How to use Numidia [+rage at people who argue Numidia sucks]

[roam]

Unforgettably I came back after a week to see a thread with deluded individuals informing me Numidia sucks and is worse than Gaul. Due to the absurdity of these statements I have decided it would be worth while creating a topic about it.

The basis will be 15k cwb. I don't play 10k often, and if we take the money higher than that, we end up realistically playing with Rome, Greece, Carthage and Seleucia--ie the expensive factions.

Numidia is a skirmish faction. It is a minor faction. Numidia is essentially the faction you take when you want a challenge but still maintain an excellent skirmishing ability. You can imagine it as a weaker version of Rome, but also cheaper.

Numidia has access to 8 missile units, with archers and slingers, Numidian legions, long shield cav, camels and numidian jav cav.

With this in mind you Should take:

6 archers
2 slingers
8 Cav
4 Legions

in almost all circumstances. That is the standard Numidian style. What cav you take varies from faction to faction. It is up to you to determine what you need, however the strategy is nearly always the same.

Shoot and Destroy

When playing numidia, you will get your ass handed to you if you go in and charge. You will rage and you will say Numidia sucks. Guess what? You suck.

Numidia is a patient faction. Imagine scythia without kick ass maidens and weaker archers. When playing Numidia, you need to win the archer war and then concentrate on separating the cav if necessary, before moving onto the weakest component in the game--the infrantry.

Cause as much damage as possible with arrows then surround and kill. Simple. Thats the general idea behind skirmish.

Anyone who expects Numidia to be able to win by charging numidian legions and their cav at praes and urbs is quite frankly retarded.
Learn to play before judging Numidia.

Now we have sorted out the general strategy and determined 99% of those who say Numidia sucks are noobs, there is the point of camels.

Camels get a +4 attack v cav and cav get a -2 attack v camels. Morale is not effected. Camels are only effective if they can engage the enemy cav. However this does mean that praes and catas, which are more expensive than num camels, can be raped by them. The fact Numidia has access to kick ass jav cav, decent light cav and most importantly camels, does give it a highly potent cav force. This of course is something the retarded numidia haters know nothing of.

To conclude, factions Numidia can quite easily beat (ie factions equal to or worse than):

Gaul
Spain
Germania
Thrace
Greece
Dacia
Scythia (playing numidian style is imo the best way to rape scythia with parthia and armenia)

Factions numidia can beat in the hands of a skilled player/ I've beaten with it vs decent players:

Rome (which according to some is equal to it)
Armenia
Seleucia
Pontus



Please refrain from posting more idiotic comments about Numidia sucking because the idiots who do that are Noobs. End of story.

[TheFoolOnTheHill]

nice guide

[roam]

Hm I have encountered another 'wtf' statement. Hence children i feel the need to discuss archers with you.

At 15k cwb, archers are rapage. Contrary to the popular belief of certain noobs archers will very often tip you the battle. Apart from the obvious advantages of making your opponent attack you, and being able to cause fear, it is foolish to belief that archers are there just to counter your opponents archers.

They are a lethal weapon. My Lancer army for macedon v carthage essentially revolves around me using archers correctly since royal pikes and lancer combo will not beat a sacred band 1v1. Those guys are lethal.

Archers therefore can tip the balance of infrantry in your favour and if you have archers in the endgame and your opponent doesn't they are a great asset, and cheap too.

Why are rush armies risky? No archers=potential to get shot up.
Why do noobs fails? Very often, at least partially, due to underration of archers,

The next idiot who claims noone takes cretans as macedon should seriously consider brain surgery...

Incidentally, whilst I am in the process of ranting let us consider that the Prince of Macedon got raped Thrace-Macedon by Varus. He is a good player, given, but any idiot who puts him 1. on a list should also consider brain surgery. I fail to see how it is possible to lose both numidia-macedon and thrace-macedon to the same guy and him not to be considered better than the loser...

[TheFoolOnTheHill]

Are you talking about ender??? Because h said that same thing multiple times
i can beat selucids with thrace

[roam]

Yes

But the rules state im not allowed to specifically shame people.

EDIT: I mean pom better than zeke, varus, ahille etc...what retarded nonsense is this...

PoM is not worthy of being on the list of top players purely because he uploads battles of him playing decent players under aliases.

Fact is most clanless suck, so most clannies wouldn't put the effort in. Essentially PoM beats someone who hasn't really tried and then makes fun of them...wouldn't be as bad if it weren't for the fact that he makes useless noobs think they are good...

[Magic_8_Ball]

k

[Ender Wiggin]

Not appreciating the thinly veiled allusions to me. You want to talk about what I said? Let's talk in the appropriate channels.



Anyway, I find this guide a bit flawed

It is only good against non-chariot factions, falls apart in the woods, and is only good against factions that suck at standard 15k cwb, except Germania.


I think Armenia could take this pretty easy.

4 units of heavy spears
6 units of archers
2 units of Eastern infantry
8 units of cav, likely 6 of Bedouin warriors and 2 of Cataphract archers.

[Magic_8_Ball]

Anyway, I find this guide a bit flawed

It is only good against non-chariot factions, falls apart in the woods, and is only good against factions that suck at standard 15k cwb, except Germania.

Roam is trying to say that Numidia is a very viable faction in many situations. If you were looking for a faction that works well in every situation, use Egypt every game. Your precious Seleucid and the "overpowered" Rome both have weaknesses and can be countered, but they still work well in certain situations. Rome loses to cataphract factions, but does that mean it's a bad faction? Seleucid gets destroyed by Brits, but does that make them awful?

What you're trying to do is point out that Numidia is bad because of various reasons, but then I could say that every faction is bad because of various reasons and situations. All factions have strengths and weaknesses (admittedly, some have more strengths and other have more weaknesses), but that doesn't mean they're all bad.

Numidia is considered a minor faction, but the logic you're using to say that it is a bad faction is very flawed. Nobody even plays in the woods, and it can stand up to a lot more than Germania. In fact, it can go toe to toe against Scythia.

I don't mean to be rude, but your Armenian army is also incredibly crap to the point where a good Numidian army would beat it.

[Ender Wiggin]

Roam is trying to say that Numidia is a very viable faction in many situations. If you were looking for a faction that works well in every situation, use Egypt every game. Your precious Seleucid and the "overpowered" Rome both have weaknesses and can be countered, but they still work well in certain situations. Rome loses to cataphract factions, but does that mean it's a bad faction? Seleucid gets destroyed by Brits, but does that make them awful?

What you're trying to do is point out that Numidia is bad because of various reasons, but then I could say that every faction is bad because of various reasons and situations. All factions have strengths and weaknesses (admittedly, some have more strengths and other have more weaknesses), but that doesn't mean they're all bad.

Numidia is considered a minor faction, but the logic you're using to say that it is a bad faction is very flawed. Nobody even plays in the woods, and it can stand up to a lot more than Germania. In fact, it can go toe to toe against Scythia.

I don't mean to be rude, but your Armenian army is also incredibly crap to the point where a good Numidian army would beat it.

Brits aren't the gods of Seleukia as you'd like us to believe. A few pikes and they lose effectiveness.

Egypt doesn't work well in Siege or Forest, btw.

Numidia is bad because it fails on big money, forest maps, hilly maps, siege maps, prippet marshes, and is only mildly effective against any faction that doesn't have some reputation for sucking (Everyone loves GCS and Germania, so there's some cases where numidia is very effective against commonly loved factions I guess)

[Magic_8_Ball]

Brits aren't the gods of Seleukia as you'd like us to believe. A few pikes and they lose effectiveness.

Egypt doesn't work well in Siege or Forest, btw.

For the last time, nobody plays competitively on a forest or a siege. You're making yourself seem like an idiot when you talk about those two kinds of maps.

And yes, Brits destroy Seleucid. Ever hear about Head Hurlers and Warlord Chariots? They'll tear apart any Seleucid pike and Chaz strike. If you don't fancy the idea about Brits beating Seleucid, then I could always say Egypt, Pontus, and possibly Scythia.

Finally, please admit to your mistakes for once. You just ignored me when I pointed out how awful your logic is and threw in two more useless tidbits.

USSR is mostly friendly egywhores but Mercs and GoTW are bragmasters who troll and brag but don't really succeed in the game.

I've actually seen many talented USSR and BiA members. They're simply Russian counterparts of the European clans. Sure, they use chariots a lot, but I find the other clans don't use them enough a lot of the times.

You're right about basically everything there, roam, but there's no need to be such a dick about it. Also, saying a clanned player will beat someone who isn't in a clan 95% of the time is simply incorrect.

Roam's dickhead level can go much higher than this.

[|Sith| Max]

Not appreciating the thinly veiled allusions to me. You want to talk about what I said? Let's talk in the appropriate channels.



Anyway, I find this guide a bit flawed

It is only good against non-chariot factions, falls apart in the woods, and is only good against factions that suck at standard 15k cwb, except Germania.


I think Armenia could take this pretty easy.

4 units of heavy spears
6 units of archers
2 units of Eastern infantry
8 units of cav, likely 6 of Bedouin warriors and 2 of Cataphract archers.

As a long time Armenia lover i am absolutely disgusted by your suggestion.
Instead, try
5 GG Cata
1 GG Arab Cav
2 GG Horse Archers
6 GG Archers
3 GG Heavy Spears.
So that you dont fail as much.

Brits aren't the gods of Seleukia as you'd like us to believe. A few pikes and they lose effectiveness.

Egypt doesn't work well in Siege or Forest, btw.

Numidia is bad because it fails on big money, forest maps, hilly maps, siege maps, prippet marshes, and is only mildly effective against any faction that doesn't have some reputation for sucking (Everyone loves GCS and Germania, so there's some cases where numidia is very effective against commonly loved factions I guess)

Both brits and egypt own seleucids in MP and 99% of all matches between normal players are on Grassy Flatlands on Clear Mid day. there are no hills or weather advantages.

You're right about basically everything there, roam, but there's no need to be such a dick about it. Also, saying a clanned player will beat someone who isn't in a clan 95% of the time is simply incorrect. I've never been in a clan, and I have beaten clanned players countless times, even some of the good ones that pop up here on the forum. I don't recall having played any of the very best ones, and since I don't play multiplayer often (barely ever anymore) partially because I prefer managing an empire etc, and partly because it's full of mouthy dickheads, I'm sure they would beat me. Still, on the whole your statement about clan less players is a huge exaggeration. Some people prefer not to be in a clan because they like to play 1v1s and therefore clans are largely pointless, as the best way to learn strategy is to play and beat people, and be beaten and learn from both, not to be taught it by someone. Also, they might simply have better things to do with their time.

Indeed. 95% is . its 98%. I apologize for the way that Roam delivered this truth as he was quite rude in the execution. While i did train him, he left our clan some months ago and started hanging around with a bloke named Slayer. Since then his manners degenerated. What he said is still true. Roam is a good player and can compete with the best.

In short, Ender was wrong and roam wasted his time proving it.

@Jim; to add to Maiars list, there are other clans like PARSA and KoTW ,KINGS and OTD who are really not that great and imo even below the clanless

Who are you to judge KINGS and OTD? Show a little respect for clans that were around before you in public.

Roam's dickhead level can go much higher than this.

Yes it can Jim. Trust me, i taught him

[DarthLazy]

Why is this person being taken seriously? He isarguing about scenarios which never even happen.

[roam]

1. Forests and anything not on the grassy flats gives unfair advantages to certain factions. Argueing Numidia < Germania because Germ is better in forests is quite stupid. That is obvious...barb factions get attack bonuses in such terrain and desert facs get disadvantages.

Grassy flats and other flat maps with no trees etc is the only fair terrain to fight on. By using forests etc as a reasonable argument you lose the shred of credibility you still have.

2. Brits is probably the 2nd best faction in the game, 2nd to egy and maybe pontus. Depends how you look at it. Firstly Brits is a pure skirmish faction or a rush faction. The only time I've played balanced is vs egy where hurlers are not that useful tbh.

A typical Brits army is

6 warlords
2 light chariots
6 g/g+3 exp slingers
6 g/b hurlers

You might have some money left. There is no inf.
Hurlers rape everything, even the sb. The most obvious counter for Brits is greece and carthage but a skilled brits player can still decimate the pike. Just because you have a few pike does not mean brits loses automatically. Very easy to lose as seleucia and pontus to brits if you use your chars badly.

3. The decent facs on big money are rome, rome, rome, rome, greece, carthage and seleucia.

Argueing Numidia fails on big money is likewise retarded. Using those other examples as reasons for numidia failing are likewise flawed. Why? Because they are not fair setups. Sorry, but no 1/2 decent clanny would ever play on any of those scenarios. Note the term decent, and tbh 95% of clanless would lose to the average clanny. Clanny players are nearly always preferable to a clanless.

4. Would you like me to post a guide where i tell you what to bring for every faction as Numidia?

Lets see:

My army for thrace:

6 g/g+1exp legs
6 g/g archers
2 g/g slingers
6 g/g num javcav

My army for fighting Scythia

6 g/g+1 exp camels
6 g/g archers
2 g/g long shield cav
2 g/g slingers
4 desert inf various upgrades

Maybe put some exp on archers or more on camels

Numidia is an excellent skirmish faction. It maintains excellent skirmishing abilities but also requires a certain degree of skill to use. Winning as Numidia always looks good. Numidia is like Thrace. Thrace is the faction used if you want to play a pike faction similar to macedon but not as good. It makes an excellent center in a 3v3 but it looks far better when you win as them.

Numidia would get raped by egy, true. So would seleucia. So would every other faction. Egy is the best faction and has the capacity to beat everything--even the so called counters. If you play 100 games v a very skilled egy player you should lose 100 times.

Contrary to your beliefs Numidia is an excellent faction at non noob games. I would also like to point out Germania and GCS are not that widely used by the clan community...and as i pointed out, the clan community are better players than the vast majority of non clannies. To me if you had credibility points you'd be at...-1000.

5. That armenian army is poor.

a)Cata archers...seriously...you'd pay 1230 for a ha?
Catas rape because of charge and the mace as a secondary weapon. Cata archers do not possess that advantage. 2 cata arch are worth approx 1/6 of your money at 15k...sorry they ain't that great.

b) Bedouin warriors...no just no. My numidian army would include better camels. Cataphracts would be far more effective.

c) G/G num legions would pretty effective vs a g/g spear. Your cav already sucks, so my cav has already ed them over. Bye bye spearmen.

d) 2 units of eastern infrantry...telling you why this is dumb is a waste of time. If you want cannon fodder take a peasant

[Maiar93]

I tried explaining it to him already. Seems like he's too stubborn to actually stop when he is clearly told that he's wrong. Trust Magic, ender. You seem like a total MP newbie who knows nothing about the game. Magic is a rtw multiplayer veteran who's been trained by one of the best players in RTW and who has read through a lot of MP theory.

[Maiar93]

Thanks for taking yar time Roam ^^

[roam]

Thanks for taking yar time Roam ^^

A combination of summer extended by about 8 weeks due to study leave and the fact i am having a rest day after my camping trip means I have nothing better to do.

EDIT: Incidentally...spain > Numidia...lmao...Numidia rapes spain

[TheJim]

You're right about basically everything there, roam, but there's no need to be such a dick about it. Also, saying a clanned player will beat someone who isn't in a clan 95% of the time is simply incorrect. I've never been in a clan, and I have beaten clanned players countless times, even some of the good ones that pop up here on the forum. I don't recall having played any of the very best ones, and since I don't play multiplayer often (barely ever anymore) partially because I prefer managing an empire etc, and partly because it's full of mouthy dickheads, I'm sure they would beat me. Still, on the whole your statement about clan less players is a huge exaggeration. Some people prefer not to be in a clan because they like to play 1v1s and therefore clans are largely pointless, as the best way to learn strategy is to play and beat people, and be beaten and learn from both, not to be taught it by someone. Also, they might simply have better things to do with their time.

[Maiar93]

There are noob clannies that are barely better than a regular clanless player of RTW. But what roam was talking about are the main clans: Sith, TAoW, HoS, Saeculum are the main good-quality clans. The next category usually contains of these clans: Mercs, USSR, GoTW. USSR is usually in the main category or in the secondary category, you could place them in both. Have you beaten any |Sith|3| or more member? Any TAoW member? Any HoS member? Any Saeculum member?

I'd also like to add that you speak of "beating players" the wrong way. Everyone can beat everyone, but the point is that you can't beat an overall better player more times than he beats you. And you may get a lucky victory or two, but it does not actually prove anything. If you have beaten any Mercs, USSR or GoTW member then you are one of the 95%. USSR is mostly friendly egywhores but Mercs and GoTW are bragmasters who troll and brag but don't really succeed in the game.

By the way, being in a clan has profits. For example HoS or TAoW, you have loads of top players in RTW to play against and to learn from. In Sith, you have a great training program and good staff plus some top players. Clanless players usually don't get to play against the top players, or anything over average, as they don't usually host 1v1 random opponent games or join them.

[TheJim]

There are noob clannies that are barely better than a regular clanless player of RTW. But what roam was talking about are the main clans: Sith, TAoW, HoS, Saeculum are the main good-quality clans. The next category usually contains of these clans: Mercs, USSR, GoTW. USSR is usually in the main category or in the secondary category, you could place them in both. Have you beaten any |Sith|3| or more member? Any TAoW member? Any HoS member? Any Saeculum member?

I'd also like to add that you speak of "beating players" the wrong way. Everyone can beat everyone, but the point is that you can't beat an overall better player more times than he beats you. And you may get a lucky victory or two, but it does not actually prove anything. If you have beaten any Mercs, USSR or GoTW member then you are one of the 95%. USSR is mostly friendly egywhores but Mercs and GoTW are bragmasters who troll and brag but don't really succeed in the game.

By the way, being in a clan has profits. For example HoS or TAoW, you have loads of top players in RTW to play against and to learn from. In Sith, you have a great training program and good staff plus some top players. Clanless players usually don't get to play against the top players, or anything over average, as they don't usually host 1v1 random opponent games or join them.

I've played and beaten members with "sith" as a tag, but since they are none of the ones I see here on the forum (at least not to my knowledge) I can't categorically say I've beaten them. TBH, when I (rarely) play multiplayer, the clans people are in don't bother me in the slightest and I rarely pay attention as I just play for fun. In my experience clanned players get much more sand in their vaginas when you beat them, and demand rematches, so the vast majority of the time, I actually will be beating them multiple times. Clanless players play generally for fun and are more likely just to say "gg" and move on without getting mouthy, abusive and overly competitive.

Now you are also changing Roam's definition by saying if I haven't beaten certain clans, then I am in the 95%. Well yeah, I never claimed to be as good as the best players, but my point was, being in a clan does not make you automatically more skilled than one who is not in a clan.

[Maiar93]

Now you are also changing Roam's definition by saying if I haven't beaten certain clans, then I am in the 95%. Well yeah, I never claimed to be as good as the best players, but my point was, being in a clan does not make you automatically more skilled than one who is not in a clan.

No, i didn't mean that. I was trying to point out that in general players in those clans are far more advanced than players in the second category, making beating them far more better achievement. We (sith) also have a lot of Retireds and Elders who still randomly play the game, not actually being good in it anymore as they have stopped playing it. But as others pointed out, there are certain categories where you can put clans into, like HoS, TAoW, Sith, Saeculum being in the top category etc. ascending down to "noob" clans who usually are worse than the regular clanless, and are stereotypically badmouthing 12-year olds.

Well, it's hard to find better than average players, for example, in Sith with |5| or lower rank, although there are of course handful. Better players usually reside in TAoW and HoS, and about all of them are at least good at the game.