More mongols?

**kylerox3221** · December 19, 2009, 08:31 AM

anyone know a submod that gives mongols more units and make them more aggressive? i have clean ss 6.1

**Lysimachus** · December 19, 2009, 08:35 AM

Get SS6.2

**kylerox3221** · December 19, 2009, 08:37 AM

SS 6.2 sais i need a premium account

**romy** · December 19, 2009, 08:44 AM

My friend, get SS 6.2/RR/RC , it's the best submod out there and it adds a lot of new freatures , new campaigns, new units...
The Mongols have a larger roster with completely new models from the Rusichi mod.And I can say that they're really agressive because in every late campaign I play , they have already an empire from Bagdad to Moscow in the 50 first turns.
I warn you that this submod change the whole recruitment compared to SS 'vanilla'.Check the submod's thread for more info.

**Gamerofthegame** · December 23, 2009, 06:33 PM

Originally Posted by romy

My friend, get SS 6.2/RR/RC , it's the best submod out there and it adds a lot of new freatures , new campaigns, new units...
The Mongols have a larger roster with completely new models from the Rusichi mod.And I can say that they're really agressive because in every late campaign I play , they have already an empire from Bagdad to Moscow in the 50 first turns.
I warn you that this submod change the whole recruitment compared to SS 'vanilla'.Check the submod's thread for more info.

Further irrelvant from the irrelvant current discussion, I thought 6.2 didn't have any submod support?

**Lysimachus** · December 19, 2009, 08:39 AM

You don't need a premium account?

**Lysimachus** · December 19, 2009, 08:47 AM

I played the Mongols in SS6.2 and got an empire like that within like, 12 turns

**Darkie** · December 19, 2009, 09:04 AM

They're imba, I am no.3 in military points as England on turn 57 or so and I just have 4 % of theirs. They have around 3 milj points :O

**Vaz** · December 19, 2009, 09:23 AM

They're meant to be. In Genghis wasn't assassinated, he would have destroyed and vassalized Nogorod, Kiev, and was winning the wars against the Khwarz Shahdom and had proceeded onto the Ghurids.

The mongols would have dominated the Entire world had they mastered sea power. As it were, Ogedai hadn't had the time to learn, whereas if only Jochi had been accepted as Khan (he was born after Borte was raped by the Merkit tribe, so his true parentage was always in doubt), and not shunned by both his younger brother, Chagatai, and his father, that would have been a sight to behold - especially with warriors and leaders such as Tolui, Jelme, and Temugin's brothers Khasar and Kachiun. As it were, their steamroller was ended after destroying the Xi Xia Kingdom.

**Darkie** · December 19, 2009, 09:56 AM

Originally Posted by Vaz

They're meant to be. In Genghis wasn't assassinated, he would have destroyed and vassalized Nogorod, Kiev, and was winning the wars against the Khwarz Shahdom and had proceeded onto the Ghurids.

The mongols would have dominated the Entire world had they mastered sea power. As it were, Ogedai hadn't had the time to learn, whereas if only Jochi had been accepted as Khan (he was born after Borte was raped by the Merkit tribe, so his true parentage was always in doubt), and not shunned by both his younger brother, Chagatai, and his father, that would have been a sight to behold - especially with warriors and leaders such as Tolui, Jelme, and Temugin's brothers Khasar and Kachiun. As it were, their steamroller was ended after destroying the Xi Xia Kingdom.

You don't just master seapower. And They had to few numbers to rule their empire. They could never occupy western europe. And when europe came out of the dark ages the monguls or the islamic-mongul empire didn't stand a chance.

**JorisofHolland** · December 19, 2009, 10:43 AM

Originally Posted by Darkie

You don't just master seapower. And They had to few numbers to rule their empire. They could never occupy western europe. And when europe came out of the dark ages the monguls or the islamic-mongul empire didn't stand a chance.

The argument about numbers I won't fight, it's hopeless. But you must realise they could have crushed Western civilisation, even if they would not rule their lands. Europa was in the Dark Age and it would take quite some time till luck would free them from it. Luck is so important because of the discoveries made. Without those, Europe would have been nothing but a colony of other nations.

I don't know much about Mongol history, but if they wouldn't have divided the empire, they would have been able to conquer the world (at least, the part that does not lay across the sea)

**Vaz** · December 19, 2009, 11:52 AM

Originally Posted by Darkie

You don't just master seapower. And They had to few numbers to rule their empire. They could never occupy western europe. And when europe came out of the dark ages the monguls or the islamic-mongul empire didn't stand a chance.

The Koreans mastered Sea Power Via necessity.

The mongols lost their tribal allegiance through necessity.

The Islamic Empire itself was more than suited to dealing with the Slow, poorly equipped, and non acclimatised European armies - which was why the Sicilian Normans were so well valued, for their knights were both skilled, and more used to the heat of southern italy.

Considering by the end of the Dark Ages it was the turn of the century, and the Mongols Empire was only begun by about 1180, and only reached the Turkic Islamic Empire under Chagatai and Fragmented in 1290 ish, signalling the end of a monodominant Mongolian Empire.

The Assassination statement is quite logical - considering that one of Genghis' wives was of the Xi Xia and Jin Empires, and then following his death, the prior campaign against the Shahdoms ended for 5 years, never to restart, in turn to see Jin and Xi Xia lands completely and utterly destroyed, never to rise again in the time following that. Combined with the 3 previous assassination attemps having failed (of which one nearly killed him), and the fact that nearly 80 major and minor lands were conquered and Vassalized.

The Mongols in the East were few and far between - and without the support of the Ilkhanate under Kublai, son of Tolui, son of Genghis, they weren't able to ensure that any losses were quickly and uncompromisingly covered over, like they were against any defeats suffered versus the Ghorids/Shahdoms, and with only provincial troops lacking the lifelong training the mongols had had, not to mention their lack of will to fight for a nation which owned them.

**toluas** · December 19, 2009, 10:10 AM

Originally Posted by Vaz

In Genghis wasn't assassinated, he would have destroyed and vassalized Nogorod, Kiev, and was winning the wars against the Khwarz Shahdom and had proceeded onto the Ghurids.

Not taking into consideration the dubiety of "what if"-history, the claim that Genghis was assassinated is - to put it cautiously - a bold and daring one. There is absolutely no indication that this was the case. Nobody knows for sure, but at age 65 there's a reasonable probability that he died for very unspectacular, natural reasons.

Originally Posted by Vaz

if only Jochi had been accepted as Khan (he was born after Borte was raped by the Merkit tribe, so his true parentage was always in doubt), and not shunned by both his younger brother, Chagatai, and his father, that would have been a sight to behold

I agree that things would have proceeded differently if Mongol unity had been maintained after Genghis Khan's death. There are apparently reasons to believe that Chagatai did not shun his elder brother (half-brother) Jochi, but that he saw his only chance of claiming the succession of his father by accusing Jochi of being a bastard. This topic was only ever raised at times of succession - or at least that's when it is bequeathed to us. And Genghis Khan was the most avid defender of Jochi at the Khuriltai where the succession was to be decided.
Btw, even if Jochi had been accepted as Khan, it would not have made much difference, as Jochi died in 1226, while his father was still alive.

**Darkie** · December 19, 2009, 10:58 AM

The monguls weren't able to destroy the major forts and castles. They lost in hungary in 1286. And western europe was to densely populated for mongul cavalry to excel. And Western europe had the bigger numbers and they could counter attack with their heavy cavalry.

**toluas** · December 19, 2009, 11:21 AM

Originally Posted by Darkie

The monguls weren't able to destroy the major forts and castles.

They destroyed a lot, so what makes you think it would have been any different with forts and castles?

Originally Posted by Darkie

They lost in hungary in 1286. And western europe was to densely populated for mongul cavalry to excel.

Well, most of Europe was not densely populated.

Originally Posted by Darkie

And Western europe had the bigger numbers and they could counter attack with their heavy cavalry.

They have been fighting mainly against enemies with much bigger numbers: "Chinese", Kwarezm, Abbassids, Europeans...

**Abyrvalg** · December 19, 2009, 12:08 PM

Originally Posted by Darkie

They lost in hungary in 1286. And western europe was to densely populated for mongul cavalry to excel. And Western europe had the bigger numbers and they could counter attack with their heavy cavalry.

Did you ever heard about Sajó and Legnica?

Originally Posted by Vaz

In Genghis wasn't assassinated, he would have destroyed and vassalized Nogorod, Kiev, and was winning the wars against the Khwarz Shahdom and had proceeded onto the Ghurids..

IRL mongols destroyed Kiev and vassalized Novgorod even without Genghis (he was too busy in the East).
And Khwarezmid Empire was destroyed too.

**JorisofHolland** · December 19, 2009, 11:30 AM

Not to mention they were far more cunning than those only in name "honourable" knights that led our armies.

**Vaz** · December 19, 2009, 12:18 PM

Sorry - wasn't clear - yeah, Jelme and Jochi took the North IIRC with their Tumans (about 20,000 Mongols, in addition , while Chagatai and Kajiun stayed in the Khwarz, while the Ghurids went down to those who stayed with Chinggis.