Page 1 of 1
Thoughts on Colonies and Conquest
Posted: Sun Mar 20, 2011 5:07 pm
by timmy1
The armies covered by Colonies and Conquest are not generally the sort of armies I would choose but they present an interestingly varied selection that is very different from what is in the first 3 books. The Chinese style mixed battle groups are an interesting innovation.
The quality seems to be the highest of all the volumes so far and I learnt a lot about the history of the period. Even though I will probably use only one, or at most 2, of the armies I do find it an interesting book and am really glad I purchased it.
Posted: Sun Mar 20, 2011 11:39 pm
by azrael86
I'd agree, although some of the choices seem rather arbitrary. Why are the middle eastern armies in this book instead of with the Ottomans? How come Thai, Burmese and Khmer - all who have separate lists in Ancients, now can share a list?
It also seems we are missing colonial Spanish?
Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2011 8:44 am
by rbodleyscott
azrael86 wrote:It also seems we are missing colonial Spanish?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Tordesillas
Hence the Colonial Spanish are in "Cities of Gold"
Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2011 8:56 am
by jonphilp
This is a well presented book. I may quibble a bit over the Ming/Manchu lists but I am building a Ming army to fight the Japanese in Korea. I know from a couple of traders that they are getting a rush of orders for armies in this book. Well done FOGR
Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2011 8:55 pm
by azrael86
I was thinking we might have a Phillippine version.
Posted: Thu Mar 24, 2011 11:10 am
by burnsibub
What happened to Siamese? Its such a great army in DBr!
Posted: Thu Mar 24, 2011 11:46 am
by rbodleyscott
burnsibub wrote:What happened to Siamese?
Siamese = Thai
Posted: Thu Mar 24, 2011 2:51 pm
by khurasan_miniatures
RBS, taking his marching orders from the pope again!
Posted: Sat Mar 26, 2011 7:08 am
by timmy1
While I agree one is taking his orders from the other, just not sure you have it the right way round...
moghuls
Posted: Fri Apr 01, 2011 5:03 pm
by Samei00
bit disappointed that mughals don't get to upgrade to muskets in 17th c a la Gush because their gunpowder is rubbish
still they get to field average cavalry instead of all superior saving points as an option
and elephants are optional (but what self respecting mughal general won't field at least 2 nellies)
Posted: Sun Apr 03, 2011 12:07 am
by Scrumpy
If elephants get in they are all but unstoppable it seems. Nothing apart form 4 deep pike or spear get a poa v them in melee.
Posted: Sun Apr 03, 2011 11:41 am
by marty
If elephants get in they are all but unstoppable
A pretty big "if" really given the shooting POA's and death rolls. Still I suppose you can always hope you are out on a flank against only mounted who cant shoot!
Martin
Posted: Sun Apr 03, 2011 7:24 pm
by Scrumpy
The Elephant armies get plenty of LF to absorb musketry. OK artillery might be a problem, but a good player will ensure their is enough crap to get shot at to protect the big grey beasties.
Posted: Sun Apr 03, 2011 7:55 pm
by hazelbark
Scrumpy wrote:The Elephant armies get plenty of LF to absorb musketry. OK artillery might be a problem, but a good player will ensure their is enough crap to get shot at to protect the big grey beasties.
I think you are over-reacting to one tercio vs 2 BGs of Elephants.
I think Elephants are a threat, but not certain how serious.
Re: Thoughts on Colonies and Conquest
Posted: Sun Apr 03, 2011 11:44 pm
by davids
timmy1 wrote:The armies covered by Colonies and Conquest are not generally the sort of armies I would choose but they present an interestingly varied selection that is very different from what is in the first 3 books. The Chinese style mixed battle groups are an interesting innovation.
The quality seems to be the highest of all the volumes so far and I learnt a lot about the history of the period. Even though I will probably use only one, or at most 2, of the armies I do find it an interesting book and am really glad I purchased it.
I am interested in the Colonial armies, the Dutch mainly, but are there many figures available for this period, in particular mid to late 17th century? Any idea of manufacturers for late 17th century Dutch colonials or likely looking substitutes (in 15mm)? Unfortunately I'm not sure that too many of the Colonies and Conquest armies will feature on the battlefield.
Re: Thoughts on Colonies and Conquest
Posted: Mon Apr 04, 2011 3:37 pm
by hazelbark
davids wrote:
I am interested in the Colonial armies, the Dutch mainly, but are there many figures available for this period, in particular mid to late 17th century? Any idea of manufacturers for late 17th century Dutch colonials or likely looking substitutes (in 15mm)? Unfortunately I'm not sure that too many of the Colonies and Conquest armies will feature on the battlefield.
Yep, I think that is an intriguing one and there are a few others around that are of interest. As I dug through the lists hard I found a few more, but they look very vulnerable without terrain.
Grumpy's has some figures I think.