Ottoman Sipahi

[Leodegar]

hi,

i'm playing the turks in sp campaign game. and i´m just wondering what are my ottoman sipahi for?
when using them, they did not very well compared to armenian heavy cavalry.

then i took a look at the stats, and armenian heavy cavalry is better in anyway.

Charge Attack Defence Armour Speed Moral
Ottoman Sipahi 4 2 3 4 9,20,22 2
Arm. Heavy Cav. 8 3 3 4 9,20,22 4


so i´m wondering what´s the use of ottoman sipahi? does anyone use them? if, how?

[Fragony]

They are not that good, but they only require a horse breeder, which makes it very easy for you to build them everywhere. They are still better then hobilars and mounted sergeants, just see them as expendable cavalry that does te job when needed.

[lancer63]

They are a bit new to me, only used them once in battle, but so far they are pretty acceptable medium cavalry. They held out well against elmo head spears and Gulham bodyguards. One unit of OS routed 2 AUM units and only broke under overwhelming odds.
Still have to test the sipahis of the porte. Been reading bad views about them.

[Doug-Thompson]

There's one more statistic worth mentioning -- cost.

AHC -- $300
OS -- $200

However, this is another example of getting what you pay for. Also, OS have a higher maintenance cost.

[Bhruic]

It's the same with the Ghulam Cav. Exact same stats as Armenian Heavy Cav, but 2 less charge. Higher build cost requirements. The only advantage they have is that you can build them everywhere. Of course, Armenia does nothing for me but pump out AHC, so I rarely need to build Heavy Cav anywhere else.

Bh

[nick_maxell]

Haven t tried them yet but looking at the stats posted by leodegar I d say AHC go north and OS go into the desert, the armor can make quite a difference there (and AHC suck in the desert) - my best guess is that they are the cheaper desert version of AHC for Turkey (and an exclusive unit if you loose the AHC building provinces and need decent cav quickly before buildings for gulams are finished)

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

nick

[katank]

I seriously don't know why half the cav options exist.

I swear that I see no point to ghulam cav when AHC exists nor kwarzies when you can get avar nobles.

these cav are not only lower build req but better stats and cheaper support.

same thing for OS although I suppose desert argument is a good one.

why not just use camels though? cheaper and quite effective.

[ichi]

Sipahis, when V3 or better, can be effective desert cav, effective at dealing with the Saharans or other Cav of the Muslim factions. Otherwise, they are flankers, routers, harassers.

In the game there are some units that seem unnecessary because similar or better options exist. There is an histrocial basis for some of these units, but there are also two other good theories for this.

One, the 'redundant' units provide a little variety or diversity. usually these have slightly different stats (compare AHC and Ghulams, or Feudals and Porno Cav, Halbs and Bills, ).

or

There are some units that represent bad choices. In the campaign an unsuspecting player might build a stable full of OS because of the lower build requirements and/or cheaper cost to build, not realizing they are relatively weak and relatively expensive to maintain.

Khwarazmians, like Katank implies, fall into this category.

Regardless, it doesn't bother me the way it appears to bug some folks. I usually build a few Sips for my Turks, along with Ghulam Cav and Bodyguards, Turcoman HAs, AHC, even a few Sips of the Porte late in the game.

Regarding the AHC vs Ghulam Vs Sipahi comparison.


Quote[/b] ]I d say AHC go north and OS go into the desert, the armor can make quite a difference there (and AHC suck in the desert)

I'll bet you that most folks think AHC go North and and Ghulams and Sips go south, but if you look at the stats Ghulams have the same armor as Sips or AHC. AHC should do well in the desert.


Quote[/b] ]why not just use camels though?

I don't think that turks get camels, except as Mercs or thru bribery (which is a good idea for a Turk Lord to do).

ichi

[son of spam]

Turks get camels. Every Muslim civ can build them with only a fort.

[Doug-Thompson]

Turks get Bedouin Camels, but have to occupy Syria, the Sinai or Egypt. Neither they nor the Egyptians can build their own Berber Camels, though, except by Jihad occasionally.

[P.S. Oops. Forgot Arabia, as katank points out below.]

[ichi]

Thanks Doug and SoS

*hangs head low*

Been playing a lot of MP lately, where Turks don't get camels.

But in SP you are correct, Bedouins are available to the Turks in Syria, Egypt, and the Sinai.

Shoulda stopped in my post while I was ahead.

Gah

ichi

[katank]

actually they are available in Arabia and other desert provinces too.

due to extremely low build reqs, camel spamming is quite effective early on as cheapo counter unit.

[[DnC]]

Citaat[/b] (ichi @ April 12 2004,21:18)](compare AHC and Ghulams, or Feudals and Porno Cav, Halbs and Bills, ).
Porno Cav?
Is that some weird modification you've made? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-jester.gif

[katank]

this has been mentionned in many threads.

ichi teachs his byz cavalry naughty things http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[SpencerH]

I found OS to be a good cav unit in SP campaign. OS- of the porte were more useful for me though. Maybe it has to do with valor and weapons upgrades, or how you use them (I'm not much for heavy cav charges) ?

[Grand Warder of the Kremlin]

I think Porno Cavs was referring to the Pronoiai Allagion of the Byzantines. Nonetheless, I made a little correction in the names file in honor of this particular typo. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/bigthumb.gif

[katank]

yeah, funny stuff. I think it's intentional upon ichi's part though as he said the same thing in several threads.

therefore, I propose we call em porno cav from now on at the forum just as we affectionately name the byz circus barney.

@spencer, Siphs of the Porte are really great. too bad they are only 20 men. some thing a little modding will fix http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

I don't like OS much though just due to superiority of AHC in just about every way and other cav all providing better shock which is what heavy cav is for, to wither and shatter their lines from the rear or flanks with a nice charge.

[Gregoshi]

http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wave.gif Hello SpencerH and Warder. Welcome to the Entrance Hall. Pull up an ottoman and rest your weary feet...perhaps I should rephrase that. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

[squippy]

I got good use of out of my Sipahis. I agree that the distinction is partly to allow the player to make a sub-optimal choice and partly due to realism and partly due to the fact sipahi are better in the desert. Sure the AHC are the best cav available to the turks, but only as long as they hold armenia - an dI have frequently enough seen them driven out and replaced by the horde, the Egyptians, the Byz, sundry crusading factions and even the Hungarians. I like the variety the turk army rost has despite its apparent redundnacy. I can find specific roles for all the hybrid archers too.

[SpencerH]

Quote[/b] (Gregoshi @ April 14 2004,21:05)]http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wave.gif Hello SpencerH and Warder. Welcome to the Entrance Hall. Pull up an ottoman and rest your weary feet...perhaps I should rephrase that. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif
Glad to be here. I started playing VI again and decided to stop lurking.

[BrianBoru]

i never go to forums or sites until my second install of the game. ya know ya uninstall it, then ya watch a movie or something and it makes ya wanna conquer the world http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-glasses2.gif then i come at meet all the nice people.