timurid and ottoman list

[pyrrhus]

I am thinking of buying these two armys for my up coming birthday (march ) I know the book doesn't come out till the fall but without being to revealing (sexy) can anybody with some knowledge of these two armys give me some Idea as to what I should get for about 800pts each I have a chance to buy some figs cheap but have no clue as what to buy any help would be great ,Favorite figure manufacturers etc (ps I am in the States)

[trev]

Hi Pyrrhus,

Here's a very rough list for the Ottomans circa 1400AD. I haven't seen the beta lists, so these are my guesses as to what the stats will be and I've left a few points spare. I've based this list on the army of Nicopolis. For Ankara you might want to add a Turcoman ally to represent the troops of the recently conquered beyliks. I've been generous with the Janissaries, and Kapi Kulu Spahis, so if you want points for an ally I'd cut back these to smaller units and probably drop some of the extra Feudal Spahis. No idea how competitive this list would be but it's at least historically plausible.

regards,

Trev

1 Sultan (C-in-C) FC - - - - - - CinC 1 = 50 pts
2 Bey TC - - - - - - - 1 = 35 pts
3 Bey TC - - - - - - - 1 = 35 pts
4 Azaps MF Unprotected Average Undrilled Bow - - - 8 @ 5 = 40 pts
5 Azaps MF Unprotected Average Undrilled Bow - - - 8 @ 5 = 40 pts
6 Kapi Kuku Infantry (Janissaries) MF Protected Superior Drilled Bow - - - 6 @ 9 = 54 pts
7 Kapi Kulu Spahis Cv Armoured Superior Drilled Bw* Lancers Swordmen - 4 @ 19 = 76 pts
8 Asiatic Feudal Spahis Cv Protected Average Undrilled Bow Swordmen - 6 @ 11 = 66 pts
9 Rumeliot Feudal Spahis Cv Protected Average Undrilled Bow Swordmen - 6 @ 11 = 66 pts
10 Allied Serbian Cavalry Cv Armoured Superior Undrilled Bw* Lancers Swordmen - 6 @ 18 = 108 pts
11 Ackinjis LH Unprotected Average Undrilled Bow - - - 6 @ 8 = 48 pts
12 Ackinjis LH Unprotected Average Undrilled Bow - - - 6 @ 8 = 48 pts
13 More Feudal Spahis Cv Protected Average Undrilled Bow - Swordmen - 4 @ 11 = 44 pts
14 More Feudal Spahis Cv Protected Average Undrilled Bow - Swordmen - 4 @ 11 = 44 pts
. Stakes for the archers & Janissaries - - - - - - - Fortification 10 @ 3 = 30 pts
Total = 784 pts

[hazelbark]

4 Azaps MF Unprotected Average Undrilled Bow - - - 8 @ 5 = 40 pts

These guys could also be LF

6 Kapi Kuku Infantry (Janissaries) MF Protected Superior Drilled Bow - - - 6 @ 9 = 54 pts

Jannisaries are also swordsmen as they fought well in close combat too.

7 Kapi Kulu Spahis Cv Armoured Superior Drilled Bw* Lancers Swordmen - 4 @ 19 = 76 pts
8 Asiatic Feudal Spahis Cv Protected Average Undrilled Bow Swordmen - 6 @ 11 = 66 pts

No on the lancers and all the spahis types will likely be superior.

10 Allied Serbian Cavalry Cv Armoured Superior Undrilled Bw* Lancers Swordmen - 6 @ 18 = 108 pts

These will be KN by 1400 and no BW*. Almost never will a unit have missile, impact and melee weapons.

You probalby want some trash foot too. The Ottomans had a bunch. So consider enough for say 8 bases of Mob, 4 defensive spear, or 4 MF Iaylar fanatics.

[PELAGIUS]

*At last - list talk!!!!!

*May I jump in and comment?

Hi Pyrrhus,

Here's a very rough list for the Ottomans circa 1400AD. I haven't seen the beta lists, so these are my guesses as to what the stats will be and I've left a few points spare. I've based this list on the army of Nicopolis. For Ankara you might want to add a Turcoman ally to represent the troops of the recently conquered beyliks. I've been generous with the Janissaries, and Kapi Kulu Spahis, so if you want points for an ally I'd cut back these to smaller units and probably drop some of the extra Feudal Spahis. No idea how competitive this list would be but it's at least historically plausible.

regards,

Trev

1 Sultan (C-in-C) FC - - - - - - CinC 1 = 50 pts
2 Bey TC - - - - - - - 1 = 35 pts
3 Bey TC - - - - - - - 1 = 35 pts
4 Azaps MF Unprotected Average Undrilled Bow - - - 8 @ 5 = 40 pts
5 Azaps MF Unprotected Average Undrilled Bow - - - 8 @ 5 = 40 pts
6 Kapi Kuku Infantry (Janissaries) MF Protected Superior Drilled Bow - - - 6 @ 9 = 54 pts
7 Kapi Kulu Spahis Cv Armoured Superior Drilled Bw* Lancers Swordmen - 4 @ 19 = 76 pts
8 Asiatic Feudal Spahis Cv Protected Average Undrilled Bow Swordmen - 6 @ 11 = 66 pts
9 Rumeliot Feudal Spahis Cv Protected Average Undrilled Bow Swordmen - 6 @ 11 = 66 pts
10 Allied Serbian Cavalry Cv Armoured Superior Undrilled Bw* Lancers Swordmen - 6 @ 18 = 108 pts
11 Ackinjis LH Unprotected Average Undrilled Bow - - - 6 @ 8 = 48 pts
12 Ackinjis LH Unprotected Average Undrilled Bow - - - 6 @ 8 = 48 pts
13 More Feudal Spahis Cv Protected Average Undrilled Bow - Swordmen - 4 @ 11 = 44 pts
14 More Feudal Spahis Cv Protected Average Undrilled Bow - Swordmen - 4 @ 11 = 44 pts
. Stakes for the archers & Janissaries - - - - - - - Fortification 10 @ 3 = 30 pts
Total = 784 pts

*A sound list The only real question is about the Serbs. By 1396 I doubt the Serbs would be classed as Bw* despite a very few diehards as Byzantine influence had faded. The last real show for Bw* might be the Battle of Velbusdh in 1330? A brave decision to class them as Cv as they seems to outclass Timurid cavalry at Ankara 6 years later. Your reasoning on this one trev?

*An army that tempts me greatly - although Timur tempts me more!

*Yours disgracefully

*Pelagius

[trev]

Thanks for the corrections hazelbark. I'm a bit surprised about the Timariots being superior but that could be because of relation to other lists and the rest sounds sensible enough. Does the list cover the differences between the early 'Gazi' armies and the later 'Imperial' ones?

Cheers,

Trev

[trev]

Hi Pelagius,

Nice to talk to fellow heretic.

*A sound list The only real question is about the Serbs. By 1396 I doubt the Serbs would be classed as Bw* despite a very few diehards as Byzantine influence had faded. The last real show for Bw* might be the Battle of Velbusdh in 1330? A brave decision to class them as Cv as they seems to outclass Timurid cavalry at Ankara 6 years later. Your reasoning on this one trev?

This is just my faulty memory. I knew they changed to western armour but couldn't remember exactly when off the top of my head. I guessed and figured someone more on the ball would correct me if I as wrong. To be honest, although I know a little about the Early Ottomans they're well outside my area of proper knowledge and it's been a good few years since I learned what I do know. Most of my research was on several centuries later.

*An army that tempts me greatly - although Timur tempts me more!

I completely agree about the Ottomans being tempting and I might know someone I can convince they need a Timurid army. I have a great interest in Ottoman history and I've been wanting to do this period for a long time. I was involved a little with the playtesting for the WAB Vlad book and so we played some games then with 17thC proxies. I even had my money ready to get an 15thC army but Andy at Old Glory didn't have some of the packs I wanted in and then I got sidetracked. Butterfly wargamers eh! Can you recommend any good sources for the period up to say Mehmet the Conqueror? He really intrigues me. I read a little about the 1480 siege of Otranto recently. There's a great historical what if. A 1481 Ottoman invasion of Italy would make a great campaign. I have all the standard wargamers' sources, Ospreys, WRG books etc. of course plus a few more general Ottoman histories but nothing really detailed on this period, especially the military side of things. Can you suggest anything? A couple of the Brill books look good, especially the Sons of Bayezid one and the War and Society in the Eastern Med one.

For figures I've been considering 10mm recently. Kallistra seem to do a decent line for the era and I like the massed look of 10mm. 28mm is my favourite scale usually but I think will look a bit odd with the short ranges in FoG. I like the rules though and I don't usually need much excuse to buy new lead.

all the best,

Trev

[pyrrhus]

Thanks for all the ottoman list help I am looking for some hints with Timur .I am getting my figs from museum miniatures ,opinions ? I saw naissmith has some figures aswell but I liked the museum stuff better . Any help with a good list with options would help alot . Thanks again Patrick ps doyou think the timurids and ottoman list have a chance against the other later lists (knights)?

[carlos]

Museum is kind of generic sometimes and they will list the same figure for several different troop types. The best Timurids I think are from Donnington:

http://shop.ancient-modern.co.uk/timuri ... s-61-c.asp

I've got the piles of skulls, the civilians, the mounted generals, etc from them and they're great. Very timurid, not just some random mongol figures.

[hazelbark]

Thanks for the corrections hazelbark. I'm a bit surprised about the Timariots being superior but that could be because of relation to other lists and the rest sounds sensible enough. Does the list cover the differences between the early 'Gazi' armies and the later 'Imperial' ones?

I don't have any facts about the final list what it looks like. Looking at the rise of rome and storm of arrows i would not be suprised that the early ottomans (ghazi) could be a different list.

The Ottomans of the 14th and 15th century had pretty good Sipahi/Timariots. There were the core of the army, expereienced and performed quite well. The decline of the Timariot system was more of a 16th century issue.

Still i wouldn't be shocked if so can be downgrade to average.

I ran the ottomans about 8 times in the beta rules and it was a fun army. Managed several envelopmentsl.

[nikgaukroger]

Off the top of my head I believe there will be an Average option for the Timariots.

No Bow* for the Serbs either - even if some of them did have bows they appear, as far as I can see, to have functioned as shock lancer cavalry and so are graded thus.

[trev]

No Bow* for the Serbs either - even if some of them did have bows they appear, as far as I can see, to have functioned as shock lancer cavalry and so are graded thus.

Is this the same for Byzantines? I know I got my date of western influence wrong but I was presuming those would be the kind of stats Byzantine style cavalry would get. It's not an area I know much about though, so maybe I mis-remembering the amount of archers in the late Byzantine cavalry.

Cheers,

Trev

[nikgaukroger]

Most Byzantine cavalry - up to the Nikeforian list anyway - will be 1/2 Lancers and 1/2 Bow; although the Tagmata in the later lists will be Lancer, Bow* as they appear to have fought in shallower formations and so the 50:50 Lancer:Bow formations don't appear to be justified. They effectively shoot the same most cases.

[trev]

I don't have any facts about the final list what it looks like. Looking at the rise of rome and storm of arrows i would not be suprised that the early ottomans (ghazi) could be a different list.

From the research I did before, it seems the traditional approach has been to see the early Ottoman army in terms of two periods. The first `Gazi' period has the Ottoman forces primarily comprised of the Bey's Turcoman horse archers, urban militia infantry and religious fanatics. By the late 14th century however, the mounted Gazis and Turcomans have been largely replaced with the more reliable but less fanatical Spahis and Ackinjis, while the better trained Janissaries and Yayas have supplemented the urban militias. Finkel in Osman's Dream plays down the religious aspects of the earliest forces though and says they were more opportunistic than fanatical. She says that 'Gazi' did not have an anti-Christian connotation in the early 14thC and the image of their origin as holy warriors was later propaganda. This fits better with the large numbers of Christians in the early Ottoman armies and their pragmatic switching back and forth of alliances as and when it suited them. There do seem to have been changes in the army structure though but maybe that can simply be allowed for by having start dates for the Kapi Kulu.

The Ottomans of the 14th and 15th century had pretty good Sipahi/Timariots. There were the core of the army, expereienced and performed quite well. The decline of the Timariot system was more of a 16th century issue.

I haven't got it with me but I seem to recall some stuff in Ian Heath's Armies of the Middle Ages Vol 2 about the Spahis equipment being wretched in the early days some not even having swords and things like that. I tendency I have noticed is for our image of the early Ottoman armies to coloured by the later forces of Suleyman.

Still i wouldn't be shocked if so can be downgrade to average.

An option would probably be best. Possibly they need an option to field Christian style troops from Thrace, Macedonia and Bulgaria too as Christian garrisons do seem to have defected wholesale and many members of the Christian military elites were incorporated into the Spahis.

I ran the ottomans about 8 times in the beta rules and it was a fun army. Managed several envelopmentsl.

That's good to know. It's an interesting period with a lot of great characters and diverse military systems clashing, which is always good fun.

Cheers,

Trev

[trev]

Most Byzantine cavalry - up to the Nikeforian list anyway - will be 1/2 Lancers and 1/2 Bow; although the Tagmata in the later lists will be Lancer, Bow* as they appear to have fought in shallower formations and so the 50:50 Lancer:Bow formations don't appear to be justified. They effectively shoot the same most cases.

I see, thanks. Would the Tagmata be deployed in one rank then?

T

[rbodleyscott]

Most Byzantine cavalry - up to the Nikeforian list anyway - will be 1/2 Lancers and 1/2 Bow; although the Tagmata in the later lists will be Lancer, Bow* as they appear to have fought in shallower formations and so the 50:50 Lancer:Bow formations don't appear to be justified. They effectively shoot the same most cases.

I see, thanks. Would the Tagmata be deployed in one rank then?

Not compulsorily, but to maximise lance effect vs an equal sized BG of armoured horse archers it would be a good formation to adopt. The converse is that you would not want to take on 2 BGs of 2 rank deep heavy horse archers because they would get twice as many dice in the melee phase. (And possibly shoot you to sh*te on the way in).

However, when Simon and I played a test game of Nik Byzantines vs Hamdanids, 1 BG of Tagmatic lancers, deployed 1 rank deep, did indeed manage to defeat 2 BGs of ghilman 2 ranks deep due to the success of their initial charge.

[trev]

Thanks Richard. I shall check out the rules to make sure I understand.

T

[hazelbark]

This fits better with the large numbers of Christians in the early Ottoman armies and their pragmatic switching back and forth of alliances as and when it suited them.

I haven't got it with me but I seem to recall some stuff in Ian Heath's Armies of the Middle Ages Vol 2 about the Spahis equipment being wretched in the early days some not even having swords and things like that. I tendency I have noticed is for our image of the early Ottoman armies to coloured by the later forces of Suleyman.

An option would probably be best. Possibly they need an option to field Christian style troops from Thrace, Macedonia and Bulgaria too as Christian garrisons do seem to have defected wholesale and many members of the Christian military elites were incorporated into the Spahis.

the question every rules writer has to decide is are these incorporated into the main army or are they distinct forces. Some like say Voynuks probably or could be are incorporated. But the obvious ones like the Serbs, walachians and such were forces brought in by a local or signifcant Voivode or such and they would be allies in FoG terms.

I do think you are correct that the images from different time periods are blurred together. Clealry this was renaissance problem to as in one decade the Turk was fearsome and the next he was toothless. For surviving and being a threat for so long, it is amazing how many battles the turks lost. The recovery after Bayezit gets captured at Ankara is amazing, although partially a function that all the neighbors had been equally slaughtered i suspect.

This was my first competition army and I've alway really enjoyed the period of the 14-16th century Ottomans. In FoG they sema very viable army. The Timariot are solid but not better than knights. The jannisaries are actually troops that can fight HtH now. yep I look forward to the return of the fearsome turks.

[PELAGIUS]

#Good evening trev

Nice to talk to fellow heretic.

#I like to think of myself as more one of the Chosen

*A sound list The only real question is about the Serbs. By 1396 I doubt the Serbs would be classed as Bw* despite a very few diehards as Byzantine influence had faded. The last real show for Bw* might be the Battle of Velbusdh in 1330? A brave decision to class them as Cv as they seems to outclass Timurid cavalry at Ankara 6 years later. Your reasoning on this one trev?

This is just my faulty memory. I knew they changed to western armour but couldn't remember exactly when off the top of my head. I guessed and figured someone more on the ball would correct me if I as wrong. To be honest, although I know a little about the Early Ottomans they're well outside my area of proper knowledge and it's been a good few years since I learned what I do know. Most of my research was on several centuries later.

#Most things are outside my proper knowledge. I take after Einstein in that he never committed anything to memory as it was already in books! My only problem comes when I try and use my brain.

*An army that tempts me greatly - although Timur tempts me more!

I completely agree about the Ottomans being tempting and I might know someone I can convince they need a Timurid army. I have a great interest in Ottoman history and I've been wanting to do this period for a long time. I was involved a little with the playtesting for the WAB Vlad book and so we played some games then with 17thC proxies. I even had my money ready to get an 15thC army but Andy at Old Glory didn't have some of the packs I wanted in and then I got sidetracked. Butterfly wargamers eh! Can you recommend any good sources for the period up to say Mehmet the Conqueror? He really intrigues me.

#My source has always been first and foremost Ian Heath's 2nd Volume on armies of the middle ages and for later armies George Gush's rennaisance warfare (the latter is hard to find though) so you have the jump on me

I read a little about the 1480 siege of Otranto recently. There's a great historical what if. A 1481 Ottoman invasion of Italy would make a great campaign. I have all the standard wargamers' sources, Ospreys, WRG books etc. of course plus a few more general Ottoman histories but nothing really detailed on this period, especially the military side of things. Can you suggest anything? A couple of the Brill books look good, especially the Sons of Bayezid one and the War and Society in the Eastern Med one.

#Afraid I got sidetracked by Abbasids, Mamluks and Il-khanids some years ago so have been worshipping at the feet of Kennedy, Fry and Waterson

For figures I've been considering 10mm recently. Kallistra seem to do a decent line for the era and I like the massed look of 10mm. 28mm is my favourite scale usually but I think will look a bit odd with the short ranges in FoG. I like the rules though and I don't usually need much excuse to buy new lead.

#I have a lot of 15mm eastern cavalry of the period but may branch out into 28mm once the two titans of the ruleworld have decided who is top dog. I have a few classical period 6mm armies and they are mighty impressive if you can get others to play with this scale - on 25mm bases!

#A pleasure to chat. You must do reports of any battles as I shall always be interested

#Yours disgracefully

#Pelagius

all the best,

Trev[/quote]

[pyrrhus]

Any Idea what the Timurid list would look like ? Are the Tarkhans going to be classed bow*knights ?

[nikgaukroger]

Are the Tarkhans going to be classed bow*knights ?

I think "no" would be a safe answer to that