|
Post by sonic on Sept 30, 2019 19:18:20 GMT
I've been doing some research into 'weird' armies that I could build and I came across the Chukchis. They are a people living in the Siberia region. Apparently, they fought against the North-Western Pacific Americans, but I can't find any mention of them in DBA 3. Are they in there or are they a missing link? Any help greatly appreciated!
|
|
|
Post by Vic on Sept 30, 2019 21:08:47 GMT
As far as I know there are no lists for Siberian peoples in DBA.
|
|
|
Post by vodnik on Sept 30, 2019 21:31:50 GMT
...there are any Siberian lists in DBArrr...
|
|
|
Post by Simon on Sept 30, 2019 21:51:48 GMT
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on Sept 30, 2019 22:44:09 GMT
The section covering the Chukchis or Koraks can be found near the bottom of the page. Well worth the read about a little known tribe.
|
|
|
Post by sonic on Oct 1, 2019 6:37:54 GMT
Some good information there. Thank you. Thanks also for confirming that there is no list for any of the 'Siberian' armies in DBA. I've had a look at possibilities and decided that perhaps a list would be a variant on the Northern Barbarian (I/14) and/or the Northwestern American (IV/9). Given that the Chukchi were renowned for their headhunting and archery, a mix of Wb and Bw?
|
|
|
Post by Vic on Oct 1, 2019 12:18:33 GMT
I've had a look at possibilities and decided that perhaps a list would be a variant on the Northern Barbarian (I/14) and/or the Northwestern American (IV/9). Given that the Chukchi were renowned for their headhunting and archery, a mix of Wb and Bw?
I'm only superficially familiar with their warfare methods, but I agree that a suitable list would be built around a core of close combat elements including the general and a bulk of 3Bw elements (as you say, that's pretty similar to North-Western American, IV/11). Whether close combat elements should be classed as Blades or Warbands would depend on their favoured tactics and approach - given their reliance on body armour, if they placed emphasis on weapon skills and warrior autonomy I can see them classed as Blades as is the case for IV/11; if their fighting relied more on surprise attacks, ambushes and retreating when in danger I can see them better suited to be Warbands, like Eastern Forest Americans, IV/9. A few Ps elements to represent scouts and skirmishers are probably justified too.
I have seen lists for later periods (the Cossack wars and the conquest of Siberia) that contained some mounted scouts on reindeers, but I don't know whether this practice can be projected back to before contact with Russian cavalry, and it seems clear it wouldn't apply to maritime expeditions or even coastal groups at all, as it looks like only inland Chukchi relied on reindeer husbandry. It could perhaps justify a single LH element as an option, to add some colour to the army.
|
|
|
Post by vodnik on Oct 1, 2019 16:53:14 GMT
...the nearest ethnic group of the siberian tribes seems to be the northeast pacific american tribes like the Kwakiutl and Tlingit or Alaskan tribes. But there is a certain iron age influence namely from Mongolia or further south... ...my Siberians but i don't know what tribe:
|
|
|
Post by sonic on Oct 1, 2019 18:33:32 GMT
Nice looking army. Which army? Which figures?
|
|
|
Post by vodnik on Oct 2, 2019 6:59:00 GMT
...these are old Kremlin minnies now sold by Mike Yarrow. That warriors with guns are Cossacks or Khanty tribesmen, the men with bows or spears are Yakuts or so...
|
|
|
Post by sonic on Oct 2, 2019 15:56:43 GMT
Soon have an order for Mike Yarrow! Not sure what to do with the archers. 3Bw or 4Bw? They appear to have practiced 'mass' shooting but were then willing to charge, so maybe 4Bw to give them more staying power?
|
|
|
Post by Vic on Oct 3, 2019 9:14:46 GMT
3Bw. In my opinion 4Bw should be reserved for "regular" troops - well drilled, maintaining formation, obeying officers' orders.
|
|
|
Post by sonic on Oct 3, 2019 11:46:03 GMT
OK, so I'm thinking:
1 x General 3/4Bw 4 x Warriors 3Wb 4 x Archers 3Bw 3 x skirmishers Ps
Does anypne have any comments?
Ian
|
|
|
Post by Vic on Oct 3, 2019 12:26:20 GMT
Looks fine to me. There could be a Warband option for the general unless there's some historical evidence to support he'd fight primarily with the bowmen, and perhaps there could be some "3Wb or 3Bw" overlap to allow the player to tune the list a bit, something like
1 x General 3Wb or 3/4Bw 3 x Warriors 3Wb 2 x Warriors 3Wb or Archers 3Bw 3 x Archers 3Bw 3 x skirmishers Ps
|
|
|
Post by sonic on Oct 3, 2019 14:25:28 GMT
Good thinking Vic. Unless anyone has some input to change things, that's the list I'll go for.
|
|