PDA

View Full Version : Egyptian, Roman, or Barbarian?



prefect
11th Apr 2003, 06:12
Definatly Egyptian. Cant beat their cavalry/chariots. Soldiers are way underpowered though. Guardians have nice defense, and Nubian Archers rule. Everything is built quickly, and good rushes.

nitroace30
11th Apr 2003, 10:37
Yeah i see what you mean-i just played the EGYPTIAN'S in a skirmish game-"BUT"-i have a bone to pick with them, they are fast but as you said they lack good infantry which is crucial in the battlefield. Their NUBIAN archers kick-but they are weak. The Barbarians are quite good-fast infantry, powerfull units-BUT-they lack organization. The ROMANS are my favourite-they are organized and excellent fighters their LEGIONAIRS are brilliant-BUT they are slow. This is their major setback. I love the Praetorians and the Gladiators though. Over all i love all the civilizations. They all have unique quilities and are fun to play.

prefect
11th Apr 2003, 18:18
yeah rome is tough. i think the barbarians are a good match for them though. organization doesnt matter because youre in control anyway. Praetorians are easily defeated by Berserkers, and Chariots.

Athos
11th Apr 2003, 22:02
The Barbarians are great for the sheer power they have with their units, and how German Cavalry can dominate the field when put to good use.

Egyptians left a bad taste in my mouth; the whole 'slut rape' tactic makes me think of anyone who plays as an Egyptian a rusher.

silvercue
11th Apr 2003, 23:29
I have only recently got the game so I am on SP atm - will play MP soon, what is slut rape - I take it the Egyptians have some type of lame, cheap rush tactic? Guess the small time to make units causes this? PLease explain.
Thanks

prefect
11th Apr 2003, 23:35
slut rape is the uber rush with slaves.

ShadowFiend
11th Apr 2003, 23:50
Egyptians are the best.

I haven`t used slaverush before, and won`t do it, but I discovered other egypt superiority over the other 2 civs...

This is the meatshield tactics...

Basically amassing soldiers and basic archers... Barbs are falling like flies from arrows so they are easy prey... furthermore with numbers I can easily match the better quakity troops and overcome them.

Athos
12th Apr 2003, 00:24
I saw someone compare the Egyptians once to Zergs.

I think he is wiser beyond his years.
:)

nitroace30
12th Apr 2003, 02:39
Yes thats all true-one of the best things i love about the romans is their formations-it looks so cool. Barbarians and egyptians are just scattered. And i think the legionaires are the best STANDARD fighting unit in the game-their turtle formation looks so good.

SHADOW_PRAETORIAN
12th Apr 2003, 04:51
The Roman Are The Exact oposite to the Egypians, They Have awsome infantry but they lack in the cavalry Department.
But The Equities are Alright.
Contarii, Crossbows should of been added to the Romans Though.
Also they shcould of included:
Chariot archers (Egyptians).
Celtic Skirmisher (Barbarians).
Slingers (All).

SHADOW_PRAETORIAN
12th Apr 2003, 04:59
Reasons Why I Like Playing Romans in Praetorians:
1. I'm Roman Italian.
2. I love Using Infantry.
3. They have Cool Names.
4. I Greatly Admire Julius Caesar.
5. I Can Speak Latin.
6. They Had one of the Greatest Empires in the World.

nitroace30
12th Apr 2003, 10:36
Hey you said romans dont have slingers-wrong they do, and they are awesome. Sure the romans aint got the best cavalry, but what they lack in mounted units they make up for in infantry. Rome is legendary Egyptians are good but dont mess with rome they kick ass.

Athos
12th Apr 2003, 23:40
Did they have crossbows in Rome?

SHADOW_PRAETORIAN
13th Apr 2003, 06:52
Contarii = Ancient Roman Cataphract.
Crossbow = Crossbow.

Yes of Corse They Did, why do you think I said so.

nitroace30
13th Apr 2003, 10:12
I hope they make an expansion-there are so many ideas i have for an add-on.

ShadowFiend
13th Apr 2003, 12:25
Romans NEVER had crossbow.
It appeared first in medieval eras by Genova.

ANDYMS
13th Apr 2003, 19:15
Originally posted by ShadowFiend
Romans NEVER had crossbow.
It appeared first in medieval eras by Genova.

check out this webb site http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ancient/romans/tech_01.shtml look for manuballista the roman crossbow

Athos
13th Apr 2003, 21:13
Thats just a Ballista, or a smaller version of it.
Like Shadowfiend said, the crossbow came around as an individual weapon until medieval times.
it wasn't until the 10th or 11th centuries AD that the crossbow became a major military weapon.
If you really wanna go back far, the earliest known records of the crossbow were from China and Greece, in 341 BC.

The Romans had crossbows, but they were in the form of Ballistas, or very heavy crossbows that were not carried by individual troops.

http://www.worldcrossbow.com/history.html#HISTORY

And regarding cataphracti:
Romans weren't the best horsemen, they relied on auxiliaries for their cavalry, like guals or Thracians.

I believe the Cataphracti were Byzantine (which would be late Roman history, not the current time frame of this game)

Also, are you sure contarii means cataphracti? I did a search on it and all I found were slingshots...no cavalry

silvercue
13th Apr 2003, 21:56
If you download the Rome: Total War movie trailer you can see what I think are Manuballistas in that?

SHADOW_PRAETORIAN
14th Apr 2003, 05:07
Well the Pics Used Crossbows in the Dark ages, And they got it from the Romans. But I must say they wern't Widly used by the Romans, But they should be included.

Athos
14th Apr 2003, 05:45
I guess you're going to have to settle with a Ballista, which is a crossbow, just a big one.

ShadowFiend
14th Apr 2003, 14:56
Thanks Athos, you spoke my words exactly :)

Btw it`s like calling the arquebus a rifle, just because it`s the predecessor of the rifle, but it`s not a rifle, otherwise they would call it that way and wouldn`t use different phrase for it.

SHADOW_PRAETORIAN
15th Apr 2003, 11:27
Constantine was the first to use it as an auxilary in his Civil Wars.

Athos
15th Apr 2003, 19:44
use......

crossbow?
cataphracti?

SHADOW_PRAETORIAN
16th Apr 2003, 07:10
BOTH.

Athos
17th Apr 2003, 06:28
Constatine wasn't the first to employ Cataphracti in battle...

Cataphracti is the "Romanization" of the greek word katafraktos which means 'armoured horseman'.

The first cataphract cavalry appeared in Armenia and Parthia appromaxitely during the Hellenistic era.

And not much is really known about Roman crossbows (other than the manuballista and such), and again, it wasn't a fully blown military power until 11th century AD, earliest.

SHADOW_PRAETORIAN
17th Apr 2003, 08:29
What I Ment By First To Use The Cataphract Was That He Was The First To Use Cataphract In A Byzantine Fasion *8-14 century*, Also Infantry Crossbowmen Where Used To Counter Gothic Armoured Horsmen.

Athos
17th Apr 2003, 20:41
In Byzantine fashion...what exactly is that? As Shock troops? That's not strictly "Byzantine Fashion".
Constantine faught Licinius in the 4th century, before 8 to 14th century time period.

Now, regarding the Goths I was able to find a report stating that Constantine had Goths as his auxiliary and were crucial in defeating Licinius. I'm not 100% sure on that as I couldn't find other reports confirming this, as I was able to find a few reports stating a Goth raiding problem prior the the war with Licinius.

Now, regarding infantry crossbowmen as a counter to Goth heavy cavalry, where did you find this? Through the research I've been doing I haven't found a single bit about Roman crossbowmen in the 4th century fighting Goth Heavy horsemen.

SHADOW_PRAETORIAN
19th Apr 2003, 01:11
To Be Honest There is Not Much On The Subject and It Took Me 4 Months To Find Out This Little Piece Of Info.

Entity
26th Apr 2003, 05:39
Well, from a purely superficial standpoint:

Roman Centurians have the best leader, i mean comeon! the guy has a horse!

Barbarians have the best cavalry special unit! i mean jeez look at the armor on those german warmachines!! now THATS riding in style.

Egyptians have the most wicked special archer cavalry. How fun is it to ride around ur enemy while shooting them full of holes huh? TOO fun.

Overall:

Romans have strong defence so, with a healer, your men survive a bunch more battles. however unless you like to split ur men up after they're made, those square formations get kinda stale. More like ur playing with fighting squares of men.

Barbarians have great warriors and flexible special units but otherwise, their combat uniforms stink, i mean they're SO AD 100s.

Egyptians can pump out units fast not to mention having archers that can actually replace the basic ones totally. However, if you cant organize mass units well in battle, prepare to get your butt kicked.

In Regards to Poll:

Who won the war after all lol? but beyond that id say the others will catch up because everyone STARTS out with romans and then branches from there. I mean jeez their most interesting unit is the gladiator (dragnet) ok pfft im bored. whereas barbs got cavalry that can hop into woods and hunters that rule woods. egyptians got chariots, shooting while riding, and poison :eek: so u know bottom line: romans are boring.

Athos
26th Apr 2003, 18:57
Haha
Good job entity on getting this subject back on topic,
and at the same offering some comic relief as well.
;)

The Roman's may be boring, but when you see a unit of Praetorians fight their way out of overwhelming odds because of their immense defense, well, that is amazing.

But the Germans do have incredible cavalry, the fact that they can ride into the woods does make them almost uber units. Well, maybe they are uber units.

And the Egyptians, with Nubian archers and their poison, do rock, and the Parthian cavalry is amazing, but mostly you see them being used for their super rush capabilities.

Centurion
26th Apr 2003, 20:01
I prefer Romans, why?

Well the Praetorian unit preety much destroys anything in its path, auxillaries are preety fast to flank and charge into enemy archers, Equties are the fastst unit in the game arnt they?
And legionnares are solid fighters, the slingers are great for destroying siege weapons/artillary and wearing down the enemy so they cant charge.

And cant forget the 30 troops to a unit eiher, makes there spearmen the best in my eyes

Also theyre Centurions are great for a defence bonus, ride on horses and can give stamina back to troops

Problems with the Romans though are that theyre legionnares are sloooooow and man for man they cant take barbarians

Which brings me onto my second favourite group, the barbarians, they have the best calvary, germanic calvary even fight in woods, however they get severly kicked by praetorians.
Also they are the strongest fighters in the game, man for man they will always win, unfortunately they are the slowest to build (72 seconds for 16 warriors) and are usually swamped by enemy forces that outnumber them.

But with a chieftain at a high level the barbarians get an insane offensive bonus and they can steal enemy mana/stamina

The Egyptians i have ot say I like the least, theyre units are so fragile, even guardsmen set to staitonary can be obliterated with ease, however war chariots are great at decimating standard infantry types, nubian archers are excllent at harrasing the enemy -making them be poisoned

And parthian calvary is good for leading troops away and wearing them down gradually, however if fighting the Romans you have ot be carful for Equities which are really fast and can run Parthian calvary down.

Also the Egyptians have balanced officials for theyre armies and the ,infantry can 'pray' to regain man and are cheap to produce so you can get more troops out of a village than any other group in the game, so you can have superiority in numbers.

in order:
I)Romans
II)Barbarians
III)Egyptians

~Cent~

SHADOW_PRAETORIAN
1st May 2003, 15:00
Also, Barbarians Have the Best Attacking Infantry Too, The Beserker and Warriors Thow Rocks Too (COOL).

Same:
I-Roman.
II-Barbarians.
III-Egyptians.

soverign
14th May 2003, 00:47
The chineese came up with the first true crossbow, and later developed the first rapid fire weapon, which happened to be an advancement of their crossbow---the Cho-Ku-Nu

I could never get the egyptians to work for me :/
All my little suckers always die and i cant promote anybody and cant control all of the towns i've garrisoned, and i then get crushed by everybody else.

I have yet to try the Barbarians, but my noblemen lasted forever when i got them in mission 1.

But leigonaries are hellaa cool, and the romans formations are big- I like that.

So i geuss i'd say romans, but im not voting cause i havent played them all yet

xtend13
6th Jun 2003, 18:46
The Romans are the most balanced, and the square formations are easy to control. I recently played a scenario with a freind in which I got a center town with 1000 and some surrounding towns and he got the rest I played the barbarians and found my new favorite unit is the Beserker! I now try to play with the Barbarians!:D

soverign
14th Jun 2003, 04:51
Ooooo. Now I've played Barbarians and BARBARIANS RULE :)

sionnach
14th Jun 2003, 10:20
I tried playing as the Egyptians, didn't like them at all. After the structure and discipline of the Roman army, the (invents new word) scatterness of the Egyptians annoyed me.

FV Constantinus
18th Jul 2003, 20:54
I like the Romans the best. Their organization is great. I love the speed of the Equites, very good for speeding to the aid of a failing attack. My favorite unit are the Legionaries. They kick butt. I love the turte formation, very useful when assaulting something heavily defended with archers. My second favorite are the Barbarians. The Noblemen are awesome. They are gret fighters. I can send them to the front of the attack many times before they start to take big loses. I guess that makes the Egyptians my third favorite even though I havn't expiremented with them a whole lot yet. In closing, you just can resist the Romans. They're just too cool with their huge empire and all. I'm also a bit biased toward the Romans because I have a great interest in the Emporer Constantine the Great.

Pauldls
1st Aug 2003, 22:34
I only played as the Romans but now i'm playing only as Barbarians, I do much better with barbarians. I played as eygpt once and hated it.

Me$$iaH
7th Aug 2003, 18:02
My favorite is the Egyptions, because i like big armies, but i dont play with them all the time, i choose a race based on the race my opponent chooses. If my opponent is Romans, i choose barbarians [because barbarians can take on romans easily with a big army], if my opponent is barbarians, i choose egyptions [with a large number of soldiers, 2 priests and a few pharaos, egypt takes on barbs easy], and when my opponent is egyptions, i choose romans [egyptions often build large groups of archers, so turtle formation gives u an advantage, and soldiers are no match for legionairs].
this ofcourse is my way of playing, if you dont agree with me, please let me know :)