why cant byzantines make armenian HC?

[ick_of_pick]

the moslems can, which is retarted because the armenians are eastern orthodox christians, and the armenians held very important positions in the byzantine empire, there was a line of assyrian and armenian emperors! it makes no sense!

[sbreden]

I was wondering the same thing. Are they not available to the Byzantines in any time period? I have not played them through enough to know? Is their something historical that might limit these troops to islamic factions in the region?

[This message has been edited by sbreden (edited 10-23-2002).]

[Galestrum]

Hehe i hated that too, so i modded it where ONLY the byzantines can make them =)

you can do this in the crusaders_unit_prod11 file in the MTW folder, before messing with this you should save a copy somewhere else, in case you make a mistake, which will cause your campaign to not be accessible.

i suggest you check out the modding forums and the appropriate DL's available at the .org

to make armenian cavalry useable by the byzantines, if i recall, you need to:

replace ALL_FACTIONS with BYZANTINE and

replace MUSLIM with ORTHODOX

in the armenian cavalry unit lines

after that the armenians are back to where they belong, in the greatest empire the world has seen =)

[Papa Bear!]

ick, I can't imagine playing the turks without armenian heavy cav. They were my mainstay, if not them then the turks have nothing for cav at all. (turcoman, ottoman siphai, khwarziam, they all wont cut it, though turcomans come close)

[Galestrum]

really, i love the kwarzman, one o my favs

[Papa Bear!]

actually i've barely used them as a turk, but in my current campaign as the polish they showed up as mercenaries, and me being an underdog to everyone around me, I was anxious for some elite looking troops.

Needless to say I was thoroughly disappointed when my unit of 40 kwharwhatevers were cut down by 20 early royal knights. Maybe 2 valor to the royals, but my kwhars even got the charge on them, (while the royals were chasing some alans, I'm all mercs).

It was pethetic, my khwars were annihalted, and the royals lost about 7 guys, but gained huge valor. 7 less guys but 2 more valor? I effectively strengthened them, http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/frown.gif

[Kraxis]

Armenians are very important for Turks, there is simply no other melee cavalry for them early enough, and lets me honest they don't have much in sense of melee in the early game. They need these guys.

Besides, the Armenians did fight for the Turks as well, so it would be fitting if the Byzantines and Turks were the only to train them, but not Turks alone.

------------------
BTW, Danish Crusades are true to history.

You may not care about war, but war cares about you!

[Kalt]

Quote Originally posted by Kraxis:
Armenians are very important for Turks, there is simply no other melee cavalry for them early enough, and lets me honest they don't have much in sense of melee in the early game. They need these guys.

Besides, the Armenians did fight for the Turks as well, so it would be fitting if the Byzantines and Turks were the only to train them, but not Turks alone.

[/QUOTE]

Are you on crack? The turks get Saracen Inf. in RUM possibly within the first 12 turns or so. Once you get them, youve got GREAT melee, arguably the best in the game at turn 12.

By turn 20 you can be pumping out 400 saracens a turn.

[Ckrisz]

The Sipahis do suck, unfortunately.

I think there should be a specific Turkish horse archer unit, like the Mamluk horse archer, with some melee capabilities, and the Armenian heavy cav should be region-specific. But ah well, Heavy Jannies make up for it. http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif

Also the Mamluk Cavalry really looks underpowered. These guys beat the Mongols straight up (okay, a rearguard unit, but still a substantial force), for God's sakes, something Teutonic and Templar Knights never managed. Pump them up some!

[Papa Bear!]

Quote Originally posted by Kalt:
Are you on crack? The turks get Saracen Inf. in RUM possibly within the first 12 turns or so. Once you get them, youve got GREAT melee, arguably the best in the game at turn 12.

By turn 20 you can be pumping out 400 saracens a turn.[/QUOTE]

uh, to interject, Who exactly is on crack?

You might notice that the saracen combat value for melee is what, 0? a negative, I don't remember exactly but it scarecely exists.

I'm not arguing that saracens aren't a potent force, but their not a melee unit, their a spear unit. For stopping enemy units, particularly cav, but not for tearing up enemy units, as melee units would. ghazi infantry would've made a much better rebuttal, except that everybody knows that ghazi are only good for about 1 fight.

Furthermore, lets not stray from the topic, neither ghazi nor saracens can fill the vacancy provided by a turk without armenians. Saracens are hella slow, ghazi are fast, but not fast enough, and they'll die too quickly to ever provide the quality flank charges that armenians can.

Without armenians, (and leaving the kwharziam out of it), the turks would be left at the mercy of every other factions cavalry, (except the almohads, but at least they get their aum)

[Goodridge]

I've found that Armenians are a bit too fragile. I actually do like Turcomans and Siphai. I ussually have a strong center of Saracens with Ghazi and other shock on the flanks, and Ghulams for a rear attack. I ussually send a unit of Ghulams to either far flank with a unit of Armenians. They do fairly well, but I have seen 40 strong units of Armenians get reduced to less than 10 in just a few seconds of melee. I have also seen that happen to kwhars as well. Kinda strange considering that both are supposed to be 'heavy.' Should be more survivable.

------------------
Kyle Goodridge

[Arcsim]

You guys are neglecting the camels. While they may be slow, they're pretty powerful especially against enemy cav.

[Whitey]

the thing I hate about camels is that they dismount as peasents...

[Papa Bear!]

and generally my camels get worked against enemy cav. (which is frustrating cuss I've shared a story on the .com forums about a butchering of 3 units of my horse to 1 camel squad)

but in general I find the camels lacking.

I did forget about ghulams though, and I don't think anybody uses armenians as the heavy cav they claim to be... but they make excellent "mediums"

[Kraxis]

Quote Originally posted by Papa Bear!:
and I don't think anybody uses armenians as the heavy cav they claim to be... but they make excellent "mediums"[/QUOTE]

Exactly, they are not really heavy, their stats are not that great, but they are rather cheap (300 florins) and you get them easily. I don't mind they don't last very long, they are cheaper than most other cav.

------------------
BTW, Danish Crusades are true to history.

You may not care about war, but war cares about you!

[Papa Bear!]

I started a polish campaign for variety, unfortunately its gonna play strategically not that differently from my last turk campaign. (it seems pole retainers and armenians have identical stats)

[Dorkus]

Kalt could have put it less obnoxiously, but imo he's right -- Sar inf are by far the best early-game infantry (heck, they're the best infantry period).

Now that's largely due to their bugged +2 valor bonus. With it, sar inf become 2 atk, 7 chg, 9 def (yes, 9!!!) behemoths. They're practically unkillable, and 2 atk is more than enough when you have a 100 man unit that REFUSES to shrink.

Even w/o the valor bonus, however, Turks and Egyptians get a huge advantage in being able to produce chiv serg equivalents with a keep level building.

It's true that turks don't have a lot of cav, but they really don't need it, since all you need to do with your cav is draw the enemy into your sar inf.

[This message has been edited by Dorkus (edited 10-24-2002).]

[Papa Bear!]

could be, but frankly I simply disagree.

Saracen infantry are awefully tough, but you can't substitute medium cav for flanking and running down enemy troops, (be they withdrawing or holding naptha)...

I think, without a doubt, an army relying on saracen where you'd normally have saracens and armenians would be at a disadvantage. Its just that simple as I see it. Saracens fall into a whole different class, and an entirely different strategic role.