What the h3ll is the deal with Buraidah?

**adam4000000** · January 18, 2008, 07:05 AM

Why can't I go to Buraidah? (in the province of the Arabian desert) Why is there a city there without a garrison? Why can't I lead my troops there?

I've planned on building an Arabian empire, but without this huge portion of the map, I can't!

**Slash5** · January 18, 2008, 07:16 AM

There's 4 unconquerable regions. I guess they did it because they had to fill the areas but made them inaccessible for gameplay etc.

**Manco** · January 18, 2008, 07:19 AM

There are three cities you can't conquer,and that's one of them. It's probably for gameplay reasons, for example conquering ONE city and controlling the entire desert is just wrong and the region is too inhospitable to merit more settlements I think.
Or maybe there are hidden resources and stuff for the script, like it was in EB?

edit:are there 4?

**Slash5** · January 18, 2008, 07:26 AM

Tibet, Arabian desert, the place west of Egypt and west of Khwarezm.

**Manco** · January 18, 2008, 07:29 AM

AH,I was already wondering why the Khwarezm didn't seem to conquer that settlement. I wonder why that one is inaccessible, it can hardly be because of gameplay reasons

**spooksman** · January 18, 2008, 07:44 AM

LOl now I know, I was preparing to take that town with a full stack cutting across the desert, intending to use it as a base to launch attacks on Medina and Mecca (I mean, what kind of a respectable Abbasid Caliph will I be yet don't have control over two of the holiest cities in Islam?)....

But yeah, now I've to track ALL the way around the Arabian Peninsula. Oman will unfortunately have to pay dearly for this unforeseen setback in my grand plans for the Muslim world...

**Slash5** · January 18, 2008, 07:45 AM

It seems like a pretty insignificant area, and they might have done it to keep the khwarezm and kychaks away from each other.

**billydilly** · January 18, 2008, 08:26 AM

Ahh! So that's why I can't find the city in the desert - my spy has circled the entire region twice.

**GrandViZ** · January 18, 2008, 08:34 AM

The last one (near the Khwarezm) is not intended, and will be fixed.

**_TheChevalier_** · January 18, 2008, 08:44 AM

Originally Posted by Slash5

Tibet, Arabian desert, the place west of Egypt and west of Khwarezm.

The settlement west of Egypt, which is Siwa Oasis, can be conquered, just follow the path from the fishing village.

**mastaace** · January 18, 2008, 09:03 AM

as for the arabian desert, i guess the unconquerability should simulate that it is impossible to lead an army through the arabian desert, which appears to be one of the most hostile deserts of the world, if not THE most. Also, as for the other regions mentioned, they could not get under a single control, as there are much different tribes, mostly unreachable somewhere in the boondocks.
espacially for arabia: why to control a region where really quite nobody lives and where nothing is (except oil, but i guess the people of back then did not have any use for it)?

**kabeast** · January 18, 2008, 04:07 PM

They didn't even know that there was oil in the ME until mid 20th century anyway.

**~~Miraj~~** · January 18, 2008, 04:16 PM

Why should the centre of Arabia be conquered? It shouldn't, its far too inhospitable and sparse.

These uncrossable and unconquerable regions are there for a strategic reason. Arabia is a giant loop. From the Sinai all the way around syria and Iraq, down to Oman, west to Yemen and then back up to the Sinai.

That province will always be a giant blocked zone you have to go around. Won't be changed ever.