Did you ever defend a city succesfully from an enemy army that outnumbered you just with the garrison troops?

[twgamer20197]

I mean a battle in a campaign where an enemy army ( that outnumbers your garrison troops 2:1 or 3:1) attacks your city ( either walled or not walled ) and you have only the garrison troops at your disposal to defend the city ( or at the most what you have is a single general unit in the city plus the garrison troops ).

In my case I always try to keep at least a single general unit in a province where it is likely to be attacked by invaders. So when they come, I recruit some mercenaries if I can afford it. But what if in case you can't afford to hire mercenaries?

In that case, what would be your advice on how to defeat an enemy army that outnumbers your garrison troops greatly?

[Alwyn]

I've defended cities successfully with only garrison troops against a full stack. However, I don't play on the hardest difficulty levels and this only worked when I had a large garrison force. I don't think I could usually manage this against multiple enemy armies, without adding a general and recruiting some mercenaries to reinforce the garrison.

I sometimes find it easier to defend unwalled (rather than walled) cities. In my Suebi campaign I've got some large garrisons and their garrison cavalry are useful.

My advice would be the obvious things:

Hold choke points with good defensive infantry, if you can. If possible, hold the enemy in a street and send light infantry, skirmishers (or whatever you have) to attack the enemy in the rear.

Your skirmishers are much more effective if they can shoot at the enemy's unshielded right flank or rear, ideally from close range. If the enemy have no cavalry, consider sending skirmishers to force the enemy to divert some of their troops to chasing them.

In unwalled cities, use garrison cavalry to kill their skirmishers after their melee infantry are engaged. In walled cities, keep your cavalry inside the walls unless the enemy have no cavalry.

[Ozymandias Maximus]

Many times! I love those type of battles. You need to bog them down in choke points with melee infantry and flank with skirmishers. The skirmishers can absolutely decimate them if they have the rear flank. I've also had the AI do stupid stuff and send an entire stack to the gates of a walled settlement. You can hold them back with like 2 units of spearmen and skirmishers on the walls will have a turkey shoot while they all pile up outside the gates.

[twgamer20197]

Thanks for all your advices. In my opinion defending a walled city is easier than a non-walled city because your towers can kill some of the enemy troops while they don't get inside the city yet. And specially if you have some ballistas or onagers installed upon the walls.

In non-walled cities, maybe you need to do something to make your enemy come only from a specific direction. Not letting them come from multiple directions at the same time

[Alwyn]

I agree, arrow towers can be really useful when you're defending. Do you find defensive artillery on the walls to be useful? Because of their limited arc of fire, I can usually only hit the enemy with one unit of defensive artillery and don't get good results. Maybe I'm missing something?

For non-walled cities, I find some layouts easier to defend than others, it depends on the number and arrangement of the choke points on the way to the central square. Defending the choke points would be harder if you're playing on smaller unit sizes (I play on large).

[twgamer20197]

Maybe if it is a coastal non-walled city and in case the central capture point is on the shore, it becomes even easier. For example I watched in youtube a gameplay of someone who was playing the Rise of the Republic campaign as Rome at legendary level. He succesfully defended Ostia from a Volsci army which had a full stack just with the garrison troops.

What would I do there is positioning my melee troops right next to the sea so that they are never charged from behind nor from the side

[twgamer20197]

Many times! I love those type of battles. You need to bog them down in choke points with melee infantry and flank with skirmishers. The skirmishers can absolutely decimate them if they have the rear flank. I've also had the AI do stupid stuff and send an entire stack to the gates of a walled settlement. You can hold them back with like 2 units of spearmen and skirmishers on the walls will have a turkey shoot while they all pile up outside the gates.

Lol I suppose the AI is very fool without any unofficial patch or mod.

[LuckyPistol]

Depends entirely on your faction's culture IMO.

Hellenic factions can pikewall all day, clogging the enemy in the narrow streets so the rest of your garrison can harass and sandwich them. For those unfortified settlements, there's usually a hill variant where you can just watch the enemy waves crash against you.

Rome and Eastern garrisons usually can hold out using similar tactics provided you have at least one heavy infantry, but there will be higher casualties.

Getae and Odryssians have their Thracian/Dacian skirmishers and Barbarian settlement designs that make it easy to kite or bottleneck the enemy and rain hell upon them. I've faced off dozens of Celtic stacks with the Getae garrisons doing most of the work.

Other barbs like the Celts, Iberians, the Seubi, Tylis and Ardiaei, and the Desert factions can't really rely on their garrisons IMO, unless you have some tier III/IV barracks supplementing the town garrison.


They key to defending with garrisons is allowing yourself huge casualties to get the enemy to route (and alternatively to do as much damage as possible if you won't win). Your melee infantry might get torn to shreds, you might sacrifice a recently depleted ranged unit to hold off the enemy advance, but as long as you can kill the enemy general and get the rest to route (and then hopefully mop up), your garrison will have succeeded.

[twgamer20197]

I've faced off dozens of Celtic stacks with the Getae garrisons doing most of the work.

Do you mean you defeated even armies with full stack?

While you are holding off the enemy units in a narrow street with your heavy infantry and in case you put your ranged units behind your infantry, you should deactivate automatic fire and then order them to shoot at the enemy units that are from the second line of battle to backward to avoid casualties by friendly fire or at the enemy ranged units if they are within your ranged units range.

[FriendoftheDork]

Do you mean you defeated even armies with full stack?

While you are holding off the enemy units in a narrow street with your heavy infantry and in case you put your ranged units behind your infantry, you should deactivate automatic fire and then order them to shoot at the enemy units that are from the second line of battle to backward to avoid casualties by friendly fire or at the enemy ranged units if they are within your ranged units range.

Can't answer for him, but for my Selecuid playthrough my most successful defenses was having my pike hold them off (and massacring cavalry), then move my skirmishers around to fire into their backs. My cheap infantry would then be used to charge his skirmishers and slingers from behind, making a sandwhich and causing a mass rout. (this may not work on higher than normal difficulty). And yes this was a fairly weak garrison against a full stack of Iranians.

[twgamer20197]

Can't answer for him, but for my Selecuid playthrough my most successful defenses was having my pike hold them off (and massacring cavalry), then move my skirmishers around to fire into their backs. My cheap infantry would then be used to charge his skirmishers and slingers from behind, making a sandwhich and causing a mass rout. (this may not work on higher than normal difficulty). And yes this was a fairly weak garrison against a full stack of Iranians.

Maybe killing the general as quickly as you can would help you stand a better chance.
Even if you lose the battle, you shouldn't be affraid of losing that city. At least causing the enemy army as many casualties as you can ( let's say about 50% of the army ) would be fine so that you finish them off with an army you bring there to recover the city before that enemy army replenishes its losses fully

[LuckyPistol]

Do you mean you defeated even armies with full stack?

Yeah, certain Getae settlements have a hill you can position your peltasts/skirmishers where they have good escape routes should the AI try to go for them. Once you hold up the enemy advance and blob them together, send in those javelins and rain hell from above, doubly so if you can use flaming shot. They also work as great general killers.

[twgamer20197]

Yeah, certain Getae settlements have a hill you can position your peltasts/skirmishers where they have good escape routes should the AI try to go for them. Once you hold up the enemy advance and blob them together, send in those javelins and rain hell from above, doubly so if you can use flaming shot. They also work as great general killers.

Should my stronger infantry units be used always for the job of holding the line? And the weaker infantry units to get around to charge at them from behind?

And as to the ranged units, do you think it is not a bad idea to place them behind your strong infantry units who are holding the line but however ordering them to shoot at the enemy units that are in the second enemy line and those more backward? Of course if they shoot at the ones who are in the first line you'll accidentally kill some of your infantry. Or shooting at the enemy ranged units if your garrison has no cavalry.

[LuckyPistol]

Should my stronger infantry units be used always for the job of holding the line? And the weaker infantry units to get around to charge at them from behind?

Assuming you only have your garrison to defend, yes, the heavier units should be the first to hold the line and absorb the initial blow of the enemy. Lighter units can follow behind in support or around the flanks as you've already said. Mob/plebs should be held in reserve and used for catching routing units if you don't have cavalry, or use them as fodder to absorb ranged attacks or buying time when moving other units (I've had to retreat further into a settlement and sent the mob as a screen).

And as to the ranged units, do you think it is not a bad idea to place them behind your strong infantry units who are holding the line but however ordering them to shoot at the enemy units that are in the second enemy line and those more backward? Of course if they shoot at the ones who are in the first line you'll accidentally kill some of your infantry. Or shooting at the enemy ranged units if your garrison has no cavalry.

If you have archers and javelins, and there are enemy ranged units in attack range, then it's a viable tactic against the AI. Against another player, they will most definitely be shooting at your own ranged units as well, so beware the two-way street. Slingers, in my experience, don't shoot over your own units very well, they should always be on the flanks. If you have no choice but to keep them directly behind your line, turn off auto-fire.

[twgamer20197]

Assuming you only have your garrison to defend, yes, the heavier units should be the first to hold the line and absorb the initial blow of the enemy. Lighter units can follow behind in support or around the flanks as you've already said. Mob/plebs should be held in reserve and used for catching routing units if you don't have cavalry, or use them as fodder to absorb ranged attacks or buying time when moving other units (I've had to retreat further into a settlement and sent the mob as a screen).

Or perhaps those weaker infantry units can be also used for chasing the enemy ranged units and trying to sandwich them on the streets so that they don't shoot at your best infantry units that are holding the enemy units off on a choke point on the street.

If you have archers and javelins, and there are enemy ranged units in attack range, then it's a viable tactic against the AI. Against another player, they will most definitely be shooting at your own ranged units as well, so beware the two-way street. Slingers, in my experience, don't shoot over your own units very well, they should always be on the flanks. If you have no choice but to keep them directly behind your line, turn off auto-fire.

It would be great if your garrison has cavalry units to get rid of the enemy ranged units quickly

[LuckyPistol]

Or perhaps those weaker infantry units can be also used for chasing the enemy ranged units and trying to sandwich them on the streets so that they don't shoot at your best infantry units that are holding the enemy units off on a choke point on the street.

That won't work well with most barbarian settlements, as they're very open.

It would be great if your garrison has cavalry units to get rid of the enemy ranged units quickly

Certain barracks and barbarian farms do give cavalry garrisons.

[twgamer20197]

I see. But it would be very good to use both your weaker infantry units and your cavalry to deal with the enemy ranged units specially if there isn't much open space in the city. Then collaborating with the stronger infantry units that are holding the enemy off by charging from the rear of the enemy melee units ( with both your cavalry and weaker infantry units ). And using your ranged units ( javelins or archers ) to fire from behind your heavy infatry line at the enemy units who are more backward

[Alwyn]

Yes, I also use ranged units to fire at the enemy units at the back of their formation, to try and reduce friendly fire. If you can achieve cavalry superiority (for example by defeating their cavalry with your spears or pikes), you might be able to move your skirmishers to fire at the enemy flanks or rear.

[twgamer20197]

I think I'll practice city defense when being outnumbered in the personalized battle mode of the game

[twgamer20197]

Let me share an example of a battle where a gamer who successfully defended a non-walled city when he was outnumbered almost 3 to 1. This is why one should never surrender before even fighting ( You don't need to watch the whole video. Just from the start up to 7:47


EDIT:
I don't know why the video is not visible. Here is the direct link:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etrCWZJt05Q