The most challenging factions for Veteran players.

[AntiDragon4185]

As much as I like this game, and as challenging as it is to micro-manage a sprawling empire, I can’t help but feel a little bored sometimes. Whenever I pick England in the Grand Campaign, I just know that I will dominate the map. Even on VeryHard/VeryHard, all the other factions can do is slow me down.

Now, I still love this game, but I was wondering what Factions are best suited for experienced players who want victory to be uncertain.

Here are my impressions of the factions with the most inherent difficulty.
Remember, in this case, a poor unit roster is actually preferable.


Classic Campaign
-H.R.E.
(Surrounded by many other factions, all catholic)
(On the verge of excommunication at the start)
(Taking Rome is a long campaign goal: Excommunication inevitable)
(Generic units until late game)
(Even late game units are lackluster)
(No clear access to ports)
-Turks
(Poor siege units at start; consolidation difficult)
(Right in the path of Mongols/Timurids)
(Crusades NEVER STOP COMING)

Britannia
-Norway
(Terrible economy)
(Army upkeep is devastating; reinforcements make it worse)
(Long campaign goals demand warring with everyone)

Crusades
-Turks (Again)
(Moderate economy, still worse than others)
(Divided kingdom is vulnerable)
(No buffer against Mongols)
(Fighting crusaders requires skill over brute force)

Americas
-Tlaxcalans
(No gunpowder or Calvary, and no way to attain them)
(Unit roster slightly worse than neighbors [No Coyote priests/arrow warriors, Archers fewer in number])
(Cannot consolidate before attacking Aztecs, like Tarascans)
(Cannot replace units as fast as Aztecs)
(Need to fight for every city Aztecs already own at start)
(No warpath)
(Spanish/Tarascans hit you the moment you finish the Aztecs)
-Chichimec
(?Poor economy?)
(No warpath)
(Need to pick fights with far-off factions to get gunpowder/horses)
(Need to fight through multiple native factions just to reach foreigners for guns/horses.)
(Unit roster demands finesse and tactics over brute force of southern natives.)

Teutonic
-Teutonic order
(??? No Cities ??? [What was Creative Assembly’s rationale behind patching this handicap out?])
(High Catholic Religion required for best infantry/Calvary; spearmen can only do so much.)
(Long campaign goals require you to piss off everyone else.)
(Borders are more exposed than any other faction. Especially problematic with Long campaign goals.)
(Units have high upkeep + provinces provide poor income.)
To summarize, The Teutonic Order needs a huge number of units to defend themselves from their neighbors, much less conquer them, but can only field a limited number of units to do so.
-Lithuania (Pure Pagan)
(No large cities = no high tier buildings)
(No high end guilds)
(No Hanseatic liege)
(Also over exposed, like Teutonic order.)
(No gunpowder at all)

Again, these are just my theories. I don’t know if these really are the most difficult in practice.

[Incredible Bulk]

Hi and welcome, thank you for your post we will help you out as best as we can

[AntiDragon4185]

I’m sorry; I think I made a mistake. When I tried to submit this thread, I kept getting a message that said “Post Denied”, so after trying several times, I realized that all my attempts HAD been posted after all. Could someone fill me in on how to delete unwanted threads, or what that “Post Denied” message was all about?

[Aeratus]

The factions you listed aren't particularly challenging, actually. Instead, I would consider the following to be "hard" factions:

Rebels (Britannia): The smallest rebel faction in any of the official campaigns. Very little resources and forces isolated across islands vulnerable to Norway. This is the one of the most challenging faction in the official campaigns.

Norway (Teutonic): Under the default configuration, Norway is unable to train any units. Pretty big handicap (lol). This means that you'll have to rely on family members and mercenaries. Fortunately, family members are so overpowered that you can still win.

Mongols (Teutonic): Although not as difficult, the negative 2500 king's purse means that your economy is weak in the beginning. This gives a balanced challenge.

Sweden (i.e., Teutonic rebels) are also pretty fun, although not as difficult as Britannia rebels, because Norway is always a sitting duck.

Americas campaign rebels also seems interesting, since you'll eventually have to fight a lot of spam armies that have better troops than what you have. This might be a hard campaign, but I have never tried it.

[Highlander of Scotland]

yep also what about stainless steel scotland and kwhazarims. Also the moors are quite hard because everyone will attack you

[Shroomicide]

Another challenging thing to do is playing as the Mongols or especially the Timurids in the base game. It takes a bit of patience, but trying to capture the whole world with no base economy and level 5 cities and castles everywhere is very challenging.

[Vampiresbane]

...but I was wondering what Factions are best suited for experienced players who want victory to be uncertain.

Some of the above posters really love their rebel and not-immediately-playable-without-modding factions.

I'll comment more on the factions you did mention because you can play them right out of the box.

Classic Campaign
-H.R.E.
(Surrounded by many other factions, all catholic)
(On the verge of excommunication at the start)
(Taking Rome is a long campaign goal: Excommunication inevitable)
(Generic units until late game)
(Even late game units are lackluster)
(No clear access to ports)

First 20 turns or so is very hard. But once you consilidate, take Venice, and bribe the Pope you're really home free. Things really start looking up when Venice/Milan get excommunicated, which will happen if you let them attack you. Turn 20+ or so, life is super easy, even late game despite not getting the best gunners or cannon (your military will be so far ahead of everyone's it won't matter).

-Turks
(Poor siege units at start; consolidation difficult)
(Right in the path of Mongols/Timurids)
(Crusades NEVER STOP COMING)

Definitely pretty hard in vanilla. It can be a tad easier if you're ruthless in preparations for the Mongols, attack them early and make sure you get the upper level archers that lay spikes. Consolidation is only mildly hard. Crusades can be stopped or slowed by keeping relations with the Pope high.

Britannia
-Norway
(Terrible economy)
(Army upkeep is devastating; reinforcements make it worse)
(Long campaign goals demand warring with everyone)

I've played this. You're not kidding about army upkeep putting the hurt on this kingdom, but it's probably because CA is trying to force you to act like a raiding kingdom. And raiding you will do. It's the bread and butter of these guys and it's the only way I could win.

Crusades
-Turks (Again)
(Moderate economy, still worse than others)
(Divided kingdom is vulnerable)
(No buffer against Mongols)
(Fighting crusaders requires skill over brute force)

Consolidation is much harder in the Crusades xpac. If you're lucky though, fight battles early on with the Principality of Antioch and kill their King and Prince. I've killed off the entire faction in less than 10 turns by focusing on fighting their generals. Once they're gone, Asia Minor and Antioch regions are much easier to take. Then the world is your oyster. Overall easier and harder in different ways than the vanilla version of the Turks. Oh and you don't get gunpowder (least I don't think you do) in the xpac version.

Americas
-Tlaxcalans
(No gunpowder or Calvary, and no way to attain them)
(Unit roster slightly worse than neighbors [No Coyote priests/arrow warriors, Archers fewer in number])
(Cannot consolidate before attacking Aztecs, like Tarascans)
(Cannot replace units as fast as Aztecs)
(Need to fight for every city Aztecs already own at start)
(No warpath)
(Spanish/Tarascans hit you the moment you finish the Aztecs)
-Chichimec
(?Poor economy?)
(No warpath)
(Need to pick fights with far-off factions to get gunpowder/horses)
(Need to fight through multiple native factions just to reach foreigners for guns/horses.)
(Unit roster demands finesse and tactics over brute force of southern natives.)

I played as a similar faction as the chichimecs that adopted tech, but had access to warpath. Warpath was almost necessary. Fighting as the Tlaxcalans or Chichmecs will probably be difficult, but I imagine since Chichmecs get cavalry sooner or later, they're easier in the end though Tlaxcalans will have a much better economy early on.

Teutonic
-Teutonic order
(??? No Cities ??? [What was Creative Assembly’s rationale behind patching this handicap out?])
(High Catholic Religion required for best infantry/Calvary; spearmen can only do so much.)
(Long campaign goals require you to piss off everyone else.)
(Borders are more exposed than any other faction. Especially problematic with Long campaign goals.)
(Units have high upkeep + provinces provide poor income.)
To summarize, The Teutonic Order needs a huge number of units to defend themselves from their neighbors, much less conquer them, but can only field a limited number of units to do so.

Can be hard. The no Cities thing does make sense at least on paper since they were a military order and organizing civic construction wasn't exactly their thing. Needless to say, I could only win as these guys if I bum rushed Lithuania. Otherwise if I didn't I basically ended up at war with almost EVERY single other faction on the map and my faction was wittled down into nothing.

-Lithuania (Pure Pagan)
(No large cities = no high tier buildings)
(No high end guilds)
(No Hanseatic liege)
(Also over exposed, like Teutonic order.)
(No gunpowder at all)

I have to admit I've never won with this faction. I played once and eventually gave up. Being mostly missle cavalry esque, but no great economy to start off with was pretty difficult considering the upkeep costs of cavalry. I haven't tried since, but one of these days I'll be going back to give it another shot. I may have to try a raiding style with these guys since trying to go toe to toe with the Teutonics on Vh/Vh is not a pretty picture.

Overall a lot of your choices are hard, but I'd say Lithuania, Chichimec, or the Tlaxcalans will be the hardest for you. If you want more of a regular European faction, I'd say the Teutonic Knights are the next hardest.

[Comrade Roboto]

In vanilla, the hardest faction would be the rebels. Expect to be sieged multiple times every turn!

[Shroomicide]

In vanilla, the hardest faction would be the rebels. Expect to be sieged multiple times every turn!

I can vouch for this. It's a ton of fun, too!

[Comrade Roboto]

I can vouch for this. It's a ton of fun, too!

I once did for the hell of it. I went FUUUUU- after five minutes and quit. True story.

[Aeratus]

I'll comment more on the factions you did mention because you can play them right out of the box.

If limited to conventional factions, then I'd say Teutonic Order. They require more planning than the normal faction due to difficulty in finances. In addition, most units are overpriced.

Lithuania is more of a conventional faction compared to the Teutonic Order. Lithuania has very strong infantry, including the Samogitian Axemen which is very easily to build and can go toe to toe against any Teutonic infantry.

[AntiDragon4185]

I did some research into how to play the rebels and other non-conventional factions mentioned above.
For those who are having difficulty, this should help.
http://www.twcenter.net/wiki/HowTo:Unlock_All_Factions

F.Y.I. I haven’t tested it myself, so it might be wise to make a backup for your game before you start mucking around with how it's meant to function. Still, it should give good experience for basic modding, and the new content is certainly worth the risk.

P.S. Thank you all for all your advice thus far.

[Shroomicide]

In reply to AntiDragon, here's a post on how to play as truly unplayable factions such as the Mongols or Timurids : http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=584521

[Kaiser Nonsense]

Welcome to the forums!

If you are looking for a challenge and lots of fun, I'd recommend you try the mod Stainless Steel, it's way harder than vanilla and a way new experience on Medieval 2, you absolutely need to learn how to play again.

[AntiDragon4185]

@Shroomicide
Thanks for the link! I probably wouldn't have found it otherwise; most of the sources I checked said it was outright impossible to play as Mongols/Timurids

Welcome to the forums!

If you are looking for a challenge and lots of fun, I'd recommend you try the mod Stainless Steel, it's way harder than vanilla and a way new experience on Medieval 2, you absolutely need to learn how to play again.

Thank you for the welcome.
I've heard of Stainless Steel, but I thought the changes had more to do with style/depth/historical accuracy. I wasn't aware that the gameplay itself was so radically different.

Unfortunately, I'm a Steam user, and I've heard that can be a big problem.
After doing some research, I’ve read NoMercy88’s solution to this, (http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?p=7808159#post7808159) but I’m concerned that I might damage or lose the Original game or the Kingdoms Expansion by doing so. Still, nothing ventured, nothing gained...

[shikaka]

Thank you for the welcome.
I've heard of Stainless Steel, but I thought the changes had more to do with style/depth/historical accuracy. I wasn't aware that the gameplay itself was so radically different.

Unfortunately, I'm a Steam user, and I've heard that can be a big problem.
After doing some research, I’ve read NoMercy88’s solution to this, (http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?p=7808159#post7808159) but I’m concerned that I might damage or lose the Original game or the Kingdoms Expansion by doing so. Still, nothing ventured, nothing gained...

Stainless steel is mostly a gameplay+eye candy mod, not historical really. If you want a challenge it is good tho, but be prepared that it is has some downsides (like long turn times and endless - so boring - AI stacks).

As for mods, I have a steam-less version, and it is possible to drag and drop teh whole Medieval 2 folder. (I actually have 4 copies now: the original install as a backup, 1 for Broken Crescent, 1 for Thera, and 1 Chivalry II)



As for most challenging... I think Byzantium. You have bad militia, you don't get a charger cavalry until level 4 stables, and infantry is bad all round. Most of the time you will have to use peasant/militia archers with spear militia and a few heavy infantry. Still managable of course, if you practice with basic horse archers against heavy inf and heavy cavalry.

[Kaiser Nonsense]

...but be prepared that it is has some downsides (like long turn times and endless - so boring - AI stacks)

I don't understand why you people complain so much about the turns, they are fast here, perhaps it's your computer that needs a bit of improving huh?

On vanilla turns change in 3 seconds, SS takes like 15, 20 seconds.

[Aeratus]

Stainless steel significantly increases the difficulty of the game.

But people were still not satisfied, so there are additional sub-mods like BGR which further increase difficulty by adding features like supply lines and drastic limitations on how often you can recruit units.

[UndrState]

I've seen a few of these kinds of posts lately, with people looking for challenges - the questions I have for the poster (and people generally), is how high is your reputation and the chivalry of your family members in these games you are playing? Seems to me that maintaining a high reputation and reaching a long campagne's goals are tough, as is entering only into "Honorable" battles, you know where the odds are against you. Aren't these built in, roleplaying choices there precisely to make the game more challenging?

[AntiDragon4185]

I've seen a few of these kinds of posts lately, with people looking for challenges - the questions I have for the poster (and people generally), is how high is your reputation and the chivalry of your family members in these games you are playing? Seems to me that maintaining a high reputation and reaching a long campagne's goals are tough, as is entering only into "Honorable" battles, you know where the odds are against you. Aren't these built in, roleplaying choices there precisely to make the game more challenging?

You make an excellent point; self imposed challenges are often the best, especialy if the game itself recognizes such choices.

That said, In regards to your reputation/chivalry suggestion, I was under the impression that both dread/chivalry and good/bad reputation were equally viable, with the same number of pros and cons inherent in either path. Are you saying it's harder to be Chivalric than it is to be Dreadful?

As for reputation, on VeryHardDifficulty it lowers each turn automatically, so everyone is going to hate you regardless of your conduct. In my experience, trying to keep a high reputation isn’t just challenging, it’s outright futile… but again, that’s only my experience.