Questions on Sauromatae gameplay

[athanaric]

I was able to play some more turns. It's actually not really fun tbh. The battles are quite repetitive after a while. The distances are huge and from all the people that are bordering me right now it was the Saka who decided that it would be a good idea to go to war against me. Gah! Just when I thought I was ready to start trampling the Getai I have to dedicate a third of my army to the east. Double Gah!
I'm not sure whether I will continue this campaign, especially when my gaming time is so limited.

Actually, I've noticed that the Saka always attack you as soon as they share a border with you. OTOH, if you play Saka, the Sauromatae will leave you alone for quite a long time. That's just weird.

[Madoushi]

My first game as the Sauro, I took Tanais, then bypassed the Crimea and kept pushing west, focussing on settlements with only 6-8 defenders.

Even then, with an army of four FMs and four HAs, I do my fighting by engaging an enemy, shooting all my arrows at them, running away, and repeating. Doing this, I hardly ever suffer any casualties, which was good as I began pushing into Poland just as my debt disappeared. I kept setting my captured Polish cities to Military Allies, though, so a bunch defected to the Sweboz, and then from then on, my game would always CTD.

So, I started a new game, and saw on the blitz thread they recommend taking Gava-Yugra first and annexing all the provinces around there before pushing East.

So, I started a new game and am trying that, but by the time I took the city, I was almost 20K in debt. Now I'm hoping to roll through most of the Northern Provinces before I start brushing up against the Saka or Pahlava...

[Titus Marcellus Scato]

I never went more than 10K in debt with the Sauromatae.

Perhaps I should add some detailed notes to my 'Guide to EB Blitzing' for them. You have to blitz very quickly to avoid getting very heavily in debt, it means attacking Eleutheroi cities with smaller armies than those of the enemy. Small enough to for you to put the city under seige, and the AI sallys out to attack you immediately when you end the turn. This helps a lot, because it's easier to defend with horse archers than it is to attack with them, and with a AI sally you are fighting a defensive battle which also gets you the city when you've won.

[xzGAB]

Historically Sarmatians fought with horse archers, but having a few heavy lancers. Later they changed to heavy cavalry only (afaik). If I am right, why don't they get the reforms to get something like the super-mega-heavy-killer armoured knights of the Parthian (20 of armor... o.O)??

[athanaric]

Historically Sarmatians fought with horse archers, but having a few heavy lancers. Later they changed to heavy cavalry only (afaik). If I am right, why don't they get the reforms to get something like the super-mega-heavy-killer armoured knights of the Parthian (20 of armor... o.O)??

The Sauromatae bodyguard unit has 22 armour (equal to Hellenic Cataphracts, plus better skill and morale) and is superior to most cavalry in the game. In EB, they appear more often than historically (well, in the early campaign years at least) . This kinda makes up for the lack of reform units.


The things about Sauromatae gameplay I really would like to see changed in EB II (and in AtB as well, if possible) are:

- The recruitment of auxiliaries. Right now it is impossible to recruit Greek, Germanic, or Thraikian units in the Bosphoran region without resorting to exploits.
- The availability of small ports. Right now only the Sauromatae AI can build proper ports (up to level 3, the second biggest kind), whereas the player can't. This is a discrepancy which can't be explaind from the position of historical accuracy.