New Unit - Egyptian Elite Guards

[Barkhorn1x]

Egyptian Elite Guards
Elite Guards can always be relied upon to stand in the line of battle and give a good account of themselves, so their lives should not be thrown away needlessly. They are the best native Egyptian infantry, and the Pharoah's own bodyguard, fiercely loyal to the Twin Crowns and the royal family.

The Guards are recruited from amongst the younger sons of the lesser nobility who cannot afford to join high-status cavalry forces. These are matched by a leavening of lower-class professional warriors that bring a hard, professional edge to the force. They may look like ceremonial guards, but they are soldiers for a working day too Their morale is higher than other Egyptian units, and this makes them valuable shock troops in battle, as does their training and equipment. They wear the finest armour, greaves, helmets and carry 3m thrusting spears and swords as weapons.

http://www.totalwar.com/community/unit1.htm

Barkhorn.

[Big King Sanctaphrax]

Don't thse guys look a bit too er...Egyptian? I thought Egypt had been Hellenised by the game's time period...Ah well. At least it's not more bloody peltasts... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

[Spino]

Geez, another Egyptian unit sporting headgear from the Yul Brenner Fall Pharoah Collection http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/rolleyes.gif

Call me crazy but this Egyptian elite unit doesn't look like it's going to fare well against the heavy infantry of the other Mediterranean powers, let alone their elite units. Based on CA's 'interpretation' of the Egyptian military from 300 B.C.-14 A.D. are we looking at a rehash of the Egyptians from Medieval? All the Egyptian units I've seen in screenshots and movies give me the impression that they're great for desert battles but are inadequately protected too stand up to the heavy infantry of the Carthaginians, Greeks, Macedonians and Romans.

[JeromeGrasdyke]

An interesting observation, and the subject of much discussion at CA about a year ago. I'm sad to report that the Hollywood brigade won this one quite convincingly, and we've ended up portraying the Egyptians as Egyptian rather than Greek, as would be more historically accurate. The building style has gone the same way. "It looks pretty" ... (sigh)

As for the unit balance, well, you're right. The normal Numidian and Egyptian foot aren't much good in a toe-to-toe fight against a hoplite phalanx or some legionary cohorts. But there are other balancing factors in there, such as the Egyptian chariots and Numidian cavalry, and skirmishing infantry tactics are working reasonably well now in the game. We had one very interesting battle of Armenians - with masses and masses of light troops: peltasts, slingers and light foot, and quite a lot of light cavalry - against a Macedonian army consisting of a substantial amount of heavy cavalry and quite a few phalanxes. This was a Time Commanders battle which we were using in house as part of a RTW tournament.

Initially everybody thought the Macedonians would be hands-down winners, and the luck of the draw was determining the tournament (groans and moans all around) but one of the first contests on that battlefield turned out very differently... The Macedonians lost an early cavalry battle which cost them most of their mounted troops; then the Armenian general kept standing off, letting the peltasts and slingers do the work with missile weapons, and suddenly it became apparent that it was quite difficult for the phalanxes to tie down the enemy without auxiliary troops, because the phalanx takes some time to set up and lower the spears. The Macedonian general lost his cool, and started charging with the phalanxes. The battle line disintegrated. Each time a phalanx would close with an Armenian unit the Armenians would get mauled, but the surrounding Armenian units would back off and keep the missiles coming. Eventually the Macedonians lost through sheer attrition... It was quite a sight though, like a pack of large bears eventually brought down by yapping dogs.

So there you are - the game balance will provide a way http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

[Hurin_Rules]

That's a shame Jerome. But fight the good fight bro-- don't give up on historically accurate units. We appreciate your efforts to fight the Hollywoodizers.

[Jacque Schtrapp]

Unfortunately, Hollywood will always make more money than history and ultimately that is the bottom line. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/mecry.gif

[Spino]

Thanks for responding Jerome http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wave.gif

While many of us are pining for historical accuracy I think some of us are simply surprised to see the Egyptian military being portrayed as being exclusively 'Old/Early Dynasty' as opposed to having a few Hellenized unit types thrown in for good measure. I simply don't see the harm in including a few historically accurate units so that gamers don't get a completely skewed version of history. Oh well, I suppose it's nothing a few dedicated modders can't handle.

Secondly, thank you very much for the recount of that battle between the Armenians and the Macedonians. I assume it was between two human players? If so then perhaps the biggest question on my mind now is not simply whether the factions are balanced but will the AI be able to take advantage of each faction's strengths and weaknesses? It is clear from playing Medieval that the tactical AI is unable to properly handle an army that is unusually laden with skirmisher units, foot or mounted. AI controlled armies with large numbers of horse archer units perform particularly poorly because of this.

[Kraxis]

Spino, what do you say the the Cleruch? That is a Macedonian unit.

And I would say, I hate the horse archers of the AI the most, they are a pain in the rear if in substantial numbers. The AI only really falters when they run out of arrows.

BTW, thank you for the little battlereport Jerome. It has lightened my fears about the light infantry.

[Barkhorn1x]

Thank you for your honesty Jerome. We now understand a bit more what goes on in the "creative" assembly.

Barkhorn. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

[Spino]

Cleruch excepted of course... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif But then again unless someone can correct me I don't believe the historical Cleruch looked anything like the version CA has given us.

Horse archers can be a major pain in the ass but I think the AI is a little too willing to commit its regular horse units before its horse archers have had a chance to expend all their ammo. In the High and Late eras these tactics almost always prove fruitless against the heavily armored Catholic faction troops who need as much 'whittling down' as possible before engaging. But honestly my real beef is with how the AI uses its foot skirmisher units. In the hands of a human player excellent units like Bonnachts and Almughavars can be positively devastating. In the hands of the AI these same units behave so badly they often become a liability.

[Hakonarson]

Quote[/b] (JeromeGrasdyke @ Oct. 15 2003,12:30)]As for the unit balance, well, you're right. The normal Numidian and Egyptian foot aren't much good in a toe-to-toe fight against a hoplite phalanx or some legionary cohorts. But there are other balancing factors in there, such as the Egyptian chariots and Numidian cavalry, ....
thanks for the insight - it's a shame it's so damned wrong http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/pissed.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/pissed.gif

The Egyptian army at the stage WAS essentially a Macedonian phalanx - there was little native Egyptian infantry until the hurriedly recruited levies armed as pikement that fought at Raphia - and did well enough to be retained from then on

The Egyptians also didn't use much if any Numidian cavalry http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/frown.gif

there shouldn't have been any need for fantastical units to balance anything

[hellenes]

People people
What do you think that the CA will do all the job for the modders?Ha?
I dont think soo
What do you expect?If they put historically accurate units these will simply push out the Hollywood zonked junkie's fantasy creatures (dudes stop smokin that $..t) which will never be used and thus will embarass their creatorsSo they will make ONLY fantasy creatures thus leaving no choise to the no modders players than using these creatures.
BUT the most embarrasing thing IMHO will be the names of games in MP like "NO fantasy units" or even worst "Only the ones with reality mod".
The major question that i have is WILL THE CA DEVS TAKE THE RESPONCIBILITY FOR THE MISINFIRMATION OF MASSES OF CONSUMERS ON THE HISTORICAL FACTS?
The answer is left on their concience...

PS:At least we can thank ca for the creation of units for future archaic 2000-1000 BC mods.

[JeromeGrasdyke]

Quote[/b] (Spino @ Oct. 15 2003,18:55)]While many of us are pining for historical accuracy I think some of us are simply surprised to see the Egyptian military being portrayed as being exclusively 'Old/Early Dynasty' as opposed to having a few Hellenized unit types thrown in for good measure.
The tech tree and unit list are still undergoing revision, but there are entries there for historically accurate Egyptian Hoplites and Numidian Legionaries at the moment, alongside the classical troop types for those factions. So it *is* a mix, not just one way or the other http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif We're not going entirely off the historial track, not to worry. It's just that the Egyptian stereotype is so deeply embedded in popular western culture that the powers that be felt obliged to go this way.

Also, the Egyptians indeed do not use Numidian cavalry... the Numidians use Numidian cavalry, and I mentioned them mainly because the Numidians have a similar troop mix to the Egyptians - very little heavy infantry, with a few other troop types to compensate. Of course late during the game's period they copied the Roman legionary troops, and so the balance shifts a little at that point.

[The Wizard]

So these are those cool units with the funky hats.. still, I'd prefer those nasty Chosen Axemen http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[Kraxis]

Quote[/b] (JeromeGrasdyke @ Oct. 16 2003,02:27)]Also, the Egyptians indeed do not use Numidian cavalry... the Numidians use Numidian cavalry, and I mentioned them mainly because the Numidians have a similar troop mix to the Egyptians - very little heavy infantry, with a few other troop types to compensate. Of course late during the game's period they copied the Roman legionary troops, and so the balance shifts a little at that point.
Eh???

So there is a Numidian faction? COOL

Hehe, you can't let anything slip here, we will jump on it right away. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[Nelson]

Quote[/b] (JeromeGrasdyke @ Oct. 16 2003,02:27)]there are entries there for historically accurate Egyptian Hoplites and Numidian Legionaries at the moment, alongside the classical troop types for those factions. So it *is* a mix, not just one way or the other http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif We're not going entirely off the historial track, not to worry. It's just that the Egyptian stereotype is so deeply embedded in popular western culture that the powers that be felt obliged to go this way.

A commendable compromise, Jerome. When presented with lemons, make lemonade

History doesn't get in the way. It shows the way.

[Kraxis]

Quote[/b] (JeromeGrasdyke @ Oct. 16 2003,02:27)]but there are entries there for historically accurate Egyptian Hoplites and Numidian Legionaries at the moment, alongside the classical troop types for those factions.
Completely forgot to comment this...

*clars throat* Ahem...

THEN SHOW THEM http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/tongue.gif
No, seriously it would help a lot of people out of this nagging state mind. So far we only really have the Cleruch as a historical unit and these Guards and the Peltasts as semi-historical.

[JeromeGrasdyke]

Quote[/b] (Kraxis @ Oct. 16 2003,16:06)]So there is a Numidian faction? COOL
Hehe, you can't let anything slip here, we will jump on it right away. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
Damn ;-) Yes, there is a Numidian faction, which has a deplorable tendency to take over north Africa in a very unhistorical fashion with the AI and starting positions the way they are now. Of course it doesn't help that the historical event which gives them access to legionary units is not yet implemented and so they start of with quite a lot of kick-ass troops, but hey, these are the kinds of things you run into during development.

Just a couple of comments about the Armenians vs Macedonians battle - yes, it was a battle between two human players. At the moment the battle AI is roughly equivalent to Medieval's, with a few extra bits thrown in for the new sieges, and so it is functional but has most of the same weaknesses. Luckily we still have plenty of time for the planned improvements http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

Jerome ~ CA

[Spino]

Quote[/b] ]The tech tree and unit list are still undergoing revision, but there are entries there for historically accurate Egyptian Hoplites and Numidian Legionaries at the moment, alongside the classical troop types for those factions. So it *is* a mix, not just one way or the other We're not going entirely off the historial track, not to worry.

Very nice Thanks for the information Jerome. It's rather comforting to know there are like minded individuals at CA pushing for historical accuracy. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wave.gif


Quote[/b] ]It's just that the Egyptian stereotype is so deeply embedded in popular western culture that the powers that be felt obliged to go this way.

Yes, it's sad that Elizabeth Taylor, Yul Brynner and select episodes of Xena: Warrior Princess are permanently etched in western society's collective subconscious... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/frown.gif Although in defense of Yul he DID look the part.


Quote[/b] ]Yes, there is a Numidian faction, which has a deplorable tendency to take over north Africa in a very unhistorical fashion with the AI and starting positions the way they are now.

I'm sure Numidian kings Massinissa, Jurgurtha and Juba would be most pleased to hear of this 'deplorable tendency'. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif It is also great to know that the Numidians will be a faction and have their own unique units. The Amazigh (Berber) peoples of that region will finally have their day in the sun. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif


Quote[/b] ]...At the moment the battle AI is roughly equivalent to Medieval's, with a few extra bits thrown in for the new sieges, and so it is functional but has most of the same weaknesses. Luckily we still have plenty of time for the planned improvements

Yes yes yes Improve away I cannot speak for everyone here but an improved AI is at the top of my wishlist for RTW

Thanks again for your comments Jerome... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wave.gif

[Kraxis]

Quote[/b] (JeromeGrasdyke @ Oct. 16 2003,13:36)]
Quote[/b] (Kraxis @ Oct. 16 2003,16:06)]So there is a Numidian faction? COOL
Hehe, you can't let anything slip here, we will jump on it right away. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
Damn ;-) Yes, there is a Numidian faction, which has a deplorable tendency to take over north Africa in a very unhistorical fashion with the AI and starting positions the way they are now. Of course it doesn't help that the historical event which gives them access to legionary units is not yet implemented and so they start of with quite a lot of kick-ass troops, but hey, these are the kinds of things you run into during development.
Oh... I could help to root that out. You need not test it yourself, I could do that for you... Entirely for free. See, you could easily save a lot of money. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif Yes, me helping CA = stardom


Quote[/b] ]Luckily we still have plenty of time for the planned improvements http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

heh... yes, sadly I would say, but since you are at it, do away with it Make the AI my worst fear http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif

[Hakonarson]

Quote[/b] (JeromeGrasdyke @ Oct. 16 2003,02:27)]The tech tree and unit list are still undergoing revision, but there are entries there for historically accurate Egyptian Hoplites and Numidian Legionaries at the moment, alongside the classical troop types for those factions. So it *is* a mix, not just one way or the other http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif We're not going entirely off the historial track, not to worry. It's just that the Egyptian stereotype is so deeply embedded in popular western culture that the powers that be felt obliged to go this way.

Also, the Egyptians indeed do not use Numidian cavalry... the Numidians use Numidian cavalry, and I mentioned them mainly because the Numidians have a similar troop mix to the Egyptians - very little heavy infantry, with a few other troop types to compensate. Of course late during the game's period they copied the Roman legionary troops, and so the balance shifts a little at that point.
Egyptian Hoplites? Really?

AFAIK the Egyptians stopped hiring GREEK Hoplites (mainly Athenians IIRC) long before the RTW period - but they never had Egyptian hoplites. Egyptian PIKEMEN sure - but not hoplites.

The Egytian army of this era was not lacking in light troops - at Raphia light troops comprised maybe 15,000 of 70,000 infantry - not exactly overwhelming numbers of light troops by my reckoning.

CA has some good research for sure - I just ish they'd show us a few snippets of it from time to time

[The Wizard]

The Egyptians had lots of light troops ever since the Old Kingdom... thats why the Hittites formed such a threat back in the day..