Conquistador list

[rbodleyscott]

The current verisions of the Tlaxcalan and Inca lists cover the armies in which huge numbers of natives assisted small conquistador foces in major battles.

However, they don't cover the Conquistador forces when fighting on their own, nor those having only a relatively low proportion of Indian allies. (e.g. 530 Spanish + 2,000 Tlaxcaltecs, 530 Spanish + 1,000 Tlaxcaltecs, 1400 Spanish + 2,000 Tlaxcaltecs).

It seems to me that we need a Conquistador list to cover these, with a highly restricted list size - so that you can just about make 800 points including generals with the allies.

What do you think?

e.g.

Spanish cavalry 2-4
Sword and bucklermen 8-24 (Option for pikemen as per vs Narvaez)
Crossbowmen 2-4
Arquebusiers 2-4
Guns - not really sure - maybe 0-2 or 3 or 4

+ Allies

For most of the forces, this would represent an upscaling of about 10x normal scale.


Either that, or we need to double the existing numbers in the Tlaxcalan list. (But not the Inca list)

[SirGarnet]

Obviously a Conquistador list would be a focus of disproportionate attention. The advantages of not having a Conquistador list are that this reflects and highlights the small numbers of Spanish troops involved during that narrow period preceding the Spanish Colonial list, avoids carping on that basis about the size/scale/composition of the list and the "super-Spanish" comparison with the army in Europe, and avoids complaints about the allies list requirements.

I don't think there can be objections to the current approach, particularly if you allow a greater proportion of Spanish specifically to reflect the more even proportions in some battles - maybe in campaign lists, which highlight that it is a well-considered exception.

To ensure no one misses the fact that the Conquistadors ARE in the book, perhaps the cover blurb and/or intro can highlight the conquistador role e.g., conceptually "topple the Aztec Empire with a conquistador-led Tlaxcalan army" or something similar.

[nikgaukroger]

I don't think there can be objections to the current approach, particularly if you allow a greater proportion of Spanish specifically to reflect the more even proportions in some battles - maybe in campaign lists, which highlight that it is a well-considered exception.

I agree with Mike's approach here.