Scots Jacobite Rebels

[marshalney2000]

Once again thanks for your comments.
Poorly motivated highlanders - probably the definition I selected is wrong. I was attempting to highlight that by the time of Cromdale a few clans were a bit dispirited and just wanted to go home. The same could however be said of many clansmen at Culloden 56 years later but this did not stop them charging ferociously (Like Hungry Wolves). I think it would be wrong to take away the impact foot and swordsmen classification as this deprives them of their natural fighting strengths. It also keeps the points up rather than providing a cheap support unit for the better units. If a problem I would rather take away this line completely.
Skirmishers: the men selected by Cameron of Lochiel were a small group of clan warriors sent out as skirmishers. These men obviously had muskets so can move up from musket* of the main battle line units were not all were. They would also be more from the gentry than the humblies and were well versed in swordsmenship. They would have given a good account of themselves in hand to hand.
Are they any different from the Korean skirmishers in FOG a/m which I recall were swordsmen and skirmishers. Don't think such a small unit would be an uber troop type!!
John

[rbodleyscott]

Skirmishers: the men selected by Cameron of Lochiel were a small group of clan warriors sent out as skirmishers. These men obviously had muskets so can move up from musket* of the main battle line units were not all were. They would also be more from the gentry than the humblies and were well versed in swordsmenship. They would have given a good account of themselves in hand to hand.

Well Enfants Perdu led by King's Musketeers (Athos, Porthos etc ) don't get to be Swordsmen (See Early XVIIth century French list), so I doubt if these should. They might possible be Superior but I will leave Nik to decide that.

[marshalney2000]

Kings musketeers bah!!!
Let's not compare those Nancy boys with real highlanders.
John

[nikgaukroger]

Skirmishers: the men selected by Cameron of Lochiel were a small group of clan warriors sent out as skirmishers. These men obviously had muskets so can move up from musket* of the main battle line units were not all were. They would also be more from the gentry than the humblies and were well versed in swordsmenship. They would have given a good account of themselves in hand to hand.

Well Enfants Perdu led by King's Musketeers (Athos, Porthos etc ) don't get to be Swordsmen (See Early XVIIth century French list), so I doubt if these should. They might possible be Superior but I will leave Nik to decide that.

I'm rather tempted to leave them as is as an unusual BG. To be honest IMO Swordsmen is a wasted point on LF and despite them not having a melee capability the Froggies get a better deal by spending points on Superior.

[rbodleyscott]

Skirmishers: the men selected by Cameron of Lochiel were a small group of clan warriors sent out as skirmishers. These men obviously had muskets so can move up from musket* of the main battle line units were not all were. They would also be more from the gentry than the humblies and were well versed in swordsmenship. They would have given a good account of themselves in hand to hand.

Well Enfants Perdu led by King's Musketeers (Athos, Porthos etc ) don't get to be Swordsmen (See Early XVIIth century French list), so I doubt if these should. They might possible be Superior but I will leave Nik to decide that.

I'm rather tempted to leave them as is as an unusual BG. To be honest IMO Swordsmen is a wasted point on LF and despite them not having a melee capability the Froggies get a better deal by spending points on Superior.

True

[nikgaukroger]

Once again thanks for your comments.
Poorly motivated highlanders - probably the definition I selected is wrong. I was attempting to highlight that by the time of Cromdale a few clans were a bit dispirited and just wanted to go home. The same could however be said of many clansmen at Culloden 56 years later but this did not stop them charging ferociously (Like Hungry Wolves). I think it would be wrong to take away the impact foot and swordsmen classification as this deprives them of their natural fighting strengths. It also keeps the points up rather than providing a cheap support unit for the better units. If a problem I would rather take away this line completely.

I have no conceptual issue with Poor quality Impact Foot and Swordsmen, the French get them in a number of lists. All we need is to change the troop description from Poorly Motivated I think as this gives the wrong impression as Richard has demonstrated. Suggestions?

[marshalney2000]

Nik, how about dispirited and make it applicable to 1690 only. In 1689 at both killiekrankie and even Dunkeld the behaviour of all the units was enthusiastic. The evidence of deterioration was really prevalent in 1690 when overall leadership was poor and there was no real sense of purpose particularly as no help was coming foam James or France. We could even restrict the superior clan option to 1689 as a suitable balance.
John

[nikgaukroger]

Well as they aren't compulsory I don't think we need date limit them to be honest.

How about, to reflect overall army "spirit", we say you cannot field the Superior highlanders with the Poor ones?

[rbodleyscott]

"Dispirited" works for me.

[marshalney2000]

Happy with the note that superior cannot be selected along with poor.
John

[marshalney2000]

Again after looking at Niks new lists I wonder if the Jacobite cavalry should be determined horse as well. Certainly the remnants of Dundee's horse should not be worse than English newly raised horse.
John

[marshalney2000]

Having done some further research, think both types of cavalry in the Jacobite list should be determined horse, armoured with pistol in impact and melée. Only difference is that the remnants of dundee's horse should be superior being the veteran dedicated remains of the regiment.
Joh