Faction 8: Egypt

https://i.imgur.com/Wqdcvke.jpg

Egypt

“Legacy, independence, power.”

Ptolemaic Egypt has close cultural ties to the Hellenistic world, while maintaining many Egyptian traditions. Founded by Ptolemy in 305BC following the death of Alexander the Great, it has become a centre of culture and trade under the influence of its Macedonian rulers.

A general under Alexander, Ptolemy was appointed to govern Egypt after his king’s sudden demise. With Alexander’s empire fragmenting, Ptolemy declared his independence, securing Egypt against his power-grabbing rival generals during the Wars of the Successors (322 – 275BC).

Embracing Egyptian religion and customs, the Ptolemies have since made themselves Pharaohs, continuing the long engineering tradition of great temple and monument building. Greek culture and learning are actively encouraged however, and an upper class of Greco-Egyptians has emerged. But things are not always harmonious; with Greek units garrisoned and veterans settling throughout the territory, the privileges of Greek citizens have led to frequent and bloody uprisings by the indigenous people.

The intermingling of Greek and Egyptian fighting styles provides the Ptolemaic Pharaohs with a military that is both advanced and balanced, yet still honours the role of the champion commander. Making great use of spear and pike, their forces are further diversified with skilled swordsmen, scythed chariots, and more exotic units such as African war elephants. Egypt's position on the Mediterranean Sea also requires a substantial navy to protect its colonial and trade interests.

While Alexandria has become a beacon of civilisation and learning, its rulers are power-hungry opportunists. This new dynasty may yet expand its territory and influence further – perhaps to unify the Greek-speaking peoples? Or west, to carry out Alexander's threatened conquest of Carthage?

As a Successor Kingdom, Ptolemaic Egypt is progressive and forward-looking. They are skilled statesmen and academics, and their naval prowess is unquestioned. However, as a recently established dynasty on foreign soil, the native Egyptians will take some convincing as to the value of their new rulers …

https://i.imgur.com/60IDZzm.jpg

Awesome! I love the factions, but I hope there will be more than eight.

Not really happy about the inclusion of "scythed chariots," which sounds like 100% anachronism. Orgah historians, is there any evidence the Ptolemies were still using chariots at this late date? Anything at all?

-edit-

Clarification: I know chariot racing was still a huge sport, and I know chariots were used for formal/religious processions. My question, rather, is whether there's a single shred of evidence that the Ptolemies were using chariots as a practical weapon of war.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Appianos Alexandreus, "Romaika, Preface.10"

The kings of my own country [Egypt] alone had an army consisting of 200,000 foot, 40,000 horse, 300 war elephants, and 2,000 armed chariots, and arms in reserve for 300,000 soldiers more. This was their force for land service.

---

Take it or leave it :)
Later states how that is quoted from the royal accounts of Philadephos.

BTW, ugh at Petra being ptolemaic...
This faction was certain, I'm still glad there's Pahlava :P

Well, that answers that; thanks for the clarification. Scythed chariots here we come!

Not unexpected news on this last faction.

For goodness sake Arjos, why couldn't you just call him Appian, I was about to accuse you of making that up. :stare:

It would seem like that we are going to see a proper historical egypt afterall. But Im mourning for the selecuids. However, that rally point image in the factions page had given me hope (just like CA wanted ;) it might mean a ninth faction, either as a pre-order bonus or as a cover up for the 1TPY crisis. We shall see.

5-6 provinces. Egypt is easily the most powerful of all the playable factions at the initial start date. Intriguing.

Also: thank god we have Ptolemaic Egypt and not Old Kingdom Egypt.

By the way, has anyone noticed the 3rd pike from the left? Upon closer inspection it looks like the metal is serrated. Or is it just me? Also does anyone know if they were in use in egypt back than?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Monk

Also: thank god we have Ptolemaic Egypt and not Old Kingdom Egypt.

---

Though we get old kingdom eye liner. I am strongly skeptical of the historical evidence for the Ptolemaic infantry being part of an emo band.

Never heard of Funeral for a Pharoah? My Ptolemaic Romance?

Glad it's finally done. Now we can get down to the important stuff.......verifying the number of leaves on palm trees, making sure the port side oars are not on the starboard side of the ships, etc. You know. Anything that will quickly pass the time until October and the game comes out.

Long summer ahead. :sweatdrop:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnhughthom

Never heard of Funeral for a Pharoah? My Ptolemaic Romance?

---

Good AAR titles.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnhughthom

For goodness sake Arjos, why couldn't you just call him Appian

---

Never! You Anglo-Saxons already have the bigger part of the world, speaking your language, be happy with that :P
I don't call you Giovanni Ugo Tommaso, now do I? XD

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alexander the Pretty Good

Though we get old kingdom eye liner.

---

The phalangitai look like natives and iirc, the eye lining wasn't a cosmetical/social status choice, for the working classes, but it genuinely helped with sunlight. (Ancient "sunglasses" if you will)...

I want to know what's that at the bottom of faction list? What's your opinion?

OKAY, if you are not excited about Aegypt, I don't know what's the problem; it's properly represented with egyptians forming phalanx formations....

The Rooster invites you to GET EXCITED ABOUT EGYPT!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WcDEfv-etkQ

Again the units look good and more historical, 100x better than the old Mummy returns armies.

I like it. game looks stunning. I'm waiting for this. And wish for more screnshtots.

As Monk pointed it out, Ptolemaic Egypt at the time of the game is the most powerful of all playable factions. Interesting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by edyzmedieval

As Monk pointed it out, Ptolemaic Egypt at the time of the game is the most powerful of all playable factions. Interesting.

---

In what sense is it the most powerful? As anyone who plays hotseats will tell you, the number of provinces are not the only (or the most important) sign of a faction's strength. First, Egypt will have public order problems, meaning they will have to focus in internal issues before they can expand. Thus, they are more or less assigned a role of a builder/turtler and not that of a rabid warlike nation.

We have no knowledge of their armies but the Roman legions should still be more cost-effective and should be able to consistently outperform due to superior morale, discipline, arms and tactics, not to mention the whole militaristic society that ran the Republic. I'd take Roman legions lead by capable, power-hungry men who must achieve military victories to become someone in their society over a bunch of Macedonians ruling over multitudes of unhappy dirt farmers. That Rome is notoriously bad at seafaring will probably be the one major reason why Egypt's conquest will have to wait for a while.

That, and Carthage, Epirus and their friendly neighbourhood Gauls and Germans.

It will be interesting to see how powerful the Ptolemies will be by the time Rome players can invade.

i hope this tw will have diseases for armies! nothing would ruin ur day like an outbreak of diarhea > extra latrine duty for the allied legion > teutoburger wald all over again XD

Quote:

---

Take it or leave it :)
Later states how that is quoted from the royal accounts of Philadephos

---

It would take more than one person's account to prove such a thing, but....it seems there will be no choice but to have chariots in the game once again. Let us hope the devs pay more attention to how chariots were actually used in warfare.....please, please, please, no more silliness like the original where chariots tooled around on rough, stony terrain and steep hillsides like they were on a Sunday cruise.................

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ReluctantSamurai

It would take more than one person's account to prove such a thing, but....it seems there will be no choice but to have chariots in the game once again.

---

Absolutely, hence my "take it or leave it"...

Still they had parade chariots, even refitted to be drawn by four elephants. The knowledge and inventive surely wasn't amiss...
Later against a non-hellenic opponent (perhaps in the hope of exploiting a novelty), Antiochos employed them. And we have a source mentioning them in Egypt at the time...

Imo it was simply a "dealer's choice", against trained and acquainted Makedones, Basileis decided not to use them (at the same time, afaik, we lack in-depth sources for the earlier Syrian Wars), but it was a tactical decision. To let the player make that choice, is perfectly in line with the TW genre and doesn't call for inaccuracy...

Quote:

---

To let the player make that choice, is perfectly in line with the TW genre and doesn't call for inaccuracy

---

It's a game, not a historical model, and as such, there should be features just for fun....even if they are not exactly historical. That's fine by me.

My only take is that the devs pay attention to detail on this one. Chariots cannot operate on rough, stony ground, nor can they be used on hilly or mountainous terrain. Historically, charioteers were the elite-of-the-elite, and should therefore be very expensive to train and maintain. The very last thing I would want to see are endless stacks of chariots rambling out of Egypt to overrun the known world.........

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ReluctantSamurai

It's a game, not a historical model, and as such, there should be features just for fun....even if they are not exactly historical. That's fine by me.

My only take is that the devs pay attention to detail on this one. Chariots cannot operate on rough, stony ground, nor can they be used on hilly or mountainous terrain. Historically, charioteers were the elite-of-the-elite, and should therefore be very expensive to train and maintain. The very last thing I would want to see are endless stacks of chariots rambling out of Egypt to overrun the known world.........

---

Or out of the British Isles for that matter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Myth

Or out of the British Isles for that matter.

---

Initial efforts to follow the Charter of the Land were thwarted when it was quickly discovered that chariots are ill-suited to ruling the waves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by quadalpha

Initial efforts to follow the Charter of the Land were thwarted when it was quickly discovered that chariots are ill-suited to ruling the waves.

---

Tell that to the Britons in RTW who can go and take Rome itself with just their donkey carts :laugh4:

On the chariots:

The way my professor told it in university at least some of the successor kingdoms indeed did use weird innovations like scythed chariots in battle. They did so because their neighbours had identical armies to their own: everybody had big pike-armed phalanxes supported by heavy cavalry. This created a bit of a stalemate situation which they tried to resolve through tricks like this. They never seem to have achieved any success, though. Not when Darius used them against Alexander, not when the Seleucids used them and not when Pontus did.

I don't think there are records of the Ptolemies using them, but if there are no Seleucids I don't see a big problem with including them. It only requires a very little alternate-history thinking to assume that if one Hellenistic monarch gave them a go another might also give it a try.

(Or to put it in a total war context: even the Europa Barbarorum mod had scythed chariots in it, albeit only for the Pontics and the Seleucids.)

Edit: Here's a fun short write-up of the battles where Pontus used their scythed chariots. http://twincitiesfieldofglory.blogsp...-chariots.html Seems they actually did their job in one of them. Not so much against the Romans, though.

Again...it's not a matter of historical accuracy for me. If chariots are included, just use some common sense on where they can be used, and how much they cost.

Quote:

---

Tell that to the Britons in RTW who can go and take Rome itself with just their donkey carts

---

Yep...and "pimped" donkey carts at that....imagine two horses towing a heavy wagon that can out-run a single rider on a horse:inquisitive:

The real question is why does Ptolemaic Egypt control Petra? They never did, nor did any Hellenistic power. Only the Romans succeeded at that.
The Nabataeans even succesfully defended themselves from Makedonian conquest twice not such a long time before the start date of our game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ReluctantSamurai

Again...it's not a matter of historical accuracy for me. If chariots are included, just use some common sense on where they can be used, and how much they cost.



Yep...and "pimped" donkey carts at that....imagine two horses towing a heavy wagon that can out-run a single rider on a horse:inquisitive:

---

Actually reconstructions of La Téne era chariots have proven to be rather light vehicles, although not as light as those of Bronze Age Egypt. It remains to be tested, however, if they could outrun a single horse.

Quote:

---

It remains to be tested, however, if they could outrun a single horse

---

If you have any experience at riding horses, you would know the answer to that question:quiet:

You have to remember though that Northern European Iron Age horse breeds were much smaller than modern breeds.

Has nothing to do with the breed of horse.

While I am not a "Horse Whisperer", I did have the opportunity, when I was younger, to work with a horse trainer whose specialty was training teams of Belgians. Even match-paired from birth, there are big obstacles to overcome in getting a pair of horses to pull in perfect synchronization. One horse might be stronger than the other, one may respond to commands better or quicker than the other, and so on.

In a warfare situation you can add injury and battlefield stresses to the mix. Terrain will also play a factor, as even minor obstructions or hazards will slow a chariot. Net result is that you will likely never get a team to pull in perfect unison, whereas a single rider has only injury or battlefield stress to deal with.

IMHO, no team pulling a chariot could ever outrun a single rider.

All this bickering over something so unimportant. The real question is, will there be cake?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vuk

All this bickering over something so unimportant. The real question is, will there be cake?

---

There will only be pie. Thank god.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moros

There will only be pie. Thank god.

---

They aren't glossing over what happens when you select exterminate this time around then?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B-TCIamyYCo

Why do I want to slap that idiot?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vuk

Why do I want to slap that idiot?

---

Why do you? He seems to make a good point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vuk

Why do I want to slap that idiot?

---

He wastes a lot of time trying to sound cute.
And popped collars are never cool. ;)

Some of it is interesting, though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ReluctantSamurai

Has nothing to do with the breed of horse.

While I am not a "Horse Whisperer", I did have the opportunity, when I was younger, to work with a horse trainer whose specialty was training teams of Belgians. Even match-paired from birth, there are big obstacles to overcome in getting a pair of horses to pull in perfect synchronization. One horse might be stronger than the other, one may respond to commands better or quicker than the other, and so on.

In a warfare situation you can add injury and battlefield stresses to the mix. Terrain will also play a factor, as even minor obstructions or hazards will slow a chariot. Net result is that you will likely never get a team to pull in perfect unison, whereas a single rider has only injury or battlefield stress to deal with.

IMHO, no team pulling a chariot could ever outrun a single rider.

---

Good points. This leant itself to the chariot being the war-tool of the wealthy, as only a person who had others to feed, clothe, etc. could afford the constant training etc. necessary to run an egyptian style chariot. Though the degree of wealth was smaller, the situation in Bronze Age Britain was analogous. Only the professionals who worked for a local lord could afford the time etc. Celtic warfare involved a lot of dismounting from the chariot as well, probably for precisely the reasons you note.

That said, Brittanic horseflesh tended toward the small side -- they were often labeled ponies by the Romans -- and would have been poor choices in combat as a ridden mount. Bigger and stronger breeds from the Med spelled the end of the British chariot as, with proper sized animals, the advantages of cavalry over chariotry that you note above quickly ended the old ways.

Quote:

---

Bigger and stronger breeds from the Med spelled the end of the British chariot as, with proper sized animals, the advantages of cavalry over chariotry that you note above quickly ended the old ways.

---

So maybe it's related to the breed, after all....:bow: