Carthage, Oversized Garrisons vs Defensive Armies

[RodriguesSting]

So, during my first Carthage game to wash off the rust, I did my usual plan of taking Sicily entirely first and waiting for the Romans to peace out. That works, but then the issue that they would constantly contest Corsica with me on lightning attacks became evident. As I had invested quite a bit on the island, including a FM governor, having to retake it every 10-20 turns was a bit of a pain in the ass.

So, current game. I decided to not take Messina this time, to avoid a war with the Romans, and would just face off whatever the Marmetines would throw me there in exchange of some strategic peace. Turns out, they didn't throw a whole lot. Apparently I was mistaken and they don't actually seem to spawn new armies unlike Syracuse. Still, my plan, this time, was to have Garrisons in all settlements just to boost public order (always 60%, even if it ended up quite large - I would treat as a resource I could tap in times of crisis), and to have a full stack cheap army (Libyan-Phoenician skirmishers, infantry, and cavalry) with some ships for quick transport in each possibly theater. That left me with three major possibilities: Africa/Homeland, Sicily, and Iberia. So far, I managed to squeeze out two of these armies, and for now I am treating my expansion army (higher quality units all around, including elephants and siege weapons) as the African army for now. The two weaker armies are both lead by FM that can be elected as War Leaders, to capitalize on the possibility of reaction against invasions.

That lead to a problem, though, because I saw one of such armies *desert*right in my homeland while doing some rebel hunting. The general had 3 Loyalty, and all the old farts (starting FL and FH) died recently, so my authority was really in the (specially as I can't chose my heir effectively). So now, while these defensive armies might be a good call for any faction, maybe I should at least reconsider the generals for Carthage, and prioritize someone with very high loyalty rather than any actual military potential.

So, any thoughts or suggestions on the matter?

[Satapatiš]

I always prioritize loyalty over good military skills. It's easier to train a FM or a client ruler into a passable general than to make them loyal. Talentless sycophants are the best starting material.

[Lusitanio]

If you have two generals in the same stack they will not rebel, or also spies with the army.

[Rad]

I had FMs rebel even with spies in the army
It's less likely, but it can happen.

[BailianSteel]

So, during my first Carthage game to wash off the rust, I did my usual plan of taking Sicily entirely first and waiting for the Romans to peace out. That works, but then the issue that they would constantly contest Corsica with me on lightning attacks became evident. As I had invested quite a bit on the island, including a FM governor, having to retake it every 10-20 turns was a bit of a pain in the ass.

So, current game. I decided to not take Messina this time, to avoid a war with the Romans, and would just face off whatever the Marmetines would throw me there in exchange of some strategic peace. Turns out, they didn't throw a whole lot. Apparently I was mistaken and they don't actually seem to spawn new armies unlike Syracuse. Still, my plan, this time, was to have Garrisons in all settlements just to boost public order (always 60%, even if it ended up quite large - I would treat as a resource I could tap in times of crisis), and to have a full stack cheap army (Libyan-Phoenician skirmishers, infantry, and cavalry) with some ships for quick transport in each possibly theater. That left me with three major possibilities: Africa/Homeland, Sicily, and Iberia. So far, I managed to squeeze out two of these armies, and for now I am treating my expansion army (higher quality units all around, including elephants and siege weapons) as the African army for now. The two weaker armies are both lead by FM that can be elected as War Leaders, to capitalize on the possibility of reaction against invasions.

That lead to a problem, though, because I saw one of such armies *desert*right in my homeland while doing some rebel hunting. The general had 3 Loyalty, and all the old farts (starting FL and FH) died recently, so my authority was really in the (specially as I can't chose my heir effectively). So now, while these defensive armies might be a good call for any faction, maybe I should at least reconsider the generals for Carthage, and prioritize someone with very high loyalty rather than any actual military potential.

So, any thoughts or suggestions on the matter?

Why not have both? My own preferred solution is to designate one "Provincial Capital" with an Oversized Garrison, and use that for my Defensive Army.

In the Qarthadastim homeland I usually keep a near full-stack of FMs there for election role-playing (though I didn't bother moving most officers to anywhere other than my core territories,) so garrisoning wasn't an issue. Any time somebody tries to raid the New City or the nearby Qarts, I can immediately trample them with a dozen elite cavalry units.

Anyways, I'd go with Lusitanio's suggestion of several generals. I do strive to do this and RP the non-Commander FMs as deputy officers, as plenty of famous historical figures served as lesser commanders before taking on the big leagues. I'd be more enthusiastic about it if it could count towards the "Blooded" trait line.

Prioritizing highly loyal generals is a good idea. Some generals are diamonds in the rough, and even generals you'd think'd be meatheads (with only Vigorous as a positive trait) have developed fine tactical acumen under my watch.

If you have two generals in the same stack they will not rebel, or also spies with the army.

I've had multiple FMs rebel in the same stack. Though it only happened once or twice in my several thousand turns spent playing EBII, and every time it happened my faction was a massive empire, which reduces loyalty in FMs. Still, bastards took the Arkah's best soldiers with them.

[Lusitanio]

I've had multiple FMs rebel in the same stack. Though it only happened once or twice in my several thousand turns spent playing EBII, and every time it happened my faction was a massive empire, which reduces loyalty in FMs. Still, bastards took the Arkah's best soldiers with them.

That's really bad luck. You guys always surprise me with the amount of bad luck you have xD

[Rad]

Well, I was pushing my luck to begin with. The general was capable, but disloyal. I thought having a spy in the army would be enough to stop him from rebelling, but it didn't help. I got what was coming to me

[Satapatiš]

Better safe than sorry, if your army is very large and expensive then keep the best general paired with the most loyal one, then add a spy to the mix. But I noticed that good generals only matter in night battles and autoresolves. Otherwise the army can be led by anyone.

[Rad]

I take such misfortunes in stride. Disloyalty was, is and always will be a part of human nature

[nvm]

Use your FL to lead armies, they can't rebel, unlike FH!

[BailianSteel]

That's really bad luck. You guys always surprise me with the amount of bad luck you have xD

When you spend thousands of turns farming, you're bound to pull up a few rotten eggs. Fortunately I had hit the empire stage at this point and could easily afford the loss...I just like collecting and gilding unique regionals and elites.