C3C PBEM : Rise of Rome - scenario-based PBEM

[akots]

... It was a long game ...

Actually, compared to other games with 5 human players, this one moved at a lightning speed. For most of the time we made a turn per day. There were occasional breaks but it was really very fast. Just want to thank Loulong for organizing this one and keeping a close watch on it. As well as playing a minor power. This was apparently not a huge fun but it helped to keep the important balance intact.

 

[akots]

... Just how many friggin' luxes are my so-called friends (the Greeks) giving him???!!!!!

Surprizingly, only furs. This was my little revenge for Ravenna and all that aggressive settling in the middle of the game in Danube valley. It screwed a lot of plans especially the ones including Scyth. And we did not have very strict rules about trade embargos.

 

[ironduck]

I didn't know Macedon was also spying back for Rome (figured they did not want to help Rome any further since the fall of Carthage would mean a sure win for Rome). It wasn't a big surprise though, since I knew Rome and Macedon had a detailed treaty of sorts regarding what was and wasn't allowed, and Macedon likely did not want to piss off Rome. Either way, the espionage was definitely helpful for Carthage.

4) Since Rome is the only city on the river, this actually guarantees they get ToA (and probably Bacchanalia as well) which is way overpowered. To counter this, Carthage better be more aggressive when Hannibal gets to war elephants. At least it was possible to land some troops and may be pillage some tiles or captured and kill workers. But it was a bit frustrating to watch them sit and wait when Roman legions will finish killing the AI and come to Iberia and Sicily.

This comment feels a little annoying since you did not know our millitary situation at that time. As I explained in my long post, Carthaginian millitary was extremely limited after being erased from Sicily. I realize you have beat Rome as Carthage in another game, but it started off rather differently. When I first got into a lot of trouble from the get-go it was a long haul to get out of it. Well played by RJ to break Carthage so early in the game, of course. I have played RJ before and knew he can attack ferociously and swiftly, so just blindly attacking to pillage tiles etc would be rather foolish, especially considering the balance of power.

I can assure you Carthage was not sitting and waiting, I was doing my best to build forces and deploy them to damage the Romans the most. I think I only made two obvious mistakes, the first was the failed initial assault to secure Sicily (although I'm not sure I could do much better in a new game with RJ). The second was using workers to blockade Sardinia, but I was unaware that they no longer have that ability.

And yes, our tech pace was considerably slower - hardly surprising. We traded with Persia early in the game, but they got strapped for cash and mostly concentrated on fighting the Macedon who kept pushing them further back. Rome and Macedon on the other hand made oodles of money and could research at lightning speed.

I actually think this game was the most fun for me as Carthage because it was a constant uphill battle where I was both being attacked and could do fun counter attacks. The Romans 'had' to win this game after they did so well in the beginning (also grabbing Temple of Artemis), it was mostly an expansion game for them. The Macedons and Persians were locked in a war of attrition from the time Random Fan took over, and Egypt could only do so much with their 3rd world status as RJ put it

 

[akots]

At that point in the game when Carthaginian military was stronger, it was well possible to wreak havoc in Roman core apparently. Sardinia was important. But if all these elephants would land around virtually defenseless Rome or Neapolis (Rome was in anarchy), this would have been extremely devastating imo. I just remebered that RJ was really surprized and a bit scared back then.

 

[LouLong]

OK I guess my 3rd word country must say something now !

3rd-rank : for sure. 3rd world ? Not so sure. We made good money, which helped Carthage a lot (I don't remember how much altogether but gold + gpt amount to quite much).

First I think Egypt played by a human changed a lot the way the game was played. For instance in normal games Persia would have rolled over Egypt whereas here, through cunning because it was my only weapon, Egypt even expended !
Now it was not really fun most of the time but sometimes it was really great to play diplomatically

My point was to survive. Carthage was busy with Rome and after the initial shock when they settled Kyrenaic, relations started to improve (probably because they lost so much power in Sicily actually lol). Macedonia could be an interesting ally but not officially. Persia was the main threat and owned areas that are traditionally Egyptian dominions (Palestine). Rome was distant but threatening but could be a punctual trading (tech or lux) partner.
So we kind of got an agreement with Akots. Not really official, partly because of the bad reputation I had at that time through another scenario. But I guess Akots can consider I was a good partner in THIS game at least. I would have liked it to be stronger but (probably because of its treaties with Rome) it did ot happen.
Besides I was not important enough (even for Persia after Random Fan took over).

After the first Carthaginian disaster I grew worried about a plain and simple Roman path to victory.

So as a small neutral power I tried to organize a small international conference in Egypt (kind of enjoy the drinks and the girls on the banks of the Nile, leave your weapons at the gate and let's do something to limit Rome's success).
My proposition of the organization of army groups from Macedonia and Persia (these would be under a flag of truce) to attack Rome's expansion in the North and East while I would send a fleet and Carthage try to attack in Spain did not work well, mostl because of Akots' lack of interest (which is clear now). Rocinante agreed but soon after he quitted. Anyway the plan would have needed Akots' agreement to be doable.

Then I concentrated on trying to expand my pop (not by founding other cities but by developing existing ones) and my trade. My troops were so weak (apart from my ships that were standard) that I gave up the idea of attacking directly but provided money to Carthage.

I tried some more times to drag Akots into a conflict with Rome but without success (by then I had kind of figured they had signed an agreement).
My fleet was crushed by Romans and I only tried one small (by comparison to Rome's forces) landing to disrupt Roman supply lines but I arrived to late.

Nice though, albeit AP on (IIRC) made it a pumping out units game at the end.

 

[ironduck]

I was never stronger than Rome. I followed the millitary advisor every turn, and I only pushed up into 'average' for a small period of time while Rome was in anarchy. That meant that I was not even equal to Rome, I simply got into the 'average' bracket which can contain quite large differences since there are only three brackets.

When I took the two islands I did consider going further and attacking Rome, but I expected the Romans to keep a decent amount of troops in their heartland (just adding what they had on those two islands would be tough to deal with), and when you land an invasion you need to have an overwhelming force, not just a slightly more powerful one. I figured I needed to gather more forces, but by the time I had that I started getting attacked in Spain which kept me occupied.

My point being that a) according to my advisors Rome was always stronger and b) if I landed a mediocre force in the Roman core and it got wiped out I would be dead meat. If I had known the Romans had very little forces in the peninsula I would obviously have attacked before, but the same thing can be said for the Romans. If they had known just how weak I was after losing Sicily they could have wiped out Carthago. Neither of us knew, so we didn't.

 

[ironduck]

Lou, I didn't mean to say that you played as a 3rd world country, simply that you had tough odds that meant you could never be a major power at least millitarily - and also difficult territorially since Egypt is squeezed into a small area. It was a more fun game at least for me with Egypt played by a human, and as I said in the end game half my economy was contributed by Egypt, which was quite impressive. I estimate that meant perhaps 25-30% more units to hold the Romans back with after their invasion..

Also, I'm not sure if anyone realizes that what you all apparently consider a Carthaginian 'disaster' in the beginning was also effective warfare by RJ! It sounds like I lost something I should have won by default, but have any of you played all-out war with RJ? He's a pretty good player, you know.

 

[akots]

@Ironduck: Well, actually, Rome knew you were weak back then after the Sicily was captured.

And Roman core was virtually defenseless if you would have landed a decent force of War Elephants there. This was known to Macedonian scouts. Macedonian king back then even was tempted to do it himself and it looked like 20 or 30 HCs could do the job and very well. But he decided to stick to his word instead.

@Loulong: Yep, remember than conferece. It did not yield good results since Macedon and Persia did not want to make a truce and play a phony war for some time. My main concern would be that Persia might grow too strong to handle comfortably lately in this case. Which was probably right.

 

[ironduck]

Akots, if you knew the Roman core was virtually defenseless and was tempted to land a force there yourself then why didn't you inform me? Instead you waited with bringing information until later when I asked you for it.

Also, I doubt the Romans knew just how weak I were or they would have taken Carthago (or perhaps they were just allowing me to stay in the game? RJ will have to answer that)

 

[akots]

In another game, as Carthage, I have put highest priority in holding off in Sicily. This included heavy whipping of cities there, in Sardinia and even some in the core to get there as many units as possible within the few first turns. As well as building walls. All NMs available were shipped there. iirc, There were about 10 or 11 units overall by turn 6 including a few starting swords and spearmen/NM. But not sure if this would be enough against RJ.

 

[akots]

Akots, if you knew the Roman core was virtually defenseless and was tempted to land a force there yourself then why didn't you inform me? ...

It was before the overwhelming Roman rexing was evident. And Macedonian forces made a good progress over Persia at that time. So, devastating the Roman core back then by Carthage was not in the best interest of Macedon. Apparently, wrong conclusion has been made by me. If I knew what would happen with Persian stalemate, this could have changed a lot.

 

[ironduck]

In another game, as Carthage, I have put highest priority in holding off in Sicily. This included heavy whipping of cities there, in Sardinia and even some in the core to get there as many units as possible within the few first turns. As well as building walls. All NMs available were shipped there. iirc, There were about 10 or 11 units overall by turn 6 including a few starting swords and spearmen/NM. But not sure if this would be enough against RJ.

It was all over by turn 3 or so, there was no time to whip much (I did whip though). I made a few mistakes in moving troops around, but as I mentioned it *was* top priority to control Sicily, but when Caesar landed he mowed everything down.

 

[ironduck]

It was before the overwhelming Roman rexing was evident. And Macedonian forces made a good progress over Persia at that time. So, devastating the Roman core back then by Carthage was not in the best interest of Macedon. Apparently, wrong conclusion has been made by me. If I knew what would happen with Persian stalemate, this could have changed a lot.

Well, if this was before you had decided that it was in Macedons interest to help Carthage then you can hardly say that you were being frustrated awaiting Carthage's attack on Roman core while I was apparently 'sitting and waiting' according to you. The window of opportunity I had to attack the Roman core according to you happened before you decided that it was in Macedon interest to help Carthage. So if you were happy with the partnership you had at the time with Rome I don't see how you could be frustrated by Carthage's lack of progress in the war. Something here doesn't make sense

Either way, I think that in order for Carthage to beat Rome when Rome has its back completely free the Carthaginian player has to be considerably better than the Roman player (or just plain lucky). I doubt I'm a better player than RJ so without the relevant intelligence while I had the opportunity I don't think I did too badly.

 

[Rubberjello]

Wow! What great revelations are coming out!
(Thanks for the complements, Ironduck. But I'm not sure I really deserve them (at least tactics-wise). I this game has taught me anything, it is that my strength as a player is more for growing a Civ than being a warmonger.)

In terms of some of the issues brought up:
By the time Carthage invaded Sardinia, most of my Northern Forces were back from the Celtic/Hun wars (quite a few Elite Legionairy II's and III's). These, combined with the evacuated forces from Siciliy and Sardinia, would have been able to fight off a force of 35+ Elephants/Cavs quite easily. (Be it Greeks or Carths). It would have been nasty if Sicily and Sardinia were bypassed and a direct landing was made near Rome. (and yes...freshly out of Anarchy, I was close to panicking due to the sudden show of strength by the Carths). Once I was able to start cash-rushing units though, my Military grew back very quickly indeed.

In terms of the Carthage original defense of Sicily...it was very, very stiff. We both put a great deal of effort into those initial battles, if I remember right. I think I lost 4-5 of my precious legions during it. The result was that I think both Rome and Carthage were militarily exhausted by the time the "Island Wars" were over. I don't see how Akots could have done much better than Ironduck did, as Ironduck even threw in his precious general, which Carth players don't do from what I've seen on these forums (They wait for elephants or Cavs). 80% of the Roman military was used either Sicily or Sardinia.

I don't know why Akots was so surprised with Roman Settlements on the Danube. I settled there very, very early in the game. At that point I wasn't really trying to limit Greek power or expansion - I just knew from prior experience that those cities could become marginally productive with their locality to Rome. (And they became far more productive when the capital was switched to Genoa! )

I still think that Akots hiding the Carth invasion force was a low blow, but it was something I might have done in his place, so I really can't blame him!
I regret giving Persia some techs in that it was a direct violation of our agreement with the Greeks, but the collapse of Persia under the previous two rulers was seriously endangering a nicely balanced game.

In the interest of a balanced game, I still don't agree with Loulong's decision to ally with Akots against the crumbling Persians. That was just as bad as having an AI bought in a cheap alliance. (Although I do really appreciate Loulong's playing Egypt so that they weren't brought into an alliance much earlier like other games have shown which creates some balance issues.)

One thing that this game taught me---Legions suck. They are way too expensive considering an enemy cav can quite easily kill them. The second thing (besides protecting my core better!) was that Armies suck for offensive operations against other humans (where they are targeted unmercifully) - they are much better defensively. Masses of cheap defenders protecting Cavalry was the only way to go for the long slog through Spain --- which got boring for both Ironduck and myself, as it was equivalent to trench warfare.

 

[ironduck]

Well, I'm glad to be vindicated by RJ with regards to the Sicilian battle! It's a long time ago and I don't remember every single detail, but I rushed from the very first turn to take it over BEFORE Caesar arrived, and I really thought I had it nailed when Hannibal's army stood outside the Roman city with a single defender remaining or so. Then Caesar arrived and crushed me. It's a shame we didn't write stuff in the forum at that time, but it was a very intense fight for the few turns it lasted as we both knew it was key for how the game would unfold. I lost and the Romans got the breathing room to expand northwise.

Also, I always figured that I would have been destroyed if I had landed that invasion force that akots talked about and RJ just confirmed it. It was only later when I had a much larger force and specifically pinpointed Rome itself that I was successful. Horses can't really blitz through when you play the way RJ and me did - in case no one noticed, RJ never blitzed through Carthaginian lands, it was slow, steady progress. You either have a huge stack of pikes or you get slaughtered trying to fend off cavalry counterattacks. The Romans got to feel that three times in a row before they mounted their enormous pike stacks.

Btw, RJ you never really were in danger in Spain after you managed to put in that city to split my territory in two. At that point I was merely trying to make it look like I had troops waiting for you like I did earlier, but in reality I was moving my forces into position to attack Rome itself. Unfortunately I was delayed due to the loss of Sardinia and thus you had time to gather forces and I knew I couldn't just walk through your core.

If the same team here wants to try another scenario I'm definitely up for it! It was a lot of fun to play Carthage, rarely a dull moment with the Roman dogs of war breathing down my neck! I just hope I don't end up at war with RJ again!

 

[akots]

Well, what can I say? It was as complicated game as it probably could have been certainly with some mistakes and misjudgements by all players including Macedon in particular! Both from the strategical, tactical, and diplomatic point of view. But it was a great fun!

 

[dgfred]

WOW, that's some great reading material !!!

 

[Random fan]

Heh I guess it is time for me to confess some sins too . Well after I joined the game one of the the main priority was to climb out of the tech hole so I searched for opportunities to fish for techs At first I got monarchy from Carthage which ruler were so kind and gave me it for free . But the main priority were Republic and Enginnering of course. All those rivers around Arbela and other cities were a great pain to defend so I could really use Enginnering and although Persia is religiuos I didn't wanted to switch at first to Monarchy and then to Republic, keeping in mind that Macedon were already in process of switching to Republic. So we asked Rome to gift Persia Engineering at first and then Republic. Rubberjello probably thought that it was in his best interests to keep Macedon occupied and granted my wish for symbolic price which I offered myself and promised not to trade techs to Carthage. But after I noticed the pre-dominant position of Rome in the game which were just rolling over AI cities I figured that Rubberjello could use a little bit challenge and in order to "balance" things out offered Carthage at first Enginnering and then Republic

The other sin was that I exploited AI . The Scyth were threatening my northern cities so I was desperate to get rid of them. I signed peace with them and then allied them against Macedon and against Egypt for gpt deal. They couldn't deal any real harm to Macedon and especially to Egypt but I didn't wanted Akots or LouLong to ally them against me on the next turn again. And after Macedon hammered them really badly and they were no longer a threat to me I declared war on them and cancelled the gpt deal. I figured that they were at war with Persia for the whole game anyway and betrayed Macedon by allying with me. So I felt like betraying a traitor and former blood enemy

Then I stayed with Egypt in the phoney war state for the rest of the game since there were no reason to make peace with them. They wouldn't ally me against Macedon, and even by doing so they wouldn't be any help anyway. Yes the peace with them would allow me trade with Carthage a luxury or two, but I were getting a war happyness bonus from staying at war with them. And the most important thing was that I didn't wanted them to spy on my cities, but as I see now akots found the other ways .

What concerns warfare I qiuckly figured that offense is the best defense in this scenario and I didn't biuld a single numidian or immortal in this game. I dismissed infrastructure except roads and didn't biult a single marketplace granary or any other city improvements except for barracks and temples and Forbidden Palace. I didn't biuld any new cities in the beginning either, since I were expecting macedon to attack anytime. I even whipped two population points for heavy cavalry in the cities that reached its population limit while I were staying in oligarchy. Later when it were 30 or so turns left to the end of the game I felt pretty safe about my little empire in the corner of which I grew very fond of I thought that probalbly instead of biulding heavy cavalry as mad in the beginning it would be more beneficial to biult some marketplaces and new cities, but now I see that Akots probably new my numbers via spying and maybe that kept him from invading me earlier.

Staying alive was not very hard. I just didn't give akots opportunities to attack first. What use of your superior numbers of heavy cavalry if you can't attack with them first. And the fact that hoplites cost 40 shields while garrison only 20 forced Akots to form his military mostly of HC. Anyway after the first unsuccesful attempt to invade Persia I ended up with the crapload of elite HC while Akots had almost none. Then the leaders start appearing and the number of my armies grew from 2 to 5. I guess that happens when people are defending their country The constant flow of scyth obsolete units which no longer were a problem definetely helped too.

What concerned attacking on my own I didn't see any good reason for it. I was not trading with anyone and I didn't see opportunities to trade either. I didn't see any good land to grab. Desert to the west and mountains to the north which were so war from my capital and hardly would become productive. So my cities we steadily spitting out heavy cavalry and I waited fo Macedon to attack first and then maybe counter attack. Then it became boring, the Rome was rising so in order to add some spice I offered Akots truce so he could confront Rome while I could have fun consuming Egypt but he declined. And the game reached it logical end.

 

[ironduck]

I find it amusing that I was the only one who didn't break any treaties or deals - even the AI was breaking deals left and right

 

[dgfred]

I find it amusing that I was the only one who didn't break any treaties or deals - even the AI was breaking deals left and right

You played well and honorably . I'm anxious to lurk other
games and see if it is possible to beat a 'human' Rome , without the
cause being sorry play by the Romans. It seems to me the Legions are just
about unstoppable especially early .