|
|
Post by timurilank on May 3, 2017 6:32:23 GMT
IV/68e Spanish Army (1495 AD – 1503 AD) remove IV/74 Free Company & Armagnac (1357 AD - 1444 AD)
IV/68f Spanish Army (1504 AD – 1515 AD) remove IV/74 Free Company & Armagnac (1357 AD - 1444 AD)
(Both these Spanish armies list IV/74 as an enemy, but IV/74 doesn’t mention either, and the dates are wrong)
The old version IV/68 gave one list each for the Spanish and Portuguese, end date for these was 1485 AD. Expanding the list for the Italian Wars we find this incorrectly copied. The Free Company do appear on sub-list IV/68d.
Action:
Remove IV/74 Free Company & Armagnac (1357 AD - 1444 AD) from IV/68e Spanish Army (1495 AD – 1503 AD).
Remove IV/74 Free Company & Armagnac (1357 AD - 1444 AD) from IV/68f Spanish Army (1504 AD – 1515 AD).
|
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on May 3, 2017 6:34:18 GMT
IV/72 Amazonian Army (1350 AD – 1662 AD) add IV/72 Amazonian Army (1350 AD – 1662 AD)
(If any army should have itself as a mutual internal enemy, it’s this one!)
The Amazonian are not listed as an enemy of itself in the old version which may be why it does not appear in the current version. Aside from the Tupi and Guarani I do find references to cannibalism among the Amazonian and this would involve the ritual offering of captives; e.g., conflict. As hunter gatherers, they would invariably find themselves in territorial dispute with other tribes.
Action:
Add IV/72 Amazonian Army (1350 AD – 1662 AD) to IV/72 Amazonian Army (1350 AD – 1662 AD).
|
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on May 3, 2017 6:35:25 GMT
IV/78 Yi Dynasty Korean (1392 AD - 1598 AD) add IV/59a Post-Mongol Samurai (1300 AD – 1464 AD)
(Army IV/59a lists IV/78 as an enemy, but IV/78 doesn’t mention IV/59a, only IV/59b)
These are listed as mutual enemies in the old version. The major conflict of 1592 – 98 is covered by IV/59b but the expedition to Tsushima Island would involve the earlier IV/59a sub-list.
Action:
Add IV/59a Post-Mongol Samurai (1300 AD – 1464 AD) to IV/78 Yi Dynasty Korean (1392 AD - 1598 AD).
|
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on May 3, 2017 6:36:08 GMT
IV/81 Inca Imperial Army (1438 AD - 1534 AD) add IV/70 Chanca or Canari Army (1350 AD – 1470 AD)
(Army IV/70 lists IV/81 as an enemy, but IV/81 doesn’t mention IV/70)
These two were mutual enemies in the old version and reading the historical background text (3.0) the Chanca invasions are mentioned in the very first sentence.
Action:
Add IV/70 Chanca or Canari Army (1350 AD – 1470 AD) to IV/81 Inca Imperial Army (1438 AD - 1534 AD).
|
|
|
|
Post by stevie on May 3, 2017 19:52:07 GMT
Here they are…the VERY LAST of the Book IV errors:- 
IV/13c Medieval Germans (1440 AD – 1493 AD) add IV/85b Burgundian Ordonnance (1478 AD – 1506 AD)
(Army IV/85b lists IV/13c as an enemy, but IV/13c doesn’t mention IV/85b, only IV/85a)
IV/13d Medieval Germans (1494 AD – 1518 AD) remove IV/82a French Ordonnance (1445 AD – 1480 AD)
(I’ve only just noticed this on page 5…I don’t know how it got there, but IV/13d doesn’t mention IV/82a, nor should it. I must have put it there in error. To be deleted, if only to hide my shame.)
IV/82a French Ordonnance (1445 AD - 1480 AD) add IV/76 Early Burgundian Army (1363 AD – 1471 AD)
(Army IV/76 lists IV/82a as an enemy, but IV/82a doesn’t mention IV/76)
IV/82a French Ordonnance (1445 AD – 1480 AD) add IV/85a Burgundian Ordonnance (1471 AD – 1477 AD)
(Army IV/85a lists IV/82a as an enemy, but IV/82a doesn’t mention IV/85a)
IV/82b French Ordonnance (1481 AD – 1515 AD) remove IV/85a Burgundian Ordonnance (1471 AD - 1477 AD)
(Army IV/82b lists IV/85a as an enemy, but IV/85a doesn’t mention IV/82b, only IV/82a, and the dates don’t match)
IV/85b Burgundian Ordonnance (1478 AD – 1506 AD) add? IV/13d Medieval Germans (1494 AD – 1518 AD)
IV/13d Medieval Germans (1494 AD – 1518 AD) add? IV/85b Burgundian Ordonnance (1478 AD – 1506 AD)
(Did these two ever fight each other? If so, then the army lists don’t mention it. If they didn’t, then forget it.)
Page 5 has been updated: fanaticus.boards.net/thread/603/historical-opponents?page=5&scrollTo=4421
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well timurilank me old matey, we finally got there. 
Every single army, enemy, ally and date, in all 4 books, all thoroughly checked, analysed, scrutinised and inspected.
I didn’t think it would take this long (I had hair when we started), but it’s done now.
Only it’s not quite over just yet. There are still a few green items concerning the early Romans in Book I to finalize.
I’ve completed my researches into these and will post my findings for you to check tomorrow.
Then there is the question of presentation.
I originally planned to have a short one-line note under each entry to explain the reason for the edit, but that was before anyone realised just how many corrections there actually were. And it would make pretty dull reading:-
“Wrong date”, “wrong date”, “not mutual enemies”, “wrong date” etc.
I have a new idea. The errors all fall into one of these four categorises:-
A) Dates that don’t match.
B) Enemies that are not mutual.
C) Geographical errors, where they couldn’t have physically reached each other.
D) And last of all, the forgotten wars, where a major conflict has been omitted (Khazar vs. Rus for example).
Category ‘A’ and ‘B’ corrections are easily spotted and players can look in the lists to see these for themselves.
So only category ‘C’ and ‘D’ corrections need to be explained, and to keep things looking tidy these can be in the form of a numbered footnote, either at the bottom of each page of the final document or at the end as an appendix.
With this in mind, I want to go back to the start of this long, long thread and dig out your lovely little explanations.
I found them to be quite informative, and I’m sure that other people would think the same.
|
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on May 3, 2017 22:09:15 GMT
Here they are…the VERY LAST of the Book IV errors:-
Well timurilank me old matey, we finally got there.
Every single army, enemy, ally and date, in all 4 books, all thoroughly checked, analysed, scrutinised and inspected.
I didn’t think it would take this long (I had hair when we started), but it’s done now.
Only it’s not quite over just yet. There are still a few green items concerning the early Romans in Book I to finalize.
I’ve completed my researches into these and will post my findings for you to check tomorrow.
Enjoy your beer. Mine is a glass of red wine. I will look at the medieval items tomorrow after I have my coffee and croissant. After tomorrow I shall miss the early morning ritual of bicycling to the baker for fresh croissants. |
|
|
|
Post by felixs on May 4, 2017 6:08:45 GMT
Very impressive work. Thank you! IV/78 Yi Dynasty Korean (1392 AD - 1598 AD) add IV/59a Post-Mongol Samurai (1300 AD – 1464 AD)
(Army IV/59a lists IV/78 as an enemy, but IV/78 doesn’t mention IV/59a, only IV/59b)
These are listed as mutual enemies in the old version. The major conflict of 1592 – 98 is covered by IV/59b but the expedition to Tsushima Island would involve the earlier IV/59a sub-list.
Action:
Add IV/59a Post-Mongol Samurai (1300 AD – 1464 AD) to IV/78 Yi Dynasty Korean (1392 AD - 1598 AD).
IV/59b is supposed to stop in 1542, the reason obviously being the introduction of (modern style) firearms and the adoption of fire drill and even something like pike-and-shot tactics. Nagashino (1575) is the most cited example for this, but I think the firearms are much less of a factor here, instead we should look at the effect of prepared positions. So I have my doubts on the post 1542 change and I would happily use IV/59b for the Imjin war (Hideyoshi invasion, if you prefer), just replacing bows by firearms. There would have been change, but probably not enough to portray in DBA. However: The way the list is meant, I doubt that IV/59b covers 1592-1598. |
|
|
|
Post by davidconstable on May 4, 2017 6:12:49 GMT
Enjoy your beer. Mine is a glass of red wine. I will look at the medieval items tomorrow after I have my coffee and croissant. After tomorrow I shall miss the early morning ritual of bicycling to the baker for fresh croissants. Enjoy your wine, still go to your bakers, mine is on the corner, a 1min walk.
Mine is not a French breakfast (I am English), doughnuts, pineapple tarts, bacon twists and nice hot chocolate.
Can I say to you both, thanks, I had no idea it was as bad as it was.
David Constable
|
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on May 4, 2017 7:01:22 GMT
IV/13c Medieval Germans (1440 AD – 1493 AD) add IV/85b Burgundian Ordonnance (1478 AD – 1506 AD)
(Army IV/85b lists IV/13c as an enemy, but IV/13c doesn’t mention IV/85b, only IV/85a)
This error was a result of the date changes for the Medieval German lists ‘c’ and ‘d’.
Action:
Add IV/85b Burgundian Ordonnance (1478 AD – 1506 AD) to IV/13c Medieval Germans (1440 AD – 1493 AD).
|
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on May 4, 2017 7:02:03 GMT
IV/13d Medieval Germans (1494 AD – 1518 AD) remove IV/82a French Ordonnance (1445 AD – 1480 AD)
(I’ve only just noticed this on page 5…I don’t know how it got there, but IV/13d doesn’t mention IV/82a,
nor should it. I must have put it there in error. To be deleted, if only to hide my shame.)
Agree.
Action:
Remove IV/82a French Ordonnance (1445 AD – 1480 AD) from IV/13d Medieval Germans (1494 AD – 1518 AD).
|
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on May 4, 2017 7:02:46 GMT
IV/82a French Ordonnance (1445 AD - 1480 AD) add IV/76 Early Burgundian Army (1363 AD – 1471 AD)
(Army IV/76 lists IV/82a as an enemy, but IV/82a doesn’t mention IV/76)
An omission as these two are mutual enemies in the old version.
Action:
Add IV/76 Early Burgundian Army (1363 AD – 1471 AD) to IV/82a French Ordonnance (1445 AD - 1480 AD).
|
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on May 4, 2017 7:03:27 GMT
IV/82a French Ordonnance (1445 AD – 1480 AD) add IV/85a Burgundian Ordonnance (1471 AD – 1477 AD)
(Army IV/85a lists IV/82a as an enemy, but IV/82a doesn’t mention IV/85a)
Correct. The dating of the French Ordonnance changed in the new version. This is clearly an omission.
Action:
Add IV/85a Burgundian Ordonnance (1471 AD – 1477 AD) to IV/82a French Ordonnance (1445 AD – 1480 AD).
|
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on May 4, 2017 7:04:15 GMT
IV/82b French Ordonnance (1481 AD – 1515 AD) remove IV/85a Burgundian Ordonnance (1471 AD - 1477 AD)
(Army IV/82b lists IV/85a as an enemy, but IV/85a doesn’t mention IV/82b, only IV/82a, and the dates don’t match)
Correct. The duchy was annexed by Louis XI.
Action:
Remove IV/85a Burgundian Ordonnance (1471 AD - 1477 AD) from IV/82b French Ordonnance (1481 AD – 1515 AD).
|
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on May 4, 2017 7:05:40 GMT
IV/85b Burgundian Ordonnance (1478 AD – 1506 AD) add? IV/13d Medieval Germans (1494 AD – 1518 AD)
IV/13d Medieval Germans (1494 AD – 1518 AD) add? IV/85b Burgundian Ordonnance (1478 AD – 1506 AD)
(Did these two ever fight each other? If so, then the army lists don’t mention it. If they didn’t, then forget it.)
The old version did list these two as mutual enemies with their conflicts ceasing with the German ‘c’ list (end date 1476 AD). The new version extended the end date of IV/13c to 1493 so as to include the territorial disputes between Louis XI and Maximilian I of Habsburg; France annexing the duchy and the Burgundian Netherlands coming under control by the Habsburgs. The disputes ceased with the Treaty of Arras (1482).
Action:
None.
|
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on May 4, 2017 7:18:52 GMT
Very impressive work. Thank you! IV/78 Yi Dynasty Korean (1392 AD - 1598 AD) add IV/59a Post-Mongol Samurai (1300 AD – 1464 AD)
(Army IV/59a lists IV/78 as an enemy, but IV/78 doesn’t mention IV/59a, only IV/59b)
These are listed as mutual enemies in the old version. The major conflict of 1592 – 98 is covered by IV/59b but the expedition to Tsushima Island would involve the earlier IV/59a sub-list.
Action:
Add IV/59a Post-Mongol Samurai (1300 AD – 1464 AD) to IV/78 Yi Dynasty Korean (1392 AD - 1598 AD).
IV/59b is supposed to stop in 1542, the reason obviously being the introduction of (modern style) firearms and the adoption of fire drill and even something like pike-and-shot tactics. Nagashino (1575) is the most cited example for this, but I think the firearms are much less of a factor here, instead we should look at the effect of prepared positions. So I have my doubts on the post 1542 change and I would happily use IV/59b for the Imjin war (Hideyoshi invasion, if you prefer), just replacing bows by firearms. There would have been change, but probably not enough to portray in DBA. However: The way the list is meant, I doubt that IV/59b covers 1592-1598. DBA3 have handguns used solely by skirmishers (Ps). Using the Bw factors for the matchlock armed Ashigaru would work; these might be better represented as ‘solid’ to reflect their fire drill.
|
|
