Faction strengths?

[Grade_A_Beef]

Can anyone give me a rundown of all the faction styles and their strengths compared to other factions of similiar style?

I understand that Macedon, Seleucia, and Ptolemaics (Epeiros too to some extent) each have different regionals and some unique units, but I can't tell what makes Macedon and especially the Ptolemaic recruit lists better than the Seleucids (which is just huge).

Also I don't understand what kind of advantages the Suromatae have over the other two nomad factions. Sauka gets decent infantry after reforms and Pahlava gets the super heavy catas......but the Suromatae.....yeah.

Pontos, Armenia, and Saba all have different styles but I have no clue how to play as them. They don't seem to have any unit advantages over their neighbors.

Nice exception would be the Getai, who are a breath of fresh air whenever you fight them or use them, seeing as they can fight so many neighbors with different tactics and have their own unique ones as well.

[Cute Wolf]

Sauro's strength lies in their horse's numbers! They have easy acess to the cheapest horse archers ever (in terms of both recruitment cost and upkeep), Sauromatae Fat Aexdantae, at mere 1000+ Minai and about 250 minai upkeep... they could ammased in great numbers compared to their Saka and Pahlava counterparts, not to mention that they are also mercenary so they could be levied quickly if sorely needed... compare with Duna Asya or Pahlava Shivatir, maybe in small 3 or 4 unit, that doesn't matter too much, but when you have multi stacks of HA army that need patrolling all the Steppe.... their difference in upkeep will matter a lot, especially if the economy was tight! Many Sauro Variants of the Nomad units are also cheaper, with just sightly less performance, just use them as Zerg version of Nomads.

Makedon and Epeiros have acess to Agrianikoi Pelekuphoroi, among the best assault troops to be employed against seleukid cataphracts on foot (read: TAB). And the makedonians has acess to Hysteroi Pezhetairoi, maybe not a relatively good units when compared to Argyraspidai or the Crack Chaonion Agema... but at least they have an incredibly large AOR (even to the extent you'll babysitting the Romans for march of time) you can just train them virtually anywhere in the mediterranians...

Epeiros has better choice, the Molosoan Agema is the fastest heavy cavalry that you can use not only for breaking enemy formations, but also to riding down skirmishers and still have enough stamina to impale enemy general... also the Chaonion Agema is the top-crack phalangitai by stats... they beat everyone and with acess to experience inducing temples, they become killing machine by birth... and the last thing wonderful with Epeiros is.... They can train Elephants at Ambrakia!!!! Means the Romans will get many fresh elephant meat if they carefully use their leves and velites, or become a smashed sticky meaty sauce if they aren't.

Pontos gaining extremely wide kind of units, that wasn't particularly good, but you did have every counter for everything your enemy is about to thrown at you...

Hayasdan? They had horse archers and catas while they are civilized and didn't get their reforms as hard as Pahlava does (you just build some market and then change the gov't type). They are basically a civilized nomads with inclination to massive archery tactics (having Kovakasi Archers available at the start and in nearby regions means that those cheap but damn good archers are about to be ammased and made the sky dark with their arrows)

Saba? At least.... they have really isolated position and they have mines in nearby settlements, just play turtle and you can build up your force. But actually, this faction is among the hardest of factions available........

[ARCHIPPOS]

"but I can't tell what makes Macedon and especially the Ptolemaic recruit lists better than the Seleucids (which is just huge)."

they are not... supposedly the Seleucids get THE best troop choice in the game.

[Grade_A_Beef]

Well, yeah, I know the Seleucids have the best troops choice. Just want to know what kinda perks Macedon and Ptolemaics get to differentiate themselves from the Seleucids. Looks like Macedon's explained, but the Ptolemaics are a different story.

The Ptolemaics seem to have nothing going for their unit roster; though their advantages on the strategic map is huge. Do they get anything aside from occupying fabulously rich provinces and a strategically strong poisition (as in they only have to deal with the distracted Seleucids early on?)

I've checked the EB list, and it looks like the Dacian bodyguard unit is slightly better than the Molosson Agema, although it's a shame the Getai can't recruit this unit as a standalone cavalry unit.

[athanaric]

but I can't tell what makes Macedon and especially the Ptolemaic recruit lists better than the Seleucids

Nothing. The Seleukids have the best recruitment list in the game.

Makedones are the masters of phalanx, though. Their reformed Heavy Palanx in addition to Argyraspides and a very decent levy phalanx are testament to that.
Ptolies get better access to Egyptian (levies/mid tier), Galatian (assault swordsmen), and Ethiopian (fast mid tier units + Elephants) units, but are inferior otherwise.

Also I don't understand what kind of advantages the Suromatae have over the other two nomad factions. Sauka gets decent infantry after reforms and Pahlava gets the super heavy catas......but the Suromatae.....yeah.

Again, the only difference is your own skill. Sauromatae have a quality problem against Saka in particular (lower range and armour on average), and therefore are difficult to play. Try to get Roxolani Nobles. They are very expensive, though. However, if you play smart you may have privileged access to some excellent Greek, Dacian and Germanic infantry units. Skythian units are also very useful!

Pontos, Armenia, and Saba all have different styles but I have no clue how to play as them. They don't seem to have any unit advantages over their neighbors.

Pontos and Armenia are very diverse, which means they can adopt any play style, even "barbarian". Armenia is like a weaker version of Pahlava, but with better infantry and a more consistent economy system.

Saba is "officially" the weakest faction (unit wise) but still fun to play. They have decent foot archers and are pretty enduring; a bit like Swêboz with better ranged units but no heavy units.

-> Edit: Hint: Saba can recruit Galatian Heavy Swordsmen in Egypt! This means that if you (as a Saba player) ever see some of those wandering unaccompanied through the desert, fel no hesitation to bribe them. These guys are heavier than any of your factional units and thus an excellent addition to your army. They were incredibly helpful for me when I defeated the Ptolemaioi.

[Apázlinemjó]

Ptolies get better access to Egyptian (levies/mid tier), Galatian (assault swordsmen), and Ethiopian (fast mid tier units + Elephants) units, but are inferior otherwise.

Let's not forget the Klerouchikon Agema, the second strongest phalanx unit in the game and the Basilikon Agema, the heavy thorakitai, also they can get Kretikoi Toxotai as factional unit.


To Pontos: They are the jack of all trades in the game, but you can't use your full potential at the start of the game, if you are playing them, because you have to survive the Seleucids first.

[WinsingtonIII]

Can anyone give me a rundown of all the faction styles and their strengths compared to other factions of similiar style?

I understand that Macedon, Seleucia, and Ptolemaics (Epeiros too to some extent) each have different regionals and some unique units, but I can't tell what makes Macedon and especially the Ptolemaic recruit lists better than the Seleucids (which is just huge).

Also I don't understand what kind of advantages the Suromatae have over the other two nomad factions. Sauka gets decent infantry after reforms and Pahlava gets the super heavy catas......but the Suromatae.....yeah.

Pontos, Armenia, and Saba all have different styles but I have no clue how to play as them. They don't seem to have any unit advantages over their neighbors.

Nice exception would be the Getai, who are a breath of fresh air whenever you fight them or use them, seeing as they can fight so many neighbors with different tactics and have their own unique ones as well.

Well I think it's important to remember that EB focuses on historical accuracy more than anything else, so some factions will simply be weaker than their neighbors, and that's just something that you're going to have to deal with. I personally think it makes the game more interesting than putting too much effort into creating factions that are perfectly balanced.

Cute Wolf already covered most of these, but I'll say what I think about some of the one's he didn't go into detail about.

The Ptolemaic roster is not as strong as the Seleucid roster overall as far as I can tell. That's a decision that I'm sure was made based on historical data, and when playing as them it's just something you have to deal with. The Ptolemaoi do have a couple things going for them. The Machimoi swordsmen, although not particularly good, provide a cheap and decent medium sword infantry in their homelands, and I don't think the Seleucids really have an equivalent to that. They also have the Galatikoi Kleruchoi (Galatian Heavy Infantry), which are a very effective heavy sword unit (with the added bonus of it being a Galatian that can be recruited outside of Galatia), and I'm pretty certain that the Seleucids do not have an equivalent to that.

Pontos is one of those factions that have it rough. Any campaign you play with them with be very difficult due to both their starting position and their poor roster. Their biggest benefit, as I can tell, is that they get the largest selection of Galatian troops out of any faction in the game, and Galatian troops are generally pretty good. However, they are only recruitable in one province. The combination of Hellenic and Galatian rosters is interesting, and you can play them with either Hellenic or "barbarian" tactics, or a mixture of both, but Pontos is hampered because its Hellenic roster is subpar and Galatians are limited to one province. They also lack cataphracts, so even their cavalry is generally outclassed by those around them. Conclusion: Pontos has a weak roster, with little in the way of strengths, but that's just how it is.

Saba, as Cute Wolf said, has a good starting position, but again, their roster is weak. Most Sabaean and Arabian troops wear little to no armor, so they will die like flies under missile fire. Even the Sabaean Noble Infantry, some of the heaviest armored troops they can muster, have less armor than Hellenic Theurophoroi, which are considered fairly light by Hellenic standards. The strength of many Sabaean and Arabian troops is that they have surprisingly high morale. Arabian Light Infantry will hold in melee versus superior foes for quite some time before routing, which is not what you would expect by looking at them. Sabaean Levy Spearmen have 13 morale (!) which is surprisingly high considering their levy status. But this is where the strengths end. Saba lacks cavalry, decently armored units in general (other than their bodyguard), and has trouble holding a line. When fighting against the Ptolies and Seleucids, you're going to have to resort to Pantodapoi Phalangitai more and more the further you get from home, which I hate doing when I'm not a Hellenic faction.

That's just my take, but I think it's just that EB makes factions historically accurate, so sometimes you will end up with factions that have weak rosters with few strengths.

[GenosseGeneral]

concerning ptolies i can just point at the galatians... ever seen an diadochoi army with useful hevy infantry? especially together with thorakitai, they can be used for some kind of a "reformed" army and they are VERY useful to assault walls... but u still got phanlanxes and all that other greek stuff. do not underestimate the ptolies' units...

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

The Seleukids get access to the same Galatian roster that Pontos does I believe. And the Galatian Spearmen are basically the equivalent of the Galatian Swordsmen except that their secondary weapon is a spear instead of a javilin.

I would add that the major strength of Macedon besides the reformed Phalanx is their access to Thracian units including the Peltasts which they can recruit unlike any faction except Getai. Epiros has access to Italic infantry ranging from light to heavy and all decently effective. Ptolemies do get great access to Galatian Swordsmen but I feel this is their only major advantage. I don't think Klereuchoi Phalangitai are the equals of Argryaspides and they have very limited recruitment area as well.

On the flip side their Machimoi are very useful but no more useful than say, Eastern Axemen or Cappadocian Hillmen which the Seleukids have great access to.

[Centurio Nixalsverdrus]

@Grade_A_Beef:

The scissor-rock-paper system of vanilla has been replaced by the historical-accuracy system of EB.

[WinsingtonIII]

On the flip side their Machimoi are very useful but no more useful than say, Eastern Axemen or Cappadocian Hillmen which the Seleukids have great access to.

Machimoi have more staying power in melee than Cappadocian Hillmen or Eastern Axemen. They have 6 armor while the various axemen only have 2, and they have 3 shield while the axemen have 2. Overall they have 19 defense, while the axemen have only 15. I think that makes them better at holding in melee for some time and makes them less vulnerable to missiles, which is important in the east. The higher lethality of the axes makes them better flankers (the Machimoi's sword is armor-piercing just like the axes though) but the greater staying power of the Machimoi makes them a bit more versatile in their role in my opinion. Of course, if you want versatile medium infantry in the Middle East with surprising staying power, you should probably just go for Ioudaioi Taxeis (although they lack axes or swords and instead have spears), which both the Ptolies and the Arche have access to.

[athanaric]

Let's not forget the Klerouchikon Agema, the second strongest phalanx unit in the game and the Basilikon Agema, the heavy thorakitai, also they can get Kretikoi Toxotai as factional unit.

The Klerouchikon Agema has exactly the same stats as the Argyraspides, and a smaller AoR.
Every faction can recruit factional Kretan Archers, if they control Kydonia, Antiocheia, or Alexandria. I've even recruited those guys with Casse, Swêboz, Saka, Hayasdan, and Sab'yn.

In fact, the small AoR of most of their units, especially the elites, is the biggest weakness of the Ptolemaioi, compared to other successors.

[retep219]

Pontos is one of those factions that have it rough. Any campaign you play with them with be very difficult due to both their starting position and their poor roster. Their biggest benefit, as I can tell, is that they get the largest selection of Galatian troops out of any faction in the game, and Galatian troops are generally pretty good. However, they are only recruitable in one province. The combination of Hellenic and Galatian rosters is interesting, and you can play them with either Hellenic or "barbarian" tactics, or a mixture of both, but Pontos is hampered because its Hellenic roster is subpar and Galatians are limited to one province. They also lack cataphracts, so even their cavalry is generally outclassed by those around them. Conclusion: Pontos has a weak roster, with little in the way of strengths, but that's just how it is.

I wouldn't call Pontos's roster all that bad. It does take some time to get to their better units, but once you have them, you can field an army that can easily beat anything the AI will throw at you. (Hey, is that surprising?) They don't really lack much--Chalkaspides are an elite phalanx that seem to get bad press, but aren't all that bad. They are the same price as Hysteroi Pezhataroi and are recruitable at the same MIC level. However, the Chalkaspides are almost identical to the reformed phalanx...they only lack a single point of attack. Same defence and morale. Pantodapoi Phalangitai are also present, being cheap and very good to hold the line. In the way of Galatian elites--true, it's just one province (Two, if you count Odrysai, which can recruit the Shortswordsmen and Heavy Spearmen, as well as Rhomphorai instead of Tindonatae) but is very centrally located and provides the Heavy Spearmen, unmatched among anything you'll see in the AI armies except for their clone, the Heavy Swordsmen that the Ptolemaioi sometimes field, as well as the Tindonatae which can easily rout an AI army. Plus you get cheap but dependable medium swords a good four turns after Galatia falls (Something you can accomplish on turn two/three without losing many men if you force a sally and win, which is quite possible, if difficult)

As for the issue of cataphracts, I don't know what exactly you mean by that term, but Pontos does get the Kinsmen Heavy Cavalry. They're not true cataphracts, but are pretty close. They're recruitable in Amarvir with an MIC that Hayasdan will always build for you if you don't blitz them out of existence within the first fifteen or so years. And if you're worried about cavalry inferiority, get the Scythed Chariots. They shred non-cataphract cavalry, and if maneuvered correctly will put a dent in even the cataphracts, assuming that the cataphracts aren't allowed to charge.

[Apázlinemjó]

The Klerouchikon Agema has exactly the same stats as the Argyraspides, and a smaller AoR.
Every faction can recruit factional Kretan Archers, if they control Kydonia, Antiocheia, or Alexandria. I've even recruited those guys with Casse, Swêboz, Saka, Hayasdan, and Sab'yn.

In fact, the small AoR of most of their units, especially the elites, is the biggest weakness of the Ptolemaioi, compared to other successors.

Ahh checked the EDU, you're right about the Agema, however what I wanted to say with Cretans, that you can train them almost at the start of the game with Ptolies and with Seleucids too.

EDIT: Nvm

As for the issue of cataphracts, I don't know what exactly you mean by that term, but Pontos does get the Kinsmen Heavy Cavalry. They're not true cataphracts, but are pretty close. They're recruitable in Amarvir with an MIC that Hayasdan will always build for you if you don't blitz them out of existence within the first fifteen or so years. And if you're worried about cavalry inferiority, get the Scythed Chariots. They shred non-cataphract cavalry, and if maneuvered correctly will put a dent in even the cataphracts, assuming that the cataphracts aren't allowed to charge.

Or you can get a cheaper and almost identical unit in stats, the Scythian Nobles. Also you can train Steppe Riders, who are excellent at wearing out the A.I. Cataphracts and after that it's a piece of cake to bring them down.

[IrishHitman]

Makedonia's strength is that you can deploy a proper combined arms army without being distracted with random regional troops that generally don't fit such a strategy.

I've never played with the Ptolemaic or Seleucid kingdoms for any real period of time, because while they have some pretty fun units, they simply don't fit my military strategy.

[abou]

I think you guys are focusing too much on the military and not everything else about gameplay - starting positions, economy, location, etc. The Seleukids may be able to build up the best military, but their starting position means that they can't really utilize such a military right away.

[ziegenpeter]

And they will never have the best available units in ONE army, because it would be very cumbersome to gather them from all over the empire.

[Alien of Germania]

You are all forgeting Baktria, Im playing Seleucids at the moment after an amazing campaign as Baktria and I found Baktria the more stronger and richest concerning unit recruitment comparing to other factions in general.

[WinsingtonIII]

I wouldn't call Pontos's roster all that bad. It does take some time to get to their better units, but once you have them, you can field an army that can easily beat anything the AI will throw at you. (Hey, is that surprising?) They don't really lack much--Chalkaspides are an elite phalanx that seem to get bad press, but aren't all that bad. They are the same price as Hysteroi Pezhataroi and are recruitable at the same MIC level. However, the Chalkaspides are almost identical to the reformed phalanx...they only lack a single point of attack. Same defence and morale. Pantodapoi Phalangitai are also present, being cheap and very good to hold the line.

But compared to Hysteroi Pezhetairoi, Chalkaspides have an AOR of 4 provinces in Asia Minor, while the Hysteroi Pezhetairoi are recruitable in S. Italy, all of Greece and S. Thracia, the entire West coast of Asia Minor, Antioch, N. Egypt, Mesopotamia, and Baktra. From a campaign perspective that makes them a better unit. Plus I think the more accurate comparison to make is between Chalkaspides and Agryaspides and Klerouchon Agema, because those are the elite phalanxes you will actually be facing for the most part. In comparison to these, Chalkaspides do not stack up. Just going by morale alone (which I consider the most important stat for phalanx troops) the have 13 while the equivalents the AS and Ptolies will be sending your way have 16. The fact that they are less expensive is actually a very good thing from the perspective of playing as Pontos, but they are not as good an elite as the ones you will be facing.

As for Pantodapoi Phalangitai, I agree they are a surprisingly good unit, but practically every faction in the East has access to them, so I don't think they are really a particular strength for the Pontic roster (that implies that it's something unique to them). So really, the three things the make the Pontic Hellenic roster weak compared to others are Chalkaspides, a lack of Pezhetairoi, and a lack of successor cavalry. I realize that these don't really hold them back much in the hands of any human player versus the computer, but technically they do have a below average Hellenic roster, that's all I'm saying.

In the way of Galatian elites--true, it's just one province (Two, if you count Odrysai, which can recruit the Shortswordsmen and Heavy Spearmen, as well as Rhomphorai instead of Tindonatae) but is very centrally located and provides the Heavy Spearmen, unmatched among anything you'll see in the AI armies except for their clone, the Heavy Swordsmen that the Ptolemaioi sometimes field, as well as the Tindonatae which can easily rout an AI army. Plus you get cheap but dependable medium swords a good four turns after Galatia falls (Something you can accomplish on turn two/three without losing many men if you force a sally and win, which is quite possible, if difficult)

I would agree with you on every point here. I said in my previous post that Galatians are one of the strengths of the Pontic roster, but I lamented their small AOR. The reason I didn't include Odrysai is because early on you probably won't control it, and Galatia is in a better location to reinforce against the AS anyways.

As for the issue of cataphracts, I don't know what exactly you mean by that term, but Pontos does get the Kinsmen Heavy Cavalry. They're not true cataphracts, but are pretty close. They're recruitable in Amarvir with an MIC that Hayasdan will always build for you if you don't blitz them out of existence within the first fifteen or so years. And if you're worried about cavalry inferiority, get the Scythed Chariots. They shred non-cataphract cavalry, and if maneuvered correctly will put a dent in even the cataphracts, assuming that the cataphracts aren't allowed to charge.

Well they don't have true cataphracts, that's all I meant by that term. I don't even like cataphracts very much, but I just thought that I would point out that this is something that Pontos lacks that pretty much every other Eastern faction has access to. I love the Royal Kinsmen (the early bodyguard) and the regular kinsmen heavy cavalry are quite good, but again, they don't stack up to the elite cavalry you will facing around you. True cataphracts will eat them in melee, and in general the Hellenic elite cavalry have better morale than them and are just are maneuverable as they are. All I'm saying is that there is a reason why these troops were in decline during EB's time period, they were somewhat archaic. As for chariots, in close battles where you are forced to take some risks with your cavalry, Scythed Chariots become more of a liability than they are helpful. I don't really think that Pontos has bad cavalry overall, but you have to admit that their selection (in their homelands, I'm not counting steppe regionals that many Eastern factions get) is small for an Eastern faction, which hampers their abilities somewhat.

[seienchin]

I would be interested which factions you think are the worst, unitwise?
I personally think Saba.
Armenia would be powerfull if it would be located in europe, but compared to its neighbours it is really mediocre. Still no saba though
I found casse to be surprisingly powerfull, because of huge units and good moral. Still in the campain their rate of casualties is insane

[Grade_A_Beef]

well, no, I'm asking for a rock-paper-scissors thing. It's easy enough to counter anything a faction sends at you....

What I want to know is what kind of distinguishing feature there is for each faction, especially the ones that practice similar fighting styles.

[athanaric]

What I want to know is what kind of distinguishing feature there is for each faction, especially the ones that practice similar fighting styles.

In short, I would sum it up like this:


Successors:

Makedonia - most "pure" Successor-style faction; best Phalanx roster (also when counting availability). Lots of specialist melee troops (incl. elites); some excellent but difficult to get missile support. All in all very strong in melee and combined arms.

AS - excellent unit selection covering every troop type in the game, but difficult to assemble. Lots of elites, but still has to rely more on levies and regionals than Makedonia.

Ptolemaioi - like AS, but lacking HAs and true Cataphracts. Also the AoR of their best units is very small. This is of course offset by their advantageous position on the map.


Surrounding factions:

Pontos - much like AS, but slightly weaker in terms of Phalanx, factional heavy infantry, and heavy cavalry. Has easiest access to Galatian troops though.

Hayasdan - in between Pontos and Pahlava, with some good infantry, especially (light) archers. Strong but expensive cavalry of all kinds.

Pahlava - Strongest cavalry faction with 4 types of recruitable cataphracts; also their HAs are a distinct advantage over the Hellenistic neighbours. Decent light and medium infantry, especially archers, but no factional elite infantry. Their best units are readily available almost everywhere, even more so after the "reforms"! Fear the Dêhbêd cavalry

Baktria - much like AS but more cavalry heavy. Again, limited AoR of the best units. Only Hellenistic kingdom with factional HAs, but no elite phalanx. Easiest access to Indian units.

Epeiros - kinda like a western version of Baktria, without the HAs and super-heavy stuff. In matters Phalanx almost equal to AS or Makedonia.


etc.

[ARCHIPPOS]

Athanaric's post sums it up excellently i'ld say :)

i really like the short sentences and using up the AS as common measure :)

[Dodge_272]

I've found the Casse are very good at making people run away, and that's about it. :D

[ziegenpeter]

I love the Royal Kinsmen (the early bodyguard) and the regular kinsmen heavy cavalry are quite good, but again, they don't stack up to the elite cavalry you will facing around you. True cataphracts will eat them in melee, and in general the Hellenic elite cavalry have better morale than them and are just are maneuverable as they are. All I'm saying is that there is a reason why these troops were in decline during EB's time period, they were somewhat archaic.

You mean cataphracts were in decline?
AFAIK they were in use even in medieval times. (In the ERE e.g.)

[Andronikos]

The Kinsmen heavy cavalry is descendand of Persian heavy cavalry from Achamenid times, it's not cataphract. And this type of cavalry was on decline, because it was proven ineffective when comapred with hetairoi, the most powerful and widely used heavy cavalry of that era. On the other hand, cataphract model was a new one and it was on ascent.

[Pinwhistle]

The Casse are one of the more competent factions, at least in battle, for their unfailing ability to make at least 2/3s of any opposing army run away. They are, more or less, expert terrorizers. They can be a bitch to play though, because despite being able to sustain the isles as an economic powerhouse, expansion is usually difficult.

[Apázlinemjó]

The Casse are one of the more competent factions, at least in battle, for their unfailing ability to make at least 2/3s of any opposing army run away. They are, more or less, expert terrorizers. They can be a bitch to play though, because despite being able to sustain the isles as an economic powerhouse, expansion is usually difficult.

Naked dudes & Chariots, you can do that with Pontos too.

[Brennus]

The Casse are one of the more competent factions, at least in battle, for their unfailing ability to make at least 2/3s of any opposing army run away. They are, more or less, expert terrorizers. They can be a bitch to play though, because despite being able to sustain the isles as an economic powerhouse, expansion is usually difficult.

Thats very true, especially if you hit one of those two very sensitive nerves, the Sweboz or Romani, then your continental empire never sees peace.

[ziegenpeter]

So what is techniclly the difference between persian heavy cav and cataphracts?