These factions are the best, according to me.

[WindBlownLeaf]

First off, let me say that this applies only to SP grand campaign, as I have never played multiplayer.

This list will be highly personal, as there are two particular things that I give huge preference to when it comes to selecting a faction:

1.) Powerful melee infantry

2.) Powerful missile infantry

These units form the backbone of every army, and the majority of units will be from these two categories. Even missile cavalry is inferior, in my opinion, to missile infantry. The unit size of missile cavalry is very small and they are big targets which will always trade unfavourably against missile infantry.

Of course, heavy cavalry is very powerful - I don't deny that. However, every faction in the game has access to the single most powerful unit of heavy cavalry in the game: the general! Not only does the general's bodyguard have excellent stats, but it is also possible to develop it's stats by gaining powerful traits as the game progresses.

As for why melee infantry is powerful, well... anyone who's seen a unit of dismounted knights chop through hundreds of men and withstand volley after volley of missile fire while taking minimal casualties will understand my point.

I do place some preference on archers over crossbowmen due to their ease of use and high rate of fire. In any case, for most of the game you will not be facing highly armored enemies so AP missiles will not be mandatory.

Without further ado, here is my list:

1.) England (Dismounted Feudal Knights; Armored Swordsman; Longbowmen; Yeoman Archers)

2.) Venice (Dismounted Feudal Knights; Venetian Heavy Infantry; Venetian Archers)

3.) Sicily (Dismounted Norman Knights; Muslim Archers)

4.) Scotland (Dismounted Feudal Knights; Noble Highland Archers)

5.) Byzantines (Dismounted Byzantine Lancers; Byzantine Guard Archers)

6.) Russia (Dismounted Boyar Sons; Dismounted Dvor)

7.) Denmark (Dismounted Feudal Knights; Norse Swordsman; Dismounted Huscarls; Norse Archers)

These are in no particular order, but I do prefer some over others. The catholic factions are superior in my opinion because of the crusade mechanic. Grabbing cairo early provides a massive boost to the economy and crusading generals get many good traits. The catholic factions also have better infantry.

These seven factions are what I like to call 'fortress level' factions, which means that you are able to start producing powerful units as soon as a fortress has been created. Getting to a citadel simply takes too long, so factions with powerful units locked behind that level where not included (like the moors)

Unfortunately I was not able to include any islamic factions as their infantry just does not measure up to the other factions'. However, if I were to recommend one it would definitely be the Turks. The jihad mechanic is really useful.

[76561198120390739]

Out of curiosity, why don't you mention Highland Noble for Scotland and Dismounted Huscarl for Denmark? Looking from this list of faction, I think I have somewhat similar play style as you.

[WindBlownLeaf]

Originally posted by arthur_xb:

Out of curiosity, why don't you mention Highland Noble for Scotland and Dismounted Huscarl for Denmark? Looking from this list of faction, I think I have somewhat similar play style as you.

Sword and shield infantry have hidden stats that make them better than almost every 2handed infantry, despite the fact that they are supposed to counter them. I also just prefer infantry that have a shield for that resistance to missile fire.

[Raging Twilek]

no jinnettes? i quit

[WindBlownLeaf]

Originally posted by Val Kill More:

no jinnettes? i quit

I'm biased against missile cavalry.

[Raging Twilek]

Originally posted by WindBlownLeaf:

Originally posted by Val Kill More:

no jinnettes? i quit

I'm biased against missile cavalry.

i know alot of people are inc myself most of the time,. but thers nothing liek a 20 stack of jinnettes, jsut absolute spear throwing hell

[2GenL]

Nice list!
Not a fan of the the Genoese Crossbowmen from milan?

[WindBlownLeaf]

Originally posted by 2GenL:

Nice list!
Not a fan of the the Genoese Crossbowmen from milan?

I think crossbows are good but they are just harder to use.

[Khagan]

Originally posted by WindBlownLeaf:

Even missile cavalry is inferior, in my opinion, to missile infantry.

Missile cavalry does hate solid missile infantry (of the sort you list). On the other hand, it's at least as good as missile infantry against just about anything else; it's only real problem against non-missile enemies is limited ammunition supply.

However, every faction in the game has access to the single most powerful unit of heavy cavalry in the game: the general!

Not all generals are equal. Byzantine generals with a cataphract bodyguard should avoid prolonged melee with Western generals with a bodyguard of knights (unless they have a suicide wish).

As for why melee infantry is powerful, well... anyone who's seen a unit of dismounted knights chop through hundreds of men and withstand volley after volley of missile fire while taking minimal casualties will understand my point.

Not me then, since I've never seen that.

5.) Byzantines (Dismounted Byzantine Lancers; Byzantine Guard Archers)

6.) Russia (Dismounted Boyar Sons; Dismounted Dvor)

7.) Denmark (Dismounted Feudal Knights; Norse Swordsman; Norse Archers)

The Byzantine Lancers and the Norse Swordsmen are not particularly good swordsmen; no better than the archers they are paired with! Just get more of the archers. In fact the same applies to the Boyar Sons, not because the Boyar Sons are weak but because the Dvor are so spectacularly good.

Originally posted by WindBlownLeaf:

Originally posted by arthur_xb:

Out of curiosity, why don't you mention Highland Noble for Scotland and Dismounted Huscarl for Denmark?

Sword and shield infantry have hidden stats that make them better than almost every 2handed infantry

Foot Huscarls have one-handed axes, not two-handed; they are identical to the Boyar Sons you do include on your list. The Danes have lots of different heavy infantry, but the foot huscarls are the only ones you really need. Yes, DFKs are better armoured, but is that really worth 50% greater maintenance cost? That is, are 2 units of DFKs better than 3 of huscarls?

I agree that you don't want the Highland Nobles for Scotland, but the Noble Swordsmen are good value (the same as English Armoured Swordsmen and only slightly more expensive).

[Khagan]

Originally posted by WindBlownLeaf:

Originally posted by 2GenL:

Not a fan of the the Genoese Crossbowmen from milan?

I think crossbows are good but they are just harder to use.

The Genoese are really just good light infantry, not solid archer/swordsmen; their melee factor is quite a bit lower. Aventuriers would fit the bill though.

[WindBlownLeaf]

As for why melee infantry is powerful, well... anyone who's seen a unit of dismounted knights chop through hundreds of men and withstand volley after volley of missile fire while taking minimal casualties will understand my point.

Not me then, since I've never seen that.

I just tested a unit of dismounted feudal knights against five units of spear militia on normal unit scale. Lost between 20 and 30, got over 300 kills

As for why I didn't include noble swordsmen for scotland, as I said I didn't consider units that needed a citadel to recruit. IMO takes too long to get to that point

Foot huscarls are worse that other infantry denmark has available at fortress level. Good, but they dont make the faction

(sorry, just tested them vs some militia swordsmen [same stats as norse swordsmen] and dismounted huscarls are indeed better)

[Khagan]

Originally posted by WindBlownLeaf:

I just tested a unit of dismounted feudal knights against five units of spear militia on normal unit scale. Lost between 20 and 30, got over 300 kills

Who was providing the 'volley after volley of missile fire'? And I wouldn't call 'between 20 and 30' out of a starting force of 60 'minimal casualties'.

Anyway, I've just run 3 spear militia against one DFK on huge units. The knights lost 110/121 (the survivors running for the hills) and the spears 151/451. That's about what I would have expected. 'Quantity has a quality all of its own.'

Edit: Tried again with normal units. The knights lost 61/61, the spears 85/226.

[WindBlownLeaf]

Originally posted by Khagan:

Originally posted by WindBlownLeaf:

I just tested a unit of dismounted feudal knights against five units of spear militia on normal unit scale. Lost between 20 and 30, got over 300 kills

Who was providing the 'volley after volley of missile fire'? And I wouldn't call 'between 20 and 30' out of a starting force of 60 'minimal casualties'.

Anyway, I've just run 3 spear militia against one DFK on huge units. The knights lost 110/121 (the survivors running for the hills) and the spears 151/451. That's about what I would have expected. 'Quantity has a quality all of its own.'

Edit: Tried again with normal units. The knights lost 61/61, the spears 85/226.

I will provide a screenshot.

EDIT: seems i cant put a screenshot here(?)

tested 1 DFK against 3 spear militia on normal unit scale, lost 18 and killed 180

tested 1 DFK against 2 spear militia and 2 peasant archers, they routed both units of spears but werent able to catch up with the archers

[Khagan]

Originally posted by WindBlownLeaf:

tested 1 DFK against 2 spear militia and 2 peasant archers, they routed both units of spears but werent able to catch up with the archers

1 spear militia and 2 peasant archers vs 1 DFK, normal scale: knights wiped out for the loss of 21 spearmen (including 8 from friendly fire, but hey, omelettes and eggs). A massacre rather than a battle, most of the knights being dead before they even reached the spears.

One unit of anything, no matter how good, against two or three of anything vaguely useful (i.e. not peasants) is always going to be at a huge tactical disadvantage.

[WindBlownLeaf]

Originally posted by Khagan:

Originally posted by WindBlownLeaf:

tested 1 DFK against 2 spear militia and 2 peasant archers, they routed both units of spears but werent able to catch up with the archers

1 spear militia and 2 peasant archers vs 1 DFK, normal scale: knights wiped out for the loss of 21 spearmen (including 8 from friendly fire, but hey, omelettes and eggs). A massacre rather than a battle, most of the knights being dead before they even reached the spears.

One unit of anything, no matter how good, against two or three of anything vaguely useful (i.e. not peasants) is always going to be at a huge tactical disadvantage.

That is very strange and not even close to what I experienced? Are you using a mod like retrofit or something? Were you controlling the knights or the other units? On what difficulty are you playing?

I encourage anyone reading this to do their own testing.

[Khagan]

Originally posted by WindBlownLeaf:

That is very strange and not even close to what I experienced? Are you using a mod like retrofit or something? Were you controlling the knights or the other units?

No mods, and of course I was controlling the other side.