Medieval 2: Total War

Remove all ads!

I've been playing this quite a bit lately and although I have like 6 campaigns started I have yet to finish. Not from lack of skill I just like to try out all the different factions. Although on my campaign as Hungary I just got annihilated by the Mongols(didn't think they were due for a while yet and HRE wouldn't leave me the hell alone so I was focused on the other side of my empire).

The only thing I really don't like about this is that I can't seem to get any decent Diplomats, I supposed I ask for too much too fast. The other thing I have problems with is assassins. They just don't seem to have any decent chances on the people you want to assassinate, even with spies and a maxed out assassin.

TBH I was wondering if you guys have any tips for attacking cities, as that seems to be the main thing I have problems with. Defending i have no troubles, but sometimes on attacking I just get destroyed, when I should have a pretty easy win.

As for my favorite faction, so far its Russia and Spain. I really don't like HRE too much as you start out extremely strong, and I don't like the English too much as I tend to prefer cavalry, although I have to admit the longbows just flat out own everything in the time period.

I found a fairly effective way of gettting rich in the middle east.On my Spanish campaign I took a full stack army to Antioch(sp?) for a crusade, and since the distance to capital is insane all my settlements have low public order, so i've been taking a city, sacking it, and moving my whole army on to sack another town, at least until I get myself and island somewhere in the middle so that I can have some decent public order. The only two towns I'm still holding down there are Jerusalem and Gaza, because I exterminated the Populace of both since Jerusalem is the required area for my campaign(the general I have there is maxed on Chivalry so I really want to avoid doing that) I figured I might as well keep it. Luckily the Mongols took the northern route in this game

 

Cannons/catapults/trebuchets and plenty of infantry. Smash their walls to bits from a safe distance then send infantry through the gaps. One hole is easy to stopper, create loads. Using siege towers, ladders and rams is just asking for trouble. Horses are not really any good in attacking castles, neither are archers. You want tough infantry.

 

Barmy's strategy is pretty close to what I normally do. I tend to use a combination of cavalry and infantry though. I generally bash a bunch of holes in the walls using artillary then I send the infantry into the central ones and then the cavalry into further ones to hit the defenders' flanks or rear.

 

Yup. That was the first faction I won the game with. Their main advantage is that not only do they start with a TON of settlements, there are about six or seven rebel settlements within easy reach of your empire to boot. Most factions start with two or three settlements, so the starting 6 or so that you get is a big advantage right there. Within the first 10 or so turns of the game you could conceivably have about a dozen settlements already.

I also think France (current game) is ridiculously easy too. Currently the year is 1278 (haven't even got to the Black Death yet) and I already own 39 settlements, with Tunis and Helsinki currently under seige, and the city east of Timbuktu (can't remember the name) will be under seige in another turn. I could conceivable win this game before the year 1300, although the Mongols may have taken Jerusalem by now, which would make that deadline difficult.

I took Henkie's advice about not bothering to keep a few factions with just a settlement or two left to avoid further conflict. I killed off the last Milanese family member, which turned Milan into a rebel settlement, which the Papel States quickly added to their empire. The Papal States actually own 4 settlements in my game, which is about 3 more than they usually have. Then I placed one of the last two Danish settlements under seige, where the heir was present. The king in the neighboring settlement came over and the two armies attacked. Both the king and the heir were killed, and as it turns out, they were the last two family members, so I got that settlement, the other settlement went rebel, and was taken by Poland. Finally, I went to the HRE. I was one turn away from placing their last settlement under seige, but they saved me the trouble by attacking me on the way to the castle. The last family member was killed, so the castle went rebel, which I took a couple of turns later.

Their are two unusual developments in this game. First, only half of the Catholic factions are left in the game. When you look at the Papal standing scroll, it's wierd seeing so few Catholic factions listed. I have personally eliminated Spain, Portugal, Denmark, HRE, and Milan. After kicking the English off the European mainland and signing a cease fire, they eliminated the Scots. So the only remaining Catholic factions are France, England, Venice, Hungary, Sicily and Poland.

Secondly, I can now answer the weird question concerning the line of succession in my empire. As you may recall, I had a couple of bad run-ins with inquisitors, so it was actually the king's grandson who was the heir to the throne. When the king died, the heir was just 20 years old. The heir ascended to the throne, and another family member from a completely different branch of the family tree become the new heir. The only reason I think that particular heir was selected was he was the only other family member younger than the king (by one year). So as it currently stands, even if the king has male children, they will not inherit the throne, unless the heir should die first.

However, it may be best that the line continues on another branch of the family tree, because the current branch needs to be pruned. The king that just died was probably the best king I ever had. He actually got a few authority increasing traits, and so by the time of his death he had 10 command, 10 dread, and 10 authority. Sadly, after having what was probably my best monarch ever, I now have what is arguably my worst monarch ever. The current king is insane, a hypochondriac, and is apparently gay with a "foriegn fruitcake" in his retinue. As if that wasn't enough, he has a bunch of other negative attributes, so he is a terrible general, AND a terrible governor - he's good for nothing. Even though I have taken him into many battles, he still only has one star in command (because of all of the negative command attributes) and has an authority of 0, which I didn't know was possible for a king to get - the previously lowest score I had seen was 2. Again, it was because he has many traits and retinue members that apply a negative score to his authority.

Finally, I have finally figured out my guild crisis. I think the problem I was having was I was accepting too many of the first offers for guilds. Once a city gets a guild, it cannot get any other guilds. So if you don't like the one offered, it's best to turn it down in hopes that you get a better offer later. I now have much more variety in guilds, including not one but two guild HQ - thieves and Hospitaller knights. I particularly like the explorers guild - the movement boost is nice, and it also applied a trade boost, which I was unaware before getting the guild.

I mostly agree with what others have suggested, but I will add that it is a good idea to expand to the east as well. There are a ton of rebel settlements eastward and southeastward. If you don't take them the Russians will take the eastern ones, and the Hungarians will take the southeastern ones. You can take a few and still have the Russians as a barrier between you and the Mongols. Remember that you may not have to deal with the Mongol and the Timurids - they may go south and show up in the middle east. If you're really lucky you might not have to deal with either of them.

Obviously, you'll also want to grab as many of the rebel settlements to your immediate west as you can. They are all the ones in the area of Stettin - the ones the Poles, Danes, and HRE fight to get to in every game. Those will be your priority as I have noticed that the Russians expand very slowly, so you can take you sweet time getting to Kiev and the others.

If you must attack the city, then I definitely agree with what others have said in that you should take along a few units of siege weapons and bash a bunch of holes into the castle walls, preferably knocking off a bunch of archers in the process. Using rams, ladders, and siege towers typically doesn't work too well.

However, the only time I try to take the city is when I have a clearly superior force to what the settlement has. If you are laying seige to a settlement with a full stack army inside, especially if it is a fortress or citadel, you are probably better off maintaining the seige until they sally forth to meet you. It can be annoying, as some settlements have enough food to hold out for 9 turns. However, every turn they stay inside they lose about 5% of their total troops, so the longer they hold out, the easier the ensuing battle gets. I still recommend bringing some seige weapons, even if you intend to wait them out, because all of the enemy troops will come out through the main gate. Have your seige weapons target the first group coming out, and they are so bunched together, you can typically inflict massive casualties. As an even bigger bonus, the first group out is typically the general, so you can kill off the general seconds into the battle.

 

Yea I noticed that problem with the guilds on my first game. Generally if I already have a guild I try not to get it again. On my Spain campaign I currently have woodcutters, explorers, thieves, merchants, Knights of Templar, and Solomnic Knights guild. I beleive that every settlement I control that is large city or fortress now has one.

I started out a campaign as Venice last night. I really like the challenge of this, as I am right next to HRE, Hungary, the Byzantines, and Milan(small I know, but I haven't really had the chance to eliminate the backstabbin lil' bastards yet). I'm actually expanding fairly slow in this one so far, as I'm trying to figure out good ways to become extremely economically strong in all my settlements. I have taken Florence and the two rebel Settles settlements to the east of Venice, and I have taken Naples from Sicily and Allepo.

I plan on finishing of Sicily and then moving on to the rebel island settlements, and then across the the water to start on taking the desert, and eliminating the Moors.

[ February 27, 2007, 17:20: Message edited by: iLLusioN' ]

 

Drat! Not only have the Mongols taken Jerusalem, but they have apparently taken over all but one settlement of the faction formally known as Egypt. I'm currently at 42 settlements, I am in the year 1292, but completing the game by 1300 seems out of reach now. The Pope has declared a crusade against Jerusalem. My plan is to take the full 10 turns to put together a crusading army, and then send them by sea to Jerusalem. With any luck, the other factions will get a head start to Jerusalem, and soften the Mongols up a bit before I get there. Of course, by implementing this strategy, it will be after 1300 by the time I even get to Jerusalem, never mind actually conquering it.

Fortunately, the Crusade has got a fairly decent response, considering how few Catholic factions are left. Besides my faction, Venice and Hungary are the two most powerful remaining Catholic factions, and both of them have sent a crusading army. Oddly, the PAPAL STATES CREATED A CRUSADING ARMY was well. I've seen dozens of Crusades, and never have I seen the Papal States actually attempt to shoulder some of the burden. I'm thinking that it must have something to do with the Papal States oddly controlling 4 settlements in this game. I guess you can't make much of a crusading army if the only settlement you control is Rome, but when you hold 4 settlements you can.

I have discovered one significant downside to my usually employed stategy of conquering all of Africa when playing a Catholic settlements to keep up good relations with the Pope. Since the newly-conquered settlements in Africa are pretty far removed from your capital, and are mostly Muslim, the only way to maintain order after conquering them is to exterminate the population. The problem there is you now have a settlement with few structures, and a long way to go to reach the next settlement level. As a result, newly captured settlements are near useless for fresh recruitments, and I notice that my armies are still being produced in my original citadels of Tolouse and Toledo, and then being sent (typically by ship) to where ever they need to go. The one advantage of taking over settlements with your religion is that you can typically incorporate them into your kingdom peacefully.

They are challenging, especially when you take Florence like you did, as you now potentially are sharing a border with all of the aforementioned factions. One thing I recommend to do early is change your capital. I forget the name of it, but your capital is on an island that serves no military significance. The problem is that all of your new family members come of age there, and have to be shuttled to the mainland to be used. It's a pain in the butt, so I usually make the switch early on. The settlement immediately east of Venice is Ragusa IIRC, and that is a pretty good choice for a capital.

I have found that the best way to maximize income is to keep the peasants happy. Obviously, you need to build financial structures when you can. But generally speaking, you make more money by having the peasants happy enough to maintain a "very high" tax rate, even if it means delaying the production of financial structures rather than building the financial structures straight away and running a "normal" tax rate. In other words, the tax rate, and not what is in the settlement is the primary factor in determining income. Obviously, if you are already running a very high tax rate, you'll maximize your returns by building the financial structures, but for me they are no longer a priority. After I have roads, I will only go for a financial building if I have over 100% public order with the maximum tax rate. Otherwise, I build brothels, town guards, etc. to maximize the tax rate, and then start pumping out ports,

EDIT: One more thing I forgot to mention. I obsolutely LOVE the French crossbowmen unit. I think they are called Adventuriers. Their range is incredible. I can even decimate pavaise crossbowmen with these guys as their range is so much greater. They are definitely coming on the crusade with me - probably 6 units worth of them - if I have time to get it done, I'll probably get them the heavy plate armor upgrade too.

[ February 27, 2007, 19:31: Message edited by: Aldeth the Foppish Idiot ]

 

Continuing with the HRE after I won, now almost at 1700. England, Scotland, France, Spain, Denmark, Milan, Sicily, and some other non-catholic factions are gone. The only factions left are HRE, Portugal, Venice, Poland, Hungary, Moors, Turkey, Russia, Byzanthine, Mongols, and Tirumids. I took Rome from the Papal States, so all they got now is a Pope and a ship, and I'm about to reduce that to a Pope.

The Cardinals are all Venitian or HRE. Seven HRE, six Venitian, and a Venitian Pope, soon to be deceased.

My current battlelines are the border to Poland and South-Eastern Europe, the Stettin-Madgesburg-Prague-Vienna-Venice wall. Venice attack Vienna and Venice while Poland sit around doing nothing, presumably out of cash. The other line is Bordeaux-Tolouse where the Portugese is continiously launching their men to the death. The Portugese also try to take Ajaccio and Cagliari from me, but that is prevented by two sturdy gunpowder and elite units armies located in each of the settlements.

The Papal States and the Portugese used to rule the Mediterranian, until I sent down my Gold-Rank Gun Holk and Carrack armies. Needless to say, I haven't lost a single ship while I've sunk 50+.

As for my own counterattacks, I use strictly mercenary armies. I get about 40k per turn so I can afford it, and when I've taken a settlement I replace all but the Arquibuisers, as they are pretty much the best unit around. This allows me to build a decent army in one or two turns to take whatever I want, as well as reinburse sieged settlements. I'm heading down to take the Iberian Peninsula first and then Poland is gonna kick the bucket.

As I am excommunicated as a result of taking Rome(my current regent have survived since, three Popes have died so far), I called a crusade to Jerusalem to make sure the other factions don't call a crusade on me, as I had every single other settlement in the crusade options scrolls. However, since I am excommunicated, they are using the crusaders to attack my borders. A bad mistake on my part, but with a 1-10 killcount I don't really worry.

I also took Dublin, the last English settlement(they had the King, the Prince, 2 Swordsmen units, 1 Peasant Archer unit, and 1 Town Milita unit, all reduced since a previous battle), with nothing but two units of Reiters, the mounted gunpowder units of HRE, one which had only 9 knights. I did it by sieging the town until they were forced to attack me to not surrender and then I picked them off slowly but efficiently and the town was mine. A bit cheesy, but I wanted to see if it was possible.

 

That's something I've never tried - I'm assuming the reason you continued playing is that you are trying to conquer the entire known world. Considering you still have both the Mongols and Timurids to deal with, it may be a while yet. It's kind of funny that the year is now 1700, and you still are using 1500s military equipment and dealing with the world from a 1500s perspective. You could conceivably get to near modern times before you take over everything.

Now that I think about it, facing the Mongols and Timurids may not be that bad, from both a military and economic viewpoint.

Economic: I'm assuming that the reason you're taking in so much money is that most of your cities have run out of stuff to build at this point. There's only so many building available to build, that even your level 5 settlements may have very well run out of options at this point. That means all your cities are huge population centers filled with happy citizens (from all the public order increasing buildings) who can be taxed out the whazoo. They take in tons of taxes every turn, and the only cost is unit upkeep, which is probably a pittance compared to their revenue streams.

Military: One of the reasons that the Mongols are so tough in the early going is not only because they show up with a huge force (although that certainly helps) but that at the point in which they show up, they have better units than anything your faction can conceivably have at the time. At that moment you are out-manned and out-classed. However, by the time you get to the late game where you can start producing professional armies (if you are playing the big five), the gap has narrowed considerably, and maybe even has turned the other direction where your troops are now superior. The final factor is that the amount of troops you are capable of producing is now on par with the Mongols as well. In my current game, I am once again the world's strongest faction, meaning my military now surpasses that of the Mongol Horde.

 

I've been ranked number 1 in everything for about thirty turns. They spent everything they had in wiping out eachother so now the Tirumids have a few but well-defended areas while the Mongols have all but the most western part of Africa and most of the Middle East but only a few troops in each settlement. The north-west part of the Middle East is held by the Turks and Byzanthines, but they should both be rather easy.

Yeah, pretty much. The only thing bringing my Public Order down is the excommunication from taking Rome. Know if I can be reconciled without having to turn over Rome?

Also, I can get Cardinal Superiority so fast it isn't funny. Oh wait, it is. I got the Master Theologican Headquarters and a lot of Huge Cathedrals so as soon as I build a priest he starts with at LEAST 5 piety and gets auto-promoted to a Cardinal 85% of the time. It's quite useful, I must say.

 

My assassin took out the last Mongol family member and I am now taking back the rebel settlements. The Mongols seem not to have had much in the way of defenders in the settlements they took over so it looks like I should have no problem taking them back. I just took Damascus and my army is on the way to Jerusalem which should give me the win given that I already have 47 settlements.

The Pope just died, which was good because my Papal rating had dipped to around 5 and I actually was about to send an assassin after him. With my majority in the council of cardinals I voted in one of my guys and jumped back up to 10 Papal rating.

 

Well I already did that. I changed my Capital to Venice, as it is my most developed city right now, and also the best protected. Hungary and the Byzantines seem to have taken an intense disliking to me.

Hungary sent 2 full stack armies against Ragusa, and I managed to take them out with about 700 units....500 of which were militia I had 4 Bowman units and 2 general units. I sent out my lesser general and managed to kill the armies using the siege towers and 3 our of 4 ladder groups. Sent a Militia out the gates to kill the ram users, and with my general I took out the Ballista they had and made it back to the city with 3 units left...including the general. Then the computer decided to send 2000 units up a god damn ladder. All 2000 units were in about a 3 inch space on my computer screen trying to get up the ladders, and i'm pretty sure thats why i lagged so god damn bad. It very seriously took me an hour and a half to finish the battle: 1 because i was grossly outnumbered, and 2 my pc was lagging hardcore. I ended up killing 1900 of 2400 of their infantry/foot archer units. The rest were cavalry and had no way to attack me. I ended up only capturing 4 ppl 3 of which were generals that they payed ransom for...and that i moved a 2nd army in to eliminate their heir, best general, and the heirs son.

 

I have noticed things like that too. It appears the Mongols and Timurids are only unstopable when they first arrive on the scene. After they take a few settlements over, they start behaving like a normal faction. In my game the year just passed 1300, and I am now once again ranked #1 in everything, including troops and wealth. I also think a major factor at least for the Mongols is that their units don't get any better as the game progresses, making them wildly overpowered when they first show up, but just average by the end of the game. I have never tried destroying the Timurids, but I imagine they do not suffer from this, as they already have late-game units.

What's wrong with 5? Unless you are planning on doing something else to anger the Pope, an average rating is perfectly acceptable. I definitely don't like my Papal standing to drop below 5, as you lose the ability to request crusades, but other than that there really isn't anything wrong with a rating of 5. By the middle of the game Papal standing should rarely be a problem. Usually you have so many Cardinals that whomever you pick becomes the Pope (which increases your standing) and with the construction of cathedrals and later huge cathedrals, you should consistently have a high standing

While I have never had this happen to me, you are not the first person to report a story similar to this. Evidently, even if you have a pretty good PC to run the game on, you are going to run into serious problems if all of the ground troops try to get up a single set of ladders.

That having been said, it doesn't surprise me at all that you were able to win a heroic victory and kill 1900 troops with only a few units remaining. That's because climbing ladders is the worst way to try and take a wall. When the attackers are on the ladder, they lose a major chunk of their defense ability. The only defense they get is their base armor. The shield is rendered useless for defense, as is their defensive skill. Therefore, even battle tested heavy infantry take major losses in trying to get up the ladders, and weaker units like spearmen and militia don't stand a chance. In fact, the advantage is so heavily tilted towards the defenders that even if the defending units were militia against heavy infantry, you probably would have held the wall. Now, if they actually got a foothold on top of the wall, then you would have a problem.

Too bad you can't see a breakdown of how many men your towers killed (although since you can see the breakdown for all other units, I suppose you could figure it out). That would be interesting to see. I imagine a significant portion of the enemy's losses were troops that never made it to a ladder. All of the troops waiting at the bottom were getting pelted continuously by arrows from the towers, while only a few were attempting to get up the ladders at a time. Did you take a screen shot after the battle? I'd love to see the body count on top of the wall, and at the base of the ladders.

As far as my game goes, I only play about 10 turns last night, but that was enough to reach the year 1300 - I think I'm technically at 1302 - and I took absolutely no new settlements, so I'm still sitting at 42.

If the Crusade is to be successful, it's me who has to do it, and I am not optimistic. The Hungarians got a beat down laid on them, and the Papal States and Venice signed a peace treaty with the Mongols before the Crusading armies even reached Jerusalem, so they didn't even try to take the city.

I have a few assassins and spies in the area, attempting to pick off Mongol generals, and having moderate success. That's how I know of the lackluster effort given by most parties involved in the Crusade. My Crusading army consists of a few grand bombards, one general, 6 other heavy cavalry, 3 heavy infantry, and the rest (9 I think) Adventuriers. I am not optimistic that is going to do it.

The thing that bugs me is as soon as my crusading army was assembled and boarded a ship, I had two castles and one city gain the ability to produce new troops. I waited until there was one turn left to produce a crusading army, so it's not like I could have delayed it further. It is frustrating that my best troops are not on the Crusade. I'm thinking my Crusade attempt will also fail, I'll lose most of the troops I send, and that it will be the next attempt that will be more successful. Now that I have the ability to produce culverns, basilisks, and serpentines, in addition to aequebusiers and mismounted french archers, the next attempt should be more successful.

 

I suppose there is nothing wrong with a Papal rating of five but I have so many cardinals and priests that are ready to become cardinals that replacing the Pope isn't really a big deal for me. I had a trio of assassins buzzing around Milan and Venice so it would not have been a big deal to send the maxed subterfuge one down to Rome to get the easy bump in Papal rating.

Speaking of which Venice was stupid enough to besiege one of my cities with an army that was greatly relying upon three generals and their bodyguards for offensive punch. My assassins took out two of the generals and my sally had no problem wiping them out. They tried again with a proper army a couple of turns later but I had thrown up ballista towers which thanks to the bug act as cannon towers. Naturally the towers cut them to ribbons.

 

The other thing I like about my current game is the vast number of different guilds I have. I started turning down guilds about half way through the game to wait and get one I really wanted. In future games, I think I will start this process even earlier. Because of my later start, I don't have as much diversity as I would like. For example, I only have one theologians, one assassin, and one merchants guild. I'd like to have more, especially considering my assassins guild is in Oslo, and thus, not in a particularly useful place.

One more question regarding guilds: Once you get the headquarters, does that give the benefit throughout your entire kingdom? I know that each upgrade in guild gives agents produced there a higher rating than what they otherwise would have. However, I would like to think that the actual headquarters would do even more.

About the only complaint I have is that all of my troops have to be produced in the extreme western parts of my kingdom, only to be transported to the eastern parts of my kingdom. Not only that, but they have to make a few stops along the way if I want them in peak condition to fight. For example, my two best troop producing castles are Tolouse and Angers. Troops produced at either place have to make stops at Bern to get their weapon upgraded, as that's the only location of a swordsmith guild, and then go all the way to Toledo - the only location of an armor factory in my kingdom. Same thing goes for artillery. After being produced, they have to go to Paris, as that's the only university I currently control.

I knew this would happen from the beginning of the game though. It's not practical to build everything everywhere in the early going - you don't have the money. While it may be nice to have armor upgrades available everywhere, since the higher level building have all the lower level buildings as prerequisities, it tens of thousands of florins in additional costs. Also, since I have so few castles, it was also impractical to hope to get the proper guilds in cities located nearby.

 

Yeah, guild acceptance is definitely something that I am going to have to focus on managing better next time. I have thieves' guilds everywhere in my current game.

I am not sure which faction I am going to try next. I am currently leaning towards trying an arabic faction.

 

Yep - same here. It seems that thieves guilds are some of the most commonly offered guilds, and I too have more of them than any other type. In fact, I may go so far as to say that the number of theives guilds I have is approximately equal to the total of all other guilds I have combined.

The strategy guide is even tight-lipped about guilds. After reviewing it, they only say that the better guilds offer better agent training. I wish I knew how to quantitate what they did - it's not even in the guild description if you right-click on it in the building browser.

All of the Arabic factions - Moors, Egyptians, and Turks are all pretty powerful in terms of the available units. As you might expect, there are also some serious downsides to this as well. Some are pretty obvious - given their location, they frequently have to deal with crusades, the Mongols, and Timurids, which greatly increases the difficulty. Some of them are not-so-obvious though. You would think that playing a Muslim faction would bring you into frequent conflict with the Catholic factions, but given the victory conditions, you're much more likely to get into conflict with other Muslim nations. All three Muslim factions have two cities they must hold in order to win. All three have Jerusalem as one of the cities, with the second being Toledo for the Moors, and Constantinople for the Turks and Egyptians. For all practical purposes, this means the Egyptians will need to eliminate the Turks, the Turks will need to eliminate the Egyptians, and the Moors will most likely have to eliminate both of them.

And Crusades are a major pain in the arse. Not only is it not fun having to defend a city against multiple consecutive attacks against full stack armies, it also screws your economy. You'll have trade agreements with everyone, and as soon as a Crusade is declared, all participating countries break their trade agreements with you. When the Crusade ends, it's sometimes not that easy to get a ceasefire and restoration of trade relations back in place.

For overall advice, I'd say that the Turks and Egyptians are about the same in difficulty, with the Moors being somewhat easier. The Moors obviously do not have the immediate threat of a Mongol invasion, and for some reason, it seems like Moorish settlements are infrequent crusade targets.

IMO, the Byzantines present a far more interesting game, as you really have no obvious enemies other than the Turks, nor do you have any obvious allies.

 

Up in year 1780-something now. No more factions being destroyed, but I now have noticed the closest outposts of the Mongols. It's Gazzaro, the city next to Zagreb, that is the closest Mongol city they have. This is going to be rough, I'd say.

As for Poland, they are down to two settlements. One in North Africa from an earlier Crusade and then there's Karkow, their capital. The Capital is in constant riots since I keep burning down their buildings with my assassin and they don't have the money to rebuild them. Hoping to kick them out this way in order to assault the city easier, since they got 20+ units in there.

Portugal have been beaten down to the Iberian Peninsula and I'm continuing the expansion to take all of Iberia with my mercenary armies while my full-experience, 9-ship fleet is holding the Mediterranian free from Portugese, Venetian, and Rebel influences. Only myself and the Mongols are still around.

Oh, killed the Venetian Pope too and got one of my own elected, so I'm now reconciled. Good thing is that I still got Rome and can raise the taxes just about everywhere due to a lesser disorder rating. Bad thing is that I can't attack anyone at will.

Still, only myself, Poland which is extremely crippled, a weakened Hungary, a mediocre Portugal, and a threatened Venice left of the Catholic factions. Russia and Byzanthine are both crippled and Russia will be my next target after Portugal, Poland, Venice, and Hungary are all dealt with. After that, it's time to expand south towards the Middle East and east through North Africa. Not a single settlement shall be left alone during my conquest.

As it look now, I'll be a good time into the 20th or 21st centuries before this game is over, and I haven't even started to move towards the Americas.

 

Yeah, you still have a long way to go. But it kind of makes sense. Consider how long it takes to play a long campaign, and then you're not even half way done. I never bothered to actually count how many settlements in total are in the game, but it has to be at least 100. So when you hit the 45 settlement mark, there are still more settlements outside your borders than within them. That having been said, it seems like things would have to start to get easier once you hit a certain point.

It appears that you have all of central and most of western Europe under your control. Those cities have been around for so long that you probably don't even have to look at them anymore, as they are fully developed and are no threat to be attacked. Assuming you are keeping the six free militia units in each city, that should be ample to deal with any rebels that pop up.

The biggest advantage about doing this is that you get to see all of your options in fighting opposing factions. Despite that I've played through this game numerous times, I'm still very inexperienced with fighting some of the factions. For example, I have never played nor fought against the Byzantines or the Turks, making them appealing options for my next campaign, whenever I get around to it.

 

Yeah, as I said, I go all mercenary armies now because it takes too long to properly train an army. However, the HRE Reiters are ****in' A! Riding gunpowder units with a decent charge and lots of ammo? Yes please!

And yeah, all of France, Germany, Switzerland, Austria, Italy, All but Krakow of Poland, Sweden, Denmark, Norway, England, Holland, Belgium, Wales, Scotland, Ireland and Finland is mine, together with two settlements in Northern Spain. I got a lot of **** going right now.

It's useful, yes, but not as good as you think. Poland have not been able to field anything post-gunpowder in like, ever, due to being stuck in-between me and Hungary. Russia and Hungary is the same, down to cheaper units. The Mongols and Tirumids keep Turkey and the Byzanthines down to a low level as well, and we all know what the Mongols and Tirumids have. What's left then is Venice, Portugal, and the Moors. The Moors may be gone, not sure, and Portugal always use the same kind of units. They go in quantity instead of quality and use the pre-gunpowder units.

Venice just send stacks of five or six units at me. They have never really been a real threat.

 

I finished off my long campaign as the English and started a new campaign as the Moors. Compared to the English they are much less suited for an inital rush at the nearby rebel settlements. I quickly put together an initial army and tried to take out El Cid at Valencia and got my butt kicked. I put together a second army with the same results. I decided this game wasn't going at all how I liked so I restarted - still as the Moors.

The second time I decided to take it much slower, ignore the mission to capture Valencia, build up my initial army a lot more and attack Lisbon. I killed the King and the Heir of Portugal and thus wiped out the faction in one quick attack. Meanwhile I had created a second relatively small army that I used to take Tunis and Tripoli.

I have spies and assassins making things miserable for Spain. I waited until I built up a strong army and finally went over to wipe out El Cid. All in all a much better start.

One thing that is annoying about the Moors is that the starting faction leader is pretty old and dies really quickly. That left the royal family a bit small for my liking but the Moors' royal family seems to breed like rabbits so that isn't a problem for long.