Chariots in Swifter than Eagles
Posted: Wed Jul 10, 2024 5:51 am
				
				Ok - so i've been very much enjoying both FOG II and FOG II Medieval. Having had a long-standing interest in the high bronze age I was very much looking forward to the release of Swifter than Eagles. Having played Swifter than Eagles (STE) now for a while, I've very much enjoyed it as well, but I do have a few questions.
The main issue raised by STE is in the army lists. Almost every serious study of high bronze age chariots tends to argue that they followed the Mittanian model (i.e. they were primarily armoured horse archers). This applies to Mitanni, Kassite Babylon, the Middle Assyrian Empire, Syrian and Canaanite principalities, Egypt, Hatti, the Luwians, and the Myceneans (Drews, 1993; Lorenze and Schrakamp, 2011; Wernick, 2013; and many many more). However, the STE army lists provide spear armed chariots for Myceneans, Luwians, and Hittites.
While I can see a case from a game perspective - in terms of providing more variety - in giving some army lists spear armed chariots, making this the only option available to these lists seems odd given that the apparent bulk of the available evidence tilts very strongly towards all of the high bronze age palace cultures deploying bow armed chariots presumably used in a very similar way. We know that both the Mycenean and Hittite written records record stores of arrows alongside chariot parts and where we have written accounts of chariot training or the deeds of kings we often have reference to bows. Most high bronze age royal iconography in Anatolia shows the king with a bow - not to mention the questionable physics of spear equipped chariots in the first place (Wernick, 2013).
I'd like to see an option - or alternative set of lists - that allow for the Mycenean, Luwian, and Hittite Imperial lists to deploy bow-armed chariots in place of the - probably mythical - spear armed Anatolian light chariot or heavy Mycenean/Hittite chariot.
Cheers,
De Coucy
			The main issue raised by STE is in the army lists. Almost every serious study of high bronze age chariots tends to argue that they followed the Mittanian model (i.e. they were primarily armoured horse archers). This applies to Mitanni, Kassite Babylon, the Middle Assyrian Empire, Syrian and Canaanite principalities, Egypt, Hatti, the Luwians, and the Myceneans (Drews, 1993; Lorenze and Schrakamp, 2011; Wernick, 2013; and many many more). However, the STE army lists provide spear armed chariots for Myceneans, Luwians, and Hittites.
While I can see a case from a game perspective - in terms of providing more variety - in giving some army lists spear armed chariots, making this the only option available to these lists seems odd given that the apparent bulk of the available evidence tilts very strongly towards all of the high bronze age palace cultures deploying bow armed chariots presumably used in a very similar way. We know that both the Mycenean and Hittite written records record stores of arrows alongside chariot parts and where we have written accounts of chariot training or the deeds of kings we often have reference to bows. Most high bronze age royal iconography in Anatolia shows the king with a bow - not to mention the questionable physics of spear equipped chariots in the first place (Wernick, 2013).
I'd like to see an option - or alternative set of lists - that allow for the Mycenean, Luwian, and Hittite Imperial lists to deploy bow-armed chariots in place of the - probably mythical - spear armed Anatolian light chariot or heavy Mycenean/Hittite chariot.
Cheers,
De Coucy