dont understand how the missions differ so much im on hard level and they attack me like crazy min 10 , all AI players they keep spaming troops if i try to defend or attack
Nice one, this mission took me only 2 hours 18 minute to finish until I found the relic, but I had already finished off the Brits, killed Reynold at the southern base at start and held it with very few units. Ended up having 858 kills and 406 losses, pretty damn brutal mission if you don't follow the objective. Would of been probably smarter to scout rather than just brawl out and kill all four enemies... :D
In my standard and moderate playthroughs, I brawled this one out, but didn't feel like doing it like that for my hard playthrough...just attacked the Hospitallers with basically my starting army +6-8 archers, held them hostage until I aged up to Castle, then brought back the relic home. Of course, during all this the other crusaders wasted my base, but that wasn't important, and the fight was over after 18 min ;) I just lost pretty much everything though.
I got so pissed at the AI teams Archer, Skirmisher spam, i just had to destroy every team and forget about the Relic mission! As i was taking out Red-English the Yellow Knights Templar started to support them with infinite Skirmisher spam. My Crossbowmen and Camels just could not take it. I had to add Skirmishers of my own and that changed the balance and then it was mission destroy everybody! Once all the teams were destroyed, then we automatically win no need to worry about the Relic!
It was interesting - to keep control, without castles and towers. I didn't go as smoothly as Ornlu, but there was room for mistakes. Another time I would start with the orange and yellow players as they caused me problems and attacked from the flank. (I had 2 TC's at main entrance for defensive purposes, dunno if that was the best idea)
I don't feel so bad for taking my time after seeing this, but interesting to see a different style, been watching your campaign vids after I complete them
Super easy to cheese out...you can just go insta Castle take all your starting troops + one monk and go for the relic on the top left edge of the map shoot Down palisades with cav archers distract nearby troops with them and just grab the relic with the monk and go home. Enemy monks will do nothing to your monk.
I remember doing a speed Strat for this on old AOE2 (CD), you basically rush castle age and trick the enemy into leaving their base so you can rush in and take the relic.
Yea...I'm not sure what Age of Empires was trying to do, but their history is a little off... For starters, the Arabs and Turks did form impressive civilizations before and after the Crusades...they were also a people who originally conquered the area via force of arms. As Roman territories, Palestine/Israel/Canaan/Outremer/whatever, were primarily Christian when the forces under...I believe Abu Bakr and/or Uthman swept up from Arabia, conquered the area, as well as Modern day Iraq and Zoroastrian Persia. In later centuries, Asia Minor and parts of the territory originally conquered by the Arabs was taken over by the Seljuk Turks. I'll grant this is a fairly simplistic history, but the crusades and the history leading up to them is fairly complex, and even the sixteen weeks I took for a course on the subject could only give enough information to at least make the politics make sense. It should also be noted that prior to and during the crusades, the Muslim forces were usually as focused on fighting each other as they were fighting the Crusaders, with the Saracen's unity under Saladin being an aberration to a political environment usually defined by political disunity and internal strife-both on the Muslim and Christian sides. After the third Crusade, it ended when Saladin died and his empire was divided between his three sons- though I should note it was later united under the Fatimids, who conquered the last Christian territories after fighting off the Mongols. Also, the "cruelty" of the Crusaders and Muslims in this war is often a bit exaggerated or underplayed, depending on the politics which a given media might be catering too. The massacre when the crusaders first took Jerusalem, for instance, was actually keeping with the rules of war at the time, where if a city surrendered, terms were supposed to be honored and the population spared, but if the city was taken by storm, to quote my teacher, "All bets were off." Similarly, when Saladin took the city under a negotiated settlement, most-not all, as some were kept as slaves or subjects if they couldn't be ransomed- were allowed to leave. Again, for a fair number, their escape was via ransom, not a humanitarian release. Saladin also put down the captured Templars and Hospitalers without mercy after Hattin-a far cry from the hospitality this game describes- not because he was a butcher or a sadist, mind, but because these were his most dangerous enemies, and if he let them go, ransomed them, or kept them around, they'd endanger him later. Long story short, the Muslims and Christians were both abiding by the rules of war at the time. In times of piece, there were respected areas were neither side would attack in order to ensure safe pilgrimage and trade, while the Templars, often mischaracterized as fanatics and intolerant butchers, were arguably the most tolerant of military orders in the day. They had a section of their headquarters in Jerusalem-adapted from the Church-turned Mosque on the temple mount- set aside so Muslim pilgrims could pray in peace. Again, they weren't perfect, and it's worth noting the Templar's grandmaster was the one responsible for the defeat at Hattin, advising the king to attack when the rest of his advisors said it was a bad idea to march metal-armored army through the desert heat away from defensible positions, all for his zeal to defeat Saladin. Still, they were not the way this game or other media portray them, the same with the Crusaders and Jihadis. Both were fighting for territory they believed to be theirs by God's will. Both thought of their conflict as a holy struggle. Both fought according to the rules of war at the time. Both had brilliant and imbecilic leaders in their turn. Both were at times humane and brutal because they were at war, and generally, people aren't that nice when they're fighting to the death.
Thank you for the lesson. I've always maintained that the crusades were to a degree justified. You see this in Hollywood as well. Kingdom of Heaven, while not a completely terrible movie, pushes this incorrect narrative quite hard
While you can't build castles you can build town centers which you can fill with vills or archers. And use that instead for a town center if you want to turtle. That being said if you have the skill killing them one by one is always better.
Ran out of gold but was able to spam enough trash units. Sold some wood and food in the market, researched Redemption and crept up on the monks defending the relic. This was long and arduous. I was constantly being attacked throughout. The level is a headache. EDIT 1: Weird, when I played it said pop limit of 75 in the text but I had a pop limit of 120 with houses already built to accommodate this.
I was curios how to complete this mission without speed run i use onager to kill monks and i build palisade walls to block enemy units from coming inside than i pick relic with monk and you can convert teatonic knights to improve your army
I find this campaign to be one of the more dishonest and deceiving ones in the game. Even when you're playing as a heroic historical figure in other campaigns, the atrocities committed by that leader are not white washed in the way it is with the Saladin campaign. For example, it isn't mentioned that Reynald de Chatillon was only beheaded by Saladin after refusing to convert to Islam. Saladin was a conqueror, not some peace loving desert hippie who only turned ruthless after the Crusades began.
I mean it’s not really white washed in an uneven manner. The initial crusader states themselves were essentially created through the fanatic pillaging and rape of Jerusalem, despite the initial goal being to “liberate” the hole lands. More than some holy army, it was a group of frenzied mercenaries attacking and pillaging mostly civilian towns and killing anyone they saw. They didn’t include the brutal images of that mass rape and violence from the side of the crusader states either lmao, so it’s pretty much an even white-washing. There’s such a selective outrage anytime something than European military excellence is shown or referenced in these games. The montezuma campaign for example was full of inaccuracies as is every other campaign in the game. Your outrage was selective and idiotic if anything.
Also he wasn’t beheaded because he refused to convert to Islam, that’s more a customary right offered to enemies of the state in a medieval context. He was beheaded ofc under the pretext of leading raiding campaigns and the general tension that existed between Muslim states and the crusader states. As in he was about to be executed anyway, the right to convert is only an offer made to annul this. It’s not as if, had he refused to convert, as just some random civilian he would have also been executed. This contributes to the myth that Muslim empires initiall were hell bent on violent conversion when actually historically, there haven’t really been mass- violent campaigns of conversion in Islamic history, largely because non Muslims paid an added tax to the state which was an important form of state revenue. When more people converted to Islam and protested not to pay the tax it actually led to problems in state revenue and at some points in the early Islamic period, conversion was even banned (and then legalized again later for other political purposes). Saladin would have also been executed if the crusaders got their hands on him. Again idek what the point of your comment was, other than to reflect an ignorance of the historical period, by specifically pointing out Saladin as somehow having been whitewashed, when really both sides were, and the complexities of the historical tension can’t be captured in a game in the first place.
@@fahim-ev8qq This is a really important point! This period of history was ripe with atrocities and religious extremism on every side, but the example of Reynald being offered the choice of conversion or death is not as convincing as it sounds. For one thing, a Crusader who converts (even if he is lying about his conversion) is less likely to return to fight you in the future (the Catholic nations will likely treat them as an outcast, to begin with). To my knowledge, the Crusaders did not have any such tradition of offering the choice of converting to Catholicism instead of death. Is Saladin's offer an example of mercy, or coercive and violent evangelism? Medieval Islam was not universally intolerant of other religions. It depended very much on the era, the specific individual/society, and the context. During the Golden Age of Islam there were examples of deep cultural and scientific exchanges between guests from different religious backgrounds (although religious dogma contributed to the end of the Golden Age, so like I said, these things are complex). At the end of the day, war is war, and religious war is particularly gruesome. It is also complicated to compare cultural practices, especially when religion is involved.
@@fahim-ev8qq Also, it's not stunning that Saladin is treated to some extent as the protagonist of the Saladin campaign...after all, the heroes of the other campaigns weren't exactly saints either, and William Wallace didn't even survive the final scenario according to the history books...
> At the Horns there is a single pool of water, and Saladin controls it.
> Support your economy with farms.
> ...
dont understand how the missions differ so much im on hard level and they attack me like crazy min 10 , all AI players they keep spaming troops if i try to defend or attack
Nice one, this mission took me only 2 hours 18 minute to finish until I found the relic, but I had already finished off the Brits, killed Reynold at the southern base at start and held it with very few units. Ended up having 858 kills and 406 losses, pretty damn brutal mission if you don't follow the objective. Would of been probably smarter to scout rather than just brawl out and kill all four enemies... :D
brawling is its own satisfaction :P
PRO tip: you scout resigning and revealing the map and playing again xD
3 years later; i did the same thing.lol
In my standard and moderate playthroughs, I brawled this one out, but didn't feel like doing it like that for my hard playthrough...just attacked the Hospitallers with basically my starting army +6-8 archers, held them hostage until I aged up to Castle, then brought back the relic home. Of course, during all this the other crusaders wasted my base, but that wasn't important, and the fight was over after 18 min ;) I just lost pretty much everything though.
I got so pissed at the AI teams Archer, Skirmisher spam, i just had to destroy every team and forget about the Relic mission!
As i was taking out Red-English the Yellow Knights Templar started to support them with infinite Skirmisher spam. My Crossbowmen and Camels just could not take it.
I had to add Skirmishers of my own and that changed the balance and then it was mission destroy everybody!
Once all the teams were destroyed, then we automatically win no need to worry about the Relic!
It was interesting - to keep control, without castles and towers. I didn't go as smoothly as Ornlu, but there was room for mistakes.
Another time I would start with the orange and yellow players as they caused me problems and attacked from the flank. (I had 2 TC's at main entrance for defensive purposes, dunno if that was the best idea)
I don't feel so bad for taking my time after seeing this, but interesting to see a different style, been watching your campaign vids after I complete them
Super easy to cheese out...you can just go insta Castle take all your starting troops + one monk and go for the relic on the top left edge of the map shoot Down palisades with cav archers distract nearby troops with them and just grab the relic with the monk and go home. Enemy monks will do nothing to your monk.
i really dont like this mission
I remember doing a speed Strat for this on old AOE2 (CD), you basically rush castle age and trick the enemy into leaving their base so you can rush in and take the relic.
Yea...I'm not sure what Age of Empires was trying to do, but their history is a little off...
For starters, the Arabs and Turks did form impressive civilizations before and after the Crusades...they were also a people who originally conquered the area via force of arms. As Roman territories, Palestine/Israel/Canaan/Outremer/whatever, were primarily Christian when the forces under...I believe Abu Bakr and/or Uthman swept up from Arabia, conquered the area, as well as Modern day Iraq and Zoroastrian Persia. In later centuries, Asia Minor and parts of the territory originally conquered by the Arabs was taken over by the Seljuk Turks.
I'll grant this is a fairly simplistic history, but the crusades and the history leading up to them is fairly complex, and even the sixteen weeks I took for a course on the subject could only give enough information to at least make the politics make sense.
It should also be noted that prior to and during the crusades, the Muslim forces were usually as focused on fighting each other as they were fighting the Crusaders, with the Saracen's unity under Saladin being an aberration to a political environment usually defined by political disunity and internal strife-both on the Muslim and Christian sides. After the third Crusade, it ended when Saladin died and his empire was divided between his three sons- though I should note it was later united under the Fatimids, who conquered the last Christian territories after fighting off the Mongols.
Also, the "cruelty" of the Crusaders and Muslims in this war is often a bit exaggerated or underplayed, depending on the politics which a given media might be catering too. The massacre when the crusaders first took Jerusalem, for instance, was actually keeping with the rules of war at the time, where if a city surrendered, terms were supposed to be honored and the population spared, but if the city was taken by storm, to quote my teacher, "All bets were off." Similarly, when Saladin took the city under a negotiated settlement, most-not all, as some were kept as slaves or subjects if they couldn't be ransomed- were allowed to leave. Again, for a fair number, their escape was via ransom, not a humanitarian release. Saladin also put down the captured Templars and Hospitalers without mercy after Hattin-a far cry from the hospitality this game describes- not because he was a butcher or a sadist, mind, but because these were his most dangerous enemies, and if he let them go, ransomed them, or kept them around, they'd endanger him later.
Long story short, the Muslims and Christians were both abiding by the rules of war at the time.
In times of piece, there were respected areas were neither side would attack in order to ensure safe pilgrimage and trade, while the Templars, often mischaracterized as fanatics and intolerant butchers, were arguably the most tolerant of military orders in the day. They had a section of their headquarters in Jerusalem-adapted from the Church-turned Mosque on the temple mount- set aside so Muslim pilgrims could pray in peace. Again, they weren't perfect, and it's worth noting the Templar's grandmaster was the one responsible for the defeat at Hattin, advising the king to attack when the rest of his advisors said it was a bad idea to march metal-armored army through the desert heat away from defensible positions, all for his zeal to defeat Saladin. Still, they were not the way this game or other media portray them, the same with the Crusaders and Jihadis.
Both were fighting for territory they believed to be theirs by God's will. Both thought of their conflict as a holy struggle. Both fought according to the rules of war at the time. Both had brilliant and imbecilic leaders in their turn. Both were at times humane and brutal because they were at war, and generally, people aren't that nice when they're fighting to the death.
Thank you for the lesson. I've always maintained that the crusades were to a degree justified. You see this in Hollywood as well. Kingdom of Heaven, while not a completely terrible movie, pushes this incorrect narrative quite hard
played today. Pop limit is changed to 120!
While you can't build castles you can build town centers which you can fill with vills or archers. And use that instead for a town center if you want to turtle. That being said if you have the skill killing them one by one is always better.
Ran out of gold but was able to spam enough trash units. Sold some wood and food in the market, researched Redemption and crept up on the monks defending the relic. This was long and arduous. I was constantly being attacked throughout. The level is a headache. EDIT 1: Weird, when I played it said pop limit of 75 in the text but I had a pop limit of 120 with houses already built to accommodate this.
And the best offense is the good defense
In this scenario, the best offense is tc drop :D
I was curios how to complete this mission without speed run i use onager to kill monks and i build palisade walls to block enemy units from coming inside than i pick relic with monk and you can convert teatonic knights to improve your army
oopsie, I was looking for the misison of age of empires 4, it has the same name
This mission is a lot harder in age of kings. Took me a long time on extreme hard to finish it
No, its not really.
Spoilers for the Sultans Ascend:
The fourth scenario has the same name as this one.
I miss the old Reynald dialogue where he yells "Saladin! we have some unfinished business!" This voice actor sounds lame.
how do you destroy your own pallisade please ?
click palisade+press Delete
This mission give population only 75 is impossible
I kill reynald earlier then they all raid me untill i have no land to improve
I find this campaign to be one of the more dishonest and deceiving ones in the game. Even when you're playing as a heroic historical figure in other campaigns, the atrocities committed by that leader are not white washed in the way it is with the Saladin campaign. For example, it isn't mentioned that Reynald de Chatillon was only beheaded by Saladin after refusing to convert to Islam. Saladin was a conqueror, not some peace loving desert hippie who only turned ruthless after the Crusades began.
I mean it’s not really white washed in an uneven manner. The initial crusader states themselves were essentially created through the fanatic pillaging and rape of Jerusalem, despite the initial goal being to “liberate” the hole lands. More than some holy army, it was a group of frenzied mercenaries attacking and pillaging mostly civilian towns and killing anyone they saw. They didn’t include the brutal images of that mass rape and violence from the side of the crusader states either lmao, so it’s pretty much an even white-washing. There’s such a selective outrage anytime something than European military excellence is shown or referenced in these games. The montezuma campaign for example was full of inaccuracies as is every other campaign in the game. Your outrage was selective and idiotic if anything.
Also he wasn’t beheaded because he refused to convert to Islam, that’s more a customary right offered to enemies of the state in a medieval context. He was beheaded ofc under the pretext of leading raiding campaigns and the general tension that existed between Muslim states and the crusader states. As in he was about to be executed anyway, the right to convert is only an offer made to annul this. It’s not as if, had he refused to convert, as just some random civilian he would have also been executed. This contributes to the myth that Muslim empires initiall were hell bent on violent conversion when actually historically, there haven’t really been mass- violent campaigns of conversion in Islamic history, largely because non Muslims paid an added tax to the state which was an important form of state revenue. When more people converted to Islam and protested not to pay the tax it actually led to problems in state revenue and at some points in the early Islamic period, conversion was even banned (and then legalized again later for other political purposes). Saladin would have also been executed if the crusaders got their hands on him. Again idek what the point of your comment was, other than to reflect an ignorance of the historical period, by specifically pointing out Saladin as somehow having been whitewashed, when really both sides were, and the complexities of the historical tension can’t be captured in a game in the first place.
moron
@@fahim-ev8qq This is a really important point! This period of history was ripe with atrocities and religious extremism on every side, but the example of Reynald being offered the choice of conversion or death is not as convincing as it sounds. For one thing, a Crusader who converts (even if he is lying about his conversion) is less likely to return to fight you in the future (the Catholic nations will likely treat them as an outcast, to begin with).
To my knowledge, the Crusaders did not have any such tradition of offering the choice of converting to Catholicism instead of death. Is Saladin's offer an example of mercy, or coercive and violent evangelism?
Medieval Islam was not universally intolerant of other religions. It depended very much on the era, the specific individual/society, and the context. During the Golden Age of Islam there were examples of deep cultural and scientific exchanges between guests from different religious backgrounds (although religious dogma contributed to the end of the Golden Age, so like I said, these things are complex).
At the end of the day, war is war, and religious war is particularly gruesome. It is also complicated to compare cultural practices, especially when religion is involved.
@@fahim-ev8qq Also, it's not stunning that Saladin is treated to some extent as the protagonist of the Saladin campaign...after all, the heroes of the other campaigns weren't exactly saints either, and William Wallace didn't even survive the final scenario according to the history books...