View Poll Results: Weakest Faction?

Voters
145. You may not vote on this poll
  • Kingdom of Jerusalem

    7 4.83%
  • Eastern Roman Empire

    9 6.21%
  • Ayyubid Sultanate

    3 2.07%
  • Turkish Sultanate

    13 8.97%
  • Kingdom of Armenia

    7 4.83%
  • Kingdom of Makuria

    40 27.59%
  • Kypchak Confederacy

    7 4.83%
  • Kingdom of Georgia

    4 2.76%
  • Abbasid Caliphate

    2 1.38%
  • Imamate of Oman

    42 28.97%
  • Khwaresm Shah

    6 4.14%
  • Great Seljuks

    11 7.59%
  • Sultanate of Ghazni

    6 4.14%
  • Ghorid Sultanate

    3 2.07%
  • Malikate of Sindh

    37 25.52%
  • Solanki Rajputs

    16 11.03%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4
Results 61 to 77 of 77

Thread: WEAKEST FACTION IN BC

  1. #61
    Julio85's Avatar Signifer
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Torino, Italy
    Posts
    202
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: WEAKEST FACTION IN BC

    Quote Originally Posted by nein View Post
    malikate of sindh, dangerous position and the worst units of any faction. They make the makurians look like a powerhouse in comparison... those guys really need some medium infantry and archers

    the abbasids are easy! You can turn Baghdad into the wealthiest region in the game... 20k plus easy. They have a wide array of troop types and no other faction initially threatens them.

    honorary mention goes to the khwarezmshahs, tough rebel garrisons... poor economy... unhappy regions... the ghurids... the mongols... poor unit selection (everything is expensive so garrisoning regions effectively is frustrating - they really need some cheap levy units)
    khwarezmshahs maybe need a highe source of Income

    Abbasid seems powerfull but not as much as Egypt they have to be the same level of income...

  2. #62
    zburanuki's Avatar Hastatas Posterior
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Athens, Greece
    Posts
    963
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: WEAKEST FACTION IN BC

    i voted for makuria because they are neighboured with the ayyubids and don't have elite units, so in the early game you may have difficult time. BUT the toughest are the khwarezmshahs as in late game you are screwede due to the mongols and the seljuk or abbasid expansion, not to mention the expensive units. in the curent version nevertheless you can ally with the ghurids.
    Last edited by zburanuki; December 19, 2012 at 05:13 PM.

  3. #63
    Byzantineboy's Avatar Aquilifer
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    327
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: WEAKEST FACTION IN BC

    - according to me - Kwarezmshah has to be played by player or to be destroying by mongol

    Because in fact, Mongols took Baghdad and Damas, and it's very funny to see mongols hordes attacking everybody

  4. #64
    Princeps
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    1,156
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: WEAKEST FACTION IN BC

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

    learned some interesting stuff here... the mongol connection to christianity for one. I knew they disliked muslims but had no idea some of their royalty were actually christian. Also the conquest of damascus, where he entered the city with a variety of christian allies including bohemund. I also thought that the mameluks defeated him... apparently I was wrong. Hulagu departed with most of his forces after the khan died, the mameluks actually defeated kitabuga and the small amount of soldiers hulagu left behind. Also the crusaders played a large role in this defeat, allowing the mameluks to pass through their territories. They distrusted the mongols more than the mameluks strangely enough... despite hulagus strong pro-christian stance


  5. #65
    Byzantineboy's Avatar Aquilifer
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    327
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: WEAKEST FACTION IN BC

    In fact Kitbuqa son was killed/assassinated by a frank crusader...
    Naimans and Keraits were nestorian-christian.

  6. #66
    matmohair1's Avatar Pili Prior
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Abu Dhabi - UAE
    Posts
    2,141
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: WEAKEST FACTION IN BC

    wow...did any one notice yet...
    Makuria, Oman & Sindh got most of the votes
    & they're all on the Tropic of Cancer - l0l!


  7. #67
    Princeps
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    1,156
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: WEAKEST FACTION IN BC

    >In fact Kitbuqa son was killed/assassinated by a frank crusader...

    >Makuria, Oman & Sindh got most of the votes
    & they're all on the Tropic of Cancer

    I smell a conspiracy, somehow these facts gel together I know it


  8. #68
    Mamertine's Avatar Cornicularius
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    The Dale of Scott
    Posts
    280
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: WEAKEST FACTION IN BC

    I know I will get flak for this, but I don't care. Rome.

    Reason being smaller factions like Oman and Makuria are supposed to be small and weaker. They are probably over powered from a realistic standpoint, but this is a game.

    Rome, if they recovered half of Anatolia should have the population to make huge armies and the grassland for a lot of horses, same goes for the Seljuks.

    The Ayyubids are the strongest faction, imo and rightly so. Not all factions should be all powerful.

    So it's more a question of who was strong but made weaker in the game than they should be, not who is the weakest overall, imo.
    Last edited by Mamertine; December 24, 2012 at 01:58 PM.

  9. #69
    ΔriŽl's Avatar Princeps Prior
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Ponce, (Colony) of Puerto Rico
    Posts
    1,314
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: WEAKEST FACTION IN BC

    I Will Say Oman.

  10. #70
    hameem123's Avatar Cornicularius
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    ...
    Posts
    266
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: WEAKEST FACTION IN BC

    Quote Originally Posted by nein View Post
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hulagu_Khan

    learned some interesting stuff here... the mongol connection to christianity for one. I knew they disliked muslims but had no idea some of their royalty were actually christian. Also the conquest of damascus, where he entered the city with a variety of christian allies including bohemund. I also thought that the mameluks defeated him... apparently I was wrong. Hulagu departed with most of his forces after the khan died, the mameluks actually defeated kitabuga and the small amount of soldiers hulagu left behind. Also the crusaders played a large role in this defeat, allowing the mameluks to pass through their territories. They distrusted the mongols more than the mameluks strangely enough... despite hulagus strong pro-christian stance
    many Khans have mix views,attitude and tolerance,the earlier Khans hate both Muslims and Christians while some only hate Christians and some also hate Muslims,there have been Khans who converted to Christianity but most of the late Khans converted to Islam,forgot the name of the Khan but i think his kingdom is from Southern Russia like the place where Kypchack Confederacy is,if you look at the many late Khans portrait and paintings most of it is in Persian or Arabic text and they are portrayed wearing Turkish,Arabic,Persian clothes rather than their traditional Mongolian clothes,but most in Arabic ones (due to its practical to wear such local clothes for weather protection),one more thing to add is whenever Khans conquer a area they always administer mainly Turkish or Muslims as rulers of a certain area acting like "Mayors" and i think the reason for this is because Muslims govern with justice and prohibits civil disobedience and its factors (alcohol,prostitution,interests,credits,etc.) its a long story. (sorry for my confusing post because i don't know how to write in formal sentence or paragraph form.)

  11. #71
    Ichon's Avatar Centurio Primus Ordine
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    7,939
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: WEAKEST FACTION IN BC

    Not sure if map position is included or strictly roster? If map position then Makuria, if roster then probably Kypchak or Sindh. I don't know why people think Oman, they might not have elite but numerous and cost effective middle tier which is bulk of my armies anyway and the BG are elite enough. Oman map position is pretty strong as well to me and its economy can boom by the time it face much enemies.

    Kypchak should have more diverse roster- in history they have men from Kypchak, Cumans, Rus, Scandinavians, Slavs, Poles, Prussian, Bulgars, Greeks, other Turks, Alans, Caucuses hillmen, etc.

    Sindh also feel weak- not sure if it is intentional due to economy ability to pump out massive armies so keep them weak for balance or some other reasons. Factions on map edge are difficult to balance especially AI as it has no pressure on multiple fronts.
    Last edited by Ichon; December 26, 2012 at 01:30 AM.

  12. #72
    Ansar Warrior's Avatar Cornicularius
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    252
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: WEAKEST FACTION IN BC

    One Unit which is way over strengthen'd imo are the Ayyubbids Thaqlah axe men.

    I don't know any history behind this unit but you can out number them, charge them (cavalry), shoot with arrows and they hardly die?

    Tabardaryia I'd understand as their Mamluks but don't know why these other guy's are so durable?

  13. #73
    lekseus's Avatar Signifer
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Russia, South Urals
    Posts
    203
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: WEAKEST FACTION IN BC

    Quote Originally Posted by Ansar Warrior View Post
    One Unit which is way over strengthen'd imo are the Ayyubbids Thaqlah axe men.

    I don't know any history behind this unit but you can out number them, charge them (cavalry), shoot with arrows and they hardly die?

    Tabardaryia I'd understand as their Mamluks but don't know why these other guy's are so durable?
    Install RC\RR balance and they will be ok

  14. #74
    Ansar Warrior's Avatar Cornicularius
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    252
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: WEAKEST FACTION IN BC

    Quote Originally Posted by lekseus View Post
    Install RC\RR balance and they will be ok
    Oh, and the rest please explain what else it will adjust?

    I'm very wary of adding mods, all I use is the AOR mod.

  15. #75
    gamegeek2's Avatar Sōkō yumi
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Posts
    828
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: WEAKEST FACTION IN BC

    Quote Originally Posted by Ansar Warrior View Post
    One Unit which is way over strengthen'd imo are the Ayyubbids Thaqlah axe men.

    I don't know any history behind this unit but you can out number them, charge them (cavalry), shoot with arrows and they hardly die?

    Tabardaryia I'd understand as their Mamluks but don't know why these other guy's are so durable?
    Look at how much armor those Thaqlah guys are wearing. Considering how much they are wearing, I'd say arrows do too much to them in vanilla BC 2.3.2. The lamellar leather armor is basically impenetrable by arrows, especially considering that it's reinforced by chain, which can only be penetrated if it is hit head-on (chain mail deflects arrows if they hit at angles). They seem to have good padding on their thighs, which would suggest that this could absorb arrows. This leaves the legs/feet/hands as the only unprotected areas on their body, and these are the least likely areas to be hit by volleys of arrows.

    I have no idea if this unit is historical but based on its equipment your experience sounds reasonable.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mamertine
    Rome, if they recovered half of Anatolia should have the population to make huge armies and the grassland for a lot of horses, same goes for the Seljuks.
    Byzantium had massive manpower problems even when they controlled almost all of Anatolia, that's why they developed the theme system in the 9th century to ensure a good supply of ever-prepared semi-professional soldiers; they were able to field a good number of these in times of need, certainly many more than their opponents could, but their armies were far from massive.
    Last edited by gamegeek2; January 06, 2013 at 03:33 PM.

  16. #76
    Mamertine's Avatar Cornicularius
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    The Dale of Scott
    Posts
    280
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: WEAKEST FACTION IN BC

    Quote Originally Posted by gamegeek2 View Post
    Byzantium had massive manpower problems even when they controlled almost all of Anatolia, that's why they developed the theme system in the 9th century to ensure a good supply of ever-prepared semi-professional soldiers; they were able to field a good number of these in times of need, certainly many more than their opponents could, but their armies were far from massive.

    Not quite. The Theme system was put in place a few hundred years prior, late 6th century or early/mid-seventh century, it's debatable. The whole concept of the Theme system was to harness the massive manpower in Anatolia, which was the main population of Rome 60-70% or more, depending on the century and losses in the Balkans, Italy, Syria, etc. Look at the population of modern day Turkey and Greece, it's not a science, but it should give you a good idea of the difference.

    The Theme system in the 9th century was it's pinnacle (Basil II), as well as the mid-late 8th century (Nikephoros II and John I Tzimiskes). There's a reason why this was considered the Byzantine golden age.

    I have never heard of the Byzantines having manpower issues during the Theme system until the civil wars/battle of Manzikurt and the subsequent loss of Anatolia. This created a huge issue for dealing with cavalry losses, too. Look at a topographic map, Anatolia is a huge plateau in the middle which is ideal for grazing horses. Greece is all arid and mountainous, with the exception of Thessaly. This is why only Thessalian cavalry was popular in Greece going back to the Bronze age; no other Greek polis had the proper land to produce enough horses for effective cavalry.

    The loss of Anatolia was the loss of Byzantine's major recruiting ranks. It's no coincidence that the army was mostly mercenaries after losing most of the peninsula.

    If Rome regained Anatolia, they should be able to produce huge Thematic armies like they in the golden age, and prior.

    Byzantine Manpower:

    565 AD - 150,000 (pre-Theme)
    668 AD - 109,000 (Arab Wars)
    840 AD - 120,000 (Golden Age)
    1025 AD - 250,000 (pre-Mankikurt)
    1081 AD - 20,000 (post-Manzikurt)
    1453 AD - 1,500 (Fall of the Empire)

    Source: Treadgold, Warren T. (1997). A History of the Byzantine State and Society. Stanford University Press.

    Conclusion: Rome did not have manpower issues until they lost Anatolia. The Theme system was put into place to harness the huge Anatolian population so Rome could defend it's borders against the ever-encroaching enemies like the Arabs, Turks, Rus, Bulgars, Slavs, Huns, etc.
    Last edited by Mamertine; January 11, 2013 at 06:57 PM.

  17. #77
    Latchman's Avatar Ikko-Ikki
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Sker
    Posts
    26
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: WEAKEST FACTION IN BC

    Man, I don't know what you guys are talking about, I was a serious powerhouse when I played Oman. The economy is great, especially if you control both sides of the Gulf of Oman and play nice with the right people.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •