My first go with the Turks

I have been playing MTW/STW for a long long time. I dont not have the ability to upgrade my PC for MTW2 so i am back at MTW XL mod.

After looking through the list of countries (for the 1000th time it seems) i passed over my preferred novgorod faction and the English and realized in the hundreds of hours i have played MTW i never made a go of the Turks.

And so i begin. I will start on early, i have read the guide on the board and found the strategies to be good if your a blitzer. i am not really i prefer the turtling approach until i have my ducks in a row.

All this said a couple of questions mates:

1. Turks seem to have a wide variety of troops, which of these gives the best bang for the florin? i prefer horse missle moble armies but have evolved into a combined arms player for sure.

2. Which direction do i head? its either the Byz or Egypt.

3. Ribat and building specilizations by province, if you have a preference.

So any assistance would be great. i play XL mod on VH.

Thanks,

Odin

Generally, when playing with the Turks I try to produce huge numbers of turcoman horse, ghazi infantry, ottoman infantry as archers (in Rum), Armenian Heavy Cavalry in Armenia and saracen infantry.
It's been some time since I last played the Seljuks in XL, but I would probably go for Armenia initially, as the Armenians have a tendency to attack Rum sooner or later, and this can be painful if it coincides with fighting with the Fatimids and Byzantines. The Fatimids (Egyptians) tend to have poor troops (lots of nubian spearmen, desert archers and camels) and little with which to counter horse archers. I will try to hit them early and establish a one-province border with them at the Sinai before they can start transferring Saharan Cavalry. As for the Byzantines - simply wait for them to be at war with Sicily and the Cumans. If you get to Nicea and your fleet protects your borders, then the only way the Byzantines can invade will force them to fight a bridge battle and then even the katanks are easy to deal with. The Seljuks initial strategy should be to get a nice Empire with only three borders - Egypt, Georgia and Nicea or Constantinople (Nicea is easier to defend). Then they can build up their navy, get all the income from trade and slowly expand in whatever direction they want (North Africa is perhaps the best choice military wise and economic wise) while defeating an occasional Crusade in Nicea or Constantinople (if they ever cross).

Build up your fortifications in Georgia. If you're brave (or foolish) enough, take Lesser Kazar and max out the fortress, put your best defensive/anti cavalry troops in it, and wait for 1230. :skull:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kavhan Isbul

Generally, when playing with the Turks I try to produce huge numbers of turcoman horse, ghazi infantry, ottoman infantry as archers (in Rum), Armenian Heavy Cavalry in Armenia and saracen infantry.
It's been some time since I last played the Seljuks in XL, but I would probably go for Armenia initially, as the Armenians have a tendency to attack Rum sooner or later, and this can be painful if it coincides with fighting with the Fatimids and Byzantines. The Fatimids (Egyptians) tend to have poor troops (lots of nubian spearmen, desert archers and camels) and little with which to counter horse archers. I will try to hit them early and establish a one-province border with them at the Sinai before they can start transferring Saharan Cavalry. As for the Byzantines - simply wait for them to be at war with Sicily and the Cumans. If you get to Nicea and your fleet protects your borders, then the only way the Byzantines can invade will force them to fight a bridge battle and then even the katanks are easy to deal with. The Seljuks initial strategy should be to get a nice Empire with only three borders - Egypt, Georgia and Nicea or Constantinople (Nicea is easier to defend). Then they can build up their navy, get all the income from trade and slowly expand in whatever direction they want (North Africa is perhaps the best choice military wise and economic wise) while defeating an occasional Crusade in Nicea or Constantinople (if they ever cross).

---

thank you for the tips.

I had just 30 minutes last night so I started a game to see where I was. The Turk starting position is not very attractive at all, those provinces are wastelands that need to be build. That said, the armenians are an obvious first target but thier king is a 5 star general so its not going to be a cake walk considering the starting troops.

Overall it looks like the egyptians are the easy "large" target straight away, but that conflicts with one of my house rules of not attacking same religions unless attacked first.

To start it looks like ghazi infantry are a pretty good value for the bulk of my melee troops, decent stats and with a good general might make it up to very good. There fast but well see how they are in combat tonight.

Anyone else with detailed tips, please post them I do appreciate it.

Odin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vladimir

Build up your fortifications in Georgia. If you're brave (or foolish) enough, take Lesser Kazar and max out the fortress, put your best defensive/anti cavalry troops in it, and wait for 1230. :skull:

---

I've had my fun with the mongols playing the novgorods and the cumans 50 times over. I might go as far as georgia but I suspect that dealing with a crusade or two will be first and foremost, the mongols will have to wait.

When i play as turks, i always take loads of horse archers, as they are simply the most fun unit type in the game.... ghazi are okay for campaign but i prefer to use more solid unit types - spears etc., ghazi's have a nasty habit of dying in large numbers even when they're winning... If you do use gahzis make sure you target weakly armoured units first to chain, and try to flank with their pace, also watch out for cav :2thumbsup:

i would notmally ally with the armenians first (a costly battle early on against multiple princes and a king doesnt sound too fun) and concentrate on dealing with the egyptians, do your rules include the use of agents against other muslim factions?

:2thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Odin

thank you for the tips.

...the armenians are an obvious first target but thier king is a 5 star general so its not going to be a cake walk considering the starting troops.
Odin

---

Remember that you outproduce them 2:1. It shouldn't take you more than a turn or two to build the troops you need.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scurvy

do your rules include the use of agents against other muslim factions?

:2thumbsup:

---

My general rule is to honor alliances and not attempt to topple Like minded religious allies. I mean i have used cardinals as catholics and burned every general over 4 stars and invaded but i dont go that way any more.

So generally I will maintain:

1. 3-5 assisins (that are valored up)
2. 10 combo spies/priests
3. 1-2 diplomats
4. One senior religous leader (cardinal)

If your an enemy I bring the full compliment of my army/agents/diplomacy to bare, but as a general rule I do not harm allies, makes my games a little more challenging.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vladimir

Remember that you outproduce them 2:1. It shouldn't take you more than a turn or two to build the troops you need.

---

True, when I did my initial observation last night he had one heir 2 spears and a archer unit. I'll pepper them to death with arrows, but the only real flanking cav I have early is my kings unit and he is only a 3star general. Considering the armenian king is a 5 I am hesitant to bring my king to bare in that fashion.

SO I am thinking that an invasion of 2-3 horse archers, 3 Ghazi inf, my king and maybe a bedohin camel unit should be enough to get the job done.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Odin

True, when I did my initial observation last night he had one heir 2 spears and a archer unit. I'll pepper them to death with arrows, but the only real flanking cav I have early is my kings unit and he is only a 3star general. Considering the armenian king is a 5 I am hesitant to bring my king to bare in that fashion.

SO I am thinking that an invasion of 2-3 horse archers, 3 Ghazi inf, my king and maybe a bedohin camel unit should be enough to get the job done.

---

What are you facing? I'm not realy familiar with the Armenian unit roster but I've used the armanian infantry (as mercs) and there excelent troops in early. They have good melee stats with an AP weapon plus they're armed with bows IIRC.

Arm Inf will outshoot your (T)HA and outmelee them, they will survive a ghazi charge (with many causulties) and killing them with your king will just be to costly if it succeeds at all. I don't know about your camels but their just to big and slow not to be living pincushins.

My advice:
- take more missile units so you can soften them up before engaging.
- take at least 1 unit of spears with you, Ghazis are excellent flankers but die to quickly to be your line inf.
- use your HA to isolate the Armenian king before the melee starts. outflanked ghazis are dead in seconds. Besides a tired general/king is far easier to kill.

I do not believe the armenian infantry is a missile infantry - they have only maces, and their main strength lies in their huge number - 100 of them. The Armenians may or may not build a unit of them - most probably they will not. The naxarars are pretty much Kwarizmians in units of 20 men. The ghazis can take care of them easily in a forest, but if you need to face them in the open, you will need a unit of spearmen to hold them before you can hit them with your camels or sultan in the back. Since there are two units of them, at least two units of spearmen are highly recommended. The naxarars are heavily armored and while slow, it will take a loooong time to make a significant impact on them using only horse archers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Odin

SO I am thinking that an invasion of 2-3 horse archers, 3 Ghazi inf, my king and maybe a bedohin camel unit should be enough to get the job done.

---

Overkill. Remember: weapon/counterweapon. And two stars is only one extra valor point. Use a HA unit to lure the general into your Saracen and problem solved. A 3:1 force rule would be nice but don't forget the advantages of hills, forests, etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kavhan Isbul

I do not believe the armenian infantry is a missile infantry - they have only maces, and their main strength lies in their huge number - 100 of them. The Armenians may or may not build a unit of them - most probably they will not.

---

You may be right as it has been a long time since I used them. However, I use my mercs quit agresively and I remember being pleased with their performance. Just keep in mind that 40 men more per unit is a big deal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kavhan Isbul

The naxarars are pretty much Kwarizmians in units of 20 men. The ghazis can take care of them easily in a forest, but if you need to face them in the open, you will need a unit of spearmen to hold them before you can hit them with your camels or sultan in the back. Since there are two units of them, at least two units of spearmen are highly recommended. The naxarars are heavily armored and while slow, it will take a loooong time to make a significant impact on them using only horse archers.

---

The HA's aren't supposed to kill a unit, they're used to disorganise and withle down the enemy so they are easier killed by others. Read the HA guide in the guide forum to see what they can accomplish.

But for the rest it all depends on what the Armenians can field. The 2 units of spears is however advisable.

I have read the guide - it is excellent, and I often use all HAs armies and I have been able to destroy entire units using just HAs. However, unless the AI gives a chase with its spearmen, I really do not see how 2 or 3 units of horse archers can have any serious impact in this particular situation. From what I remember, the Armenians start with a unit of HAs of their own by default in early. Anyway, I am sure Odin will figure it out and win the battle easily. The good thing about most Turkish troops in early is that they are cheap and easy to replace.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kavhan Isbul

The good thing about most Turkish troops in early is that they are cheap and easy to replace.

---

Yes well said.

They had to spear units (no missles) one bow and two naxarars. I went in with 3 horsebow, 3Ghazi and 2 behdowin camels. After a troop review I had a camel unit with a general that had a skilled attacker trait which bumped him up to a 4star general, so he lead the attack.

The battle played out behing some buildings which made me unecessarily loose some horsearchers. In the end I won the battle but, as others have mentioned Ghazi die fast. I have spent a few turns in consolidation, building some troops and now have 1 3star heir, and 1 2 star heir each at the head of a decent army a strong compliment of troops.

I allied with the egyptians and tonight after the kids are to bed will attack the Byz empire and eventually drive to Nicea. I have turcoman horse, ghazi infantry,and armenian heavies as the primary offensive force and have horsearchers and spears holding with a few camels holding defensive positions against potential egyptian aggression.

Overall I am most surprised by the income potential of the Turks, no issue for me at all as accumen seems to be in abundance and finding good govenors is not hard.

thanks for all the feedback and insights fella's I much appreciate it ! Its been months since I fired up MTW, its been on my harddrive for years for a reason, no matter how long I am away from the game I can always come back and bank on getting yet another 20-30 hours of enjoyable gaming in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Odin

...and tonight after the kids are to bed ...

---

And you have most eloquently pointed out my biggest distraction while trying to work out a strategy. Sometimes so much concentration is required that I have to wait until my wife goes to bed as well.

Aside all that congratulate me its my 300th post. :balloon2:

I have a habit of going death by arrows myself while playing the Turks, but this seems very Early on so you might not quite be their. In that case death by exhaustion ... i mean HAs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sensei Warrior

And you have most eloquently pointed out my biggest distraction while trying to work out a strategy. Sometimes so much concentration is required that I have to wait until my wife goes to bed as well.

---

I usually get the weekend evenings to play my vids now, its just the way life shook out.

So The byz have given me all I can handle, Treb archers are a tough little unit... and to the AI's credit it wasnt bashfull charge them into my Ghazi inf and clogging up my plans. Finally got to Nicea after loosing an heir and a battle in Trebizond (the emperor himself led the relief force). I ended up having to hire some mercs because in all candeor they byzantine lineup of troops is formidable.

Literally just took nicea and havent been able to build it up much, Constantanople is the big prize but he's got 2 stacks and a couple of jedi's waiting for me. So I will sue for peace tonight, take some time to build up the provinces I have, start to build a fleet and will have to bide my time on the invasion.

I did manage to develop an nice heir out of this mess and increase my kings influence by 2 crowns so hopefully the son coming up is born with 4 stars. Eqyptians are slugging it out with the almohads so while the back door seems safe for now my struggle will be to I pour everything into taking Constantanople or do I build up and bide my time? I am a natural turtler but if the situation merits I will blitz, and I have the Byz back pedaling, Im just hoping the Cumans or the hungarians size the day and move toward Bulgaria.

When the time is right, you'll probably prefer making an amphibious assault on Constantinople, rather than the river crossing/bridge battle between Nicaea and the Big C. Of course, that presumes naval superiority before making the attempt.
I've made the bridge crossing sucessfully a few times, but it's definitely more of a challenge, and usually results in many more casualties to your armed forces.

Cheers!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geezer57

When the time is right, you'll probably prefer making an amphibious assault on Constantinople, rather than the river crossing/bridge battle between Nicaea and the Big C. Of course, that presumes naval superiority before making the attempt.
I've made the bridge crossing sucessfully a few times, but it's definitely more of a challenge, and usually results in many more casualties to your armed forces.

Cheers!

---

A 3/4 stack of seige weapons usually has a good chance of taking out the general before your troops cross. I just wish I could remember if cats have the range.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geezer57

When the time is right, you'll probably prefer making an amphibious assault on Constantinople, rather than the river crossing/bridge battle between Nicaea and the Big C. Of course, that presumes naval superiority before making the attempt.

Cheers!

---

I stop at nicea and sued for peace. I didnt have a port built yet and had spent a good amount of florins against armenia and the byz. That said I have captured a good swath of land helping my influence and getting me better heirs.

So I spent a good 15 turns committed to build up of provinces disbanding crap units replacing them with better quality, in prep for the final assault on Constantanople. then the egyptians back stab me and attack syria. I had two offensive armies ready to go in armenia (with a port and some dhows built) that had been planned for the byz. 4 turcoman horse archers, 4 armenian heavies 3 sacren infantry and each army had a 4+ star heir and an merc or two artilery unit.

The egyptian units are no match for turk troops and tactics. Literally the only unit I had a modicum with trouble with were nubian spears, but they broke fast. I have pushed the egyptians all the way back to egypt and they are begging for peace. I will take egypt and stop there making that a choke point.

While the egyptian offensive bore fruit by way of influence, rich provinces, and battle expirence it took me away from the main goal of taking Contantanople and making it my capital. I am plaing on hard and I thought the egyptians would have been harder but really they do employ crap units. So I am in consolidation for another decade or so, its about 1145 and the next goal is to still take out the Byz, only now I have a robust navy that allows me to hit greece first and move in from there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Odin

then the egyptians back stab me and attack syria.

---

Happens every time I'm afraid. ~;)

This is why people tend to attack the Egyptians first, before going after the Byzantine. It also makes alot more sense, as the Egyptians are holding 5 of the best provinces in the game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Caravel

Happens every time I'm afraid. ~;)

This is why people tend to attack the Egyptians first, before going after the Byzantine. It also makes alot more sense, as the Egyptians are holding 5 of the best provinces in the game.

---

Its logical to attack the egyptians straight away, there units suck quite frankly and ive really had no trouble at all defeating them on my terms and in my time.

I have house rules i play with, I dont attack same religions or allies, unless they attack me first. However on the flip side, it would be a heck of an easier go having those income producing egyptian provinces 1st, then attacking the byz.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Odin

Its logical to attack the egyptians straight away, there units suck quite frankly and ive really had no trouble at all defeating them on my terms and in my time.

I have house rules i play with, I dont attack same religions or allies, unless they attack me first. However on the flip side, it would be a heck of an easier go having those income producing egyptian provinces 1st, then attacking the byz.

---

The Egyptians get nothing much unique, in the way of units, until the high period, where the mamluk units are available. Unfortunately the mamluk units are hardly groundbreaking so they can be dissappointing. Bedouin Camels, Saracen Infantry, Saharan Cavalry and Nubians are about their best units early on. Nizaris take so much teching up that you'll hardly see them fielded by the AI unless they've come from a jihad. Early on it's camels, nubians, desert archers and of course peasants. Combine all that with the few low valour generals (they only get one good general to start with IIRC) in 20 man Ghulam Bodyguard units and you've got a rout waiting to happen.

My strategy as the Turks vs the Egyptians is to Attack Antioch early on. The Sultan in Antioch rarely fights, usually withdrawing to Tripoli. You just have to repeat until you've arrived in Palestine. By this time they probably will fight if you attack Arabia or the Sinai. I tend to wait at this point and let those provinces acclimatise to me rule. Then I launch a two pronged attack to force the 1 province choke point at the Sinai. Egypt follows soon after, unless I want to leave the Egyptians in the game.

The battles that you do fight are simple enough if you deploy Turcoman Horse and shoot out the general first. The rest will then rout once they take a small beating.

To provide a better challenge, and more interesting campaign, it can be an idea to go for only Antioch. Then make peace with the Egyptians (if possible) and move against the Byzantine when you're strong enough.

I play the game modded, so the Fatimids/Ayyubids/Mamluks provide more of a challenge with the +1 valour Bedouin Camels and Arab Infantry (souped up slightly, 100 man unit) in Arabia.

Well, I actually find the Mameluk HAs to be a very nice unit. And the Mameluk Cavalry is very useful against other heavy cavalry, such as order knights or katanks, as long as you can pin them down with saracen infantrymen. I personally do not think that the Egyptian units, even in early before the Mameluks, Abyssinian guardsmen and the arablaesters are weak, as long as they are used properly. Overall, if the Middle East is left alone to the AIs, it is in perhaps as much as 75% of all games that the Egyptians will become the superpower there, but this may be due to the nice income they get and the weak starting position of the Byzantines and the Turks. Once they get to Armenia and start churning out Jihads and Armenian Heavies, the Egyptians can be quite a foe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kavhan Isbul

Well, I actually find the Mameluk HAs to be a very nice unit. And the Mameluk Cavalry is very useful against other heavy cavalry, such as order knights or katanks, as long as you can pin them down with saracen infantrymen. I personally do not think that the Egyptian units, even in early before the Mameluks, Abyssinian guardsmen and the arablaesters are weak, as long as they are used properly. Overall, if the Middle East is left alone to the AIs, it is in perhaps as much as 75% of all games that the Egyptians will become the superpower there, but this may be due to the nice income they get and the weak starting position of the Byzantines and the Turks. Once they get to Armenia and start churning out Jihads and Armenian Heavies, the Egyptians can be quite a foe.

---

while that maybe true, the only serious unit I faced was Sacren infantry. Obviously the AI isnt as adept as I am in generalship and its behavior is predictable, but throwing unit after unit of Behdowin camels at me seemed a tradgedy particularly when they took the offensive.

in other games I have played (mind you have played nothing but the XL mod for what a year or more) the egyptians do tend to dominate but its usually at the benefit of the Byzantines demolishing the Turks very early, at least in my expirence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kavhan Isbul

Well, I actually find the Mameluk HAs to be a very nice unit. And the Mameluk Cavalry is very useful against other heavy cavalry, such as order knights or katanks, as long as you can pin them down with saracen infantrymen.

---

They're not bad, though Fari are better (better charge) for the same money IMHO. Turcoman Horse are still better overall (cost, building dependency, support, availability, valour bonus in Tripoli, faster) than both though, because they're faster which is all important for HA's. If the Mamluk HAs had been faster than the Faris then they would have been worthwhile. The building dependencies are rather steep also, requiring you to tech up to castle level.

Mamluk Cavalry are another dead duck. Compared with Armenian Heavy cavalry and Ghulam, they fall well short of the mark. The armour piercing attack is not much of a bonus either, as you can employ cheaper Ghazis or Abysinnian Guards to do much the same thing, better. The only good thing is the low building dependency, the bad is the poor charge and higher support costs than AHC.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kavhan Isbul

I personally do not think that the Egyptian units, even in early before the Mameluks, Abyssinian guardsmen and the arablaesters are weak, as long as they are used properly. Overall, if the Middle East is left alone to the AIs, it is in perhaps as much as 75% of all games that the Egyptians will become the superpower there, but this may be due to the nice income they get and the weak starting position of the Byzantines and the Turks. Once they get to Armenia and start churning out Jihads and Armenian Heavies, the Egyptians can be quite a foe.

---

The egyptians gain the upper hand due to them controlling some of the best provinces in the game. This enables them to pump out units like nobody's business and rush their neighbours. This is why the Egyptians always do the dirty on you, because they can. They tend to glut on low quality troops such as spearmen and peasants, then they invade, e.g. Syria. The Turks will then "decide that they cannot win the battle" and will pull out. In this way the Egyptians win through numbers alone and not quality.

I completely agree with all observations. What I was trying to say was that the Egyptians do not lack any important troop type, even if the one they have is not superior. They have good spearmen in both the Nubians and the Saracens, they have good archers in the desert archers (and later they get crossbowmen, arbalesters and even mameluk handgunners, the latter being useful in desert conditions), they have javelinmen in the Arab Infantry, they get Ghazis, Arab Heavy Infantry, Dismounted Faris and Abyssinian Guardsmen for a wide choice of blade infantry, and they have enough cavalry types - Ghulam Bodyguards, Ghulam Cavalry, Saharan Cavalry, Armenian Heavy cavalry, the two types of Mameluk Cavalry, Faris, Steppe and Steppe Heavies if they get to those provinces, and Kwarizmian cavalry (which I find a bit useless), plus Camels, great for attacking RKs or Ghulam Bodyguards at the back. Yes, they do not have longbowmen, almughavars, Gothic Knights, Variangian Guardsmen, Kataphrakti, Swiss Pikemen and Halberdies, and Turcoman Horsemen or Szekely, but they have all the necessary troops to deal with pretty much any situation.
In contrast, the Almohads cannot get a decent heavy cavalry unit unless they get to Rum, Armenia and Lesser Armenia. The Ghulams are great, but expensive and come only in units of 20. The Turks do not have crossbowmen and arbalesters. Compared to them, the Egyptians can't complain.

Hmm, it seems to me that as I think of the Egyptian line up there are no units that make you drool. Varangian Guard, the Byz that's it, no one else gets 'em. Billmen or Longbowmen ditto for the English. AUM ditto for the Almos. The Egyptians ... no one. There is no stand out exclusive unit for them, at least not as I recall. It seems like the Egypts got shorted in the cool unit department.

With that said, in the case of playing the Turks, the Egyptians have only 2 units, Peasants and Mounted Peasants (Camels). Thats it, they are Peasant Spammers. I used to make the rush to Constantinople and secure my northern and eastern borders because, in my mind, the Byz was the bigger threat. If they get up and running they are very dangerous.

The Egyptians always did the dirty to me, and usually in Syria. I'd choke to see the 9000 man army cross the border to give me the boot, that is until I'd see the lineup. Hmm, 'bout a 50-50 split between .... you guessed it Peasants and more Peasants (Camels). So 1/2 an hour later I'd have a general who is a Skilled Defender after a huge slaughter. It's a wonder they have any farmers left considering I'd massacre thousands if not tens of thousands in my push towards Egypt.

Now adays I tend to trap the Egyptian Sultan in Antioch and sell or kill him off. Then rush to wipe Egypt off the map before they rev up the Peasant machine. Of course if you don't want to unify the Muslim world then use them to train up your generals, heirs, assassins, and what not as they try to sweep you away in a dirty, smelly sea of Peasants.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kavhan Isbul

I completely agree with all observations. What I was trying to say was that the Egyptians do not lack any important troop type, even if the one they have is not superior. They have good spearmen in both the Nubians and the Saracens, they have good archers in the desert archers (and later they get crossbowmen, arbalesters and even mameluk handgunners, the latter being useful in desert conditions), they have javelinmen in the Arab Infantry, they get Ghazis, Arab Heavy Infantry, Dismounted Faris and Abyssinian Guardsmen for a wide choice of blade infantry, and they have enough cavalry types - Ghulam Bodyguards, Ghulam Cavalry, Saharan Cavalry, Armenian Heavy cavalry, the two types of Mameluk Cavalry, Faris, Steppe and Steppe Heavies if they get to those provinces, and Kwarizmian cavalry (which I find a bit useless), plus Camels, great for attacking RKs or Ghulam Bodyguards at the back. Yes, they do not have longbowmen, almughavars, Gothic Knights, Variangian Guardsmen, Kataphrakti, Swiss Pikemen and Halberdies, and Turcoman Horsemen or Szekely, but they have all the necessary troops to deal with pretty much any situation.
In contrast, the Almohads cannot get a decent heavy cavalry unit unless they get to Rum, Armenia and Lesser Armenia. The Ghulams are great, but expensive and come only in units of 20. The Turks do not have crossbowmen and arbalesters. Compared to them, the Egyptians can't complain.

---

Its hard to argue, you make a strong case and I agree that the egyptians do have a good selection of troop types, sadly for me they chose not to employ them when they attacked.

Quote:

---

The Turks do not have crossbowmen and arbalesters. Compared to them, the Egyptians can't complain.

---

this is a great observation and one that has me thinking of the future of my expansion into Europe. it looks like I am going to have to have some merc units to counter the crossbows/arbalesters.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sensei Warrior

Now adays I tend to trap the Egyptian Sultan in Antioch and sell or kill him off. Then rush to wipe Egypt off the map before they rev up the Peasant machine. Of course if you don't want to unify the Muslim world then use them to train up your generals, heirs, assassins, and what not as they try to sweep you away in a dirty, smelly sea of Peasants.

---

this is a popular strategy as per the guide here on the org. Cant argue with its effectiveness, the sultan does sit in Antioch an awful long time and its almost a no brainer to isolate him and ransom him.

Personally i think its an exploit on a poor choice of AI positioning. Effective yes, but the game needs players integrity (not suggesting you dont have it mate) to make the game a full challenge.

Quick update and advice needed.

I pushed the Egyptians back to Egypt and am sitting in Sinai, they sued for peace and I accepted. My initial intent was to take Egypt, I still might but in all the fun some of thier provinces rebelled, and the net result is there is an 8 star rebel general sitting on one of the islands surrounded by my fleet (the island name escapes me, its the one closest to the middle east).

So my sultan died, a new one comes in and has half the influence of the old one, i have 2 4+ star generals and one 3 star with a skilled attacker trait. This 8 star rebel general would be a great addition to my invasion of the Byz empire.

So my question: He currently comes with a 20k+ florin price tag, do i sacrafice some troops and whittle down his stack to lower his price? Do i pay this money (I have it, barely...) or do I have to take him out and be done with it?

Any opinions would be great !

Thanks,

Odin

Unfortunately (or fortunately), the AI's arbalesters are rarely a huge problem. They can outshoot your futtuwas and ottoman infantry, but when the AI attacks, it will charge its spears and melee infantry, together with its knights (mostly royal) at your line, while leaving its missile units exposed to any flanking cavalry. The Armenians can deal with arbalesters, even pavise ones, easily. The AI has the nasty habit of not making its pavise arbalesters holding position, which emans that every time they are approached by something, such as a cavalry unit, they will try to move, so instead of their strong shield side, you can catch them at their exposed backs.
Since you are playing the XL mod, I believe you can compensate to a degree by recruiting Welsh Bowmen available to all factions after 1320. I know I have been able to recruit them with the Volga Bulgars at least.
As for the general in Cyprus, I would try to get him, but I think it might be a lot cheaper to killf off some of his troops first. In this process however, you need to make sure that you do not kill him, and that you lose the battle (you do not want him getting any vices such as weak defender, good runner, etc.). Autocalculating will most probably work best.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Odin

This 8 star rebel general would be a great addition to my invasion of the Byz empire.

So my question: He currently comes with a 20k+ florin price tag, do i sacrafice some troops and whittle down his stack to lower his price? Do i pay this money (I have it, barely...) or do I have to take him out and be done with it?

---

Check out his V&Vs. If there's none of the coward line of vices there (eager to retreat, doubtful courage, good runner) then I would go for the bribe if your economy can stand it, and if the unit type is worth having (Urban Militia or Spearmen are probably not worth it, though it depends on your situation). If the bribe fails he may get one of the loyalty virtues making him more expensive. If you get a reassessment of the armies worth when the emissary gets there, I wouldn't continue with your initial offering because he'll probably reject it and then pick up one of the loyalty virtues. Raise the offer if necessary.

Also as regards arbalests and pavise units not being available for the Turks, this is a bit of game balancing as far as I can see and has no bearing on historical availability of such weapons. I'm pretty sure that muslim and many eastern armies wouldn't have used them at all.

Well, are a few contemporary images of mameluks with crossbows, which may have led the game developpers into beliving that they were wide spread, when indeed they were not and their use was limited to ship crews and hunting, as the Mameluks preferred the composite bow in battle due to its faster shooting rate. The crossbow was known in the East (after all this is where it came from), but the composite bow remained the preferred weapon even a few centuries after the invention of gun powder. So while the crossbow may have become popular in the Muslim West, in North Africa and Iberia, a crossbow heavy Ayybid/Mameluk or Seljuk/Ottoman Army is indeed ahistorical. The latter is fortunately impossible, but the former happens quite often in the game, putting the Turks at a disadvantage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kavhan Isbul

Well, are a few contemporary images of mameluks with crossbows, which may have led the game developpers into beliving that they were wide spread, when indeed they were not and their use was limited to ship crews and hunting, as the Mameluks preferred the composite bow in battle due to its faster shooting rate. The crossbow was known in the East (after all this is where it came from), but the composite bow remained the preferred weapon even a few centuries after the invention of gun powder. So while the crossbow may have become popular in the Muslim West, in North Africa and Iberia, a crossbow heavy Ayybid/Mameluk or Seljuk/Ottoman Army is indeed ahistorical. The latter is fortunately impossible, but the former happens quite often in the game, putting the Turks at a disadvantage.

---

Sorry, I was running late there. I was still at work and rushing to finish up before going home. I was referring to pavises specifically and not crossbows as a whole. My thoughts are that the Turks being restricted to crossbows only is porbably more accurate for all muslim factions. A simple bit of modding can fix that.

What are your thoughts on mounted crossbows? I have always wondered why they are available earlier than unmounted ones. It doesn't seem to make much sense.

In the Second Lateran council, Pope Innocent II outlawed crossbows and arbalests in warfare between Christians (Catholics), so this is evidence that they were in widespread use at that time. Pavises appear to date from the 14th century, placing them in the MTW late period. In view of this I would structure as follows:

Crossbows:
All Periods
All Factions

Arbalests:
All Periods
Catholic and Orthodox


Pavise Crossbows:
Late Era
Catholic and Orthodox

Pavise Arbalests:
Late Era
Catholic and Orthodox

caravel, i can only help with factions on the Balkans. I will need to do some reading on Russia and the Middle East before I can say anything about the use of crossbows there with confidence. In the Balkans, there are bolts found, but few, especially in the Eastern Balkans, and they may actually date back to the 15th century, when Polish and Hungarian Crusaders fought against the Ottomans. The Hungarians are known to have used crossbows with success against the Mongols at Mohi (although they ended up losing the battle). As for the Byzantines, they used all sorts of Western and Eastern mercenaries. In terms of modding the game, I think that the Byzantines should have to pay double the training and upkeep costs of crosbowmen and arbalesters to reflect their heavy dependence on mercenaries. Crossbowmen and arbalesters have a cheap upkeep anyway, at 22 I believe, so doubling this would still make it less than a florint per man for a unit of 60.
I completely agree with you that it makes no sense at all to have mounted crossbowmen before infantry ones. My understanding of mounted crossbowmen was that they were a sort of mounted infantry, and used horses only to move around, but dismounted before firing. of course, this cannot be implemented in MTW, and I might be wrong about this. Also, I do not think mounted crossbowmen were the Western answer to Eastern HAs. Hence the Turcopoles.
I do not think that pavises were ever used out of Western Europe. I will check, but I feel quite confident that they were not used in Russia (unless perhaps along the Baltic), and the Middle East.

If I might add, I think that Arbalesters don't fit in any era before the Late Era. Yes, crossbows with the actual bows made of steel existed well in the 13th century, but those early arbalests had a nasty habit of snapping, crushing the operators head. Also, crossbows started to get out of "fashion" by the late 14th century (at least in western Europe), thanks to the obivous downsides they had against longbows. "Crossbows" were not extensively used again until safe arbalests became common in the late 14th/early 15th century.
Also, I think that the Scandinavian factions really shouldn't have arbalests at all, as it was pretty much military backwater up here (in Sweden, the crossbow didn't start to replace the bow untill the mid 13th century).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Odin

Personally i think its an exploit on a poor choice of AI positioning. Effective yes, but the game needs players integrity (not suggesting you dont have it mate) to make the game a full challenge.

---

~:eek: Yes a bit of a cheat, but if one were to not to exploit the AI at all the game might get dull. For example,

From Kavhan Isbul: The AI has the nasty habit of not making its pavise arbalesters holding position, which emans that every time they are approached by something, such as a cavalry unit, they will try to move, so instead of their strong shield side, you can catch them at their exposed backs.

So make sure you don't take advantage of that. The AI has problems with shipping and trade, so make sure you don't do that either. I'm pretty sure you'll agree there are tons more. I personally believe that if a player didn't exploit at least some of these faults then the player couldn't win. I will however admit that the Egypt Sultan thing is pretty cheesy, but in my defense I never ransom him back. He always gets the axe, as a sign to the Egyptian empire of what happens to those who defy the Turks.

With that said, I am a great fan of 8* Generals and will not hesitate to empty the Royal Treasury to employ (bribe) one. There is an interview process. He needs to be a unit I can train. Unlike Caravel, I am not picky about what his unit is I will pick up an 8* Peasant, Urban Militia, or Spearmen just as quickly as a Jannisary Hvy Inf or whatnot. My generals have the habit of watching more battles than fighting, but thats personal perference. After a quick background check of his V&Vs (all the ones that Caravel listed).

Of course bribing him has a drawback. For me every general I have bribed as gotten Weak Principals. Its no big deal if handled carefully, but it is annoying when the AI (and I have been on the recieving end of this) bribes a whole stack of your troops for less than Blue Book.

If the price tag is too much to bear, and it might be since your just starting out, follow through on your idea to whittle some of his forces down. Send a small force and sell their poor digitized lives as dearly as possible. Make sure you kill of as much of his force as you possibly can before your inevitable defeat. That should lower the asking price dramatically. In the end, I am not sure if this will work since he's an 8* general, but if he's the General of typical Egyptian Peasant rabble then it might not be too bad.

As I've been blathering on I just thought of something. IIRC, most of the good Egyptian generals were Camels, yes? Well, good luck and let us know what happens.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kavhan Isbul

caravel, i can only help with factions on the Balkans. I will need to do some reading on Russia and the Middle East before I can say anything about the use of crossbows there with confidence. In the Balkans, there are bolts found, but few, especially in the Eastern Balkans, and they may actually date back to the 15th century, when Polish and Hungarian Crusaders fought against the Ottomans. The Hungarians are known to have used crossbows with success against the Mongols at Mohi (although they ended up losing the battle). As for the Byzantines, they used all sorts of Western and Eastern mercenaries. In terms of modding the game, I think that the Byzantines should have to pay double the training and upkeep costs of crosbowmen and arbalesters to reflect their heavy dependence on mercenaries. Crossbowmen and arbalesters have a cheap upkeep anyway, at 22 I believe, so doubling this would still make it less than a florint per man for a unit of 60.
I completely agree with you that it makes no sense at all to have mounted crossbowmen before infantry ones. My understanding of mounted crossbowmen was that they were a sort of mounted infantry, and used horses only to move around, but dismounted before firing. of course, this cannot be implemented in MTW, and I might be wrong about this. Also, I do not think mounted crossbowmen were the Western answer to Eastern HAs. Hence the Turcopoles.
I do not think that pavises were ever used out of Western Europe. I will check, but I feel quite confident that they were not used in Russia (unless perhaps along the Baltic), and the Middle East.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Innocentius

If I might add, I think that Arbalesters don't fit in any era before the Late Era. Yes, crossbows with the actual bows made of steel existed well in the 13th century, but those early arbalests had a nasty habit of snapping, crushing the operators head. Also, crossbows started to get out of "fashion" by the late 14th century (at least in western Europe), thanks to the obivous downsides they had against longbows. "Crossbows" were not extensively used again until safe arbalests became common in the late 14th/early 15th century.
Also, I think that the Scandinavian factions really shouldn't have arbalests at all, as it was pretty much military backwater up here (in Sweden, the crossbow didn't start to replace the bow untill the mid 13th century).

---

Well I suppose the same goes for Gunpowder. Many of the early handguns were insanely dangerous and inaccurate, yet they do appear in the late era. Maybe arbalests should be available from the high era and only to Catholics and Orthodox? This could partially account for the period or unreliability? Overall this scheme would distribute these weapons across the eras, instead of them all arriving together in the high period. Pavises should probably be Catholic only, and some of the eastern and northern factions such as the Hungarians, Poles and Danes probably shouldn't get them either. The mounted crossbows could then be left as they are. From what I know of the mounted crossbows, they were usually dismounted first, though they could fire from their horses, but not on the move (not that that's a problem for MTW as sadly even horse archers don't fire on the move anyway).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sensei Warrior

~:eek: Yes a bit of a cheat, but if one were to not to exploit the AI at all the game might get dull.

---

Yes and your example is a fine one. I normally exploit the AI when it comes to the mongols to be honest, knowing they are coming and creating choke points full of spear type units makes me guilty of it.

That said, this particuar egyptian exploit not only nets you an easy two province gain (assuming you win both battles) but you also can kill the sultan, of if you auto calc you can ransom and make a large sum of money. IMHO thats a big exploit.

Quote:

---

As I've been blathering on I just thought of something. IIRC, most of the good Egyptian generals were Camels, yes? Well, good luck and let us know what happens

---

Yes he is a camel unit, I normally keep commanders far away from the action anyway unless its mop up, desperation, or a clear opportunity for a flank.

double post

Thank you all for the input and discussion i do appreciate it as it makes campaigns much more enjoyable when you can chat about it outside that actual game play.

During the week I get maybe 30-60 minutes a night to play games, so progress has been slow. Weekends are different and a serious gaming session is planned.

Ran into a snag though last night, my game CTD, it happens from time to time not the end of the world by any means. So i started the auto save game and bribed that general, then the egyptians attacked me. Much to my shame I been preparing my armies to assult the Balkans and they were all armored up.... So i had some serious losses in the desert, still I ended up removing the egyptians as a faction.

During this time i had a few auto saves happen, i finished my game play for the night and escaped out to save, CTD. Boot up the game select the last auto save to see where I was, reconcilled that, escaped to save, CTD. I played a few more turns to the next auto save, then escaped again, CTD, rinse repeat.

So the long and short of it is i have the old save game which I will have to boot up and start with, which means my gains against the egyptians and getting this general are gone, not the end of the world by any means but it killed about 20 turns worth of action.

Ouch. 20 turns of action sometimes means the better part of a fortnight in play. I've noticed with my system, repeated CTDs from a specific save are because of the file I am using. If I use another save point is no big deal. It's tedious but I have gotten in the habit of saving at the end of every year. That way if I have to back up its not all that far.

It will not save this game, but in the future ...

I hate to have to replay the same years over again, so the corrupted save-game factor has resulted in me quick-saving (CTRL-S) before hitting ESC for a regular save every year end. There was an old thread years ago that indicated having the Auto-Save feature turned on increased the risk of a corrupted save-game file, so I keep that always turned off.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sensei Warrior

Ouch. 20 turns of action sometimes means the better part of a fortnight in play. I've noticed with my system, repeated CTDs from a specific save are because of the file I am using. If I use another save point is no big deal. It's tedious but I have gotten in the habit of saving at the end of every year. That way if I have to back up its not all that far.

It will not save this game, but in the future ...

---

You know it happens so infrequently that I dont really pay much attention, however this time it hurt because a lot transpired. I wont bail on the campaign but dependant on where my other save is saved from I might start over.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geezer57

I hate to have to replay the same years over again, so the corrupted save-game factor has resulted in me quick-saving (CTRL-S) before hitting ESC for a regular save every year end. There was an old thread years ago that indicated having the Auto-Save feature turned on increased the risk of a corrupted save-game file, so I keep that always turned off.

---

I remember a dicussion about the auto save. I rarely have CTD (XL is a wonderful mod, very stable). however I do keep the autosave feature just in case and havent had many issues with it. Yes this has happened to me before but i've rebooted off an autosave in the past and been able to resave no problem.

Doing a quick ctrl - s seems a reasonable way around the issue.

You can have the autosave on, but if you load it, it may be corrupted, in which case it's no good to you. Quicksave, both CTRL+S and the quicksave option that appears on the prebattle window, is prone to corrupted savegames. You can avoid this by not using the prebattle save at all, and by only quicksaving immediately after you hit end turn and dismiss all info parchments. Don't send agents on missions or move anything, save immediately, with CTRL+S. You can then hit escape and save from the main menu if necessary. Hitting esc can sometimes crash the game. I'm convinced that this is either XP/2K or video card related. When you hit escape there is a sound effect that plays and an animation when the map zooms in and the menu overlay fades in. I believe it may be this that causes it on occasions. I have tested this under Win9x and it never occurs and have tried an old 3dfx graphics card under XP and it doesn't occur with that either, because the animation doesn't play at all, the screen goes momentarily black and the menu appears instantly (the card obviously doesn't support the "effect").

All info I never knew before. It happens to me rarely, and I save so much, so I rarely have to back up more than a year or 2. I didn't realize that the game had a problem with the auto-save feature. I noticed my rig has on rare occassion scragged a pre-battle save, but that is also very rare.

I play MTW on a machine with integrated graphics, and I've had the occasional CTD when I hit ESC, so it can't be due to high-end graphics. On the other hand, it works 99% of the time, so my integrated graphics must support it. I've also had issues using the ESC button to cancel a facing movement while I'm holding ALT + RC. Sometimes it crashes, and sometimes it asks me if I really want to surrender.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sensei Warrior

All info I never knew before. It happens to me rarely, and I save so much, so I rarely have to back up more than a year or 2. I didn't realize that the game had a problem with the auto-save feature. I noticed my rig has on rare occassion scragged a pre-battle save, but that is also very rare.

---

My most common corrupted save game file comes from the pre-battle quicksave introduced with VI. I've just about completely given up on it, which is a shame (as it's really convenient when there are multiple battles per turn). My current machine is much more stable than some of its predecessors, but will occasionally act up if it's been left on for a week or so. So if I'm playing a campaign, and approach the end of a year with the expectation for multiple battles, I'll perform a regular save followed by a reboot to freshen things up. I'm less likely to experience a CTD in the middle of a series of battles, which has cost me hours of play in the past.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geezer57

My most common corrupted save game file comes from the pre-battle quicksave introduced with VI. I've just about completely given up on it, which is a shame (as it's really convenient when there are multiple battles per turn).

---

Same here. I now avoid it completely.

@gunslinger: It may not be a question of "high end graphics" but moreso, newer drivers, later directx compliancy and newer cards combined with the XP/2k platform which MTW/STW weren't really designed to run on. Your onboard graphics likely to be much more up to date, as far as Driver and DirectX compliancy is concerned, than an early Radeon (7000 - 9700), Geforce2/3/4 or Voodoo4/5, which were about the norm around the time when STW and MTW were released.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geezer57

My most common corrupted save game file comes from the pre-battle quicksave introduced with VI. I've just about completely given up on it, which is a shame (as it's really convenient when there are multiple battles per turn).

---

I still use the pre-battle quicksave when I'm in the middle of a series of battles and don't have time to play them all through in one sitting but after I hit the save button I autocalc the rest of the battles and make a 'proper' save before quiting.

If the quicksave is corrupt then I still have a save with some of the battles autocalc'd rather than having to fight the ones I'd already done again.

So I resloved my savegame issue and have gotten back to where I was, bribed the 8 star general and demolished the egyptians. Now I have a few more heirs floating around with some decent command stats and I am preparing to invade the balkans.

My issue is in my haste I have built armored troops, 4 armies each comprised of : 4 Sacren infantry, 4 THA's, 4AHC, 2 seige weapons and 1 command unit. All of which were intended as invasion forces for the Balkans, the defenisve units i have left in my provinces are the typical low level horse archer/urban malitia.

so my issue is I built armorers in most of my provinces to prepare for the Byzantines, forgetting prudence and forgetting that at some point i will have to fight in the desert again. The egyptian escapade exposed my weakness with the armor as my troops won, but I took unnecessary losses due to armor exhaustion.

At some point someone will crusade against me, thus far one has not happened (its on or around 1150). Should I destroy some of my armorers to relieve this burden in the desert? My thinking is that in the valor bonus regions that bonus compensates for the lack of armor, even in the better conditions.

So its really a question of balance, i am assuming my fight with the Byz isnt going to be a cake walk, hes got plenty of tanks and jedi running around, yet I need a solid army or two for crusade defense without armor.

Personally I usually have a province with a grand mosque for producing the best high morale Saracens. You may want to use Bulgaria for this purpose due to the +1 valour bonus for JHI. In this province I upgrade the armourer to the maximum possible, and upgrade to the master spearmaker to get the valour bonus for the Saracens. For the desert Saracens I usually have a few provinces able to turn those out in the holy land and Egypt. Their armour is usually not upgraded at all, but their morale and valour is as high as I can get it (Master Spearmaker, Ribat). Eventually once you've secured all of the desert provinces, you may want to start upgrading the armourers in other provinces to make units that are fit for european action.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Caravel

Personally I usually have a province with a grand mosque for producing the best high morale Saracens. You may want to use Bulgaria for this purpose due to the +1 valour bonus for JHI. In this province I upgrade the armourer to the maximum possible, and upgrade to the master spearmaker to get the valour bonus for the Saracens. For the desert Saracens I usually have a few provinces able to turn those out in the holy land and Egypt. Their armour is usually not upgraded at all, but their morale and valour is as high as I can get it (Master Spearmaker, Ribat). Eventually once you've secured all of the desert provinces, you may want to start upgrading the armourers in other provinces to make units that are fit for european action.

---

I think we share the same way of thinking, my intent is to take Bulgaria and make that where I build the military academy and the janissaries, and sure once I take the Balkans I will probably make it the hub for european armies.

Sadly my situation now is (by my own hand) that my desert provinces now have armorers. Built to deal with the byz, neglecting the defense needs for future crusades, and thus my cunundrum, I very well cant defend in the desert with armor its just a handicap i cant afford with the cavalry I employ.

So I am thinking i need to demolish some armorer's now, or i gamble and hope my navy can hold off a crusade until I get the balkans up and running (which by the way isnt a slam dunk).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Odin

I think we share the same way of thinking, my intent is to take Bulgaria and make that where I build the military academy and the janissaries, and sure once I take the Balkans I will probably make it the hub for european armies.

---

Once the Military Academy has gone up, the units produced in the province will be disciplined. Disciplined Saracens can be useful for the Turks, as they won't rout when the lesser (non elite or non disciplined) units are routing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Odin

So I am thinking i need to demolish some armorer's now, or i gamble and hope my navy can hold off a crusade until I get the balkans up and running (which by the way isnt a slam dunk).

---

Which provinces do you have armourers, and what main troop types are you producing there?

Hmm. Well, I suppose you could bulldoze a couple of armories to relieve some production pressure, but I really dislike wasting build time.

I think I would use the newly conquered provences that you are going to acquire through your expansion into the Byz's territory to build armorless troops. In the inbetween time you could use mercs when you have to, to round out your border garrisons in case of emminent attack. Once you push to Constantinople and Georgia you'll have choke points and probably a little time to organize your production regions better.

There is a certain amount of risk with this idea, but like I said I really dislike wasting building build time and in essence that is what you'll be doing if you destroy the armories you just spent 4 years or more building.

>>>>>@gunslinger: It may not be a question of "high end graphics" but moreso, newer drivers, later directx compliancy and newer cards combined with the XP/2k platform which MTW/STW weren't really designed to run on. Your onboard graphics likely to be much more up to date, as far as Driver and DirectX compliancy is concerned, than an early Radeon (7000 - 9700), Geforce2/3/4 or Voodoo4/5, which were about the norm around the time when STW and MTW were released.>>>>


"Good to hear" that I´m not the only one whose game crashes while ESC´ing to safe. I have Win98SE still btw :) So no 2000 or XP problem. I use ATI8500 + Intel Mainboard with the latest Direct-X and the last Ati Driver for Win98/ME..... I remember from playing and HOI there was a simmilar problem, a search for the error was not succesful since it was not possible to identify the "culprit"........

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alpha666

"Good to hear" that I´m not the only one whose game crashes while ESC´ing to safe. I have Win98SE still btw :) So no 2000 or XP problem. I use ATI8500 + Intel Mainboard with the latest Direct-X and the last Ati Driver for Win98/ME..... I remember from playing and HOI there was a simmilar problem, a search for the error was not succesful since it was not possible to identify the "culprit"........

---

You're running on a Radeon 8500 though which is similar to the 9000 I was using. I wonder if it's an ATI driver problem, as I've never had this particular problem using other brands, though maybe others have? :dizzy2:

You're running on a Radeon 8500 though which is similar to the 9000 I was using. I wonder if it's an ATI driver problem, as I've never had this particular problem using other brands, though maybe others have? :dizzy2:


Mh, maybe so please all users post your videocard (sorry for OT)

Well i played today for some hours (this game is too addictive, some work wasn´t done because of that - this is one of the games which players needs much self-descipline to quit the game and do something more important ) and no error this time. I also disabled the autosave like suggested above.

>>>>You're running on a Radeon 8500 though which is similar to the 9000 I was using. I wonder if it's an ATI driver problem, as I've never had this particular problem using other brands, though maybe others have? :dizzy2: >>>>


Mh, maybe so please all users post your videocard (sorry for OT)

Well i played today for some hours (this game is too addictive, some work wasn´t done because of that - this is one of the games which players needs much self-descipline to quit the game and do something more important ) and no error this time. I also disabled the autosave like suggested above.

I didnt destroy the armorer's, as the advice given was sage why waste the 4 years? This weekend I had a chance to think out what was going to happen next. My goal has always been to take Constantanople, but to be honest the Byzantines are a tough nut to crack. They have taken out the serbs, and the hungarians and have a nice european empire with lots of jedi heirs running around.

I am convinced that the turk force structure (mine anyway) and defeat there generals in europe unless its a massive multi pronged attack. I have 4 armies with AHC's, THA's, and sacren infantry, each commanded by a 4+ star general.

This weekend i swept accross north africa to morocco where the almohads reappeared. I built a navy that has my connected to all sea zones in the med/black sea and I am starting to round spain. So as I am building up provinces and, turtling a little I turn on the matteosatori cheat just to see where everything is.

the hre is gone, France is dominanting, but the english have the entire British isles conquered and held normandy. The volga bulgarians (to my surprise) have eliminated both russian factions and are in a death match with lithuania in the north. Poland and the Cumans are lingering around the black sea and most of italy is controlled by the pope.

then venice went rebel, i invade win with ease and now have a base from which to invade the byz into serbia. Also portugal has taken iberia. I did take a screen shot but my rig at home is so stripped down I dont have a program from which i can view the pic. I will try and get that pic up and post it in the history of your empire thread or something.

Thanks again,

Odin

This really has nothing to do with anything in this thread, I just wanted to say it:clown:
I played around little with custom battles today, and practised a bit with javelin infantry (mostly Slav Javelinmen and Jobbagys) and realised what it would be to have a unit like JHI with javelins...Put them on a hill, let the enemy attack you. You throw about two-three volleys, killing 3-20 men (depending on what unit is attacking) and then charge them - using your charge bonus... *drools*

Of course, it would be even better to have a 100 man unit of JHI armed with longbows or arbalests, but that's just a bit too far off.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Innocentius

This really has nothing to do with anything in this thread, I just wanted to say it:clown:
I played around little with custom battles today, and practised a bit with javelin infantry (mostly Slav Javelinmen and Jobbagys) and realised what it would be to have a unit like JHI with javelins...Put them on a hill, let the enemy attack you. You throw about two-three volleys, killing 3-20 men (depending on what unit is attacking) and then charge them - using your charge bonus... *drools*

Of course, it would be even better to have a 100 man unit of JHI armed with longbows or arbalests, but that's just a bit too far off.

---

I think what you are looking for are armored almughavars. If you start an XL game in Latem, I think there is a nice rebel stack of them waiting to be bribed in Greece.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kavhan Isbul

I think what you are looking for are armored almughavars. If you start an XL game in Latem, I think there is a nice rebel stack of them waiting to be bribed in Greece.

---

PLy as the Irish on XL, ultimate javelin faction (i created armies of all javelin units when playing as them, and they actually work) :2thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scurvy

PLy as the Irish on XL, ultimate javelin faction (i created armies of all javelin units when playing as them, and they actually work) :2thumbsup:

---

i personally never liked the javelin units until i played a round with the hungarians. I cant remember the unit name but they were cheap and really helped clog up enemy units for my Szelesky and avar nobles to demolish.

And on a final note, in one of my many forays with the english William the conquerer died at the hands of one of those filthy irish javelins :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Odin

i personally never liked the javelin units until i played a round with the hungarians. I cant remember the unit name but they were cheap and really helped clog up enemy units for my Szelesky and avar nobles to demolish.

And on a final note, in one of my many forays with the english William the conquerer died at the hands of one of those filthy irish javelins :)

---

Jogaby are the hungarian javelins, and they are quite good, i norm put them on hold and have my ha's fall back into them and then round, giving them 2-3 volleys at enemy flank, normally kills over half the unit,

was william hit in the eye? :idea2:

Well, personally I think Jobbaggy are pretty useless. They are after all only peasants except in a smaller unit and they throw a volley or two before they get massacred by whatever it is that hits them.
The Irish javelin units are a lot better, but they suffer from the problem that they don't stand a chance against cavalry (all javelin units suffer from this).

Thinking of it, I might have to mod the JHIs so that they can fire arbalest projectiles:idea2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Innocentius

Well, personally I think Jobbaggy are pretty useless. They are after all only peasants except in a smaller unit and they throw a volley or two before they get massacred by whatever it is that hits them.
The Irish javelin units are a lot better, but they suffer from the problem that they don't stand a chance against cavalry (all javelin units suffer from this).

Thinking of it, I might have to mod the JHIs so that they can fire arbalest projectiles:idea2:

---

Jobbaggy are bad against cav, but when put on hold they can at least stop the enemy unit for a while, 2-3 volleys is enough to kill at least a 3rd of the unit, they are best when used with the support of cav for flanking etc.

irish javs are better, and the best can equal cav when put on engage and chaged, i can;t remember what they are called right now, but the ones with the small shields certainly can :2thumbsup:

The jobbaggy are only useful if you can hide them behind a friendly spear unit, during a defensive bridge battle. They could probably serve as garrison troops, as they are cheap and available only with a fort, I believe. They have horrible morale and there is no way they can stop a cavalry charge even by Steppe Cavalry - they will rout instantly on impact, at least on expert. Slav Javelinmen have a bit better morale (still low though), but they, as well as the Jobbaggy, the Kerns and the Dartmen have little armor and die in large numbers when they get in the range of enemy missiles. The best javelin unit in the XL mod are the Bashkorts, available to the Volga Bulgars and the Cumans. They actually have a cavalry defending and ranking bonuses. With plenty of armor upgrades they can do wonders.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Odin

I didnt destroy the armorer's, as the advice given was sage why waste the 4 years?

---

:jawdrop: I gave sage advice? Well I guess even I can have a rare moment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Innocentius

Well, personally I think Jobbaggy are pretty useless. They are after all only peasants except in a smaller unit and they throw a volley or two before they get massacred by whatever it is that hits them.
The Irish javelin units are a lot better, but they suffer from the problem that they don't stand a chance against cavalry (all javelin units suffer from this).

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scurvy

irish javs are better, and the best can equal cav when put on engage and chaged, i can;t remember what they are called right now, but the ones with the small shields certainly can

---

The Irish unit you are trying to think of is Kerns, unless the Irish have another jav unit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kavhan Isbul

The jobbaggy are only useful if you can hide them behind a friendly spear unit, during a defensive bridge battle ... They have horrible morale and there is no way they can stop a cavalry charge even by Steppe Cavalry - they will rout instantly on impact, at least on expert. Slav Javelinmen have a bit better morale (still low though), but they, as well as the Jobbaggy, the Kerns and the Dartmen have little armor and die in large numbers when they get in the range of enemy missiles. The best javelin unit in the XL mod are the Bashkorts, available to the Volga Bulgars and the Cumans. They actually have a cavalry defending and ranking bonuses. With plenty of armor upgrades they can do wonders.

---

Dare I even ask what some of you guys are forcing your poor javelinmen to do? Just kidding, well here's some notes for anyone who is interested.

The first line of Kavhan Isbul's quote is the classic, most simple way to use javs. They are definately not meant to stop a charge of Cavalry. Expecting them to do so, is like expecting Archers to stop the same charge.

For starters, turn skirmish off. Unless you are playing a mod that has adjusted the range of a Javelin the jav unit will always move away from an advancing unit before firing. Javelimen are used to deal with Armored Units, the more armor the better they do. This does not mean they should be attacking just Cav, any Armored unit is a target, its just Cav are the most often used example because they tend to have alot of Armor and are bigger targets. Not all Cav resemble tanks though, Hobilars, Saharan Cav, and most of your light Cav aren't armored up at all. However, Swiss Arm. Pikes, Halbrediers, CMAAs, and any Foot Knights are some of the many other good targets.

They should be used in concert with a pinning unit. In the case of Cavs, Spears should pin the unit and then the javs should fire away, preferrably from the flank, although from behind the pinning unit works as well. For other units use the rock, paper, scissors, method. Melee units get pinned by Cav, for Polearms I would suggest a melee unit although I'm a bit uncertain about them.

As for Archer type units, they will get smacked around an awful lot. Remember at range Archers beat everyone. If your forced to use javs against Archers your best bet is put them on engage at will and charge the Archers.

Some javs are better then others. IIRC Kerns and Spanish Javelinmen are competent melee fighters, although in this regard they make better flank and charge units, then charge headlong into the fray units.

Javelin units are some of the harder units in the game. They take alot of trial and error to get right. Once you get the magic combo, then they are very satisfying to use. I think that's everything, but in case its not, I will plug Froggies Unit guide, she has a number of good ideas as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sensei Warrior

The Irish unit you are trying to think of is Kerns, unless the Irish have another jav unit.

---

Nah, I think you mean Bonnachts, they have shields and come in 100-men units. The Irish have two javelin units apart from Kerns: Bonnachts and Irish Dartmen.

Of course I don't expect my javelin units to take on a cavalry charge (although I have made them recieve a few when I felt they were exposable:laugh4: ), the problem is they don't have enough time to run away from pretty much any unit. They're too slow to work as skirmishers, as soon as an enemy unit charges them, they won't be able to run far enough off for the enemy unit to let go and turn their attention to something else. Like horse archer can simple ride away out of the enemy units "line of attentions", the javelin units have to use their own legs, and are thus not quick enough. And once they get caught in the slightest melee, they're screwed.

Arr...Bashkorts, me ole enemies...Annoying bastards. I had a battle against the Cumans (I played as the Hungarians and had quickly robbed them off Wallachia and Moldavia) where they proved very frustrating. They seemed to wait behind the line of spearmen untill all my arrows (both from archers and Szekely in their rear) were gone, and then moved up and showered my spear wall with javelins. As I was too weak to attack, all I could do was to wait until they too ran out of spears and were forced to attack.
Got my revenge though, seems Bashkorts, even with +1 armour don't stand a chance against valour 2 FMAAs:charge:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Innocentius

Nah, I think you mean Bonnachts, they have shields and come in 100-men units. The Irish have two javelin units apart from Kerns: Bonnachts and Irish Dartmen.

---

Whoops, you're right I forgot about them. Man the Irish have more javs then you can shake a stick at.

Of course I am not suggesting that javelnmen should be expected withstand cavalry charges, although armored almughavars and bashkorts could, provided the cavalry is not Mongol Heavies, Katanks, Order Knights or something really heavy. Here I am referring to units in the XL mod.
Overall, I am not a great fan of the Irish units. First of all, not everyone can train them - if you play with a Muslim power they will be simply unavailable. Second, you need to get to Ireland, which may be a bit hard if you are playing with the Byzantines or the Hungarians. Third, you cannot build more than a unit per turn, meaning you may never get enough of them and depending on your faction, gallowglasses might be more needed for your troops.
There are better options in other javelin units. I find the Kerns better than the Jobbaggy, and the latter are only available to the Hungarians, but they can build those everywhere they go, and they have pretty much no building requirements. They come extremely handy when you need to face a Byzantine invasion in Wallachia - great for killing katanks.
However, the Slav javelinmen are even better, because they are trainable in so many provinces. Their usefullness is enhanced by their availability in provinces, which have defensible rivers where javelinmen are a great asset - Muscovy, Kiev, Moldova/Bulgaria (depending which way you expect an invasion to come from). I really love these guys every time the Horde arrives.
I am notsure which factions can build Spanish javelinmen and if those are limited to the Spanish and Aragonese, but these are good and can even be used as flankers, as already noted above, and this is important early when armies are still small and you need to get everything out of every single unit.
The best javelin unit IMO are the jinettes, because of their versatility and huge impact, especially early in the game. They are available in most Iberian provinces and can solve plenty of problems - from Almohad Urban Militia, through Huscarles, to Katanks. It is a pity that the AI has no clue how to use them, but considering that the Spanish tend to become a superpower in every game, this is perhaps a good thing - otherwise the Spanish will have a huge edge similar to that of the Byzantines (or even greater).

Kavhan Isbul: You bring up a number of good points. I have been on a bit of a Catho jag lately so the Irish and Spanish jav units are much easier to acquire than for someone playing an Eastern Faction.

The Jinnettes are the best jav unit hands down. I left them out of my post because they were mounted and everyone was refering to inf jav anyways. The reason why the comp has so many problems with handling Jav units (esp the Jinnettes) is the range of the jav, which is lower than the distance skirmish uses to tell units to start backing away. So by the time a unit is in range to get hit by the Jinnette the Jinnette is already starting to back away.

There is a fix that I know of. If you mod jav's range in the PROJECTILESTATS file to 2500, the javs range is still very short, but can be effectively utilized by the comp. I found this one out in Froggies Guide to MTW (not the unit one). I've used it once or twice and was very surprised at how fast the comp 'got a clue'.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Innocentius

Nah, I think you mean Bonnachts, they have shields and come in 100-men units. The Irish have two javelin units apart from Kerns: Bonnachts and Irish Dartmen.

---

Irish Dartmen have longer range than most javelins, but are not armor-piercing. Bonnachts throw spears, which are AP, but they only have 1 spear per man. They have decent melee stats, so after the initial devastating volley, they can then finish off a unit pretty easily (think pila-throwing Roman hastati from RTW). IIRC, Bonnachts are not fast units like Kerns and Gallowglasses. Kerns can be considered the "standard" javelin unit, with better melee stats than most.

Basically, the Bonnachts are best used as garrison troops and to chew up large amounts of the throwaway troops that the AI uses (mostly UMs). The Kerns are clearly the best javelin unit for the Irish - and all western European catholics for that matter - while the other two should only be trained in small numbers for special duties.
Another problem with Javelin units overall is that they become outdated pretty rapidly as soon as the year turns 1205. Heck, even a faction able to produce Mounted Sergeants will never again have to worry about javelins.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kavhan Isbul

The best javelin unit IMO are the jinettes, because of their versatility and huge impact, especially early in the game. They are available in most Iberian provinces and can solve plenty of problems - from Almohad Urban Militia, through Huscarles, to Katanks. It is a pity that the AI has no clue how to use them, but considering that the Spanish tend to become a superpower in every game, this is perhaps a good thing - otherwise the Spanish will have a huge edge similar to that of the Byzantines (or even greater).

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sensei_Warrior

The Jinnettes are the best jav unit hands down. I left them out of my post because they were mounted and everyone was refering to inf jav anyways. The reason why the comp has so many problems with handling Jav units (esp the Jinnettes) is the range of the jav, which is lower than the distance skirmish uses to tell units to start backing away. So by the time a unit is in range to get hit by the Jinnette the Jinnette is already starting to back away.

---

Ah, Jinnettes. How do I love thee? Let me count the ways.... ~;p Truly, they're my favorite unit in the game -- even more than Gazi Infantry and Bedouin Camel Warriors -- and for me, that's saying quite a lot. While I generally dislike employing missile cavalry (because of the micromanaging necessary to use them effectively), Jinnettes are definitely an exception.

I think it's because I really do get results with them almost every time -- it's a rare battle of mine in which they fail to play an important role (especially in the Early period). And as Kavhan Isbul pointed out, they're good against a variety of different units (including AUM, of course). His mention of Kataphractoi is an excellent example; those nasty Jedi generals the Byz field all the time provide great target practice for my jinnies as they merrily gallop in circles around them!

It is a pity the AI generally doesn't use them very well, but I doubt anyone who's fought major campaigns against the Spanish/Aragonese minds very much. ~;) They're a real pain to fight against when they're employed effectively!

Oddly enough, for as much as I've played the Spanish (Castille-Leon in XL), I've almost never used Spanish Javelinmen. I think that at first I was too lazy to figure out how one uses them in battle, and then after a while I simply got used to doing without them....especially once I got the hang of Jinnettes. ~:rolleyes:

I never use Spanish Javs either, I'd rather spend my florins on Jinnies.

Actually, after my rather haughty post I am loathe to admit, unless I'm playing the Viking Era I almost never use Javs. They really do involve too much micro management. If I want to micro manage my troops I'll play an Eastern faction.