Egypt is beyond the AOR of ERE?!

[crazyorc]

It's strange, the castle i occupied offers nothing to me?In history, i recall Egypt is one province of Roman empire for long~:hmmm:

[Ahiga]

But was lost back in 654. Which to the start of our mod is a period of +500 years. And even back in 654 there was a very strong ideological conflict between the Miaphysite Copts and the Orthodox Church of Constantinople, one of the reasons the Muslim Arabs prevailed in their conquest of the region.

Roman troops are also of an Anatolian/Armenian/Greek/European ethnicity, and would not work as being recruited out of Egypt.

While there were large minorities or small majorities of Christians in Syria, Iraq, the Levant and Egypt, they were thoroughly removed in identity from the Roman Empire at this point, save perhaps for some of Syria.

1.1's Auxilia system will make Egypt useful to the Romans, though.

[Sevachenko]

But will it make Anatolia useful to the Ayyubids . Can't wait though for the armies of Egypt and Syria to once again conquer everything!

[Dead*Man*Wilson]

Egypt is beyond the AOR of ERE?!

Makes sense to me.

[bigdaddy1204]

Actually, the Egyptians hadn't forgotten Byzantine rule. When Manuel I Komnenos attacked Egypt in the 1170s, the Egyptians offered to pay him tribute, and the deal was framed in terms of the ancient grain shipments sent to Constantinople in the days of Justinian and Heraclius!

[Fenix_120]

Actually, the Egyptians hadn't forgotten Byzantine rule. When Manuel I Komnenos attacked Egypt in the 1170s, the Egyptians offered to pay him tribute, and the deal was framed in terms of the ancient grain shipments sent to Constantinople in the days of Justinian and Heraclius!

I think this was more of a "save ours skins!" ploy than a 'He's our emperor!" one...

[Ermeni]

it could be justified to say that alexandria should be able to muster roman troops. Considering there must've been a significant number of Greeks (Greek speaking and orthodox Greeks) in those days. But I'm not sure. I think there where at least 100 000 greeks in Alexandria before the arrival of Nasser who was a disaster to the non Egyptian population.

[Zenith Darksea]

This is true. There was still a significant Orthodox minority in Egypt and Syria during this period. How else do you think we still have Orthodox Patriarchates of Alexandria and Antioch today?

[JERUSALEM]

Where was some copts in that city as well and they are not orthodox at all.

most of those copts are monophysits as i know.

[Kubelwagen]

I think it was only in 1000 that Christians and Jews became the minority across the "Muslim world."

But still, Egypt was long gone from Byzzie rule.

[merlinuscdxx]

I think it's accurate to not be able to recruit ERE troops in Egypt, yes, even in Alexandria. While it is true that there were a large number of Greeks still living in Alexandria at the time of the Fatimid/Ayyubid transition, these Greek folks wouldn't really know exactly how to fight in the "new" Roman style. There were several reorganizations/ doctrinal alterations in the Roman military since the Muslim Caliphate kicked out the Roman Administration. Though some local levies would not be inaccurate (some type of "Greek Levy" made up of Greeks living in the area, as they would be more willing to fight for a new Greco/Roman ruling class than the current Islamic ruling class).

[Ahiga]

Recruitment is also less of a simply religious issue and more of a cultural/ethnic one as well - The Roman's bread and butter units are in our mod and based on our research recruited from their Armenian, Anatolian, and Greek citizenry, rather than Orthodox citizens - Hence Syria/Anatolia/Mediterranean regions. It's kind of like if the Abbasid caliphate were to reconquer Egypt - they held it back in the 8th and I believe some of the 9th Century, yet if they were to return there in our campaign they wouldn't have the infrastructure or traditions in place to start training back the locals.

Auxilia is going to remedy some of that, though. What's the way that local copts and orthodox egyptians would have fought? Right now for Christian recruitment in Egypt what we have in mind is local Orthodox Arab/Egyptian citizenry as militia archers, spearmen and local Coptic marines (using an existing Middle eastern mesh) with crossbows and sword.

Is there anything else we could throw in there for Christians conquering egypt? That would be authentic to how the copts or orthodox Egyptians could have fought? You mention Greek militia merlinuscdxx, how would they have fought? How would they have been armed, and looked?

[merlinuscdxx]

I was merely referring to the probable loyalty shift that Egyptian Greeks (those that stuck to the Greek culture) would most likely experience. I would imagine that they would dress and fight in a similar manner to the Egyptian troops of the same class as themselves, though I'd imagine that, if they are being subsidized by the new "Roman" ruling class, they'd be using a mix of ERE style equipment (supplied/ sold by the Roman Administration) and locally produced "light" armor and weaponry (as the heavier, more expensive stuff would have been bought up/ "requisitioned" by the old Ayyubid Administration).

It is merely a concept as of right now,developed "on the fly" as it were. You do bring up several good points on the ethnicity issue, though. I'd imagine that the "Greeks who join the new Roman militia" would consist of Egyptians of any ethnicity that "identified" more with Greco-Roman tradition, familial ties, and outlook (Religious and/or Cultural) than the local norm.

Historical accuracy seems to be a rather difficult benchmark in this particular case, since we didn't historically have the ERE doing a whole lot of reconquering in areas with entrenched Muslim rule.

[bigdaddy1204]

Well, there is the case of Antioch. Lost to the Muslims in the early 600s, it was reconquered by the Byzantines in the 960s I believe, and held for over a century thereafter.

However, it's such an obscure topic that I'm unsure whether there is any substantial information to go on with regard to this particular instance...

[Ahiga]

Well, there is the case of Antioch. Lost to the Muslims in the early 600s, it was reconquered by the Byzantines in the 960s I believe, and held for over a century thereafter.

However, it's such an obscure topic that I'm unsure whether there is any substantial information to go on with regard to this particular instance...

Yeah, that's what's led to Syria being included in their AOR. Along with the ethnic makeup of Syria being the same as the troops the Romans use.

[republic_bohemia]

In my opinion the AOR of all factions is a good thing and bad.

The good is that every faction has to be careful on how they wage war and distance/wealth ect.

The bad thing is that some Provence's needs to be historically improve and fixed on.

Regards.John

[Grifman]

I don't know if this is possible, but the AOR ought to consider how long you've held an area. After 40 or 50 years you ought to be able to recruit in an area. You've got an entire new generation coming up, raised under the current empire holding that area. That ought to count for something.

[Jazz19]

I don't know if this is possible, but the AOR ought to consider how long you've held an area. After 40 or 50 years you ought to be able to recruit in an area. You've got an entire new generation coming up, raised under the current empire holding that area. That ought to count for something.

I agree with this, the AOR should be expandable after generation or so to reflect the changing cultural patterns that would occur.

[Ahiga]

It's not possible. Or it is possible, but in a complicated way. Basically, you would need to have a building that takes 40-50 years (80-100 turns) which allows you to recruit troops from it. That certainly is a possibility for the future, though it's too much work for a 1.5 release and may not be something we're interested in.

However it needs to be said again that our troops are based on ethnic makeup, so the generation being brought up under Roman influence in Egypt is still going to be dusky skinned Egyptians, not the Armenian/Greek/Anatolians which make up the majority of their units. Even in 40-50 years the makeup of Outremer had a minority of Frankish citizens, and even after holding Northern India for quite some time the Turkish rulers had a real problem finding Turkish soldiers to recruit (Because they came from Central Asia) and had to turn to locals riding arab horses with spears.

We considered an idea of Strelac's where you would be able to recruit locals dressed in the conquering "religion's" fashion (2 styles, one Western with Greek/Latin gear, one Eastern with Arab/Persian gear), so the Romans in Egypt would be able to acquire Arabs with kite shields, aketons and roman helmets or the Ghaznavids acquire Armenians in circle shields, leather lamellar and turbaned helmets, however it was postponed indefinitely for a few reasons (Number of EDU space needed, how it would be included). It is an idea we're still interested in, and could or could not be returned to in the future.

Though if it's a contest, I'd say that the BC team is more interested in diversity rather than integration. We'd rather a Roman Empire conquering the East begins to look like "The Thousand Nations of the Romans" rather than "Greeks Greeks everywhere!"

[Miraj]

Just because a region was heavily Orthodox Christian (Coptic in Egypt's case) does not necessarily mean that Roman units should be available. After all the Roman units are supposed to represent Greeks, Latins and other Anatolians along with Scandinavians (the Varangians).

So to have those types of warriors pop out of a Roman controlled Egypt does not make much sense to me, since I don't think the Romans would ever (or ever did) want to go around colonizing these places. Instead it makes more sense to me if they had a decent selection of Coptic christian auxilliary/regional units serving them.