No. They will appear as their lists are published. PatienceScrumpy wrote:
Is there any chance you could do a collective book of those allies offered to armies, but are not in print yet ?
Missing Lists
Moderators: hammy, philqw78, terrys, Slitherine Core, Field of Glory Design, Field of Glory Moderators
-
nikgaukroger
- Field of Glory Moderator

- Posts: 10287
- Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 9:30 am
- Location: LarryWorld
Nik Gaukroger
"Never ask a man if he comes from Yorkshire. If he does, he will tell you.
If he does not, why humiliate him?" - Canon Sydney Smith
nikgaukroger@blueyonder.co.uk
"Never ask a man if he comes from Yorkshire. If he does, he will tell you.
If he does not, why humiliate him?" - Canon Sydney Smith
nikgaukroger@blueyonder.co.uk
-
PyrrhicVictory
- Corporal - 5 cm Pak 38

- Posts: 35
- Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 4:18 pm
-
hazelbark
- General - Carrier

- Posts: 4957
- Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 9:53 pm
- Location: Capital of the World !!
I think they said the sicilians are in Oath of Fealty in the Autumn but Wolves from the Sea in February will have Normans and depending on how they did them and what year you are after they could be there.PyrrhicVictory wrote:Not sure if it is already covered, but Sicilian Norman?
My guess is the Vesper Siclian and 13th century types are in Oath. 1041 is Wolves.
-
mellis1644
- Administrative Corporal - SdKfz 251/1

- Posts: 128
- Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 8:40 pm
Yes the current books seem to stop at the Sahara and so all the Southern African armies have been 'missed'. That includes the ancient ones (what's know about them) and then the armies of the 'middle ages' period as well. That includes the true African Muslim states etc. I don't think that these have been covered.olivier wrote:I'd love to see some of the africans kingdoms army ( if you can find an expert about them) as Ghana, Mali, Songhai, Kanem and Axoum.
I'm not sure I'd ever field an army of these (other than maybe the African Muslim) but others may.
-
timmy1
- Lieutenant-General - Nashorn

- Posts: 3436
- Joined: Fri Feb 29, 2008 8:39 pm
- Location: Chelmsford, Essex, England
Nik
Found another one. The Parthian vassel states seem to have disappeared from the Parthiasn list, showing only as allies. Fine for Parthians but as the vassel existed in most cases as seperate armies where do I find them? I am most interested in Elymais (also known as Elam, Susiana or Khuzistan) as they fought the Parthians (and possibly the Sassanids) between 188 BC and 227 AD. I believe that this should be a seperate list, even though the evidence is sparce.
Found another one. The Parthian vassel states seem to have disappeared from the Parthiasn list, showing only as allies. Fine for Parthians but as the vassel existed in most cases as seperate armies where do I find them? I am most interested in Elymais (also known as Elam, Susiana or Khuzistan) as they fought the Parthians (and possibly the Sassanids) between 188 BC and 227 AD. I believe that this should be a seperate list, even though the evidence is sparce.
-
LambertSimnel
- Administrative Corporal - SdKfz 232 8Rad

- Posts: 152
- Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 12:33 pm
- Location: Leamington, Warks, UK
I was going to suggest alist for Anglo-Burgundian Hundred Years War armies such as Saalisbury's army at Cravant, then I realised that it would be better as a variant of the Hundred Years War English (Continental) list, andthen I realised that the variation would be to add 'or Burgundian' after Gascon a couple of times.
-
jcmedhurst
- Corporal - Strongpoint

- Posts: 64
- Joined: Sun Sep 07, 2008 10:20 pm
Another Point of View
One thing that doesn't seem to have come up yet is the issue of whether or not some missing lists deserve to be represented.
One of the problems with DBM to my mind was the prevalence of competition-winning armies whose historical record was based upon minimal evidence - or indeed whose armies performed extremely poorly in real life. I am thinking here particularly of armies like the Ancient Makkan and the Camel-Knights of remotest Sudan. If the entire army is going to be based on a few scratchy bits of rock art then we should probably leave it be.
The same probably applies to all the itty-bitty armies, some of which I see are now covered by ally lists, which is just right, they couldn't usually put a decent field army together without help. I notice though that the very Late Byzantines are not covered by the lists, which is probably right, there is not really a field army after 1400AD. This should also rule out some of the Polynesian type armies, if the island is only home to 5000 people then chances are you are not going to get the kind of army fielded that makes sense in a set of rules like FOG. As it is the rules squeak most when the representative scale of the armies are very different, such as classical and some medieval armies. Yes knights were very good but there were never very many of them.
So, in short my plea is that some army lists deserve to be missed out and we shouldn't put lists in for the sake of it. That said, we shouldn't be restricted by cultural blindness.
John
One of the problems with DBM to my mind was the prevalence of competition-winning armies whose historical record was based upon minimal evidence - or indeed whose armies performed extremely poorly in real life. I am thinking here particularly of armies like the Ancient Makkan and the Camel-Knights of remotest Sudan. If the entire army is going to be based on a few scratchy bits of rock art then we should probably leave it be.
The same probably applies to all the itty-bitty armies, some of which I see are now covered by ally lists, which is just right, they couldn't usually put a decent field army together without help. I notice though that the very Late Byzantines are not covered by the lists, which is probably right, there is not really a field army after 1400AD. This should also rule out some of the Polynesian type armies, if the island is only home to 5000 people then chances are you are not going to get the kind of army fielded that makes sense in a set of rules like FOG. As it is the rules squeak most when the representative scale of the armies are very different, such as classical and some medieval armies. Yes knights were very good but there were never very many of them.
So, in short my plea is that some army lists deserve to be missed out and we shouldn't put lists in for the sake of it. That said, we shouldn't be restricted by cultural blindness.
John
-
rbodleyscott
- Field of Glory 2

- Posts: 28322
- Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:25 pm
-
hazelbark
- General - Carrier

- Posts: 4957
- Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 9:53 pm
- Location: Capital of the World !!
Yes I think the FoG authors have generally adopted a good philosophy on list choices. The obvious issue also of scaling up what was the euqivaletn of about 4 bases into a full list would have lots of distorting effects. Yes it would be fun but it really starts moving the cart down the road toward fantasy and away from history.
-
EricDumDum
- Senior Corporal - Ju 87G

- Posts: 79
- Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:17 pm
-
mellis1644
- Administrative Corporal - SdKfz 251/1

- Posts: 128
- Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 8:40 pm
The point about small armies/kingdoms is well made but the African armies such as for the Malian and Songhai kingdoms/Empire definitely count(http://www.nationsencyclopedia.com/Afri ... STORY.html has a small history of these). There may be others but what the heck I'm no expert in this area/time period - there are wiki entries for the Bantu expansion and Kingdom of Mutapa Empire which especially later in the FoG period there may have justifiable armies in them as well but maybe this is just one or two more generic lists. The oral traditions come down through history and one assumes that these armies were quite large - how big is questionable but should at least justify their own lists as this was a booming area in the later medieval world - just known from the rest of it.
Zulu and some limited Arab range figures are likely somewhat appropriate.
The strategy and tactics magazine #244 had a good article on this as well, called 'Sundiata of Mali: Master of a Hundred Vanquished Kings' By William Stroockwhich. I'll be honest it was this what triggered my post and interest and I looked in the current army books and could not find a list for these guys.
Hope this helps.
Zulu and some limited Arab range figures are likely somewhat appropriate.
The strategy and tactics magazine #244 had a good article on this as well, called 'Sundiata of Mali: Master of a Hundred Vanquished Kings' By William Stroockwhich. I'll be honest it was this what triggered my post and interest and I looked in the current army books and could not find a list for these guys.
Hope this helps.
-
robertthebruce
- Field of Glory Moderator

- Posts: 505
- Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2007 8:24 pm
- Location: Granada, Spain.
Nik, to go with my (early) La Tene above, how about the Umayyad army at the time of Tours that invaded Spain and France?
This Army list, or Army list option, wasn´t included in the Ummayyad list. Initially we thougth to include this option in the Andalusían Army list, but Finally we decided to make a different list.
This army list is not written yet and I don´t know if Richard will include it in lost scrolls, or any other suplement.
Maybe we have to talk about it again.
Cheers
David
-
hazelbark
- General - Carrier

- Posts: 4957
- Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 9:53 pm
- Location: Capital of the World !!
Serious yes. But never in the field. They had a larger fleet than an army practically.EricDumDum wrote:I have a suggestion : Order of Saint John... I know it was a small army, but they were serious opponent with Ottoman armies ( and I have the army who is sleeping)
In our period the Knights are basically on Rhodes and there were less 1000. Other that ship-to-ship did they ever fight on dry land other than Rhodes?
-
BillMc
- Administrative Corporal - SdKfz 251/1

- Posts: 125
- Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 12:40 am
- Location: US of A
You could probably replicate a Knights of St. John using the Medieval Cypriots.hazelbark wrote:Serious yes. But never in the field. They had a larger fleet than an army practically.EricDumDum wrote:I have a suggestion : Order of Saint John... I know it was a small army, but they were serious opponent with Ottoman armies ( and I have the army who is sleeping)
In our period the Knights are basically on Rhodes and there were less 1000. Other that ship-to-ship did they ever fight on dry land other than Rhodes?
Bill
-
nikgaukroger
- Field of Glory Moderator

- Posts: 10287
- Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 9:30 am
- Location: LarryWorld

