aristonicus
Munifex
The man from Lucania returns..
Posts: 25
|
Post by aristonicus on Feb 1, 2021 13:24:36 GMT
Hello all,
I am here to access the brain trust.
I am considering this army and would like to hear the consensus on what figures to use for the Elite horse archers who were chained together in a deep block - the 6Cv in the list.
My question is: were they on barded horses, or were they just armoured as per Essex miniatures Chinese Northern & Southern Dynasty range PCH9 Heavy Horse Archers?
Regards
David
|
|
|
|
Post by snowcat on Feb 2, 2021 0:12:16 GMT
If they were chained together in a square, surely they would have been stationary? How is a square of 5000 elite mounted archers chained together meant to move? Furthermore, I'd say it's a square because they're facing in all 4 directions. In other words, it's a static, defensive formation. It wouldn't surprise me if the archers dismounted and shot from between/behind their chained armoured horses in a kind of wagon laager defense. Chinese armies did similar things with chariots and carts. Representing this with 6Cv is IMO inappropriate.
|
|
|
|
Post by Haardrada on Feb 2, 2021 2:56:17 GMT
The tactic is a bit of a mis-quoted by the dba note. The tactic was used by the Murong Hsien pi against Ran Min's army that was mainly infantry and fought in forested country. The problem was that Ran Min's infantry kept slipping through the Hsein pi horse and escaping so that the Murong could not have a complete victory over Ran Min. Thus their Leader Murong Ke(De) devised using chained Cavalry to trap Ran Min's infantry. Firstly, they allowed Ran Min's troops to win skirmishes to embolden them to attempt battle in the open and when they did the chained Cavalry horses broke their necks after they charged but formed a barrier that trapped Ran Min's troops and they were slaughtered..other sources claim that the Chained Cavalry is a metaphor for fighting in close formation.
|
|
|
|
Post by snowcat on Feb 2, 2021 21:48:06 GMT
Would you believe three men and a wheelbarrow? How about two little dogs with a chain?  |
|
|
|
Post by Haardrada on Feb 3, 2021 0:40:18 GMT
My question is: were they on barded horses, or were they just armoured as per Essex miniatures Chinese Northern & Southern Dynasty range PCH9 Heavy Horse Archers? Regards David PCH9 are nice figures and at the end of the day what you use is down to you're own personal choice. The evolution of Chinese and opposing Cavalry equipment was in transition in the 2-4th Centuries AD with horse armour being dated as early as 188AD.However,the evolution of Cataphract armour and equipment started around the start of the 4th Century AD as it is recorded that the Hsuing nu were using horse armour captured from Hsien pi. By 312AD armour was becoming more widespread ,Cavalry may have been used en masse in archery exchanges, but true Cataphract shock tactics didn't really evolve until the Northern Wei began to conquer Northern China in the 380-90's.Up until that time most armour was recorded as padded but metal or lamellar armour increased in use. I hope this information helps. 😊 Ps. Ran Mins defeat was in 352 AD. |
|
|
|
Post by snowcat on Feb 3, 2021 21:20:06 GMT
It's fair to say that some of the options in the Mu-jung Hsien-pi wouldn't be out of place in HoTT!  For the OP: barded horses. Elite mounted rode barded horses. Figurines from the period show those who carried bows usually with less armour on their arms, but I personally wouldn't be too fussed about that aspect. |
|
|
|
Post by Cromwell on Feb 5, 2021 9:39:57 GMT
There is an old maxim, "Never tie a horse to yourself or another Horse" Reasons are fairly obvious I would have thought.
I would have thought chained cavalry was fraught with danger for the secured horsemen, in fact more dangerous to themselves than the enemy.
I go left of that tree, you go right. Oh dear!
|
|
|
|
Post by snowcat on Feb 5, 2021 11:58:48 GMT
That's why it sounds much more like a static defensive formation...or a load of cobblers.
|
|
|
|
Post by Haardrada on Feb 5, 2021 13:23:41 GMT
That's why it sounds much more like a static defensive formation...or a load of cobblers. Maybe, but remember it is the rule writers who have chosen to represent these elements as 6Cav and still include an option for Cataphracts within the same list(?). There are several references to Chained Cavalry in Chinese accounts, another refers to early Jurchen Cavalry who fought in very close formation. The rule writers here opted to represent them as a 3Kn formation but with one lancer flanked by 2 horse archers. |
|
|
|
Post by elliesdad on Feb 5, 2021 14:35:34 GMT
A different war, many centuries later and on a different continent entirely. July 1861 saw Thomas J Jackson’s Virginian Brigade at the First Battle of Bull Run.
In this battle Jackson and his troops gained the nickname Stonewall.
No-one suggests Jackson and his troops were secured behind any sort of actual physical defensive barrier of stone, rather the nickname is a metaphor.
My gut feeling is that the “chained cavalry” is likewise a metaphor to suggest the cavalry were strong and resolute in fighting against their foes.
As Cromwell suggests, tying horses together would be a recipe for disaster...
Geoff
|
|
|
|
Post by snowcat on Feb 5, 2021 23:27:33 GMT
That's why it sounds much more like a static defensive formation...or a load of cobblers. Maybe, but remember it is the rule writers who have chosen to represent these elements as 6Cav and still include an option for Cataphracts within the same list(?). There are several references to Chained Cavalry in Chinese accounts, another refers to early Jurchen Cavalry who fought in very close formation. The rule writers here opted to represent them as a 3Kn formation but with one lancer flanked by 2 horse archers. Yup, good point. And yes, I'm quite familiar with the Jurchen.
This Chinese use of the terms 'chained' or 'horse team' should perhaps be reworded to reflect the alternate and far more believable 'close co-operation' between elements of a single formation or multiple formations (e.g. archers with lancers). Otherwise, 'chained' has to be a static defensive formation if taken literally.
So if you take the 6Cv option, it represents a mobile but tougher nut to crack. In the case of the Mu-jung, you could represent this with a base comprising some fully armoured lancers with some not quite so completely armoured mounted archers. I'd probably have them all on armoured horses, but it's up to you.
|
|
|
|
Post by Haardrada on Feb 6, 2021 1:13:29 GMT
I totally agree with you snowcat, I chose to mix figures for my II/61b Murong Hsien pi... I used essex Northern & Southern Dynasty figures for the majority of the army(using some of the T'ang and Huns for the LH), but chose Outpost miniatures from their Sui & T'ang range... I used STC10 on STC9 horses that Outpost were happy to supply at the same cost as normal packs(note the Spears are sold separately) or you can source your own. I believe they very much look the part. www.outpostwargameservices.co.uk/suitang.htm |
|
|
|
Post by snowcat on Feb 6, 2021 1:18:40 GMT
I'm doing much the same thing mix-wise for my Northern Dynasty Chinese: Essex for the foot and Outpost for the mounted. |
|
|
|
Post by Haardrada on Feb 6, 2021 1:24:34 GMT
I'm doing much the same thing mix-wise for my Northern Dynasty Chinese: Essex for the foot and Outpost for the mounted. I have also devised a way to provide the Murong Xianbei Cavalry with their destinctive feathered plumes too....I found the tip of the tails of the serpent shield device for the warhammer dark elf Spearmen I have in my spares box are just the right size to fit on the top of the helmets once the plume is removed. 😉 |
|
|
|
Post by Baldie on Feb 6, 2021 7:50:59 GMT
Khaine will be pleased.
|
|
