Page 5 of 5

Posted: Mon Feb 23, 2009 7:05 pm
by Scrumpy
On a related topic, are there any good sites or books about Harold's Welsh campaigns ?

Posted: Mon Feb 23, 2009 8:40 pm
by tadamson
Scrumpy wrote:On a related topic, are there any good sites or books about Harold's Welsh campaigns ?
I fear not, I don't even recall any good papers in the journals!

Posted: Tue Feb 24, 2009 12:46 am
by DaiSho
Scrumpy wrote:Therefore William the Tanner obviously used loaded dice. :D
Pr :!: ck :shock: .

I hate people who do that!

If I ever come across this William fella across a wargames table I'll refuse to play him. It's just not on!

:)

Posted: Tue Feb 24, 2009 1:24 am
by spike
rbodleyscott wrote:
Scrumpy wrote:At Hastings the Saxons would have been on ++ at impact, and ++ in melee against the knights.

Therefore William the Tanner obviously used loaded dice. :D
However, we are working on the assumption that much of the fyrd at Hastings would be rated as Protected, Poor.
Thats one hell of an assumption!
Most of fyrd of Essex and Wessex were probably unengaged at Stamford Bridge, due to the requirements of bringing in the harvest in. Starvation would have been mentioned in the ASC, if the harvest was poor or uncollected.
The majority of the troops marching North and South would have been the Huscales, and they were on horseback.
But there would be a large proportion, of the lesser equiped men, who would have been stood behind the men with armour, whilst this overall would make the BG's only protected, they are probably still average in troop classification.

So the Milites hit the line at -- and fight at the melee at -, so you need some luck, and this battle did last most of the day.

Spike

Posted: Tue Feb 24, 2009 2:28 am
by IanB3406
Of course in FOG you just have your skirmishing archers pick a spot and shoot for 5-6 turns......The Saxon's have no skirmishers and eventually you are gonna get them to drop somewhere.....or they can chase the skirmishers off the hill which is what you want.

Unless Harold has an IC umbrella? --which might make this pointless.

By the way, I had always heard that the Huscarls where used to re-inforce the Fryd battle line in this battle and not deployed as a separate unit. I wonder if this would be better represented by having the option to take no Huscarls and upgrade several Fryd Units as Superior (but stay protected assuming the effect was more to moral).

Ian

Posted: Tue Feb 24, 2009 9:34 am
by tadamson
IanB3406 wrote:Of course in FOG you just have your skirmishing archers pick a spot and shoot for 5-6 turns......The Saxon's have no skirmishers and eventually you are gonna get them to drop somewhere.....or they can chase the skirmishers off the hill which is what you want.
historically, the missiles from the rear ranks kept archers at bay :?

Unless Harold has an IC umbrella? --which might make this pointless.

By the way, I had always heard that the Huscarls where used to re-inforce the Fryd battle line in this battle and not deployed as a separate unit. I wonder if this would be better represented by having the option to take no Huscarls and upgrade several Fryd Units as Superior (but stay protected assuming the effect was more to moral).

Ian
Huscarls were bodyguard troops and stayed around the leader. Though were there were enough to be a 'unit' is debatable. The theigns, 5 hide men etc of the mounted warband dismounted at Hastings (and probably at other battles) and seemed to mix with the ceorls in the shieldwall.

Tom..

Posted: Tue Feb 24, 2009 5:02 pm
by madaxeman
Scrumpy wrote:On a related topic, are there any good sites or books about Harold's Welsh campaigns ?
This is a touch late, but many of the books listed on this page cover the full period of Welsh military history...

http://www.madaxeman.com/wiki2/tiki-ind ... eval+Welsh

Tim

Posted: Tue Feb 24, 2009 5:34 pm
by Scrumpy
Thanks Tim.

Posted: Tue Feb 24, 2009 6:29 pm
by PyrrhicVictory
IanB3406 wrote:Unless Harold has an IC umbrella? --which might make this pointless.
Ian
I do not think this is a bad assumption. Harold Godwinson marched his army all the way to Stamford and defeated Harald Hardrada, a noted commander in his own right. Then hard-marched his army back to Hastings. There he was able to hold his army together and repulse wave after wave of Norman charges, and held his army in check to not fall for feigned retreats. However very shortly after his death, his army fell due to pursuit of retreating/ feigned retreating troops.

Posted: Tue Feb 24, 2009 8:29 pm
by vsolfronk
Perhaps there should be a mechanism for an un-attached leader getting "an arrow through the eye/falling over door-nail dead." Perhaps in JAP, the owning player rolls- needing boxcars twice in a row for each nattached commander!

Posted: Thu Mar 05, 2009 3:20 am
by evileli
I don't know if this really a mistake or not, but is there a reason that Normans Do Not have Bretons as a ally choice?

Posted: Thu Mar 05, 2009 8:42 am
by nikgaukroger
The notes under the Breton ally may explain.

Posted: Wed Mar 18, 2009 8:50 am
by caliban66
I friend of mine said that he was surprised with anglodanes due to their Non-norman mercenary superior armoured LS/Sw cavalry. Was he right. Have the Anglodanes such cavalry without norman mercenaries?

Posted: Wed Mar 18, 2009 9:30 am
by philqw78
IIRC they can have lots and lots of average cavalry.

Posted: Wed Mar 18, 2009 10:22 am
by nikgaukroger
caliban66 wrote:I friend of mine said that he was surprised with anglodanes due to their Non-norman mercenary superior armoured LS/Sw cavalry. Was he right. Have the Anglodanes such cavalry without norman mercenaries?

Not mercenaries it is the Huscarls fighting as cavalry.

Posted: Wed Mar 18, 2009 1:03 pm
by robertthebruce
caliban66 wrote:
I friend of mine said that he was surprised with anglodanes due to their Non-norman mercenary superior armoured LS/Sw cavalry. Was he right. Have the Anglodanes such cavalry without norman mercenaries?

The army list explain it, I canĀ“t believe that Huscarls ride on horses into the battle and fight ever on foot.



Cheers

David