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

[TalonisWolf]

Agreed, loot only the castle and the dead.

 
  Specifically, dead soldiers. Just in case any of the less then honourable soldiers get any bad ideas.

[PewdsRocks]

If any of our men are that crappy I vote we bury them with the guy they tried looting. Poetic justice!!!

[TalonisWolf]

Here here!

[WhitiusOpus]

-snip-

First off, it depends what type of weapons, tactics, and armor we're talking about here. I'm also the medieval/ancient history buff, but I don't like to brag. Mainly, they used common chainmail, which protected great versus slashing attacks (mainly what Gual berserkers would do) but very little to stabbing or blunt. This was negated by the lorica segmentata that was put into use after the Marian reforms, near the height of the empire. These, however, we're very expensive to upkeep.

I'm basing our soldiers off of the comitatenses of the late Empire. This provides us with better flexibility with cheaper cost, with the only real disadvantage being less able to initiate the complex formations, which would honestly take too much training to do anyway.

Also, we don't even know if Romans are canon in this 'verse, and the same with their gear. We could try to RP our guy creating it, but even if it is canon, how will we produce/find it?

Ho nailing our boots is twofold. It makes it much harder on our men's feet, but gives them added grip and protection from things like caltrops.

[PewdsRocks]

I dunno about you but I'll take a sore foot over slipping over mid battle and being gutted. Besides march around in those boots for a couple weeks and the soles of your feet harden anyway and you'll largely stop noticing it.

Actually looking at a comparison between Lorica Hamata ( Roman chain mail ) And Lorica Segmentata ( Roman banded mail armor. ) the segmentata was only superior against blunt force attacks which were by far the rarest anyway.
It's main advantage was that it was cheaper and easier to make, lighter and easier to take on and off. In actual effectiveness the Hamata was superior against both slashing and penetrating attacks. Hamata was especially effective at stopping arrows as well.

Then looking at another it says the exact opposite. From what I've been able to find nobody ever really gave an answer that was generally accepted. I doubt this game will go that in depth anyway.

But they don't need to be comon for the purpose of the game it's just the name so the GM can see what the armor looks like easily. I'm basing more of the hastati or principes the pre reform version of legionaries in terms of armor and shield.

[WhitiusOpus]

Here, read this forum. They had the exact same conversation that we are, right now. You are correct on the assumption that it was really only better against bashing attacks, such as war-hammers and clubs, but chainmail is notoriously vulnerable to piercing attacks. Neither was particularly superior, as the Hamata had less maintenance and was easier to produce, the Segmentata was cheaper and afforded slightly better protection, while taking longer to make, and needing to be fitted.

I wouldn't try to base our men off of early era Romans. One of the main reasons they were so successful was their tactical doctrine, training, and discipline. They were vulnerable to flanking attacks, and mainly forced their enemies into combat. Their style of fighting is not a good match for a mercenary unit, as we don't want to spend unnecessary time and money training and equipping soldiers that won't be as effective. We need flexible troops to meet the demands of a flowing battle field, not the grinding, slow moving formations of early era Rome.

[PewdsRocks]

Ahhh that I know, but the equipment itself is solid. The shield is durable, has good cover and light enough for infantry combat. The boots provide superior grip which in close range infantry combat is essential. If you can force your enemy back you have the advantage.
The armor itself I favor chain purely because as long as your wearing it then it won't rust and it's simpler to maintain and clean.

Weapon wise the spear is simpler and the ability to combine it with a shield makes it a more effective choice for our requirement.
Sword wise I disagree with the roman gladius. Effective as it was I like the reach on the spatha. A little less suitable but we won't be using such a tight formation so the cutting blade and the range is more useful for our purposes anyway.
The rest of the kit doesn't make a huge difference but for our purposes the romans shield, helmet and boots are the best suited for what we want as is the spear.

It is flexible as well, the boots design gives you good grip on the vast majority of surfaces. The shield can be used for offense and defense, close order or loose formation and is a weapon in it's own right. On top of providing fantastic defense against both missile attacks because it covers from shins to shoulder so just ducking slightly gives you almost full body protection.
And because of the shape wrapping slightly around it gives reasonable defense against being stabbed from the sides.

The helmet design is as effective as anything else at deflecting impacts.

The spear is more flexible then a pike or halberd as well. A pike virtually forces you to move slowly because on your own 1 pike man is a dead man. You have no shield and it's to cumbersome to fight.
A shield and spear combo allows you to move fast and counter infantry and cavalry equally well just by holding the spear half way up it's body giving you shorter reach but the ability to recover very fast after an attack you can use it to counter infantry and using a lower grip to extend range for anti cavalry.

We should train them in close order fighting but not up to the impressive level of the romans. Just enough to maintain a good close formation and shield wall or spearwall.

[TalonisWolf]

  I'm going to have to agree with WhitiusOpus. The Romans were at their best against an enemy which was inferior in training and lacking in organization.

  Chances are, our enemies are slightly more advanced in tactics then that.

  However, in terms of equipment, PewdsRocks does have some good points. The spear also is easier for an untrained soldier to use- stabby stabby. Aim for centre of mass. Pull guts out. Simple, but effective.

  As for the Spatha, it is a slashing weapon designed for Calvary. It is going to lose much of its effectiveness in the hands of untrained/minimally trained infantry. If we have Calvary, go for it as a complement to what arms they already have.

  The boots are great in urban fighting, but otherwise weight you down or cause you to slip on damp grass. I had to wear those damned things for a scout camp, so I can tell you this from personal experience.

  As for formations, train them well enough to form a shield wall in case we are hired to settle civil unrest, and the Tortoise to limit damage from mass arrow volleys. Anything else would be a waste of resources.

[PewdsRocks]

Oh I know the romans strengths, although the greeks were considered the most organized in the world and they still got crushed by the romans. As did Parthia and Carthage. The romans did excel at fighting barbarians but so did the greeks, parthia, carthage, macedonia. Any of the more civilized nations did.

Sword wise we could go for the more common simple hand a half sword. I prefer the spatha but it is a weapon best designed for use in slashing.

We could provide 2 sets of footwear easy enough the standard boots and a set of nailed as well for when we go into urban enviornments. Adapt our equipment to suit the battle.

[TalonisWolf]

 Let me put it this way. The Romans, for all their might, probably would have looked on medieval tactics and technology in admiration.

 Also, do we have any sappers? Those folks whose sole purpose is to undermine the castle wall and cause it to collapse? That could be handy. And what do we have for range? Archers take time to train, but have a higher rate of fire then crossbows. Archers also can be more accurate at an longer range, great for picking Calvary charges off.

[PewdsRocks]

Nope no sappers or archers.

This is a unit thats specialityis stealth and ambushes it never needed sappers.

We're gonna need to diversify but infantry are top priority.

[TalonisWolf]

  Alright then, sappers need only be miners. See how many men within our ranks have experience mining. Recruit from the surrounding area. It'd be a start, and is something to do while we besiege the castle.

  Also, construct siege weapons from lumber in the area. Again, keeps the men busy while doing something useful.

[WhitiusOpus]

-roman tactics and such snip-

I agree with you. I am no longer arguing in favor of pikes/tower shields. I had already put in the Spatha as an option for our weapon. I believe the later Oval Shield scutum design is superior to what we want, as (1) it's cheaper. (2) it's easier to move and lighter, which means more mobile troops. This allows our men to move and react better. To put it into perspective, a Scutum weighed roughly 18-20+ pounds. An Oval shield weighed only 10-12. That's half as heavy, which allows our men to fight longer without getting tired, as well as the previous advantages listed.

PPE: Almost forgot to mention, but we won't be fighting Greeks or Egyptians. This is feudal era, Gothic Plate knights mounted on war horses, wielding laces. Dismounted men-at-arms wielding Greatswords. Peasants being the main force in the army, with very little training or experience. It's a different era, and on of the main reasons that Rome changed it's military structure to that of the comitanses and limitanei legions, and changed their equipment and training as well. I'm not saying that Rome was changing because of the medieval era, but that they were merely adapting to the changes around them.

@TalonisWolf, I agree with you on the Spatha, but it's suggestion was just part of fitting the 'roman theme'. I think the hand-and-a-half is probably the best here, also.

For footwear - A pair of nice leather boots (hobbed) for fighting and common footwear (shoes, sandals, etc) for traveling.

Is this roughly what we want?

Spoiler: Light Infantry (click to show/hide)

Weaponry
- 1x Sword : hand-and-a-half or broadsword seems like the best option now. It complements our fighting with the spear. The hand-and-a-half is better for very close range, shield wall versus shield wall combat. The broadsword is better for open battles, giving our men room to wield them.
- 1x Oval Shield : The oval shield is the best option, as it gives our men greater mobility in the field than the scutum does, with the sacrifice of not being as effective in formation. But seriously, the technology of the current time period, along with the level of training negates using too complex formations.
- 1x Spear : A spear gives good reach while also being able to used with a shield.

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.

Do we want to give our men a tertiary weapon for breaching armor? Like a handaxe or warhammer? (The one-handed ones)

[Baffler]

Is this roughly what we want?

Spoiler: Light Infantry (click to show/hide)

Weaponry
- 1x Sword : hand-and-a-half or broadsword seems like the best option now. It complements our fighting with the spear. The hand-and-a-half is better for very close range, shield wall versus shield wall combat. The broadsword is better for open battles, giving our men room to wield them.
- 1x Oval Shield : The oval shield is the best option, as it gives our men greater mobility in the field than the scutum does, with the sacrifice of not being as effective in formation. But seriously, the technology of the current time period, along with the level of training negates using too complex formations.
- 1x Spear : A spear gives good reach while also being able to used with a shield.

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.

I can get behind this, but a third weapon makes for a lot of weight to carry, especially if we're adding a hammer or mace that relies on weight for stopping power.

[PewdsRocks]

I guess. I still favor the scutum it's far more effective, more durable and offers more flexibility then the flimsy oval shields that broke so easily against shields and maces. A single good axe swing will split an oval shield or a mace swing will splinter it.

The bronze shield boss on the scutum will deflect an axe swing and block a mace swing without damaging the shield.