Great video but I’ve got to say my method is the most heroic journey you have ever seen in the Parthian campaign. I decided I hated the Middle East, and that I needed to haul my ass west, maybe Cyprus, Greece, sunny Spain? I didn’t care. I gathered everyone and went west. My towns were getting dominated with peasants sacrificing themselves and I left the towns virtually defenceless as I scarpered. I managed to take Sidon. Built a ship. Egypt and Pontus breathing down my neck I then went on a huge voyage and dodging ships until I arrived in Italy and croton. Sidon does just as I left port. Never cut it so fine, had to sacrifice a general to buy me some time. The brutii were luckily very spread and sparse as they were focused on taking Apollonia and Salona and thermon etc. I swept in and took croton and made croton my new capital just as I lost my last town back in the Middle East. I was also lucky enough that my economy held out long enough not to go under so I could build things. Honestly cut it so fine it was unbelievable. Literally down to my last pennies when I arrived. So there I was stranded in Italy with the faction ready to start its new location. I’m now after 100 turns sat there with 20 territories as the most powerful faction with 300k. Brutii scipii Macedonian and Greece all gone because of my wrath and lack of mercy in finding a new homeland in the med. I actually have screenshots proving my journey haha
Parthia was the first faction I won on vh/vh setting. Here was my experience, dont attack seleucids early on, because it will bring you into border with egypt. Early on parthia simply doesnt have enough money and people to deal with two full stacks from egypt. You could actually quite easily defeat two full stacks with your overpowered one full stack horse archer, the problem was they would show up every 3-5 turns. The worst case would be seleucids forming alliance with egypt, it would happen if your first move was to take babylon. What I found most easy was to first Attack armenia, then pontus, take over anatolia first, then go after egypt and also seleucids if they havent been taken over by egypt. Going this route takes a lot longer, but it makes you taking on egypt from the coastline instead of arabian desert. Although you would likely face post marian roman troops by the time you get into italy, but it only makes the game more entertaining at this point.
I recently ran a Scipii campaign where by the time I got to the Middle East, the damn Parthians had conquered almost everything. Just a sea of purple, no Selucids, no Armenians, Pontus was limited to just it's Western Turkish cities, and Egypt literally only had Memphis left. In this same campaign, the Spanish built a huge empire and Dacia wiped out Germania before promptly being wiped out by the Thracians. I like to think of this campaign as Revenge of the Nerds for the weaker factions.
I am playing Parthia for the first time and my situation seems to be quite unusual (but very intersting). I have to precise I play on hard/hard. I decided to focus on destroying Armenia quickly and I did, but then Seleucids and Pontus allied together against me while Scythie threatened my northern borders. I struggled a lot but I pushed all of them back. The thing is Egypt only focused on the western territories, so Seleucids were quite strong, sending full stacks after full stacks on me!
You said that horse archers are poor. You are wrong sir. Horse archers are the reason why the mongols dominated half the world. They are the most OVERPOWERED units in any total war game (by far, no contest). This is simply because you can freely harass the enemy with minimal casualties if used properly. I've fought many battles where I have killed thousands of soldiers while losing like 23 myself. The AI plays terribly vs horsearchers, they tend to just walk around getting shot or charge their exhausted infantry at you. If you are an experienced player you can destroy 10 full armystacks with 20 horse archers. Focus on killing their cavalry and general first, then charge their isolated units - you will wreck anything that comes your way. If you are familiar with LegendOfTotalWar you will know this aswell. It is a very micro-intensive strategy though, you might find it tideous to always keep an eye on your cavalry to make sure they are out of range from the enemy. With all this being said, I claim that horse archers are worth their weight in gold and should be your bread and butter. This is coming from a guy who has spent 1000+ hours into total war games, always V/H difficulty, i've won several hotseat campaigns aswell vs competent players. Just wanted to give my two cents. Cheers mate
Slingers have ammo of 40, archers have 30. So no Slingers have more ammo. Also the trajectory of the rock is flat, so the rocks tend to hit fast moving and badly armoured units like horse archers and chariots a lot more, making slingers the unit of choice against them. On the other hand Slingers have a range of 80, archers of 120. This way archers are a better allround unit.
I believe slingers reload faster than archers, but I could be wrong. If so, then the damage output over an amount of time should be similar, considering the lower damage value.
I would have re-balanced the Parthians to have slightly better non cavalry roster whilst still having weaker infantry than the Hellenstics and the Romans. The map should be enlarged in the east include the rest of the Seleucid empire territories. The Parthians will now be moved new starting positions east of the Caspian Seas their first objectives is to conquer the Seleucid territories in the far east to establish a secure homeland. This will allow them to reform the Persian empire and gain new more powerful units Melee Infantry: Eastern Levies: This is pretty much the Eastern Infantry renamed and have their recruitment and upkeep reduced. Persian Spearmen: Replacing the Eastern Infantry as the mainline infantry, the Persian Infantry have better morale and improved defense skill to 4 and their attack increased to 5 especially how they are going to be your main front-line units to hold the enemy whilst your main killing power is in your archers and super heavy cavalry.Persian Infantry are still inferior to the Infantry of the Diadochi kingdoms so best used as a holding unit for hammer and anvil. HIllmen: Should have their spears replaced with armour piercing axes and javelins making them a cheap equivalent to Roman legionaries. However due to inferior melee stats they will lose in a head on engagement with heavier infantry so they are best to be a flanking unit. Persian Heavy Spearmen: The heaviest infantry available unit to the Parthians. A spearmen unit with good defense, armour and melee skills but is still inferior to Greek Hoplites, Diadochi Pikemen and Roman Legionaries. A post reform unit used to hold the line and can last longer than regular Persian Infantry. Has an axe for secondary attacks that pierce armour. Missile Infantry Eastern Slingers: Slingers that have vastly improved range and armour pierceing Persian Archers: A unit that replaces Archers. Their range is increased to long range so they can target enemies at ranges further than before. However they can not form close formation and are weak in melee and are poorly armoured Archer-Spearmen: A Persian Archer that replaces their knife secondary with a Spear and have improved melee stats in attack and defense skill and have combat bonus against cavalry and can defend themselves against weak infantry and cavalry. However still poorly armoured and are vunerable to massed range fire Mardian Archers: An improved Persian archer with very long range and improved range damage to 10. Also has average melee stats to hold its own against light infantry but is weak to cavalry and still lightly armoured and will suffer against range fire. Heavy Persian Archers: Has the same stats as the Mardian Archers but now has good armour meaning they can wistand enemy archer fire but will suffer against slingers and heavy cavalry available in the post reform era Cavalry: Parthian Horse Archers: This pretty much the same as normal horse archers but with increased ammo count and longer range and very good stamina Parthian Nobles: Renamed Persian cavalry. Dahae Riders: Same Parthian Horse Archers with increased damage but have a spear for a secondary weapon with a decent charge bonus. Recruitable only in the steppe regions and during the pre reform era of the game though can be purchased as mercs later Dahae Nobles: A well armoured horse archer that have lances for a good charge but is weak in sustained combat. Recruitable only in the steppe regions and during the pre reform era of the game though can be purchased as mercs later Early Parthian General: A well armoured horse archer that has sword for secondary and good melee stats. Avaible in the pre reform era Late Parthian General: A extremely heavily armoured and powerful cataphract general unit with outstanding charge and melee stats. Attack rating 14, Defense 30, Charge 10 Eastern Light Cavalry: A javelin throwing skirmersh cavalry Median Cavalry: A medium cavalry unit with decent charge and melee stats. Primary weapon is a spear whilst the secondary weapon is an armour piercing axe. Cataphracts: Heavily armoured and strong cavalry unit with a powerful charge Noble Cataphracts: A cataphract unit that is even stronger than normal cataphracts. Is very expensive. Attack rating 11, Total Defense 28, Charge 9. Royal Cataphracts: This is the strongest horse unit in the game even stronger than other Cataphracts available only in the post reform era and from the highest level of Stables. Attack 14, Defense 30, Charge 10. Very Good Morale, Very Well Armoured Camel Cataphracts: A heavily armoured camel rider with a combat bonus vs cavalry and combat bonus in desert Indian Elephants
@@johnirby8847 Yes the Cavalry is, though people want a game where the infantry can be used as well. And well parthian infantry isn't the best for sieges, and taking cities in the main aspect of the game so it has to be done, Parthias out of all the empires in that empire survived to the end of the "classical" rome era, therefore they'd deserve a little more late game beef compared to the superior selucids they would conquer.
Parthia is one of the hardest and most interesting faction to play. Horse archer is the most powerful & annoying unit in RTW To play horse archers, you need to pause the game very often
i tend to train eastern infantry over hillmen cause there is simply more of them in a unit and i use them as a buffer between my cav and the enemy forces so my own cav can reform behind them
Archers and militia hoplites is all you need to counter them. It’s arrow on arrow slog fest. You will take losses. When they run out of arrows on either side use fast militia cav to chase them down, hold ALT to set them to melee to hunt them down. As they approach them they still will throw javelins too.
@@RocketHarry865 true, but they are dirt cheap peasants that exist to die, even if... when they run, if you did it right, your shock cav will be mid charge straight into the opposition's back or side
I'll have you know, I use camel units all the time (had a bout where I played as Numida, who uses Camels regularly as their cavalry), and they're far better than you give them credit for. They are actually great anti-cavalry units, making the enemy cavalry rout if you can keep a solid offensive up, and they're just fast enough to run down most infantry units. And considering how terrible Parthian infantry are, they're the best anti-cavalry units you're gonna get. Still, I can agree that it's better overall to use Cavalry units if you prefer speed over intimidation. And also, I personally only like Camel Archers for having better missile stats than Horse Archers do.
Onagers do have some field use, if used on the field with fire pots, though inaccurate, they can take huge chunks out of units, aim at the center of the army and missed shots have a higher potential to hit something, it can also be used to attack while fighting defensively, if you have onagers and a superior position, i.e. a hill but you initiated the attack, the AI will often turtle and make you approach, but if you have onagers they have to choose between attacking your superior position, or weathering the fire, this works best on infantry faction like greeks and gauls, but cavalry factions and horse archer factions rely less on position and will be largely unaffected, oh and i do this with Romans mainly, it does require a strong immobile front line
In one campaign I do in VH/VH when fighting Carthage, they send against my archers 3 stacks of Long Shield Cavalry ignoring that behind them was my Camel Cataphract. The 3 units route after a few seconds of fighting killing one camel, but losing nearly 50 units. So yes Parthia sure is OP when you have resources and mixed armies.
You mention pronunciation isn't your forte but it is still kind of weird how you manage to properly pronounce Seleucia and consequently mispronounce Seleucids.
I always keep a unit of peasants within my skirmishing line just to have cheap meat shields in case the AI decides it's a good idea to charge directly against my javelins/slingers with his general unit xD
I cheese those rebel settlement Lure their defensive army out of the town get them running and tired. Then I sneak my general into their town center. Their units will be too tired to get back
How the hell do you even consider besieging a settlement with this faction? Maybe I'm just being a scrub, but I can't see anything other than autoresolving being a viable solution.
ESFAndy011 In early game, I just go all out on rangen cav... With 1 inf for a siege unit. Get control of the gate and send in your cav archers. Always keep them on the option where they retreat from close enemies and just snipe all of the enemies’ units.
If it's a wooden walled city, I'll use what few infantry units I possess (usually Hillmen, since they're generally quick infantry units) to break holes in the walls at various locations, and then let my cavalry archers pepper the enemy with arrows, or charge into enemies' exposed flanks. It's difficult, but doable if you're patient (Elephants work wonders in these scenarios, but by the time you get them, most cities have stone walls). If the enemy has a stone wall, my suggestion is to wait them out. Besiege the city, and wait for them to surrender or sally out to meet you. I've learned from personal experience that it's ill-advised to RT a siege with stone walls as Parthia; being a calvary-heavy faction, it's not a wise tactic. Generally, when besieging enemy settlements, you want them to come to you. Preferably into open territories where your calvary have more mobility and you have the advantage. The same goes if *you* are the defender; you want them to be in a scenario that benefits you, and sometimes that means sallying out to meet them (not always the best option, but the plus side is that it usually prevents the enemy from having any siege equipment built). It allows you to turn the fight into your favor, more often than not.
1st parthia play style heavily relies on horse archer second camels are not bad because they are fucking slow !!!???? camels are great against cavalry. total war series are historically and militarily very accurate and camels are bigger then horses and it causes horses to scare. this dynamic is deployed in game
Camels just can't survive regular archers though...camels can't even hit fast moving horse archers in skirmish mode. Camels are great if you don't like to pause but unless it's multiplayer you can pause and avoid all camel attacks
@@johnirby8847 even the scenario you described is a win for Persians. if enemy's cavalry left the army so they don't face your camel riders your regular horseman can take their main army easy as it could get. I did not say maneuverability is the strong point of camel riders. their strong point is their strength against horse cavalry which is historically accurate too( because camels are bigger than horses and horses get scared more easily). Persian armies always are mainly cavalry and having some cheap camel riders alongside them gives you more strategic maneuverability. Persian play style is to surround enemy units with horse archers and make them to fight you and when they try to catch horse archers you ambush them with regular cavalry which even this is historically accurate. in the end camel riders are not useless not in in single player and not in multiplayer but are not main component of army earthier and can be replaced with more expensive and well armed units. they are in general early - mid game units because regardless of their strength, once your kingdom gets big, recruiting and having them becomes a hassle which even this is logical because camels are only suited for dessert conditions not conquering Europe for example
@@Mehdi-mc4ij But you see my friend that is their weakness. Camel cataphracts will absolutely destroy cavalry units...there is no doubt. Horse archers can surround and attack if the opponent lets that happen...there is no doubt. The problem is an army of 4 phalanx and 12 archer units can beat stacks and stacks of horse archer/camel cataphract combos. Anytime a cataphract trys to charge the archers you just bring up pikes from behind the archers. Anytime the horse archers attempt to surround you push all units in one direction to force all the horse archers to move or be split...constantly micro your archers to hit whatever horse archers turn around to hit them in the back. Horse archers only work if they can surround or fire while moving or retreating. If you constantly push them in a direction they will run out of space to move on the map. The archers don't have the same problem because if you micro correctly archers will never have their backs turned to an opponent where they are most vulnerable but the horse archers will continuously have their backs showing in order not to be flanked.
@@johnirby8847 how you want to defend with 4 phalanxes against Persian cavalry? phalanxes are good against cavalry as long as they are facing them. if you are packing that many archers to counter Persian mounted archers then you don't have enough soldiers to defend and prevent cavalry flanking. I have played lots of Persia campaigns and I gotta say contrary to you belief Persians never have problem fighting Greek based cultures. instead Persians feel weak against well rounded armies which has little of every type of unit like Romans or Egyptians. all this said I am not saying Persians are the strongest factions. my point in my original comment is that this guy in video does not know what he is talking about. he does not know how to play with Persians and camel cavalry is not useless. certainly there is combinations that hard for Persians to fight.
@@Mehdi-mc4ij 4 phalanxes and 12 archers is what you would use against a human in multiplayer. You are right he doesn't know what he's talking about with the camels. They are they best anti-cavalry in the game.
i always disband the cataphracts, they are tooo expensive and horse archers do the job easily in the early game, also i let the northern province rebel then massacre them, cause they are never happy and income is negative from them for llike 20 turns otherwise.
I personally would agree that abandoning that place is probably for the best; it gets little to no income, and it's generally a bad place to begin with. However, I fear you severely underestimate the power of the Cataphracts. Yes they're expensive, but they are *so* worth the cost; you just need to know how to use them. They're shock troopers, with a powerful charge attack; not even heavy Roman Cavalry can stand up against getting hit by a Cataphract charge, especially if you manage to flank them. I'd recommend keeping them for as long as you can, and use them at key moments in battle to turn the tides in your favor - while they are powerful cavalry units, I wouldn't recommend them for chasing down enemies or pursuing other cavalry units; no, their use is in the more immediate vicinity, where they don't have to travel too far to cause damage.
income is never negative. Cities never lose you money. If the "income" becomes positive after sacking the city that's because the game thinks "there's less people here, it doesn't need to contribute as much to paying for your armies" This means your *other cities* need to pick up the slack and pay for what that city was paying for. Plus, there's less people here now, which means less tax income. This means you are making far less money to pay for the same army expenses. You sack cities to deal with public order and for some extra short term cash from looting, that's it. If you're going to let it rebel, there's little point in taking it back when you can just take a much more profitable city to the south.
