Post 1500 Samurai (re-posted from Renaisance forum) - reply

[sergiomonteleone]

Hi,
it's strange but is not possible to reply to your topic.

I like very much Samurai history and I'm very curios to see army list in Empire of Dragon (I hope not to rebase some of my HF samurai for MF).

I've already planned to refight SEKIGARHA BATTLE in October.

Unfortunately I have not a lot of free time to make beta tester for FOGR (I'm doing this already for FOGN).

Waiting Empire of Dragon I agree with what you've written on the FOGR forum and agree also with Irondog.

Some suggestione in my opinion:

- HF Samurai should be SKILLED swordmen: from historical point of yew using sword (katana) was a sort of art for Samurai and surely they were more expert and trained than Roman Legionari (they are skilled sw)

- HF Samurai: probably HEAVY armoured is to high if you compare them with dismounted medieval KN

Sergio[/b]

[DaiSho]

- HF Samurai should be SKILLED swordmen: from historical point of yew using sword (katana) was a sort of art for Samurai and surely they were more expert and trained than Roman Legionari (they are skilled sw)

- HF Samurai: probably HEAVY armoured is to high if you compare them with dismounted medieval KN

Sergio[/b]

Skilled Swordsmen sounds reasonably good for earlier periods. By the later period (Sekigahara) I'm not sure it would be as relevant. I mean, I'm sure there would be some skilled swordsmen guys in there, but I feel that the earlier Samurai would be more skilled than later periods.

Heavily Armoured - Sure, in comparison to Medieval Knights they probably don't rate as Heavily Armoured, but there's the rub isn't it... they didn't fight the medieval knights, so are they 'heavily armoured' for their region. When you have only 4 ratings to go by, it's sometimes hard to fit all into those 4.

There would be quite a few retainers/ashigaru with little to no armour = Unprotected
There would be quite a few retainers/ashigaru and lightly armoured samurai who would have armour, but not much = Protected.
There would be quite a few (majority) of Samurai who would be wearing full armour = Armoured.
There would be a reasonable number (especially later on) of Samurai (especially dismounted Samurai) who would be wearing O-Yori = Heavily Armoured (IMHO).

However, interestingly enough, in the renaissance period (Sekigahara again) they started to lighten their armour, for the same reasons that they did in Europe. Some wore heavy european Do (Cuirass) but the majority wouldn't have. I think that the Samuria Period holds very much to the bell curve, with the 1400's having the heaviest armour and either side of the 'bell' having lighter armour.

Ian

[sergiomonteleone]

- HF Samurai should be SKILLED swordmen: from historical point of yew using sword (katana) was a sort of art for Samurai and surely they were more expert and trained than Roman Legionari (they are skilled sw)

- HF Samurai: probably HEAVY armoured is to high if you compare them with dismounted medieval KN

Sergio[/b]

Skilled Swordsmen sounds reasonably good for earlier periods. By the later period (Sekigahara) I'm not sure it would be as relevant. I mean, I'm sure there would be some skilled swordsmen guys in there, but I feel that the earlier Samurai would be more skilled than later periods.

Heavily Armoured - Sure, in comparison to Medieval Knights they probably don't rate as Heavily Armoured, but there's the rub isn't it... they didn't fight the medieval knights, so are they 'heavily armoured' for their region. When you have only 4 ratings to go by, it's sometimes hard to fit all into those 4.

There would be quite a few retainers/ashigaru with little to no armour = Unprotected
There would be quite a few retainers/ashigaru and lightly armoured samurai who would have armour, but not much = Protected.
There would be quite a few (majority) of Samurai who would be wearing full armour = Armoured.
There would be a reasonable number (especially later on) of Samurai (especially dismounted Samurai) who would be wearing O-Yori = Heavily Armoured (IMHO).

However, interestingly enough, in the renaissance period (Sekigahara again) they started to lighten their armour, for the same reasons that they did in Europe. Some wore heavy european Do (Cuirass) but the majority wouldn't have. I think that the Samuria Period holds very much to the bell curve, with the 1400's having the heaviest armour and either side of the 'bell' having lighter armour.

Ian

Hi Ian,
I completely agree, in fact Samurai era was very large and different for example in how kind of weapons they used (i.e at the beginning a lot of BW, than more arquebusiers and different armour).

I add another suggestion for a discussion: Ashigaru with arquebus MF or LF?
In my opinion MF because they weren’t used like troops for skirmishing.

I very curious to see Empire of Dragon to see if the army list is historical or not.

Sergio

[rbodleyscott]

I very curious to see Empire of Dragon to see if the army list is historical or not.

The list reflects the fact that Samurai mostly fought (mounted) amongst their (foot) followers. The rating of such BGs reflects the mixture. It may not be to everyone's taste, nor fit the samurai as portrayed in films, but it is historical.

Of course the army list in Empires of the Dragon ends at 1500 AD, so later changes are not reflected.

[sergiomonteleone]

I very curious to see Empire of Dragon to see if the army list is historical or not.

The list reflects the fact that Samurai mostly fought (mounted) amongst their (foot) followers. The rating of such BGs reflects the mixture. It may not be to everyone's taste, nor fit the samurai as portrayed in films, but it is historical.

Of course the army list in Empires of the Dragon ends at 1500 AD, so later changes are not reflected.

Hi Richard
I hope there are also dismounted Samurai so HF.
Swordmen or Skilled swordmen (from historical point of you for example comparing them with Roman Legionari)?

As it change at 1500 AD I guess there won't be more Arquebusiers?

Sergio

[rbodleyscott]

I hope there are also dismounted Samurai so HF.

Only from 1467, and they are MF either Skilled Swordsmen or Offensive Spearmen.

They are very very few HF in Empires of the Dragon. Our analysis of Far Eastern warfare came to the conclusion that MF better suited the evidence.

As it change at 1500 AD I guess there won't be more Arquebusiers?

There are no BGs with firearm capability.

----------------

As I have already posted it elsewhere, I may as well repeat it:

To quote the list blurb:

"We represent mixed battle groups of bushi and foot followers as Medium Foot, whether or not the bushi are themselves mounted. Prior to 1467, such battle groups should depict a mixture of mounted bushi and foot follower figures. We recommend that they should be based on Mob depth bases each with 1 mounted bushi figure and 2 or 3 foot followers with mixed weaponry. From 1467 it is appropriate to depict the bushi in mixed battle groups as dismounted and use normal depth Medium Foot bases."

These mixed BGs are graded as Medium Foot, Armoured or Protected, Average, Undrilled, Bow*, Heavy Weapon.

Of course there are some BGs of detached Samurai who are Armoured Superior cavalry (or MF after 1467) and detached followers who are Poor MF. (Some upgraded to Average Ashigaru from 1335).

That's enough clues for now. For the rest, you will need to await the book.

[nikgaukroger]

As it change at 1500 AD I guess there won't be more Arquebusiers?

Indeed - which is why post 1500 armies should be discussed over on the FoG:R forum as those rules are post 1500 - viewforum.php?f=70

[MARVIN_THE_ARVN]

That's enough clues for now. For the rest, you will need to await the book.

Thanks, they sound interesting and not too overpowered.

Although I never played WAB I saw the Samurai list and laughed, it would have fit right in with the WHF lists

[sergiomonteleone]

They are very very few HF in Empires of the Dragon. Our analysis of Far Eastern warfare came to the conclusion that MF better suited the evidence.

Do you mean also for example for CHI'N, HAN and CHOU?
So all the ex-Sp of DBM will be MF in FOG? ........................ as all the players with this kind of armies I don't want to rebase all my figures

My ask you why the Wargame Research Group (if I'm not wrong you Richard was one of the main authors of DBM) made good research regarding Samurai and Chinese Armies, decided that main footmen in the previous armies were Bd in DBM will be MF and not HF in FOG?

Sergio

[rbodleyscott]

They are very very few HF in Empires of the Dragon. Our analysis of Far Eastern warfare came to the conclusion that MF better suited the evidence.

Do you mean also for example for CHI'N, HAN and CHOU?

Yes.

May ask you why the Wargame Research Group (if I'm not wrong you Richard was one of the main authors of DBM) made good research regarding Samurai and Chinese Armies, decided that main footmen in the previous armies were Bd in DBM will be MF and not HF in FOG?

Because DBx has a limited range of troop types into which troops have to be shoe-horned even if they don't really fit.

FOG has a more diverse classification which is not directly comparable, and which allows troops to be further differentiated.

Furthermore there has been a lot more discussion on oriental warfare in the 15+ years since the DBx lists were published. We accessed this discussion and translations of contemporary texts and came to conclusions which differed from the DBx represntation. The FOG list writing process involved some of the expert originators of the DBM lists too, plus additional experts not used for the DBx books.

So all the ex-Sp of DBM will be MF in FOG?

With a very few exceptions yes, and mostly Heavy Weapon rather than spears.

as all the players with this kind of armies I don't want to rebase all my figures

As the depth of bases has little importance in FOG anyway, there is no reason why you need to rebase any of your troops if you don't want to. If the army list permits no HF then there is no reason why your opponent should be confused by your basing.

[nikgaukroger]

Although I never played WAB I saw the Samurai list and laughed, it would have fit right in with the WHF lists

To be fair they always said it was more of a Seven Samurai army than a real historical one

[peterrjohnston]

As it change at 1500 AD I guess there won't be more Arquebusiers?

Indeed - which is why post 1500 armies should be discussed over on the FoG:R forum as those rules are post 1500 - viewforum.php?f=70

To be fair to Sergio he did say he had problems posting there, I assume in this thread:

viewtopic.php?t=11212

I can post there, but are there any restrictions?

[nikgaukroger]

No restrictions - that is the public FoG:R forum so anyone with baord access can view, post, etc.

[DaiSho]

In my opinion MF because they weren’t used like troops for skirmishing.

There is only the option for MF IMHO. Even if they were used in numbers more akin to light infantry in some situations, they were not used that way, and so you would end up with wargames armies using systems and tactics that their historical counterparts never did.

One thing I did forget about when talking about armour was the Japanese Pavise.

Not the greatest picture because it's oversized for field battles (these are more of a siege style pavise)
http://www.eastofindia.com/images/kato% ... hields.jpg

They were originally designed to combat the dominance of the horse. Of course Samurai horse was a horse-archer in the same period so it's something to hide behind when being peppered by Samurai arrows, but they continued to be used even when the Samurai started to change over to Yari and Naginata armament, so they must have had some effect even against a shock style charge.

Ian

[DaiSho]

Although I never played WAB I saw the Samurai list and laughed, it would have fit right in with the WHF lists

To be fair they always said it was more of a Seven Samurai army than a real historical one

So you can have seven samurai and a bunch of peasants in your WAB army?

Ian

[sergiomonteleone]

As the depth of bases has little importance in FOG anyway, there is no reason why you need to rebase any of your troops if you don't want to. If the army list permits no HF then there is no reason why your opponent should be confused by your basing.

Good idea, I hope it can be used also in tournament.
Many thanks for all the clarification (I completeley agree considering skilled swordmen Samurai with sword).
I'm looking forward to buy the book
Sergio

[sergiomonteleone]

As it change at 1500 AD I guess there won't be more Arquebusiers?

Indeed - which is why post 1500 armies should be discussed over on the FoG:R forum as those rules are post 1500 - viewforum.php?f=70

To be fair to Sergio he did say he had problems posting there, I assume in this thread:

viewtopic.php?t=11212

I can post there, but are there any restrictions?

Peter, it's strange but was in Ancient and Medieval FOG.
Like Nik said there are no restrictions except for the Area 51 (like FOGN)
Sergio

[MARVIN_THE_ARVN]

To be fair they always said it was more of a Seven Samurai army than a real historical one

And it was!!

Im even getting tempted to rebase my clan war army for a, get ready for it, 25mm FOG army!!!

Yes the man with no 15mm and lots of 6mm would go for 25mm

Good idea, I hope it can be used also in tournament.

If you were playing me I would not mind at all, but im not a purist and once played a game with someone who used a deck of cards as a doom wheel and a mix of spacemarines and orcs as skaven (Sorry for the GW reference)

So you can have seven samurai and a bunch of peasants in your WAB army?

And ninja's and warrior monks.

[bertalucci]

Tried the proper lists Muramachi vs Han Chinese on boxing day.
Ow - both armies scared me for differing reasons.
I was constantly afraid of rolling rubbish with the Ave Bushi. Just not how you expect to feel playing Samurai Too many films
I was constantly afraid that the Han foot would swamp me. Cos until they take losses they are as good as the Samurai and drilled! Cos its also my army
Towards the end of the game I was afraid that I would never pass a CMT and so never contact another unit by choice by turning or wheeling. Cos Bushi are undrilled! Not that I think they should be, just it was frustrating.

Only won because the Samurai Cav got to and trashed the Han Camp with only 1 fragged unit difference between the armies.

Need to see how it goes against other opponents - but my impression is not an army for those of a nervous disposition

But exciting - I needed a lie down - Perhaps that was the turkey left overs

[irondog068]

Played my 800 point vs Mongols. Fought to draw, my big concer was the Ashigaru with Yari you have to take with every pure Samurai. They were kind of a liablity. I found using nothing but armored Ashigaru gave the Mongols fits. More than once the Mongols were forced to take fire from 2x 6 stand units (6 dice) vs. there 4 dice (4 stand cavalry units) even with rerolls the size of the Ashigaru started to shoot up the Horse and even routed a light horse unit.

Dave