Exciting. This allowed me to review the capabilities of Persian units (always underestimated, which also owes a lot to popular culture!). I loved the beginning on the explanations as to the name, the composition of the unit (shepherds, etc.). Personally, I would love to see new videos of this format, with a (little) more historical information on the units presented because it's damn well done ! Thanks for this one !
I really like the idea of this format! Hope to see more of it 🙂 Just a little suggestion: Maybe you should also say some words in regard to which army lists get these units (through allies and normally). And maybe some kind of direct comparison to similar units could be nice. (In this case for example: Why would you want to take Sparabara over eastern archers?). Anyhow, keep up the great work!
Some good ideas. I want to keep my videos to 10-15 mins. I like the idea of being a bit snappy and concise. But, yes, some more details I think would be good such as more comparisons and a bit more historical info perhaps.
Additional info: This unit is classed as Bowmen with melee capabilities as opposed to Heavy/Medium Foot with Bow that you find in the Assyrian army because historically the Assyrians were mixed 50/50 for bowmen and infantry while the Persian Sparabara were 90% bowmen with just the front rank of spear. Thus, in the game they are represented as Bowmen with melee capabilities.
The Bowmen classification also means that cavalry of all sorts get an additional 100 Impact POA charging them in open terrain. So a unit of say, Veteran Armored Cavalry would get 50 Light Spear, 50 Superior, 100 charging Bowmen in Open, vs 100 Light Spear on Impact. Even light cavalry get this bonus. As you say, Sparabara types are still very dangerous to cavalry, but it is one way in which the Sparabara are worse off than Assyrian Foot.
Exciting. This allowed me to review the capabilities of Persian units (always underestimated, which also owes a lot to popular culture!). I loved the beginning on the explanations as to the name, the composition of the unit (shepherds, etc.). Personally, I would love to see new videos of this format, with a (little) more historical information on the units presented because it's damn well done ! Thanks for this one !
I really like the idea of this format! Hope to see more of it 🙂
Just a little suggestion: Maybe you should also say some words in regard to which army lists get these units (through allies and normally).
And maybe some kind of direct comparison to similar units could be nice. (In this case for example: Why would you want to take Sparabara over eastern archers?).
Anyhow, keep up the great work!
Some good ideas. I want to keep my videos to 10-15 mins. I like the idea of being a bit snappy and concise. But, yes, some more details I think would be good such as more comparisons and a bit more historical info perhaps.
Additional info: This unit is classed as Bowmen with melee capabilities as opposed to Heavy/Medium Foot with Bow that you find in the Assyrian army because historically the Assyrians were mixed 50/50 for bowmen and infantry while the Persian Sparabara were 90% bowmen with just the front rank of spear. Thus, in the game they are represented as Bowmen with melee capabilities.
The Bowmen classification also means that cavalry of all sorts get an additional 100 Impact POA charging them in open terrain. So a unit of say, Veteran Armored Cavalry would get 50 Light Spear, 50 Superior, 100 charging Bowmen in Open, vs 100 Light Spear on Impact. Even light cavalry get this bonus. As you say, Sparabara types are still very dangerous to cavalry, but it is one way in which the Sparabara are worse off than Assyrian Foot.