What are the gameplay differences between the nomadic factions?

Hello all,

I was just wondering if the differences between the Saka and Sauromatae were just cosmetic, or is there a real difference in how one goes about playing them (besides the obvious differences in starting position and Saka reforms)? I'm enjoying a Saka campaign now, finally since that nomad client ruler fix is in (many thanks Bovi :2thumbsup: ), and was just wondering how different the Sauromatae actually are gameplay-wise.

Saka can eventually obtain their own infantry, wheras the Sarmatians are an exclusively Cav faction. Moreover, the Sarmatians have far fewer horse archer options, as they tend to specialize in Heavy Cavalry. I would tend to think that their absolute lack of infantry would define them against the other nomads who have at least a couple of units that can be deployed to capture cities.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Irishmafia2020

Saka can eventually obtain their own infantry, wheras the Sarmatians are an exclusively Cav faction. Moreover, the Sarmatians have far fewer horse archer options, as they tend to specialize in Heavy Cavalry. I would tend to think that their absolute lack of infantry would define them against the other nomads who have at least a couple of units that can be deployed to capture cities.

---

Thanks for your reply. I did know about the Saka infantry thing, IIRC, you need regional barracks in Bactria and India, and have gotten the reforms (which are pretty quick and easy to get). I am noticing, though, that while it's said that the Saka were more about horsearchers, their Early Kataphrakts and FM Kat's are really tough. I just started a Sauromatae camp to go along with the Saka I've got going now, since I really wanted to find out for myself (I am still interested in hearing everyone's thoughts on the subject, though). I'm noticing that the Sauro's have a lot of HA/HC hybrids, and they seem a bit more fragile than the Saka Kat's. So, to me it seems that the Saka cav is more extreme on either end of the light/ heavy spectrum (really light or really heavy), and the Sauro sit more toward the middle in that respect. Y'all let me know if you agree with this.

... so playing Sarmatians you will most likely field armies of locals with very short lives backed by an uber-elite Roxolani Nobles or equivalent. It makes the battles trickier if you don't want your generals to get bad traits by retreating once the quivers are empty. you'll have to attack strong infantery with your peasants-in-arms and move your cavalry fast enough for your footmen not to be slaughtered. And even in victories your footmen will be slaughtered anyways. It's likely you'll rely on mercenaries and the ables one are a financial disaster for your economy. it's likely you begin to love those expensive hardened footmen and treat them with particular attention.

Playing Sarmatians roleplaying is compulsory: micro roleplaying. It's likely you'll know the name of everyone of those odd greek phalanxmen. Strange thing for a nomad.