|
Post by Haardrada on May 23, 2018 4:57:27 GMT
The Swiss didnt seem to have a problem attacking archers (ask Charles the Bold 😉)....or anyone else for that matter.lol
|
|
|
Post by Haardrada on May 22, 2018 19:21:39 GMT
Thank you Goragrad, Haardrada and Menacussecundus, There are some good suggestions here. The W&E Scots Irish levy and warriors would make an animated looking warband. I may be mistaken, but were not round shields the fashion at this time.
There are a few possible sources of oval or other types of shields in use in Wales during this period.Four Irish tribes had migrated to Wales during the late 3rd Century and were particularly present in Dyfed. Also it is currently under debate what extent South Wales had been Romanaized and what effect the Romans had on the tribes in this region. Lastly,the fall of the Sub Roman Kingdoms could provide captured/copied weapons and armour or ex-Sub Romans fighting for the Welsh. This might help as an outline of the period and more... www.earlybritishkingdoms.com/kingdoms/index.html
|
|
|
Post by Haardrada on May 21, 2018 21:10:31 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Haardrada on May 20, 2018 10:37:02 GMT
I was thinking I could use them to create a crib sheet for each of my armies...so I can swot before/during a battle.😊
|
|
|
Post by Haardrada on May 20, 2018 7:03:09 GMT
Wow that must have taken some time and a great deal of effort?Many thanks Jim they are awsome.😊
|
|
|
Post by Haardrada on May 16, 2018 17:43:32 GMT
Haardrada, what of the conquest of Greece itself? You don't think advance guards of the Persian Army fought running battles against hoplite regiments again and again? And the Persian infantry were terrifying enough to cause the Spartans, of all people, to chicken out from a fight, IN PUBLIC, against the Sparabara (the Persians offered to withdraw their Cavalry so they could get the game on mano-a-mano), basically admitting that they were utterly unsure of their chances? So it seems you have more confidence in Spartan prowess over Persians than they did themselves. And Spartans were certainly no dummies at hoplite warfare, so they must have judged the Persian foot represented a real and credible threat to the survival of the Phalanx, in spite of the success of Athens at the battle of Marathon Bay. I reject utterly the latter, more popular notion that the EAPs were effete pansies in pyjamas, the view favoured inexplicably by most ancients rules writers. Fact is the Napoleonic French Army hardly had any lasting battlefield success since Leipzig. By the reasoning many ancient designers use, French infantry at Waterloo should all be low-quality conscripts, and should melt away as soon as they see an Allied soldier... I mean, clearly, French infantry could not stand up to British infantry, so they should collapse immediately on sight. There were several engagements at and around Miletus, including field forays, and if the hoplite battle system were so great, why would the Greeks have fled the Persian army (and the "vast numbers" argument has been largely discredited, based on carrying capacity of roads, and survivability of supply lines) and hidden behind the fortifications? DBA v3 does many things well. Capturing the Classical Period, not so much... Is there evidence of engagements of the Persian army with Greek forces on its entrance to Greece which give detailed accounts of the battles? I think your refering to Battle of Platea when describing how the Spartans were chicken and would not fight man to man when offered...I have not come across this in accounts I have read but do not discount it as taunting has been common place on many a battlefield.My conception of the battle was that it was a stand-off...the Greeks fearing flanking by the Persian cavalry and facing greater numbers versus the Persians not wanting to attack enemy in a more advantageous position since the Greeks were uphill.It was Persian raiding on the Greek supply line that broke the stalemate when the Greeks decided to retire to a more secure line of defence,that the retreat was so chaotic the Persians saw their chance and attacked.The Persians however had not expected the Greeks to turn and fight. I don't regard the Spartans as being special in any way...it was the Tegeans who initiated the charge,the Spartans refused until suitable omens were in their favour.My suggested rule that they(and the Athenians) do receive the +1 flank support due to their ability to be able to "occassionally manouvre effectively"as metioned in the army list narative for Early Hoplite Greeks! My concerns for the effectiveness of the Sparabara formation are grown from the lack of accounts of its success and its abandonment as a tactic by the Persians around 465BC and future use of simular tactics by Byzantine Infantry,Medieval Italian states and the disasters of Charles the Bold during the Burgundian wars. It could be possible Hoplite tactics evolved partly in response to the Sparabara tactics as the improvement of heavier armour,helmets and larger shields used in close and deepening formations could be a response to heavy missile fire...as the Hoplite tactics evolved after Marathon the Sparabara may not have been as effective.
|
|
|
Post by Haardrada on May 16, 2018 8:14:48 GMT
Plataea and Ephesus for starters. Miletus as well. Plus the smashing of mercenary hoplites in the conquest of Babylon. Ephesus is probably the only one of these that the Persians were successful in the field against a Hoplite formation.As for Miletus it was a siege I think? However,the Persians also scored victories over the Carians during the revolt..if this was due to Superior tactics,numbers or cavalry we are none the wiser as the Carians resorted to ambush tactics. In the Battle of Platea the account of the battle being hard fought before the Persians colapsed could also count the Persian numerical supperiority as a factor and that the Spartans and Tegeans did not attack at first (waiting for favourable omens)and also being pressured by cavlalry. It is clear the Sparabara formation could contribute to tactical success(alone or with support is unclear) but could also fail against heavier armed formations used agressively. What I would suggest in dba terms is that hoplites of this era (if fighting historical opponents)only get the +1 flank bonus if Spartan or Athenian Hoplites and others only if they do not initiate combat or are in persuit.My reasoning behind this is that only Spartan Hoplites were drill enough to maintain formation and the Athenians demonstrated they were organised enough to do so at the Battle of Marathon. The Sparabara 8Bw should get the +1 side support from other 8Bw elements if also not initiating combat or in persuit.My reasoning for this is that it was a practiced formation that had been effectively used by the Persians against several other opponnents in several campaigns before so they were most probably trained to fight in this mass formation. These I would only consider as house rules or for given scenarios.
|
|
|
Post by Haardrada on May 15, 2018 18:17:22 GMT
I've been reading through this topic with interest, but one thing puzzles me....is there any historical evidence where 8Bw could be considered equal to or superior to 4Sp?
|
|
|
Post by Haardrada on May 14, 2018 8:18:20 GMT
It is advantageous too to remember that Ps can make a second move not only in your sides first bound....if the Ps element starts a bound entirely in good going,does not start or end the bound within 1BW of enemy and ends the bound partially or within bad or rough going (pips allowing).
A rather cool little rule that one.😊
|
|
|
Post by Haardrada on May 9, 2018 9:31:05 GMT
This sounds so very familiar! I do to suffer from the same affliction.
I try to maintain interest in an army by reading all that I can about them,research their weapons,armour,dress,banners,their history and battles...but then I get to a point where another army undermines my interest and replaces the worked-on army in priority.
|
|
|
Post by Haardrada on May 6, 2018 16:56:13 GMT
Its an epedemic!lol....Grenadines plus Islamic Berbers ordered.😊
|
|
|
Post by Haardrada on May 5, 2018 16:39:09 GMT
Having recently finished a new army (I/5a Early Elamite) and renovated a couple Meso-American armies, it was time to order a new army: II/61b Mu-jung Hsien-pi. Or, as I'm calling it, the "Moo"-jung, what with its bovine, disguised-elements gimmick. Like many of you perhaps, I spotted this gimmicky army soon after getting my hands on Purple. But, with no dedicated Mu-jung range available, I've pondered a few times just how to build this quirky army. Here's my solution. All Essex 15mm. - Cataphracts -- Since the Commentary suggests that the Cataphracts "are assumed to be similar to those of the Northern Wei", and Essex makes a Northern & Southern Dynasty range, PCH1 fits this bill nicely.
- Light Horse -- No way. With options for either 6Cv or the Disguised Hordes, I would never use the LH. Didn't buy any.
- Cavalry (6Cv) -- The quilted caparisons on these lance & bow armed cavalry (PCH10a and PCH11) are what sold me on this range. No solid justification other than being contemporaneous --and looking spiff.
- Solid Blades -- The list defines these as "Chinese-trained". If one also assumes Chinese-equipped, then PCH4b seems plausible. Oh, and PCH12 Foot Officers for added visual interest.
- Solid Crossbows -- Ditto so went with PCH5. A pack of PCH4a will provide a std bearer for all eight solid Foot elements.
- Psiloi -- PCH7 with extras as Camp Followers.
- Solid Hordes -- Essex Generic Chinese Peasants CHO18. If it works visually, each Horde may also sport an ox and slave figures from XEQ3 as the perpetrators of the dust blowing ruse, their work now done. (If it doesn't yield the right look, I'll just create a vignette for them in the Camp.
One never actually needs to deploy "women mounted on oxen", etc. That's the disguised element thing. In some games, I'll place the 4x6Cv, only to reveal that they are actually 4x7Hd on the 2nd Bound. In other games, they'll remain as 4x6Cv. Pretty simple, really. Pretty expensive too! 36 cavalry figures alone. But an army with Cataphracts, double-deep Cav, infantry with Flank Supports, AND the disguised Hordes gimmick, it should offer lots of painting and gaming entertainment. An interesting army Paul which should offer some interesting games.I too had tried to weigh up doing the army and with what figures and chose the same range but looked at using PCH9 as the rear rank of the 6Cav...the cost did put me off.
|
|
|
Post by Haardrada on May 5, 2018 5:40:07 GMT
Thanks guys for your input...I often mix figures from various manufacturers if I find them of simular proportion and hight to vary poses from one element to another which has worked well in several armies that I have done.Erics work is inspiring.
I have both the source books and have looked on-line and found several illustrations of Grenadine soldiers.I've even put in a search for '15mm dba iv/38 Grenadine army' and found several finished armies as well as two player blogs with conpleted armies and background info....Sorry if I sound a bit fussy and nerdy but part of enjoyment of building a new army for me is research it before I commit to do it.
This army is not a sterio-type medieval army...with lots of LH backed by fast crossbows and supported by Sp with a low aggression that fights in hilly terrain. Its what I regard as an anti-army which looks like it will perform well against mounted...LH,Cb(combat draw)and Cm all have QK ability vs Kn..but I'm still working out how it will deal with Bd armies(thats why I fancy the Berber allies to add more Sp and Kn or Cm) to use the Sp as bait and hit flanks with Cb and LH.
I love LH armies but found I had few armies relying on missile troops so thought I'd give this one a go.😊
|
|
|
Post by Haardrada on May 3, 2018 21:02:36 GMT
Very nice Tony,I remember seeing them in the eye candy on the old Fanaticus site.😊
It looks like I'll be opting for Essex figures but Im having to sift for choices....The army I want to do is mid-late 13th-early 14th century making the Andalusian figures too early and the Late Grenadine figures too late.I dropped the idea of Mercenary Spanish spearmen for Arab style(and Berber allied) spearmen as I was not sure what figures I could use(round or heater shields?kite style would be too early.).I also decided peter pig tauregs would probably look best too.
|
|
|
Post by Haardrada on May 3, 2018 13:54:44 GMT
Hi I'm looking to do an Early Grenadine army and wonder how it performs (if someone already has the army?).
Are the Islamic Berber allies worth taking?
Any suggeations on figures,flags and colour schemes are most welcome.😊
|
|