Italian Condotta Infantry

BiscuitCity · Post by **BiscuitCity** » Sun Jun 22, 2008 4:01 am

Hi all. I thought I'd offer some unsolicited comments on the Italian Condotta Army list.

In general, I like the army list. I especially like the way the heavy infantry is handled, with the limit of 8 bases total. However, I feel that there are some problems with the Italian spearmen, or lack thereof.

As I understand it, for most of the period covered by this list, "infantry" to the Italians meant companies of Crossbowmen, and troops armed with a spear and a large shield. For the most part, these troops would operate together on the battlefield, but on occasion (especially towards the end of the period) the spearmen would operate independently, especially when storming fortifications.

I would expect this to be modeled in the army list by allowing mixed Battlegroups of Crossbowmen and Defensive Spearmen. Also, maybe an option for seperate units of Protected Defensive Spearmen or (my preference) Light Spear/Swordsmen. However, there is no option for mixed battlegroups in the list other than the milita crossbowmen, and the only spearmen are the Javelinmen, who are simply Light Spears. This is would be a rather unfavorable classification - I assume that is meant to represent the lighter kinds of Italian infantry. It is a suitable classification for those troops, but not for the heavier types.

hammy · Post by **hammy** » Mon Jun 23, 2008 11:20 am

What about the militia pavisiers and crossbowmen?

IanB3406 · Post by **IanB3406** » Mon Jun 23, 2008 12:31 pm

What about the militia pavisiers and crossbowmen?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have some terrific painted Mirlton figs but the fact that they are poor..........I guess it's historical but i have a hard time finding a real use for them, esp as crossbow are a - POA against so many -----re-rolling half your hits. Won't they be outshot by skirmishers? They are poop troops and best avoided

BiscuitCity · Post by **BiscuitCity** » Mon Jun 23, 2008 9:11 pm

hammy wrote:What about the militia pavisiers and crossbowmen?

Right. That combination accurately models Italian infantry tactics in the late 1300's. But there should be an option to field mercenary crossbows in the same formation at least up to the mid 1400's, and there should be better ratings for the spearmen when fielded independently.

hammy · Post by **hammy** » Tue Jun 24, 2008 8:50 am

By the look of the list the mercenary crossbowmen are the ones near the start of the list who are average drilled protected MF crossbow. Presumably the list authors did not consider that the mercenaries fought in the mixed spear and crossbow formation.

In period crossbow are not that bad as there are a lot of armoured foot and mounted about and bow is no better than crossbow in that situation.

BiscuitCity · Post by **BiscuitCity** » Thu Jun 26, 2008 10:42 pm

Crossbowmen are fine - I am not complaining about their utility. I have 12 bases in my army and they are okay troops. If anything, the combined spear/crossbow battlegroups would probably be worse than straight crossbows.

It's just that the spearmen, for their two historical roles, are either poorly modeled or non-existent. In DBM the crossbow elements were assumed to include a certain proportion of pavises and other weapons. It would be fine if this was the case in FoG, but I am perplexed why some crossbow-armed troops are treated one way while others, who were identically armed, are treated another way.