Poles Again....

[VictorJ]

Now having Clash of Empires, is there any reason why there are no options with the winged hussars. With other lists, cavalry are given lots of options.

The hakkapelita, as an example, have a choice of either melee pistol or swordsmen, armoured or unarmoured etc. By the early 30YW list, they even get an option to go to elite. Even the Qapu in the Turkish list have options to be armoured/heavily armoured, elite/superior etc. The hussars, on the other hand have no elite option, and no melee pistol option.

Is there any chance that some options be added in the post 1630's lists (being too late now for Clash of Empires), for hussars to get a melee pistol option, possibly lance on impact as an alternative to, but not instead of, impact horse (which looks better vs Eastern opponents but worse vs Western), and possibly an elite option aswell. At least in this way, some interpretation on how they operated can be placed in the hands of players. At the moment, the hakkapelita are actually better than the hussars, due to the options they get access to.

In the post 1630's period, depictions of pancerni have them with pistols, so perhaps they should also get a melee pistol option aswell.

Anyway, got it off my chest now.

[SirGarnet]

The Hakkapeliita were noted by contemporaries as being particularly fierce, but there are few - only a single BG - so classifications accommodating their evolution over a short period of time does not allow abuse.

There are Hussars aplenty, and they are pretty good against Western horse. Impact Mounted is better than Lancers as they maintain the POA against Pistols. Impact Mounted don't get their POA against Heavy Lancers, but neither do Light Lancers - and there are few Heavy Lancers out there, and my guess is none in period.

Against Hussars you might as well have Reiters with a shooting POA to try to disrupt them before Impact. since the Impact Pistol does not count.

My problem with Poles is trying to fit what I'd like into 800 points.

[nickdives]

I think, having reflected on my previous posts!, that for a Polish Army to have much effect against a Western P&S army, you want as many P&S units as you can buy, arty, Haidduks to support/plug gaps in the P&S, some mercanary Cuirsassiers/horse and some Tartars and Dragoons for the flanks. If you have any points left over perhaps a units of Hussars, but bear in mind if the opponents are Swedes there will be a unit of Hackapals just to destroy your Hussars! For the Hussars to stand any chance against the Hackapals you are best to have at least 6 bases - 138 points which could probably buy you 3 P&S units, far more use!

The Polish lists are better used against Ottomans, Muscovites, Cossacks and other mainly horse Eastern European types. I suppose this is all about evolution where the early Vasa Swedes had such a hard time against the Poles, along came GA, re-thought things and put into the field Swedish armies capable of holding their own.

[DanielS]

Drop the points based army list and use historical order of battles and you will find that your Poles vs Swedes games take on a diffrent flavour, particularly as almost all actual fighting was done by horse & shot. Historicaly the Poles avoided fighting the Swedes if the later depolyed with the full complement of P&S infantry, artillery, portable obstacles and fortifications. The Swedes on the other hand were not particularly interested in risking a full scale engagement with the Crown Army as the ghost of Kircholm was still haunting the Swedes. So the war was much more about raids, beating up quarters and other "actions of war" than large scale decisive battles.

As I've pointed out in another topic the Hackapells are overrated, no historical evidence of them being either "elite" or using diffrent tactics from the other native Swedish cavalry. In 1626-1629 the real hussar killers were the veteran German cavalry in Swedish service but the Clash of Arms list pretty much ignores that fact.

rankly I don't see that there is much to complain about regarding the Hussars, they get impact mounted rather than lance, determined horse rather than Gendarmes and are always superior. Essential all of their weak spots have been removed. True they don't get to upgrade to Elite which I was expecting give the performance of the very best banners but then neither are the hobbled by having the average & poor units which existed in the historical armies. And the rest of the Polish list is a real smorgasbord of troops with multiple choices. It's hard can't see why the Poles felt a need to reform their army after 1629 if they had such a varied and flexible choice of troops at their command.

[nickdives]

Daniel, I think that you have hit the nail on the head in your first para. I generally try to use a more historical approach, prefering actual OOBs rather than points based systems. Generally points based battles are ok for club nights but some armies are so badly matched it may not work very well!

Or a campaign based system works well as even some historical battles seem to be the result of a lot of luck where the small army wins as a result of a mad mistake by the larger!

Still enjoy the rules, it worked well for Breitenfeld and looking forwards to Lutzen in a couple of weeks. Still if I turn up to a club night with the Poles and find myself faced by an effective P&S force I think I may about turn and head to the bar!

[VictorJ]

Hi Daniel, I agree, impact horse is most appropriate for hussars, having an option as lancers is a retro step, but I was really only making a last minute plea before the next lists get published, that they be given some more variation, and not be so pre-set.

Overall, I think the options in the clash of Empires list are quite good, my main gripe would be that after the Turkish wars in 1620 odd, I thought that there should be more mounted cossacks allowed and fewer hussars, and even some lower morale hussars at this time, as you mentioned.

[nikgaukroger]

but I was really only making a last minute plea before the next lists get published,

I'm afraid the lists went to Osprey a long time ago - the lead times are considerable.