Your Favourite army

[acl]

I've been reading Nick Aitchison's Picts and Scots at War (Stroud, Sutton Publishing, 2003), and would recommend it to whoever is writing the Pictish list.

He doesn't say anything too definite about the infantry. The fashionable view seems to be that the DBM classification of them as long spear-armed auxiliaries (aux X) is not the most likely. Tho, there is much uncertainty, and I hope the option for them to serve on deep bases (20mm deep for 15mm armies) is retained for those of us who have already based them up.

Aithison has most to say about the Pictish horse, which he regards the cream of the army. He is scrupulous in acknowledging that the sources for them are thin, and I think a lot of what he says is based on analogy with other early medieval armies. But he thinks these were the Pictish nobility (they are often shown hunting), and imagines them charging into close contact at the start of a battle. The carved stones he reproduces show them mostly armed with long lances, and he reckons that their use of these rather than throwing javelins may have distinguished them from some of their opponents.

Some of this is a bit tenuous, but it does not fit too well with the DBM classification of the bulk of them as light horsemen. At least for the later period I think an option shd be given for a Pict to make a fair portion of his horsemen close-fighters.

Note, Aitchison reckons that Picts wore virtually no armour, so tho perhaps vigorous, these horsemen wd not have had much protection against shooting.

Alan

[shall]

Thanks Alan. We'll make use of it when we get ot that list for finalisation.

Si

[Klairuhnz]

My favorite armies would be
Later Swiss
Nikephorian Byzantine
Alexandrian Imperial.
The last I will have to build once these rules are released.

[nicofig]

1° Alexander Macedonians
2° Carthaginans
3° Gauls
4° Chinese

[sum1won]

I'm particularly interested in medieval African warfare south of the Sahara. Any chance that these will be included in the army lists? I am willing to help you out if interested.

Cheers

Richard

All I know about that was that there are a number of references to 'iron cavalry' in western africa. I'm not sure what period that was from, though.

[gareth121]

Thoughts about Medieval Portuguese in the DBM universe. Not sure yet how this translates to FoG

It has always struck me as odd that in DBM the Med. Portuguese get a regular cnc only in 1385.

This is the year of the Battle of Aljubarotta where the army was commanded by King Joao - (who before he became King was the master of one of the Portuguese military orders). He went on to command the army in the following and subsequent years. However in DBM he loses the 'Regular' status after that first battle.

While there were no major battles in 1386 and the campaign was particularly unsuccessful, he was campaigning in association with John of Gaunt's English and is reported to have taken siege engines with his army - again IIRC in the DBM universe Artillery is only available after 1390 when the English allies are not available.

Some sources attribute John of Gaunt with the responsibility of bringing Morris Dancing back to Britain when he returned after this campaign.

[rbodleyscott]

Thoughts about Medieval Portuguese in the DBM universe. Not sure yet how this translates to FoG

It has always struck me as odd that in DBM the Med. Portuguese get a regular cnc only in 1385.

FoG does not have regular and irregular generals, so this issue disappears.

[whitehorses]

Regarding the Wars of the Roses, the Irish & Scots seem to have been for mainly for one side & not the other. The Welsh fought for both
For instance, the Yorkists & Lincoln's rebellion against Henry VII had the Irish - the Duke of York was Lord Lieutenant of Ireland & most of the Irish nobles were also Yorkists, particularly the Fitzgeralds . The Ormonds were Lancastrians, but very few others were.
The Welsh had a foot in both camps, most notably at Mortimer's Cross wheher both armies had a big contingent of Welsh infantry.
The Scots were nominally on the Lancastrian's side, but this is prolly more due to Margaret promising them Castles & land than any deep-felt committment to the Lancastrian cause. And after the debacles at Hexham & Hedgley moor, Scots support is down to hiding Margaret & Prince Edward & not much else.

Also a lot of Artillery about in the battles, especially the Bombards, although as at Northampton & possibly Blore Heath, there was a mix of Organs & Bombards behind fortifications. Handgunners were available too, though not in open battles - they seemed to have mainly in the town battles like St. Albans.

[carlos]

I own and play both the old, old Nubians and their Christian descendants. I hope the former are not treated as a mass of savage tribesmen but actually given a bit of the sophistication they acquired from their northern neighbours.

An army I'd love to play would be Timurid, but DBM makes such a mess of that list that it's nearly unplayable. Here's hoping FoG changes all that, because I've got all the lead ready to paint...

[Greuthungi]

My favourites are:
1. Early German, my first ever army, used in 7th ed, where they were rather neat for a beginner. They were pretty hopeless in DBM, even though I tried everything possible, including field fortifications. Nothing beats a horde of brown-clad savages in my mind Later on, they got more sophisticated with a lot of ex-roman auxiliaries and officers (read Tacitus). Never seen that in a ruleset though Had more succes with 500p Early Visigoths and Galatians, lots more light foot to annoy the opponent.
2. Feudal Spanish, great flowing army with a nasty core of knights. In DBM, I used the full complement of Ps(I), from left to right on the battlefield, and charged forward (or rather, let the Ps(I) feel their way forward).
3. Thematic Byzantine. Another hopeless army in DBM, but just love the uniforms! Guess they will be more useful in FoG. It's about time to check it out (although it would decrease my translating time).
4. Any charging camelry armies

[nikgaukroger]

Carlos - I think you'll find Timur's army quite playable in FoG

Greuthungi - I assume the ex-auxiliaries you are referring to are the Batavians commanded by Civilis? They're in - and to be fair they were in the DBM lists as well. As for charging camelry armies you will probably find them in a Christian Nubian army but don't expect them to be too good

[Greuthungi]

Greuthungi - I assume the ex-auxiliaries you are referring to are the Batavians commanded by Civilis? They're in - and to be fair they were in the DBM lists as well. As for charging camelry armies you will probably find them in a Christian Nubian army but don't expect them to be too good

Hi Nik,

No, the auxiliaries commanded by Civilis were "Active Duty" Auxiliaries who deserted for the good cause. Many of them were Batavians of course, but what I mean is that tribesmen would return to their native villages after having been in the auxilia for x years. They would spread news about Roman tactics and probably join in a for little fight when needed. Civilis himself was an officer of the auxilia and knew everything about the Roman army. The Batavian Revolt almost had a deserter legion as well. Caligula's mounted guard was mostly comprised of Batavians and Canninefates and probably returned to their native lands in time for the Batavian Revolt (once read an article about it). The Chatti copied Roman tactics after a while, digging camps at night and charging on orders. All the generals of the Batavian Revolt were officers of the auxilia. Would be nice to have some of these things reflected in army lists.

Eltjo

[nikgaukroger]

I am extremely doubtful about the idea of ex-auxilia tribesmen returning back to the barbaricum and training their compatriots in Roman style warfare. The main reward for service in the auxilia was citizenship (from at least Claudius' reign) which, I would suggest, meant that the majority stayed as Roman citizens within the empire. Certainly from what I can see there is really no change in (western) barbarian warfare techniques right through the empire period which you would expect if the go home and train them theory was correct - for example the Germans in Ammianus' accounts are pretty much the same as those in Tacitus' (of course there is the inevitable comment that Ammianus classicised and saw himself as a continuator of tacitus).

[lutonjames]

Hi all (first post)

One of my favorite armies is, that of Spartacus's Revolt.

I have loads of medieval stuff, but i'm hoping the rules will inspire me to crack on with building this army.
And I hoping the army list is a bit more inspired then the DBM list.

[hammy]

The Spartacus list for FoG is more useable than the DBM one but it is difficult to produce an inspired list from the history of the revolt.

The list is certainly interesting and the FoG troop classifications do mean the resulting army sits halfway between a Roman army and a Gallic or German one.

I am Spartacus!

BTW it's on telly at the moment if you have ITV3

[LambertSimnel]

The only army I currently have is Carolingian Franks. I take it that the list hasn't been written yet, but has a decision been made as to whether they are too early to have knights?

Also will there be army lists for Social War Italians and Truceless War Mercenaries? I thought that it was strange for WRG to omit these armies from the 2nd DBM list book given the presence of some less historically important armies.

[rbodleyscott]

The only army I currently have is Carolingian Franks. I take it that the list hasn't been written yet, but has a decision been made as to whether they are too early to have knights?

The Knights class in FoG only includes actual Medieval knights and their followers - from the later 11th century onwards. Troops like Goths and Lombards are classified as Cavalry, Lancers. It seems likely that Carolingian cavalry will be similarly classed.

Also will there be army lists for Social War Italians and Truceless War Mercenaries? I thought that it was strange for WRG to omit these armies from the 2nd DBM list book given the presence of some less historically important armies.

We plan to have a section on the Field of Glory web-site for player written army lists. The best of these (after editing for consistency with other lists) may either find themselves in future army list books or be given official tournament status on the web page.

[lutonjames]

The Spartacus list for FoG is more useable than the DBM one but it is difficult to produce an inspired list from the history of the revolt.

The list is certainly interesting and the FoG troop classifications do mean the resulting army sits halfway between a Roman army and a Gallic or German one.

I am Spartacus!

BTW it's on telly at the moment if you have ITV3

Seems a fair interperation of the limited amount that is 'known'.
It's an army that was only about for a very limited peroid of time- most other armies- have centuries where we can work foward and backwards, to work out, what they may have been like.

If I had built it before- I would have used the DBM Gaul or Roman lists- but used revolt figures.

[hammy]

The Spartacus list for FoG is more useable than the DBM one but it is difficult to produce an inspired list from the history of the revolt.

The list is certainly interesting and the FoG troop classifications do mean the resulting army sits halfway between a Roman army and a Gallic or German one.

Seems a fair interperation of the limited amount that is 'known'.
It's an army that was only about for a very limited peroid of time- most other armies- have centuries where we can work foward and backwards, to work out, what they may have been like.

If I had built it before- I would have used the DBM Gaul or Roman lists- but used revolt figures.

There is as you I am sure know a DBM Slave Revolt list, the problem is that the slaves with Roman equipment end up being classes as non impetuous Bd(I) but the masses are impetuous Hd(S). Hd(S) are not good in DBM and their impetuosity tends to get them into trouble.

FoG classes Roman legionaries and Gallic warriors as similar troops, granted the Romans are drilled, have armour and are better swordsmen than the Gauls but essentially they are similar at the core. The slave revolt army now looks like a Gallic / German army with better armour but weaker skirmishers and little if any cavalry.

[Chang_Noi]

I'm not sure that favourite is the right discription - but I'm into reseaching the Thai (also known as Siamese) and will build it asap. Having a wife that speaks/reads the lingo makes access to the Thai texts much easier, same about the 9000km distance from home.

In the meantime I have Medieval German (Holy Roman Empire), Swiss (pikes), and Navaresse (on foot).

In training are El-Murabitun, Bretons, and Ghaznavids although the last failed their figure count so are awaiting reinforcements when the treasury allows.

I'm happy to share my Thai researches if you get your lists into the Far-East. I will need to get the rules in hand though to refer to the FoG classifications.

Cheers
Wayne