Is posible to make turks to win?

[Gogolometro]

What is one of the bads of 6.3 is not the anihilation of crusaders, the constant crush of HRE, but after 50-100 turns, one of the bigest empires colapse, the turks. I played them, I play against them, I ally with them, I was very far away from them, but became constant, turks are eaten by fatimids. Yes they lose something to byzantium and persians, mongols, but the turk killer is almost all time Egypt, fatimids or ayubids dont matter.
What I saw in latest RR-RC, HRE was not crushed. Turks ruled eastern map. This can happend in 6.3 too, if they get saracen militia not spear militia, if recruit the heavy spearmans in 2 turns not 5 and ottoman infantry need 2 turns to recruit. With azabs, turkish HA and spear militia, of course they die. Nafftun is incredibly hard to get, spahis are weak, and janissaries late. They need some steroids.

[Ichon]

They need 2nd good castle away from frontlines too. So often Byzantines capture Caesara or Fatimids do... then its goodbye for Turks usually.That plus saracen militia is enough I think. 5 turns instead of 2 for the heavy spears is too much.

[Overlord.ru]

It also greatly depends on which AI you're using. I tried Savage and Lusted( Meneth's compilation though) and it were 2 different games. All muslim factions had strong alliances and fought together against crusaders and then mongols. Lusted AI is far more logical and not so insane, the only problem is - mongols. They swallowed Khwarezm at about 40-50 turn, and then crushed turks after about more 20 turns, though there was even a successful crusade against mongols. The conclusion is - turks, fatimids, moors, khwarezm had strong and reliable alliances, so - try another AI.

[Point Blank]

What is one of the bads of 6.3 is not the anihilation of crusaders, the constant crush of HRE, but after 50-100 turns, one of the bigest empires colapse, the turks. I played them, I play against them, I ally with them, I was very far away from them, but became constant, turks are eaten by fatimids. Yes they lose something to byzantium and persians, mongols, but the turk killer is almost all time Egypt, fatimids or ayubids dont matter.
What I saw in latest RR-RC, HRE was not crushed. Turks ruled eastern map. This can happend in 6.3 too, if they get saracen militia not spear militia, if recruit the heavy spearmans in 2 turns not 5 and ottoman infantry need 2 turns to recruit. With azabs, turkish HA and spear militia, of course they die. Nafftun is incredibly hard to get, spahis are weak, and janissaries late. They need some steroids.

Heavy Spearmen as average Late Pros should take 2 turns to train.

[Gogolometro]

It takes 5 mate, 4 for ottoman infantry. All take to long except turkish archers and spahis who are decent.

[Point Blank]

It takes 5 mate, 4 for ottoman infantry. All take to long except turkish archers and spahis who are decent.

Ottoman Inf is correct at 4, because they are an average (combination) unit, ie they shoot and melee as average, giving them the same combat power as a superior unit at least. Superior unit training time is 3 turns, and the composite bow adds +1 (longbow actually adds +2 due to greater draw poundages to achieve same effect as composite bow), so total 4. Average spearmen should just take 2 turns to train.

[bɑne]

It takes 5 mate, 4 for ottoman infantry. All take to long except turkish archers and spahis who are decent.

Ok, I'm confused.

type             ME Heavy Spearmen
dictionary       ME_Heavy_Spearmen      ; ME Heavy Spearmen, lp
category         infantry
class            spearmen
voice_type       Heavy
accent              Arabic
<...>
stat_cost        2, 800, 180, 75, 55, 620, 4, 100
armour_ug_levels 11, 15, 23
armour_ug_models me_heavy_spearmen, me_heavy_spearmen_ug1, me_heavy_spearmen_ug1
ownership        kwarezm, turks, egypt, moors
era 1            kwarezm, turks, egypt, moors
era 2            kwarezm, turks, egypt, moors
recruit_priority_offset    15

Are you talking about a different Heavy Spearmen?

[Gogolometro]

Maybe I am wrong. I will check again. Mauby a confusion with recruitment of hasham.

[SirRobin]

Well, I like a game where some factions are stronger and have more advantages than others - if I preferred a 100 per cent fair game I would play chess

But we can say of course that for historical reasons, the Turks should be a viable as a winning faction, at least up until first world war ..

[Gogolometro]

Sir Robin, I am not turk, not biased on them, and I not have any love for their army. Still, hundreds of years their empire was the strongest in the area. Their military succeded to defeat many cristian armys. They owned aybids/fatimids, any presence in Levant. Almost all south and east Mediterana was on their hands. They eradicate Kingdom of Hungary, anihilated greek state, bulgarians, serbian state, all east and south of Wienna. Even Golden Horde of mongols was their vassal. Instead of this, from a huge empire they became a tiny to nothing in no time. Savage AI is not gracul AI. Something is changed. In RR-RC they was hard hiters. My nightmare was to challange them. I preffer crusade after crusade than send a army in Anatholia to get my arse kicked.
Is complet unatural to see Scotts survive and turks dead. Dunno were things go wrong, but what I saw all time egiptians kill them.

[teks]

I was reading up on the turks tonight. It was said that their bows fired as far as the english longbow, but they fired much smaller arrows designed to kill unarmored opponents and block out the sun. If we tried to show this in the turkish archer's stats do you think it would help them any?
It's too bad you can't really perform hit-and-run tactics in this game. Turkey would be much better off.

Really how big of a role do unit stats play in AI vs AI battles anyway? I always figured the bigger army normally won.

[Ichon]

I was reading up on the turks tonight. It was said that their bows fired as far as the english longbow, but they fired much smaller arrows designed to kill unarmored opponents and block out the sun. If we tried to show this in the turkish archer's stats do you think it would help them any?
It's too bad you can't really perform hit-and-run tactics in this game. Turkey would be much better off.

Really how big of a role do unit stats play in AI vs AI battles anyway? I always figured the bigger army normally won.

Arrows designed to block out the sun? What are you reading? Also your other post talked about Turks laying down and firing bows which I have heard of but very limited. If a bow had extreme draw weight and they are firing lots of arrows using their legs they probably wouldn't get nearly as fatigued if aim did not count much. I doubt it happened very often though.

You can do hit and run as player. I have done it a couple times. Using HA till arrows are gone then withdraw units 1 by 1 until just BG left then retreat. You take some losses but should be very minor. Only need to do that when you have like 5 units of HA vs entire stack and can't kill them all in 1 battle. Attack again next turn or the AI will attack you and its possible to win having killed half their army.

The unit weight does matter in auto-calc battles for AI. I think general command and heavy cavalry have the biggest difference but in full stack armies the one with better weight will win- sometimes dramatically.

[teks]

Arrows that block out the sun...its persia, im greek, the 300 movie. I'll let you put the clues together. They also said the same line in the documentary I watched, so I just had to say it myself.
The archers using their legs was from that history channel documentary on the crusades, and I wanna call b/s on that. How a man could fire with any accuacy with his legs is beyond me. No I was actually reading this from a different forum regarding medieval history. They were discussing why the turkish arrows couldn't pierce armor like the english. They came to a conclusion that the turkish bow had a similar draw weight to an english crossbow, but the arrows they fired were shorter then the archers draw length. Their bows had an extension to guide the arrow while you drew it back. Because they were so light they fired a long distance, but the longbow fired nice big armor-piercing arrows.
Obviously I didn't research into this myself, but they are always looking to give units more flavor. This could give the turk's wide archer selection look more useful. If your facing an unarmored army your long-range archers could prove deadly, and if fighting better-equipped armies switch off to a heavy archer.

[Mihajlo]

in AI vs AI hit and run isnt that good. That is the main problem in auto resolve :s Turks have good army roster, imo at least, their position isnt that good (but it is historically correct however). Turks should have two goals that need to be done asap: 1st is to take Trebizond, one more castle and since war with Byzantines is a must, then this is good target. 2nd is took provinces in south modern Turkey (for levant control and huge boost on economy). I usually make alliances with crusader state for first 20-30 turns, so I can crush Byzantine Asian territories. However I doubt AI can do all this.
Like I said main problem with AI vs AI is that archers dont count much, so fixing something there should be goal to set things right....

[vtec.dominion]

I always was amazed why the Turks were going down so fast in my games. As the OP says they are eaten by Fatimids & Mongols and Byzantium on my late campaing games and kwarezmians early on.
Looks like the AI can't manage them properly. Im playing late campaign with them at the moment and they are absolutely great! The only unit i miss is strong infantry able to take the western heavy cavalry charge.
Oh, and Iqta-dar recruitable only in Caesarea is pain in the arse

[Point Blank]

Eastern composite bows used a full range of arrow weights, from light 'flight arrows' for extreme range (not normally used in battle) to heavier 'war arrows'. They also used bodkin-type arrowheads on occasion.

[Gogolometro]

Like a no historian, but passionate about stuff, I can tell you how turks kill here In Wallachia and Moldavia.
Yes, happens a bit alter, not in 1200 but in XIV and XV century.
They send always golden horde at advance when vassalise them, before that the pasha with some light force. Light force mean a lot of army, more than locals can stand. Ussual they launch their auxiliary troops, serbians, albanians, the syrians. They dont use excesive the arrows. Not arrows kill enemy, except of course golde horde raids who mean tons of HA. In fact against turks guerilla was combinated with counter raids of wallachian and moldavian light cavalry with lot of bows themselves.
The auxiliary troops are just like acid, opening the lines. Even in the bigest battles, janissaries was entering in fight later. The shock troops.
Lot of kills before guns and cannons was close combats, lot mean less charge of heavy cavalry but lot of hand to hand combat.
You not make abushes, fight in heavy winter near swamps and bridges, in forrests because arrows, but because turks can sent tousands after tousands of soldiers yelling allah akbar.
Is curious in fact the ottoman turks look like a range soldiers roster, not like a slayers. They chop armors, and the Nicopole crusade must be a proof. Germans, french, flamands, hungarians, dont die because arrows kill them at range, because the turks have horse archers. Cristian knights broke turks line after line. The charge coutinue for a very long time. Ethusiasm was on their lips. The knights die in a gigantical circle, like a anaconda sufocating a mamal. All knights was crushed by janissaries halebards. Dismunted and taken prisoniers to be decapitated.
Turks have something in SS lack, numbers, huge numbers. If a armored sargent have 61 soldiers, a scutatoi 81, jannisaries must be maybe dubble of that number.

Years ago I asked Mongols to became a nightmare. A lot of smart guys from here make that posible. Is time to make turks the bigest power in the east. A real and very dangerous power. No more byzantines owning so easy turks, no more overkill from fatimids. Let see the ottoman empire here please.

[Ichon]

That doesn't fix problem though... Turks have trouble in early era. If you played any 1450 campaigns with them they are hugely powerful. Not only due to starting regions but their roster by that point.

I think Turks early roster is good. Not using heavy infantry in the way you mean until much after 1100. Problem is Turks never make it that far. Turks regions are historical... giving them more would be weird. However- if they get 2nd developed castle other than Caesara it helps them much. Also less regions for Byzantines in 1100 where really some of the regions they have should be rebel. Turks were pushed back by Crusaders a little and Komnenus and also political problems but that left power vacuum not some other regional power controlling everything. Mostly cities paid minimum tributes (taxes) to either Turks or Byz or sometimes both. Even County of Edessa tried to gain some of that money but wasn't strong enough to hold any territory beyond its normal borders.

Also- Turks weren't ever some extreme numbers. Just like reported Mongol "hordes" reality is their armies were usually not that large in most situations. Siege of Vienna maybe exception but they had large population base compared to Wallochia. So its not that Turks armies huge, but Wallochian armies were small.

[Gorrrrrn]

been trying to give the turks a chance in early era with rozmod with mixed results:

problems:
trade income - turks are spread out in a line meaning they get relatively less trade income internal to their empire
compared to a faction like england where all the regions can trade with each other.
sea trade - even with port at basra they can't trade early on as all other potential ports are rebel - they have to capture non-adjacent regions to get any sea trade there.
elsewhere iconium can generate sea trade income if turks get trade relations with neighbours (and that disappears if they're at war.)
strategic location - turks are in the midst of several hostile factions - byzantines, crusaders, cumans, khwarezm and fatimids. all want to expand into turkish territory -
makes getting alliances very important for survival but also very difficult.
unit upkeep - turks seem to pay more for unit upkeep esp for horse archers which should be relatively cheap.

(if you wanted to reproduce a more historical solution you'd need to:
- make all Byz family members very disloyal and prone to revolt.
- severely limit crusader recruitment
- prevent khwarezm armies from crossing mountains (esp in winter)
- prevent fatimids from sending infantry armies across deserts
- prevent cumans from doing much of anything in turkish area.)

[Ichon]

If there could be a way to make a castle in one of the northern mountain passes that K-Shah armies or Mongols have difficulty passing that might help somewhat, especially if Turks get a 2nd major recruitment center short ways behind that. That would force K-Shah to come further south into contact with Fatimids more likely and Mongols to go north and south more. Be interesting to see results anyway.

Trade income for Turks is going to be low- also their ratio of castles to cities and that many of their cities are undeveloped. Would be nice if Adana, Antioch, Damascus, Jerusalem were more developed in early game. Maybe a couple others- if Adana had lower garrison then Turks would more often capture it early and gain access to rich city with sea trade. Also gives CS a bit more leverage with Antioch and Jerusalem 1 level higher to start.

I did notice playing Turks that the HA seemed a bit expensive but some of them are also better stats. The very basic unit though is not that good and seems expensive. Human player will prioritize getting ports but AI often does not. I don't see Cumans being an issue for Turks- usually Byz and Fatimids are their problems- occasionally K-Shah but by the time they get there in force Turks are already half gone.

Is there a way to script closed mountains passed in winter? That would be really really cool. I'm sure I'd have heard if some other mod accomplished it though. Wow- with that and BGR I would have to play sooo many factions all over again.

Biggest problem is that MTW does not work well with nomads... in this period Turkic peoples were spread fairly broadly and any campaigns lost by Seljuks often had easy time replacing manpower so even though many other their urban centers weren't developed aside from what they captured, their population base was actually still quite high. Until Mongols pushed remaining Turks west or absorbed them into the various Khanates by 1300s in 1100 Turks were still moving around.