But equally, some even may even have some levels of Soldier or suchwise.
Bishop Odo of Bayeaux, for example! He may not have had any other classes...
Pikes had very little place in medieval warfare. They did exist in the ancient world, yes, but they wouldn't return to any kind of regular usage until almost the 15th century -- well after the time of this setting.
I think you are underestimating their usage considerably. Pikes were always in the background as anti cavalry weapons. For example, the Scots used them extensively at Stirling Bridge (1297) Falkirk (1298) and, of course, Bannockburn (1314)
I got rid of the Hyrkanian bow and kept the Shemite bow
I'm operating from memory here, but isn't the Hykanian bow a mounted weapon and the Shemite a foot one?
No, no its not. Happy as I would be to pinch the credit, Damien published first!
and that the turcopoles were beloved by westerners, then we have a very different view of the source materials.
Popular? beloved? Who said anything about that? I said "not killed on sight" and "Tolerated". And I didn't say "Westerners" either. I wouldn't recommend that the Saracen PC tour the beautiful Rhine valley, for example. Italy should be fine.
Please inform me how the first person accounts of a christian crusader, writing about other christian crusaders i.e. cannibalizing the dead saracens, falls under the heading of 'propoganda'. On second thought -- don't
No no, I will. Its just a matter of copy pasting from that link I gave you.
The Tafurs were recorded to have resorted to cannibalism at the siege of Ma'arra; this was reported by Raymond of Aguilers, but not by other chroniclers of the First Crusade (France, Victory, p. 315 and note 49). It is tempting to deduce that they were accused of this crime because they were poor warriors, even peasants, despised and feared by the more noble warriors who regarded them of being capable of any depravity
Alternatively, it is possible that the story of cannibalism originated with the Tafurs themselves. If they put it about that they ate the bodies of their dead enemies after battle they would scare their enemies so much that any enemy they met would flee rather than fight them.
In any case, even if it is true, one group of semi autonomous near brigands resorting to cannibalism during a major food shortage does not equate to Crusaders routinely eating their foes.
Suffice to say your reading of the relationships between muslims and christians is something I disagree with
You're the one who asked for the sources... its not my fault if they don't say what you want them to!