Originally Posted by
B_Ray
I always dread posting my opinions on this forum since it seems a safe bet that I'm amongst the most ignorant about the topics at hand, but I'll risk sounding like a fool and say this. Does substantial, superior information on the Kingdom of Saba/Sheba really exist, relative to the Nabataean Kingdom? Prior to reading this thread, I didn't know anything about either Saba or the Nabataeans, but a brief Google search yielded much more detailed information on the later than the former. And it appears that the Nabataeans held considerably greater power during EB's time frame than did Sheba. Indeed it seems that Sheba was falling whereas Nabataea was rising. One website even claimed that in the 1st century BC, the Nabataean empire was briefly the largest in the western world (though certainly not the most powerful).
So I have the impression that there is just cause for including the Nabataeans as a playable faction, even if information on their military is sketchy. Is there really more accurate information on the Sabaeans'? And besides, Nabataea would have (for me) a more interesting position on the map and serve to provide the Ptolemies another immediate rival besides the Seleukids. In my campaigns, the AI Ptolemies just spend their first hundred turns chipping away at the Seleukids, who already have enough to deal with, only coming into conflict with the isolated Sabaeans if a province curiously rebels into their possession.
So there's my two cents. :egypt: