Why are no veteran royalists ?

[switze01]

Hi

Seems a bit unfair that the royalist foot at naseby are not rated as vets
They were pushing the new model back up the hill until cromwells ironsides
hit them up the rear
Were all the new model poor then ?
I re enact parliament so have no royalist bias at all - it just seems a bit unrealistic.

Steve

[nikgaukroger]

Hi

Seems a bit unfair that the royalist foot at naseby are not rated as vets
They were pushing the new model back up the hill until cromwells ironsides
hit them up the rear
Were all the new model poor then ?
I re enact parliament so have no royalist bias at all - it just seems a bit unrealistic.

Steve

May I draw your attention to the "Veteran foot regiments or commanded out musketeers" in the list from 1644 onwards ...

[switze01]

fAIR ONE - most of the royalist foot at naseby vets then

[deadtorius]

superior = vets

Expensive but especially when it comes to the cav it makes a difference between them staying around forever or running away quickly. So far we have only been doing 600 point games so I can't get too much superior foot on the table since the superior cav is so expensive but necessary.

[Blathergut]

eheheheheehehehehe....but not for me! eheheheheheheeee

[deadtorius]

Bloody poodle hating Parliamentarians.......

[timmy1]

Don't have to be a Roundhead to hate poodles...

[david53]

Don't have to be a Roundhead to hate poodles...

Sure the covenanters did'nt like them either just think 200,000 pounds scots for a king more if he has a dog with him..........