Hannibal Campaign woes and Pontus campaign struggle

[GiveWarAchance]

I finished the Pontus campaign recently and found it to be very hard cause I had 6 wins and 7 losses at the end. I was dismayed by having to recruit a new army after every win cause the campaign cherry picks a small number of random battles from the many that Pontus had in their struggle to takeover Anatolia while the Romans tried to get revenge for every little slight they could imagine. After each win, I was told I then lost 3 more battles and had to recruit a new army, so I was fighting the Romans who had superior and elite legions against my average level new recruits which were not as good as legions. So I lost many battles and was kicked back 3 times to repeat 2 battles. I am thinking this campaign could be vastly improved by allowing the player to keep one army so it gains experience and link the battles together instead of telling me I was losing several battles after every win. So make the campaign much longer but with linked battles and an army that carries over. That would make the campaign more fun and more realistic cause the player could be in control of those battles I was told I lost. And the superior & elite legions are very nasty to fight cause I automatically lose all fights unless I have the legions surrounded on 3 or 4 sides which is only possible in late battle if I manage not to have a mass rout.

About the Hannibal campaign, I played it though and won when this Fog2 game was new. It was hard but I was able to grind through for the win. But I tried 3 times to play it again these days and I got totally wrecked. I am stuck on the second battle with the Gauls which was a small roadbump battle for the historical Carthage cause the Gauls were holding up a mountain pass by ambushing the Carthaginians who were able to fight through the ambush to continue. But in this game it is an open field battle and my army literally melted away within 3 rounds of combat. I redid the battle depleted with a few reinforcements and I gave up when the routing was 28% to 0% after only 2 rounds of combat. Even the elephants lose 5 elephants per round and quickly rout. The African spearmen look impressive with big spears and stout shields but they take about 260 to 270 losses each round while doing almost no damage and rout after a couple hits like that. My Ligurian foot and Phoenician-style foot also take hundreds of losses per round and rout within 2 rounds as well so my whole line collapses completely with 3 rounds nobody is left except skirmishers and a few cavalry and I am due for the 40% rout rule to mercifully end it like Big John McCarthy swooping in to stop the slaughter.

Any ideas how to win as Carthage? I know about flanking but we had even numbers of units so that is not possible at battle start but I did manage to do some 2v1 attacks but my units always attack at 0% win chance and 75% loss chance even when attacking enemy units already engaged so my units took critical hits almost every time. The enemy is using all warbands plus some cavalry and Celtic chariots. The warbands are wrecking any type of units I field in part cause they are above average and some even highly superior versus my average units.

I guess everyone is busy with PBEM games now, but I hope some will try the Hannibal and Pontus campaigns. I am not sure what to do about the Hannibal one because I get wrecked by the Gauls and I know the Romans are much more dangerous than Gauls so the future is worse than bleak so I think Hannibal should take the loss and head back to Spain and not go near the deadly Gauls.

[SimonLancaster]

I haven't played that campaign but in general you don't want to go 1v1 against Superior Warband or standard Warband with Ligurian Foot and Phoenician Foot. Try to keep that until the last if possible. Once in melee, your African Spearmen should have an advantage over Warbands if they survive impact without being disrupted.

It also sounds like you didn't have much luck with your elephants as they usually do better on impact.

[samuelhoward]

drift bossI finished the Pontus campaign recently and found it to be very hard cause I had 6 wins and 7 losses at the end. I was dismayed by having to recruit a new army after every win cause the campaign cherry picks a small number of random battles from the many that Pontus had in their struggle to takeover Anatolia while the Romans tried to get revenge for every little slight they could imagine. After each win, I was told I then lost 3 more battles and had to recruit a new army, so I was fighting the Romans who had superior and elite legions against my average level new recruits which were not as good as legions. So I lost many battles and was kicked back 3 times to repeat 2 battles. I am thinking this campaign could be vastly improved by allowing the player to keep one army so it gains experience and link the battles together instead of telling me I was losing several battles after every win. So make the campaign much longer but with linked battles and an army that carries over. That would make the campaign more fun and more realistic cause the player could be in control of those battles I was told I lost. And the superior & elite legions are very nasty to fight cause I automatically lose all fights unless I have the legions surrounded on 3 or 4 sides which is only possible in late battle if I manage not to have a mass rout.

About the Hannibal campaign, I played it though and won when this Fog2 game was new. It was hard but I was able to grind through for the win. But I tried 3 times to play it again these days and I got totally wrecked. I am stuck on the second battle with the Gauls which was a small roadbump battle for the historical Carthage cause the Gauls were holding up a mountain pass by ambushing the Carthaginians who were able to fight through the ambush to continue. But in this game it is an open field battle and my army literally melted away within 3 rounds of combat. I redid the battle depleted with a few reinforcements and I gave up when the routing was 28% to 0% after only 2 rounds of combat. Even the elephants lose 5 elephants per round and quickly rout. The African spearmen look impressive with big spears and stout shields but they take about 260 to 270 losses each round while doing almost no damage and rout after a couple hits like that. My Ligurian foot and Phoenician-style foot also take hundreds of losses per round and rout within 2 rounds as well so my whole line collapses completely with 3 rounds nobody is left except skirmishers and a few cavalry and I am due for the 40% rout rule to mercifully end it like Big John McCarthy swooping in to stop the slaughter.

Any ideas how to win as Carthage? I know about flanking but we had even numbers of units so that is not possible at battle start but I did manage to do some 2v1 attacks but my units always attack at 0% win chance and 75% loss chance even when attacking enemy units already engaged so my units took critical hits almost every time. The enemy is using all warbands plus some cavalry and Celtic chariots. The warbands are wrecking any type of units I field in part cause they are above average and some even highly superior versus my average units.

I guess everyone is busy with PBEM games now, but I hope some will try the Hannibal and Pontus campaigns. I am not sure what to do about the Hannibal one because I get wrecked by the Gauls and I know the Romans are much more dangerous than Gauls so the future is worse than bleak so I think Hannibal should take the loss and head back to Spain and not go near the deadly Gauls.

I tried it out and it was really hard to win. Looks like my technique isn't working for me or I just haven't had any luck

[GiveWarAchance]

samuel, you tried the Hannibal campaign or Pontus? I think Pontus is winnable but Hannibal campaign was a disaster for me. Ironically, when I played Hannibal when this game was new I was able to enjoy it and planned to replay it again. I think it is a good campaign but the changes over the years to the units like warbands may have changed this campaign a lot. I really wanted my African spearmen to whoop some barbarians but good but it didn't work out.

SLancaster, I usually keep elephants in reserve and commit them later after the front lines are engaged because I am terrified of light javelin troops using the poor animals for pincushions. Maybe that is a not a good tactic because my infantry routed within 1 to 2 turns of engaging which would not allow time for the elephants to join in before they were my only units left unrouted so they would naturally want to join the rout as well.

[Paul59]

The warbands are wrecking any type of units I field in part cause they are above average and some even highly superior versus my average units.

In a campaign the AI Gallic army should not have any Above Average or Highly Superior units. It sounds to me like you might be playing on Deity difficulty, that gives the AI a quality boost and reduces the quality of your units.

I think it is a good campaign but the changes over the years to the units like warbands may have changed this campaign a lot.

If anything, warbands have been nerfed since the early days of the game. They certainly lost their +1 Cohesion Test modifier for being Heavy Foot, although they have had their points cost reduced from 63 to 58 points for Average units, and from 81 to 75 points for Superior Warbands.

I might give the campaign a go to see how I get on, like you I haven't played it since the early days.

[GiveWarAchance]

Paul, I do remember warbands were nerfed just after the game was released. I'm not sure how they evolved after that though. I don't think warbands are tough, but with experience they become combat effective.
As for the Hannibal campaign, I may have just played it well the first time. I do remember my African Spearmen barely holding out against the Romans and relying on the elephants to prevent a general rout, but I don't remember getting whooped by the Gauls early on when going from Spain to the Alps.

[Paul59]

Paul, I do remember warbands were nerfed just after the game was released. I'm not sure how they evolved after that though. I don't think warbands are tough, but with experience they become combat effective.
As for the Hannibal campaign, I may have just played it well the first time. I do remember my African Spearmen barely holding out against the Romans and relying on the elephants to prevent a general rout, but I don't remember getting whooped by the Gauls early on when going from Spain to the Alps.

I searched the game's patch notes, and I couldn't find any other changes that were specifically aimed at Warbands.

Did you check what your difficulty level was? The AI's units do not gain experience in a campaign, so if you were facing Highly Superior and Above Average warbands the only explanation is that you were playing on Deity.

I started the Hannibal campaign earlier this week and beat the Gauls 12/44, this was on Prince (static) level. It was nowhere near as easy as the score line suggests. It probably helped that I beat the Spanish 0/48 in the first battle. I played pretty well I thought, and had a lot of luck, and it could easily have gone against me. I couldn't guarantee that I would win it every time. So it seemed like a challenging battle to me, despite the score line, but I wouldn't say it was too hard.

[GiveWarAchance]

Hello Paul. I always set the game to the middle level (I forget name) on static so no AI bonuses I think. The map was very bottle-necked so I had to fight the warbands front to front with no chance at flanking. The mountains were historical so I don't mind them, but I think I my army routed immediately cause front vs front combat is always a disaster in this game and needs flanking and/or plenty of ranged weapon softening up normally to avoid a mass rout. Not sure what I did right the first time I played through the campaign. I think the time I lost, I was using Spanish Scutarii & African spearmen vs the warbands which is not smart cause Scutarii are quite fragile.