You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

Rome Strategy Discussion
Moderated by Terikel Grayhair, General Sajaru, Awesome Eagle

Hop to:    
loginhomeregisterhelprules
Bottom
Topic Subject: You don't need TS
posted 25 December 2005 15:50 EDT (US)   
Many people use the Town Square method when they are being sieged. Well there are ways that are a lot better and more fun. The way I like to use is only good when the enemy has spies in your city. This happens often to me in VH so its mot a problem.

You just stack hoplites(any infantry will work, but hoplites are perfered) at the gate, and put any missile troops on the walls.(If you are using wooden walls, put them at the side. If you have calvalry put the hoplites a little back, and put the calvalry in position to flank.
__GGGGG__ G=Gate
CC_____CC C=Calvalry
__HHHHH__ H=Hoplites(infantry)

Pre Battle setup:

Effects:


"The most virtuous are those who content themselves with being virtuous without seeking to appear so."-Plato

[This message has been edited by shadowarmy75 (edited 12-25-2005 @ 04:00 PM).]

Replies:
posted 25 December 2005 18:39 EDT (US)     1 / 8  
Somebody came up with this strategy months ago. Like, when the game came out. It is useful though, and I've utterly massacred many armies that outnumbered me greatly. The only real weakness to this strategy is elephants. When charged at any unit, they throw men in, and in the confusion, if the hoplites are hit with cavalry, they are almost certain to rout.

So, it's a effective strategy, but it is by no means invicible.


(¯`•._.•[ .:^:. ]•._.•´¯)
¨‘°ºO.:.Oº°‘¨
KaiserWinterfeldt ¨‘°ºO.:.Oº°‘¨
R.I.P. Kayla Renee Winterfeldt & Jet Jetboy Winterfeldt
(¯`•._.•[ .::. ]•._.•´¯)
(¯`•.__.•´¯)
(¯v¯)
posted 25 December 2005 18:42 EDT (US)     2 / 8  
The only reason why I posted this is because everyone perfers the TS stategy and I dont see much advantage in that. I mean the moral one is good but not much else.

"The most virtuous are those who content themselves with being virtuous without seeking to appear so."-Plato
posted 25 December 2005 18:54 EDT (US)     3 / 8  
The strategy is actually in many ways much more powerful than the strategy you posted. Units will not rout in the TS, and phalanx factions become about twice as hard to defeat. The TS becomes a place where quality and quantity often are more important than tactics, whereas anywhere else, tactics dominate the battlefield.

(¯`•._.•[ .:^:. ]•._.•´¯)
¨‘°ºO.:.Oº°‘¨
KaiserWinterfeldt ¨‘°ºO.:.Oº°‘¨
R.I.P. Kayla Renee Winterfeldt & Jet Jetboy Winterfeldt
(¯`•._.•[ .::. ]•._.•´¯)
(¯`•.__.•´¯)
(¯v¯)
posted 25 December 2005 19:13 EDT (US)     4 / 8  
Well, whenever my cities have been seiged by other factions, I've always just palced a good deal of Spear Warband at each area that would be attacked by seige weapons and consequently rushed into, and let them hold the area. I never really like using the Town Square strategy, except for Germania in Roman cities, since the small streets are excellent choke points. The one advantage of the "holding at the gates" with Phalanxes is that as units begin to rout, since they are a good deal closer to each other than in a Town Square, more morale-lowering effects take place, causing more routs more quickly.

Nations to play in MIITW:
Holy Roman Empire
Poland
posted 25 December 2005 22:27 EDT (US)     5 / 8  
I've always favored the TS approach but only with phalanxes. Also, I only use it when most of my garrison is comprised of Phalanxes. I'm certain less casualties result then (no deaths from routing, and as long as you have a nicely packed square, it's nearly as good as blocking off a chokepoint.)

I once held off an army of 1,000 Eastern Infantry with six groups of Town Watch. Yes, EI are pretty weak, but still, I thought it was quite a feat.


+)(+|| Kaeso Maecilius Britannicus ||+)(+
.: "Do whatever you want now. But if you disturb me, I will kill you." :.
( Gatts )
posted 26 December 2005 08:35 EDT (US)     6 / 8  
I don't like the TS strategy, but I don't rely on walls or gates either.
I place, archers and skirmishers on the wall, with upgraded standard infantry where the enemy is likely to ladder or deploy towers. Fire arrows will reduce the effectiveness of both, as I noticed when a unit of urban cohorts was utterly annhilated when the tower collapsed through burning, just as the gate was about to open.

In front of the gate my most elite unit will, be placed. On the gatehouse entrances, go 2 of the second most elite units. I do this, so my elite unit is given support, and it cannot be flanked in the unlikely event the enemy takes my walls.

I place cavalry units, about 6 houses away on either side of the two second-most elite units. Just in case they get overrun, but they usually don't, as I noticed when MY urban cohorts and 2 praetorii cohorts turned the gate into a moshpit, with 5 units of heavy axemen and 2 berserkers. In all, the 3 units I had suffered 188 losses between them (huge unit scale ).

My general will alway go in the square. I try to keep siege equipment out of towns as it tends to be useless. If there is any there however it'll go in the TS with the general, in case the town is likely to fall. They give a grand last stand.


St Jimmy
Angel face and a taste for suicidal
posted 26 December 2005 11:44 EDT (US)     7 / 8  

Quote:

The strategy is actually in many ways much more powerful than the strategy you posted. Units will not rout in the TS, and phalanx factions become about twice as hard to defeat

If you don't have enough troops to cover a front of the square you are going to have flanks. In the bigger towns the squares are huge and covering one side needs a lot of units. But with the gate strategy you cand hoold it with one unit. If they have rams you just put your infantry at points where you think the rams are going to attack. Put calvalry at flanks and nothing can pass.


"The most virtuous are those who content themselves with being virtuous without seeking to appear so."-Plato

[This message has been edited by shadowarmy75 (edited 12-26-2005 @ 11:45 AM).]

posted 02 January 2006 21:54 EDT (US)     8 / 8  

Quote:

The only reason why I posted this is because everyone perfers the TS stategy and I dont see much advantage in that. I mean the moral one is good but not much else.

I usually prefer to place spear(or other solid) infantry in front of where the enemy is breaking in, as per your strategy. At the same time, I mass my cavalry at a side gate & rush them out & into a flankiing position, ready to attack a breach point from the outside (where there is space to move) & ready to chase down any routers.

I have however also found the TS strategy to be a lifesaver. I had an incident during my germania campaign where I was caught with my pants down, so to speak. A large Brutii force had snuck north thru dacia & assaulted one of my eastern towns, which was guarded by a couple of warbands and a couple of peasants. The pre-marius brutii army was at least 3-4 times bigger than the garrison ( 3? velites, 5-6 hastati, couple of principes), & was using 3 rams, so there was NO way for me to hold the walls. I massed my warbands & peasants at the TS & had to let each roman unit throw itself on my spears. This worked surprisingly well in the end & I won an amazing victory.

NEVER underestimate the TS advantage.

Having said that, I usually have enough troops to swamp any TS defenders & I usually charge straight in whenever I'm attacking a town square.

GM


Stupid questions & their appropriate responses from an Australian tourism web site:

Q: Which direction is North in Australia? (USA)
A: Face south and then turn 180 degrees. Contact us when you get here and we'll send the rest of the directions.

Total War Heaven » Forums » Rome Strategy Discussion » You don't need TS
Top
You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register
Hop to:    
Total War Heaven | HeavenGames