Which Hellenistic state you prefer and why?

[neoptolemos]

Suppose that CA will include all the Hellenistic states in the game with a fairly accurate manner.
Which of these states will be your choice as a faction to play and why?
What strengths and weaknesses do you think they should have?

1.Achaean League including Athens
2.Aitolian League
3.Sparta
4.Epirus
5.Macedon
6.Rhodes
7.Pergamum
8.Seleucids
9.Ptolemies
10.Pontus (due to the great number of Greek colonies)

Edit: they are not includeδ in the poll but you can drop your opinion for Bactria, Massalia, Italiot Greeks and Syracuse as well

Cheers

Pics removed due to copyright reasons
~The Holy Pilgrim

[Bethencourt]

Seleucids. Have huge land (strength) and very much extended borders (weakness). Unbalanced land development. Religion problems. Good comunications inherited from Persians. Cultural flexibility so extended tech tree. Commercial power.

1.Achaean League including Athens
2.Aitolian League
3.Sparta

No much to say, just a shadow of what they were in the past.


4.Epirus. Good moral army, elephants. Good general.

6.Rhodes Great fleet and commercial power.

What about Syracuse and Magna Grecia?

[Kinjo]

Ptolemies, I like their location and trade potential.

[bartozer]

It's all about the Seleucids for me. I don't even know why I just liked them before I even learnt anything about them. Besides that I'll go with anything in Greece, Sparta, Athens etc.

[John ''True Grit'' Wayne]

SPARTA and Athens but mainly SPARTA :sparta::sparta:

[DarthShizNit]

The Seleucids so I can pick a fight with everybody . That an a FANTASTIC unit selection that no other faction save the Eastern Roman Empire in BI had.

[Manuel I Komnenos]

Seleucids. A true Empire by every meaning. Huge, prosperous and rich cities, military colonies, vast recruitment pool of Greek/Macedonian and foreign soldiers.

[clone]

Seleucids. A true Empire by every meaning. Huge, prosperous and rich cities, military colonies, vast recruitment pool of Greek/Macedonian and foreign soldiers.

in theory its good but i cannot understand how you can play with so large nations.for me its a nightmare not only the difficulty but the fact that you will have to fight 4 enemies and more at the same time.i prefer small nations(one city if possible) like sparta

[Manuel I Komnenos]

in theory its good but i cannot understand how you can play with so large nations.for me its a nightmare not only the difficulty but the fact that you will have to fight 4 enemies and more at the same time.i prefer small nations(one city if possible) like sparta

Playing the Seleucids in EB on hard settings was a real pain but if you managed to stabilize the frontiers and grew your economy, it was rewarding as you could field large, quality armies and strike wherever you wished.

[DarthShizNit]

How to win as the seleucids (in vanilla anyway). Launch an all out attack on the parthians with what few units you have, drawing the king and that stack with the 2 cataphracts in it. Build a ton of milita cav, snipe the general, retreat and then bribe the stack with those lovely cataphracts. Proccede to win.

[Manojlo]

Somehow I'm late for poll but Rhodes would be my choice and it's because I love Islands

[neoptolemos]

Yep Selecids would have some boys like these

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[Slaxx Hatmen]

Epirus and Pergamon for me. I like the underdogs plus they both have interesting locations and military options.

Yep Selecids would have some boys like these

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Is that one of the Kennedy brothers on the right?

[Zipzopdippidybopbop]

Seleucids; since RTW1 I've always found them so exotic and Eastern!

Indeed, I've become so fascinated by them that (alongside the original Antigonid Kingdom) I aim to study them in depth at my masters level in university =P

[Bethencourt]

What about Syracuse and Magna Grecia? Massalia?

[neoptolemos]

What about Syracuse and Magna Grecia? Massalia?

Hmm i was thinking about the Hellenistic world in the East and left these Westerners out of focus..

Can anyone edit the poll and add these three?
Mods please....

Macedon...it would be a good role play.Take the once mighty home of Alexander,and try to restore his once great empire.But in my opinion it would be harder than Alexander s Macedonia setup,because of the multitude of states.

Indeed that's a good point!!!

[Andreius Pretorianus]

Macedon...it would be a good role play.Take the once mighty home of Alexander,and try to restore his once great empire.But in my opinion it would be harder than Alexander s Macedonia setup,because of the multitude of states.

[Xanthippus of Sparta]

Seleucids; In TW the diversity of unit types, the different geographic areas to fight in, and the challenge of the campaign appeal to me.

I also really enjoy playing as Pontus, as it's very fun to build up a tiny kingdom. Maybe if Pergamon is in RTW2 they will be like this as well.

The Ptolemies are interesting in terms of units but their geographic position is so strong (by Ptolemy I's historical design) that their campaign was never hard in RTR or EB I.

Sparta could be interesting in RTW2 if they are an independent faction. You would be struggling to hold the Pelopennese against the Macedonians, Aetolians, and Achaeans.

[karamazovmm]

what about bactria? that would be my choice, since they have a interesting roost, not to mention it will be more interesting to avoid the Mediterranean sea.

[Xanthippus of Sparta]

what about bactria? that would be my choice, since they have a interesting roost, not to mention it will be more interesting to avoid the Mediterranean sea.

Good call, if they are in RTW2.

When they were first added to RTR, I played a long campaign with them. However, being far from the Mediterranean isn't always a good thing.