Dates of the period

General discussion forum for anything related to Field of Glory Renaissance Wars.

Moderators: hammy, Slitherine Core, FOGR Design

o54881
Senior Corporal - Destroyer
Senior Corporal - Destroyer
Posts: 116
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 10:55 pm
Location: Barnet, London

Post by o54881 » Wed Feb 11, 2009 10:46 pm

The end of the FoGR period is more to do with firing techniques like volley fire and shooting by company.
The "establishment" of regiments is another distinct break point.

SirGarnet
Brigadier-General - Elite Grenadier
Brigadier-General - Elite Grenadier
Posts: 2182
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2008 10:13 am

Post by SirGarnet » Thu Feb 12, 2009 12:16 pm

The existing FoG rules already provide for thin linear formations - it's just that one base deep lines are not very strong.

Volley fire could easily be represented by POAs in the same manner as Impact Foot vs. Light Spear, at least when facing musketeers.

However I think there would be too many special rules or compromises involved in having rules focused on the 16th and 17th C adjusted and balanced for the 18th C as well. My guess is Napoleonic rules would provide more suitable mechanisms for retrofitting to the 18th C. Best I feel to get the rules right for what they cover rather than overstretching them.

charlesmasefield
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 301
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 9:37 am

Post by charlesmasefield » Mon Feb 23, 2009 6:19 pm

timmy1 wrote:Charles, if you are planning to go to the end of Pike in major armies, you need to go to 1718.
Yes, I know 1700 is arbitrary and doesn't coincide with any significant event save that most armies had pretty much given up the pike by then. I would be quite interested in going to 1718ish as that would bring in the Spanish Succession and Northern Wars but I would need to crank up my knowledge on those.

charlesmasefield
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 301
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 9:37 am

Post by charlesmasefield » Mon Feb 23, 2009 6:28 pm

nikgaukroger wrote:A better approach would be the end of effective pike use and not just a date at which they were finally withdrawn - which is what I suspect 1718 is.

Although even better is looking for a break point when warfare changes style - if such can be identified.

Although if you're looking for a semi-arbitrary date towards the end of the C17th I rather like the end of the War of the League of Augsburg :)
Thanks Nik, I'll bear this in mind. Our main effort so far has been focussed on the earlier part of the period.

puster
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz 251/1
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz  251/1
Posts: 145
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 10:11 pm

Post by puster » Mon Feb 23, 2009 10:57 pm

charlesmasefield wrote:
timmy1 wrote:Charles, if you are planning to go to the end of Pike in major armies, you need to go to 1718.
Yes, I know 1700 is arbitrary and doesn't coincide with any significant event save that most armies had pretty much given up the pike by then. I would be quite interested in going to 1718ish as that would bring in the Spanish Succession and Northern Wars but I would need to crank up my knowledge on those.
I think these wars would belong to the "Lace Wars" more then the Renaissance wars.

On the other hand, its the rule that matters.

Looking at the main reason for the military development from the triumph of the pikeblock during the burgundian wars to their demise its the development of the firearms. Handguns and guns become lighter, easier to use and more effective. The introduction of pistols make Reiters feasable, the improvement of muskets make them vanish, etc...

A perfect rule system would start where FOG ends, with the crossbow and then just introduce increasingly more effective firearms to the same system. If the effective army buildups and usage for that configuration match their historical precendents, you hit the nail. The introduction of the bayonet makes pikes unnecessary. If the ruleset provides for bayonets and the yet better efficiency of guns and muskets you may just make it to the end of the lace wars and the reintroduction of military levees, probably up to 1790, when the army sizes make another scaling mandatory.

So while the ruleset currently is scheduled for Renaissance, don`t excluse the later period right now. But, or rather: BUT make sure that the system evolves from FOG as seamless as possible, and look where you can go from there. If that means stopping when the pikeblock vanishes around 1650, then stop there. Please do not neglect the early Renaissance just to include some lace wars.

timmy1
Lieutenant-General - Nashorn
Lieutenant-General - Nashorn
Posts: 3436
Joined: Fri Feb 29, 2008 8:39 pm
Location: Chelmsford, Essex, England

Post by timmy1 » Tue Feb 24, 2009 6:12 am

Puster

I am sorry but that is not quite correct. Push of Pike is still used after 1650. Plug bayonets do not make pike totally unnecessary.

I agree that the end date needs to be determined by styles of warfare rather than when pike is used. What I was describing was when pike stopped being used.

puster
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz 251/1
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz  251/1
Posts: 145
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 10:11 pm

Post by puster » Tue Feb 24, 2009 1:21 pm

timmy1 wrote:Puster

I am sorry but that is not quite correct. Push of Pike is still used after 1650. Plug bayonets do not make pike totally unnecessary.
Where was an actual "push of pike" used after the ECW/TYW?

Afaik it was so rare to actually use pikes in close combat that Grimmelshausen noted (during the TYW) that anybody who killed a pikeneer probably killed an innocent. The main usage of the pike in the TYW was to defend muskets against cavalry. I am sure that pikes were used later, though mainly as cheap weapons for units without access to or training as musketeers - but for pitched battle? The late 17th century, however, is not among my main areas of interest, so my lack of knowledge is probably just based on my shortcomings. If you have any examples of engagements between pikeblocks after the ECW/TYW, I would be glad to learn more.

pylum2
Corporal - Strongpoint
Corporal - Strongpoint
Posts: 69
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2009 8:34 pm

Post by pylum2 » Wed Feb 25, 2009 1:32 am

I certainly hope that that the period goes to 1700. I have a Louis XIV,Williamite Anglo-Dutch and Scots Jacobite DBR armies that would love to be put on the table. Its been awhile since the Scots have been mowed down by shot. My French have done standins as Irish Jacobite as well,the poor fellers always got confused as to who they would be,from one battle to the next.

pylum2
Corporal - Strongpoint
Corporal - Strongpoint
Posts: 69
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2009 8:34 pm

Post by pylum2 » Mon Mar 09, 2009 9:20 pm

Ok,in anticipation of this ruleset,I just ordered a huge amount(for me,at least) of Italian wars Essex stuff. I had to guess at what to order,but used a cross between my DBR lists and Storm of arrows. I probably should have consulted my Gush lists,too,but didnt. I'm also going to start rebasing my Warhammer ECW stuff,but try to keep it compatible,namely 3 pike and shot on 60mm frontage. Havent decided on the cav.

hazelbark
General - Carrier
General - Carrier
Posts: 4957
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 9:53 pm
Location: Capital of the World !!

Post by hazelbark » Tue Mar 10, 2009 3:13 am

pylum2 wrote:I certainly hope that that the period goes to 1700. I have a Louis XIV,Williamite Anglo-Dutch and Scots Jacobite DBR armies that would love to be put on the table. Its been awhile since the Scots have been mowed down by shot. My French have done standins as Irish Jacobite as well,the poor fellers always got confused as to who they would be,from one battle to the next.
While i appreciate your desire. I think there is a strong arguement to cut off somewhere between 1648 and 1688.

The armies of 1694-1700 are vastly different than 1618.

I think the big issue that have to be tackled are:
How to model the Tercio.
How to model the firepower (swedish?) that decimates the tercio.
What to do with the Ottoman/middle eastern/Asian/colonial type forces that have not evolved the musket and pike formations.
Also the evolution of the mounted arm in this period has a number of types from the Gendarmes of 1507 to the deep pistol cavalry to the hard charging later period.

All very interesting.

pylum2
Corporal - Strongpoint
Corporal - Strongpoint
Posts: 69
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2009 8:34 pm

Post by pylum2 » Tue Mar 10, 2009 1:08 pm

No argument that there is a huge difference between the beginning and the end of the century.But any cutoff date is arbitrary,and 1700 has been the traditional year in the past. There is so much evolution going on during the 1500-1700 time frame that it is very difficult to say. What would one use as a criteria? The abandonmnet of the pike?(which seems to be the argument posed on these boards so far) You can cite examples from the Eighty Years war and the ECW where that is the case. Use of bayonet? The plug bayonet turns the musket into a short pike,with its own pike drill. Evolution of the firearm?

ethan
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Posts: 1284
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2007 9:40 pm

Post by ethan » Tue Mar 10, 2009 3:28 pm

I think it is better to get the early period through the end of the Thirty Years War right. If the post-Thirty Years War stuff can be included without causing rules and play balance problems then great. But if the later period has to be sacrificed to get the early period right then IMO that is the right thing to do.

Obviously, a supplement/new rules set bulding forward from the Rennaissance or backward from Napoleon can then be made to cover the "missing" periods.

pylum2
Corporal - Strongpoint
Corporal - Strongpoint
Posts: 69
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2009 8:34 pm

Post by pylum2 » Tue Mar 10, 2009 5:30 pm

Yes,I agree on the play balance issue. But how do you acheive balance between an Italian wars era Landsknecht pike block,with its paltry 1:4 arquebus screen versus ranks of salvo firing Swedes? If you favor the pike and mute the shooting capacity(which FOG has set a trend toward) of the Swedes,then they dont stand a chance when the pike hit home (I've actually played this with WRG 2nd,and it wasnt pretty). At any rate,this is a difficult era to play out of period and maintain balance. I would actually favor a core system with subperiod rules,but where would you draw the distinction?

SirGarnet
Brigadier-General - Elite Grenadier
Brigadier-General - Elite Grenadier
Posts: 2182
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2008 10:13 am

Post by SirGarnet » Tue Mar 10, 2009 5:40 pm

The Imperial tercio of the 30YW had already evolved to a smaller and shallower formation more like the Swedish brigade than the classic tercio, but I think the same system could fairly encompass the 30YW even though it's likely to be a cataphract/knight type of supercession that will challenge the points balancing and make theme play particularly important.

I agree that somewhere before the 1690s a system well-tailored to the 1500s is going to give out and which combat interactions break when will depend on the rules mechanisms used (and, I hope, vice versa).

pylum2
Corporal - Strongpoint
Corporal - Strongpoint
Posts: 69
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2009 8:34 pm

Post by pylum2 » Tue Mar 10, 2009 8:26 pm

I hadnt even thought about hvy armored cav(ugh!) even though it was mentioned above. One thing I can count on,the Italian Wars will be there,so I've hedged my bets by ordering a gangload of Essex. :roll:

puster
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz 251/1
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz  251/1
Posts: 145
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 10:11 pm

Post by puster » Tue Mar 10, 2009 10:58 pm

pylum2 wrote: What would one use as a criteria?
I would use the following
1) The usage of line formations and dropping the pike block from the army list as a fallback-position.
or
2) The introduction of the bayonet, making pikes largely obsolete vs. bayonet armed muskets.

o54881
Senior Corporal - Destroyer
Senior Corporal - Destroyer
Posts: 116
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 10:55 pm
Location: Barnet, London

Figures for armies.

Post by o54881 » Thu Mar 19, 2009 10:30 am

Given most "Early modern" wargamers use DBR then that will be the bases used for beta testing.
Units in FoG are in 4 or 6 stands per BG some thing to remember when painting or tidying up troops.

SirGarnet
Brigadier-General - Elite Grenadier
Brigadier-General - Elite Grenadier
Posts: 2182
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2008 10:13 am

Re: Figures for armies.

Post by SirGarnet » Thu Mar 19, 2009 5:08 pm

o54881 wrote:Given most "Early modern" wargamers use DBR then that will be the bases used for beta testing.
Units in FoG are in 4 or 6 stands per BG some thing to remember when painting or tidying up troops.
So long as 2 Pike bases with 2 matching Shot on each side works for a BG . . .

Post Reply

Return to “Field of Glory : Renaissance Wars : General Discussion”