Factions/Play styles you've never used.

[Rittsy]

Hello,

I was just playing Rome Total War and realised that despite having the game since release, modding the life out of it and spending hundreds of hours playing it, the factions I choose and my play-style haven't really changed. This got me thinking about Rome II and for some reason playing as Parthia seemed really appealing.

I usually use infantry heavy armies, primarily Roman, and the desire to play as a cavalry/missile based faction seemingly came out of the blue. This got me thinking, based on what you have seen of the game, are there any factions or play-styles you would have never really considered that you can't wait to try out in Rome II?

[Bearnation54]

I almost always use heavy infantry based armies, I never liked skirmesher armies or Calvary based Armies, although I do keep some calavry and ranged units to support my armies

[ToonTotalWar]

Likewise I have no appeal to play the likes of Scythia in Rome 2 (still a locked faction for now) but parthia does appeal especially if they have there famed archer units!

[blackheartz]

I dislike light infantry units and skirmishers quite a lot and I do not see myself playing as a faction that relies primarily on them. Full cataphract stacks are coming in my Parthia playthrough .

Edit: Up until now I also did not bother with navies, except from when transport was necessary or a little defense here and there. I can see me going for naval dominance in R2 though.

[Gelston]

In Shogun FOTS I've tried two play styles. One with heavy gunpowder, and the other with no gunpowder at all. Both were extremely viable, and I hope with Rome 2 they continue this trend where you don't have to morph into one type of play.

[kikokyle]

In Rome I never used barbarians, and often in Rome, M2, and Shogun 2 I've never used much skirmish troops.

[♠ Thomas Cochrane ♠]

Don't use skirmishers much, unless they're right behind my heavy infantry pouring missiles onto already engaged enemies. As for the enemy, I suffer from seeing any light infantry as my excuse to charge cavalry in. not being an idiot though, I don't tend to hang around too long with them so their spears can cut my horsies up.

[Jester]

i changed my overall gamestyle because the TW games have changed. in Medieval2 it was a good strategy to steamroll over the campaign map. a very bad idea in Shogun2 though

on the battlefield, it depends on the faction, but i always try to have a good mix of units.

[Kinjo]

I can't say there isn't much I haven't tried, but the play style I liked the least in RTW was the barbarian factions. Hopefully they will be more interesting in Rome II and I can become High King of the Britons or something cool like that when I unite Britannia as the Iceni.

[Marcus Claudius Marcellus]

In the previous Rome I always played Rome or occasionally Macedon. Looking forward to playing Pontus in RII as I just finished a book about Mithridates VI. Also I have to say the Parthian's look pretty hard.

[Raikou]

I always played Romans and Carthaginians. Can't remember trying anything else but I do look forward to trying Macedon and the Barbarian tribes for sure

[Aymer de Valence]

I've never found much use for peltasts and skirmishers outfield. They either seem to get shot to death by archers or only manage to get one volley of javelins before being charged by the enemy. In sieges however I find them incredibly useful both defending and attacking

[Leggy]

My armies always consists of A General, Four heavy infantry, four ranged, four heavy cavalry and three siege equipment.

[Epic28]

My armies always consists of A General, Four heavy infantry, four ranged, four heavy cavalry and three siege equipment.

Do you never make a full stacked army?

[Lavrentivs]

I've always been good with my use of heavy infantry and skirmishers, but (in true stereotypical Roman style) have always been terrible with my cavalry.

"Oh wow, look at my infantry bursting through the centre! Oh damn, I forgot about my cavalry and now they're being attacked by spearmen "

[Dude with the Food]

I used to prefer heavy spearmen with a couple of archers/cavalry but I think now it'll be thirds between cavalry, infantry and archers.

[General David]

I've barely used Carthage while playing RTW, but given the level of attention CA has put on it (with a selection of 3 families with varying traits) I'll probably give them at least a couple of runs.

As for my aversion to Barbarian factions, that will probably not change as I prefer the organized armies of the Mediterranean.

[Luzspit]

If think I've tried almost every style (on different games)
But to use a heavy cav army is not my favourite.

I played as Takeda not so long ago trying to use their bonuses. The campaign was fun but I'm not good playing with too many cav.

[a tw player]

Likewise, my armies are always exactly the same it seems whichever game I play: 1x General, 4x support units (javelin/archers), 4x cavalry, 10x infantry (split into differing types depending on game/faction), 1x field artillery/siege weapon/empty space. Of course in NTW/FOTS army composition does vary.

Plan is always the same, draw 6x infantry in a straight forward line to absorb the enemy forces, position support units behind this line to thin enemy lines upon their approach, engage enemy bulk forces with my 4x infantry reserve being fed in to support the line when required, 2x cav on both flank target enemy cav/support units and flank the enemy bulk, hitting them from the rear. Generally, enemy forces become surrounded, rout, and a slaughter ensues. Sadly no AI can ever deal with this and every single battle becomes the same...Hoping Rome 2 offers more of a challenge!

[DogSoldierSPQR]

I never used the horse-dominated factions. I never really played as the barbarians either, except for the Cimbri in Roma Surrectum 2 and I only stuck because of the war cries haha
Other than that, nothing interests me except for the Greeks and Romans, mostly Romans obviously.