Playing as a Muslim Faction

**caravel** · 03-29-2009, 02:12

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** · 03-29-2009, 02:18

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** · 03-29-2009, 20:08

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** · 03-29-2009, 22:16

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.

**Roark** · 03-30-2009, 01:53

Originally Posted by Caravel

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** · 03-30-2009, 08:34

Originally Posted by Roark

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** · 03-30-2009, 18:20

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** · 03-30-2009, 22:16

Originally Posted by 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

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** · 03-31-2009, 09:58

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** · 03-31-2009, 14:06

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?