Playing as a Muslim Faction

[gollum]

Hello Bondovic,
thats exactly right, imagination - you name it, they (JA) do it; when your melee line is faltering they plug the gap, when the enemy line is faltering they give it a push to tip it over, when your general is fighting a vicious cavalry melee with some nasty knights/HC they flank the enemy and give him a breather, when the two sides are exhasted they sit a top a hill fresh and claim victory by a glorious downhil charge to the enemy tired and depleted infantry, when enemy slow heavy infantry is caught between them they shoot it before ambushing it (with the aid of TH or BGs), when conditions allow they do the occasional flanking and more according to the situation.

Your arguments about +2 valor on TF sound persuasive.

For my part i play a home-mod of vanilla that takes out all province valor bonuses, all armor bonuses all weapon bonuses and all morale bonuses so added valor isnt a factor. But thats just me.

You are right that JI make JA redundant when they appear in vanilla. Theoretically however you can tech up faster to JA and JHI that take the master bowyer and spearmaker that usually are built anyway. The JI need the full swordsmith building line too that takes a lot of time, is expensive and relatively useless for the Turks (other than for Futuwas that i am not particularly fond of due to their abominal defence). So you can stick with JAs and JHI combo as i do - just another way to combine the janissary units.

[caravel]

(other than for Futuwas that I am not particularly fond of due to their abominal defence).

On the other hand I love Futuwwa, but they have to be combined with Saracens and TF. I've lost count of how many times Futuwwa units have saved the day with a timely flank charge. Unlike Ghazi infantry Futuwwa have a bow which makes them much more useful. I also find a use for Ottoman Infantry believe it or not.

[gollum]

I love Ottoman infantry too. Not only they are easily available and cheap - but they have an armor piercing attack - the perfect cheap hybrid for late. The reason i dislike Futuwas is the same reason i dislike Nizaris - they take a lot of casualties from missiles and in the melee. They win you battles but you need a new stack to continue the campaign. However as the Egyptians there is no alternative - but not to worry, the Egyptians can train arbalasters

[caravel]

Futuwwa often charge without orders, as with Ghazi, and this can be quite devastating. I totally agree with your criticisms of them, i.e. their poor defence etc, but I enjoy trying to utilise units that have specific strengths and weaknesses. The trick with Futuwwa is to deploy them so that rhe enemy are focusing their missile fire on your better armoured units (Saracens and Turcoman foot). So the Futuwwa should be bringing up the rear.

The big difference between JA and these others is the elite status. This means you won't see them running along with the non elite units. IIRC there is no other elite pure missile foot unit?

Nizari are like souped up Ghazi with bows - minus the AP bonus. The problem there is the defence, as with Ghazi it's extremely poor. Even Futtuwa have better defence, which makes them more useful if they get stuck in melee.

[gollum]

Indeed. Futuwas are the archetypical flanker unit, fast, lightly armored, with great attack, good morale and low defence. They are good for hammering anviled battle lines as you say, as well as taking advantage of high angles of attack by virtue of their high morale that enables them to travel away from the main army in smaller groups. The fact that they have bows, just makes them even more deadly and flexible.

[caravel]

I rate Futuwwa above Ottoman Infantry. OI have shocking morale and can let you down badly. Poor Morale is fine for a unit like TF, because you would only deploy them in Melee against broken or routing units anyway, but with those axes, OI are asking to be sent in as flankers - but their morale combined with their poor charge and morale stats, make them worse than Futuwwa IMHO.

And congratulations on your promotion to member AlexandersForlornHope.

[gollum]

Indeed - however the AP bonus shines if you include OI in stacks led by a good general. They also can be built more easily allowing to replenish stacks while advancing in enemy territory to complement xbows.

Congratulations AlexandersForlornHope.

[bondovic]

Hello Bondovic,
thats exactly right, imagination - you name it, they (JA) do it; when your melee line is faltering they plug the gap, when the enemy line is faltering they give it a push to tip it over, when your general is fighting a vicious cavalry melee with some nasty knights/HC they flank the enemy and give him a breather, when the two sides are exhasted they sit a top a hill fresh and claim victory by a glorious downhil charge to the enemy tired and depleted infantry, when enemy slow heavy infantry is caught between them they shoot it before ambushing it (with the aid of TH or BGs), when conditions allow they do the occasional flanking and more according to the situation.

All right, I suspected as much. Daddy is not convinced, however. Mainly because: out of the jobs you so eloquently describe there isn't really anything there that the TFS actually aren't better at. This is not only based on experience but also on actual numbers. The only task I'd choose JA over TFS for is flanking. This because of their slightly higher atk (I[!]IRC). Regarding gap-plugging I give the nod to the TFS because of their substantial edge in def over the JA.

I'd love to dwell further into this subject, but I really have to get on with RL. Stay tuned...

[gollum]

Big Mamma isnt convinced either Bondovic

Good luck with RL and return soon...

[Roark]

Nizari are like souped up Ghazi with bows - minus the AP bonus. The problem there is the defence, as with Ghazi it's extremely poor. Even Futtuwa have better defence, which makes them more useful if they get stuck in melee.

I think that, given the Nizaris' cost, high speed, charge and attack, it would be a crime to use them as anything BUT a shooting flanker.

No unit in the same class does it better, though.

[caravel]

I think that, given the Nizaris' cost, high speed, charge and attack, it would be a crime to use them as anything BUT a shooting flanker.

No unit in the same class does it better, though.

Exactly. Which is why they have been hamstringed defensively. If Nizari had decent defence, they're be extremely overpowered.

[gollum]

Well not extremely, they d be a kind of Warrior Monk (as they were) - units that are lightly armored can always be shot and resisted by high armor/defence units. But i agree - they are better as they are

[bondovic]

Well not extremely, they d be a kind of Warrior Monk (as they were) - units that are lightly armored can always be shot and resisted by high armor/defence units. But i agree - they are better as they are

The point is that if they were better defensively they'd be anti-line as well and you'd have to slap them with nothing but the elite of the elite of your roster. It's this dual role capability that would make them overpowered. If the intended use for them is shooting flankers you have to reflect the exaggerated attack stats of theirs with lower defensive ones. This makes them harder to use, but more streamlined for the intended role.

[gollum]

Well, given the multitude and toughness of cavalry in MTW i would prefer for foot flanker units like Futuwas and Nizaris to have been melee oriented units instead (even with smaller attack but higher defence). In order for them to flank safely you have to advance often a unit to protect them from counter-attack/charge from heavy cavalry (usually) enemy units and this is often risky as you might end up the covering unit and the flanker too if the enemy guards the flanks with enough numbers. Cavalry is much more suited to flanking in any case since they are faster and tougher. You get to do effective flankings with foot units only when you outnumber the enemy in units do they cannot cover all units you bring behind their line.

However as they are they still have a lot of uses - the only problem being that you cannot use them in large proportion as they take a lot of casualties from getting shot and meleeing as i mentioned elsewhere.

[PershsNhpios]

By the equestrian Poseidon!

I have a question!

Is it possible to play as either the Fatimids or Turks and maintain an alliance with your eastern muslim counterpart?
Is there a way to dissuade the AI from war with those of his own zeal?

Sometimes I have chosen the Turks or Fatimids with a view to locking shields with my good brethren and staving the French, swearing never to allow Antioch to turn a funny blue, red or yellow colour.
I have however always been bitterly disappointed.

Has anyone ever experienced a campaign with a Turko-Arabic alliance lasting longer than the rise or fall of Byzantium?

[gollum]

There is Mr Glenn;
go to your main MTW folder.

In there, in the campaign folder, you will find 3 txt files entitled EARLY, HIGH, LATE. Click the one you play, and scroll down. Once you found the AI faction personality column set the Turks/Egypts from MUSLIM_EXPANSIONIST to MUSLIM_PEACEFUL.

Then the Turks/Egypts will keep their part of the deal

[caravel]

Faith does not seem to have much bearing on alliances. It may seem that it does influence the forming of alliances because the Turks, Almohads and Egyptians all seems to ally early on - but this is probably down to proximity. If you look at the western catholic theatre there is plenty of inter faith conflict there, so I don't think faith has any bearing whatsoever.

-Edit: Yes changing the AI behaviour type will make factions more or less aggressive and alter other aspects of behaviour, but there is no rule that makes muslims side with muslims or choose the muslim ally in a conflict. Thre is only one way to ensure united muslim factions and that is to play as the Turks and conquer the other two.

[Roark]

Is it possible to play as either the Fatimids or Turks and maintain an alliance with your eastern muslim counterpart?
Is there a way to dissuade the AI from war with those of his own zeal?

- Form alliances with his allies.
- Don't go to war with his allies.
- Send a princess or high-valour emissary to seal the deal.
- Maintain good garrisons on your borders with him to discourage invasion.
- Don't hold any of his homelands or GA goals.
- Don't get too big.

Nothing is certain, though.

[Roark]

Whoops. Muslims don't have princesses.

The abovementioned points are good general guidelines, though.

Bottom line is, however, if you want to expand, you're gonna make some enemies along the way. Quite often you have little control over the making or breaking of alliances.

[nzd07]

The muslims control alot of land, but what I hate about them is that they have no decent troop that can easily be made.

For example:

Danes: Vikings, I'm pretty sure all you need is a fort
Byz: Byz infantry, all you need is a swordsmith.
Germans,Italians,English,French,Spanish (I'm missing a few): Feudal swordsman, swordsmith.

See what I mean, troops like these are what help me make large conquests, keep loyalty high, and control rebellions. Plus you don't have to spend extra florins and time on all of those buildings.

The only thing I like about the muslim factions are the Almohad urban militia or else I stay away from Muslim factions because I hate sitting around planning out my structures, I'm not very patient

[Knight of the Rose]

Egyptians:

Fort => Camels

That's all you need



More seriously - if you're too impatiant to build two structures to train units, then I cannot imagine you could finish a campaign.

Examples of good muslim troops:
Mosque + swordsmith: Gazi inf.
Spearmaker upgrade: Muhawid spearmen, saracen spearmen
Horse breeder in africa: saharan cav.
Swordsmith: Arab inf. is a inferior unit compared to catholic heavy inf. But muslim armies should be able to persevere using other methods, especially desert troops on defence or horse archers everywhere...

/KotR

[Roark]

The only thing I like about the muslim factions are the Almohad urban militia or else I stay away from Muslim factions because I hate sitting around planning out my structures, I'm not very patient

Try the Tyberius add-on for XL. It significantly reduces the time required to construct buildings.

[oz_wwjd]

Byz infantry are in my opinion sub-decent,they suffer from low morale,at least in my experience. I never use them in my field armies or as anything below a garrison as with the Tyberius add-on for XL, I have more opitions that I can rely on not to cause a mass chain rout at the most crucial time..