The name says it all, this time the test is about the Nomads. I included Pahlava even though they become settled later in the game.
Mine is Pahlava.
Printable View
The name says it all, this time the test is about the Nomads. I included Pahlava even though they become settled later in the game.
Mine is Pahlava.
Pahlava. Best colour and best looking cataphracts.
Without doubt the Saka. Technically the Pahlava have a more interesting unit roster, but that's only due to their reforms, which they only get when they cease being a true nomad faction.
Where's the Gah! option? tsssk.
Anyway it used to be the yuezhi, now it's the saka. Their more unique and I find them most interesting as I know little or nothing about them.
Saka, I have too much personal experience with them (see below)
Baktrian Catanks look better.Quote:
Originally Posted by strategos alexandros
Yes, lion masks do look Kewl don't they?
As for me, the Sauromatae, simply becasue they are, and will always be, a Ancient Russia:2thumbsup:
EBII has another great nomad faction though. I think that's going to be my new favourite.
You teaser...Quote:
Originally Posted by Moros
I chose the Sauros just because that was my first thought. But I like all three of them so I don't really have a reason why...
If there's another Nomad faction it will probably be the Scythians or someone related to Cimmerian Bosphorus, so...
I voted Saka, but I really like Pahlava upon reflection - they always annoy the Seleukids enough so that my Baktria can breathe.
Not even close to the Russian steppes my freind. ~;p.Quote:
Originally Posted by Basileos ton Ellenon
Really in Need of Occultus signatures.
It's not the Yuezhi because there will be no emerging factions...
Could it be the Kamboja/Asvakas? An Iranian people in what is now Afghanistan, that fought with Alexander's armies?
They did migrate into India during the latter half of the EB time period.
Whatever it may be, wouldn't another Steppe faction make it awfully crowed there with Baktria, Saka, Pahlava (and Seleucids).
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...-Hem_323bc.jpg
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...-Hem_200bc.jpg
Hmm... I wonder who it could be.
No...it couldn't be...But of course! The Arctic Marine Mammal Hunter Empire!
Bah that's just misinformation :smash:.Quote:
Originally Posted by Moros
do my eyes play tricks on me or are there really iberians in the caucasus at 200 bc :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Subotan
otherwise great map man
Those are the Georgians, aka the city Kartli, north of Armavir (in EB terms).
EDIT: Hell yeah! I broke the Saka-Pahlava tie!
My favourite nomadic faction is Saka Rauka because of their unique culture, history, units, and infrastructure. Weren't they the farthest east Scythian tribes, or were those the Yuezhi?
Also, in that map posted by Subotan, who are the Ko-kun tribe? Is there a way to represent them in Europa Barbarorum as maybe a unit or two? I don't remember seeing a reference to them in EB, but were they Iranian or Turkic in origin?
Artorius Maximus, yeah, the Saka-Rauka are the easternmost branch of the "Royal Skythians", though Skythian was a name seemingly used by both Greeks and Persians to refer to any steppe horse-archer tribe in a generic sense, i.e. the horsearcher rabble. The Yuezhi were also known as the Tokharians by the Greeks, I think that they may come from the same (very) early Indo-European origins as the "Skythian" tribes, but developed independently on the Eastern side of the Pamirs/Tarim Basin. It's interesting that the Baktrian Greeks refer to them as "Tokharians" and not "Skythians" as Greeks have done with other steppe tribes, so it makes me think that there were signifigant differences between the Yuezhi and the Saka/ other Skythians. I've heard a bit about Tokharian being the IE language that was spoken the furthest east. I just took a look at that map, looks like the Ko-kun tribe may be an early Proto-Turkic tribe, since they are not marked off as Iranic. There's probably not a whole lot of evidence to create a unit for them though.
On second thought, looking at that map again, the Ko-kun, along with the Hsin-li are so centrally located between the Ugrian tribes, the Siberian hunter gatherers, the Iranian nomad tribes, and signifigantly West of the candidates for *Proto-Turkic tribes* that they could have originated from any of the above, since the steppe is big and wide open. I'm betting that there just isn't a whole lot of evidence to say for sure what their deal was.
*(Xiong-nu-thought to be the ancestors of Attila's Huns by some historians, the Yenesei Kyrgiz- there were later tribes of Kyrgiz that were thought to be of Turkic origin, and a tribe called the Hun-yu, don't know anything about them, but their name sounds similar enough to both the Xiong-nu and the later "Hun" that there may be a connection)*
Thanks, even though I didn't make it :sweatdrop: I'm also surprised that nobody mentioned the fact that Albania had migrated from Epeiros to Azerbaijan :laugh4:Quote:
Originally Posted by theoldbelgian
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caucasian_Iberia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caucasian_Albania
Stuff like that isn't uncommon, usually because lazy Romans named two separate countries "Mountain Land" or something.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galicia_(Spain)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galicia_(Central_Europe)
No idea. *Googles*Quote:
Originally Posted by Artorius Maximus
Right, I found a girl from Tennessee on Myspace, a Japanese Animé, and something to do with Coca-Cola and a Chinese Pharmaceutical company... But nothing about any Iranian/Turkic Nomads.
I'm pretty convinced by that hypothesis. The Xiognu were royal pains in the ass for the Chinese, and they easily had the resources to expand to the West, either voluntarily or because of population pressure.Quote:
Originally Posted by MerlinusCDXX
Edit: Here's a map for 300BC
http://worldhistorymaps.info/images/East-Hem_300bc.jpg
Next new Nomad faction...Hm. Garamantes? Aww c'mon, please tell us! Will you say we've got it right if we guess it?
I'm surprised the Pahlava hasn't got substantially more votes, i expected it to be a landslide in their favour.
They're definitely my favourite, there's just something i like about the way they were nomads, conquered the Seleukid territories, saw the ways of settled life, liked it, stayed, adapted, then carved out an empire of their own.
Oh and the combined poll results right now add up to 100.001%. HOW IS THIS POSSIBLE!?
Note that Moros used the term nomad faction, not steppe faction. Could it be that he was talking about... Numidians? :inquisitive:
I actually agree with that statement, but I'm very careful not to post anything here as a statement of fact unless I have multiple verifiable academic sources to back me up. I just posted the hypothesis as it is put forth, and there are historians who disagree with it, so I wrote some instead of many or most, since I don't know who leans in which direction.Quote:
Originally Posted by Subotan
Aha, a real Historian I see? Awesome.
"Royal Scythians" is a term used to describe the classic Scythians of the northern Black Sea littoral during the 4th-3rd c. BC and not the Saka.Quote:
Originally Posted by MerlinusCDXX
In a weird sense, you are actually both right. The Royal Scythians proper in the Classical age would refer to the tribe in the northern Black Sea littoral as MeinPanzer mentioned; these were referred to as the "Scythians beyond the Sea" in Achaemenid nomenclature. At the same time, the Sacaeraucae/Sakaraukoi according to the likes of J. Harmatta denotes their linguistic emphasis on "lordliness", and posits "The Lordly Scythians", which is comparable to the western counterpart, the later Roxolani, or Raukhsh-Alanna, which roughly means "The Brilliant Aryans". Observe the similarities of Rauka/Rauksha/Raukoi/Roxolanioi. Interestingly, the precursors of the Roxolani had supplanted the previous Royal Scythians both in matter of geographical position and role of status before this entity attained its definitive distinction from the Legae, Siracae, Iazyges and the Aorsi/Alans/Yancai (?). From Old-Persian and Sanskrit Khshathrapa/Ksatriya/Rokhshanna and even the royal title in Persianate cultures, Shah, which is believed to be derived partly from previous Akkadian epithets of royalty (Sha-), we find many cognates.
So in a sense, they are actually both "royal" tribes, but separated from each other. I would therefore rather propagate for a distinction of the Royal Scythians and the Royal Sacae in order to lessen any confusion.
TPC, thanks for shedding some light on the subject. I had a feeling that something was missing in what I had posted, but I couldn't quite nail it down. I was hoping that someone with more expertise on the subject than myself would correct any misconceptions that I had.
What about Saharan nomads??? That's my guess...
I choose Phalavan because they CAN BECOME SETTLED....... and get benefits of more civilized units...
Some people, me included, think that this has A LOT to do with the establishment of the IndoGreek Kingdom. They invaded there as part of the IndoGreek Armies and they were awarded lands to settle along with their families. They are mentioned as part of the army which attacked(along with Yavanas=IndoGreeks at that time, later every NW invader of India) and seized Mothura (an Indian city in the SE of New Delhi).Quote:
They did migrate into India during the latter half of the EB time period.
Bah horses are for weaklings!
Though Sauromatae's isolation makes it a bit fun.
Hmmmm. Sounds like someone could do with a "visit" of Pahlav and Saka horse archers and cataphracts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rilder
Just ignore him, it's his fear speaking.Quote:
Originally Posted by HunGeneral
On Topic:
Pahlava, the Sauros don't have proper catas and it just feels wrong that the Saka are still building tents after having conquered all of asia... (I hope the Saka get a reform similar to the Pahlava one in EB II) (Apparently something like that was planned for EB I, but was never realized.)
Fear of what? Afraid of using horse archers?
I don't like nomad factions because I don't like using calvary. not because I'm afraid of my own units shooting me or something.
Voted for the Saka as they get the best of both worlds with excellent cavalry and then good infantry with the indosaka reform. They also have in my opinion the best horse archer unit in the game the Saka Early Nobles. The only annoyance is that theire settlements can't reach above city level.
My guess is either the massagetae or a numidian tribe as they were at least semi nomadic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Moros
Pahlava-only ones with freely recruiteable Clibinarii, rather than tying them to FM's. excellent cavary too.:yes:
I still fondly remember the pahlava tryout I had-them cata's were Awesome!
Pahlava are best Nomads cause they can settle down and civilise and have normal build trees. So you can build a big empire with big cities. Not just a bunch of tents here and there.
I voted Saka - I like there units alot pluss they can recruit there best horse units everywhere (including the best Horse archers - early Saka nobles - like bobbin said). Pahlav is also nice but I don't like there limited recruitment area.
So do I - that would make te Saka my absolute favourite (among the nomads for sure):yes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Tolg
Oh, I had the (wrong:sweatdrop:) impression you claimed nomad units were weak and I meant you should try fighting against them to prove otherwise:sweatdrop:Quote:
Originally Posted by Rilder
I voted Sauromatae, only nomad faction I have played so far but only (nomad) faction I have feel like playing. Basically because they have the most beautifull unit in the whole game (Sauromatae FM), are in the best position to atack/sack/raid both Europe and Asia, are trully nomads (never settle, in the game at least) and the most close to scytians, who I would love to be in game. Perhaps in EBII, I hope.
PS: And because I reaaally like their Dragon faction symbol.
Why are the Early Saka Nobles so popular?
The Saka are my favourite nomad faction, but I don't like the ESN all that much...
Granted, they do have excellent arrow range, but:
- they can't do cantabrian circle
- they have low ammo (30, compared to 40 for most HAs)
- they have all the disadvantages of heavy armour, but still their armour value is pretty low (they seem to be on the disadvantageous side of a turning point); I'd prefer either Yancai Uaezdaettae, who have (only slightly) worse armour but retain all mobility including cantabrian circle, or a heavy HA with decent armour like Daha Uazdaettae for example.
Actually I don't even use cantabrian circle - as much as I know they only start "circling" when the enemy gets somewhat close which is not really useful - (with armored horse- archers it wouldn't be worth it because they tire faster) loose formation works better .Quote:
Originally Posted by Tollheit
True but thats why you need some HA for support. In the beginning the ESN are the heavy cavalry arm after your Saka FMs - they cost less then Saka Cataphracts/ Saka Bodyguards (as they are called in EB1.2) are easier acceseable and supporting your FMs first with bows and then with charging the rear of engaged enemy units they gain exp quite fast.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tollheit
There armour really doesn't seem to be to great but there main task should be to shoot arrows at the enemy, rest if possible an then follow the charging FM cavalry to finish of any enemy forces remaining. Differently from other HAs they can fight quite well in meele especially if there used to charge alreday engaged troops.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tollheit
Besides thiss the other reason why they are so usefull is that these guys are you only HA who (in theory) are availeable everywhere, in every province of the campaign map pluss they only requiere the first level "nobility" training facility (court) to train them which is availeable both with Nomadism and Pastorialism. So once you get far away from the steppes they could turn out to be the only HA you have close by in sufficient numbers and can retrain them fast enough for constant use.
The other noble- nomad units you mentioned are also quite usefull but there recruitment areas are quite limited.
I do use cantabrian circle a lot, and it works well for me.Quote:
Originally Posted by HunGeneral
If you order each HA unit to attack a target, they will start circling as soon as they start to shoot at that target. It makes a big difference (less losses). Even standard unarmoured HAs can withstand arrow fire for quite some time while circling.
I often use Saka Riders for this job. Albeit not armour-piercing, their lances are faster than those of ESN, they are probably as fast as any infantry weapon, so they do quite well, too. (+ they are cheaper)Quote:
but there main task should be to shoot arrows at the enemy, rest if possible an then follow the charging FM cavalry to finish of any enemy forces remaining. Differently from other HAs they can fight quite well in meele especially if there used to charge alreday engaged troops.
They're cheap, upkeep 643 compared to 898 for the yancai, excellent in melee, have good morale and a MASSIVE recruitment area. I'd have to disagree with you on the armour front, i feel they have good enough armour for repelling arrows whilst still having lots of mobility. Their only downside would be the number of arrows but thats pretty much it in my opinion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tollheit
I tend to use them supported by swarms of light HA's early in the game, but later on they become my main HA component supporting the cataphracts. I use the Dehbed to fufill a similar role in my Pahlava games.
All those nomad Barbaria/Barbarus should be wiped out and led through Rome in Triumph so they no longer bother civilised peoples!!!
I never actually played a Nomad faction. When current Roman one is over it will probably be Baktria or Suebi, then a Nomad one. I will look at your recommendations then.
Despite my hate of Nomads, I have played a sauromatae game, it was funish, but horribly unsatisfying, the AI couldn't fight back and felt way to exploitive to use them
Looks as if it will have another "barbarian" faction as well... I bet it's the Boii.Quote:
Originally Posted by Moros
Voted Saka for their lovely units and their ability to adapt in certain way to Hellenic and Indian ways. Economically speaking, I like Pahlava best though.
Well first of all: "quisqe est barbarus alio".Quote:
Originally Posted by Macilrille
Actually I found roman and helleneslave... levy soldiers to be quite usefull asfodder... distraction while my horsemen finish of anyone who opposes them.
I'll be here, don't worry.Quote:
Originally Posted by Macilrille
New nomad faction in EBII? - I should check the EBII forum more often.:sweatdrop:
The Sarmatians don't need cataphracts! Their FM's are tanks. I don't think I ever had one die in battle, and I had their empire essentially the size of modern Russia when I lost my save in the 1.2 upgrade.Quote:
the Sauros don't have proper catas