Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Yes!

9 (90%)

No!

0 (0%)

I really don't care!

1 (10%)

Total Members Voted: 10

[PewdsRocks]

Yup and as was mentioned mercenaries are well known for robbing and looting enemies and civilians alike.

Want to make a reputation then set yourself apart. We don't touch anything outside the castle, our spoils of war and that sets us apart from most of the mercenaries.

[WhitiusOpus]

Looting the castle itself sounds fine. I don't think anyone would have a problem with that. Looting the town itself is a no-no in my opinion though.

+1

I agree, a good reputation will be useful for us.

I agree, good reputation is good.

+1, sorry if I made myself less clear, but I was talking about the area we took, not the town away from the castle. I was under the assumption that the castle was surrounding/containing a village or small town of sorts. I didn't want to go attack a town not in the area. Also, a good reputation is always a good thing, but people mainly hire mercenaries based on success, not their morality. Although some might, if the job warrants it.

[PewdsRocks]

Success is good. Success and morality is better.
And will make us stand out.

This whole fight has raised a question. When we expand after the contracts completion to replace our dead and so on do we get some medium infantry? If we're going to be needed for direct assaults then we could do with having at least a small force of men who have some good armor and shields to draw attention away from our crossbows not to mention being skilled in hand to hand combat so we're not throwing light infantry crossbows into melee combat.

Oh and 2 suggestions.

Promote the 4 men who opened the gates to be junior officers and assign 2 of them to each of the current officers to learn. A promotion will show our men that we will always reward those who deserve it and will be a good way to boost morale to counter the effects of taking casualties and as was mentioned we only have 2 officers 1 of whom is now out for a while.
Some junior officers will ease that problem and those 4 did prove they have the skills the unit needs so now we can test them to see if they can lead.

Give the dead honorable burials with the whole unit attending.

[WhitiusOpus]

I agree with the above for the most part, and about hiring infantry, but not of the heavy type. True, we might be expected to capture castles again in the future, but I vote on Light Infantry, mainly chainmail and with pavises. We can use them to provide protection for or crossbows with the pavises, and we could also arm them with halberds or pikes to help protect against cavalry, our main enemy, at the moment.

[PewdsRocks]

Chain mail is medium infantry mate. Light infantry is leather armor.

That sounds fine but can I suggest also getting kite shields and swords or axes. They need the means to fight infantry if it comes to it and you don't wanna use a pavise shield for that it's to heavy and big. Halberds are slow and offer no defense against missile weapons so the infantry will need 2 sets of equipment.
An enemy infantry force with good shields can get through a crossbow volley and reload time means we get limited shots so we need a defense against them.

[WhitiusOpus]

Chain mail is ubiquitous armor. Leather jerkins and such, sure, that's "Light" but that doesn't necessitate the definition of "Light Infantry" as using only leather jerkins. It's quite common for other units to use chainmail, just not full body. A steel pot helmet, thick leather boots, and a chainmail shirt are fairly considered 'light' equipment. Or maybe studded jerkins, but it's all in the same class. If you didn't notice, our current equipment consists of a mail hauberk, which is clearly made of chainmail, and I wouldn't consider ourselves or our men 'medium' infantry.

You're sticking to the RPG elements of armor classification, not actual medieval interpretation. As well, it would be cheaper to just get two separate, smaller infantry units (as well as making them more effective) and equip them differently, than have double the gear for one body of troops. Here's what I suggest for their equipment -

Spoiler: Light(?) Infantry (Pending name and classification) (click to show/hide)

Weaponry
- 1x Sword : Hand-and-a-half, preferably, for ease of use and general use. For fighting infantry.
- 1x Pavise/Tower Shield : It's great for protecting our crossbow men, and isn't entirely useless in melee. Provides very good protection for a mobility penalty, but has a rather large advantage- the Shield Wall.
- 1x Pike/Halberd : Currently, we are most vulnerable to cavalry. Crossbows reload slowly, and are men have almost no melee protection. Polearms provide the best defense to this, while not being as effective against infantry, that's what the swords are for.

Armor (All armor for limbs come in pairs)
- 1x Thick Leather Boots : A soldier is always marching, and a good set of boots increases morale and mobility.
- 1x Studded Leather Greaves : Not as much protection as Chain, but better than leather. Provides good mobility.
- 1x Leather Jerkin : Decent protection to torso, with good mobility. Can cushion blows to the armor above it.
- 1x Chainmail Shirt/Hauberk : Good protection with little impediment to movement, protecting the most important area.
- 1x Studded Leather Foreguards : Optional, but added protection to forearms. Gloves, maybe?
- 1x Bascinet/Pot Helm : I chose these two because they seem the most applicable to our style of fighting. These helms are made to deflect downward blows, which is great protection against cavalry and archers. The Bascinet is less suited for this than the Pot helm, but provides better protection to infantry level fighting.

All in all, this gives our men a better than average mobility, and helps round off some of our more dangerous weak spots. We won't always be assaulting castles.

[PewdsRocks]

Why not use a roman legionary style shield instead? The Scutum. It's just as effective, works perfectly fine for shield walls/close order formations as was proven by the romans and is also light enough that you can maneuver with it significantly easier as they proved when the legions took on and defeated the greek phalanx which was slow and bulky just like units with tower shields and the tower is also heavier so it will tire you if you have to carry it for long. And the Scutums iron boss is also great for shield bashing just for that little bit of flexibility in infantry combat.

And use spears rather then Pikes/Halberds. They're just as effective against cavalry and significantly cheaper and easier to wield and more importantly they allow you to use the shield at the same time so when your countering cavalry you don't become a sitting duck for archers.

I was thinking more of a full set of mail as well because in low numbers they need the durability to make up for it. Rather then the armor our foresters used which failed against badly equipped peasants. Everything else looks fine but they should have at least knee length chain mail rather then just the shirt length and heavier.
If peasants with rusty swords and pitchforks could breach that armor what will happen when our men face enemies with good quality equipment?

[WhitiusOpus]

You make a good point with the scutum idea, I like that. It's just that the success of that type of shield relied largely upon very strict unit discipline and cohesion, requiring the formation to stay together. If we can train our men to that sort of standard, and rarely fight outside of formations, that will work. Although you're wrong about the phalanxes, they used large round shields mainly, and they were very small, to be used with a 14 foot long pike.

I chose pikes and halberds because they are more effective against cavalry. I was thinking our men plant their Pavise (for protection against the archers you mentioned) and then wield the pikes, pointing them between the shields. Our crossbow men then rain bolts onto the enemy from above.

Also, what gives you the idea that the enemy we just faced consisted only of peasants with rusty weapons, or even had any at all? All I've seen is that they had 30 men, not how experienced they were. I was thinking light infantry so that they had the mobility on and off the battlefield to match our crossbowmen, so we can outpace any enemy heavy infantry.

Oh, and I thought of the Pavise because it can be planted into the ground, leaving our men with both hands to wield their pikes. You can't do that with scutums.

[PewdsRocks]

Greek had large shields and fairly short spears and were considered the best infantry in the world in that formation because you presented a solid shield wall and a double rank of spears just as is possible with a tower shield.
Then they faced romans who simply pinned them and flanked them and they went from the best infantry to a distant second because of the inability to maneuver making them easy to overcome if you out maneuvered them.
The shield itself is a little more difficult to wield but not by a wide margin, and is a weapon in it's own right and can be used in infantry combat and allows for maneuvering. It's only weakness compared to tower is it requires you to maintain a tighter formation. Not a major weakness to remove the crippling weakness of the tower or pavise shields inability for maneuvering.
They can't protect the foresters if the enemy can run circles around them.

The crossbow is horrible in close ranges if your using infantry to cover them. It would be entirely useless once the enemy has closed in because it's a line of sight weapon largely unlike bows. It's more powerful yes but that comes at the cost of it being line of sight so you might just barely be able to hit an enemy over your mens heads if they stay a fair distance away but if they do then they probably aren't firing so they'll just back out of range.

As for Pikes, they can be more effective yes but not with a pavise shield. The shield itself takes up so much space it will prevent you forming a full pike line that's why the Macedonians used tiny shields strapped to the arms and why most other groups had no shield at all.
A spear/pike wall can not be properly formed with shields in your way if the weapon is 2 handed.
Halberds are out from the start because if you try to make a spear wall using them your either going to cut your own mens ears off or break your arms when the horse hits it because the area of impact is so much larger. On top of being a nightmare to balance when holding it extended out so your men will be exhausted in minutes and generally not being long enough to form any kind of effective wall.
They're great against a cavalry force that's moving slowly or pinned in place but a charging force? You couldn't make an effective wall out of it.

Pikes might work but not if your using large shields like Pavise or Tower or even Scutum or Aspis shields. If you want a shield wall that counters cavalry and infantry your best options are either the Greeks Aspis shields with a short or medium spear or the
Scutum which does the same. It uses the front rank braced by the ranks behind it while presenting a solid wall of shields and spears.
The second rank themselves can put spears over the front rank if the front rank kneels and if the spear is medium length the third rank can put it under the arm of the second on the opposite side from the second so you have spears coming over the left and right shoulders of the front ranks.
That will stop a charging cavalry force in it's tracks and is still easily maneuverable.
It also provides the shield wall against infantry where in the front rank wields shield and sword for the close quarters combat and the second and maybe 3rd stabs spears over the front ranks shoulders while bracing the front rank.

Otherwise for a pike wall you either have to use small shields that don't use a hand so they are out of the way when forming the pike wall or no shield at all.
As for the Pavise being planted? It's so big it blocks you from forming a proper pike wall and on top of that if an enemy get's through it's going to topple the moment the enemy horse hits it and crush the soldier behind it.
Also what are your 2nd and so on ranks doing with theres? If they all have them planted you've got no pike wall if they don't have them at all it's to late anyway because the enemy has broken your pike wall the moment it crushed your first line. They're already inside the reach of your pikes.



It was mentioned several times our mens quality is superior to the enemies which tells me his are mostly peasants. Our lord is vastly more powerful and only has 1/5 trained men and 4/5 levies/militia units.
Our enemies army most likely consists of around the same ratio or more so his army would have been roughly 24 militia and 6 professional men. I do need the GM to confirm but it's about the right ratio.

[WhitiusOpus]

Alright, I agree with you, if only for the two reasons of
(1) not wanting to write a wall of text in repost to that.
(2) I was thinking along the lines of our infantry supplementing our crossbowmen, not completely being a force in their own right.

I'll post an updated infantry scheme here, and see if you're ok with that. I can't really think of combining the two benefits of Pavise/Tower shields, and the anti-cavalry power of Pikes.

Spoiler: Light Infantry (click to show/hide)

Weaponry
- 1x Sword : Spatha seems like the best option now, or at least the medieval equivalent. For ease of use and general use. For fighting infantry.
- 1x Scutum/Oval Shield : I'd much prefer the oval shield, as it gives our men greater mobility in the field than the scutum does, with the sacrifice of not being as effective in formation.
- 1x Spear : Currently, we are most vulnerable to cavalry. Crossbows reload slowly, and are men have almost no melee protection. Polearms provide the best defense to this, while not being as effective against infantry, that's what the swords are for.

Armor (All armor for limbs come in pairs)
- 1x Thick Leather Boots : A soldier is always marching, and a good set of boots increases morale and mobility.
- 1x Studded Leather Greaves : Not as much protection as Chain, but better than leather. Provides good mobility.
- 1x Leather Jerkin : Decent protection to torso, with good mobility. Can cushion blows to the armor above it.
- 1x Chainmail Shirt/Hauberk : Good protection with little impediment to movement, protecting the most important area.
- 1x Studded Leather Foreguards : Optional, but added protection to forearms. Gloves, maybe?
- 1x Bascinet/Pot Helm : I chose these two because they seem the most applicable to our style of fighting. These helms are made to deflect downward blows, which is great protection against cavalry and archers. The Bascinet is less suited for this than the Pot helm, but provides better protection to infantry level fighting.

All in all, this gives our men a better than average mobility, and helps round off some of our more dangerous weak spots. We won't always be assaulting castles.

[PewdsRocks]

Looks better to me.

[Playergamer]

If we're planning on using a roman-style shield wall, then the helmet is more important then body armor, as long as the wall holds.

[PewdsRocks]

That depends, roman armor could block an arrow, a sword stab a spear thrust. When your in abattle it's easy for somebody to get a stab in from the side that was roman military doctorine. They didn't target the man in front of them they held them off with the shield and stabbed the man to the right because that man was looking in front not to his side.

If you don't see it coming they can get round your shield so the armor seriously reduces the odds of that attack killing you. But the pot helmet is similar to a roman helmet except has slightly less protection on the sides of the face. Not enough to make a serious difference but you could use the roman Galea helmet instead if you wanted.

Oh also something I missed earlier, make the boots hobnailed. They give a significant boost to grip the romans used it because they almost always fought badly outnumbered so the increased grip from the friction of the metal nails allowed a lower number of men to avoid being pushed back by the superior force the enemy is exerting. Not to mention when you have a metal boot and stamp on your enemies foot it's going to do a hell of a lot of damage.

Medieval tactics and equipment is a little bit of a hobby of mine.

[Playergamer]

So, my vote is: Looting, but not excessive.

[PewdsRocks]

Agreed, loot only the castle and the dead.