Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 [2]

Author Topic: Field of Glory: Empires (Imperator, but actually good)  (Read 2626 times)

Majestic7

  • Bay Watcher
  • Invokes Yog-Soggoth to bend time
    • View Profile
Re: Field of Glory: Empires (Imperator, but actually good)
« Reply #15 on: July 23, 2019, 10:47:15 am »

I forgot about the emergency levy, but I'm still quite sure AI is cheating. The enemy is not going down in Legacy points in the ranking list despite constantly getting new troops after all. This is really my only complaint, I like the game a lot otherwise.
Logged

Majestic7

  • Bay Watcher
  • Invokes Yog-Soggoth to bend time
    • View Profile
Re: Field of Glory: Empires (Imperator, but actually good)
« Reply #16 on: July 25, 2019, 11:27:11 am »

Haha, okay, Imperial Legions are ridicilously overpowered.

I'm playing as Syracuse and Rome has Imperial legions in 200 bc. They are as good as archers in ranged combat but resist skirmishing like heavy infantry, they have flanking bonus like cavalry, hitpoints like phalanx and combat rating equal to spartan hoplites. :D Who the hell designed this and thought it was a good idea? In addition to those stats, they have siege bonus and can fortify. Hahaha, someone is a serious romeboo!

I'd be fine with legions being tough, but this kind of circlejerk stupid because it mean Rome needs no skirmishers or cavalry. Plus Roman ships are tougher than ordinary ships, which is another silly matter, considering they were known for their poor seamanship compared to Phoenicians and Hellenes.

As a result, it seems useless to play anyone but Rome or factions far away from Rome, since you just can't beat them as they have both quantity and quality.
« Last Edit: July 25, 2019, 11:50:12 am by Majestic7 »
Logged

Urist McScoopbeard

  • Bay Watcher
  • Damnit Scoopz!
    • View Profile
Re: Field of Glory: Empires (Imperator, but actually good)
« Reply #17 on: July 25, 2019, 06:20:37 pm »

Ya if you start close to Rome, you have to expand somewhere to get an advantage over them. Idk if Syracuse starts with phalanges, but you need extremely quality heavy infantry with support bonuses to hold them off.

In my last playthrough I avoided war with Rome for as long as possible, and had Gothic Heavy Infantry (which is pretty OP) and cataphracts to go toe to toe with them. Even though, if it had not been for a long series of really bad civil wars id probably just be equal with them.

Units which will probably help off the top of my head:
-- Any Phalanx
-- Gothic Heavy Inf
-- Dacian Heavy Inf
-- The Belgae Heavy Inf (I forget the name, provincial unit, same as the others)
-- Cataphracts
-- Archers (as opposed to other slinger/skirmishers)

Try to avoid medium infantry, as Rome, and other powerhouses, will slaughter them. Definitely try to reduce combat width, as they have large armies. Although, as long as you dont fight on plains, neither side will be able to use the full weight of their army, so quality is often more important.

As my empire grew, I pretty much had to tank the expenses and use mostly heavy infantry as my main frontline unit, especially named heavy infantry. Although, in some instances Cataphracts can be more devastating.

As for useless to play factions near Rome, the Italian Peninsula is tough, but (in Sicily, Iberia, or Illyria) if you can diplomicizetm well, you just have to wait them out as they'll inevitably get into other wars/revolts. Be warned, from my experience they'll most aggressively pursue their objectives in African Carthage and Illyria/Balkans.

To exacerbate the whole problem, if Rome doesn't get into historical or a-historical bloody conflicts early on, they can definitely snowball hard--although again, if they stagnate expansion-wise, you'll most likely get some space. Italy always seems like its ready to revolt.
Logged
This conversation is getting disturbing fast, disturbingly erotic.
Pages: 1 [2]