Slitherine

Some notes and suggestions on the later Hungarians:

• Hungarian and other light horse. I would remove the minima here. There is zero proof (AFAIK) that native Hungarian horse archers operated in separate bodies from the knights. They were provided by the various nobles and might well have formed the rear ranks of the knights. They were employed separately for scouting or foraging, but as far acting in separate bodies that is probably it.
  Whenever we read of light horse action in combination with the later Hungarian armies it's always either Szeklers or allies/mercenaries like Serbs, Albanians and their ilk (if the accounts go into that much detail that is). This might not be true for raids, but pretty much so for major battles. Granted absence of proof isn't proof of absence, hence I'm not advocating to remove them completely, but to make them mandatory is going beyond the evidence IMO. Now the minima could be defended by the 'other light horse' part, allowing them to represent those Albanian/Moldavian/Walachian LH contingent, but I think it would be better to have those listed separately. After all simple LH with bow isn't representing any of those very well.
• Clipeati and Armati... difficult chaps those. As far as my readings go we've no idea how the Clipeati fought or if they fought at all. We know they used pavises and were paid for a retainer as well. This leads many to conclude that the pavises they used were large indeed and required to people to haul around and emplace. We also know the Armati were supposed to fight around the pavises of the Clipeati with staff weapons... probably pole arms of various types.
  I'm not sure defensive spears really captures their behaviour and unique nature. I would therefore class them as armoured, HF, heavy weapons, counting the pavises of the Clipeati as (mandatory) portable defenses. In my opinion this gives them the right level of resistance to mounted and encourages the rather static behaviour they showed historically (once set). It also makes them a rather interesting and unique troop type. I'm not sure they should be drilled, they were Mercenaries, true but making them undrilled might encourage using them in a more historical fashion. Also they never seem to have manouvered much on the battlefield.
• The list should allow for other heavy infantry. At the Battle of Breadfield for example it is highly likely that the infantry provided by the Transylvanian Saxons were not identical with the Clipeati and Armati (who were mostly (bohemian) mercenaries).
  I think 0-16 protected or armoured Def. Spearmen should be added to the list (if the Clipeati/Armati aren't changed according to my above suggestions the armoured options can be left out as the better equipped militias can then be taken from that line. There is no evidence I'm aware of that such armoured militias and the Clipeati/Armati were ever used in conjunction).
• Why are the crossbowmen available only as LF? This makes no sense to me. I don't know of any evidence for skirmishing crossbowmen (skirmishing infantry is something of a rarity in medieval armies anyway ... and way to common in the lists IMO). At any rate they were either city milita or mercenaries, both rather unlikely to employ skirmish tactics.
• Finally the Terrain list should also include Developed. This probably already applies to the middle Hungarians as parts of Hungary were rather well settled, including some of the fought over parts. It certainly needs developed when Matthias Corvinus gains Bohmia (and later also Austria).