Playing Egypt in TLR

**antirelic** · July 23, 2007, 04:43 PM

Well, so far so good. I'm having alot of fun. Has anyone noticed how much weaker Egypt is in the early game compared to European factions? I cant explain how awesome and challenging it is though. Been focusing on expanding in Africa, and resisting crusades. Sacked Rome in revenge for the French sacking Cairo. I'm also going to pay a visit to Spain and the Dutch because they sent crusader stacks at me as well

**Irishmafia2020** · July 23, 2007, 05:16 PM

Lol... you really take those crusades personally don't you! You should just respond with Jihads, and raid and sack the mediteranean basin with fast moving water born armies. I haven't played with a Muslim faction yet, but having so many European nations as potential targets would be irresistable.

**Freedom** · July 23, 2007, 06:10 PM

Crusades? Hah! All the armies of Christendom are no match for puny assassins! Whenever a Crusade is called on me, I just build a couple assassins (2 for each possible route, 1 for the city itself) and let the assassination slaughter begin. It's very effective, especially when they send some lame Knight Esquire general who is easily disposed of.

**antirelic** · July 25, 2007, 04:24 PM

Thanks for the tip Freedom. I am trying to keep my reputation at least at so-so, and I know using assassins will get you dubious at best.

So far, I have found Egypt to be by far, WAY more challenging than any other European faction. So far, I have had my capital sacked by a crusading French army (not sure how they did it, but lots of dismounted fuedal knights, versus my weak chain era units). I had 3 faction heirs die on Jihad, 3 faction heirs die while trying to take rebel cities, 2 entire stacks of marauding muslims picked apart while trying to cut a swath through Europe by some pretty tough western units... all in all, the challenge has been great.

**headsh0ts** · July 30, 2007, 05:36 AM

Thats funny. I never really found Egypt that challenging. And not all european armies are easy. Annoy one person as the HRE and everyones after your blood.

As egypt (or any muslim faction for that matter) i just declare a jihad on the first turn against the closest province i can, and get all my generals in the army so they get the "holy warrior" trait (or whatever its called). Then i carry on as normal and repeat as soon as i can call another jihad. nO one stands a chance against my warrior Sultans!

**Freedom** · July 30, 2007, 12:53 PM

Jihads are so much better than crusades because you can use them to expand in a logical fashion early on to grab lots of rebel settlements. Plus, you have less competition (6 Islamic factions vs I think like 12 Catholic)

**antirelic** · July 31, 2007, 06:37 PM

Originally Posted by Freedom

Jihads are so much better than crusades because you can use them to expand in a logical fashion early on to grab lots of rebel settlements. Plus, you have less competition (6 Islamic factions vs I think like 12 Catholic)

Yeah, but you also have "12 enemies" that declare Crusade against you.

**headsh0ts** · August 03, 2007, 07:18 AM

And? They generally dont send armies by sea, so you just need to position your armies well.

I also think crusading armies should be able to help each other without needing an alliance. fighting them 1 by 1 isnt too hard, where if they all attacked as one id be buggered!

**ciciocle** · August 03, 2007, 02:57 PM

there is a "bug" about crusades...lets say i play england and i'm allied with a lot of catholic factions, that are also allied with egypt...when i start a crusade against egypt, all the catholic factions brake the alliance with me, and my reputation drops to despicable...i hate crusades...i almost never crusade when playing a catholc faction...and i hate the freakin diplomacy sistem, when your reputation allways goes down, no matter what...and i noticed that if you break an alliance, your reputation goes down as well, no matter the fact that you were forced to pick one out of two factions...
but i'm offtopic now...