That pathetic Byz Infantry...

[caravel]

I suspect Khwarazmians were added: a) for "flavor"; and b) to give the Eggies a heavier cav unit that wasn't "Ghulam". Which would be fine by me--while I prefer historical accuracy, I'm not exremely anal about it--but as we've all said before, they're just not powerful enough to justify their cost and high building requirements. I admit I usually recruit a couple units of them for variety's sake, but they've never formed the bulk of my cavalry corps.

Possibly, though the Fatimids/Ayyubids/Mamluks didn't make use of them historically. Though I'm pretty sure the Turks and Mongols did.

Hmm...

I personally love Kwarazmiams, and I've used them to good effect. If yer economy isn't solid by the time you can build them, and you need to be concerned about their cost, well yeah... you've definitely got other things to worry about.

I've just found it really useful to have something THAT heavily armoured which can move faster than both Goths and Katanks.

Plus, by the time I've teched up to Kwazarmiams, I've usually expanded my empire to the point where fighting in the desert isn't even a consideration.

Each to their own, I guess.

Very valid points in the defense of Khwarazmian Cavalry. I find that, with Khwarazmians I expect them to be able to take on similarly heavy cavalry, such as Chivalric Knights, Mongol Heavy and Kataphraktoi if needed. But they just aren't a match for those. When flanking I will use the fastest cavalry with the strongest charge, that I can easily pull out quickly to charge again (AHC in most cases). I just don't see a gap in my typical unit lineup for Khwarazmians. The only time I've seen them remotely useful is as reserve cavalry in extremely defensive situations under fire from the mongol horse archers. It's useful to be well armoured in such situations.

My annoyance is, that with the abundance of Turkish cavalry available historically, why the Khwarazmians and Armenians? And why are the Sipahi so pathetic?

[Empirate]

Khwarazmians are actually a lot better than Ghulam Cavalry: they have +2 defense and +3 armor in comparison, all other stats being equal. That makes them much more powerful, the closest thing Muslims have to full-fledged knights. Their morale is not up to facing knights head-on, but that's about all. Flanking knights should be giving good results. Same goes for Katanks.

I always wondered why Ottoman Sipahi have no bows - it robs the unit of much-needed versatility. I probably shouldn't have mentioned them, as they're weaker than Ghulam Cavalry in offensive power and morale while having equal defense and armor. I only now checked their stats. They just performed memorably for me in a late Turkish campaign once, but that may have been a lot of circumstance and much less of substance...

Sipahi of the Porte are (or would be) very very good, like Armenian Cataphract Archers in R:TW - bows, maneuverability and the heaviest armor available for Muslims (same as Khwarazmians). If only they had forty men instead of twenty, I'd love them and use them all I could. They'd be a lot like Boyars, then, only even heavier armored. The way things stand, with twenty men they don't perform too outstandingly. Still, they're better than plain Ghulam Bodyguards in that the general can rack up some kills without having to expose himself to melee.

Summary: Khwarazmians are way better than Ghulam Cavalry. The latter get a bonus in Lesser Armenia, so the difference between the two is mitigated (GC having a higher attack and morale but lower defense and armor than Khw). If it weren't for that bonus, I'd dismiss Ghulam Cavalry out of hand. Still, Armenians are better than both in that they're similar to Ghulams, have a bonus province, and have a higher charge. AHC are the best melee cav option for Muslims.

[Roark]

Sipahi of the Porte are one of my favourites. IMHO, they would massively overpower the Turkish roster if they were a 40-man unit.

I never use Kwarazmiams deliberately against knights. I'd rather send them against elite non armour-piercing infantry who would otherwise trouble my infantry. Wicked defence and armour means they will often win with few losses.

Variety is key in my battles. I can always find a job for Kwarazmiams, although I can understand why people would opt for a devastating charge instead. I just dig high defence and low attrition rates, I guess.