AUH: Official Q&A and FAQ

[bigjon83]

Hey guys, just wanted to voice my support for AUH. I'm really looking forward to this mod- it's great to see Med 2 applied to an Asian setting. Keep up the good work guys!

[Metatron33]

I have a question.

Will the hotseat community be able to enjoy this mod?
or will be to over scripted to be a able to hotseat on?
Thank you for your time.

[Meng]

Hey iam wondering if this mod will have an AOR where you can only recruit specific units from different regions, like Broken Crescent ? Lets imagine i take Taira clan and i take the Philippines, will i get filippinos units or japanese ?

[Spike]

Hey iam wondering if this mod will have an AOR where you can only recruit specific units from different regions, like Broken Crescent ? Lets imagine i take Taira clan and i take the Philippines, will i get filippinos units or japanese ?

an open beta version of south east asian mod are allready released BTW...

[Meng]

You mean your Nusantara mod ? I know this one, but i would prefer in medieval 2 total war and i just ask if there will be an area of recrutement like BC does

[Ixor_Drakar]

Loving everything that you have done and plan to do. I was just wondering how you will be presenting the navy in the game. I know china had massive river fleets with veritable floating fortresses. And with your navigable rivers it makes for plenty of space for naval battles on them.

[TheBohemian]

Will it be possible to pit AUH factions against European or Islamic factions from Medieval II in a custom battle? I imagine it may be difficult to achieve competitive balance (how does a Chivalric Knight match up against Bei Wei Cavalry?... or ZhanMaDao against a Jaguar Warrior?), but I would love to see it.

[medievaldude]

One question for the team. How do you like your work so far? i mean i love clearly but i would like to hear your thoughts too .

P.S
Dai viet Faction thread really Dead agree?

[abcx10]

will korea be in this mod i would love to play as my "home" country,sorry if this was asked all ready.

[hippacrocafish]

will korea be in this mod i would love to play as my "home" country,sorry if this was asked all ready.

If my memory serves me correctly (Which it might not ) I think there are actually two Korean factions, Goryeo (sp?) is one of them.

[abcx10]

If my memory serves me correctly (Which it might not ) I think there are actually two Korean factions, Goryeo (sp?) is one of them.

thx i think i all ready know the other one but i won't say it

[Vasterion]

To the mod team;

I'd like to offer my services as a coder for traits and ancillaries, to try and help speed the mod along. And, if it would help, I'm beginning to learn the coding of the edu - attempting to put across realistic units while being balanced for the AI versus AI and Player versus AI. I'd like to try an help with unit design, but I've never done anything with it, and don't want to waste time in someone having to correct my mistakes.

THanks for your time

[brennas]

Will there be different types of government? (as in Europa Barbarorum)
and settlement titles for the FM?

[bleach]

Why is there no faction in the Philippines, were they just savages at this point or what?

[nhinhonhinho]

1. The distant from Philippines to mainland are too great
2. Minimum contact between Philippines with the mainland
3. They tried to go West instead of East sea.

[hshg]

Hello.Is there anything I could do to see this mod finished,considering that I have absolutely no prior modding,skinning,modeling etc. experience?

[TheBohemian]

Yelu, I have a question about this very issue. One the one hand, some books I've read (e.g. Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World by Jack Weatherford) gives the impression that the Mongols abhorred close combat/melee and used horse-archery almost exclusively. On the other hand, it seems to me impossible to be as successful at the siege as they were, and in throttling heavy foes like the Teutonic Knights, without resorting to melee, at the very least to finish off an exhausted opponent. In any case, those Mongol armies full of "lancers" in MTW2 seem pretty off-base. So my question is: how were the Mongol armies put together and how did they operate? My guess is that they were dominated by light horse archers with only a handful of units of horsemen capable of delivering a charge or tangling with a knight/mamluk. And their siege prowess was a result of employing Chinese and Persian siege engineers after conquering the Jin Dynasty and Khwarizm.

[TheBohemian]

Another point. A lot is made in the Song Dynasty preview about the fact that the Chinese employed their siege technology defensively, as opposed to the offensive-, fortification-taking deployment of Western siege weapons. I wonder if this is merely a Euro-centric view, since our knowledge of the Song is based largely on their interaction with the Mongols, and in this interaction they were on the defensive? Surely the (pre-Yuan) Chinese attempts to take Dai Viet involved siege warfare?

Also, I find it strange that medieval Japan had castles and no siege warfare. In Shogun Total War, castles merely provided a choke point, a doorway to defend. Didn't they think to close the door?

[Marcion]

Yelu, I have a question about this very issue. One the one hand, some books I've read (e.g. Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World by Jack Weatherford) gives the impression that the Mongols abhorred close combat/melee and used horse-archery almost exclusively. On the other hand, it seems to me impossible to be as successful at the siege as they were, and in throttling heavy foes like the Teutonic Knights, without resorting to melee, at the very least to finish off an exhausted opponent. In any case, those Mongol armies full of "lancers" in MTW2 seem pretty off-base. So my question is: how were the Mongol armies put together and how did they operate? My guess is that they were dominated by light horse archers with only a handful of units of horsemen capable of delivering a charge or tangling with a knight/mamluk. And their siege prowess was a result of employing Chinese and Persian siege engineers after conquering the Jin Dynasty and Khwarizm.

While the Mongols are best known for being cavalry archers, that doesn't mean that's all they did. I don't know where that guy did his research. Their fundamental strategy was to lure their opponents into vulnerable positions using light archer skirmishers, and then after reducing, misleading, and exhausting them, charging home for the kill. They did have heavy lancers for this (the ones in MTW2 aren't entirely off base), but their common soldiers usually carried sabers and other melee weapons too, "His offense weapons consist of two bows and two quivers, a curved saber, a hatchet and an iron mace suspended from his saddle, a lance furnished with a hook for unseating enemy horsemen, and horsehair rope with a riding noose." (Grousset) They had no reservations about using any of those, since they were an essential part of their strategy.

I'm not sure what siege warfare has to do with what you're saying, but drawn out sieges of fortified settlements weren't something they were prepared for at first (see Genghis Khan's semi-disastrous campaign against the Xi Xia). Usually they would just destroy as much of the countryside and small towns as they could until the defenders sued for peace. It was usually Chinese engineers and weapons that were responsible for their later siege conquests.

Another point. A lot is made in the Song Dynasty preview about the fact that the Chinese employed their siege technology defensively, as opposed to the offensive-, fortification-taking deployment of Western siege weapons. I wonder if this is merely a Euro-centric view, since our knowledge of the Song is based largely on their interaction with the Mongols, and in this interaction they were on the defensive? Surely the (pre-Yuan) Chinese attempts to take Dai Viet involved siege warfare?

The Chinese in general were never particularly expansionist, so sieges of "foreign" enemies weren't that common. But they did happen in the numerous cases of rebellion within their own borders. But not so with the Dai Viet, their strategy was then (as it was in recent times) to withdraw into the jungle and fight a guerrilla war.

[DragonFly]

The Chinese in general were never particularly expansionist, so sieges of "foreign" enemies weren't that common. But they did happen in the numerous cases of rebellion within their own borders. But not so with the Dai Viet, their strategy was then (as it was in recent times) to withdraw into the jungle and fight a guerrilla war.

Hey, where did you see that thing? Maybe you mistake with Viet Cong fighters
Dai Viet from 11th Century to 19th Century had never fight guerrilla wars.
There were only a small number of highlanders, village militias fought by guerrilla tactic to protect their villages, they fought completely different, independent from the main army, of course they had no contact with the main army, and do not change the result.

Historical evidence:
1. They totally destroyed Southern Han's fleet by battle of Bạch Đằng river.
2. First time against Song, they won by defend Bình Lỗ fortress successfully.
3. Second times against Song, they won by defend Như Nguyệt rampart successfully.
4. 3 times against Mongol, they won by a lot of face-to-face battles (Thăng Long, Vạn Kiếp, Hàm Tử, Chương Dương, Tây Kết, Bạch Đằng...)
5. The war against Ming, they won by a lot of face-to-face battles too (Tốt Động - Chúc Động, Chi Lăng - Xương Giang)
6. The naval battle with V.O.C is a crushing defeated of Dutch's fleet.
7. They defeated Siamese by great battle of Rạch Gầm - Xoài Mút.
8. The war against Qing, they won by battle of Hà Hồi, Ngọc Hồi fortress.
9. Lastly, they invaded Champa, Cambodia, Laos, and ... (I don't want to say) of course not by guerrilla wars

---
And you must admit that both Chinese and Viets were particularly expansionist We need the truth, buddy