The Sultanate of Rûm (info and units)

[Alavaria]

The Crusader States have some fun stuff...

As far as I can remember, that depends on the units but not on the factions. If I'm right, that mean some specific units would need to be created for Rum only with the relevant parameters to favorise them in autoresolve. I'm not convinced by that.

Could make a hidden AI only bonus trait to generals and get it in that way I guess...

[Lifthrasir]

Do you, guys, realise that you're talking about changing the game mechanics without having made a single mention of an unit roster change proposal for Rum

[Jurand of Cracow]

You don't seem to realize the CS is already disadvantaged vs Muslim factions. With that kind of change, you're giving another bonus to the Muslim factions using horse archers and not only to Rum.
To keep it simple, you can't just consider Rum vs ERE but the whole gameplay and how any change affect it. Considering such kind of change faction by faction is a mistake from my opinion.

I trust you, Lifthrasir, and I do support your view.
I think there's an issue of ERE being too powerful at the begining of the game but this should be compensated in another way than buffing up the HA. The ERE had many problems on finances and loyalty of the nobles (yes, in 14th century more than in 12th, but still), so maybe this is a way to keep the balance.
Unfortunatelly, I have no much insight into the Rum roster, other than an experience from the Broken Crescent where I was fed up with the numerous HA units (7 types?) which didn't differ from one another and had misleding names. So the only opinion is not to take the BC example.

[Dekhatres]

Do you, guys, realise that you're talking about changing the game mechanics without having made a single mention of an unit roster change proposal for Rum

i guess to most ppl it's ok as it is

[Lifthrasir]

Well, people should make their mind once for all. They complain that the Muslim rosters were too similar and when they can make proposals, they stay silent.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Anyway, I won't talk about game mechanics, AI and other similar stuff here anymore as that's not the purpose of this thread

[Dekhatres]

Unfortunatelly, I have no much insight into the Rum roster, other than an experience from the Broken Crescent where I was fed up with the numerous HA units (7 types?) which didn't differ from one another and had misleding names. So the only opinion is not to take the BC example.

afaik rum did use truckloads of horse archers so BC is kinda right, not saying we need 7 types of archers in SSHIP too but still rum should have mostly horse archers in their armies not infantry


i would add (as i did to my SS6.4) 2 units of horse archers exclusive to rum, one medium and one light, that are aor, are more cost effective than all others and also can be spammed (high replenishment rate)

but then again horse archers are in autoresolve is idk if it will really work

[Alavaria]

afaik rum did use truckloads of horse archers so BC is kinda right, not saying we need 7 types of archers in SSHIP too but still rum should have mostly horse archers in their armies not infantry


i would add (as i did to my SS6.4) 2 units of horse archers exclusive to rum, one medium and one light, that are aor, are more cost effective than all others and also can be spammed (high replenishment rate)

but then again horse archers are in autoresolve is idk if it will really work

Currently, I think the faction AI will prefer to spam "foot fari archers" as in some cases they are even heavier than their actual infantry units. Also, starting with only cities puts them in an interesting position as well. If the preferred MO for their elite was the mounted archer then that's what they used guess (but the AI does seem to love the foot fari archer.


We would have to get into a bit of the mechanics if the question is the faction's ability to fight on the battlemap as opposed to autoresolve. The horsearcher focus is just fine for a player, if you're fighting AI Rum, they will likely suffer for it if you have some sort of infantry with shields that can just tank the arrows.

It does however provide an interesting difference from say fighting the heavy Byzantines or other factions that love heavy melee/charge cavalry, so I wouldn't say it's a bad difference if balanced on the more general AI-AI scenario.


When given the time etc, I've seen "muslim" AIs fill their roster with (dismounted) Christian guard, ghulams etc... or fari foot archers. Letting Rum's roster lean towards horse archers seems fine.

[Dekhatres]

at rum having only cities i see no problem, we can just allow them a few more units to be recruited in cities and slap a "hidden_resource turks" to them

i also now remembered when i played HBUR that as rum you could recruit ghazis in cities too and they were pretty decent melee units and it's also historical accurate

so basically what i think rum armies should be is

1 General
2-4 Melee Cavalry/Lancers
7-10 Horse Archers
3-5 Ghazis, Fari foot archers or other various infantry and mercenaries


i would take away ahdath militia, shurtah militia and replace them with ghazis which will have better stats

i think we can also change what units factions want to spam with recruit priority offset, though idk if it really works

[bigdaddy1204]

But then how will Turk player garrison his cities? Spear militia belong in all armies. Historical sources often focus on cavalry in Byzantine armies but that doesn't mean infantry didn't exist. Same for Rum armies. In my opinion the Anatolikoi hillmen unit from BC is a good idea, it's a local AOR unit available to both Byz and Turks. Armed with shield and axe they are useful light infantry for filling an army but will not defeat faction elite units.

For Rum i think making Ankara a fortress makes sense, there is no castle at the moment anywhere west of Caesare. Having a fortress there would allow Byz and Turks to create their elite units if they control it, it would make gameplay more strategic as holding it would be a key for both sides.

Rum roster should include powerful ghazi infantry, strong foot archers and javelins, spear levies, Anatolian hillmen, some elite infantry for storming cities and the rest at least 3 types of horse archer light, medium and heavy plus the same for lancers light medium and heavy. Would also be good to see Ghulams perhaps as their own building chain. In addition a local AOR cavalry unit like the Anatolikoi Eugenis from BC which is local nobles fighting for their lands. Also Persian and Arab volunteers could be interesting, maybe something like the BC diqan lancer, maybe in a mercenary or diplomacy building. In addition Greek converts and Rumi troops who fight for Turks; these native Greeks are recorded fighting for the Turks against John II Komnenos near lake pousgouse as they prefered Turk rule. In Angold's book about Byzantium 1025 to 1204.

[j.a.luna]

Completely agree with bigdaddy! Perfect definition of rum roster!
Also add new unit as anatolian hillmen and some new cavalry as AOR units is a great idea, furthemore of turkish archers and turkish javelinmen and mercenaries as armenians and alans(current sship)
Also if you convert ankara in a fortress, Kaiseri should be a fortress,not a citadel, due to that in a lot of games with rum, they usually conquest kaiseri and have access to ultimate units and magnific stronghold in anatolia...
So about this Lifth and MWY could guve their opinion and make some little change in the minimap( similar to georgian map)
And the proposal of rum roster of bigdaddy is fit for me, only need add some units of broken crescent and reestructure anatolian units

Edit: if i dont remember bad, ghazis units in current sship are with a little axe and shield
Also exist the azabs units as light spearmen and levies

[Dekhatres]

But then how will Turk player garrison his cities? Spear militia belong in all armies. Historical sources often focus on cavalry in Byzantine armies but that doesn't mean infantry didn't exist. Same for Rum armies. In my opinion the Anatolikoi hillmen unit from BC is a good idea, it's a local AOR unit available to both Byz and Turks. Armed with shield and axe they are useful light infantry for filling an army but will not defeat faction elite units.

For Rum i think making Ankara a fortress makes sense, there is no castle at the moment anywhere west of Caesare. Having a fortress there would allow Byz and Turks to create their elite units if they control it, it would make gameplay more strategic as holding it would be a key for both sides.

Rum roster should include powerful ghazi infantry, strong foot archers and javelins, spear levies, Anatolian hillmen, some elite infantry for storming cities and the rest at least 3 types of horse archer light, medium and heavy plus the same for lancers light medium and heavy. Would also be good to see Ghulams perhaps as their own building chain. In addition a local AOR cavalry unit like the Anatolikoi Eugenis from BC which is local nobles fighting for their lands. Also Persian and Arab volunteers could be interesting, maybe something like the BC diqan lancer, maybe in a mercenary or diplomacy building. In addition Greek converts and Rumi troops who fight for Turks; these native Greeks are recorded fighting for the Turks against John II Komnenos near lake pousgouse as they prefered Turk rule. In Angold's book about Byzantium 1025 to 1204.

spear militias have peasant attribute, losing them will make little diference in ability to garrison cities, meanwhile they would gain ghazis which would be far better


rum field armies were mostly infantry ? this is new to me

[bigdaddy1204]

There are some beautiful pictures of Rum armies, here:

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/sho...s-amp-Pictures

[Lifthrasir]

rum field armies were mostly infantry ? this is new to me

I don't think that is the meaning of bigdaddy's post. Of course, Seljuks of Anatolia had their military power based on horse archers. That's granted. What bigdaddy is pointing is that they must have some infantry beside (even if limited) to hold the enemy and let the horse archers do their job
Anyway, I need to check his proposal/list.

Regarding the "is_peasant" attribute, JoC has mentioned an interesting point in the thread for Georgia (here).

[Alavaria]

But then how will Turk player garrison his cities? Spear militia belong in all armies. Historical sources often focus on cavalry in Byzantine armies but that doesn't mean infantry didn't exist. Same for Rum armies.

This is an interesting point. SSHIP Byzantines (and heavy cavalry in general) are not as insane as in unmodified Stainless Steel. Anyway, the Byzantines have what I think might be the best spear unit, what with being heavier than any other, and having a larger size (equivalent to unit of peasants or urban spear milita, rather than most spear units). They have good swordsmen unit too.

That's what really the option I would end up wanting to abuse the most, less so their rather large list of somewhat similarish heavy cavalry with lances. It would be surprising if they didn't have something similar to a spear militia-type unit, and using "Spear Militia" or functionally/practically identical "Turkish Spear Militia" or "(Translated into turkish) Spear Militia" isn't really critical...

I have noticed many "muslim" factions rosters have very light spearmen offerings (not unlike spear militia basically) and what heavier ones they have are not as heavy as european ones but tend to be amazingly expensive as well. (They would benefit a lot from farming the european "Mercenary Spearmen" pools)

[j.a.luna]

About bigdaddy list is a good proposal, including other AOR unit as light infantry as ''anatolian hillmen'' and maybe other cavalry...is clearly that ghazis troops, azabs and tribal warrior( warrior of begs, horsearchers) should be for turks...you can obtain references from Broken Crescent mod
Regardind spearmen for turks and muslims, they already have ''shurta militia'' as spearmen militia and ''andhat militia'' as spearmen sergeants but i think that this units should be reviseda and have similar stats and prices as europeans
Regardind make a ''muslim mercenary spearmen'' is a good idea, always is good hire mercenaries spearmen for your armies in campaign, and muslims factions and their regions lack of this,...some similar is ''mutatawi warrior'' in current sship, a muslim spearmen unit only recruitable for muslims in jihads...

Edit: furthemore of make a muslim or oriental mercenary spearmen, could be make other unit called oriental/muslim mercenary crossbowmen, for equal units and mercenaries respect europeans, also muslims used a lot of crossbowmen in battles( of course, in Andalucia,Spain), this muslim mercenaries units would be in the middle east regions and north Africa for all muslims factions and of course for europeans,bizantines or others that would be in these regions( Anatolia, Persia, Levant, North Africa, Egypt...)

[Jurand of Cracow]

But then how will Turk player garrison his cities? Spear militia belong in all armies. Historical sources often focus on cavalry in Byzantine armies but that doesn't mean infantry didn't exist. Same for Rum armies. In my opinion the Anatolikoi hillmen unit from BC is a good idea, it's a local AOR unit available to both Byz and Turks.

Yes, indeed this is a good point: the lack of historical evidence on the low-tire units does not prove that they didn't exist. This is mainly because the sources are skewed by the class / power reasons. The writers or the painters were paid by the rich lords and had every reason to present only the troops that were elites or kind of parade units. Nobody care for the common units making the most of the troops. (this insight makes me also a bit sceptical about the recently proposed Georgian roster - while it may be true to the sources, it pays no attention that the sources are biased).

For Rum i think making Ankara a fortress makes sense, there is no castle at the moment anywhere west of Caesare. Having a fortress there would allow Byz and Turks to create their elite units if they control it, it would make gameplay more strategic as holding it would be a key for both sides.

While I've got no firm position on the issue, I'd like just to remind that for the gameplay reasons it's better to have not highest-tire settlements on the map at the beginning. Let make the player happy to develop them on his own! If we make Ankara a castle, then make it a castle, not a fortress. (this is a similar argument I'm making on Georgia starting settlements - if everything is at it's best, why to develop the faction).

I think j.a.luna makes also a good point that we need to take into account what's happening in the first few turns in the game. If we expect the Turks to take Kayseri then Ankara might stay a castle?

Besides, I think the EBII is doing really a good job disconnecting the nomads' recruitment capabilities from the size of settlements through the camp system. This makes possible those nomad factions to field strong horse armies (which they had) but then don't make them economic powerhouses (which they weren't).

Currently, I think the faction AI will prefer to spam "foot fari archers" as in some cases they are even heavier than their actual infantry units. Also, starting with only cities puts them in an interesting position as well. If the preferred MO for their elite was the mounted archer then that's what they used guess (but the AI does seem to love the foot fari archer.

This is very valuable point, I think this is the kind of info we need to gather: how the game evolves.

About bigdaddy list is a good proposal, including other AOR unit as light infantry as ''anatolian hillmen'' and maybe other cavalry...is clearly that ghazis troops, azabs and tribal warrior( warrior of begs, horsearchers) should be for turks...you can obtain references from Broken Crescent mod

Yes, indeed my prefence would be for using the BC example. It seems to be very well researched on this even if the gameplay suffer sometimes (those numerous, confusing HA units.

Regardind spearmen for turks and muslims, they already have ''shurta militia'' as spearmen militia and ''andhat militia'' as spearmen sergeants but i think that this units should be reviseda and have similar stats and prices as europeans

This I'm not sure. The factions should differ.

[MWY]

If you discuss wall levels, just keep in mind that those wall levels are forced to keep the population numbers accurate. You cannot just change the level of a settlement without direct effects on population growth. That's sadly just not how it works in medieval2.

Oh and sure, undelevoped settlements are nicer, but some settlements at that time were further developed than others. It doesnt make sense to reduce all settlements to villages just to enable the most development.


"If we expect the Turks to take Kayseri then Ankara might stay a castle?"

Turks are scripted to take Kayseri because otherwise they would be even weaker than they already are.


"Yes, indeed my prefence would be for using the BC example."

If you want ghazi and more tribal troops, we need good models for those troops. I think the units themselves that BC provides are good, but the models, especially for turkish troops, are just really bad in my opinion.


"Besides, I think the EBII is doing really a good job disconnecting the nomads' recruitment capabilities from the size of settlements through the camp system."

We have those for cumans. To be honest I don't think this makes sense for rum or the seljuks, since they overtook already long-established cities from the byzantines and I'm not sure how much the nomad/tribal culture was still in place.

[Lifthrasir]

"Besides, I think the EBII is doing really a good job disconnecting the nomads' recruitment capabilities from the size of settlements through the camp system."

We have those for cumans. To be honest I don't think this makes sense for rum or the seljuks, since they overtook already long-established cities from the byzantines and I'm not sure how much the nomad/tribal culture was still in place.

Agree. Seljuks were not nomads anymore in 1132 AD even if they kept some of the nomad characteristics. I'll develop that later

[Jurand of Cracow]

Oh and sure, undelevoped settlements are nicer, but some settlements at that time were further developed than others. It doesnt make sense to reduce all settlements to villages just to enable the most development.

I definitely agree even if I usually suggest nerfing. However, I don't suggest making them villages, but going one step down, like: not a citadel, but a fortress, not a minor city but a large town. Especially in the cases where I've got much doubt on the precise number of inhabitants (I've had this discussion in a different thread on our differences in thinking).

If you discuss wall levels, just keep in mind that those wall levels are forced to keep the population numbers accurate. You cannot just change the level of a settlement without direct effects on population growth. That's sadly just not how it works in medieval2.

Your're definitely right and we'll have problems here. For instance, in the Georgia thread even Lifthrasir and Levan have agreed that Tbilisi should be a fortress, not a citadel. And what to do with the current number of 50k inhabitants? Apparently it's also historical (even if I doubt slightly). We need to go down - and Lifth is going to do it.

"Yes, indeed my prefence would be for using the BC example."
If you want ghazi and more tribal troops, we need good models for those troops. I think the units themselves that BC provides are good, but the models, especially for turkish troops, are just really bad in my opinion.

Ok, fair play, I don't have any opinion on this. I just wanted to make the point that we're not to discover a wheel - if there're good models, and the modders would grant permission, why not to use those models.

"Besides, I think the EBII is doing really a good job disconnecting the nomads' recruitment capabilities from the size of settlements through the camp system."
We have those for cumans. To be honest I don't think this makes sense for rum or the seljuks, since they overtook already long-established cities from the byzantines and I'm not sure how much the nomad/tribal culture was still in place.

Agree. Seljuks were not nomads anymore in 1132 AD even if they kept some of the nomad characteristics. I'll develop that later

Seljucs (the ruling elite with some retinues) settled, but I wonder if in 1132 there're no Turkoman Tribes wandering in Anatolia (what was the key in the proces of taking over this region just 50 years before, after Manzikert). I have the impression that: yes, there're plenty of them (and even later through the centuries; even recently I've seen nomads - yezidic, so Kurdish - on the slopes of the Aragats mountain in Armenia). If this is a case, instead of making camps or introducing new buildings, I'd suggest making a unit like Turcoman Tribal Cavalry (I've seen it in BC or AP, I don't know if it's exists in SSHIP) available in Anatolia and Armenian Highlands for the muslim factions as mercenaries at affordable prices. I think it'd reflect the ease the Rum and other Muslim factions had with recruiting light horse archers.
Or any other scheme, one may discuss it.
Anyway, why not to consult guys from the Anatolian Pricipalities mod on such issues (well, actually, just one left, as I read on their webpage).

[Lifthrasir]

Just to be precise, I'm just going to nerf caucasus settlements a bit to not give a huge advantage to the Kingdom of Georgia and ruin the gameplay
I'm not going to do that for all settlements (for now ).

About Seljuks, they originally went to the High Anatolia plateau for pasture and plunder. These areas were left almost undevelopped or untouched by the Byzzies as not good enough for agriculture.
The other point that needs to be mentionned is that Seljuks did massacre original nomad tribes for pastures and not only in Anatolia (I definitively need to find my doc about that ). So I'm not convinced at all that these nomad units should be created actually