More on units (another rant)...

[Elewyn]

Elewyn I don't want Slavonic Axemen because I think Axmen is enough. As with Men-at-Arms they would be a bit upgraded unit as opposed regular Swordsmen, but unlike Men-at-Arms Axmen would be in Eastern Europe including Bohemia. ;) I think that axemen are almost everywhere, except areas where Vikings, Varangians and Slavic axemen are. They are defined as single "category" so axemen are "axe-Men-at-arms" IMO

Hospitaliers and Knights of Santiago are virtually the same as Templars I just said that in one of my previous posts, but they were pretty important and IMO it would be cool to have them.Not to mention areas where they were located(Spain, Greece) need some units. Besides who says they have to be the same in KoH? ;) were not the same, but for game they have principially the same skills.

Turkic Swordsmen wouldn't be much different from a regular Swordsmen with different clothes. This comes in my idea about customization of "generic units"(Swordsmen, Spearmen and Archers). I agree with this, but as far as it isn't I'm for Turkic swordsmen

Desert Cavalry is the same as Mameluks. There are already Camel Riders, Ghulam Cavalry and Mameluks all for the same region. Why another one? Yes, they have quite lot of cavalry units in comparison to Europe: Hobilars-Britain, Feudal cavalry-west, Boyars-east and some of Balkans, Cataphracts and Pronoias-south Balkans +as we hope Balts cav.

Europe (approx 130realms)-5-6 cav.units+maybe Steppe horsemen in Hungary? so 7
Africa+MiddleEast (approx 35realms) 5 cav.units :scratch:

Pavise Crossbowmen? Have ever heard about husites from Bohemia?

[Gorgoroth]

Croats are only Slavic by language, but Croatia is not a Slavic [indo-european] country. [Genetics] They have some Slavic genes that is true however.
Indo Europeans are migrated from the south side of the Black Sea to Europe, the ancestry of the Croats are from Iran, just like the Kurds, Armenians, Ossetians etc.

Funny thing that we -Hungarians- arent speaking a slavic language and we have the biggest amount of Slavic genes in Europe near White Russia. Well no wonder in the middle of the Slavic lands. :D


History is a wonderful thing, isnt it? :cheers:


@desert cavalry - Mameluks: I agree with you anyways, maybe there should be some other unit, instead of the desert cavalry.

But hey! The list is finazlied, right? Why are we complaining? :D

[Elewyn]

Gorgy, calm down! if you want to provoke Finellach always, pleas do it by PM's, not here.

We all know what is your main issue between you and Finellach so forget it on this board, please ;)

[Gorgoroth]

Elewyn -
This was the reply to:

"What do you mean Croatia was not a slavic country?! We speak slavic language and the Croats who came here were definately slavic?!?! "

I didnt posted anything offensive, why are you jumping on me?
:scratch: :wacko:


*edit*

The peace smiley isnt working!!!!

[Drake Maethor]

@Siena and my lady Heretic: thanks for the info. ;)

Originally posted by Siautas
ok I hope others supporters of Balts cavalery/Balts unit will join us. We must to give the last fight. Yes it's just the game, but all life is just the game. In every game I give all myself. And KOH is the game about history of my ancestry’s. I hope that my son will play this game some time. And I will not find any answer if he asks me: "why playing for Lithuania I need play with Slavonic/western European units"? I want to be sure I have done all that avoid such a question.

We need to give last fight... all are welcome to join the flag of “Baltic Cavalry” rider. I should do it even it could be my last post....

And finally MY FRIENDS: REALLY TNANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR GREAT SUPORT. IF YOU WILL BE IN LITHUANIA SIAUTASLT@YAHOO.COM :cheers: FOR YOU - PLEASURE FOR ME.

Kas bus tas bus bet Zemaitis neprazus....

Thy patrioticism and the fight of thy brethen inspires me friend.
And at the light of history my mind is set!
Devs, How can you give to this nation the units of their ancestors' enemies? :nono:
MY CHRISTIAN SWORD FOR THY CAUSE!
ZEIMATIS NEPRAZUS! :cheers:

(BTW, do you have good beer in Lithuania? :D)

And my friends, I've come with reinforcements:
I have found interesting information about the Lithuanian medieval armies and their battle tactics. This is from what it seems to be a very historical accurate medieval strategy miniatures game.
You may find the source here: Lithuanian Army (http://www.umiacs.umd.edu/~kuijt/dba148b/dba148b.html)
So, about the Lithuanian Army:

Army Notes
Lithuanian cavalry were almost exclusively unarmoured skirmishers. Some nobles had mail, although these usually fought with their followers rather than as a separate more heavily armed unit. Samogitans may have had more armour, represented by the Cavalry element. (Samogita was the Lithuanian province or region with a Baltic coastline, between the Teutonic Knights to their south-west, Livonia (controlled by the Teutonic Order) to their north.
Lithuanian and Samogitan horse fought primarily with a long light spear which could be used for both thrusting and throwing. They often carried bows, but these seem to have been used exclusively for fighting on foot.
The Auxilia elements represent groups of Lithuanian spearmen. The Psiloi elements are bowmen fighting as skirmishers."

Notes on Tactics

The Lithuanian army has the usual problem of a light-horse army. Hard to kill, but no significant punch. They have a very good group of bad-going troops - none of their historical opponents can really match them in the bad going. Their dominance of bad going is one major advantage; the other is their speed. They have the speed to attack quickly against any weakness. If you can get a flanking attack, go for it.

When running the Lithuanians you must decide if you are going to spend your pips primarily on your Light Horse, or on the Auxilia/Psiloi. Normally, an enemy concerned about protecting its flanks against a light horse army would secure one or both flanks on rough terrain. Against the Lithuanians this doesn't work so well, as they have the strength in bad-going troops to run a column of them into any such position. But bad-going combat can be an enormous pip-drain. Keep your bad-going troops in a column as long as possible, so you can move the infantry up to combat with a single pip even in bad going. This will help you delay the decision until your enemy commits his forces. If he tries to support a flank with bad going, spend most of your pips attacking that weak point with infantry. If he leaves hanging flanks, leave the infantry low on pips and try dramatic outflanking maneuvers with your light horse. But don't try both -- you won't have the pips for it.

The big concern for the Lithuanian army is enemy Bow or Crossbow. The Later Scandinavians get four such elements; the Later Polish and Teutonic Order each two, likewise two elements in each of the Post-Mongol Russian and Later Ottoman. Of the Lithuanian historical opponents listed, only the Prussian/Estonian army gets no missile troops. (Incidently, the Prussians are horrendously mismatched against the Lithuanians - warband against light horse is very grim; the factors are the same, but the light horse will not die if doubled)


Now, at the light of all this, we can say that the Lithuanian armies fought with an skirmishing style, using specially light cavalry forces and maybe some armored ones, the Samogitan cavalry. Reading about their use of mounted units armed with spears that relyed on their high speed to fight against a more heavily armed forces I couldn't help but remember the Irish hobilars fighting the heavier Norman cavalry in Ireland.
So if Ireland has a special an unique light skirmishing cavalry, then why the Lithuanians doesn't deserve one?.

[Gorgoroth]

Yes, sure there are lot better places on the net to talk about these things from a genetic aspect of view [stormfront, skadi - I am an old poster on both], soooooooo........you have posted some eh 'weird' things again, but ah well, lets step over it, it is not my business to educate you, Finny. :cheers:

[Drake Maethor]

PLEASE, LET'S US CONCENTRATE IN THE MAIN TOPICS HERE.
:cheers:

[Gorgoroth]

I think we should stop arguing about the units, the list is finalized, isnt it? :angel:
We gonna piss off the devs. :D

[Gorgoroth]

Ok, I apologize if it sounded a provocation. I swear it didnt meant to be one. :cheers:

[Finellach]

Originally posted by Gorgoroth
it is not my business to educate you

:rofl::rofl: :rofl:

[Gorgoroth]

Originally posted by Drake Maethor

(BTW, do you have good beer in Lithuania? :D)


Yes, if they buy it in the Shopping Center. :D

Btw a baltic cavalry unit would be very nice indeed, but I doubt that it will be presented in the final game.
Propably the beta test will begin soon, I dont think that the devs will add a completly new unit.

[Elewyn]

Originally posted by Drake Maethor
Reading about their use of mounted units armed with spears that relyed on their high speed to fight against a more heavily armed forces I couldn't help but remember the Irish hobilars fighting the heavier Norman cavalry in Ireland.
So if Ireland has a special an unique light skirmishing cavalry, then why the Lithuanians doesn't deserve one?. I agree. Or if they really don't deserve it or you don't think it's necessary to create new unit for area of 5-6 Baltic realms(Ireland has 3 realms too, like Lithuania), I would like to ask the devs to extend availability of hobilars also to Baltic lands (Lithuania and Samogitia especially)

[Gorgoroth]

Hobilars in Lithuania?! :beek:

Well the Hobilars were famous...what was that cavalry type in Lithuania what is so requested? I never heard about them. :rolleyes:
Still you lads are sorta right, if Ireland will have a special unit, Lithuania should have one as well, it was a major power in a period.

[Elewyn]

Originally posted by Gorgoroth
Hobilars in Lithuania?! :beek:

Well the Hobilars were famous...what was that cavalry type in Lithuania what is so requested? I never heard about them.
Still you lads are sorta right, if Ireland got a special unit, Lithuania should have one as well, it was a major power in a period. better than Teutonic knights I guess. Maybe if this change would happen it should be hand in hand with renaming them to :scratch: "Spear cavalry"?:)

we probably havent heard of them because, honestly, we don't know much about whole Baltic region and whole Eastern Europe. Tell me how many things do you know about western Europe in comparison to Eastern Europe. You as Eastern European guy. In the west it's even worse. (by Eastern Europe now I mean former communist block, by Western especially England and France). The West is selling it's history and culture better than the East. But it's little off-topic

[Gorgoroth]

Originally posted by Elewyn
better than Teutonic knights I guess. Maybe if this change would happen it should be hand in hand with renaming them to :scratch: "Spear cavalry"?:)

Hmmm, this is a good idea. The animation/gfx should stay, and the name of the unit should be changed to Baltic Cavalry or something like that. ;)
This wouldnt be hard to add this way, if I am correct. :cool:

[Finellach]

Originally posted by Elewyn
I think that axemen are almost everywhere, except areas where Vikings, Varangians and Slavic axemen are. They are defined as single "category" so axemen are "axe-Men-at-arms" IMO [B]

Yes, but I think Axmen should be specific Eastern European unit, while Men-at-Arms Western European unit. Slavic Axmen is IMO not that different than regular Axmen.

[B]were not the same, but for game they have principially the same skills.[B]

No they don't. There are no Hospitaliers and Santiago Knights. Besides even if they are they would definately have different skills. Thats why I say I want them. They were important and havng them would be fun.

[B] I agree with this, but as far as it isn't I'm for Turkic swordsmen[B]

Perhaps with a different name maybe. I dislike Turkic Swordsmen.

[B] Yes, they have quite lot of cavalry units in comparison to Europe: Hobilars-Britain, Feudal cavalry-west, Boyars-east and some of Balkans, Cataphracts and Pronoias-south Balkans +as we hope Balts cav.

Europe (approx 130realms)-5-6 cav.units+maybe Steppe horsemen in Hungary? so 7
Africa+MiddleEast (approx 35realms) 5 cav.units :scratch:[B]

Excatly my point. Thats why I say we don't need Desert Cavalry. We need Baltic Cavalry.

[B] Have ever heard about husites from Bohemia?

Hmmm I did a little research and found that 'pavise' was a tall shield carried by Crossbowmen. Thus they were normal Crossbowmen with shields. There is no difference.

[Drake Maethor]

MORE ABOUT THE LITHUANIAN TROOPS AND TACTICS!
(that means more reinforcements! heheh :cheers: )

lithuania 1350 AD to 1500 AD (http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/matthaywood/main/Lithuania.htm#Tactics)

That is a web page with info for use in that same miniatures game (which seems to be called BDE).

Allright, more on the Lithuanian Tactics:


Tactics

Although a predominantly 'light' horse army the Lithuanians adopted highly aggressive tactics on the battlefield. The opening stages saw them use their speed of movement to probe for weaknesses and to cut off or flank isolated enemy units. Initial skirmishing was often brief with the Lithuanians reforming into multiple lines and launching a general charge. These tactics often brought problems to the Lithuanians especially when fighting the Teutonic Order, whose troops were far better equipped for close combat. Parts of the Lithuanian army would often break under the strain and flee. Sometimes this 'rout' was feigned to lure the enemy out of line so they could be cut off and slaughtered. Spieralski makes note that Polish General's exploited this 'hot headedness' to draw the enemy out in pursuit of the Lithuanians, allowing Polish heavy cavalry to fall on the pursuers. See the pages on the battle of Tannenberg for more details on Lithuanian feigned retreats.

If the battlefield was unsuited for massed cavalry actions the Lithuanians would dismount and fight on foot with bows, often setting large ambushes. In the early period it was apparently customary for the Lithuanians to ride to the battlefield and then fight on foot. The Livonian Rhymed Chronicle records one such attack on a Livonian Order raiding party where the Knights were attacked in a marsh by dismounted cavalry and 'cut down like women'.


To highlight: Here again it talks about the odd use of the bow by the Lithuanian cavalry: the fact that they would dismount when the battlefield was unsuited for cavalry actions.
It seems that these lads really used skirmishing tactics!

But one interesting piece of info here in this new source:
It is about the use of the Boyars. Here it says that the Lithuanian used Boyars, read:


The Boyars

The Boyars provided the 'heavy' cavalry element of the Lithuanian armies. Lithuanian Boyars never adopted the heavy plate of the Western nations. Their armour would have been a mix of chain, scale or even leather. Some Western style armour did begin to appear amongst the wealthiest Boyars. Grand Duke Vyataus is recorded as wearing Plate armour at Tannenberg, hiding it under a dark cloak. His seal of the late 14 Century also shows him wearing plate. The fighting style and rapid movement of Lithuanian armies appeared to have limited its adoption. Boyars also retained the shield far longer than their Western neighbours. The main weapon was a Light lance called a spisa.


So did Lithuanians used boyars or by boyars this guy means Lithuanian nobles? Or perhaps the term "boyar" was used after the union with Poland... Opinions?

[Elewyn]

Hmmm I did a little research and found that 'pavise' was a tall shield carried by Crossbowmen. Thus they were normal Crossbowmen with shields. There is no difference. Only one :) The shield. I haven't seen it in unit showcase :D
That shield is quite big and heavy, mostly they didn't hold it, only put it in front of them. If they didn't use pavises, they were on war wagons mostly :) hiding themselves all the time on the battlefield, cowards :D

btw, I dislike husite period of my country's history, because of this herecy "we" became isolated for almost 100 years :( what definitely joined us to the East instead of 14th cent when we almost caught the West :(

[Gorgoroth]

The problem with Lithuania is, that it doesnt have "early history"..at least nothing important.
In fact ->
"The Lithuania as a state emerged in early XIIIth century after the union of the main lands"

Originally posted by Drake Maethor

So did Lithuanians used boyars or by boyars this guy means Lithuanian nobles? Or perhaps the term "boyar" was used after the union with Poland... Opinions?

"As the result of this union between Lithuania and Poland, a mighty Christian kingdom arose in Eastern Europe. Lithuania itself, three times as large as Poland, but far below it in culture, ceased to be independent, but it was now for the first time brought into immediate contact with Western civilization. In 1387 Jagello returned to his home, accompanied by missionaries. He won the good will of the nobles (boyars) for Christianity by granting them, on 20 February, the same liberties as were then enjoyed by the Catholic nobles in Poland....

...Besides their common warfare against the Teutonic Order, the fusion of the two peoples [Lithuania & Poland] was furthered by the Assembly of Horodlo on the Bug, in 1413, at which the earlier union was renewed, and a large number of the Lithuanian boyars were admitted into the Polish nobility, receiving identical privileges. Furthermore, both the Polish and the Lithuanian nobility received from the king the right of convoking assemblies and parliaments in the interests of the kingdom with the permission of the prince.

[Finellach]

Hehe...it would be good if by some miracle devs would add the pavise shield to Crossbowmen. That would be nice. :D

Btw. I though a bit and I don't agree that there is a need for Turkic Swordsmen. There are already Janissaries who are equally skilled in hand-to-hand skirmishes and in ranged combat with the bow. Esentially they are two units in one. Thus the need for Turkic Swordsmen and Turkic Archers as separate units is a mystery to me...:confused: