Org Mobile Site
Thread: Baktrian Doryphoroi?
All right, I know everyone on the EB team is probably sick of these questions by now, but what about the Baktrian Doryphoroi mentioned in the faction description. They are described as a well-armored and elite unit, “whose spears and bows make them one of the most intriguing units available anywhere.” But that’s the problem, they’re not available anywhere. They’re not listed in the RV, they’re nowhere in the MICs. Were they axed for historical reasons, or are they a 1.1 addition? Thanks for anything you can tell me on this. 
From the faction description:
Thanks for pointing that out though, we'll have to see about changing the faction description.
Originally Posted by :
A variety of skirmishers are also available, including well armored and elite units as well as the Baktrian Doryphoroi, whose spears and bows make them one of the most intriguing units available anywhere.
The Baktrian doryphoroi are better known as Nizagan-i Eranshahr. To save unit space, we just use the same native name for all the variants, even though the Baktrian kings would have referred to them as doryphoroi, as long as they weren't just calling them barbaroi. A variety of skirmishers are also available, including well armored and elite units as well as the Baktrian Doryphoroi, whose spears and bows make them one of the most intriguing units available anywhere.
Thanks for pointing that out though, we'll have to see about changing the faction description.
Originally Posted by paullus:
From the faction description:
The Baktrian doryphoroi are better known as Nizagan-i Eranshahr. To save unit space, we just use the same native name for all the variants, even though the Baktrian kings would have referred to them as doryphoroi, as long as they weren't just calling them barbaroi.
Thanks for pointing that out though, we'll have to see about changing the faction description.
Okay, thanks a lot. To tell the truth, I wondered if they weren't one and the same, but the description seemed to imply elite soldiers. Guess I was wrong. Thanks again for answering. From the faction description:
The Baktrian doryphoroi are better known as Nizagan-i Eranshahr. To save unit space, we just use the same native name for all the variants, even though the Baktrian kings would have referred to them as doryphoroi, as long as they weren't just calling them barbaroi.
Thanks for pointing that out though, we'll have to see about changing the faction description.
Originally Posted by :
“whose spears and bows make them one of the most intriguing units available anywhere.”
That passage is not true either. Spear-armed archers are quite common - germans, celts, getai, saba - they all have acces to such units. :)“whose spears and bows make them one of the most intriguing units available anywhere.”
I think it was written before the others all made it into the game. 
Originally Posted by paullus:
From the faction description:
The Baktrian doryphoroi are better known as Nizagan-i Eranshahr. To save unit space, we just use the same native name for all the variants, even though the Baktrian kings would have referred to them as doryphoroi, as long as they weren't just calling them barbaroi.
Thanks for pointing that out though, we'll have to see about changing the faction description.
From the faction description:
The Baktrian doryphoroi are better known as Nizagan-i Eranshahr. To save unit space, we just use the same native name for all the variants, even though the Baktrian kings would have referred to them as doryphoroi, as long as they weren't just calling them barbaroi.
Thanks for pointing that out though, we'll have to see about changing the faction description.
The description says "armored" and the Nizagan-i Eranshahr are decidedly not, though....was there originally going to be an armored version?
"armored" units *as well as* the doryphoroi. That doesn't mean the doryphoroi is armored at all.
Originally Posted by Woreczko:
That passage is not true either. Spear-armed archers are quite common - germans, celts, getai, saba - they all have acces to such units. :)
Except, the Iranian archer-spearmen not only excel with their bows, but their low cost and vast recruitment area makes them one of the most accessible, as well as versatile units available to any commander; Sotaroas carry simple bows with little punch. The same largely applies to the Skutjanz. The Arabian light archer-spearmen and the Komatai Toxotai are however quite comparable, though none of them boasts the equivalent recruitment area.That passage is not true either. Spear-armed archers are quite common - germans, celts, getai, saba - they all have acces to such units. :)
It can be a decisive difference once you have that Persianate empire. They are cheap garrison troops with excellent range; Against light horse, they are some of the finest troops available.
Don't the Arabs have a better range, though? They nearly always outshoot my slingers and never have had that happen with the Persians....
Are the Persian Archer-Spearmen really that good? My only experience with them is running over them with Saka-Rauka and Sauromatae FM´s, and occasionaly hiring them as mercs when I was taking a city, but even then all they did was add some extra firepower to stop the "civilized" people when their garrisons sallied against my blockade. Never got into any real meele.
Originally Posted by Tellos Athenaios:
Don't the Arabs have a better range, though? They nearly always outshoot my slingers and never have had that happen with the Persians....
I have always wondered about that... The Arabs should have, by comparison, quite simple bows (They had been retained until early Islamic times, where their simple bows were taunted by the Sassanians as "spindles" and as "toys"), as opposed to the Scythian-style composite bow, hailed as superior to the Persian recurved bow. In this respect the only bow which should outrange the Scythian symmetric composite model, would only at this time be the proto-Hunnic asymmetric bow; Both these models were superceded by the Sassanian composite bow, with its recognizably long "siyah" (Ears).Don't the Arabs have a better range, though? They nearly always outshoot my slingers and never have had that happen with the Persians....
Originally Posted by General Appo:
Are the Persian Archer-Spearmen really that good? My only experience with them is running over them with Saka-Rauka and Sauromatae FM´s, and occasionaly hiring them as mercs when I was taking a city, but even then all they did was add some extra firepower to stop the "civilized" people when their garrisons sallied against my blockade. Never got into any real meele.
The AI has done worse things. The deal with these infantry is to know their defensive qualities; For holding the line, they fit the bill nicely, and in the East, where mounted archery becomes a more predominant manner of warfare, these guys are the exact opposite of the spectrum; They don't need to move around that much and they carry big sticks. Horse-archers can never become "anchor-points" in an army, it would conflict against their fleet nature; Foot-archers who on boot carry big shields and/or bows, it's a different story altogether.Are the Persian Archer-Spearmen really that good? My only experience with them is running over them with Saka-Rauka and Sauromatae FM´s, and occasionaly hiring them as mercs when I was taking a city, but even then all they did was add some extra firepower to stop the "civilized" people when their garrisons sallied against my blockade. Never got into any real meele.
I've butchered entire horse-archer armies with these boys. To me they are easily the most valuable infantry around and in the ideal defensive conditions, they can be unstoppable; They will prevail against most other if not all light infantry, and they are a good counter against light horse. What can I say, I think they are absolutely brilliant
Well, I guess I should get around and finally start that Pahlava campaign I´ve been thinking about, see how good they are for myself.
Originally Posted by The Persian Cataphract:
I have always wondered about that... The Arabs should have, by comparison, quite simple bows (They had been retained until early Islamic times, where their simple bows were taunted by the Sassanians as "spindles" and as "toys"), as opposed to the Scythian-style composite bow, hailed as superior to the Persian recurved bow.
Then again, the Sassanids were apparently unpleasantly surprised by the punch Arab archery packed. I have always wondered about that... The Arabs should have, by comparison, quite simple bows (They had been retained until early Islamic times, where their simple bows were taunted by the Sassanians as "spindles" and as "toys"), as opposed to the Scythian-style composite bow, hailed as superior to the Persian recurved bow.
Anyway, last I saw they were statted for the Saka transitional composite bows for some reason, which is kinda 
...But yeah, the Iranian spear-bow guys are good. The basic Thanvares have better range though, as do the slingers who have AP to boot, so mixing and matching them to suit purposes, opposition and availability is a good idea. The spear guys are way more horse-resistant than the other two, so they obviously make for a fine redshirt wall to deploy the latter behind...
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO