
Originally Posted by
Kavhan Isbul
I completely agree with all observations. What I was trying to say was that the Egyptians do not lack any important troop type, even if the one they have is not superior. They have good spearmen in both the Nubians and the Saracens, they have good archers in the desert archers (and later they get crossbowmen, arbalesters and even mameluk handgunners, the latter being useful in desert conditions), they have javelinmen in the Arab Infantry, they get Ghazis, Arab Heavy Infantry, Dismounted Faris and Abyssinian Guardsmen for a wide choice of blade infantry, and they have enough cavalry types - Ghulam Bodyguards, Ghulam Cavalry, Saharan Cavalry, Armenian Heavy cavalry, the two types of Mameluk Cavalry, Faris, Steppe and Steppe Heavies if they get to those provinces, and Kwarizmian cavalry (which I find a bit useless), plus Camels, great for attacking RKs or Ghulam Bodyguards at the back. Yes, they do not have longbowmen, almughavars, Gothic Knights, Variangian Guardsmen, Kataphrakti, Swiss Pikemen and Halberdies, and Turcoman Horsemen or Szekely, but they have all the necessary troops to deal with pretty much any situation.
In contrast, the Almohads cannot get a decent heavy cavalry unit unless they get to Rum, Armenia and Lesser Armenia. The Ghulams are great, but expensive and come only in units of 20. The Turks do not have crossbowmen and arbalesters. Compared to them, the Egyptians can't complain.
Bookmarks