Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Lion.Kanzen

List of mercenaries

Recommended Posts

Yeah I want put some order to do it this. And I be mentioned even the units thst are in a faction.
Other reason is the user can suggest other relevant warriors.
The first sort is for Culture Faction and the other for class, style weapons and armor, and fight.
The third by version of game first part and second.
######################

my list is by Ethnic-region

or Minifaction.mercenay.
####updated############
Mythos basic mercenaries (sort biome)
These are first approved basic. I called first generation.
Hindu Kush/India

  • Kushan Cavalry
  • Indian War Elephant

Eastern

  • Eastern Archer
  • Eastern Light Cavalry
  • Indian War Elephant

Steppes

  • Scythian Horse Archer (male and female variations)
  • Scythian Axeman

Arabia

  • Camel Raider (Cav Skirmisher)
  • Arabian Javelineer

Levant (this is represented as a mercenary dock or port)

  • Phoenician Trireme
  • Judean Sikarios (knifeman)
  • Cilicia (this is represented as a mercenary dock or port)
  • Cilician Pirate (skirmisher)
  • Cilician Pirate Ship (Hemiolia)

Anatolia

  • Galatian Swordsman
  • Armenian Cataphract
  • Egyptian
  • Nubian Archer (take this out of the Ptolemies roster)
  • Mercenary Thureophoros

Balkans

  • Thracian Peltast
  • Thracian Black Cloak (swordsman)
  • Illyrian Spearman

Greece

  • Mercenary Hoplite
  • Aetolian Euzenos (skirmisher)
  • Thessalian Lancer
  • Cretan Archer
  • Magna Grecia
  • Tarentine Cavalry
  • Samnite Swordsman
  • Mamertine Spearman

Italia
?
?
North Africa

  • Numidian Cavalry
  • Masaesylian Spearman
  • North African War Elephant
  • Celtica
  • Celtic Auxiliary Spearman
  • Gallic Auxiliary Cavalry

Iberia

  • Celt-Iberian Swordsman
  • Balearic Slinger
  • Iberian Allied Cavalry
  • And then each civ could add 1-3 of their own specific mercs once they capture one of the above.

For instance:

  • Persians
  • Kardakes Hoplite
  • Kardakes Takabara

Macedonian

  • War Elephant (this is how we give them the War Elephant without making it a "standard" unit for them)
  • Greek Allied Hoplite

--------- General mercenaries ----------
This in order create the minifaction warrior and redistribute in them and Mercenary camp.
African

  • Gaetuli warrior(I need type) Yugurta wars Gaius Salustius - they are a ethnic that form Numidian Empire
  • Berebers cavalry
  • Elephant African Rider - Elite.

Athens

  • 1- Generic Name: Athenian Trireme.Specific Name: Triḗrēs Athēnaïkós.vClass: Trireme.
  • 2-Generic Name: Light Warship. Specific Name: Pentēkónteros. Class: Bireme.
  • -sailors/Marines

Dev source: http://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/Civ%3A_Athenians

Armenian
-

Bactrian
-Indian pikeman (Hellenistic)
-Indian Elephant
-Cavalry lancer

Balearic
Balearic slinger(Iberian)

Berebers
Cavalry swordsman
Desert infantry swordsman
Brigantes
Pirate brigantine ship(very light ship).

Celtic
-cavalry
-naked fanatic

Cilician
-Pirate galley
-Cilician Pirate

Cretan
Archer infantry
Marine/ship
Dahae
Cavalry archer
Infantry archer

Dacian
-Heavy swordman cavalry (elite noble)
-Heavy swordman

Egyptian
Camel swordman
Royal guard sword (kapesh sword)elite.
Priest of Isis. May be a bonus.


Epirotes
Cavalry Lancer
Pikeman
Etruscan
-
Galatian
Swordman
Cavalry swordsman

Iberian
Iberian Lancer.(Carthaginian embassy already)
Scutarii

illyrian
Illyrian Spearman hoplite
Illyrian Raider. Axe throwing
Illyrian Pirate Ship.

Italiots
Samnites infantry sword
Samnites infantry skirmish
Samnites spearman
Tarantine cavalry (skirmisher)

Allied Italic cavalry skirmisher
Corsican Pirate ship
Sardinian Pirate ship


Jews
-Maccabean infantry
-Slinger
-Zealot. Fanatic (I'm not sure with this one.)

Kushan
Cataphract
Cavalry archer

Libyan
Spearman
Libyan skirmisher

Macedon
Bolt shooter
Silver shield (elite)
Pikeman
Cavalry lancer(cheap)

Mauryan
Elephant armored
Chariot archer
Heavy infantry mace.
Elephant archer

Median
Heavy cavalry lancer
Archer

Nabatean
- Camel Archer
-Camel swordman

Nubian
Archer infantryman
Infantry spear
Infantry skirmish.

Numidian
Cavalry skirmisher
Sword Calvary

Parthian
Cataphract
Heavy Axemen
Shield bearer

Rhodes
-swordman marine
-hoplite
-archer infantry
-Slinger(cheap)

Roman
Veteran swordman(elite)
Siege ballista
Pirate Roman Quinquirreme (Sextus Pompey)

Pergamon
-Pikeman
-Cavalry Lancer
-Galatian Swordman

Phoenician
Haevy Trireme.

Pontos
Kardace hoplite(elite)
Cataphract
Shield bearer
Scythed chariot(elite)
Eastern pikeman(cheap)

Syrian
Archer infantry
Pikeman Syrian (Seleucid)
Romanized Infantry(elite)

Scythians
Amazon cavalry archer(elite)
Amazon axe cavalry(elite)
Heavy lancer(elite)
Spearman
Infantry archer(cheap)
Long Swordman

Suebii
Axe infantry - Night raiders(exotic)
Cavalry swordman
Infantry archer
Long swordman infantry

Syracuse
Hoplite
Siege tower
Bolt shooter
Light ship
Medium
Heavy ship
Marines(swordman)/hoplite

Thracian
Black coated (elite)
Thracian hoplite(cheap)
Cavalry Lancer
Skirmisher

Tessalian
Cavalry lancer
Cavalry skirmisher
Cavalry sword

Teutons
Heavy swordman(elite)
Skirmisher
Cavalry spearman

Thebes
Sacred band veteran(elite)


Non factional
-Incendiary pigs. Yeah they were real but not common.
-War dogs(roman, Celt, German, Dalmatae )
-light siege Ram.(very waek and cheap)

#######I'm not finish... I need a lot of help. I will post this for now but I'm editing######
I need sources and a illustrations represent these warriors.
Now you can comment and add info and ideas for other mercenary units
http://www.honga.net/totalwar/rome2/unit.php?l=en&v=dei&f=rom_seleucid&u=Gre_Marines

Edited by Lion.Kanzen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Illyrian mercenaries.

http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?378102-RTR-VII-Preview-III-The-Ardiae

This are very rare units mix celtic with Greek. Very exotic.

5PaMBtv.png

The Illyrian Grosphomachoi are effective and renowned skirmishers, pirates and raiders. These hardy warriors are found in Illyrian armies as capable skirmishers, quickly moving across the battlefield to harass enemy formations, occupy key points, or conduct ambushes. Armed with heavy throwing spears, and a large Celtic-style theuros shield for protection, these men are capable of close fighting with their secondary weapon, a small one-handed axe.

Unarmoured except for simple bronze pot helmets, these troops will not stand for long in close melee with heavy infantry, but are well matched against enemy light troops.

Hoplite Dalmatae

zScMK8C.png

These men are usually simple farmers, seafarers and pastoralists, who are mustered for war by their chieftains and war leaders with the promise of slaves and booty, or perhaps the need to defend their homeland from invasion. Politically, the organization of indigenous groups in Illyria was deeply rooted in its kinship structure, rather than in the development of the more sophisticated institutions of the polis or kingdom.

Although the thuereophoroi type of heavy skirmisher only became popular in Greece after 280 BC, it was a long-standing type of warrior in Illyria. Illyria was famous for its pirates, who typically prowled the Adriatic Sea in their small lemboi, simple biremes that may have held as few as 50 men. Fleets of these lemboi were able to sail into Greek and Italian waters, and disgorge their crew, who, armed as Grosphomachoi, were able to quickly move inland and pillage coastal regions before a coordinated defence could be mounted.

These are the standard line infantry of the Illyrians, and they fight as close order spearmen, armed with thrusting spears (dory), round theuros-style shields, and carrying a simple sword - the distinctive Illyrian sicca - as a secondary weapon. Largely unarmoured except for a simple helm, these warriors rely on their shield, mobility and fighting prowess for protection.

Although equipped with the Celtic-style theuros, these men still fought as close order spearmen, in a phalanx formation. The appearance of the theuros became widespread among the Illyrians from c. 280 BC. At this time Illyria came under the strong influence of the expansion of La Tene cultural templates from Central Europe, and the most significant exponents were the Celtic Taurisci and the Scordsici.

These Illyrian warriors were recruited in large numbers from among the men of the southern Illyrian tribes, and formed the backbone of the Illyrian armies that threatened Macedonia and Greece throughout the fourth and third centuries BC. Although these men operated as raiders and freebooters, they were capable of rapidly concentrating their strength and forming strong battle lines with which to confront their Epierote and Macedonian enemies in open battle. The Illyrians in 233 BC had no compunction about charging a larger Aitolian army (the League's whole levy), brushing aside their light infantry holding hilltops and following up with a fast downhill charge which swept away the Aitolian cavalry and heavier troops. The good order and the willingness to hold firm and fight hand to hand, displayed by the Dardanoi in 200 BC, is seen as early as 358 BC when Bardylis' men formed square when outflanked by a Macedonian army with more cavalry, and though eventually beaten put up a prolonged resistance. The contrast between 5th-century Illyrians fighting individually in no order and their 3rd-century counterparts in formed speirai suggests a marked improvement in battlefield organisation probably related to the new tactics. The Macedonian example probably had a lot to do with these changes, and improved organisation and more resolute tactics no doubt contributed to the successes of 3rd century Illyrian raiders.

The southern Illyrian communities such as the Ardiaei, Daorsi, Pleraei, Narensii, Taulantii etc, the so-called political Illyria, were under stronger Hellenistic influences, more engaged in maritime trade, economically more advanced than the peoples in the hinterland, and they enjoyed the highest levels of urbanisation in the region, apart from Liburnia. The nature of the internal structure of the Illyrian kingdom is disputed, as some scholars, such as Hammond, see it as the dominion of the most powerful people over others, while Papazoglu sees it as a strongly centralised kingdom with an unbroken tradition from the fourth century BC. The Illyrians kings had major difficulties in controlling the power of the leaders of neighbouring communities nominally subjected to their power in the third and second centuries BC, while attempting to establish a more centralised kingdom following Hellenistic models, in particular the Macedonian kingdom. Some of the stronger and economically more advanced south Illyrian peoples, such as the Daorsi or Taulantii, had an interest in forming an alliance with Rome and escaping the dominion of the Illyrian kings.

Hence, the kingdom of Illyria existed among the Illyrian peoples of southern Illyria, and appears to have consisted of certain tribes and strongmen called kings in the ancient sources establishing their pre-eminence among their neighbours. Ancient sources mention a certain Galaour, the ruler of the Taulantinoi, who, towards the end of the seventh century BC, waged wars against the king of Macedonia. Modern historians, interpreting a passage from Herodotus, have indicated that at this time an army of Encheliae, who lived around Lake Lychnitis (the present Lake Ochrid), invaded Greece and pushed as far as Delphi where they pillaged the sanctuary of the Oracle. For the next two centuries, wars became more frequent in southern Illyria and on its boundaries. The Illyrian tribes aimed not just at pillage; the Illyrian kings aimed to subjugate other Illyrian tribes into their federation.

Edited by Lion.Kanzen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cilician Epibatoi

C4Uuswm.jpg

(Cilician Swords)

Note: We can the mix of infantry with cilician pirates, pikeman, skirmisher and sword.

Cilician pirates got a long tradition of raiding behind them. Those boarding troops could also use their skills in a regular melee.

Native troops supported the Greek phalanxes of Ptolemaic Egypt. Brave and proud warriors, Egyptians fulfilled several roles, but were most commonly used as peltasts, skirmishers on the flanks of the phalanxes, or as non-phalanx infantry in difficult terrain. Although the Ptolemies adopted all the trappings of the Pharaohs and their religious infrastructure, there was still much unrest among the native population long after the succession. This was due mainly to the way the Greek overlords used the traditions of the Pharaohs to fill their coffers at the expensive of ordinary people. The core of Ptolemaic armies was always Greek until the Battle of Raphia in 217BC, when they faced such a large Seleucid force that Ptolemy IV was forced to muster some 30,000 native Egyptians for the first time. Need overcame suspicion of the disenchanted natives. The performance of the Egyptians in battle eventually led to a greater proportion of native troops in the Egyptian army and, in time, more diverse roles for those men as they gained the trust of their Greek commanders.

Edited by Lion.Kanzen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Iberi-Lusitans

Iberi Lancieri cataphract Iberian?

hKPoa50.png

These hardy Iberians are among the choicest units available to a Carthaginian commander. They are a good all-purpose heavy cavalry, and they have a staying power on the battlefield that is simply unmatched by all but the most elite cavalry forces. They do not suffer from the same morale problems that the other Iberian troops in the service of a foreign power do since they are usually lavished upon by their commanders and their officers marry into Carthaginian or Liby-Phoenician families. They wear good quality mail armor and carry long Iberian style ovular shields. This combined with their use of a cavalry spear and falcata make them ideal cavalry for both the charge and fierce melee. These are probably the most versatile heavy cavalry in the world, and their status in the Carthaginian army proves this.

Historically, the Iberian heavy cavalry was the most instrumental unit aside from the African Infantry at the battle of Cannae. They showed their martial prowess to an extreme degree by driving both the Roman and Allied heavy cavalry off the battlefield, turning and proceeding to drive the Roman light cavalry off the battlefield, then turning once more to completely surround the Roman infantry. Most cavalry would have been content with simply chasing after the Roman heavy cavalry. It takes a great deal of discipline to turn thrice, all without a commander of note during the battle! After ten years of fighting in Italy two thirds of these men were still at Hannibals side!

--------

Ok one most exotic unit is this

Dosidataskeli

The Dosidataskeli

In EB1 the Dosidataskeli unit were removed because historicaly there were very rare(according to a previous post in the .org if I remember correctly).

Edited by Lion.Kanzen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

K1wqeIC.jpg

In historiography[edit]

Herodotus reported that the Sarmatians were descendants of Amazons and Scythians, and that their wives observed their ancient maternal customs, "frequently hunting on horseback with their husbands; in war taking the field; and wearing the very same dress as the men". Moreover, said Herodotus, "No girl shall wed till she has killed a man in battle". In the story related by Herodotus, a group of Amazons was blown across the Maeotian Lake (the Sea of Azov) into Scythia near the cliff region (today's southeastern Crimea). After learning the Scythian language, they agreed to marry Scythian men, on the condition that they not be required to follow the customs of Scythian women. According to Herodotus, this band moved toward the northeast, settling beyond the Tanais (Don) river, and became the ancestors of the Sauromatians. According to Herodotus, the Sarmatians fought with the Scythians against Darius the Great in the 5th century BC.

Hippocrates describes them as: "They have no right breasts...for while they are yet babies their mothers make red-hot a bronze instrument constructed for this very purpose and apply it to the right breast and cauterize it, so that its growth is arrested, and all its strength and bulk are diverted to the right shoulder and right arm."

Amazons came to play a role in Roman historiography. Caesar reminded the Senate of the conquest of large parts of Asia by Semiramis and the Amazons. Successful Amazon raids against Lycia and Cilicia contrasted with effective resistance by Lydian cavalry against the invaders (Strabo 5.504; Nicholas Damascenus). Gnaeus Pompeius Trogus pays particularly detailed attention to the Amazons. The story of the Amazons as deriving from a Cappadocian colony of two Scythian princes Ylinos and Scolopetos is due to him. Pliny the Elder records some surprising facts pointing to the valley of the Terme River as possibly being their home: a mountain named for them (the modern Mason Dagi), as well as a settlement Amazonium; Herotodus (VI.86) first mentions their capital Themiscyra, which Pliny locates near the Terme.[77] Philostratus places the Amazons in the Taurus Mountains. Ammianus places them east of Tanais, as neighbouring the Alans. Procopius places them in the Caucasus. Diodorus Siculus (Bibliotheca historica chapter 49) derived the Amazons from Atlantis and located them in western Libya. He also relates the story of Hercules defeating the Amazons at Themiscyre.

Although Strabo shows skepticism as to their historicity, the Amazons in general continue to be taken as historical throughout Late Antiquity. Several Church Fathers speak of the Amazons as of a real people. Solinus embraces the account of Pliny. Under Aurelianus, captured Gothic women were identified as Amazons (Claudianus). The account of Justinus was influential, and was used as a source by Orosius who continued to be read during the European Middle Ages. Medieval authors thus continue the tradition of locating the Amazons in the North, Adam of Bremen placing them at the Baltic Sea and Paulus Diaconus in the heart of Germania.

Speculation that the idea of Amazons contains a core of reality is based on archaeological findings from burials, pointing to the possibility that some Sarmatian women may have participated in battle. These findings have led scholars to suggest that the Amazonian legend in Greek mythology may have been "inspired by real warrior women".[76]

Evidence of high-ranking warrior women comes from kurgans in southern Ukraine and Russia. David Anthony notes, "About 20% of Scythian-Sarmatian "warrior graves" on the lower Don and lower Volga contained women dressed for battle similar to how men dress, a phenomenon that probably inspired the Greek tales about the Amazons."[83]

Mounted Amazon in Scythian costume, on an Attic red-figure vase, ca 420 BCE

Up to 25% of military burials were of armed Sarmatian women usually including bows.[84] Russian archaeologist Vera Kovalevskaya points out that when Scythian men were away fighting or hunting, nomadic women would have to be able to defend themselves, their animals and pasture-grounds competently. During the time that the Scythians advanced into Asia and achieved near-hegemony in the Near-East, there was a period of twenty-eight years when the men would have been away on campaigns for long periods. During this time the women would not only have had to defend themselves, but to reproduce and this could well be the origin of the idea that Amazons mated once a year with their neighbours, if Herodotus actually based his accounts on fact.[84]

Before modern archaeology uncovered some of the Scythian burials of warrior-maidens entombed under kurgans in the region of Altai Mountains and Sarmatia,[85] [86] giving concrete form at last to the Greek tales, the origin of the Amazon story had been the subject of speculation among classics scholars. In the 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica speculation ranged along the following lines:

While some regard the Amazons as a purely mythical people, others assume an historical foundation for them. The deities worshipped by them were Ares (who is consistently assigned to them as a god of war, and as a god of Thracian and generally northern origin) and Artemis, not the usual Greek goddess of that name, but an Asiatic deity in some respects her equivalent. It is conjectured that the Amazons were originally the temple-servants and priestesses (hierodulae) of this goddess; and that the removal of the breast corresponded with the self-mutilation of the god Attis and the galli, Roman priests of Rhea Cybele. Another theory is that, as the knowledge of geography extended, travellers brought back reports of tribes ruled entirely by women, who carried out the duties which elsewhere were regarded as peculiar to man, in whom alone the rights of nobility and inheritance were vested, and who had the supreme control of affairs. Hence arose the belief in the Amazons as a nation of female warriors, organized and governed entirely by women. According to J. Viirtheim (De Ajacis origine, 1907), the Amazons were of Greek origin [...] It has been suggested that the fact of the conquest of the Amazons being assigned to the two famous heroes of Greek mythology, Heracles and Theseus [...] shows that they were mythical illustrations of the dangers which beset the Greeks on the coasts of Asia Minor; rather perhaps, it may be intended to represent the conflict between the Greek culture of the colonies on the Euxine and the barbarism of the native inhabitants.

Edited by Lion.Kanzen
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pontos Army ( like to Carthage: a army of mercenaries) that is one of many is Mitridates IV called the Hannibal of East.

(Wikipedia) : T he term did come to apply to a separate state after the establishment of the Kingdom of Pontus, beyond the Halys River (Kızıl river). The Persian dynasty which was to found this kingdom had during the fourth century B.C. ruled the Greek city of Cius (or Kios) in Mysia, with its first known member being Ariobarzanes I of Cius and the last ruler based in the city being Mithridates II of Cius. Mithridates II's son, also called Mithridates, would become Mithridates I Ktistes of Pontus ("Ktistes" meaning "The Founder"). During the troubled period following the death of Alexander the Great, Mithridates Ktistes was for a time in the service of Antigonus, one of Alexander's successors, and successfully maneuvering in this unsettled time managed, shortly after 302 BC, to create the Kingdom of Pontus which would be ruled by his descendants mostly bearing the same name, till 64 BC. Thus, this Persian dynasty managed to survive and prosper in the Hellenistic world while the main Persian Empire had fallen. As the greater part of this kingdom lay within the immense region of Cappadocia, which in early ages extended from the borders of Cilicia to the Euxine (Black Sea), the kingdom as a whole was at first called "Cappadocia towards the Pontus", but afterwards simply "Pontus," the name Cappadocia being henceforth restricted to the southern half of the region previously included under that title. This kingdom reached its greatest height under Mithridates VI or Mithradates Eupator, commonly called the Great, who for many years carried on war with the Romans. Under him, the realm of Pontus included not only Pontic Cappadocia but also the seaboard from the Bithynian frontier to Colchis, part of inland Paphlagonia, and Lesser Armenia.

Pontic army : Due to the pontic roots, Pontic army was mixed and original. Mithridates was clearly a persian ruler, but heavily hellenized. His army was composed by greek style and persian style warriors. The "old" army, those of the beginnings in 300bc, was probably still heavily persian in style. It could have counted on levy spearmen like the sparabara, light mountaineers assault troops as the kardaka, and archers. Elite units would have been probably of royal takabara and kardaka style. Pontic cavalry was described having units of numerous horse skirmishers, an unusual fact as most eastern horsemen use bows instead. This was a product of the ancient persian style cavalry. Local troops were also available in large numbers, from cappadocia for the most, scythians from the black sea as mercenaries, even sarmatians. Nearby armenian mountaineers could also make valuable and cheap raiding infantry. Lately, in 150 bc., Pontus accesses to its greatest extent during Mithridates VI reign, and troops from all minor asia were available. A large part of the infantry was now composed of light "romanized" soldiers, driven from the light successors thureophoroi and the thorakitai evolution. Although this army was still impressive, it was no match against the Roman legions which crushed them definitely at Chaeroneia, when the pontic commander, Archelaus, gathered an army of 120 000 composed of Pontic, Thracian, Bithynian, Cappadocian, Scythian, Phrygian and Galatian troops. Sulla's tactic for his 40 000 roman legionaries and greek-macedonian defected troops rendered the famous pontic scythian chariots useless while having his infantry on the top of the chaeronian hills.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Hellenistic is more obviusly with variations.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hellenistic_armies

The Hellenistic armies is the term applied to the armies of the successor kingdoms, which emerged after the death of Alexander the Great. After his death, Alexander's huge empire was torn between his successors, the Diadochi. During the Wars of the Diadochi, the Macedonian army, as developed by Alexander and Philip II, gradually adopted new units and tactics, further developing Macedonian warfare. The armies of the Diadochi bear few differences from that of Alexander, but during the era of the Epigonoi (Successors), the differences were obvious, favoring numbers over quality and weight over maneuverability. The limited availability of Greek conscripts in the east led to an increasing dependence on mercenary forces, whereas in the west, Hellenistic armies were continuously involved in wars, which soon exhausted local manpower, paving the way for Roman supremacy. The major Hellenistic states were the Seleucid Empire, Ptolemaic Egypt and the Antigonid kingdom (Macedonia). Smaller states included: Attalid Pergamum, Pontus, Epirus, the Achaean League, the Aetolian League, Syracuse, and other states (like Athens, Sparta etc.).

Cataphracts

Cataphracts were heavily armed and armoured cavalrymen. The Cataphract (Kataphraktoi) were first introduced into the Hellenistic military tradition with the Seleucid Antiochus III the Great's anabasis in the east from 212-205 BC. With his campaigns in Parthia and Bactria, he came into contact with Cataphracts and copied them. Most of the Seleucid heavy cavalry after this period were armed in this manner, despite keeping their original unit names. The Cataphract generally only served in the eastern Hellenistic armies.

Both man and horse were entirely encased in armourin the form of scale or banded segments sewn onto a fabric. Riders' faces were covered in seamless metal helmets. The weight carried by the horse was excessive, and prolonged charges were out of the question. Instead, cataphracts trotted to within a reasonable distance before charging, exerting energy only during the decisive engagement. Once in combat, the cataphract and his steed enjoyed superb protection from attacks thanks to their armour. However, stamina, endurance and heat were always concerns in extended combat.

The standard cataphract weapon was a xyston-like spear. For close-quarter combat, a mace or sword was made available as a secondary weapon. The mace and cataphract ideas were combined into the Sassanid-introduced and Roman-named Clibanarii, who were armoured, both man and beast, in chainmail, and armed with a mace.

Dromedaries[edit]

Camels are attested in use in the Seleucid army at the battle of Magnesia, but their small number (500) suggests they were not a regular addition.[33] According to Xenophon,[34] their scent scared off horses, but this effect must not have been especially notable or more writers would have commented on this.

Chariots[edit]

War chariots were rarely used during the Hellenistic era. Their value against any opponent or commander of notable skill was very low as was already proven by the Ten Thousand (the Greek mercenaries with whom Xenophon served) at Cunaxa and Alexander in Arbela. Their use is considered more harmful than beneficial in the Greek tactical manuals, yet they could have a frightening effect on badly trained, inexperienced opponents, such as Asiatic tribal armies. The idea that the Romans had no previous experience in fighting chariots might be the reason why Antiochus III used them against the Roman army, with disastrous results for his own army. Appian suggests that wounding the horses drawing a war chariot can cast the formation in disorder, because an out-of-control chariot forces other chariots to engage in evading maneuvers to avoid being hit by its scythes.[26] Archelaus also used them against Sulla in the battle of Chaeronea, again to no avail.[27]

Edited by Lion.Kanzen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Summary.

Xerxes I, king of Persia, who invaded Greece in 484 BC employed Greek mercenaries.

In Anabasis, Xenophon recounts how Cyrus the Younger hired a large army of Greek mercenaries (the "Ten Thousand") in 401 BC to seize the throne of Persia from his brother, Artaxerxes II. Though Cyrus' army was victorious at the Battle of Cunaxa, Cyrus himself was killed in battle and the expedition rendered moot. Stranded deep in enemy territory, the Spartan general Clearchus and most of the other Greek generals were subsequently killed by treachery. Xenophon played an instrumental role in encouraging "The Ten Thousand" Greek army to march north to the Black Sea in an epic fighting retreat.

Memnon of Rhodes (380 – 333 BC): was the commander of the Greek mercenaries working for the Persian King Darius III when Alexander the Great of Macedonia invaded Persia in 334 BC and won the Battle of the Granicus River. Alexander also employed Greek mercenaries during his campaigns. These were men who fought for him directly and not those who fought in city-state units attached to his army.

Carthage contracted Balearic Islands shepherds as slingshooters during the Punic Wars against Rome. The vast majority of the Carthaginian military – except the highest officers, the navy, and the home guard – were mercenaries.

Members of independent Thracian tribes such as the Bessi and Dii often joined the ranks of large organized armies as mercenaries.

The Sons of Mars were Italian mercenaries used by the Greek kings of Syracuse until after the Punic Wars.

Celtic mercenaries were a staple of many ancient armies. The king of Bythnia hired Galatians to his armies and gave them a parcel of land, which became Galatia, after their defeat, brought on by their raids and warfare against the various cities in the regions. There were also the semi-mythic amsaig, noted foremost as the mercenaries of Cu Chullain, but the term advanced later as a term for various Gaelic mercenaries.[citation needed] Another figure in oral legend, Milesius was given the princess Scota after conducting a successful campaign for Ancient Egypt.

Mithridates VI Eupator recruited a large number of Iranians along with the Galatians into the Pontic army during the Mithridatic Wars against Rome, using the Leucosyri, Persians and Scythians.

Illyrians were hired across the Balkans and further. They were known for their unreliability.

In the late Roman Empire, it became increasingly difficult for Emperors and generals to raise military units from the citizenry for various reasons: lack of manpower, lack of time available for training, lack of materials, and, inevitably, political considerations. Therefore, beginning in the late 4th century, the empire often contracted whole bands of barbarians either within the legions or as autonomous foederati. The barbarians were Romanized and surviving veterans were established in areas requiring population.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we are to include mercenaries and mercenary camps, it is important that we don't add too much for for the poor art team to add these units to the game. :) Sometimes I like to start designing an idea as outlandish as possible, then pare it down in subsequent design iterations. But since the game is in an advanced state, I think it would be better to start an idea small and simple, then expand it later when time becomes available.

To that end, I think the list of mercenaries should be a lot smaller than you have here. I think it's okay to list as many mercenaries as you can think of, then pick and choose the more interesting or historically important from that list.

First, I think we can decide on a list of biomes or cultures we would like to represent as mercenary camps/mercenaries, then go from there. I think these cultures would work, starting from the East and moving West, and I'll give some merc ideas with them:

Hindu Kush/India

  • Kushan Cavalry
  • Indian War Elephant

Eastern

  • Eastern Archer
  • Eastern Light Cavalry
  • Indian War Elephant

Steppes

  • Scythian Horse Archer (male and female variations)
  • Scythian Axeman

Arabia

  • Camel Raider (Cav Skirmisher)
  • Arabian Javelineer

Levant (this is represented as a mercenary dock or port)

  • Phoenician Trireme
  • Judean Sikarios (knifeman)

Cilicia (this is represented as a mercenary dock or port)

  • Cilician Pirate (skirmisher)
  • Cilician Pirate Ship (Hemiolia)

Anatolia

  • Galatian Swordsman
  • Armenian Cataphract

Egyptian

  • Nubian Archer (take this out of the Ptolemies roster)
  • Mercenary Thureophoros

Balkans

  • Thracian Peltast
  • Thracian Black Cloak (swordsman)
  • Illyrian Spearman

Greece

  • Mercenary Hoplite
  • Aetolian Euzenos (skirmisher)
  • Thessalian Lancer
  • Cretan Archer

Magna Grecia

  • Tarentine Cavalry
  • Samnite Swordsman
  • Mamertine Spearman

Italia

  • ?
  • ?

North Africa

  • Numidian Cavalry
  • Masaesylian Spearman
  • North African War Elephant

Celtica

  • Celtic Auxiliary Spearman
  • Gallic Auxiliary Cavalry

Iberia

  • Celt-Iberian Swordsman
  • Balearic Slinger
  • Iberian Allied Cavalry

And then each civ could add 1-3 of their own specific mercs once they capture one of the above.

For instance:

Persians

  • Kardakes Hoplite
  • Kardakes Takabara

Macedonians

  • War Elephant (this is how we give them the War Elephant without making it a "standard" unit for them)
  • Greek Allied Hoplite

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we are to include mercenaries and mercenary camps, it is important that we don't add too much for for the poor art team to add these units to the game. :) Sometimes I like to start designing an idea as outlandish as possible, then pare it down in subsequent design iterations. But since the game is in an advanced state, I think it would be better to start an idea small and simple, then expand it later when time becomes available.

To that end, I think the list of mercenaries should be a lot smaller than you have here. I think it's okay to list as many mercenaries as you can think of, then pick and choose the more interesting or historically important from that list.

First, I think we can decide on a list of biomes or cultures we would like to represent as mercenary camps/mercenaries, then go from there. I think these cultures would work, starting from the East and moving West, and I'll give some merc ideas with them:

Hindu Kush/India

  • Kushan Cavalry
  • Indian War Elephant

Eastern

  • Eastern Archer
  • Eastern Light Cavalry
  • Indian War Elephant

Steppes

  • Scythian Horse Archer (male and female variations)
  • Scythian Axeman (How about some melee cavalry instead, certainly more common than infantry. Steppe Cataphracts would be good for flavor over any other)

Arabia

  • Camel Raider (Cav Skirmisher)
  • Arabian Javelineer

Levant (this is represented as a mercenary dock or port)

  • Phoenician Trireme
  • Judean Sikarios (knifeman) (A thureophoros version would be more common, and a Syrian archer should be a must)

Cilicia (this is represented as a mercenary dock or port)

  • Cilician Pirate (skirmisher)
  • Cilician Pirate Ship (Hemiolia)

Anatolia

  • Galatian Swordsman
  • Armenian Cataphract (Cappadocian Cavalry would have a far more common factional range than Armenian Catafracts, and is an exact Anatolian unit, not something slightly off geographically)

Egyptian

  • Nubian Archer (take this out of the Ptolemies roster)
  • Mercenary Thureophoros (something natively egyptian istead, like a levy spearman?)

Balkans

  • Thracian Peltast
  • Thracian Black Cloak (swordsman)
  • Illyrian Spearman (Illyrians would mostly be peltasts as well, Also many famous tribes had Cavalry, we should probably include a Paeonian or Thracian one)

Greece

  • Mercenary Hoplite
  • Aetolian Euzenos (skirmisher) (It's spelled Euzonos. However, a peltast would be far more common and a Rhodian Slinger more interesting/worth the recruit for most factions. Most famous Aetolian unit would be it's Cavalry, even if not in great numbers. We could also include a ship here, most city states granted ships to bigger powers all the time, and Cretans and Aetolians were often pirates)
  • Thessalian Lancer
  • Cretan Archer

Magna Grecia

  • Tarentine Cavalry
  • Samnite Swordsman (Samnite should more often than not be spearman, and Mamertines were for only a tiny period. How about Samnite Spear + a Syracusan Ship or Siege weapon, or a Gastraphetes)
  • Mamertine Spearman

Italia

  • ? (Italiot Ship - the early roman navy based on them, Etruscan Hoplite, Capuan Cavalry, any Celtic unit)
  • ?

North Africa

  • Numidian Cavalry
  • Masaesylian Spearman (A skismisher would be more common, or a Libyan Spearman, or a (Gaetuli/Garamantine?) chariot for flavor and since they used chariots quite late in the era)
  • North African War Elephant

Celtica

  • Celtic Auxiliary Spearman
  • Gallic Auxiliary Cavalry

Iberia

  • Celt-Iberian Swordsman
  • Balearic Slinger
  • Iberian Allied Cavalry

And then each civ could add 1-3 of their own specific mercs once they capture one of the above. (Actually this gives some sense to capturing instead of having neutral camps, even if I'm still in favor of the later and could be implemented either way)

For instance:

Persians

  • Kardakes Hoplite
  • Kardakes Takabara

Macedonians

  • War Elephant (this is how we give them the War Elephant without making it a "standard" unit for them)
  • Greek Allied Hoplite

Comments in Red.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I recommended basic, @mythos_ruler, many are in game already. The people want more for many reasons we see about them.

I add some units that other users ask add but we can't add them, add Pirates to have enoght forces.

@guys there most common basic warrior in game, they serve in all great empires and kingdoms or serves to rebels faction against great Empires. I use the basic class named. Now I will proceeded to check if they are in game.

The units I posteded after are that aren't included. Pontos units and steppes are the missing here and Illyrians.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guy I need complete the list.

Only I put the class unit but not specific unit Mythos give some suggestions using existent units. But I'm not memorized each unit in game.

Other can be good is open a wiki info. Like civ factional desing.

I try to fill empty classes. With specifict unit or name.

@Mega mania you can help me with cavalry. Especially eastern.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pergamon / Attalid Cavalry.

At Magnesia, the cataphracts routed the Roman legions but it was Eumenes' cavalry that turned the tide and effectively ensured victory for the Romans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Karian Axemen.

c1kTSH1.jpg

These Greek soldiers from Karia in western Anatolia were known for their use of deadly one-handed, single-headed axes. Axes had long been used throughout Egyptian and Greek culture, from the slashing, pole-mounted examples of the former to the double-edged labrys, associated with Labraunda and held sacred by the Karian people. Acting as shock troops in Ptolemaic armies, the Karians used their axes to hack their way through armour. Even heavy or chain armour was no defence, as the concussive force of a weighted axe head could still crush bones and organs even if it failed to penetrate. Although effective, fighting in this way was both tiring and clumsy, and the initial benefit from a charge would soon wear off. Lightly armoured, with little more than shields and helmets, Karian axemen were best employed attacking the flanks of more heavily armoured foes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About Karian Mercenaries

These Greek soldiers from Karia in western Anatolia were known for their use of deadly one-handed, single-headed axes. Axes had long been used throughout Egyptian and Greek culture, from the slashing, pole-mounted examples of the former to the double-edged labrys, associated with Labraunda and held sacred by the Karian people. Acting as shock troops in Ptolemaic armies, the Karians used their axes to hack their way through armour. Even heavy or chain armour was no defence, as the concussive force of a weighted axe head could still crush bones and organs even if it failed to penetrate. Although effective, fighting in this way was both tiring and clumsy, and the initial benefit from a charge would soon wear off. Lightly armoured, with little more than shields and helmets, Karian axemen were best employed attacking the flanks of more heavily armoured foes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I write this to have historical basis from my selected list of mercenaries and the Carians are one of my favorites .

Pharaoh's mercenaries

Like the Swiss, the Gurkha's, and other mountain people, the Carians were forced to become mercenaries. Their country was too poor to maintain a large population, and younger sons went overseas to build a new future. They were military specialists and it is no coincidence that Herodotus writes that the Greeks had been indebted to the Carians for three military inventions: making shields with handles, putting devices on shields, and fitting crests on helmets (Histories 1.175). Because of this last invention, the Persians called the Carians 'cocks'.

The first reference to Carian mercenaries can be found in the Bible: in 2 Kings 11.4, we read about Carians in Judah. (This may look strange, but it fits the picture: according to 2 Samuel 8.18, king David had a guard of Cretans.) The books of Kings were probably composed in the sixth century, but the information stems from older sources; this is the only mentioning of the Carians in the dark ages.

The Carians, however, were especially famous because they served the Egyptian pharaoh. Our main source is, again, Herodotus. He tells us that the first to employ these men was pharaoh Psammetichus I (664-610; Histories 2.152), probably at the beginning of his reign. Some circumstantial evidence supports Herodotus' words, because archaeologists have discovered several settlements in the western part of the delta of the Nile that were founded by people from the Aegean. These settlements can be dated in the seventh century.

Meanwhile, their homeland had been subjected to the Lydian king Alyattes, and, later, to the Persians. This happened after the Persian king Cyrus the Great had defeated the powerful king of Lydia, Croesus, who had had some influence in Caria.

The Carians offered their services to their new masters. They are mentioned in cuneiform documents from Borsippa in Babylonia and from the Persian capital Persepolis. When the Macedonian king Alexander the Great conquered the Achaemenid empire, he discovered a Carian settlement in the neighborhood of modern Baghdad. These Carians can not have been deported from their homeland, but must have formed a military colony, because it was a very strategic place, commanding the Silk road.

After Alexander's death, his successors contested the possession of Caria; first ruled by Antigonus Monophthalmus, it became part of the empire of Lysimachus in 301, and later became a province op the Ptolemaic empire, only to change into Seleucid hands before the mid-third century. In 188, the Romans defeated the Seleucids; the conquerors divided the country between the Pergamene kingdom in the north and Rhodes in the south. In 129, the Romans decided to annex the Pergamene part of Caria, which became part of their province Asia. The Rhodian part retained some of its independence, until it was, together with Rhodes, conquered by the Roman general Brutus in 42 BCE.

Edited by Lion.Kanzen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Source

http://europabarbarorum.wikia.com/wiki/Boii_Donno_Eporedoi_(Boii_Noble_Cavalry)

Boii Donno Eporedoi (Boii Noble Cavalry)
EB2 Boii Noble Cavalry
Boii Donno Eporedoi (Boii Noble Cavalry)
   
   
   
   
   
   

These cavalry are the finest in the Boioi nation. Well trained and with high morale they can be expected to defeat most opponents and hold their ground in a melee.

Description

The ground thunders. Beneath a torrent of hooves and steel the earth trembles. The horsemen of the Boioi, their steeds froth at the mouth, spit lapping from their bridles, their chests heave with muscle like the tides of far off lands. The Boioi riders, great men with greater valour goad their mounts onward, iron spears levelled, gripped in an iron vice. Clad in mail and helmets which glint beneath the immortal rays of the sun they ride, irresistible, indomitable, unstoppable. With the speed of lightning they ride, like a thunderclap they smash into the ranks of the foe, and like a raincloud the enemy is ripped asunder, the battlefield flooded with men running terrified from these awesome riders. 

Historically cavalry appears to have become an increasingly important component of Keltoi armies from the 3rd century BC onward, based on changes observed in the archaeological record. These include an increase in the amount of armour being worn, new helmet designs which offered better all round protection and changes in armament, namely increasingly long spears and swords, all of which appear to have been associated with an increase in the number of cavalry at this time. In the historical records from this period we also find increased mention of cavalry in Keltoi armies. At battles such as Telamon in 225BC and at Cannae in 216 BC large numbers of cavalry were being fielded, whilst the Gallic invasion of Greece in 279 BC reportedly contained 24,400 cavalry, although such numbers are no doubt exaggerated. 

The archaeological evidence demonstrates that the above mentioned developments in armour and weaponry were very much a feature of the Keltoi of Central and Eastern Europe as much as they were the populations of Gaul, indeed it could be argued that some of these developments actually began in Eastern Europe based on the existence of a type of scabbard decoration, known as "Hungarian Sword Style" which originated in this region and coincided with further lengthening of swords. Such 3rd century BC swords are well attested to in this part of Europe, like the beautiful examples from Bölcske in Hungary and Batina in Croatia. Likewise there was also an evolution in helmet styles in this part of Europe at this time with earlier, more ornate helmets such as the example from Silivas in Romania, being replaced by less ornate, more heavily reinforced types. Examples of helmets produced by the Eastern Keltoi which date to this include the Batina example from Croatia, which has the central and eastern feature of triangular iron reinforcements riveted to the side of the crown. There also exists from this time helmets which incorporate both the more practical designs of later helmets as well as ornate decorations applied to the earlier types. Arguably the most striking example of this is the Ciumesti helmet from Romania, which is similar to the Batina example but is adorned with a large bird of prey, complete with wings which moved when the wearer ran. By the 1st century BC the Keltoi of the east were producing strongly reinforced iron helmets which provided excellent all round protection. Just as with weapons of this period these Late Iron Age examples occur in the same types as those which were being produced in Gaul at this time. Examples of such helmets include the Agen type example from Cugir in Romania, a Port type helmet from Mihovo in Slovenia and a type of Novo Mesto helmet from Sava in Croatia, dated to the 1st century BC. The emergence of oppida in Eastern and Central Europe, which actually occurred at an earlier date than happened in Gaul, would have served to increase the quantity of such types of arms and armour. At oppida such as Závist in the Czech Republic, Manching in Germany and Bratislava in Slovakia, the concentration of various artisans made it possible to mass produce metal items on a much greater scale than had previously been possible when such craftspeople were dispersed over the landscape. 

In addition to the establishment of the proto-urban oppida at an earlier date, the Keltoi of Eastern and Central Europe enjoyed a further advantage compared to their Western cousins in that their location gave them access to larger breeds of horse, principally in the form of animals imported from Skythian tribes then living in the Hungarian plain. Although not every Skythian horse was markedly larger than those horses found in the west, for example at the Skythian site of Pazyryk, in the Altai mountains, the majority of horses were about the same size as a Przewalski's horse, there were some individuals which were larger by about 10cm than those animals to be found in Western Europe at this time. Classical accounts tell us that the Italic Veneti often imported the larger Skythian breeds (and indeed they can be found in some Veneti graves). Likewise the Keltoi of Central and Eastern Europe appear to have imported Skythian horses. At the oppidum of Manching in south east Germany, for example, horses have been recovered which vary in size from 1.12m at the withers to the larger specimens which are 1.38m at the withers.

Edited by Lion.Kanzen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

about Cretan archers as Auxiliaries.

Although archery was not highly thought of as a military skill in Greece, Crete produced truly excellent archers who were able to sell their services to the highest bidder as mercenaries. Firing bronze-tipped arrows from their heavy self bows, Cretan archers tended to carry shields, indicative of some additional prowess in melee, which must’ve made them an even more enticing proposition for a general hiring mercenaries for campaign. Their finest hours came when Alexander the Great hired Cretans directly into his army to support its unbeatable phalanx. Commanded by Clearchus, 500 Cretans accompanied the Macedonian phalanx into battle at Granicus, off-setting the Persians' numerical superiority on the day and enabling Alexander’s subsequent victory. Whereas the Romans didn’t traditionally use archers in their forces, once they conquered Greece Cretan archers began to appear as auxiliary troops in their armies. Notably, they fought in Caesar’s campaign in Gaul against Vercingetorix, causing him to rally the best archers the tribes could provide to range against them.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Pirates, like the Caesar vs Pirates Campaing.

we can have a such pre-Campaing maps with triggers and Objectives.

can be mix AoE RoR map and Empire Earth (xpansion) mission.

IMG_7746.JPG

 

IMG_7749.JPG

IMG_7751.PNG

Edited by Lion.Kanzen
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...