|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 11, 2019 11:22:18 GMT
andrei ,a more detailed guide for my Carthage record. First of all, logistics. Here are the generals I used and the items they have.         All of them need to be mobile. Antony and the commander won't need a mobility item since they need more damage rather than extra mobility. The only time I item swap is when Tiberius reaches his destination,which I give him a Pompey gladius.         Turn one, Antony positions to destroy Augila at turn2. Tiberius goes east to deal with the Roman city north of the Aetolian league. Pompey and Pacorus would deal with the islands Rome possesses, Hannibal 1 goes to Rome alone with Crassus and Spartacus. Hasdrubal and my commander deals with Cessetani. Also, oration on Antony turn 1. Turn 2: Antony destroys Augila. If he fails, restart. Place oration on Pompey. Pompey attacks Caralis. If he double attacks, good. If not, use destroy on Caralis. Add a legion to the auxiliary infantry at Capsa. Other units move towards their destination. Turn 3: Spawn auxiliary at Gades. Bribe Massalia, Allobroges, Illyria and Odryssia. Capture Augila using Pacorus Capture Caralis Damage Tarraco Damage Tolossa Turn 4: Capture Cyrene Capture Rome Hannibal 1 moves to Neapolis Capture Tarraco Capture Tolosa Path of each generals: Pompey and Pacorus>Caralis>Aleria(do not capture if you haven't captured it yet at turn 4)>Genoa Hannibal I>Rome>Neapolis(turn 5)>Brundisium(turn 7) Crassus and Spartacus>Rome>Florentia(captured at turn 5)> Ravenna(Captured turn 6)> Mediolanum(Capture turn 8) Tiberius>Dyracchium(turn 5,swap item to Pompey Gladius) >Nicopolis(turn 6) Hannibal II>Tarraco>Aleria(turn 8) Archer commander and Hasdrubal > Tolosa>Burdigala>last Cessetanian city Antony>Augila>Cyren(turn 4)>Aetolian main city(Turn 7)
|
|
|
|
Post by andrei on Aug 11, 2019 11:59:34 GMT
Yeah, I already understood it from Your previous explanation. In my 9 turns strategy I was too greedy to take Caralis at turn 2, so that prevented me from several bribings. Ignoring Caralis and lowering bribing cost is very smart and innovative move giving a possibility to complete it at turn 8. Great strategy. Congrats! No way I am going to play it again in the nearest time, I am leaving for vacations in a week, so want to complete as many Augustus conquests as possible. No more Carthage for now  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 11, 2019 12:09:04 GMT
Yeah, I already understood it from Your previous explanation. In my 9 turns strategy I was too greedy to take Caralis at turn 2, so that prevented me from several bribings. Ignoring Caralis and lowering bribing cost is very smart and innovative move giving a possibility to complete it at turn 8. Great strategy. Congrats! No way I am going to play it again in the nearest time, I am leaving for vacations in a week, so want to complete as many Augustus conquests as possible. No more Carthage for now Just gonna place this guide here for those who want to tie the record. A turn 7 Carthage is highly unlikely, but I'll try it after I complete all Augustus time conquest. Boii in Augustus time is annoying. And also, good luck trying to complete as much Augustus time conquest. Vacation is nearing it's end, and I'm trying to complete as much conquests as I can |
|
|
|
Post by stoic on Aug 11, 2019 14:33:23 GMT
Great result, without any doubt. Yet, the possibility to destroy Rome in 8 turns means that ET did not planned "Punic wars" conquests thoughtful enough. I don't remember any of ET games with such unbalanced starting positions of factions. Even in wc3 and wc4 with nuclear bombs and paratroopers it wasn't possible to complete a conquest in less than 10 turns.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 11, 2019 18:51:05 GMT
Great result, without any doubt. Yet, the possibility to destroy Rome in 8 turns means that ET did not planned "Punic wars" conquests thoughtful enough. I don't remember any of ET games with such unbalanced starting positions of factions. Even in wc3 and wc4 with nuclear bombs and paratroopers it wasn't possible to complete a conquest in less than 10 turns. War elephants are definitely the mvp here, along with the fact that you only need 4 units to reach crazy belligerence. I think they were trying to be historically accurate, but by doing so they made Carthage strong. Also, difference is that Rome is pretty strong already at that point. Maybe give them some starting legionares would have been nice, or better ai. Rome doesn't spawn it's infantry Gen until turn 6,and by turn 6 it's already too late for Rome. |
|
|
|
Post by andrei on Aug 11, 2019 19:59:28 GMT
stoic, I wouldn't say Punic wars is bad. It's just small conquest map which makes it possible to exploit. But this conquest is somewhat like for education  It's just for crazy speedrunners could become unbalanced
|
|
|
|
Post by stoic on Aug 11, 2019 20:26:21 GMT
stoic, I wouldn't say Punic wars is bad. It's just small conquest map which makes it possible to exploit. But this conquest is somewhat like for education It's just for crazy speedrunners could become unbalanced I think only small changes are needed to improve it. More troops for Rome and a couple of generals. Hannibal's expedition was the craziest enterprise at the time. Rome and her allies in Italy had potentially over 1 million conscripts and Hannibal had less than 60 thousands when he had left Spain. Unfortunately, it was not reflected in GCR. War elephants are cool, but they played a role only once - at the battle of Trebia. They died soon after that because of a climate. It is not possible to comprehend all difficulties Hannibal could encounter when we are playing GCR. It is a pretty straightforward strategy in the game. It was anything but straightforward at the time... |
|
|
|
Post by andrei on Aug 11, 2019 20:34:21 GMT
stoic, I wouldn't say Punic wars is bad. It's just small conquest map which makes it possible to exploit. But this conquest is somewhat like for education It's just for crazy speedrunners could become unbalanced I think only small changes are needed to improve it. More troops for Rome and a couple of generals. Hannibal's expedition was the craziest enterprise at the time. Rome and her allies in Italy had potentially over 1 million conscripts and Hannibal had less than 60 thousands when he had left Spain. Unfortunately, it was not reflected in GCR. War elephants are cool, but they played a role only once - at the battle of Trebia. They died soon after that because of a climate. It is not possible to comprehend all difficulties Hannibal could encounter when we are playing GCR. It is a pretty straightforward strategy in the game. It was anything but straightforward at the time... Italy wasn't unified even at Spatacus time, not to mention Hannibal. Italics were not Roman citizens. They couldn't be conscripts |
|
|
|
Post by stoic on Aug 11, 2019 20:42:56 GMT
I think only small changes are needed to improve it. More troops for Rome and a couple of generals. Hannibal's expedition was the craziest enterprise at the time. Rome and her allies in Italy had potentially over 1 million conscripts and Hannibal had less than 60 thousands when he had left Spain. Unfortunately, it was not reflected in GCR. War elephants are cool, but they played a role only once - at the battle of Trebia. They died soon after that because of a climate. It is not possible to comprehend all difficulties Hannibal could encounter when we are playing GCR. It is a pretty straightforward strategy in the game. It was anything but straightforward at the time... Italy wasn't unified even at Spatacus time, not to mention Hannibal. Italics were not Roman citizens. They couldn't be conscripts Nope Rome controlled Italy even before first Punic war. |
|
|
|
Post by stoic on Aug 11, 2019 20:45:37 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by andrei on Aug 11, 2019 20:46:05 GMT
Italy wasn't unified even at Spatacus time, not to mention Hannibal. Italics were not Roman citizens. They couldn't be conscripts Nope Rome controlled Italy even before first Punic war. Control doesn't mean had it as an integral part of the country. Remember Bellum Marsicum? Italy was integrated completely only after Spartacus uprising. Hannibal was successful because of disloyal Italics. |
|
|
|
Post by stoic on Aug 11, 2019 20:49:42 GMT
Nope Rome controlled Italy even before first Punic war. Control doesn't mean had it as an integral part of the country. Remember Bellum Marsicum? Italy was integrated completely only after Spartacus uprising. Hannibal was successful because of disloyal Italics. He tried to deflect some allies from Rome but this strategy was unsuccessful. Only Tarentum and Capua deflected and they were punished brutally by Rome later. |
|
|
|
Post by andrei on Aug 11, 2019 20:51:25 GMT
Control doesn't mean had it as an integral part of the country. Remember Bellum Marsicum? Italy was integrated completely only after Spartacus uprising. Hannibal was successful because of disloyal Italics. He tried to deflect some allies from Rome but this strategy was unsuccessful. Only Tarentum and Capua deflected and they were punished brutally by Rome later. So, I am right, correct? Italics were disloyal Nowadays Northern part of Italy wasn't Italy in Ancient times  |
|
|
|
Post by stoic on Aug 11, 2019 20:57:30 GMT
He tried to deflect some allies from Rome but this strategy was unsuccessful. Only Tarentum and Capua deflected and they were punished brutally by Rome later. So, I am right, correct? Italics were disloyal Nowadays Northern part of Italy wasn't Italy in Ancient times Some of them were, but only minority. Even after Cannae the majority of Italics remained loyal and they always supplied Rome with troops. Usually Italics had bilateral agreements with Rome, so they united against Rome only twice - before Punic wars and in the Civil war - Bellum Sociale. |
|
|
|
Post by andrei on Aug 11, 2019 21:00:58 GMT
So, I am right, correct? Italics were disloyal Nowadays Northern part of Italy wasn't Italy in Ancient times Some of them were, but only minority. Even after Cannae the majority of Italics remained loyal and they always supplied Rome with troops. Usually Italics had bilateral agreements with Rome, so they united against Rome only twice - before Punic wars and in the Civil war. Hannibal was moving through Italy how long.. Like 7 years moving here and there? It's not possible on hostile territories. It was only possible because he received supplies from former Roman "allies". That's what I meant saying country wasn't unified. Italics wanted that citizenship and mostly was given it much much later. |
|
