Empires of the Dragon

spikemesq · Post by **spikemesq** » Fri May 29, 2009 6:18 pm

DaiSho wrote:
Probert wrote:Or maybe just the buffet.
A friend of mine got himself a mail order bride. On the wedding night he woke up feeling a bit horny, so he tapped her on the shoulder and said 'I feel like a bit of 69'. She yelled at him 'if you thing i wake up an make beef and black bean at this time of night...'

Stay classy, DaiSho.

spud · Post by **spud** » Sat May 30, 2009 2:49 pm

what date is the Choson Korean ?

1592 - 1598AD??

DaiSho · Post by **DaiSho** » Mon Jun 01, 2009 4:35 am

spikemesq wrote:Stay classy, DaiSho.

More Arse than Class... I do win the occasional game

Ian

Huaxtec15mm · Post by **Huaxtec15mm** » Mon Jun 01, 2009 5:54 am

spud wrote:what date is the Choson Korean ?

1592 - 1598AD??

The "Choson" or Joseon Dynasty technically was from 1392 to 1910. Obviously this book will cover 1392 to 1500 and then FoGR would cover from 1500-1600+.

The Korean army would be fairly similar for both of these books with an increase in firearms after 1593 due to the their run ins with the Japanese arquebus.

A Typical Korean Army of this period would consist of about:

25-50% cavalry (2/3 "protected" cavalry w/ heavy weapon and bow* and 1/3 unprotected light horse with bow), all average quality.
50-75 % infantry:
Infantry is primarily broken into 3 groups,
regular army units (30% bow, 20% defensive spear, 10% handgun, 40% swordsmen (actually flails, glaives, maces, swords, etc...). Average quality with the option to upgrade 1/2 of bowmen to superior.
militia units (20% bow, 20% light spear, 60% swordsmen), poor quality.
guerillas, (10%bow, 10% light spear, 80% swordsmen). Poor quality with the option to upgrade to average.

Almost from the outset of the war groups of Buddhist monks came to the defense of their nation. They were only ever in small numbers but they proved their worth on several occasions. Their weapons would probably be consitant with that of the guerillas but ranked as "average" quality with the optio to upgrade to superior.

All infantry is "unprotected'.

Artillery I would say up to 4 light guns and 1 heavy gun.

After 1500 the percentage of handguns may be increased up to 20% with an appropriate decrease in bows.
After 1593 the regular infantry may add 5% arquebus, increasing 5% every year up to 1598.

Just some thoughts. I look forward to seeing how the army list for them actually turns out!

babyshark · Post by **babyshark** » Mon Jun 01, 2009 12:51 pm

Huaxtec15mm wrote:25-50% cavalry (2/3 "protected" cavalry w/ heavy weapon and bow* and 1/3 unprotected light horse with bow), all average quality.

Cavalry with hvy wpn? Now that is an interesting idea. Especially in a medieval period . . . .

Marc

hazelbark · Post by **hazelbark** » Mon Jun 01, 2009 4:39 pm

babyshark wrote:
Huaxtec15mm wrote:25-50% cavalry (2/3 "protected" cavalry w/ heavy weapon and bow* and 1/3 unprotected light horse with bow), all average quality.
Cavalry with hvy wpn? Now that is an interesting idea. Especially in a medieval period . . . .

I suspect that they would only get that when dismounting.

babyshark · Post by **babyshark** » Mon Jun 01, 2009 7:19 pm

hazelbark wrote:
babyshark wrote:
Huaxtec15mm wrote:25-50% cavalry (2/3 "protected" cavalry w/ heavy weapon and bow* and 1/3 unprotected light horse with bow), all average quality.
Cavalry with hvy wpn? Now that is an interesting idea. Especially in a medieval period . . . .
I suspect that they would only get that when dismounting.

<sigh>

Time to cancel my order for Korean figs then.

Marc

Huaxtec15mm · Post by **Huaxtec15mm** » Tue Jun 02, 2009 1:37 am

babyshark wrote:
hazelbark wrote:
babyshark wrote: Cavalry with hvy wpn? Now that is an interesting idea. Especially in a medieval period . . . .
I suspect that they would only get that when dismounting.
<sigh>

Time to cancel my order for Korean figs then.

Marc

Nope, both the halbard (glaive) and two-handed flail were used from horseback. Whether or not the rule makers decide to qualify them as "heavy" weapons or not is another matter! (my vote would be yes!).

http://i392.photobucket.com/albums/pp7/ ... /KOR10.jpg

DaiSho · Post by **DaiSho** » Tue Jun 02, 2009 1:47 am

Huaxtec15mm wrote: Nope, both the halbard (glaive) and two-handed flail were used from horseback.

Yeah sure, but was it used effectively from horseback to the point that it would negate armour?

There are many instances of weapons being used from horseback but not with sufficent effect to modify factors. Would a Khitan glaive or flail be any different from someone using a sword?

Considering the reverse side of the glaive (I believe) was used as a lance you'd be expecting the Khitans to be:

Cavalry/Armoured/Drilled/Bow*/Lance/Heavy Weapon
=or=
Cataphract/Heavily Armoured/Drilled/Bow*/Lance/Heavy Weapon

(bow* as I believe it's the best rating)

I don't think it's reasonable to think that 'swiss army knife' type weapons would be as effective as purpose built weapon of the same type. Additionally, the purchase you need to wield weapons like halberds, flails etc mean that the effectiveness would be reduced if used from horseback.

The Samurai also used glaives from horseback, but I also think that in this instance they should not be considered 'heavy weapon'.

Be interesting to see what the others think.

Ian

hazelbark · Post by **hazelbark** » Tue Jun 02, 2009 4:26 pm

Huaxtec15mm wrote:
babyshark wrote:Cavalry with hvy wpn? Now that is an interesting idea. Especially in a medieval period . . . .
Nope, both the halbard (glaive) and two-handed flail were used from horseback. Whether or not the rule makers decide to qualify them as "heavy" weapons or not is another matter! (my vote would be yes!).

I was referencing rules. I was not claiming they weren't used from horseback. Remember all the things that describe POA factrs are not literal.

Intothevalley · Post by **Intothevalley** » Wed Jun 03, 2009 7:18 am

hazelbark wrote:
Huaxtec15mm wrote:
babyshark wrote:Cavalry with hvy wpn? Now that is an interesting idea. Especially in a medieval period . . . .
Nope, both the halbard (glaive) and two-handed flail were used from horseback. Whether or not the rule makers decide to qualify them as "heavy" weapons or not is another matter! (my vote would be yes!).
I was referencing rules. I was not claiming they weren't used from horseback. Remember all the things that describe POA factrs are not literal.

I recall that there was a discussion some time ago about using heavy weapon for mounted (in a topic on Han Chinese cavalry IIRC). Someone (Nik G) said that they wouldn't discount it as a possibility, though not for Han Chinese cav, perhaps some Arabic types.

Martin0112 · Post by **Martin0112** » Mon Jul 27, 2009 5:18 am

Which list will cover the TAMIL (if so)

nikgaukroger · Post by **nikgaukroger** » Mon Jul 27, 2009 9:08 am

Southern Indian thingy.

casang · Post by **casang** » Fri Aug 07, 2009 7:16 pm

What grade will the Han heavy chariots be....

guitarmeniac · Post by **guitarmeniac** » Fri Aug 07, 2009 8:30 pm

Do any of these list cover ~1400AD - ~1500AD Japanese/Samuria? Or is that in a later book?

nikgaukroger · Post by **nikgaukroger** » Fri Aug 07, 2009 8:40 pm

The Late Heian to Muromachi Japanese list covers to c.1500AD.

rbodleyscott · Post by **rbodleyscott** » Sat Aug 08, 2009 11:08 am

casang wrote:What grade will the Han heavy chariots be....

Superior or Average before 209 BC, Average from 209 BC. Heavy chariots, Drilled, Crossbow.

casang · Post by **casang** » Sat Aug 08, 2009 12:18 pm

Thanks alot for that hopeing to pick up some figs at britcon....

hazelbark · Post by **hazelbark** » Sat Aug 08, 2009 11:41 pm

rbodleyscott wrote:
casang wrote:What grade will the Han heavy chariots be....
Superior or Average before 209 BC, Average from 209 BC. Heavy chariots, Drilled, Crossbow.

Interesting and i suppose obvious on reflection. Not many superior crossbow around.

MarkSieber · Post by **MarkSieber** » Mon Aug 10, 2009 3:30 pm

If it's possible to say at this time, what troop type/basing will Han spearmen have--I'd love to be ready for the September release

Thanks