Nizari Ismailis

[Zenthar]

Hello everyone. This is my first post, and first I'd like to say that the mod is looking great. Keep on going!

I rolled through the factions, and there were no Nizari/Hashashins.

Why?
The Nizaris were so powerful that even Saladin, who beat the Christian armies, could not beat them. Once Saladin sieged one of Nizari fortresses, but the Nizari threats ( and an proof of their power ) made Saladin retreat, and leave the siege equipment behind.

No-one could defeat them, until the Mongols arrived, and that was when the Nizaris were weak, far away from the peak of their power.

The Nizaris held several fortresses, like Masyaf and Alamut, if you are interested I can tell you more of their fortresses.

The Nizaris had an army of 30,000 men, but they didn't really use the army until the late times ( When they were weakened )

Their real power were the fida'is, assassins.

This country would be really cool to play, since you would need to balance it with the actual army and the assassinations and diplomatics.

Cheers

[AlphaDelta]

There was a long discussion about this on the forum but I cant find it now.

Here is a short answer why they aren't included.

http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showp...&postcount=123

[Zenthar]

There was a long discussion about this on the forum but I cant find it now.

Here is a short answer why they aren't included.

http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showp...&postcount=123

He says that the Nizaris weren't a power - But they were! 30,000 isn't such an large army, but it is an army that you could conquer with. And the point is.. It wouldn't take alot to add them! Recolor some hashashim etc..

[Zenthar]

Oh and.. "Hassan-i-Sabah established an independent Nizari Ismaili state"

So yes they were a proper faction too..

[Ahiga]

Oh and.. "Hassan-i-Sabah established an independent Nizari Ismaili state"

So yes they were a proper faction too..

Can you quote for us some instances where their 30,000 went out and fought in battles much like any other kingdom?

They were a political presence and they were a political power, but not in the traditional marching armies sort of way. If you can show us that they did commit their men to fighting to conquer cities, and not merely political intrigue, we could give them stronger consideration. But for now they are similar to the Italian merchants in being better represented by subtler means than a brand new faction.

[jermagon]

the nizari weren't a nation or faction,they were a group of men who had their own sects,they captured many castles in sheraz and persia they controlled many castles,they didn't have cities,they choosed the defensive position as their strategic option,and because they know that the native muslim population hate them cuz of their heretics,they began to train assassins,they terriorized the islamic world for several decades,they targeted the abbasid caliphate,seljuks they killed nezam el mulk the vizier of sultan alp arslan,they even tried to assassinate saladin twice,their main fortress ''almut'' was very fortified and well defended castle,that even genghis khan couldn't capture it.hulaqu khan of the mongol empire crushed the nizaries and destroyed nearly all their castles and captured the leader of the nizaries ''khurshah'' and forced him to surrender all his castles,then he sent him to mingokhan who executed him.

[Zenthar]

They didn't start to train assassins because the main stream muslims would start to hate them. They started being heretic after they started doing the assassinations, and you didn't really need any training to be an assassin. You needed a dagger and something to hide it under.

The Nizari were an independent state

I will look for the quote them using the army; I will copy it in 10 minutes.

and you got the basic facts right, yep, jermagon. the names got some mistakes and few minor things are incorrect, tho

----------------
"Hasan entered into an alliance with the lord of Azerbaijan against a man who had formerly been an Azerbaijani general but who had now set himself up as lord in the Hamadan area. The Caliph of Baghdad also sent forces, troops coming from as far away as Syria. Most of the expenses were paid by the lord of Azerbaijan, and one gets the impression that the whole enterprise was regarded by the participants as something of a lark. The campaign lasted for a year and was successful; perhaps undeservedly so. The rebel warlord was killed near Hamadan, and Hasan received two towns as his share of the loot.

These military adventures, including the preparations, occupied the first two years of Hasan's reign."

And indeed, it was mainly a defencive force, not an attacking. But here is a quote of when they attacked too.

[Miraj]

We're not going to include the Nizaris for a number of reasons:

1) No real information of their army, largely because they probably didn't have any worth mention. Even our most obscure faction - the Ghorids - have more military information than the Nizaris. And considering how difficult it was to think up the Ghorid roster, I can't begin to imagine how speculative a Hashashin roster would be.
2) The TW game-world cannot properly simulate political and espionage intrigues and the Nizaris were largely a political and almost cult-like body. There is no evidence of them ruling anything larger than maybe a few hamlets outside their castles.
3) They never really engaged in any wars or battles of note. Their main claim to fame was their assassins.
4) The notion of Nizaris expanding from their shiite strong-holds and lording over vast sunni lands seems probably quite fantastical. Its more probable to see Georgia or Armenia ruling over Iran than the Nizaris, IMO.

[Zenthar]

1) It could have few units from other muslim factions, then own assassins and Hashashim.

2)

"Over the next 150 years, the Ismailis succeeded in capturing more than 200 large and small fortresses in Iran and Syria with settlements in surrounding towns and villages"

http://www.iis.ac.uk/view_article.asp?ContentID=105073

3) They did engage in battle, as shown above - and even in the vanilla version you can destroy whole factions by assassination.

4) M2TW is about writing your own history, right? And if they could just convert the population, they could rule over Iran, and after raising bigger armied etc...

[Shadibadoo]

Maybe you could make some Ismaili units as Mercenarys found around Syria and Iraq??

[Ahiga]

Well, there are no plans now and no plans for the future to include Ismaili mercenaries. The only instance I've seen of them being recruited was by the Later Crusaders, and a number of issues prevent me from being behind their inclusion:

• 1) No real information of their army, largely because they probably didn't have any worth mention. Even our most obscure faction - the Ghorids - have more military information than the Nizaris. And considering how difficult it was to think up the Ghorid roster, I can't begin to imagine how speculative a Hashashin roster would be.

  I don't know how in any sort of way a Hashashin roster would be distinct. The only instances of them being used in a military sort of way that I have found were the mentionings of 'civic cavalry' and a civil militia, and Fida'I (Feyadeen) which is highly suspect, and above all, we would not include so fantasy like a unit as some sort of hyped up hashashin unit in vanilla. These guys were political assassins, not some sort of samurai force. I don't know how anything but blind fanaticism would set them apart from any other sort of unit. There's already going to be Ghazi to fill this niche (And it's far more sensible for Sunni Muslim factions to field Sunni religious fanatics than to field Shi'ite Fanatics, especially those who were reviled by a huge amount of the Sunni World)

• 2) The TW game-world cannot properly simulate political and espionage intrigues and the Nizaris were largely a political and almost cult-like body. There is no evidence of them ruling anything larger than maybe a few hamlets outside their castles.

  There is much more context for the Rajputs to invade Afghanistan (They held the Khyber pass in the 800s AD) than there is for the Ismaili to conquer, as you yourself have pointed out, they only held citadels, not cities, not nation-states, not kingdoms in the Total War sense of the word.

• 3) They never really engaged in any wars or battles of note. Their main claim to fame was their assassins.

  They may have participated in some battles, but being assassins is what they are known for. Quite frankly this would be like including a Genoese or Venetian faction because these two and other Italian trade cities had interests and even some controlled citadels in the map. I think it might even be more viable for one of these groups to go out and conquer (As they did hold much larger 'kingdoms' or swathes of territory, like Crete, Cyprus, ect.) than for the hashashin, which never showed interest in establishing an empire.
  
  It's the fault of the game we are modding that we cannot better represent these historically interesting and more accurate means. I'm sorry to say it, but we won't include Ismailis as a faction, nor are there any plans to include them as units. Ancillaries or traits brought on by the recruitment of assassins? I don't see why not. But not units or factions.

[Zenthar]

Well, there are no plans now and no plans for the future to include Ismaili mercenaries. The only instance I've seen of them being recruited was by the Later Crusaders, and a number of issues prevent me from being behind their inclusion:

• 
  
  I don't know how in any sort of way a Hashashin roster would be distinct. The only instances of them being used in a military sort of way that I have found were the mentionings of 'civic cavalry' and a civil militia, and Fida'I (Feyadeen) which is highly suspect, and above all, we would not include so fantasy like a unit as some sort of hyped up hashashin unit in vanilla. These guys were political assassins, not some sort of samurai force. I don't know how anything but blind fanaticism would set them apart from any other sort of unit. There's already going to be Ghazi to fill this niche (And it's far more sensible for Sunni Muslim factions to field Sunni religious fanatics than to field Shi'ite Fanatics, especially those who were reviled by a huge amount of the Sunni World)
• 
  
  There is much more context for the Rajputs to invade Afghanistan (They held the Khyber pass in the 800s AD) than there is for the Ismaili to conquer, as you yourself have pointed out, they only held citadels, not cities, not nation-states, not kingdoms in the Total War sense of the word.
• 
  
  They may have participated in some battles, but being assassins is what they are known for. Quite frankly this would be like including a Genoese or Venetian faction because these two and other Italian trade cities had interests and even some controlled citadels in the map. I think it might even be more viable for one of these groups to go out and conquer (As they did hold much larger 'kingdoms' or swathes of territory, like Crete, Cyprus, ect.) than for the hashashin, which never showed interest in establishing an empire.
  
  It's the fault of the game we are modding that we cannot better represent these historically interesting and more accurate means. I'm sorry to say it, but we won't include Ismailis as a faction, nor are there any plans to include them as units. Ancillaries or traits brought on by the recruitment of assassins? I don't see why not. But not units or factions.

Your first point. They used armies like any other state, and indeed their normal soldiers were not better trained than others etc; but you could give them bonus stats for their blind fanaticism. And also the fida'is were highly trained and also were part of the wars and raids, you could make a special squad for them and make them have really good stats based on the training, equipment and very blind fanaticism. They would basically never flee.

As for your second point. Maybe there is more sources for Rajputs conquering, but there certainly are sources about Ismaili's conquering also.
As I think I have said, you could give them small pieces of land scattered - it would be really interesting faction to play. If someone wouldn't like the Nizaris.. Give them option to disable it!

And third. Well, as M.G.S Hogdson says,
"The Nizaris indeed used armies on occasion, as in retalation against Sistan, or to take Lammasar by assault."

There are many other cases where they used armies; also they blocked Sunni attacks. And maybe the Nizaris didn't want to conquer a large empire, but so what? You could decide in the game, if you want to "role play", or if you wish to conquer the whole world.

The game may be a little faulty here, but it certainly is flexible enough to have Nizaris. You have Assassins in the game, and you can destroy whole factions just by them.

[Ahiga]

Well you've only posted quotations, and what we need is either websites or pictures from the books detailing these comments. It's nothing personal - When I've put forth bold or somewhat surprising comments about a faction's historical nature, I needed to provide more substantial proof in the form of tangible information.

Never the less, we don't plan on featuring an Nizari faction. To us, their political presence was more like that of the Italian Merchant Cities outposts in the Near East - Important, but not really able to be represented as we wish for it to be in the campaign map, or our mod. I think it would be absurd to have the Nizari's be a faction like every other, which is what would happen irregardless of any tweaking we could do - they would not be reliant on politics as they were, but would be going out and conquering like everyone else. In my reading of their history, I rarely if ever came across any mention of them conquering or using their armies in lieu of their political machinations. I would not want to see the Nizari's conquering wide swathes of territory when they had trouble holding any of the Syrian cities by mere political presence (Hence why they retreated to the mountain castles there, as in Persia), and unless played by a player who chose to roleplay, this is what would happen every time.

If we choose to feature some of the Shi'ite factions that exist at this time (Mostly being semi-independent or vassals to another. The Soomro, the Saffarids, the Baduspanids/Bavandids if I am not mistaking these guys for Shi'ite), then perhaps we can incorporate the Nizari into their ranks if they were historical allies or supporters of them.

But I can't be behind a Nizari faction when there are so many others which have much stronger context for inclusion, and so much issues with the Nizaris being one.

[The Mongol]

You should just make a Citadel full of Hashashim. lol

It'd be hard to take

[Zenthar]

Mmh well if nothing else that would be good