YOUR Favorite Factions
- Thread starter Quixote
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
Nicolas Giordano
Regular
1-2) Rhodoks and Khergit (equally tied)
3) Sarranid Sultanate
--
4) Vaegirs
5) Nords
6) Them.
3) Sarranid Sultanate
--
4) Vaegirs
5) Nords
6) Them.
From favorite to least favorite?
1. Nords
2. Sarranids (I just love fighting in the desert)
3. Swadians
4. Veagirs (I hate fighting in the snow)
5. Rhodoks (The are the defensive side for me and I'm to aggressive to be a Rhodok)
6. Khergits (I Hate playing them their battles take to long and their armour is kinda weak)
1. Nords
2. Sarranids (I just love fighting in the desert)
3. Swadians
4. Veagirs (I hate fighting in the snow)
5. Rhodoks (The are the defensive side for me and I'm to aggressive to be a Rhodok)
6. Khergits (I Hate playing them their battles take to long and their armour is kinda weak)
KPJFormat
Sergeant
Like (in order of preference)
Rhodoks (they suit my tactics, I like to have 2 strong infantry lines)
Nords (see above, their infantry throw stuff which is great, but I like crossbows over longbows)
Sarranids (I think they're really cool as far as flavour and appearance, but I've not played a serious campaign using just these troops, they seem quite weak early on)
Kerghits (The first faction I played, and I just think Mongols are neat. Opposite to my Rhodok tactic, I usually just charge with them unless I see a line of pikes, then I might set to follow and circle around, then charge)
Dislike
Swadians (I always feel like I'm gimping myself if I use anything other than their knights, but I feel like it's too easy/boring to use 100% knights)
Vaegirs (I don't like anything about them, really. I've tried, I really have.)
Rhodoks (they suit my tactics, I like to have 2 strong infantry lines)
Nords (see above, their infantry throw stuff which is great, but I like crossbows over longbows)
Sarranids (I think they're really cool as far as flavour and appearance, but I've not played a serious campaign using just these troops, they seem quite weak early on)
Kerghits (The first faction I played, and I just think Mongols are neat. Opposite to my Rhodok tactic, I usually just charge with them unless I see a line of pikes, then I might set to follow and circle around, then charge)
Dislike
Swadians (I always feel like I'm gimping myself if I use anything other than their knights, but I feel like it's too easy/boring to use 100% knights)
Vaegirs (I don't like anything about them, really. I've tried, I really have.)
Swads.
TheGrim
Regular
Vaegirs, easily. Their troops aren't the best, but they are numerous and inexpensive.
A force of Vaegir Knights certainly aren't AS GOOD as a force of Mamelukes or Swadian Knights, but they do the job just as well.
Plus, their archers are some of the best bowmen in the game, just load up on them and they will snipe the enemy.
A force of Vaegir Knights certainly aren't AS GOOD as a force of Mamelukes or Swadian Knights, but they do the job just as well.
Plus, their archers are some of the best bowmen in the game, just load up on them and they will snipe the enemy.
]
The nords, go go huscarls.
Lord Silvabane
Sergeant
Well here's my list.
1. Swadians, always have been and always will be. The all-rounder army, played them since the demo! Their king maybe an imbecile but the Lords are pretty awesome, especially Haringorth and Klargus. Their Knights are unstoppable with only Mamlukes coming close and their crossbows and infantry are pretty skilled aswell (Though not as good as Rhodoks).
2. Rhodoks, they're pretty awesome. The lack of cavalry bugs me but the spearmen are devastating and the crossbows destroy everything. Best siege defenders.
3. Vaegirs, very cool looking and a good variety of troop choices.
4. Sarranids, They may be flimsy but I love the way their desert attire and they can counter cavalry of even Swadians!
5.Khergits, poor variety of of troops and boring to play as but can crush other armies in field battles easily.
6. Nords, a bit of a contrast to the rest of you but they're just horrible to play as. THE worst in field battles and have no cavalry. A terrible version of Rhodoks in terms of looks, weapons, armour and are inferior in sieges to them (from my experiences). I've tried to play as them but I always end up being destroyed by anyone with cavalry, thanks to their so-called archers. Huscarls may be insane but against a well equipped Knight they will go down easily.
1. Swadians, always have been and always will be. The all-rounder army, played them since the demo! Their king maybe an imbecile but the Lords are pretty awesome, especially Haringorth and Klargus. Their Knights are unstoppable with only Mamlukes coming close and their crossbows and infantry are pretty skilled aswell (Though not as good as Rhodoks).
2. Rhodoks, they're pretty awesome. The lack of cavalry bugs me but the spearmen are devastating and the crossbows destroy everything. Best siege defenders.
3. Vaegirs, very cool looking and a good variety of troop choices.
4. Sarranids, They may be flimsy but I love the way their desert attire and they can counter cavalry of even Swadians!
5.Khergits, poor variety of of troops and boring to play as but can crush other armies in field battles easily.
6. Nords, a bit of a contrast to the rest of you but they're just horrible to play as. THE worst in field battles and have no cavalry. A terrible version of Rhodoks in terms of looks, weapons, armour and are inferior in sieges to them (from my experiences). I've tried to play as them but I always end up being destroyed by anyone with cavalry, thanks to their so-called archers. Huscarls may be insane but against a well equipped Knight they will go down easily.
Seeing as I am someone who enjoys mounted combat,
-Swadians are one of my favourites due to the knights and in Warband you get more than your fair share of the fighting, seeing as they have (potential)enemies on all sides(I only like them in SP)
-Khergits, all mounted and thus something I like. Certainly a challenge in siege and rather interesting overall despite their 'unique' style
-Vaegirs, first faction I ever played back in old M&B, they have good offensive cavalry and good archers
-Sarranids are okay, the mamelukes are definitly good, but not my favourite.
-Nords, nothing mounted although they are strong on foot. They have good infantry, especially the huscarls are useful in a siege. Otherwise not my style
-Rhodoks, I respect their crossbow sharpshooters and sergeants, but the faction doesnt appeal to me as they have no cavalry and low tier infantry that is rather weak in my opinion.
-Swadians are one of my favourites due to the knights and in Warband you get more than your fair share of the fighting, seeing as they have (potential)enemies on all sides(I only like them in SP)
-Khergits, all mounted and thus something I like. Certainly a challenge in siege and rather interesting overall despite their 'unique' style
-Vaegirs, first faction I ever played back in old M&B, they have good offensive cavalry and good archers
-Sarranids are okay, the mamelukes are definitly good, but not my favourite.
-Nords, nothing mounted although they are strong on foot. They have good infantry, especially the huscarls are useful in a siege. Otherwise not my style
-Rhodoks, I respect their crossbow sharpshooters and sergeants, but the faction doesnt appeal to me as they have no cavalry and low tier infantry that is rather weak in my opinion.
SaintJimmyz
Regular
1) Vaegirs. Good top level troops for all three categories, inexpensive with low wages. Perfect for combined arms forces.
2) Nords. Slow, but have huscarls <3
3) Khergits. Note that I am not a HA fag, I make armies of pure lancers.
4) Sarranids. Mamlukes are nice, but everything else gets torn apart by the native bandits (desert horse archerfags)
5) Bandits. The bane of my life when I have no army, and too fast when I do have troops, but they use bows not crosscrapbows.
6) Swadians. They have crossbows, which would demote them to the bottom of the pile, but their knights and infantry that use real weapons salvages them a place.
7) Rhodoks. No cav, crossbows, and spear wielding infantry. Spears + AI = suicidal troops. Utterly awful.
2) Nords. Slow, but have huscarls <3
3) Khergits. Note that I am not a HA fag, I make armies of pure lancers.
4) Sarranids. Mamlukes are nice, but everything else gets torn apart by the native bandits (desert horse archerfags)
5) Bandits. The bane of my life when I have no army, and too fast when I do have troops, but they use bows not cross
6) Swadians. They have crossbows, which would demote them to the bottom of the pile, but their knights and infantry that use real weapons salvages them a place.
7) Rhodoks. No cav, crossbows, and spear wielding infantry. Spears + AI = suicidal troops. Utterly awful.
Historically I've always had a leaning towards Nords and Vaegirs. And the Khergit Khanate was ever the enemy. BUT, in recent times I've come to like the Khergits as well and the Saranids are the enemy. Khergits are also a ***** of a foe, what with all their horsey-archery-ness. I like them on my team for that very reason, plus a party with many a mounted warrior moves much faster. I start to get impatient with a large party that moves too slowly.
As for Rhodoks and Swadians, I've never really been involved in that part of Calradia, other than warring with Swadia.
As for Rhodoks and Swadians, I've never really been involved in that part of Calradia, other than warring with Swadia.
1) Rhodoks (love their sharpshooter!!!!!)
2) Nords (GO!!!! Huscarl!!!!!!)
when I have my kingdom, I always use troops from these two faction.
2) Nords (GO!!!! Huscarl!!!!!!)
when I have my kingdom, I always use troops from these two faction.
The faction played by the player will alway steamroll the rest, I crush everything with Swadian (Knights 
) and I am fairly sure the results would be the same with a horde of Hurskarls, I just think the knights looks far better and they're cavalry.
) and I am fairly sure the results would be the same with a horde of Hurskarls, I just think the knights looks far better and they're cavalry.tsuki
Veteran
First spot definitely goes to Vaegirs. Although they don't have any best troops (I still consider Veteran archers better due to their armor) they are very versatile and cheap compared to other factions. When you leave your castle you usually don't know what to expect and single troop army has it's limitations (e.g. archer army can be steamrolled by cavalry, cavalry is poor at sieges and footmen are extremely slow and somewhat weak alone), so it's best to be equipped for all occasions.
Second spot goes to Rhodoks for their sergeant+sharpshooter combo. Mid-low tier troops might be weak, but both sharpies and sergeants are extremely good in their respective roles (plus, sharpies can defend themselves well in melee!).
Khergits are third because of the unique gameplay they offer, and the fact that they perform pretty well on the field and still cost relatively small amounts of money.
Fourth are the Swadians, for their fearsome capabilities on the field and good performance in the sieges. Their knights and sharpies are definitely great, while sergeants perform really well in sieges.
Fifth are the Sarranids. Well, nothing good about them, simply Swadian copycats with bad ranged troops.
And the last place goes to the Nords.I absolutely HATE them because I often play as Vaegirs and I'm constantly at war with those snail-eating, salt-breathing, mud-beards! Taking cities from them is very difficult, and them having both best meele troops and archers makes me think that it's somewhat unbalanced. I never play them, as my pride as a gamer don't allow me to to take such an overpowered faction.
Second spot goes to Rhodoks for their sergeant+sharpshooter combo. Mid-low tier troops might be weak, but both sharpies and sergeants are extremely good in their respective roles (plus, sharpies can defend themselves well in melee!).
Khergits are third because of the unique gameplay they offer, and the fact that they perform pretty well on the field and still cost relatively small amounts of money.
Fourth are the Swadians, for their fearsome capabilities on the field and good performance in the sieges. Their knights and sharpies are definitely great, while sergeants perform really well in sieges.
Fifth are the Sarranids. Well, nothing good about them, simply Swadian copycats with bad ranged troops.
And the last place goes to the Nords.I absolutely HATE them because I often play as Vaegirs and I'm constantly at war with those snail-eating, salt-breathing, mud-beards! Taking cities from them is very difficult, and them having both best meele troops and archers makes me think that it's somewhat unbalanced. I never play them, as my pride as a gamer don't allow me to to take such an overpowered faction.
