Greeks way too powerful

[Metaluis90]

Hey everyone, as the title says, Aren't the greek cities way too overpowered? I have played two campaigns already (Rome and Pontus) and in both of them the hellens manage to beat both Epirus and Macedonia without mercy and then start to beat Illyria (wich in my opinion are also a overpowered too, Illiryans and greeks rip off Macedonian lands)

In my current Pontic campaign, greeks control almost all the Balcan peninsula, plus Crete, Rhodes and Asia minor greek cities (with the exception of Pergamon and Abydos) and Cyrene, a little gift I made them

Macedonia should last longer as they were the former rulers of most of the greek cities and their tactical military supremacy should be at least countering the steamrolling of the greeks.

I forgot to give them a little money boost (which in my Roman campaign I did, and they last a bit longer [until 250] but still they were always in trouble) and now the macedonians were the first faction to be destroyed.

[Quinn Inuit]

You know, we really do get all types of different results. FWIW, though, the Greeks will be much more challenging in the next version, mainly due to economic and recruitment changes.

Also, Macedon should have it pretty hard. Remember, you're not playing the united Kingdom of Macedon. You're playing as Antigonus Gonatas, who had a tough time of it for his entire reign. Macedon is actually a difficult faction to play.

[Metaluis90]

You know, we really do get all types of different results. FWIW, though, the Greeks will be much more challenging in the next version, mainly due to economic and recruitment changes.

I'm very aware of it, but I don't know the other people results, that's why I opened this thread, to share opinions about this particular topic

Also, Macedon should have it pretty hard. Remember, you're not playing the united Kingdom of Macedon. You're playing as Antigonus Gonatas, who had a tough time of it for his entire reign. Macedon is actually a difficult faction to play.

sorry didn't know, I thought this Macedon was unified, or at least strong enough to stand against independent greek cities

[Quinn Inuit]

Heh, fair enough.

Yeah, that's why you don't start out with control of Macedon proper, just a few outlying regions. You have to fight Ptolemy Keraunos for Macedonia, and in the next version there will be Gauls. Oh, yes, there will be Gauls.

[Metaluis90]

Gods! I hate Gauls!

[Slowpoke]

Is it just me or are you adding a bit too many Gauls everywhere, Quinn?

[Daqin]

Hey everyone, as the title says, Aren't the greek cities way too overpowered? I have played two campaigns already (Rome and Pontus) and in both of them the hellens manage to beat both Epirus and Macedonia without mercy and then start to beat Illyria (wich in my opinion are also a overpowered too, Illiryans and greeks rip off Macedonian lands)

In my current Pontic campaign, greeks control almost all the Balcan peninsula, plus Crete, Rhodes and Asia minor greek cities (with the exception of Pergamon and Abydos) and Cyrene, a little gift I made them

Macedonia should last longer as they were the former rulers of most of the greek cities and their tactical military supremacy should be at least countering the steamrolling of the greeks.

I forgot to give them a little money boost (which in my Roman campaign I did, and they last a bit longer [until 250] but still they were always in trouble) and now the macedonians were the first faction to be destroyed.

Sounds like another example of proximity domination: Rome and Pontus are close neighbors of Greek settlements, ergo the AI controlling Greece succeeds until you stop them yourself. When I play as Parthia, the Macedonians take control of Greece proper in the first 5-10 years, and then rampage over eastern Europe; the Romans usually annex Syracuse after dealing with the Epirates (assuming Carthage doesn't get there first); Greek cities in Asia Minor eventually fall to the Galatians, who in turn fall to Seleucia or Armenia; Greek settlements in the Bosphorus region fall to Sarmatia and/or Armenia. The only Greek settlements that survive are on Crete due to their isolation. I've probably seen this scenario happen a dozen times now. But its a trend I only see as Parthia (likely get similar results as Bactria, but I haven't played much as them); if I pick a Western faction like Germania or Carthage, the Greeks' chances of survival go way up. I had one German campaign where by 240 or so, the Greeks controlled the Balkans, Sicily, and all of Asia Minor. Macedonia quickly fell to them, and Dacia was hammered by the Illyrians of all people (how embarrassing is that?).

One thing I will say, though I think this is already being addressed, is that as of now, the AI really favors hoplites and phalangites in its auto-resolve battles. And since those make up 95% of Greek armies, that can be an issue.

[Daqin]

Eh, add all the Gauls you want, I find them very easy to deal with. They love to spam swordsmen and skirmishers, both of which make great missile/cavalry fodder and are very useful for getting my units' experience up. They may wear pants, but their disdain for shirts makes them nice and squishy

[pannonian]

Eh, add all the Gauls you want, I find them very easy to deal with. They love to spam swordsmen and skirmishers, both of which make great missile/cavalry fodder and are very useful for getting my units' experience up. They may wear pants, but their disdain for shirts makes them nice and squishy

I'd love it if Quinn adds Ambacti from the parent RTR VII mods.

[Carados]

I'd love it if Quinn adds Ambacti from the parent RTR VII mods.

*snickers*

[JaNuZ99]

Eh, add all the Gauls you want, I find them very easy to deal with. They love to spam swordsmen and skirmishers, both of which make great missile/cavalry fodder and are very useful for getting my units' experience up. They may wear pants, but their disdain for shirts makes them nice and squishy

i hear you, they are great for my roman units to lvl up, with enough exp even with all the alterations made to make the romans less god-like, will make my enemies quake with fear )

[Caesar Augustus]

You after one of these perchance Carados?

[Carados]

Definitely.

Especially the ice cream version. They are sooooooooooo nice!!

[Quinn Inuit]

You think Gauls are easy? Heh. Wait till you get a load of the new ones.

And as for having too many Gauls, well, there were a lot of Gauls around back then. If you want to have a relevant barb faction for the 200s and 100s B.C., it's going to be Gauls. Sure, there were a few Germans, but they mostly don't pop up till the very end of our time frame. And we're actually going with fewer Gauls than we could be, having made research judgment calls that a couple of disputed ethnic groups weren't particularly Gallic.

[Mogan]

Heh. All we have is the Arverni and the Celtiberians. Not really lots of Gauls. But damn, they are badass now. No more stacks of just swordsmen, waiting to be pelted into oblivion.

[JaNuZ99]

Heh. All we have is the Arverni and the Celtiberians. Not really lots of Gauls. But damn, they are badass now. No more stacks of just swordsmen, waiting to be pelted into oblivion.

bring it, will my superior tactics, and some luck my legions shall crush and enslave these barbarian scum... they will feel the heel of my gladius and submit or else face the... sword??the cross???

hehe a little off-topic, and me begin someone who loves roman history, never ever pondered this till now...

did the romans put people to the cross around the 200s? +rep to anyone who could answer this for me (sources would be nice as well)

[Daqin]

Bah, they'll still cower before me when I bring my Germanic hordes across the Rhine, just as they historically did. It is extended realism after all

[Caesar Augustus]

I've no idea mate. I know it was used as an execution method by Crassus as a deterrent against any other slaves getting revolutionary thoughts after Spartacus, but that was way later. Oh, and some "prophet" about 2010 years ago was apparently killed by crucifixion

[pannonian]

It's a Phoenician method of execution, and some Carthaginian commanders have been known to have been crucified, eg. the chap who declined to contest Messana, so perhaps the Romans could have caught on at some point. However, Polybius mentions the club as the means by which decimated soldiers were killed, and the axe is the other component of the fasces, so I'd presume they were the more typically Roman methods of execution.

[JaNuZ99]

I've no idea mate. I know it was used as an execution method by Crassus as a deterrent against any other slaves getting revolutionary thoughts after Spartacus, but that was way later. Oh, and some "prophet" about 2010 years ago was apparently killed by crucifixion

nice!! major i gave you plus rep for that one.

It's a Phoenician method of execution, and some Carthaginian commanders have been known to have been crucified, eg. the chap who declined to contest Messana, so perhaps the Romans could have caught on at some point. However, Polybius mentions the club as the means by which decimated soldiers were killed, and the axe is the other component of the fasces, so I'd presume they were the more typically Roman methods of execution.

well yes thats what got me wondering, since i already knew about the method used on a unit that routed (every tenth man IIRC) though i don't hear of that practice being used too much either, maybe if an important battle was lost and the unit survived (i wish i could do that sometimes... (though most of my routed units don't seem to survive long enough to get punished by me in later battles)

and strangulation was also something they liked to do as i recall.