[EB MP]3.0 Thread - Testing and Updates

**Brave Brave Sir Robin** · 10-02-2011, 04:38

Originally Posted by gamegeek2

I have once again updated the EDU without the Saka, because I am frankly concerned about the power level of the Saka were I to stat them right now. I feel further testing is most definitely required before I complete the EDU with this very important faction.

UPDATED 10:52 PM

For Saka we could do something similar to the Romans and create two eras for them. A "steppe" era for lack of a better term and an Indo-Saka era in which they can recruit the Hellenistic units.
For the steppe era you would have access to only the steppe units such as almost all the cavalry and foot archers but none of the Indian or Hellenistic units. For the Indo-Saka era you would be able to recruit the new Greek and Indian units but there would be a limit on steppe units, maybe none of the Horse Archers since the nobility would either be in the Cataphract units or fighting on foot in the Royal Guard. Unlike Rome's eras, you would have to declare before the battle.

**Lazy O** · 10-02-2011, 05:51

Why would I have to declare before the battle? Utter nonsense.

**vartan** · 10-02-2011, 05:53

I've never thought of that, I think. About the eras I mean. Since Rome was the only one with era divisions in EBO, I didn't think it'd be important to make people declare. Only steppe declaration was significant in pre-3.0 period. Any particular reasoning behind making eras mandatory to declare?

**Lazy O** · 10-02-2011, 06:34

They are different factions folded into one?

---

Why is u not on hamachi

**TheShakAttack** · 10-02-2011, 11:41

Originally Posted by Brave Brave Sir Robin

For Saka we could do something similar to the Romans and create two eras for them. A "steppe" era for lack of a better term and an Indo-Saka era in which they can recruit the Hellenistic units.
For the steppe era you would have access to only the steppe units such as almost all the cavalry and foot archers but none of the Indian or Hellenistic units. For the Indo-Saka era you would be able to recruit the new Greek and Indian units but there would be a limit on steppe units, maybe none of the Horse Archers since the nobility would either be in the Cataphract units or fighting on foot in the Royal Guard. Unlike Rome's eras, you would have to declare before the battle.

Don't be such a silly billy!

**Lazy O** · 10-02-2011, 13:55

Yep. Or the saka and sauro will be back again with a 100% win record

**Brave Brave Sir Robin** · 10-02-2011, 14:51

I would say declare before battle because the two are radically different, unlike the Roman eras.

The only reason I brought this up is because Saka would be in line to receive discounts on cavalry units as a steppe faction, yet would get access to high quality infantry as well unlike Pahlava or Sauros. I thought of maybe making their infantry more expensive, but that is an impossibility since they share so many with Baktria and that would make Baktria unplayable. Me and Gamegeek had pondered how to "limit" the Saka a few days ago but this thought didn't cross my mind until now.

**vartan** · 10-02-2011, 18:54

Does sound good. Would there be overlaps in era 1 and era 2?

**TheShakAttack** · 10-02-2011, 23:55

I strongly disagree with this entire line of reasoning. Presumably the reason the declaration of era is necessary is because otherwise saka would be overpowered (OP). I think this is unnecessary, unfair and inconsistent.

I will be making a lot of comparisons with AS, and this is purely because they are the easiest faction to compare against.

First, lets look at the "high quality" infantry saka have access to. The contendors are:

Srenis (who cost 2.5k atm)- very expensive, not very highly armoured nor very spamable.
Hoplitai indohellenikoi - same as thueros minus the javelins. they costthe same despite this lack of jav.
Hoplitai indohellenikon - Realtively similar to hoplites but heavier. Just as crappy in offense, marginally better in defense.
Agema indohellenikon - Once again a variant of hoplites. Good infantry but very expensive (2.8 k) and fewer men.
Peltastai indohellenikoi - similar to peltastai but better melee. decent light infantry unit.
Noble hoplites- Very heavy hoplites but a 70 man unit.

One very obvious point is lack of any serious assault infantry (srenis are quite lightly armored for cost and very expensive). I acknowledge that cheaper cav would mean that expensive infantry is less of a problem, but still, srenis are quite expensive.

There are many factions that have rosters which are significantly superior to saka. They too have access to HAs and catas and a wider range of infantry, not to mention access to superior infantry and great cav. The most obvious example is AS.

Sauro is not terribly far off in terms of infantry. They have access to (upto 4) hoplites. The "good infantry" saka has are just variants of hoplites. Sauro is more diverse as it has access to fear inducing infantry (which are cheap) (slavic spearmen), germanic swordsmen who are pretty decent offensively, bosphorans, komatai, 2 diff kinds of axemen, and bastarnae. true a lot of these are mercs, but sauro has a higher merc allowance.

So whilst saka can play a good defensive infantry game, they are terrible in offensive infantry, and quite literally have no readily affordable "killers".

This is why I disagree that saka have an OP roster- just compare them to other rosters and you can see they do not really have any significant superiority that requires one to go out of their way to address it.

The second reason I disagree is because it is inconsistent. Various factions went through similar "transformations", pahlava being one, who do not have to declare anything. Pahlava get access to pandas, babylonian spearmen, parthian theros, which occured after they settled. The Gallic factions, Sweboz etc also experienced similar changes. AS historically did not start training catas until they came into contact with parthia. To apply it to a single faction smacks of unfairness.

The third reason is that Saka have a relatively small roster as it is. Splitting up Rome into different eras is acceptable due to how big their roster is- Saka, not so much.

The fourth reason is that during EB time period, Saka were pretty kickass. They were able to combine their cultural inheritance of horsemanship with the superior infantry and metalworks of the places they conquered. Very similar to how AS were able to make great use of Cav and eles available in Anatolia and further east with their inheritance of great infantry. If AS awesomeness is being portrayed in EB and EBO, why shouldn't saka?

Lastly, I note that there is truth to saka being able to make use of their cav discount and combine with their good quality defensive infantry. But why is this not acceptable? AS are able to make use of their fantastic infantry with catas, cheap light cav, and an incredibly diverse roster. Historically, where good quality cav was available, relatively cheap, and the terrain made them usable, civilisations tended to go cavalry heavy as they were very effective for both mobility and battle effectiveness. The Eastern Roman Empire became progressively cav heavier as their access to cav improved, and they began neglecting their infantry. Of course the truth is a great deal more complicated than what I have written above, but I think the above is an acceptable generalisation. The reason I brought up this example is simply to note: why should this not be reflected?

On a last note, steppe armies, whilst very annoying to play against, are not unbeateable. Esp with changes made to HA. The fact that they are hard to play against should not really be a reason to make changes like the one proposed. Of course, if they are unbeatable, then it is different and might be modified for gameplay reasons. I do not think this is the case. Further, steppe factions can always be countered with other steppe factions. I hope this doesnt sound rude, and it is certainly not aimed at any of the people who have already posted (except storm :P) but, lack of ability on the players part to counter steppe armies should not be a reason to shackle a faction (not that I am saying this is why; but I do think this is why steppe armies are highly unpopular with a lot of EBO players and therefore does influence matters).

I hope that is fairly clear. The main thrusts of my argument being saka infantry roster is not "all that" great, and very one-dimensional; that historicity should be reflected; that there are factions who enjoy privileges in EBO because of how powerful they were during EBO time period; and that other factions also went through similar "evolutions" who do not have to make such declarations.

PS. This has been written when I am not at my most sober, and written fairly rushed. Please let me know if anything is unclear and I will clarify :)