Slitherine

As an appropriate backdrop to illustrate my poor abilities as a commander of toy soldiers, I tend to pick sick kitten armies rather than 'tournament tigers'. I am resigned to those facts now. Even so I do have limits, and thus have eliminated Cossacks, Tatars and Turks from consideration.

Right now I am leaning towards ECW Irish Confederates, 30YW French or Trastamara Spanish, with a bit more favor towards the Spanish. I suspect that all of these are mediocre, which is acceptable, whereas masochistic is not.

I do not know the rules for FoGR and have not played the game, but I am familiar with FoGAM and have played an essential part in propelling a number of people to the top half of the charts.

So.

In a nutshell, in what ways will these Irish, French and Spanish lists fail in a general tournament under mediocre command, and how quickly? I realize that these are opinions not science, and that dice will be involved.

Irish I cannot comment on. Trastamara Spanish I believe suffers from the Colunela being neither fish nor fowl. It does not really shoot well, and only 1 file of pike 3 deep has all the disadvantages and few of the disadvantages of any other mixed battle group. In period it might be ok but I doubt it. I believe 30YW French has the makings of a very good army. It requires you to decide pre or post 1643 as they play in very different styles but it has all the toys. I think it is close to being a real tourny tiger's army. If I had the time and money it would be my next army.

I think the Irish would be ok. A large army with the bonus of a good force of warriors to back up the pike and shot. The cavalry is not great but could do a job if supported by light foot.
Probably like yourself I am tempted to it by the lovely Khurasan range.
John

Irish would not fail! Ever!

Well, maybe they would, but as said above, the interesting mix of annoying light troops, warriors and pike and shot is certainly a break from the ordinary in the mid 17th C. They also wore very simple functional dress that is quite easy to paint, making it a relatively quick paint-up for a second P&S army.

I really must add the cavalry and mtd command, I just need a few moments to update the website.

I think the Spanish can field up to 10 superior colonellas plus some decent supports. In this configuration they are a tough yet forgiving weapon. I agree about the TYW French. I've only faced this list once (with ECW Parliamentarians) and got my clock cleaned. Not faced nor played the Irish, but i suspect they are the weakest of the three overall.

Kevin

Another vote for the French, they can be very nasty.

Yup, the french can be nasty sods, especialy if you can get a GC in the area to support them when they get shot up.

I think the Trastamaran Spanish will fail on October 1st at around 3.15. That's when my first game with them is planned

As the Viper said, the Trastamara are a good army, though I would qualify that as in Period. The 3 pikes backed a swordsman count as a four deep column of pikes. They also have a limited bit of shooting. Add in some annoying light cav, skirmishers and some Gendarmes, they can fight with just about anyone. When the Colunelas are superior they are very resilient. 2 colunelas together can stand up to quite a bit. Not an easy army, but a fun one that can win.

As to the French, they are quite good and can be a nasty suprise. I've never fought the Irish, but Khurasan makes some beautiful figures.

Thanks to all for your comments. I read each and every one with interest as it came in.

I am glad to hear that the 30YW French are viable. The initial AARs on this site were . . . bleak. It could make a very pretty army too, or as scruffy as one wanted. Perhaps next year if all goes well.

Trastamara Spanish. *sigh* When I hear "Renaissance Wargaming", I think Italian Wars. Sadly, the general concensus among experienced players seems to be that there is a real qualitative difference between the earlier and later lists. That being the case, 30YW and ECW and Late Baroque armies will proliferate, the Italian Wars armies will be few and far between. Ah, the pobrecito Trastamaras! Alas for all that is lost! Red and yellow banners snapping in the warm Mediterranean breeze. Rich, dark, oiled adargas. Pale moonlight gleaming on orange blossoms. Dusky majas in candlelight. Sangria. Silver coins. Emerald signets. Gold crucifixes. Fine Toledo steel blades engraved: "NO ME SAQUES SIN RAZON/NO ME EMBAINSES SIN HONOR" . . . Gone. All gone. Not competitive out of period.

Right. Now I am in a mood to go mope with the Irish Confederation and Scots Covenanters.

At least I got haggis.

However the Italian Wars French with DF Swiss IS competitive... You don't get the Toledo steel but you do get the Swiss...

Check Tim Porter's Madaxeman site for a report of how he did against the Italian Wars French. I think it is a good army but then I have never won a game of FoGR...

from the games I've played the early period foot (usually pike keils) is OK. Can still steamroll through the pike and shot units (especially if Swiss). The other early period foot (XB and Heavy weapon and the like) tends to be very cheap and is perfect for providing the rear support the pike needs or sitting behind any artillery you may have. I have to agree with those who have posted serious doubts about colunelas though.

The main problem with the early period armies, in the games I have played, is the Gendarmes who are very expensive and not very good. Lance armed horse (which is also often available) is not as expensive but still not very good.

Martin

If you're intended on winning, regardless of the period, choose the French. They're hard hitting, have good cavalry... a very nice army.

For the early period, the Trastamara are good. After all, it was the army of El Gran Capitán.

I think all 3 are solid mid level armies.

Irish. Large. Lots of foot. Will absorb a lot of killing.

French a spirited attack oriented army. You get to attack gloriously.

Trastamara spanish. It has a lot more firepower than people realize for frontage. 50%. Its headache is that one kill takes away its POA advantage.

All could look well to consider the commanded out shot options.

The spanish probably take a bit more thought to get their b-level game going than the others. But none are stark raving crazy IMHO.

Instead of the 30yw French I'd take a look at the Weimerian list. You get the benefit of giving the French foot regimental guns & also having determined horse Küirassier as opposed to the orignal list where you have either dh or regimental guns depending on whether you take the pre or post 1643 versions.


I think the m* lads need the extra die roll to face up to ordinary shot & pike, giving them a chance to disrupt them on the way in etc.

My current take on the Weimarians is...

IC + 3x TC

4x French Foot + regimental gun
2x German Foot + regimental gun
2x Küirassier (unarmoured superior)
1x 4 Dragoons
2x 2 medium arty
1x Bandilier Reiter (average)
1x Command shot

Seems to work ok

Ah, but you see I am cursed with the need to build armies that interest me historically, whether the lists have been kind or not.

Otherwise I would be looking at Swedes or Imperials, or perhaps Imperials or Swedes.

Sort of like the old Holy Trinity of Seleucids, Late Romans and Teutonic Knights.

Hy

I have had ( long ago ) 2 test games and will take part at britcon next WE ( no better way to learn the rules , being smashed at a tournament ) .

What do you think of the early 30 year's swedish army . i know it is an agressive army, but not especially a winner ...but I like the army .

Thanks to all of you who gave your perspectives to my original questions. Each of you gave some good insights to consider.