwarfs)

    4.Dale (little money, bad units, Must fight Easterling spam)

    5.OOG (worst units in game, little money, must fight dwarfs)

    6.Harad (must fight Gondor spam, Fights Gondor who has good units) - note when i was at war with gondor mordor signed peace so i had to fight off the full brunt of there stacks

    7.Easterlings (never played)

    8.Isengard (good early possition,slow uruk production early game)

    9.Rohan (never played)

    10.Mordor (lots of money, can train vast amounts of orcs)

    11.Silvian Elves (lacks money, slow unit production)

    12.High Elves (never played, some of the best units in game, good possition

    13.Dwarfs (best units it game, good early money,good position)
    Last edited by Lordbuxton; July 26, 2010 at 11:36 AM.

  4. #4
    Hallow's Avatar Ducenarius
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    967

    Default Re: Rank factions by how hard they are to play in 2.0

    Quote Originally Posted by Lordbuxton View Post
    1.Gondor

    2.Eriador

    3.OOMM

    4.Dale

    5.OOG

    6.Harad

    7.Easterlings

    8.Isengard

    9.Rohan

    10.Mordor

    11.Silvian Elves

    12.High Elves

    13.Dwarfs

    Eriador are one of the hardest factions to play as.

    Bad units, little money, will lose if you get into a war with OOMM and OOG or with Isengard. Gondors Hardest because of its starting situation
    I'd say Dwarves is harder than High elves. As High elves you have Eriador to shield you from any danger (Other than Imladris which you can either garrison or give away for something else) while you build up an excellent economy and armies of the powerful Eldar units.

    I'd also say that Eriador seemed easy enough on my 2.0 campaign with them. Granted I've only gotten to turn 150ish but I easily got rid of OOG, the high elves are dealing with the western part of OOTM and I took 2 settlements from Isengard and then got peace, now they seem to be frightened of me. And after converting to Arnor, it seems to go even smoother.
    "Romans regarded peace not as an absence of war, but the rare situation that existed when all opponents had been beaten down and lost the ability to resist."


  5. #5

    Default Re: Rank factions by how hard they are to play in 2.0

    Eriador gets wiped out every game i play, when im not playing them

  6. #6
    hippacrocafish's Avatar Campidoctor
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,696

    Default Re: Rank factions by how hard they are to play in 2.0

    Quote Originally Posted by Lordbuxton View Post
    2.Eriador (Bad starting units, little money,)
    Eridor hard? I played them for the first time ever yesterday and I had invaded the mountains owned by the Orcs of Gunabound (Sp?) by turn ten or so with two big armies. They start with powerful archer militia, powerful spear militia, Greenway guards, and two super-generals (Aragorn and Gandalf). If anything I think they start out too powerful.

    My pick is Rhun mainly because the units they start with are very weak, especially against their rival (Dale) who starts with a counter to just about all of their units. You have to use a combination of Blacoth Tribesmen (Sp?), General's Bodyguard, and Variag Raiders in a very precise fashion or you might get screwed. I was surprised how effective their javelins were against the Hearth Watchmen of Dale they usually collapse under a tsunami of Javelins.

  7. #7

    Default Re: Rank factions by how hard they are to play in 2.0

    Honestly Eriador is one of the easiest factions. Sure you haven't got the best units, but alone with the starting units I've nearly wiped out OoG. You've got enough money and when your cities have developed a little bit, thigns get even easier.
    The hardest normally is Gondor, but after playing a few times with them it gets quit easy too.
    I found OotMM quite hard in the older versions, but maybe they've become easier since the latest patch.
    Easiest faction is High Elves, Harad and Rhun since you've got a lot of citeis which are able to generate money for you and only 1-2 fronts.

  8. #8

    Default Re: Rank factions by how hard they are to play in 2.0

    Hm, I am even more confused.

    I don't want to play Mordor, Harad or Rhun because I think they are too easy by default (their strategic position; all have their back covered). I already played with Gondor and Rohan and both elven factions... Dwarves seem really strong.

  9. #9
    Hero of the West's Avatar Artifex
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    1,640

    Default Re: Rank factions by how hard they are to play in 2.0

    rohan is one of the more difficult economy wise..

    ootmm was quite difficult can't say now because of their new buddie OOG..

    eriador is relatively easy in my campaign right now.. turn 30 and concuered three rebel settlement and 2 from isengard and i'm in open war with them

  10. #10

    Default Re: Rank factions by how hard they are to play in 2.0

    I was playing as Eriador and the Evil factions called a "crusade" on Bree.
    It sucked my cities were just starting to develop quite nice to.
    So im fighting stacks of evil armies sent to take Bree.
    Then whata-ya know OOG & OOMM orcs decide there gonna take back the settlements, along with some of my own.
    Yeppp, I thought it was going to be smooth sailing.
    The moral of the story?
    I Love Third Age: Total War...

  11. #11

    Default Re: Rank factions by how hard they are to play in 2.0

    Quote Originally Posted by TheFunnyOne1125 View Post
    I was playing as Eriador and the Evil factions called a "crusade" on Bree.
    It sucked my cities were just starting to develop quite nice to.
    So im fighting stacks of evil armies sent to take Bree.
    Then whata-ya know OOG & OOMM orcs decide there gonna take back the settlements, along with some of my own.
    Yeppp, I thought it was going to be smooth sailing.
    The moral of the story?
    I Love Third Age: Total War...
    That sounds good actually... I hate playing if it is too easy!

    You give me hope!

  12. #12

    Default Re: Rank factions by how hard they are to play in 2.0

    Because of corruption caused by great distances form capital, dwarfs are not so rich at begining of capaign.
    Dale is easy.

  13. #13

    Default Re: Rank factions by how hard they are to play in 2.0

    Eriador is hard because almost all of their good unit are AOR, that was my surprise when i take angmar and discover that the only units i can train there are militia ones(archers and breelands), merchaders soldier and mounted, thats all

    the other units stay in Eriador

    also the reemerge of arnor mess you up for a few turns, really bad turns if you are trying to save rohan from unleashed isengard, like me
    Last edited by Benox; July 27, 2010 at 02:07 AM.

  14. #14

    Default Re: Rank factions by how hard they are to play in 2.0

    From Hard to easiest:
    1.OMM
    2.Orks of Gundabad
    3.Dwarvens
    4.Isengard
    5.Mordor
    6.Silvan Elves
    7.Rhun
    8.Harad
    9.Eriador
    10.Rohan
    11.Arnor
    12.High Elves
    13.Gondor

    My personal opinion based mainly on units,recruitment,position.

  15. #15

    Default Re: Rank factions by how hard they are to play in 2.0

    Quote Originally Posted by son of romans View Post
    From Hard to easiest:
    1.OMM
    2.Orks of Gundabad
    3.Dwarvens
    4.Isengard
    5.Mordor
    6.Silvan Elves
    7.Rhun
    8.Harad
    9.Eriador
    10.Rohan
    11.Arnor
    12.High Elves
    13.Gondor

    My personal opinion based mainly on units,recruitment,position.
    You think gondor is easier then High Elves? Right... Btw why are Arnor and Eriador seperated?

    Ootmm and Gondor are pretty hard. Eriador although lots of fun is not that hard.
    Last edited by BlackViper; July 26, 2010 at 02:19 PM.

  16. #16

    Default Re: Rank factions by how hard they are to play in 2.0

    Quote Originally Posted by son of romans View Post
    From Hard to easiest:
    1.OMM
    2.Orks of Gundabad
    3.Dwarvens
    4.Isengard
    5.Mordor
    6.Silvan Elves
    7.Rhun
    8.Harad
    9.Eriador
    10.Rohan
    11.Arnor
    12.High Elves
    13.Gondor

    My personal opinion based mainly on units,recruitment,position.
    Mordor is 5th?

  17. #17
    Baron Samedi's Avatar Citizen
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    1,414

    Default Re: Rank factions by how hard they are to play in 2.0

    Quote Originally Posted by Zigama View Post
    Mordor is 5th?
    I don't think you should take that list too serious. I mean Gondor easiest?
    Under the patronage of MasterBigAb

  18. #18

    Default Re: Rank factions by how hard they are to play in 2.0

    Quote Originally Posted by Zigama View Post
    Mordor is 5th?

    Yes because,without trolls their army is just a fulish horde,only three black numeronians units,my list is serious,I can argue each point.

  19. #19

    Default Re: Rank factions by how hard they are to play in 2.0

    Quote Originally Posted by son of romans View Post
    Yes because,without trolls their army is just a fulish horde,only three black numeronians units,my list is serious,I can argue each point.
    And why is gondor easy? Tell me. Oh and that horde is like you say ...a horde. A cheap horde with their strength in numbers and surrounded by allies . Gondor gets gondor infantry in like what? turn 40+ or something? When harad and Mordor are attaking you it isn't easy to defend cities like osgiliath. So it shouldn't be easiest on your list imo. And your list is serious for your sake, I don't take it 100% seriously.
    "A Moment of Laxity Spawns a Lifetime of Heresy"


  20. #20
    Baron Samedi's Avatar Citizen
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    1,414

    Default Re: Rank factions by how hard they are to play in 2.0

    Quote Originally Posted by son of romans View Post
    Yes because,without trolls their army is just a fulish horde,only three black numeronians units,my list is serious,I can argue each point.
    Sorry that isn't a good argument. If you can explain my with proper arguments why Gondor is for instance easier than Mordor I give you free rep.
    My view: Mordor has a better economy, they don't have to fight countless stacks each turn, they can mass-spam units, your are backed by powerful allies and the list goes on and on..........
    Gondor on the other hand has a crappy economy, can't produce units fast, has to fight two strong enemies at the same time, has to fight countless of enemy stacks. I mean just count how many ''I play Gondor and I am getting -slapped/owned in my face'' threads on this forum ad now do the same for Mordor. That should speak for itself.
    Under the patronage of MasterBigAb

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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