Byzantines need an a/p ranged unit...

[rvg]

And no, Ballistas and Catapults do not count. Jav or Xbow, or even Naptha will do fine. Mounted if possible, but even a foot unit would be acceptable.

[Quillan]

I'm less worried about them not having an AP missile unit than I am about their total lack of gunpowder. If the Empire hadn't been on the ropes by the time gunpowder was developed, I'm certain they would have made effective and probably innovative use of it. From the start, the Empire of Rome was the leading western power in military science. Many people wrote things down, but they were the ones who collected it, studied it, and improved it.

[JCoyote]

Not to mention that Byzantium made extensive and innovative use of incendiary weapons before that. They wouldn't have avoided developing firearms... they probably would have come up with a few improvements over what other nations were using.

You could have seen things like rockets mixed with greek fire. Or perhaps the small naptha grenades fired together in large bundles from a trebuchet... like a medieval cluster bomb.

There might need to be something sort of like a fantasy unit in there, but along with the Moors there probably should be some... if the nations had stayed in the fight til later I doubt they would have just sat around and ignored new developments. That's a bit more unrealistic than giving them something they weren't around long enough to have.

[Carl]

Imagine Greek ire and gunpowder mixed together, it would probably be somthing like Napalm, nasty idea if you ask me. or imagine a cannon filled with a half a dozen small calibre cannon balls filled with thats stuff, exploding flaming grape shot, that would probably be the most scary sea weapon developed prior to rifled, explosive shell lobbing cannon.

[JCoyote]

Imagine Greek ire and gunpowder mixed together, it would probably be somthing like Napalm, nasty idea if you ask me. or imagine a cannon filled with a half a dozen small calibre cannon balls filled with thats stuff, exploding flaming grape shot, that would probably be the most scary sea weapon developed prior to rifled, explosive shell lobbing cannon.

I thought about that, but really, the pots would have been too fragile for that.

However I think the rocket idea could have been possible. Create a decent size rocket. String greek fire bottles over its surface with fuse to hold them on. Fire it over the enemy army. When it's launched the fuse is lit, as the fuse burns far enough it starts releasing the bottles. It would have been possible and something feels like it would have fit the Byzantine style.

[Rollon]

Yes, Byzantium definetely needs some good Late Era units, it's just not fair the way it is now.
I hope that'll be fixed in some mod. Definetely my favorite faction, not for the units roster but for the whole historic flavour.

[Slyspy]

You can imagine all the fantasical Greek gunpowder weapons you like, but the sad fact is that even cannon were in their infancy when Constantinople fell. Although one might argue that a surviving or andvanced Byzantium would have used gunpowder weapons (as they did in that last siege) the idea of some kind of "wonder weapon" is far fetched. The Empire was broke and broken well before the final assault by the Ottoman armies. By all means let them have the "standard" gunpowder weapons if they survive long enough, but "flaming grape" and "medieval cluster bombs" are rather unlikely!

[Whacker]

I couldn't find the link with a short search, but Musashi and a few others did some great work making some mounted gunpowder units for our Eastern Roman friends. I think the thread was in the modding forum. Hopefully he'll see this and can provide a link or some insight.

[Quillan]

He gave them the full line of units, I think. I know he made musketeers, arquebusiers and handgunners for them.

[rvg]

Gunpowder would be fine, but any a/p missile will do... it just doesn't make sense that the Byz don't get any at all.

[Carl]

You can imagine all the fantasical Greek gunpowder weapons you like, but the sad fact is that even cannon were in their infancy when Constantinople fell. Although one might argue that a surviving or andvanced Byzantium would have used gunpowder weapons (as they did in that last siege) the idea of some kind of "wonder weapon" is far fetched. The Empire was broke and broken well before the final assault by the Ottoman armies.

Yes true, but for it to have survived the Ottomann assuallt it would have had to have never become broken in the FIRST place. Thus the entire point dosen't really matter. What they might have done if they'd have got their hands on gunpowder and adopted it and developed it with a healthy empire backing them up we'll never know, but it is likliy they would have come up with many useful and advantagous uses for it that would have been unique to them.

I thought about that, but really, the pots would have been too fragile for that.

Could you explain that comment please, (sorry i'm not quite understanding you).

[Musashi]

The units I've created for Byz in my mod so far are:

Militia Musketeers
Elite Musketeers (Similar to Janissary)
Drakonikon (Mounted riflemen, basically fast pony riders with a carbine musket, meant to be used as harassers as they cannot hold up in melee)
Drakonarioi (Gunpowder shock cavalry. They use a heavier caliber carbine, which means less range due to the characteristics of black powder, but they are absolutely devastating in their ability to charge an enemy, firing on them all the way, and then crash into them in a formed charge).

But it's not ready for release, because I'm not satisfied until I can create proper Byzantine looking models for them.

Additionally, I created a rocketeer unit... basically arquebusiers who fire rockets instead of shot... but, if you've ever actually tried this little mod, you'll know exactly how horrifically devastating that is, so it's on hold until I can tweak them some.

I'm also planning to give them Naffatun of course... It's rather silly that they don't have them in vanilla... They invented them for crying out loud.

[JCoyote]

Could you explain that comment please, (sorry i'm not quite understanding you).

Well the problem is the manner in which naphtha bombs worked. They were, almost precisely, a medieval Molotov cocktail. They shattered against their target, allowing the goo to cover the target and thus be lit by the attached flame.

Putting several of them together in a cannon barrel and then VERY sharply accelerating them means they would almost all shatter in (or shortly after leaving) the barrel as they bounced off each other. It could be avoided by using thicker containers, but by the time the container gets that thick, it won't contain much naphtha and probably won't shatter against most non-building targets anyway.

Most effective liquid incendiary weapons today are air dropped or rocket delivered instead fired from cannon. Hence rocket delivery becomes a good idea even in a medieval war. My rocket concept was intended for one of two situations; either against large troop concentrations (some bombs fall short or long, no biggie) or to set fired to besieged cities. It wouldn't be very accurate at all, but would have its uses. It could also be used with more fragile and quite light glass bottles... this improves the effectiveness and with glass blowing accelerates production.

[Carl]

@JCoyote: I may be wrong about this as it's been a LONG time since I read up on Greek fire. But it was my understanding that one of it's scarier properties (and what made it unique when compared to other incendiary weapons of the day), was that it would actually ignite on contact with the air. Thus a Cannonball filled with the stuff and some gunpowder would create a self igniting explosive incendiary missile. Sure it wouldn't be much use on a battlefield as it probably wouldn't ignite. but on a ship, (you could even use a Ribualt like setup of several small cannon instead of one filled with lots of these), it would be VERY effective IMHO. Short range volleys into the thick timbers of ships should make more than a few go off, and if one hit a cannon and went of the burst of flame would probably reach the rigging. Your talking a weapon where even a single shot could probably eliminate any enemy vessel due to major fires in the rigging and mid decks. A full Broadside would reduce most ships to Little more than a flame wreathed coffin I would imagine. In addition, since it has gunpowder in it you could just set it off like you would normal exploding shot (how did they do that anyway?).

[JCoyote]

No there is some confusion about whether it ignited on contact with air. I think it's unlikely, simply because with the technology available it would have been too hard to store. Too dangerous to use.

It could have been more like a reaction of two chemicals that were mixed on the spot. Possible, but I have some doubts.

Most likely it was similar to napalm. It was known to continue burning even if you put water on it. THAT was what made it so devastating in that age.

Anyway, the point was, putting a bunch of easily breakable containers in a gun barrel to shoot out isn't an effective use.

A single shell has some potential because it doesn't have the stress of accelerating with other projectiles.

Exploding shot? That was easy... they just put a fuse in the shell. When the fuse burnt long enough, the shell went off. The mark of a good artillery crew was cutting the fuse to the right length for maximum effect. NOT easy. Exploding shells tended to explode in the ground, this limited their effectiveness over what was possible. Crews tried to time it just right so it exploded in the air. During the US Civil War era, most exploding shells still used timed fuses. In those shells, it was easy because the fuse was in a circle in the base of the shell covered with a lead plate. The plate was marked with time increments; you punched a hole in the plate at the proper time increment, which cut the fuse under it and also allowed the firing of the cannon light the fuse at that point. The trick was to try to get the shell to explode in the enemy ranks BEFORE it touched the ground. In earlier eras it was more complicated, but the principle was the same: cut the fuse to the right burn length so it would explode at the right time.

Which is why, when they have shells in M2TW exploding on impact, it gets to me a bit because that just didn't happen til much, much later.

[Carl]

It could have been more like a reaction of two chemicals that were mixed on the spot. Possible, but I have some doubts.

I've heard it suggessted that they where stored sepratly and only mixed in eithier the bellows itself, or as it came out of 2 seperate barrels. More than that, you couldn't ignite a flamethrower type weapon with a simple flame as the fuel washing over it would quicklly put it out as it starved it of oxogyen. It would practiclly HAVE to be self igniting to work like that IMHO.

Even if it wasn't self igniting, a mixture of it and Gunpowder in a standered exploding shell would STILL be lethal to ships as you'd have a wepaon that would first fire a shell into the heart of the ship where it would quickly explode ina fountin of exploding fire that canmnot be put out. It would allmost ceartianlly set of any powder stored near the nearby guns and would probably start major fires on whatever deck it hit. if it hit near the waterline it might even blow the main magazine and the entire enemy ship. Not that you'd want to be too close when it did that mind. Not to mention that the flamethrowers would still have been lethal at that kind of short range.

[Musashi]

Well, there are many, many accounts of various greek fire storage facilities going up in flames. All the accounts say the Byzantines treated it with very careful precautions, far beyond the precautions that would be used for gunpowder even. So it's not impossible that it really was that volatile... Although ignition on contact with air seems highly unlikely simply due to the fact that they would have had extreme difficulty creating vacuums at the time... But it's not impossible.

I tend to lean more towards the idea that it was something that ignited when it reacted with water. This would be somewhat easier to deal with, and quite simple to use as a trigger as well.

Additionally, the Byzantine Fireships used a bellows type arrangement which sprayed the chemical as a stream of fire... Basically a napalm flamethrower. This tends to indicate, to me at least, that some chemical reaction was used for the ignition, rather than actually starting it with a pilot flame.

[Carl]

Could be musahi, somthing falamable with one of the early elements of the periodic table mised in, (one of the ones in the Potassium/Lithium group, allthough below them obviousslly, Potassium explodes on contact wioth water fun to whatch the videos I must ay).

Intresting that it was so volatile, a bit lke Nitroglycarene (you don't think they made a watered down vershion of it do you, would that have even been possibbile back then?)

[Musashi]

I somehow doubt that... It wasn't reported to be explosive, just incendiary. If it was anything like nitro they would have had warehouses taking out whole city blocks instead of going up in flames...

They did basically treat it as though it were radioactive though hehe. Only the people who were specifically assigned to work with it were allowed to be anywhere near it, basically.

[Whacker]

The most probable answer in my mind is that it reacted with water. Areas with high humidity would be problematic, and seeing how Constantinople is ... well basically surrounded by water, there you have it.

[JCoyote]

Pilot lights aren't hard to do though. Even at sea, it's nothing to have a strong burning torch. But a water reaction does make sense. Though no, it wouldn't have been directly because of a purified low number metal... that stuff's fun to play with but not practical on a large scale weapon basis. More likely... two chemicals that when mixed ignited with water. Even THAT is horrifyingly dangerous under medieval conditions. It doesn't take pure water to set off most water reacting substances... the water in your hands or a very humid day can do it too. Which would also have naturally limited it's spreading as a technology... some places would simply have the wrong weather to make or use it for ANY length of time at all.

But that still leaves a problem... storing it on ships for very long. It wouldn't have been a naval weapon if it destroyed as many ships on your side as the enemy. So keeping it at sea would have been nearly suicidal.

Which is why I lean towards it being ignited. There was very likely a difference between it and gunpowder as well... it could have required heating in its final stage of combination. That alone, especially in that day and age, would have made it set a lot of places on fire. Because it needed flames around it to make it when it was tremendously incendiary.

Also, burning in presence of water is not burning in absence of oxygen. So even with a pilot light it wouldn't have fired back into the pump. I think it was probably very, very much like flamethrowers today.

[Whacker]

But that still leaves a problem... storing it on ships for very long. It wouldn't have been a naval weapon if it destroyed as many ships on your side as the enemy. So keeping it at sea would have been nearly suicidal.

IIRC, this is correct. I think in some books I've read, they stated that the Byzantines only loaded it onto ships when it was known to be needed.

Which is why I lean towards it being ignited. There was very likely a difference between it and gunpowder as well... it could have required heating in its final stage of combination. That alone, especially in that day and age, would have made it set a lot of places on fire. Because it needed flames around it to make it when it was tremendously incendiary.

This is also entirely possible. Some of the surviving illustrations clearly depict the mixture as already ignited as it's being sprayed from the delivery mechanism.

It would seem that reacting with water is a possible issue, and there's also the strong possibility that when prepared, it had a very low realistic shelf-life, and would become extremely volatile after a certain period of time and prone to chemical reactions and/or combustion. If that's the case I wonder if the Byzantines actually knew that or figured it out, seeing how so few people knew about it and would be in a position to determine this.

[HoreTore]

The power of wikipedia!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_fire

[Musashi]

JCoyote: The problem isn't keeping a pilot light going... It's, with medieval technology, creating an apparatus to spray it across the pilot light, without having it spark back down into the holding tank and ignite the whole lot of it, which, explosive or not, would cause an explosion due to pressure buildup in the holding tank.

This is not generally a good thing.

Whereas, if the chemical is inert except when combined with water, it's very simple to create a device that sprays water and the chemical at the same time, and they mix outside the nozzles, creating ignition with zero chance of burning back down the tubes.

[JCoyote]

Yes Hore, and even there, both references to catapult use... including the historical memoir... refer to casks/flasks with something flaming attached to it. This includes nautical catapult use. With a self igniting mixture, there would be no flame visible until it landed. That pretty much indicates something like napalm. In which case, the flamethrowers they used likely had torches held to them to light like a modern flamethrower does. There are some tactical advantages to doing things that way as well.

Burning back through the tubes requires oxygen. As long as the tubes don't have air flowing back down the same pathway (they can't when it's pumping). the substance can't light inside them. In many cases lighting could have been as simple as a guy with a pike length pole that had a torch on the end holding a flame to it. With a proper length, narrow tube, flame burning back down actually snuffs itself.

[Musashi]

Actually that's not at all true, there are numerous substances that can burn without oxygen... And accounts from the times say that greek fire would burn UNDER water. As in, it would sink, and you would see flames under the surface of the water. This suggests that greek fire was in fact a chemical which can burn without air. That being the case, burning back down the tube is a HUGE concern if it's something ignited with fire, rather than by mixing chemicals at the point of ignition.

[JCoyote]

There is a difference between burning under water and burning without oxygen. Many things can burn underwater but can't burn without oxygen. They can still use up the oxygen in surrounding air and snuff themselves.

Also, sources say it would burn when doused with water, submerged wasn't often said and could easily have been an exaggeration.

[Musashi]

Well, it could have been, but it's best to assume it's correct imho.

If it burns underwater, the likeliest explanation is that it is self-oxidizing, or that it reacts with water.

[Rollon]

Is there an easy way to give Byzantium the Naffatuns? Nevermind the textures.

[guyfawkes5]

You can imagine all the fantasical Greek gunpowder weapons you like, but the sad fact is that even cannon were in their infancy when Constantinople fell. Although one might argue that a surviving or andvanced Byzantium would have used gunpowder weapons (as they did in that last siege) the idea of some kind of "wonder weapon" is far fetched. The Empire was broke and broken well before the final assault by the Ottoman armies. By all means let them have the "standard" gunpowder weapons if they survive long enough, but "flaming grape" and "medieval cluster bombs" are rather unlikely!

A Hungarian cannon-maker named Urban offered his services to the last Byzantine Emperor Constantine IX just before the last siege of Constantinople but was turned away due to lack of funds. He consequentially turned to the Turkish sultan, Mehmet I, who gladly provided him with the monetary power to construct monsterous cannons for his assault on Constantinople. Ironically the very man Constantine turned away was used to construct weapons that blew large chunks out of the Theodosian walls just a few months later. So gunpowder was certainly available to the Byzantines before their fall, although this is reflected ingame by the Byzantines getting the basic 'bombard cannon'.

Also the Byzantines themselves also possessed cannons on their walls; we know this through contemporary sources and illustrations of the siege. Handgunners were also present on the defenders' side during the siege, although admittedly most of these were Italian and few of these troops were native Greeks. However this is also reflected through their access to gunpowder mercenaries.

I find little to no problem with the Byzantines having no access to powerful gunpower units; it makes them a more unique faction and forces the Byzantine player to utilise his factions strengths (particularly in horse archers and cavalry) to overcome its weakness in gunpowder.