Factions and units - info and descriptions

[The Wizard]

Well Steppe Merc, generally your analysis is good, quite good even, but I have a few points.

• Parthians did not use elephants. I don't know which moron at CA decided to confuse Sassanian Persians with Parthians, but the Parthians didn't use the beasts.
• IIRC, the Parthian cataphracts/clibanarii didn't fire from horseback; this was something lesser nobles did. What I do know for sure is that Sassanian clibanarii did not fire from horseback, and I may be confusing the Parthians and the Sassanids.
• On the different cataphract types: it is a good idea, but I doubt the Parthians had more lightly armored cataphracts in their own formations, distinguished them from the fully armored ones. Also, if we do something like this, we need a division between the very heavy 'East Parthian clibanarii/cataphracts/lancers' and the much lighter 'West Parthian clibanarii/cataphracts/lancers' which could serve as anti-cavalry on horseback (not sure about their historical accuracy, though).

So, a couple of points and ideas, all nicely summed up. Share your thoughts on it!



~Wiz

[khelvan]

Just a quick note - Let's be nice to CA. I am sure you were just using a figure of speech, but it is hard to find fault with the company for ahistorical units. If you look at Head Hurlers and the like, there is a bit of a 'fantasy' element intended to appeal to the masses who like 'cool' things and eye candy. I am sure they did their best trying to stay historical when the mandate is to appeal to the masses (these two do not go hand in hand).

[Steppe Merc]

Aymar would certaintly disagree Kelhvan... he has no love for CA, I assure you.

And yes, I did know that the Sassianians used Elephants, but I wasn't sure if the Parthians did as well. And I know for sure that Lesser Nobles were often bow armed... see my one pic with the two blonde guys.

sharrukin, I was just talking about the Parthians... I hadn't gotten enough info to make a unit list for the Sarmatians. But they should have armoured lancers, as should the Scythians. I would agree with you about them not having Cataphracts per se, as Osprey pointed out, they were not true Cataphracts, for that destinction went really only to the Parthians and later Sassanians.

Oh, and SOF, we also have another Germanic specilist, Stephen, who is strongly in support of the pike armed unit...

[khelvan]

That may be so, but to my mind it is no reason not to be respectful. That is all I ask.

[S.O.F]

Oh, and SOF, we also have another Germanic specilist, Stephen, who is strongly in support of the pike armed unit...

Really no German expert myself just what I had handy and thought it might be useful. But German Pikemen are contentous issue, and while a single account calims such was the case there are a large number of folks who believe it incorrect.

[The Wizard]

And yes, I did know that the Sassianians used Elephants, but I wasn't sure if the Parthians did as well. And I know for sure that Lesser Nobles were often bow armed... see my one pic with the two blonde guys.

I find the name 'Lesser Nobles' a bit confusing; I personally think 'Parthian Horse Archers' would be better, and the description would include the fact that they were drawn from Parthia's lesser nobility.



~Wiz

[sharrukin]

"azat" is the word for noble in Parthian. Azat Cavalry maybe?

400 Parthian Azat's threw an army of 50,000 mounted warriors against Mark Antony in 36 BC. Not all of that 50,000 would lack any sort of armour. We know they used spear and javelin cavalry who had some armour. The "lesser noble" cavalry may not have been able to purchase a full cataphract outfit but that doesn't mean they had to stay at home.

[Steppe Merc]

Agreed. As I said before, they were often horse archers, like in my pics, or lesser Cataphracts, often with no horse armour.

[The Wizard]

"azat" is the word for noble in Parthian. Azat Cavalry maybe?

400 Parthian Azat's threw an army of 50,000 mounted warriors against Mark Antony in 36 BC. Not all of that 50,000 would lack any sort of armour. We know they used spear and javelin cavalry who had some armour. The "lesser noble" cavalry may not have been able to purchase a full cataphract outfit but that doesn't mean they had to stay at home.

I think you misunderstood me; I was referring to the name 'Lesser Nobles' for Parthian horse archers. I find it a confusing name, and personally I prefer 'Parthian horse archers' to that, including the fact that they are lesser nobles in the description of the unit.

Interesting... so the Parthians used javelin wielding cavalry which was also able to handle itself in a charge. I didn't know that.



~Wiz

[sharrukin]

Sorry about the misunderstanding Wizard! By the way the "Azat" were the higher nobles as their numbers would suggest. I don't have the name for the lesser nobles yet. With regards to the spear/javelin combo you nailed it earlier;

"Sakae Tribesmen/Light Cavalry [Mercenaries]

Normal attack, fast, very weak defence, strong charge, poor morale, shield

(Long Scythian-style hair, moustache, tunic, baggy trousers, short boots, cowhide round shield which is slung over the back when using bow and equipped when using lance or sword, gorytos with bow slung over the hip, quiver slung over other hip, akinakes, simple saddle, Scythian [and later Mongolian] cut of the horse’s mane, no stirrups)

These tough Scythians from the northeastern frontiers of the Empire are levied from the vassal chieftains of the tribes there. Living a tough life, they learn to ride as soon as they can walk, and they are masterful horsemen. They can fight with lance, bow and sword in equal mastery. However, they are disloyal and cannot be relied on to fill important roles, but they can fill gaps in the line of horse archers in a Parthian army. They can only be hired from the eastern reaches of Iran [Note: if the map stretches that far]."

The more civilized Parthian version would lack the bow and maybe not as high morale.

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Aymar would certaintly disagree Kelhvan... he has no love for CA, I assure you.

Well, yes and no.

I love CA's guts for making the series, their imaginative work - technical and artistic - and their attention to detail in previous works, specially Shogun.

I, however, hate their recent approach and all of what is implied in it. The norrowness of mind that some people inside CA and (I believe ALL) inside Activision have, is bordering on the corporate slime approach: "the let's make some huge money with the fantasy "cool"-childish-Arcani-Iberian-Bullshite-Warrior-Pharaoh-New-Kingdom-Egypt " piece of crap fever. I could add that this has been really a disrespect for the hardcore fans of the game, who were the ones that started the ball rolling back in the times of Shogun, but I won't...

That is what's my oppinion...

[The Wizard]

Well, I find that CA and its publisher have been very arrogant towards the core of their community, the ones that they should be listening to as well as making sure the dough comes rolling in.

Compare that to companies as Blizzard, a company which has bèta online tests for its games, listens to the best players on how to improve the game with the next patch, keeps on supporting a game way past where most companies (such as Activision or EA) would stop, and includes reasonable requests and ideas into development of its games.

Sigh.



~Wiz

[khelvan]

None of us know why these decisions were made. The unfortunate reality is that in order to work with a major publisher like Activision, often a developer like CA must give up some creative control. I seriously doubt you should be directing your ire toward CA, they were probably handcuffed in what they could and could not do, and were under Activision mandates to do certain things.

Be upset about the product, not with the people who made it, unless you were a party to the decisions made and disagree with them. I doubt anyone here was a party to the decisions, so any assumption about why the decisions were made is almost certainly 100% wrong. Let's stick to the facts and be respectful to CA until we have a reason to be otherwise.

[S.O.F]

IBERIAN ALTERATIONS:and boy do they need them.
This took a bit longer to put together but I've got some pic to go with it this time. One of the major things that are required for the Iberians is that more provinces are added to Iberia, right now the 6 is a bit bare. Rebel controllered provinces in the northern mountians (Basques were still about at this time and still independent minded as ever) along with ones along the coast to represent the Greek cities particularly Saguntum perhaps Tarraco alowing both Iberian and Carthage expansion in the region with out direct war with factions.


Pics

[IMG]http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0XQAjA6UexNlZe94sUZHldP3!uxI8kF*UNNzHxAjH5iG3!*mBMV9Ixv!XdGRd3Umew8rL6C93TXdvB5Xel16Tsi0W4AY!t8cTGwC OZ9ueGeAo65wSDT1RFBJpUZeTvN3TfTNf50FANes/iberianelite.JPG[/IMG]

These fellows are the elites of an Iberian force. The fellow carrying the head is an Iberian Chieftain and the others are other wealthy Iberians part of his bodyguard.



Iberian Warriors engaging Romans mix of wealthier and poorer warriors.

[IMG]http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0WwAeA6wdIYEX4gepg*xhxp7jWvUdlSXFHl5K1ejM7fVAC703oJtYfj0Cx2GwEf8cnf5KRvtXyhPKpIFRmnmlhpdpGO8TSQlsCyr 3zJhcV0ytalBVrDazo68yZx9KcLj2bxjOsxBorFw/Iberiancav.JPG[/IMG]

Iberian Cavalry and a Roman Equite (the in game Equites could use some work as you can see).

Revising the Current Factions Units
This is part that is a real headache since we can't easily come up with names for regiments but are basic ones would be>

Infantry:
Scutarii- The current unit does quite a good job but some Scutarii would have been armoured as well and drawn from wealther Iberians. Both units could easily be included but naming the elite version is a bit of a problem

Celt-Iberians- Celts in Iberia would really have more to do with other Iberians then Gaul to the north. Perhaps being the only Scutarii types with War Cry may work.

Iberian Infantry- Suppose they can stay representing the poorer members of Iberian society or those drawn from more remote regions and not drilled in Scutarii tactics

Missile Infantry
Caetratii- This is the general name given to Iberian Skirmishers almost entirely armed with Javelins. I might be reasonable to keep the current Skirmishers and Slingers and add these fellows in as slight better in hand to hand combat and slightly more armoured folks.

Iberian Cavalry
Well the current system here may work with some reskinning and a touch of renaming. Lesser cavalry would fight with onyl a sword and shield much like the current round shields and richer or wealther warriors fighting with spear and owning some armour.

End Notes
So the major problem with the Iberians is the lack of names for units, we have some but quickly it seems to turn into Iberian Light Cavalry or Elite Scutarii or something like that.