B&G American Indians

Scrumpy · Post by **Scrumpy** » Fri May 14, 2010 8:49 pm

Anyone tried any of the bow* impact foot sword type troops in battle ? If so how did they fair ?

philqw78 · Post by **philqw78** » Sat May 15, 2010 12:52 am

Highlanders aren't too bad. But they hunt haggis not buffalo. Probably due to the fire water.

peterrjohnston · Post by **peterrjohnston** » Sat May 15, 2010 9:28 am

Also haggis need steep hills not plains, as one set of legs is longer than the other.

hammy · Post by **hammy** » Sat May 15, 2010 10:06 am

peterrjohnston wrote:Also haggis need steep hills not plains, as one set of legs is longer than the other.

True, the vast majority of Haggis have longer left legs than right. There is a very rare sub species with longer right legs know as the "anti clockwise haggis" but they are nearly extinct

Both species would struggle on plains.

stenic · Post by **stenic** » Sat May 15, 2010 10:33 am

I've tried the bow* Hvy Wpn Tupi twice now, in one they were clear to get a winning draw and in the other it was evens. This was against Medieval Danes and some araby army with lots of Off. spear MF.

Steve

peterrjohnston · Post by **peterrjohnston** » Sat May 15, 2010 12:33 pm

hammy wrote: True, the vast majority of Haggis have longer left legs than right. There is a very rare sub species with longer right legs know as the "anti clockwise haggis" but they are nearly extinct

I thought it was more of a selective breeding trait, as neither the clockwise or anti-clockwise males can turn round to mate with the female opposites without falling over to their doom (we're all doomed, I tell you); thus the clockwiseness or anti-clockwiseness trait is accentuated.

philqw78 · Post by **philqw78** » Sat May 15, 2010 1:20 pm

philqw78 wrote:Highlanders aren't too bad. But they hunt haggis not buffalo. Probably due to the fire water.

followed by

Hammy et al wrote:The mating techniques of the lesser spotted haggis

Sorry Scrumpy. There's obviously nothing on telly.
But kept in terrain the ighlanders are good. They can shoot skirmishers that are bothering them and do not need to charge out to face hard stuff. They can tho when the time is right.

peterrjohnston · Post by **peterrjohnston** » Sat May 15, 2010 1:36 pm

philqw78 wrote: But kept in terrain the ighlanders are good.

ighlanders? Do you mean igloo builder culture?

I believe the native American haggis is called a sidehill gouger, and I can see it being a problem to have one of them tramping round and round the outside of your igloo.

Scrumpy · Post by **Scrumpy** » Sat May 15, 2010 4:59 pm

Most haggis in the US would be roadkill.

hammy · Post by **hammy** » Sat May 15, 2010 10:58 pm

Back to the original topic

bow* impact foot swordsmen medium foot are a very good anti skirmisher troop type but are ratther vulnerable to even halfway decent mounted in the open. I am not sure how well an army mainly comprised of them would work in open comps but in themed events they are very good troops.

Skullzgrinda · Post by **Skullzgrinda** » Mon May 24, 2010 7:17 am

hammy wrote:Back to the original topic

bow* impact foot swordsmen medium foot are a very good anti skirmisher troop type but are ratther vulnerable to even halfway decent mounted in the open. I am not sure how well an army mainly comprised of them would work in open comps but in themed events they are very good troops.

Alas, I have been trying to drum up interest in a B&G tournament with rather meager results. Not enough armies out there, and 3/4 of them are Aztec. I did find a splendid venue however.

BTW - I did fall off of the wagon and buy the Chichimecs, God help me. Given the annihilations I suffered with my Saka, I figured I might as well, as I have already attained rock bottom. Hopefully the Chichimecs will make an appearance in FOGR

rbodleyscott · Post by **rbodleyscott** » Tue May 25, 2010 7:56 am

Skullzgrinda wrote:Alas, I have been trying to drum up interest in a B&G tournament with rather meager results. Not enough armies out there, and 3/4 of them are Aztec. I did find a splendid venue however.

Well there may be hope, at least in USA. Sales of B&G have been very good, especially (not unexpectedly) in USA. People just need to get painting methinks.

What I find a useful technique is to run two themes side-by-side - one specialist one covering one book, and a wider theme covering several books for those who don't have armies for the specialised theme. That way you can have a specialised theme without damaging attendance at your event.

Skullzgrinda · Post by **Skullzgrinda** » Tue May 25, 2010 2:47 pm

rbodleyscott wrote:
Skullzgrinda wrote:Alas, I have been trying to drum up interest in a B&G tournament with rather meager results. Not enough armies out there, and 3/4 of them are Aztec. I did find a splendid venue however.
Well there may be hope, at least in USA. Sales of B&G have been very good, especially (not unexpectedly) in USA. People just need to get painting methinks.

What I find a useful technique is to run two themes side-by-side - one specialist one covering one book, and a wider theme covering several books for those who don't have armies for the specialised theme. That way you can have a specialised theme without damaging attendance at your event.

Rob Smith and I have discussed this. His Greathall Games is the venue in mind. Rob suggested a dual theme of B&G and EotD. This is a work in progress, and unlikely to take place this calendar year.

I have to admit that my interest in B&G was tepid until I really started to dig at the historical backgrounds on these armies, which only become more interesting as more is learned.

FoG has gone a LONG way to breakup the old 'killer army' tyranny of the Seleucid/Late Roman/Teutonic Knights triumvirate, but prying people away from both horses and armor still has a long way to go.

Meanwhile, I am watching Khurasan's development of their Iroquois and Chinantec lines. VERY tempted by Mound Builders as well, as I live about 4 miles from the Natchez Trace.