Which faction do you think has the weakest roster?

[Livin La Vida Loca]

I've been playing as Armenia and held off on fighting Atropaktan, but their troops besides the kinsmen cavalry have been total pushovers, so I'll nominate them.

[PietrolEremita]

Medewi without a doubt. Or Saba if you count that nobles are very limited by being class 1 pop

[Vladdy Daddy]

Ptolemaic Egypt after the overhaul: one useless pike unit that almost every other Successor faction has, royal peltasts are the most useless unit around - there are better options for that price and population class, only one decent armored melee unit- the ptolemaic thorax soldiers, no more galatian armored soldiers to recruit - just naked spear guys that are ok, but nothing special, only one armored cavalry unit that's faction specific, no decent faction specific spearmen- just the able thorax spearmen every hellenistic faction has. They have decent archers though.
It's no wonder they get conquered by the Medewi before the Seleucids get to them when the AI is controlling them in the GC. Not exactly a weak roster, because you can build decent armies to steamroll everybody if you know what to recruit, but a rather disappointing, lackluster, flavourless one, especially for the only Successor faction that outlasted the others, especially the Seleucids with their extremely powerful roster. I would say that the Ptolemaic Egypt is the single faction that had a slightly better roster before the overhaul. Of course, I'm not talking in historical accuracy, but in gameplay terms.

[projectcorner]

Ptolemaic Egypt after the overhaul: one useless pike unit that almost every other Successor faction has, royal peltasts are the most useless unit around - there are better options for that price and population class, only one decent armored melee unit- the ptolemaic thorax soldiers, no more galatian armored soldiers to recruit - just naked spear guys that are ok, but nothing special, only one armored cavalry unit that's faction specific, no decent faction specific spearmen- just the able thorax spearmen every hellenistic faction has. They have decent archers though.
It's no wonder they get conquered by the Medewi before the Seleucids get to them when the AI is controlling them in the GC. Not exactly a weak roster, because you can build decent armies to steamroll everybody if you know what to recruit, but a rather disappointing, lackluster, flavourless one, especially for the only Successor faction that outlasted the others, especially the Seleucids with their extremely powerful roster. I would say that the Ptolemaic Egypt is the single faction that had a slightly better roster before the overhaul. Of course, I'm not talking in historical accuracy, but in gameplay terms.

It looks like galatian heavy swordsmen become general's bodyguard only. They used to be one of the best melee in the campaign！

[Vladdy Daddy]

It looks like galatian heavy swordsmen become general's bodyguard only. They used to be one of the best melee in the campaign！

Exactly! There's no longer any reason to build tier 4 barracks for Egypt. And there are other factions that for some reason can recruit great faction specific infantry troops only as general's bodyguards, thus 1 per army, which is sad and boring.

[projectcorner]

"Galatians were used as mercenaries by all the Diadochoi, but none used them as extensivly as the Ptolemaioi. The Ptolemaioi imported Galatai and other Keltoi and gave them land and peasants in the Fayuum depression and other areas in return for their services as reliable heavy infantry. Their equipment reflects their position and wealth within the Ptolemaic forces. They are armoured in good quality mail and wear light linen shirts and trousers. They are given bronze Attic-style Hellenic helmets replacing their old equipment, and they took to these rather well. They have excellent morale and discipline, since their whole purpose in life (other than turning a profit on their estates) is to serve the Ptolemaioi in war. They should be used as a heavy infantry force knowing that they outmatch most other eastern heavy infantry. They are impetuous but well trained and capable of keeping good order, their only serious weakness is cavalry.

Historically, Galatai were imported in such numbers as to have changed the ethnic makeup of some parts of the country. They often intermarried with the Hellenes and to this day the area around the Fayuum depression in Egypt is populated by fair skinned people with light eye colours. The Galatians were fanatically loyal to the Ptolemaioi, being used as a counterweight to the dangerous native troops whom they slaughtered wholesale during two rebellions. After the Roman conquest, these men joined the legions raised in Aigyptos, and spread themselves all over the near east. Theirs is a truly fascinating story that is not often told."

Above is the quote from EB's unit description of Galatikoi Kleruchoi. Personally it looks a bit questionable that they could not be recruited by Ptolemaioi in DEI, since they seem to come in large numbers.

[Vladdy Daddy]

I think they made this change (giving lesser galatian troops to Egypt) because playing as the Galatians in the GC would've seemed kinda meaningless, since their best troops could also be recruited by Egypt.

[Livin La Vida Loca]

I guess it's to keep Galatia worth playing, so that people don't just see them and think that Galatia's is just a fraction of the Egyptian roster, and so why not play as them instead? I'm certainly thinking of doing a galatia campaign after my armenia campaign, the galatian legions+ tectosages cav seem fantastic, and the galatian champions seem like a pretty unique spear unit, with their lighter armor and higher stats, but if I could get the same type of units just playing the Ptolemaioi, maybe it wouldn't be as enticing.

[Vladdy Daddy]

If only Egypt had some powerful AoR troops to make up for their lackluster roster...

[Vladdy Daddy]

Problem is that Galatia has almost the same roster as the Arverni and other gauls, which is logical, since they migrated from that area. The reason to play as Galatia in GC is the same as in the vanilla game: playing as gauls on another continent and without getting wiped out by the edetani or romans early.

[projectcorner]

I guess it's to keep Galatia worth playing, so that people don't just see them and think that Galatia's is just a fraction of the Egyptian roster, and so why not play as them instead? I'm certainly thinking of doing a galatia campaign after my armenia campaign, the galatian legions+ tectosages cav seem fantastic, and the galatian champions seem like a pretty unique spear unit, with their lighter armor and higher stats, but if I could get the same type of units just playing the Ptolemaioi, maybe it wouldn't be as enticing.

Geologically Galatia is much more challenging. Ptolemaioi has the one of the best startling location.

[Dresden]

I don't understand your point about Egypt - it has a unique roster and its always a major power in the campaigns I have seen.

[KAM 2150]

Only Seleucids have better roster than Ptolemaioi in case of Diadochi states. In other places I HEAVILY disagree, especialy when I read that Royal Peltasts are useless, which confirms you don't know how to use one of the strongest units in the mod. Not to mention that Ptolemaic roster is all about shock combat with plenty of hard hitting units, a bit opposite to tough but slow Seleucids.

[Livin La Vida Loca]

Only Seleucids have better roster than Ptolemaioi in case of Diadochi states. In other places I HEAVILY disagree, especialy when I read that Royal Peltasts are useless, which confirms you don't know how to use one of the strongest units in the mod. Not to mention that Ptolemaic roster is all about shock combat with plenty of hard hitting units, a bit opposite to tough but slow Seleucids.

Are royal pelts worth using over thorax swords? The difference in defense always seemed too big for me to justify. That said, I do agree that the Egypt roster is pretty damn good, although I wouldn't be opposed to the Medewi roster getting some love, if we're talking Egyptians.

[projectcorner]

I just want to add that I do not agree on Ptolemaioi having a weak roster. I'm only talking about the galatian heavy swordsmen.

[KAM 2150]

Stats are not everything. Formations like pikes work on completly different rules, even if stats suggest worse. Medewi will not get revamp, they weren't major military power, which makes them even more interesting to play.
History was not balanced and this is not the type of mod that everyone gets everything. You need to play to factional strengths and weaknesses. Some factions might have weaker units but also more manpower. Pure stat wise Rome would be a weak faction but due to other factors they are strong. If you have a faction like Medewi and you play it like a Greek faction, you will not get best results, same with Iberians, but you have much more posibilities in shock combat etc. There is no universal way to play all factions.

[KYREAPER]

Stats are not everything. Formations like pikes wor on completly different rules, even if stats suggest worse. Medewi will not get revamp, they weren't major military power, which makes them even more interesting to play.
History was not balanced and this is no the type of mod that everyone gets everything. You need to play to factional strengths and weaknesses. Some factions might have weaker units but also more manpower. Pure stat wise Rome would be a weak faction but due to other factors they are strong. If you have a faction like Medewi and you play it like a Greek faction, you will not get best results, same with Iberians, but you have much more posibilities in shock combat etc. There is no universal way to play all factions.

And I LOVE YOU and yall's mod for this...
You guys are a blessing for taking this approach. Thank you.

[Livin La Vida Loca]

Stats are not everything. Formations like pikes work on completly different rules, even if stats suggest worse. Medewi will not get revamp, they weren't major military power, which makes them even more interesting to play.
History was not balanced and this is not the type of mod that everyone gets everything. You need to play to factional strengths and weaknesses. Some factions might have weaker units but also more manpower. Pure stat wise Rome would be a weak faction but due to other factors they are strong. If you have a faction like Medewi and you play it like a Greek faction, you will not get best results, same with Iberians, but you have much more posibilities in shock combat etc. There is no universal way to play all factions.

Fair enough, I just wasn't sure if they hadn't been touched on yet because of time constraints, but they're in a finished, historically accurate state, then hell yeah I'm gonna play them. Thanks for the reply man!!

[Vladdy Daddy]

I'm sorry if I offended anyone with my opinion (that was never my intention, especially when I'm a great fan of DeI), but I never said Ptolemaic Egypt roster was weak, just lackluster when compared to the other Successor factions. I expected better from the overhaul. It just doesn't have the same specific flavour as before, when you could recruit galatian heavy swordsmen. Please read again what I've initially wrote. They have many pikes (4 or 5 types, including the short pikes), but not enough cavalry and heavy melee. Sure, they have great starting location, nobody ever disputed that. We were talking strictly about the rosters. I, for one, don't see much use of the royal peltasts when compared to thorax swordsmen in price, stats and population pool recruitment. I can recruit regular peltasts and pepper the enemy just as well. But it's just an opinion and I will gladly alter it if you'll bring me a strong argument and show me exactly what is the undeniable, irreplaceable role of the royal peltasts in a Hellenistic army. The same goes for the pike peltast units you've introduced at the cost of the same eugeneis first class population. Yeah, shorter pikes, less armour, same 1st class population recruitment pool, no faction specific flavour as other units. As you can see, I'm talking exclusively about their campaign worth, not multiplayer custom battles and such.

And why on earth would you restrict some (not all of them) great looking faction specific elite units to just general bodyguards? Why would you strip the fun and of playing a specific faction like that? You could've limited them to 2 or 3 per stack or put some recruitment caps to them (only 4 or 6 could be recruited in the GC or something along those lines), but do not simply relegate them exclusively to general's bodyguard. That's a step backwards even for Empire Total War style of recruitment! It's simply a waste of good units you yourselves worked on and that's a real shame, again, in my humble opinion.

[Dresden]

It seems to me like you miss that one unit and are judging the entire overhaul on that one unit change (galatian swordsmen). They have quite a few new settler units, have unique population requirements for others and have a special culture system for the faction. They still get that unit as a bodyguard and also have Galatian swords as factional mercenaries in the campaign.