Early Samurai

Stuart · Post by **Stuart** » Mon Jul 07, 2008 8:19 pm

Having seen some of the previous posts about samurai armies, I feel slightly wary about asking more questions about samurai but here goes...

I have a DBM Early Samurai (strictly speaking Bushi or Mononofu!) army of the Heian to Houjou shikken periods and I would like to convert it to FoG. Any suggestions on it? My first thoughts were:

Generals as either Cavalry or Foot "Samurai" archers.

Warlike clans will be superior foot bushi and average mononofu. Less warlike clans will be average foot bushi and poor mononofu.
Warlike temples will have superior or average monks, others average or poor monks.

Mounted Bushi, Cavalry, Armoured, Superior, Bow, Swordmen, Undrilled @ 18pt units 4-6 total 12-30
Foot Bushi archers, Medium Foot, Armoured, Superior or Average, Bow, Swordsmen, Undrilled @ 12/10 pts units 4-8 or
Foot Bushi with naginatas, Medium Foot, Armoured or Protected, Superior or Average, Heavy Weapon (or Impact Foot, Swordsmen?), Undrilled @ Sup 12/9 Ave 9/7 pts. Total number of foot "samurai" is 0-32.
Mononofu, Medium Foot, Protected, Average or Poor, Defensive Spear, Undrilled @ 6/4 pts units 6-12 total 24-48
Mononofu, Medium Foot, Protected, Average or Poor, Bow, Undrilled @ 6/4 pts units 6-12 total 0-12
Monks, Medium Foot, Protected, Superior or Average or Poor, Heavy Weapon (or Impact Foot, Swordsmen?), Undrilled @ 9/7/5 pts units 4-6 total 0-18
Emishi (pre 1100AD only), Light Horse, Unprotected, Average, Bow, Swordsmen, Undrilled @ 10pts units 4-6 total 0-12
Palisade, FF @ 3pts 0-15

Naginata usage is confusing. Mononofu have a more supporting role so defensive spear (possibly heavy weapon or even light spear?) seems most appropriate. I would see naginatas in the hands of bushi or monks being used more aggressively, possibly as part of a fast charge which suggests either heavy weapon or even impact foot, swordsmen!

Quality is an issue. Bushi, particularly mounted are the best troops with the mononofu and some monks the worst. However, most of their battles were with each other, so particularly high quality grading is difficult to jusitify in terms of the "delta". Their only real foreign enemy were the Mongols and even this was an unusual situation, but if their performance against the Mongols is actually representative, many of the bushi could be superior and even the lowest mononofu no worse than average.

Comments?

nikgaukroger · Post by **nikgaukroger** » Mon Jul 07, 2008 8:32 pm

My first suggestion would be to not base any conversion on the DBM Early Samurai list but to instead use the DBMM version - much better researched.

It is most likely that a FoG list will bear more relation to that than the DBM one.

Stuart · Post by **Stuart** » Mon Jul 07, 2008 8:37 pm

Anybody want to post a proposed list based on the latest (DBMM?) research?

nigelemsen · Post by **nigelemsen** » Tue Jul 08, 2008 10:58 am

Representing the samuria is always going to be a difficult one as you stated they spent most time fighting each other... I do not think your sugestive list is too far wrong. I am personally waiting for the "late samuria" list and maybe able to sneak in the "ikko-Ikki" league, although date wise I suspect it will beyond the current rules.

The later list would IMO be drilled and cavalry being light spear/swordsment. Ashigura defensive spearmen/bow. Samurai again could be either a combination of impact foot/swordsmen or heavy weapon/offensive spearmen... Depending on the interpetation and to enable a balanced game against "open" opponents.

nikgaukroger · Post by **nikgaukroger** » Tue Jul 08, 2008 11:10 am

One of the things that will need to be decided for the Heian, etc. period is how to represent the mounted kondei/bushi leading their followers who fight on foot - a mixture of mounted and dismounted warriors with a mix of missile and close combat weapons

Stuart · Post by **Stuart** » Tue Jul 08, 2008 6:58 pm

Ah yes, I can see that being a bit tricky! A unit with 1/2 or 1/3 Cav and 1/2 or 2/3 MF, bow in the front rank (bushi) and defensive spear in the rear, and mixed quality ratings (superior/average). Just three major issues to consider - so no pressure on coming up with an answer PDQ!

I'm glad my other armies are nice and straightforward (Seleucid, Burgundian Ordonnance and Principate Roman)!

Rudy_Nelson · Post by **Rudy_Nelson** » Tue Jul 08, 2008 8:14 pm

I am in the middle of discussions with my sculptor on whether to sculpt PRE-Samurai japanese or PRE-Columbus American Indians which fought mainly on foot.

So the discussion here on possible troop types are very interesting.

ars_belli · Post by **ars_belli** » Tue Jul 08, 2008 8:16 pm

Why not simply field the mounted bushi and their followers as discrete BGs, working in close cooperation as a Battle Line? That would be consistent with the rationale given previously for the representation of mixed groupings of Greek hippeis/hamippoi, Early German cavalry/javelinmen and suchlike in FoG.

Cheers,
Scott

Stuart · Post by **Stuart** » Sun Jul 13, 2008 5:09 pm

Given that other mixed groupings such as those quoted by Scott are considered as normal BGs (or possibly the light infantry are already considered part of the mounted BG), why not treat the mixed Bushi/followers the same way?