Not any army lists have the massed eastern archers?

[Dux Limitis]

Today I replay the battle of emesa(in epic battle),I found the Palmyra's army got many these massed eastern archer units,some says they're persian mercenaries,but they didn't appears or been add to any persian(include the Achaemenid and Sassanid ) or eastern army list.I know there's an "Assyrian style"(yes the models are same) massed archer unit been add to the Sassanid persian's army lists in the 1.4.7 version,but why don't use the massed eastern archers?That's looks more better and more accurate.Could the massed eastern archer unit been add to the Sassanid's army lists and replace the "Assyrian style" massed archers?Infact the massed eastern archers should been add to the Achaemenid Persian's army list too.And another question,the 419-329bc's Achaemenid Persian's army list don't have the immortals,in the Darius III's time they don't have 10000 men strong than before,but they're still there(presumed to 3000 men), and finally they join the battle of gaugamela in the 331bc then been destroyed,so could the immortals been add to the 419-329bc's Achaemenid Persian's army list?

[rbodleyscott]

Today I replay the battle of emesa(in epic battle),I found the Palmyra's army got many these massed eastern archer units,some says they're persian mercenaries,but they didn't appears or been add to any persian(include the Achaemenid and Sassanid ) or eastern army list.

They are not Persian mercenaries they are Palmyrans, the bulk of whose army consisted of such archers. I see that we used the normal massed archers in the army list and we will change that to use the "Eastern" archers, to match the Emesa scenario.

It would be reasonable to add a few to the Achaemenid Persian lists too, and we will do so.

I know there's an "Assyrian style"(yes the models are same) massed archer unit been add to the Sassanid persian's army lists in the 1.4.7 version,but why don't use the massed eastern archers?

Because the Massed Eastern Archer costume is not appropriate for Persians of the Sassanid era, and the Assyrian-style archer is closer to the correct appearance for that era.

And another question,the 419-329bc's Achaemenid Persian's army list don't have the immortals,in the Darius III's time they don't have 10000 men strong than before,but they're still there(presumed to 3000 men), and finally they join the battle of gaugamela in the 331bc then been destroyed,so could the immortals been add to the 419-329bc's Achaemenid Persian's army list?

They are not recorded at any of the battles other than Gaugamela, where they are known as "Apple-bearers", and even there they are likely to have fought as Persian-style hoplites rather than Sparabara-style Immortals. The sparabara system went out of favour circa 420 BC. Sadly the budget won't run to a special "Apple-bearers" model to represent a unit that is only attested at one battle, so the Immortals are just the nearest approximation.

[Dux Limitis]

Today I replay the battle of emesa(in epic battle),I found the Palmyra's army got many these massed eastern archer units,some says they're persian mercenaries,but they didn't appears or been add to any persian(include the Achaemenid and Sassanid ) or eastern army list.

They are not Persian mercenaries they are Palmyrans, the bulk of whose army consisted of such archers. I see that we used the normal massed archers in the army list and we will change that to use the "Eastern" archers, to match the Emesa scenario.

It would be reasonable to add a few to the Achaemenid Persian lists too, and we will do so.

I know there's an "Assyrian style"(yes the models are same) massed archer unit been add to the Sassanid persian's army lists in the 1.4.7 version,but why don't use the massed eastern archers?

Because the Massed Eastern Archer costume is not appropriate for Persians of the Sassanid era, and the Assyrian-style archer is closer to the correct appearance for that era.

And another question,the 419-329bc's Achaemenid Persian's army list don't have the immortals,in the Darius III's time they don't have 10000 men strong than before,but they're still there(presumed to 3000 men), and finally they join the battle of gaugamela in the 331bc then been destroyed,so could the immortals been add to the 419-329bc's Achaemenid Persian's army list?

They are not recorded at any of the battles other than Gaugamela, where they are known as "Apple-bearers", and even there they are likely to have fought as Persian-style hoplites rather than Sparabara-style Immortals. The sparabara system went out of favour circa 420 BC. Sadly the budget won't run to a special "Apple-bearers" model to represent a unit that is only attested at one battle, so the Immortals are just the nearest approximation.

Thanks for the patiently answer！！！！！！