Slitherine

As too many people seem to be interested in Neo Assyrians armies , I would like to begin an urartian army . I tried to find some info about the clothing but info is very scarce .

It seems that neo assyrians figures might be the right option for miniatures but I would like some comments on it ?

Thanks in advance

Medes could be another good anti-Assyrian army.

A lot of the period was heavily influenced by Assyrian styles. I think many people use similar figures. Certainly a lot of teh helmet images i ahve seen on-line reflect that pointed style.

I am not looking for an anti assyrian army but for an army that interest me . Alas, nearly everybody I know wants the neo assyrian army ( which interest me ) so I change . As I want also to do an persian army I will not do the medes army , it is too close but urartian is different .

I still wonder about Egyptians .

Libyan Egyptians are good in my limited experience of them.

As I told you this weekend, Late Dynastic Egyptians have the potential to be real killers (and you already have the hoplites... ).

Madbanker, next time I'll ake command of my son's hoplites and meet your seleucid

Kushite Egyptians best Egyptians.

bahdahbum wrote:Madbanker, next time I'll ake command of my son's hoplites and meet your seleucid

The fall of the Seleucid Empire (again... )

Ah, by the way... Museum Miniatures have an Urartian auxiliary in their Neo Assyrian range.

And for inspiration you might want to check this: URARTU

I can supply a good amount of information re the Urartian army if you need it - basically Assyrian does for most, with the pointed helmets as noted previously, later in period. I can send some images - they become more and more Assyrian like, with belts etc showing a combination of foot bow and spear/shield., and cavlry with chariotry. The earlier infantry on the Shalmaneser gates have a distinctive roundel on their helmets
The cavalry though are all spear armed with smallish shields, no bows. Chariotry was a small part of the army, perhaps due to the mountainous terrain, but the cavalry should be good - Urartians were employed by the Assyrians to train their cavalry.

No idea about the FOG definitions I'm afraid, i.e. what makes a cavalryman superior, but the royal army was a standing force with Bastam being bigger than any contemporary Assyrian complex.

Steve Rathgay

MadBanker wrote:As I told you this weekend, Late Dynastic Egyptians have the potential to be real killers (and you already have the hoplites... ).

They work really well except they don't like terrain.