Tribesmen (HI, Average, Unprotected, Undrilled, Impact Foot, Swordsmen) 12-150
Clubmen (HI, Superior, Unprotected, Undrilled, Impact Foot, Heavy Weapon) 0-6
Spearmen (MI Average/Poor, Unprotected, Undrilled, Light Spear, Swordsmen) 0-60
Longbowmen (LI, Poor, Unprotected, Undrilled, Longbow) 0-6
Archers (LI, Average, Unprotected, Undrilled, Bow) 0-4
Slingers (LI, Average/Poor, Unprotected, Undrilled, Sling) 0-6
Youths (LI, Average/Poor, Unprotected, Undrilled, Javelins, Light Spear) 0-6
Families (Mob, Poor, Unprotected, Undrilled) 0-8
Neolithic Northern Europe (4500 - 1700 BC)
Moderators: philqw78, terrys, Slitherine Core, Field of Glory Design, Field of Glory Moderators
Neolithic Northern Europe (4500 - 1700 BC)
Last edited by Eques on Tue Oct 01, 2013 8:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
- Posts: 3057
- Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2008 9:48 am
Re: Neolithic Northern Europe (4500 - 1700 BC)
Impact Foot, heavy weapon is not a combination that should be adopted without a lot of evidence (in Blood and Gold we had to decide whether the troop were more impacty or heavy weapony).
Longbows, really? Two differnet types of bow in one army?
Still, two small BGs of each give flavour without creating a monster.
Longbows, really? Two differnet types of bow in one army?
Still, two small BGs of each give flavour without creating a monster.
-
- Field of Glory Moderator
- Posts: 3594
- Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 8:52 pm
Re: Neolithic Northern Europe (4500 - 1700 BC)
The HI should be classified as MF for this early period for consistency with the armies in Swifter than Eagles and Blood and Gold classification schemes.
Should the poor spearmen be allowed swords? If these are meant to be mass, relatively ineffective troops, MF light spear would seem more appropriate.
Chris
Should the poor spearmen be allowed swords? If these are meant to be mass, relatively ineffective troops, MF light spear would seem more appropriate.
Chris
....where life is beautiful all the time
-
- Chief of Staff - Elite Maus
- Posts: 8812
- Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 11:31 am
- Location: Manchester
Re: Neolithic Northern Europe (4500 - 1700 BC)
Why would anyone bother with a longbow when nobody had armour?
phil
putting the arg into argumentative, except for the lists I check where there is no argument!
putting the arg into argumentative, except for the lists I check where there is no argument!
Re: Neolithic Northern Europe (4500 - 1700 BC)
Well, there is some evidence from cave paintings of rudimentary shields being used, so perhaps some (the clubmen?) being Protected.philqw78 wrote:Why would anyone bother with a longbow when nobody had armour?
Re: Neolithic Northern Europe (4500 - 1700 BC)
Yeah the clubmen was really just a highly speculative attempt to provide some sort of neolithic "elite", speculating they wouldn't have had the structures in place to have a royal guard or anything like that. So this was an attempt to represent maybe the biggest and best armed tribesmen.
There have been a few neolithic "longbows" dug up, I believe, so I just took advantage of that fact for a bit of a laugh. But then I thought they would not have been used as massed archery medium foot as in the middle ages. Would maybe just have been a few specialists per tribe. In period I doubt the longbow classification (and indeed "heavy weapon") would affect all that much, was just added for the flavour.
Could not decide between MF and HI for the warriors. Maybe I should have offered more of an option to base your army around either one or the other, speculating that different tribes would have been more warlike or fought in different ways. I wanted the "spearmen" to potentially be more than just auxiliaries, which is why I went for swordsmen ability, "swordsmen" of course being used in the "FoG" sense! But yes if used alongside the heavy foot they are meant to represent the poorer or lower class soldiery.
I did think of having an option for "protected" by virtue of being wrapped in furs but in the end I wanted to distinguish the period from the later celtic barbarian armies.
There have been a few neolithic "longbows" dug up, I believe, so I just took advantage of that fact for a bit of a laugh. But then I thought they would not have been used as massed archery medium foot as in the middle ages. Would maybe just have been a few specialists per tribe. In period I doubt the longbow classification (and indeed "heavy weapon") would affect all that much, was just added for the flavour.
Could not decide between MF and HI for the warriors. Maybe I should have offered more of an option to base your army around either one or the other, speculating that different tribes would have been more warlike or fought in different ways. I wanted the "spearmen" to potentially be more than just auxiliaries, which is why I went for swordsmen ability, "swordsmen" of course being used in the "FoG" sense! But yes if used alongside the heavy foot they are meant to represent the poorer or lower class soldiery.
I did think of having an option for "protected" by virtue of being wrapped in furs but in the end I wanted to distinguish the period from the later celtic barbarian armies.