Having read the whole Arabia preview (save the religion part, that I'll read soon/later), I'm wondering about what we can expect playing one of the Arabian and also the Numidian faction.

Concerning the desert factions in general (ie. Nabatu, Saba, Massylia):
- What about giving their units (and other "desert" units) a ground stat bonus in sand? That could represent their (strategical) superior ability to conduct warfare in dry/desert regions, and at the same time simulate the difficulty for other factions to expand into desert regions. In EB1 sand and scrub bonuses aren't used and the eg. Saba units are comparably (and of course realistically) weak, so that's why I'm asking.
- Will their units get a very low heat penalty and overall good stamina? As for the above mentioned reasons, and to compensate the mostly inferior armour/equiment. Perhaps this isn't actually realistic (dunno), but it could be good for the overall campaing gameplay balance.
- Is there a possibity or are there already plans to make the desert factions less affected by the hot/summer season? Maybe using special traits for Nabatu, Saba, Massylia generals?
- Actually, is there any way to give 'desert' factions a bonus in desert areas - other than via the afore mentioned/relevant unit stat bonuses?

Sb' w-gwm (aka Saba):
- Compared to EB1, will they be able to recruit more/better local units, imagining (a player-controlled and somewhat ahistoric) Saba that expands into more military sophisticated areas (ie. Egypt, Levante, Mesopotamia)? Their society/miliary would have then probably evolved somewhat and thus incorporated new techniques. In EB1 their possiblities to recruit local units is rather limited, as is their ability to establish higher forms of government.
- I'm curious what to expect... That said, I don't want Saba to become less challenging to play. They're a great option in EB1, if you are in for a die hard campaign.

Malkuta Nabata (aka Nabatu):
- Will they perhaps get the horde feature, due to their liftstyle till the 2th century BC?
- Sound like they'll get a fair amount of axe/ap units, right?
- How will the transformation to more a settled culture be represented? And will they have special military reforms along with that cultural change?

Regards!


@Moros - Great preview, man! What a good history lesson/read it is! Would like to give you +repright now, but I have to wait a little till I can (again).


PS: I'm posting this here and not in the Arabia preview, as I assume it would easily get lost their due to the amount of fresh comments.

Stat wise they should have some advantages when it comes to fighting in deserts. I'd imagine they also will have a lot of hardy and very_hardy units among them. They tend not to be the most armoured and when armoured they tend to wear leather and the likes, which should also be an advantage in the desert. Arab armies often used camels for transport for their armies which should result in traits that will give them a significant movement point bonus (if possible) and will make them especially more swift in desert areas. They will also, especially the Nabataeans, have less problems with logistics and supplies in the desert (water, climate, disease,... think of Gallus' campaign), which will give them benefits as well.

When it comes to the desert the Nabataeans would be king. The Sabaeans much less so, however will be better adapted then most factions. However the Sabaeans will have a rather different kind of army when compared to the old EBI army. As you should have read there was in important part that was a standing proffesional army. Hence as you can imagine it will be heavier than it was in EB I. It will also be more archer rich then the previous one. This combination of bows and decent spearmen should I imagine be a good counter to the bedouin armies. Perhaps less so with the heavier hellenistic armies though who might prove rather arrow proof from the front. However having heavier infantry to hold the line and I'd imagine there'll be some axemen as well in the future it should be able to handle them. Their main problem will be a lack of native cavalry which can be countered by hiring bedouins and some other interesting regionals that will be added in the future.

The Nabataeans will be rather similar to the infantry of Saba (ignoring the Sabaean bodyguards and nobles) and will have problems with fielding heavily armoured units. But fast and very hardy cavalry units will help here. This time the arabs will have horse archers and in the future will get camel archers as well, which they will be able to field in rather high numbers. This will give them a new advantage. And as you can read if you can build your faction up and survive for a while you can use a large part of these ancient arab methods and benefits in combination with hellenistic strategies, weapons and tactics. Though those will be for a later release. Which will give them a couple very powerfull, though limited in number, units. Of course this will also result in heavier and more hellenistic light and medium infantry.

I Imagine that the Sabaeans will be easier this time round due to being isolated and being helped by the Nabataeans who'll help stop the Seleucids and ptolemaioi (though these guys because them being Allies would make the Ptollies not conquer them). The Nabataean campaign will be a tough one though the goal would be for giving them a lenghty and good relationship with the Ptollies. Though they would still be right at the front of a huge war and thus be at risk if the Ptollies are not up to it. Yet if they can hold out and build up they could probably end up with the best military of all three desert factions.

I'm not going to comment on the Numidians as I'm not that much better informed than you are. But they will probably have similar advantages as the Nabataeans in the desert. Both stat wise on the battle map and trait wise on the campaign map.

Moros said:

Stat wise they should have some advantages when it comes to fighting in deserts. I'd imagine they also will have a lot of hardy and very_hardy units among them. They tend not to be the most armoured and when armoured they tend to wear leather and the likes, which should also be an advantage in the desert.

Click to expand...

Yeah, that would make them a force worth respecting in their home territories, but at the same time not over-power them once they expand into less arid regions.

Arab armies often used camels for transport for their armies which should result in traits that will give them a significant movement point bonus (if possible) and will make them especially more swift in desert areas. They will also, especially the Nabataeans, have less problems with logistics and supplies in the desert (water, climate, disease,... think of Gallus' campaign), which will give them benefits as well.

Click to expand...

Sounds very interesting. I'm curious to see how that will be represented.

However the Sabaeans will have a rather different kind of army when compared to the old EBI army. As you should have read there was in important part that was a standing proffesional army. Hence as you can imagine it will be heavier than it was in EB I. It will also be more archer rich then the previous one. This combination of bows and decent spearmen should I imagine be a good counter to the bedouin armies. (...) Their main problem will be a lack of native cavalry which can be countered by hiring bedouins and some other interesting regionals that will be added in the future.

Click to expand...

So a every new Saba experience. A little more heavy infantry, a little less cavalry and new merc options. Sounds good. Will be fun to play.

The Nabataeans will be rather similar to the infantry of Saba (ignoring the Sabaean bodyguards and nobles) and will have problems with fielding heavily armoured units. But fast and very hardy cavalry units will help here. This time the arabs will have horse archers and in the future will get camel archers as well, which they will be able to field in rather high numbers. This will give them a new advantage.

Click to expand...

That could be fun to harass and outflank the slow Hellenistic infantry (and partly their heavy cavalry) with moblie and fairly untiring horse-archers, and at the same time offering them no real/prolonged melee battle due to the more mobile infantry... unless these damn hetairoi get a good clean charge and smash all my elaborate plans... once again!
Looking forward to these new camel archers, indeed.

And as you can read if you can build your faction up and survive for a while you can use a large part of these ancient arab methods and benefits in combination with hellenistic strategies, weapons and tactics. Though those will be for a later release. Which will give them a couple very powerfull, though limited in number, units. Of course this will also result in heavier and more hellenistic light and medium infantry.

Click to expand...

Probably best to hold the line in the north and expand towards the Saba then - till the new units are available, I guess. Unless they can recruit some fairly good local infantry to hold possibly conquered towns in the north. We'll see, we'll see...

The Nabataean campaign will be a tough one though the goal would be for giving them a lenghty and good relationship with the Ptollies.

Click to expand...

Is there somekind of unbreakable alliance/peace treaty planned with the Ptolemaioi when playing Nabatu? Only for the first few years perhaps (only breakable by player actions)? Might be necessary to give the Nabatu a good start. But testing will show if that's necessary, I assume.


What about the horde feature for the Nabatu in case the get overrun in the early game?

I'm not too keen on the idea of hordes, once a faction dies it should die.

I really want to see those camel archers for second release. They'll be awesome.

Casual Tactician said:

Is there somekind of unbreakable alliance/peace treaty planned with the Ptolemaioi when playing Nabatu? Only for the first few years perhaps (only breakable by player actions)? Might be necessary to give the Nabatu a good start. But testing will show if that's necessary, I assume.


What about the horde feature for the Nabatu in case the get overrun in the early game?

Click to expand...

Not an unbreakable alliance, but one that is not likely to be broken too soon.

If the horde feature would be used, then they would be a likely candidate.

Delete
It posted the same thing twice

Just on the subject of hordes, would the Celtic factions be considered for them? Historically they did travel as a horde and settle places in that manner (though i don't know if any of the factions in EB II did it during the timeframe).

On an off shoot about hordes (this may or may not have been asked before) will there be any resurrection scripts for dead factions á la the original medieval?

PS
The Galatians are the celts i was referring to, had a bit of a blank moment after i started typing

Diplomacy is much better in M2TW so nabatu won't be overrun by the ptolemies soon..

Even if they are finally destroyed I 've read that we shall have re-emerging factions, so no problem.

Still horde mode is very nice feature especially for the steppan factions.

I don't know. I really don't like how you can take a final settlement with a garrison of 3 family members and suddenly find yourself overrun by thousands of fresh troops.

Re-emerging faction is an awesome feature.

I'd actually like a Horde rule where all the Horde troops you get were low-quality militia types. I felt that the most unrealistic part of the Barbarian Invasion setup was that they'd get actual good troops, instead of vast numbers of peasants. But with hordes consisting of Lugoae and whatnot, I think it would be an interesting addition to the game.