Armour

[NickHarbud]

Appendix 1 notes that:

Heavily Armoured troops have

Metal armour almost entirely covering the body.

Armoured troops have

Metal armour for at least the head and thorax - combined, in the case of foot, either with a substantial shield or with additional metallic protection.

Now on page 32 of Storm of Arrows, David Sque's magnificent galloglaigh illustration depicts three gentlemen with mail coats or hauberks covering all or most of their arms and generally reaching to their kness. They lack shields, but have additional metallic armour in the form of helmets. However, according to the army list on the opposite page, they are merely Protected.

Page 46 of Storm of Arrows, Angus McBride's illustration depicts a Low-Countries infantryman covered from head to toe in mail with helmet and hauberk. Yet the list does not allow any Armoured or Heavily Armoured foot.

English Retinue billmen are Armoured.

Swiss pikes can only be Protected despite some members having full plate armour.

Condottieri foot are never more than Protected despite quite a few of them having substantial amounts of metal armour and very large shields.

French Pavisiers are either heavily Armoured or Armoured.

Will troops such as Viking and Saxon Huscarls that have a shield (even though is cannot be used with a two-handed axe) be Armoured or Protected?

[rbodleyscott]

You have to bear in mind the tendency of modern illustrators to show only the best equipped men. In reality a large proportion of galloglaich (for example) wore only a textile Akheton. The same applies to many Medieval troops. They were generally mixed together, in which case the whole battle group counts as Protected.

We are trying (in FOG) to get away from the "equipment inflation" tendency that has afflicted some previous system.

With regard to huscarles, the later ones do qualify as Armoured. As heavy weapon cancels out armour advantage anyway, the main benefit of the armour is against enemy shooting, rather than in close combat. Their shields would, of course, be useful against shooting.

[NickHarbud]

We are trying (in FOG) to get away from the "equipment inflation" tendency that has afflicted some previous system.

Hmm, that's cool. I can live with that.

What about Early Republican Hastati? Those guys are generally appear with just a plate over the middle of their chests. Can they really all be Armoured?

[rbodleyscott]

We are trying (in FOG) to get away from the "equipment inflation" tendency that has afflicted some previous system.

Hmm, that's cool. I can live with that.

What about Early Republican Hastati? Those guys are generally appear with just a plate over the middle of their chests. Can they really all be Armoured?

I agree, Protected is more likely. The lists allows both options - go with the one you feel comfortable with.

Originally we had Protected Hastati and Armoured Principes, and a complicated system allowing them to operate separately but cooperatively. When we simplified the rules and combined the two into joint BGs we gave the option to have them as either.

[korvus]

There are some great examples to back this up. Dominic Mancini, an Italian in England during the reign of Edward IV described the troops of Edward's brother Richard's men (later RIII) as follows:

"There is hardly any without a helmet and none without bows and arrows, their bows and arrows are thicker and longer than those used by other nations just as their bodies are stronger than other peoples. The range of their bows is no less than our arbalests; there hangs by the side of each a sword no less long than ours but heavy and thick as well. The sword is accompanied by an iron buckler. They do not wear any metal armour, except for the better sort who have breast plates and suits of armour. Indeed, the common soldiery have more comfortable tunics that that reach down to the loins and are stuffed with tow or some other soft material. They say that the softer the tunics the better do they withstand the blows of arrows and swords."

It is interesting to note that these "padded tunics", what we now call akhetons or jacks, were made up of twenty-five layers of linen stuffed with combed linen fibers or raw wool. I made a reproduction for cut and puncture tests a number of years back, and found it did perform as advertised. Sword blows didn't even damage the fabric until it was put against a completely rigid backstop (a baulk of timber). Even thrusts required serious commitment tgo damage the material.

Of course, looking at fifteenth century combat manuals like Liberi's, "Flower of Battle", we find that the combat techniques the Marquis of Ferrara's household knights were trained in involved working around the opponent's armour, and often getting them on the ground so that the force of the blow is not lessened by the bodies recoiling from it. Perhaps the most gruesome of these is the arm twisted behind the back, forcing the body forward into a bent over position. The sword is then inserted into the logical cavity.

Happy times :)

Cole

[Seldon]

I agree, Protected is more likely. The lists allows both options - go with the one you feel comfortable with.

Originally we had Protected Hastati and Armoured Principes, and a complicated system allowing them to operate separately but cooperatively. When we simplified the rules and combined the two into joint BGs we gave the option to have them as either.

mmm... I love the rules but this comment makes me wonder how many nice ideas died in the way maybe one day we'll get some "optional" rules for people interested in them

BTW these discussions on guidiing principles for the lists are great to help us understand how the rules represent different things , so THANKS !!

Seldon

[shall]

I think the list team has aimed to keep lists as interesting as possible as long as the content was historically reasonable.

What they have done is removed cerrtain items of nonsense or wargaming creation that have no basis in history.

On the Roman my recollection is that legionaries who could afford it took mail shirts and those that couldn't the lesser plate - it was a peoples army at that time rather than a professional one. So the options seem historically reasonable.

Si

[Ironhand]

I really appreciate the effort to avoid "equipment inflation". I think it makes a much better and more historical game. I think the design group has done an excellent job.

[Jhykron]

Originally we had Protected Hastati and Armoured Principes, and a complicated system allowing them to operate separately but cooperatively. When we simplified the rules and combined the two into joint BGs we gave the option to have them as either.

Probably a better bet historically, anyway. The division between the pectoral plate and mail is always described as being based on the wealth of the individual legionaire, not his age classification. Saying that the Hastati have one and the Principes have another is convenient for unit identification in a game, but not really supported by the sources, who -never- associate armor with age class.

Personally, I think it's minutia anyway. Your legionaire has a 20+ lb. iron-rimmed+bossed convex body shield, a helmet, and a greave on the exposed leg... how much sense does it really make to quibble over the size and metal content of the armor backing this up, while ignoring 95% of what keeps him alive. At the same time, in terms of classification, is the guy with the pectoral plate closer to the guy in mail with the same equipment (Armored) or to the Naked Gaul with no helmet and a lighter shield (Protected)?

I kind of have the same view on the whole early to late hoplite transition, too. It's something of an ingrained WRG Ancients Rules habit to focus too much on the metal armor and ignore the whole picture.

[rbodleyscott]

I kind of have the same view on the whole early to late hoplite transition, too. It's something of an ingrained WRG Ancients Rules habit to focus too much on the metal armor and ignore the whole picture.

There is a lot of truth in this.

On the other hand, I think it is a mistake to ignore metal armour altogether. Armour isn't cheap, and if it did not convey a significant advantage, governments and individuals would not have gone to the very significant expense of purchasing it in various eras. Although the average body armour of hoplites diminished as time went on, this had more to do with decreasing average wealth amongst the hoplite class than to a discovery that armour was useless. ("Silly us", say the hoplites "we have been spending all that money on armour for the last 100 years, only to discover that it makes no difference").

[Jhykron]

On the other hand, I think it is a mistake to ignore metal armour altogether.

Unquestionably. If the evolution of armor in the medieval and rennaissance periods tells us anything, it's that the stuff works.

Armour isn't cheap, and if it did not convey a significant advantage, governments and individuals would not have gone to the very significant expense of purchasing it in various eras. Although the average body armour of hoplites diminished as time went on, this had more to do with decreasing average wealth amongst the hoplite class than to a discovery that armour was useless.

Not useless. -Maybe- superfluous or "overkill", for the price, especially if, as you say, it means fielding a smaller phalanx. To get to that bronze breastplate you have to beat past his doru and his bronze-rimmed Argive shield, which is quite a formidible first line of defense, for the time period. Anyway, it's not like the later hoplites are exactly unarmored... good textile or hard leather armor is a lot tougher than a lot of people think. Sure they're not steel, but then again nor is the bronze of the earlier period armor.

Again, though, just like with the Romans, are the Hoplites with leather cuirass, Argive shield, doru, and helmet closer in protective equipment to the muscle-cuirassed hoplites of the earlier period (Armored) or to, say, Thracian spearmen (Protected)? If I were an archer, I know who I'd rather be shooting, anyway.

[shall]

Again, though, just like with the Romans, are the Hoplites with leather cuirass, Argive shield, doru, and helmet closer in protective equipment to the muscle-cuirassed hoplites of the earlier period (Armored) or to, say, Thracian spearmen (Protected)? If I were an archer, I know who I'd rather be shooting, anyway.

Early hoplites are armoured and later ones usually protected IIRC.

Si