Give the shieldwall unit some helmets like Dailami foot and make hirdsmen armoured?

[Scartabelli]

Should the hemet design be nation specific or any nation can have 25% of the same helmet? Because many nations use the same shield wall unit.

This is a very good point. The types of helmets used by different "nations" varied quite a bit. Not only that but also the type, shape and painting of shields also varied a fair bit.

"However, as we have mentioned before, we are a small studio and our art budget (and art time allocation) is not infinite. "

Making appropriate models for all different army lists would a costly endeavour even for bigger studios, to be honest. I mean the variety of different types of equipment was far greater than most people (including players) realise. People should just accept those unit models are just a symbolic representation of their troops. Period.

[MVP7]

To be fair, while the hoplites are portrayed uniformly, it's likely that by the Pelopponesian War few hoplites wore body armor at all, with the majority simply equipped with shield, spear, and open faced pylos style helmet. In addition, armor status is not universal but is relative to what else is available at the time - so a Protected unit in 1500 might be wearing a brigandine and steel helmet, while a Protected unit in 400 BC has a shield and bronze helmet.

I doubt the late European infantry will ever be rated below 'Some armour' as outside of Europe the average armour never got that heavy. From what I have read it basically stopped at chainmail and lamellar level after end of crusades. 'Well armoured' rating is also still virtually unused so there is room for increasing European armour without dropping others below the current standards.

In any case, the higher ranking Saxon hirdsmen were often equipped by their king and anyone who could afford it would probably get some armour. To me it seems unlikely that Saxons would be the only people in Western and Northern Europe (not counting the Irish) incapable of wielding meaningful amount of armour. 'Some armour' would seem like a reasonable rating even if relatively small part of the military elite was armoured. Adding some helmets for Hirdsmen could be a nice and relatively easy way to display this.

[melm]

Models having armor or not is one issue, but the source justifying that hirdsmen are less protected than huscarl is another. I am only curious about the latter.

[rbodleyscott]

Models having armor or not is one issue, but the source justifying that hirdsmen are less protected than huscarl is another. I am only curious about the latter.

Our main source was Ian Heath's Armies of the Dark Ages, which states, when discussing 7th-9th century Saxons: "Mail byrnies and helmets were both considerable rarities amongst the early Saxons, though, like swords, they became more common later on."

Given that the Hirdsmen unit is used in the game up until 949 AD, it would at least be arguable for them to be rated as "Some Armour".

[melm]

Models having armor or not is one issue, but the source justifying that hirdsmen are less protected than huscarl is another. I am only curious about the latter.

Our main source was Ian Heath's Armies of the Dark Ages, which states, when discussing 7th-9th century Saxons: "Mail byrnies and helmets were both considerable rarities amongst the early Saxons, though, like swords, they became more common later on."

Given that the Hirdsmen unit is used in the game up until 949 AD, it would at least be arguable for them to be rated as "Some Armour".

Thanks Richard. How can I miss the lines in Heath's book on Anglo-Saxon chieftain section! I also checked Osprey's publishing Anglo-Saxon Thegn that, at least in 1993, its publishing date, outside literary sources little evidence of mail shirt was found until late 10th century. So I am fine with current Anglo-Saxon list that Hirdmen shift to Huscarl with more armor from 871-949 list to 950-1016 list. That's late 10th century transition. If the model doesn't change, I am happy to see Anglo-Saxon Hirdmen remain as "protected" which is close to historical evidence. However, if new model is added for Hirdmen, "some armor" setting is also good for me.

[Dux Limitis]

Models having armor or not is one issue, but the source justifying that hirdsmen are less protected than huscarl is another. I am only curious about the latter.

Our main source was Ian Heath's Armies of the Dark Ages, which states, when discussing 7th-9th century Saxons: "Mail byrnies and helmets were both considerable rarities amongst the early Saxons, though, like swords, they became more common later on."

Given that the Hirdsmen unit is used in the game up until 949 AD, it would at least be arguable for them to be rated as "Some Armour".

I also checked Osprey's publishing Anglo-Saxon Thegn that, at least in 1993, its publishing date, outside literary sources little evidence of mail shirt was found until late 10th century. So I am fine with current Anglo-Saxon list that Hirdmen shift to Huscarl with more armor from 871-949 list to 950-1016 list. That's late 10th century transition. If the model doesn't change, I am happy to see Anglo-Saxon Hirdmen remain as "protected" which is close to historical evidence. However, if new model is added for Hirdmen, "some armor" setting is also good for me.

I think maybe you should read Osprey's maa154 and cbt027 too.
Yes,mail armor pieces' relics of the Anglo-Saxon were not common before the 10-11 century.But some reliefs proved before this age they did have some.Like the roman's lorica segmentata,armor pieces' relics are very uncommon today,but they were on many ancient oman reliefs such as the Trajan's column and Constantine's triumphal arch.Will you say the segmentata were less used just because not many relics?For the same reason,I'd like to see the hirdsmen got new armoured models and their armor stage will rated as some armoured.Just like the"well armed shieldwall" unit in the Anglo-Danish army list.

[Dux Limitis]

Should the hemet design be nation specific or any nation can have 25% of the same helmet? Because many nations use the same shield wall unit.

"However, as we have mentioned before, we are a small studio and our art budget (and art time allocation) is not infinite. "

Making appropriate models for all different army lists would a costly endeavour even for bigger studios

So that's why I suggest them to sell new unit packs like totalwar or rise the game and dlc's price.If that will make them earn more money as art budget,to make more new unit and models.Unit packs will sells well too,did you see the totalwar's unit packs encounter any sales difficulties over the years?

[melm]

Our main source was Ian Heath's Armies of the Dark Ages, which states, when discussing 7th-9th century Saxons: "Mail byrnies and helmets were both considerable rarities amongst the early Saxons, though, like swords, they became more common later on."

Given that the Hirdsmen unit is used in the game up until 949 AD, it would at least be arguable for them to be rated as "Some Armour".

I also checked Osprey's publishing Anglo-Saxon Thegn that, at least in 1993, its publishing date, outside literary sources little evidence of mail shirt was found until late 10th century. So I am fine with current Anglo-Saxon list that Hirdmen shift to Huscarl with more armor from 871-949 list to 950-1016 list. That's late 10th century transition. If the model doesn't change, I am happy to see Anglo-Saxon Hirdmen remain as "protected" which is close to historical evidence. However, if new model is added for Hirdmen, "some armor" setting is also good for me.

I think maybe you should read Osprey's maa154 and cbt027 too.
Yes,mail armor pieces' relics of the Anglo-Saxon were not common before the 10-11 century.But some reliefs proved before this age they did have some.Like the roman's lorica segmentata,armor pieces' relics are very uncommon today,but they were on many ancient oman reliefs such as the Trajan's column and Constantine's triumphal arch.Will you say the segmentata were less used just because not many relics?For the same reason,I'd like to see the hirdsmen got new armoured models and their armor stage will rated as some armoured.Just like the"well armed shieldwall" unit in the Anglo-Danish army list.

I've read these two books. There is nothing contradicting that in Anglo-Saxon Thegn(Warrior 5). MAA154 has no more archaeological evidence but a helmet from Coppergate side in York, which is also mentioned in WAR005. And CBT027 clearly states that

By the end of the period covered by this book, it is likely that all Anglo-Saxon warriors wore mail shirts,

(The period in CBT027 is from 865-1066)
which conforms with the transition by the end the 10th century both in Heath's book and WAR005.

[Dux Limitis]

I also checked Osprey's publishing Anglo-Saxon Thegn that, at least in 1993, its publishing date, outside literary sources little evidence of mail shirt was found until late 10th century. So I am fine with current Anglo-Saxon list that Hirdmen shift to Huscarl with more armor from 871-949 list to 950-1016 list. That's late 10th century transition. If the model doesn't change, I am happy to see Anglo-Saxon Hirdmen remain as "protected" which is close to historical evidence. However, if new model is added for Hirdmen, "some armor" setting is also good for me.

I think maybe you should read Osprey's maa154 and cbt027 too.
Yes,mail armor pieces' relics of the Anglo-Saxon were not common before the 10-11 century.But some reliefs proved before this age they did have some.Like the roman's lorica segmentata,armor pieces' relics are very uncommon today,but they were on many ancient oman reliefs such as the Trajan's column and Constantine's triumphal arch.Will you say the segmentata were less used just because not many relics?For the same reason,I'd like to see the hirdsmen got new armoured models and their armor stage will rated as some armoured.Just like the"well armed shieldwall" unit in the Anglo-Danish army list.

(The period in CBT027 is from 865-1066)
which conforms with the transition by the end the 10th century both in Heath's book and WAR005.

Yes,but aren't we talking about the hirdsmen's model and armor stages before the 949ad's A-X army list in the game?The CBT27 did mention some wealthy fyrds would have mail shirt at Ashdown field in 871(page10).And even the wealthy fyrds could get one,we could presumed the hirdsmen have more mail shirts than fyrdsmen,so they did need armoured models and armor advantage reset as some armor.

[antiochosvii]

You don't need to provide evidence. We are well aware that some of the men in a shieldwall would have helmets.

However, as we have mentioned before, we are a small studio and our art budget (and art time allocation) is not infinite.

There were simply too many variations of appearance in Ancient and Dark Age armies for us to represent all of them within our available budget.

Some compromises have been made in order to get the game (and DLCs) out at all.

If you guys put out a 2.99ish cash unit pack for new models across the board, I and I think many others would buy it in a heartbeat. I love what you and the team have done here and would gladly support it to expand your art budget.

[lapdog666]

You don't need to provide evidence. We are well aware that some of the men in a shieldwall would have helmets.

However, as we have mentioned before, we are a small studio and our art budget (and art time allocation) is not infinite.

There were simply too many variations of appearance in Ancient and Dark Age armies for us to represent all of them within our available budget.

Some compromises have been made in order to get the game (and DLCs) out at all.

If you guys put out a 2.99ish cash unit pack for new models across the board, I and I think many others would buy it in a heartbeat. I love what you and the team have done here and would gladly support it to expand your art budget.

i can second that

[MVP7]

For a 2.99 unit pack RBS would have to build an all new system to technically allow the non-universal unit graphics and army lists, which would all be time away from developing actual game content. Pat would need just as much time making the new models for 2.99 pack as he uses for making models for the full priced DLC.

At best the DLC would sell a few thousand units and few thousand times 2.99 divided to Valve's cut, slitherine's cut and developers' cut the price would barely cover the coffee consumed during development months. Not that economically viable.

I think the best we can hope for is that at some point in development we get another "Praetorian update" but I doubt it's going to happen any time soon with the vast amount of new units needed for medieval period.

[Dux Limitis]

You don't need to provide evidence. We are well aware that some of the men in a shieldwall would have helmets.

However, as we have mentioned before, we are a small studio and our art budget (and art time allocation) is not infinite.

There were simply too many variations of appearance in Ancient and Dark Age armies for us to represent all of them within our available budget.

Some compromises have been made in order to get the game (and DLCs) out at all.

I love what you and the team have done here and would gladly support it to expand your art budget.

That's real.I'll gladly do it too.

[Dux Limitis]

For a 2.99 unit pack RBS would have to build an all new system to technically allow the non-universal unit graphics and army lists, which would all be time away from developing actual game content. Pat would need just as much time making the new models for 2.99 pack as he uses for making models for the full priced DLC.

At best the DLC would sell a few thousand units and few thousand times 2.99 divided to Valve's cut, slitherine's cut and developers' cut the price would barely cover the coffee consumed during development months. Not that economically viable.

I think the best we can hope for is that at some point in development we get another "Praetorian update" but I doubt it's going to happen any time soon with the vast amount of new units needed for medieval period.

We don't wanna see more dlcs lack of units also with many repaint models.I'd like to see they use the money to make more unit models to supply the earlier dlcs and the main game like the peltast/praetorian update.That's the right way for sure.

[Madaoke]

Has the above shoulder grip animation for the spearmen ever been discussed on this forum?
I know it's something small but it really bothers me everytime I see it.

[rbodleyscott]

Has the above shoulder grip animation for the spearmen ever been discussed on this forum?
I know it's something small but it really bothers me everytime I see it.

You mean the spears being used overarm? If so, what makes you think that is wrong?

[Latro]

I seem to recall someone arguing, a couple of years ago, that spears were commonly held underarm. Even in the phalanx.
I believe there was an article in 'Ancient Warfare'. Are there still people who hold that idea?

While I would agree that, in a one on one fight, a couched stance with a spear does have some merit. In close formation, No.

[rbodleyscott]

I seem to recall someone arguing, a couple of years ago, that spears were commonly held underarm. Even in the phalanx.
I believe there was an article in 'Ancient Warfare'. Are there still people who hold that idea?

While I would agree that, in a one on one fight, a couched stance with a spear does have some merit. In close formation, No.

Macedonian pike phalanxes used their pikes held in two hands underarm, but Greek hoplite phalanxes certainly used their spears overarm - it is simply a more effective way of fighting with this length of spear when matched with a large shield. You can see it on vase paintings - in close formation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Deta ... i-vase.jpg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Hopl ... Museum.jpg

And here is an Anglo-Saxon shieldwall from the Bayeux tapestry, and guess what....

http://c.files.bbci.co.uk/5731/producti ... 716367.jpg

As can be seen, the Hoplite phalanx and the Dark Age shieldwall are pretty much identical.

[Latro]

I found the whole idea rather silly but it was a discussion, for a while.
With overlapping shields it is just physically impossible to use your spear in any more 'creative way' than go stabby, stabby.