New unit at the .COM - Trebizond Archer

[Kraxis]

I wouldn't use Masurah as a template. It was a victory of defenders in citystreets against a mounted enemy that could hardly move about. Give us a true head on fight where all that mattered was martial skill.
I will grant you that Masurah saw a victory for the more intelligent side (Robert of Artois ignored his orders, while Baibar did more than asked of him), but it was not a victory of matial skills, such as the many that can be numbered in favour of the Crusaders. Is it not that which we are looking at?

The Mongols at Ain Julut were hardly the Mongols as we know them from Mohi, Leignitz or Kalka River. Mostly they were Turks pressed in Mongol service while the main body of the Mongols were off fighting a civil war. You can't equate those battles.

[Ibn Munqidh]

I wouldn't use Masurah as a template. It was a victory of defenders in citystreets against a mounted enemy that could hardly move about. Give us a true head on fight where all that mattered was martial skill.
I will grant you that Masurah saw a victory for the more intelligent side (Robert of Artois ignored his orders, while Baibar did more than asked of him), but it was not a victory of matial skills, such as the many that can be numbered in favour of the Crusaders. Is it not that which we are looking at?

The Mongols at Ain Julut were hardly the Mongols as we know them from Mohi, Leignitz or Kalka River. Mostly they were Turks pressed in Mongol service while the main body of the Mongols were off fighting a civil war. You can't equate those battles.

A fight where all that mattered was martial skill, was hattin, where Saladin was pushing up the hill through the crusader lines. They werent able to stop the saracens, although thirsty and demoralized, they still had the advantage of a better ground, and numbers. Also, you've got all the reconquest of the remnants of the Kingdom of Jerusalem by Baibars. The saracens were unstoppable, and retook every city from the crusaders.

The mongols at Ain Jalut were the same mongols who destroyed the hashashin fort at alamut, the same mongols who subdued western iran, the same mongols who defeated the 10,000 strong caliphal guard who rode out of baghdad to meet them, the same mongols who destroyed baghdad, the same mongols who defeated all the ayyubid principalities. The same mongols who defeated the knights hospitaller of Acre, and the same mongols who faced Qutuz and Baibars. Most of it had left to Kara Korum, but there was still a formidable, fully experienced force, which equalled the saracen force of egypt, where both numbered close to 20,000. They were defeated at Ain Jalut, then a year later at Homs, and never tried to challenge mamluk power in Syria again.

It is difficult for many to believe, since so much is written about the supposed Mongol invincibility, yet the Mamluks are hardly even known, except to historians and readers of Islamic history. but thre fact is that the Mamluks were an extremely powerful and tough, and immensely well-trained force. To put it simply, these were not the kind of guys you screwed around with, no matter who you were, something even the Mongols learned rather quickly.And they do deserve respect for their victories, against the Mongols, the Crusaders, and other enemies.

The mamluks were way better organised and disciplined than any mongols, due to their training on the arts of 'furusiya', an almost 11 year training course all on horse-archery, horseback riding, and mounted martial skills, which made them the finest horsemen of their time.

[anti_strunt]

A fight where all that mattered was martial skill, was hattin, where Saladin was pushing up the hill through the crusader lines. They werent able to stop the saracens, although thirsty and demoralized, they still had the advantage of a better ground, and numbers. Also, you've got all the reconquest of the remnants of the Kingdom of Jerusalem by Baibars. The saracens were unstoppable, and retook every city from the crusaders.

The mongols at Ain Jalut were the same mongols who destroyed the hashashin fort at alamut, the same mongols who subdued western iran, the same mongols who defeated the 10,000 strong caliphal guard who rode out of baghdad to meet them, the same mongols who destroyed baghdad, the same mongols who defeated all the ayyubid principalities. The same mongols who defeated the knights hospitaller of Acre, and the same mongols who faced Qutuz and Baibars. Most of it had left to Kara Korum, but there was still a formidable, fully experienced force, which equalled the saracen force of egypt, where both numbered close to 20,000. They were defeated at Ain Jalut, then a year later at Homs, and never tried to challenge mamluk power in Syria again.

It is difficult for many to believe, since so much is written about the supposed Mongol invincibility, yet the Mamluks are hardly even known, except to historians and readers of Islamic history. but thre fact is that the Mamluks were an extremely powerful and tough, and immensely well-trained force. To put it simply, these were not the kind of guys you screwed around with, no matter who you were, something even the Mongols learned rather quickly.And they do deserve respect for their victories, against the Mongols, the Crusaders, and other enemies.

The mamluks were way better organised and disciplined than any mongols, due to their training on the arts of 'furusiya', an almost 11 year training course all on horse-archery, horseback riding, and mounted martial skills, which made them the finest horsemen of their time.

You sure do love your Mamluks, I'll give you that!

[ShadowMagnet]

It is difficult for many to believe, since so much is written about the supposed Mongol invincibility, yet the Mamluks are hardly even known, except to historians and readers of Islamic history. but thre fact is that the Mamluks were an extremely powerful and tough, and immensely well-trained force. To put it simply, these were not the kind of guys you screwed around with, no matter who you were, something even the Mongols learned rather quickly.And they do deserve respect for their victories, against the Mongols, the Crusaders, and other enemies.

The mamluks were way better organised and disciplined than any mongols, due to their training on the arts of 'furusiya', an almost 11 year training course all on horse-archery, horseback riding, and mounted martial skills, which made them the finest horsemen of their time.

Mongol force, I must agree with Kraxis here, was mostly made up of Turkish slaves and would not have been a match (morale-wise and skill-wise) for Baibar's mamluk army (Baibar incidentally was of Turkish origin too).

The mamluks were undoubtedly very well organised and trained.
But you really aren't doing mamluks any favours pitting tham against Mongol war machine in a square fight.
Overall military success and tactical experience of the Mongols outweighs pretty much anyone on the planet by far.
Tactical innovations and incredibly deep understanding of how army should work displayed by Ghenghis Khan and Kublai Khan beats the likes of Baibar hands down, sorry to say.
Tough and respeced they truly are but think Alexander, Hannibal, Kublai Khan.
Take macedonian phalanx, Cannae, and scaling the Great Wall for an achievement.
Now think Baibars and mamluks - no offence but not quite there for sheer effectiveness and overall impact.

[Seleukos]

Trebizond archers again....
There wasnt particular unit like this.and his costume is ridicilus.
Take a look at ByzantiumTotalWar mod for some real units..
i really hope that i wont find "byzantine infantry" and "byzantine cavalry" in MTW2 as in MTW1...

[Moderator edit: edited for language]