The Byzantine Empire (Medieval 2: Total War)
Here I propose to discuss the Eastern Roman Empire.In my vzgyad Byzantium in the game a few nedorabotanno and weakened. In fact, in the 11th century (the beginning of the campaign in Madivala) Byzantium occupied a much larger territory than in the game. If you look at other historical game about the middle ages, even the old Knights of Honor, there LIE bigger and stronger.
Also learn more about the unique units.
1.) Cataphracts is one of the best heavy cavalry in the game.
2.) Where the Vikings? They were like the eternal guards of Constantinople?
3.) Roman infantry (later the remnants of the Legionnaires) in the Byzantine Empire, too, not...
4.) But the fleet really strong, but dromone or the firing of the court. It pleases.
The main advantages
In addition to the excellent cavalry and Navy, the Byzantine Empire, there is a magnificent unique buildings - public baths and aqueducts. These structures improve population health and increase its growth. It really helps to deal with the problems of the crowded cities in the later moves, and even when plague in the city.
Main disadvantages
Have a LIE there is one big weakness - the lack of gunpowder units, but the most common guns... It's really bad, but you can hire mercenary archers and cannons.
Additionally, the Byzantine Empire is at the crossroads of Catholicism and Islam, which is slightly complicates the game.
I consider Byzantium a powerful, unusual power, a game which is markedly different from gaming in the European countries. I think everyone who is tired of England, France, Germany, etc. should play for her.
Leva 1991, occupy ROME, or Constantinople, or nice city of England, and then be able to build the DRY DOCK, and there are already ships. which ocean is crossed.....Ah, that Age of Empires part 1 remembered...what could it be?
And so I have Constantinople, in fact, when playing as Byzantium it from the very beginning. And what about the first Age of Empires... I think she is quite unlike the Medival 2...
Leva1991
I still did not swim. But, as I understand it, eventually, after some engineering and geographical discoveries, you can build 4 types of ships, whether caravels, whether as something else nazyvayutsya. Them and you can swim wherever you want. Again, he has not sailed.
Talk about one fight.
I gathered together an army: 1 General, 5 katafraktov, 5 Latiano and 9 of the Byzantine cavalry. One cavalry. Moving this army turned out. Well, I think a walk on the rear of the Danes and plunder what you can, naturally moving away from large armies of the enemy. But only went into the woods on the way Vienna-Prague as ran into an ambush of a small army of Danes attacked them, and the course ended, my army to rest, and then pounced on me two more armies, one of which is full of all sorts of armored Vikings with axes Yes crossbows. Well, I think, all will not retreat, the army is put, but will poloviny brave Danes. And the battle began. I put forward their horse archers against the first attacking army, as heavy cavalry was placed on the hill to wait for the main army and 3-TEW. Of course horse archers killed 1st army(about 7 foot troops) having lost 50% of the composition. and then from the forest came at me 2nd best army of the Danes. I looked at them, was going to line up and pounce, but while the system lost. Or now or never. A more beautiful spectacle I have ever seen, the avalanche knights in two lines of 6 groups ahead of them 4, every 4 rows. I was on the part of the Danes to max zoom and look like thunder approaching from the slope armored cavalry guys are scary. Now I understand why in those days the knights ruled the battlefield. 3rd army of the Danes from mercenary spearmen tried to stand in systray, but was shoot the horse archers and finished off by them in melee. Well, and the 2nd, Oh and somewhere was the 2nd? :) And interestingly, even clerics(heavy cavalry with maces) has not withstood the tete-a-tete with cataractae, just kicks! Otoh: nearly 1,400 prisoners and ceases to exist 3 army Danes, although they are fighting is not bad. I have a: 35% loss, mostly horse archers and this army stood then 1 not less than a bloody battle and was sent for replenishment. The number Lychak for the fight exceeded all my expectations - all the heavy cavalry in silver. Do not argue, infantry important on the battlefield, but it turns out not always.
Fans of horse archers know English this way:
http://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=73479
The thread is long and with lots of pictures (screenshots) so be careful those who are on a moped.
2BlackCap: infantry is in fact not needed in those days. Not just proven to everyone, from the Parthians (which is the defeat of Crassus at three times the advantage of the latter), then Huns, then the Mongols (Timurids essentially the same Mongols, only under a different Khan). Horse archers calmly shot her, and then destroy Stroy heavy cavalry finishes and rout.
But the problem is that in Europe, a lot of forests. In the same Denmark in those days every tomeny just had no place to turn around. Ie teryaetsya the main advantage of cavalry... and an ambush it is easy to arrange (infantry).
Knights was largely a psychological weapon. If the line and will not run from this avalanche that you described, then you have zadelyvali for sure. Because a solid wall of tanks coming right at you in the open field the spectacle of it..
And the infantry was used because it was much cheaper than the knight, and the effect was often given not much worse. Easier to ditch half the army of peasants that cost 5,000 florins than a hundred knights worth 10,000 florins, and not only because it is cheaper. Army of poorly trained peasants with spears is easier to recover than the company of noble knights, which is actually quite limited.
2 BlackCap
2, Houdin
I agree with the power of the cavalry! In fact, the army of mixed cavalry (horse archers, heavy and light cavalry) can do any other. She will not stop any spearmen that they can shoot from afar, especially if they will build a wall of copies to each system will be. And so on my personal experience(about the use of spears against heavy cavalry):
Hungarian-Roman war, the battle of Budapest. Almost complete Hungarian army consisting almost celcom of spearmen defeated my army consisting of 10 different teams cord. cavalry and 2 units of Byzantine infantry. When the main force attacked the center of the Hungarian army, 3 of the detachment of cavalry went to the rear and all! Almost all Hungarians retreated immediately after my stroke.
LEVA 1991, quite correct to say waranga( so they called and of. translation), not the Vikings - though the meaning is the same, well, that is the Vikings, the Byzantines called them sarangani, Slavs, Vikings, and Europeans Normans. Themselves they called the Vikings (vikingau which means warrior, the one who in the campaign) OST the Big school encyclopedia.History of the middle ages. firm Russika.
BOOKS MUST BE READ
In the first medivel Byzantium was steeper , the units are better made.A spire for Byzantium's okay to promote trading of IP/X from the beginning of the bubble Nemer,also covered the Byzantine Empire from the Mongols and timurov muslimani and Russia, what a gut.
You say the Turks are strong, the Byzantine Empire surrounded. I play for Russia, so I only just managed to conquer all those around rebellow, as was reported, that the Turks treated their skis in the direction of Valhalla. :) Throw the spy to the southern borders to see who they so. Was weak Byzantium. I have the spy climb, and found that onieda and in Egypt, half the middle East lopped off, although now soyuzniki. Here you have the weak Romans. Only bad thing is that they are not like me pochemuto, and now I have them war.
Actually, I think no one called the Romans weak. They have the starting position is not very good, Yes. Well, if they are developed to the limit, the weak can only be called an idiot.
Yes, but historically the Turks got killed. Moreover, the delay is soaking Byzantium got just because of war of the Turks with Timur, which they necks slapped, temporarily loosening. And then the one just begun, and you, Romans, Turks strangled already. :)
petja5
Very straightforward and biased approach.
Same Byzantium is surrounded by not friendly factions, thirst tional richness.
Timur was at war with the Ottomans already in the moment when the fate of Byzantium was predreshen so he vozmojno leash alienated the collapse of Constantinople. The Turks indeed one of the strongest factions in the game(+Denmark, Portugal, Timurids.)
The fall of Byzantium, not as Susano with the potential power of its troops there, it was all right. The decline is primarily associated with internal social and ethnic problems(lack of integrity of the ethnic group).
And so the Army of Byzantium is not poorly made, the only katafrakty too slabo protected in some chain mail, not plate armor is of course minus oslablet Byzantium not weak.
Was the campaign for Byzantium. Battle tactics of the Byzantines Asian type horse archers and heavy cavalry. So I fought for Parthia in the RTV. At the beginning of the infantry (spear) are fairly weak, but it is quite capable of stopping the onslaught of the heavy cavalry (if 3-4 squad of Marines on 1 horse отряд8-). What's interesting - having finished the campaign I didn't even have time to build the entire century of soldiers - fought in where mostly margaritae. The closer to the end of the campaign was so boleche all the factions declares war - and quietly came and besieged the castle. In General, the campaign was fun. Interestno that Byzantium almost no duplicate units from other factions.
The drop is primarily associated with internal social and ethnic problems(lack of integrity of the ethnic group).
not quite so. The ethnicity of the Byzantine Empire was formed during the wars of the Byzantine Empire and Arab Caliphate when it was only a Peninsula of Asia Minor and the Balkans; decline of the power of the state occurred after the battle of Manzikert with the Seljuk Turks, in which the entire Byzantine Army was defeated,and the Emperor himself was captured...by the way the blame for the defeat is hanging on by a relative of the Emperor, who during the battle became part of the army on the side of the Turks, and thus secured a 100% loss Roman in this battle. After the Byzantine Empire lost Asia Minor and, accordingly, taxes and the clouds of people to recruit troops (traditionally, the army recruited there). And later still the crusaders during the 4th crusade helped the Turks took Constantinople...but after 50 years, the Byzantine Empire was restored, but to return her to power failed...
Was the Romans advanced. In principle, nothing complicated. Importance of strategic planning of regions and timely expansion. Especially the core regions in the West Dyrrachium (Epirus), in the East of Smyrna. Need to establish trade in the Aegean sea -- it's a lot of money on them and mercenaries (especially in Asia Minor) can fight. As early as possible to capture the Bulgaria forward gradually. Opravila to 1390. The Mongols took Antioch and strongly spoiled nerves and indicators, and it would have had 15 moves before. Rome, incidentally, also won.
In General, it should be noted the Romans ' only the elite half squad: the super Margarity, Yes, Trebizond archers and guards archers good. Aragami stormed the city in Italy, they are quite good at it. But in the castles of good infantry -- not enough to break the Turks it is necessary to have men with two-handed axes, halberds, etc.: cavalry beat, and then some waranga. As a result, the city was 39 of 45. There was a lot of money (saved 600 thousand, in the end is not considered).
Even the Romans ' shitty militia. This is probably correct in principle, but why Turks and Egyptians they are strong? This is totally illogical, they should be considerably worse. Italian strong, then the case, although here too much: good spearmen, crossbowmen, cavalry in great cities, SpaceGate, firearms, as a result, the locks are not needed and got a shitload of money. It turns out that the Italians are the greatest warriors that complete stupidity.
Here in the Crusades romeyskoy army has become much bigger and more diverse tactics. Now margaritae veterans in armor can not stand, but its infantry useful. Especially good provincial infantry the combination of price-quality-availability.
As for the lack of firearms, it is, of course, the disgrace, because you know that the best the Turks gunners were Greeks,-renegades (Yes, where them to take the other was).
As for the history, adhere to the ideas of Gumilev, all the time. They have lived your life and it is fruitful.
Another nice fight for the Orthodox and not depend on dad. Now, if it were possible to change faith, that would be the case, but just some Catholics -- ugh, gross.
PS
Of course, a bit annoying such stupidity as Hiking Byzantine spearmen, armed with swords (they look great by the way, the few for whom all three available upgrade armor). In General I totally agree with everyone stating that the cavalry had conditioner Dismounting, instead of doing a separate `Hiking the feudal knights''.
P. P. S.
Please accusations of religious intolerance are not present in the absence of such. But his beliefs are not going anywhere, because it is insulting, when to implement them have only 2 factions, and the opponents very much.
Exit here one: don't like, don't play.
For Byzantium is a pleasure to play. The Turks, Hungarians, Byzantines, Egypt, krestonostsy(uninvited guest is worse than...) and the MONGOLS!!!