Mounted missile troops.

[fogman]

I think the representation of mounted crossbowmen and mounted arquebusiers is wrong. I do not believe they were able to shoot while mounted as a unit the way steppe horse archers could. From what I know, they were merely mounted infantry. In the early ordonnance gendarmes company, it is documented that the mounted archers (when they were actually archers) dismounted. It is virtually certain that mounted arquebusiers could not shoot on horseback as the weapon is clearly too cumbersome to be effective. It may be possible for individual horsemen to shoot from horseback during a skirmish while on patrol but for a whole formed unit to do so effectively in a battlefield context is not believable. Looking at later developments, even when equipped with lighter and better firearms, light cavalry used the 'arme blanche' on the battlefield.

[rbodleyscott]

Normal tactical doctrine for Harquebusier units in the early 17th century was to engage in shooting with carbines from a distance while mounted. The caracole system worked as well (or as badly) for carbine armed as pistol armed horse.

The main reason for the dominance of the Royalist cavalry in the early part of the English Civil War was Prince Rupert's introduction of Swedish cavalry doctrines emphasizing the use of shock tactics rather than firepower. It took the Parliamentarians a year to switch over to shock tactics themselves.

Similarly it is hard to imagine Polish cossacks, Hungarian hussars and Ottoman cavalry habitually dismounting to use their carbines.

So if these troops could do it, it is hard to see why early 16th century units could not do it too.

[fogman]

don't know much about 17th century. not my cup of tea. I was referring to the early 16th century. i was looking at ravenna 1512 and the spanish have mounted arquebusiers and both sides have mounted crossbowmen. i cannot find anything that would substantiate what i see they can do in the game.

[rbodleyscott]

don't know much about 17th century. not my cup of tea. I was referring to the early 16th century. i was looking at ravenna 1512 and the spanish have mounted arquebusiers and both sides have mounted crossbowmen. i cannot find anything that would substantiate what i see they can do in the game.

But you are working on the incorrect premise that it is impossible to use arquebuses effectively from horseback. It clearly was possible in the 17th century, so why not in the 16th?

Where is your evidence, apart from this premise, that they were only mounted infantry?

The longbow comparison is a red herring, because it really is (more or less) impossible to use an English longbow effectively from horseback. (Japanese bows were quite long too, but asymmetrical so that they could be used on horseback).

Certainly massed crossbows were being used mounted in the 15th century and earlier, especially in Germany and Poland.

e.g.

[fogman]

"because of the difficulties involved in using the arquebus while mounted, these horse arquebusiers were really mounted infantry - they usually dismounted to use their weapon. But on at least one occasion, after the battle of Ceresole in 1544, mounted arquebusiers pursued retreating heavy infantry and, by dismounting to shoot and remounting to continue the pursuit, managed effectively simulate the traditional Parthian or Turkic tactics of light cavalry."

Arthur Jones, 'THe Art of War in the Western World', University of Illinois, 1987, p.192.

[rbodleyscott]

"because of the difficulties involved in using the arquebus while mounted, these horse arquebusiers were really mounted infantry - they usually dismounted to use their weapon. But on at least one occasion, after the battle of Ceresole in 1544, mounted arquebusiers pursued retreating heavy infantry and, by dismounting to shoot and remounting to continue the pursuit, managed effectively simulate the traditional Parthian or Turkic tactics of light cavalry."

Arthur Jones, 'THe Art of War in the Western World', University of Illinois, 1987, p.192.

And has it occurred to you that Arthur Jones may have been working from the same flawed premise?

Why would it be any harder to load an arquebus on horseback than a crossbow? It certainly wouldn't be hard to fire it. And clearly it was possible in the 17th century, so why not in the 16th? It was usual for cavalry arquebuses to be smaller than infantry arquebuses - presumably because of the issue of re-loading while mounted.

I am sure I am not going to convince you, and you are of course at liberty to mod them. If you want to do this you can just alter the unit definitions in the Squads.csv file so that they become Dragoons with Crossbow or Arquebus capability. That should presumably get more or less the effect you want.

[fogman]

there may be a good reason why reiters used pistols and not arquebuses.

another nugget: the etymology of 'argoulet' ('argoletz') says that the word first appears in 1548 in a passage where it is said to describe 'harquebuziers a cheval'.

[rbodleyscott]

there may be a good reason why reiters used pistols and not arquebuses.

Apart from the fact that they could carry 3 pistols and yes of course they would be easier to reload? There's a reason we modelled Mounted Crossbowmen and Mounted Arquebusiers as skirmishing Light Horse - clearly the longer weapon was intended to be used at a distance and not close up and personal, and time taken to reload would not matter much if the enemy had no missile weapons with which to reply.

I think we are going to have to agree to disagree on this issue. Why not try modding the units into Dragoons?

[fogman]

FoG people know how i deal with light troops. The wait will be worth it.

[flatsix518]

Don't you ban them from the tournaments you organize?



John

[fogman]

Don't you ban them from the tournaments you organize?



John

well not originally, i restricted them to 10 (the original so called '50/10 rule'! although it was more like 40/10 in lords of italy). but eventually the only way to get rid of the weird commando behaviour was to ban them altogether. on the other hand, in my scenarios there are many subtle ways to substitute for them, mixed units, accessory units ... no big deal since light troops were a sideshow in ancient battles.

from my limited experience here, the commando behaviour is still very much possible. unlike their predecessors, light troops (with firearms) are integral to the renaissance battlefield, and a potent one at that, but there are ways to deal with them so they don't run circles around you. i will demonstrate it eventually.

[flatsix518]

I will be willing to cross swords, monsieur! En grade!



John

[Aryaman]

Of course mounted arquebussiers fired from horseback, you can see one in a 17th century drawing here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_ ... %281622%29
But I wonder, from a game perspective, why mounted arquebussiers from Italian Wars armies are light cavalry while in TYW armies are "normal" cavalry

[nikgaukroger]

This period painting from (I think) just before the TYW shows some mounted arquebusiers fighting cuirassiers - you'll note the firearms being discharged. Unsurprisingly the cuirassiers look to be winning

[Miletus]

My Essex old-style Mike's Models mounted arquebusiers are DEFINITELY firing their guns from the saddle. And that's certainly all the proof that I need...

[flatsix518]

You make an excellent point.

Those models were probably close to the period.

(Just kidding.)

[Miletus]

You make an excellent point.

Those models were probably close to the period.

(Just kidding.)

Never argue with a man who's as wide as he is tall. Those Mike's Models were tough hombres... Well, BIG ones at any rate!

[flatsix518]

I knew an ancients gamer who ran 25mm elephants in his 15mm army. They were quite intimidating...

[fogman]

i wouldn't argue that it wasn't possible to fire from horseback. but i would argue that it was mostly done during patrols and reconaissance, the traditional role of light cavalry.

[fogman]

I will be willing to cross swords, monsieur! En grade!



John

I meant I will demonstrate how to deal with light troops from a scenario design standpoint. but don't worry we'll cross sabres again. actually be worried...