Native auxiliaries in the Colonial Spanish list

[khurasan_miniatures]

Am considering making some of the Indian auxiliaries in the Colonial Spanish list (there are gobs of them, of both North and South American varieties), and at first will probably just make one. Which of them would be most useful to supplement the required spanish troops?

As these will be for the mid-16th century, they will have many elements of Spanish dress and some will have Spanish swords, as is appropriate for this period. So this is not an opportunity to sneak in the native army you want the most! So for instance the Inca warriors (if made) will have elements of Spanish dress, etc.

I think the basic options are impact foot with light spear, or bow, or light spear. But I don't have the list with me ....

[marty]

I'd make whichever one can have more archer first

Martin

[jefritrout]

With the plan to make the Machupe, I would think the Inca or some other South American Indian would be a great idea. That way they could double with some of them appearing in the Machupe armies as runaways from the opressive Spanish.

I think the Inca (light spear, swords) or the Forest Tribes (bow, or bow/swords) would interest me. (They could also be used in with the Portuguese - as some mamelucos, so I am very interested in them). I will admit that the Forest tribe, since it is only allowed up to 16 stands in the army, is probably not the best choice. Economically it would make sense to probably make the Tlaxcalan or Aztec, or maybe the Incas. It is probably the Mexicans that would be a better choice, though not the one I would personally choose. You certainly don't need to make the Chinantecs, there is someone out there that makes great figures already.

BTW you will be getting an order from me next month for some Spanish and more Bolivians/Paraguayans.

[khurasan_miniatures]

I don't think there are fugitive Indians in the Mapuche list, Jeff, and anyway I'm making 17th Century Mapuches (actually, I have made them, as they are done and now just have to be cast) because they have that cool cavalry and many wear the poncho type upper wear. By the 17th century most if not all traces of native garb would have disappeared from the conquered peoples/allies. The models I'll (perhaps) be making are hybrids, half Indian garb and half Spanish, as shown in the Heath book on the Americas.

I guess the main question is, in the army list, which Indian types best augment the array of Spanish troops?

Impact foot swordsmen
Light spear Medium foot
Archers

[jefritrout]

I know that there are not any fugitives in the Machupe list. That wouldn't stop me from adding a couple of ones to a some Machupe units for a variety and a bit of spice.

As to your question...
I would like the light spear medium foot personally.
I think that a better business decision would be the impact foot swordsmen.
I will buy either or both should you make them though, but probably not in a great amount.

[Skullzgrinda]

Can the troops not be modeled as a fairly generic melee troop type, thus satisfying both 'light spear' or 'impact foot' game distinctions?

If they could the whole issue would be simplified to a choice between melee or missile.

[Delbruck]

The Chinantec look like good generic archers.

[eldiablito]

My vote, would be more Tlaxcallans! I would especially enjoy seeing some cool swan banners to go with the command stands.

Additionally, it would be great to see some of the Native American litters (aka. Mound People and/or Inca) and some Native baggage train models!

Of course, my pm to you goes into greater detail of my own, personal, wish-list.

THANK YOU!!!!!!

[khurasan_miniatures]

That's a good idea, skullzgrinda, so I assume you mean that the close combat types are more useful than the archers? I guess that makes sense as the Colonial Spanish can have lots and lots of cheap shooters.

I agree that the Chinantec archers would make good unconverted Indian auxiliaries, but I'm going to have auxiliaries from the mid 16th century made and by then most Indian auxiliaries would have a mixture of Indian and native dress. That also rules out "more tlaxcalans" unless you mean tlaxcalans in mixed dress. Again, if I do this it would be auxiliaries under Spanish rule, not natives in traditional garb.

[Skullzgrinda]

...I assume you mean that the close combat types are more useful than the archers? I guess that makes sense as the Colonial Spanish can have lots and lots of cheap shooters.

I certainly can't say that the shock 'askaris' would be better than the missile, but at least the decision tree is simplified if the same models can be made up simply as melee, and then defined as needed as light spear or impact foot. If justification can be made for native auxiliaries being in mixed units of bows and firelocks that too would enable one mold to meet both objectives. You may have enough headache with variations of haircuts and clothing styles on your hands, let alone troop function which should be pretty basic for natives, or so I would speculate.

BTW, can your Spanish colonial troops not serve as Portuguese as well, and perhaps even French? I just don't see the potential for a massive selection of Renaissance troops evolving like there is for ancients, so the more double-duty we can get the better. Perhaps this rules set will prove me wrong. Everyone I know who has played both prefers FoGR.

[khurasan_miniatures]

I can't speak for the cavalry but the infantry seems to be fairly close, based at least on the reconstructions in Ian Heath's book. They have the same quilted cloth armour in many cases, and otherwise Euro dress looked fairly similar from country to country.

Don't know about the French though, whether they adopted the quilted fabric armour or not.