1.37 Ilkhanid Mongol images

[batesmotel]

1) Why are the unarmoured less well equipped Mongol cavalry images the only ones with horse armour, while protected and armoured Mongol cavalry have none? This seems rather disingenuous and misleading.

2) Why is the image used for the best equipped Mongol cavalry have three standard bearers with a horse tail standard for the image. It does make them easier to tell apart but otherwise looks less than intimidating.

3) The Frankish Knight figures look more appropriate for Normans ca 1066 (or maybe the first Crusade at the latest) than they do for heavily armoured knights ca 1260 or later. The Hospitaller figures have much more appropriate equipment for the the period of the Ilkhanids.

Chris

[keithmartinsmith]

1) Why are the unarmoured less well equipped Mongol cavalry images the only ones with horse armour, while protected and armoured Mongol cavalry have none? This seems rather disingenuous and misleading.
>>> A bit of a mix up but addressed in the next update.

2) Why is the image used for the best equipped Mongol cavalry have three standard bearers with a horse tail standard for the image. It does make them easier to tell apart but otherwise looks less than intimidating.
>>> This is normal attire for the end of a Mongol lance. See the general images for the standard bearers. Fixing (1) above have dropped this image, still in the editor though.

3) The Frankish Knight figures look more appropriate for Normans ca 1066 (or maybe the first Crusade at the latest) than they do for heavily armoured knights ca 1260 or later. The Hospitaller figures have much more appropriate equipment for the the period of the Ilkhanids.
>>> Again wrong images. They are now contemporary to the Mongols.

Thanks
Keith

[batesmotel]

...
2) Why is the image used for the best equipped Mongol cavalry have three standard bearers with a horse tail standard for the image. It does make them easier to tell apart but otherwise looks less than intimidating.
>>> This is normal attire for the end of a Mongol lance. See the general images for the standard bearers. Fixing (1) above have dropped this image, still in the editor though.
...

I didn't object to the horse tails but the ball on the end of the lance rather than a point seemed pretty useless for an actual lance . I have some old Dixon 25mm figures that had that style of horse tail and ball on a pole as a standard which is why it stood out so much to begin with to me . (I suspect the standard must have featured in one of Ian Heath's WRG books .) Thanks for straightening out the images.

Chris