Viking troops

madmike111 · Post by **madmike111** » Thu Mar 13, 2008 4:26 am

I am putting together a Viking army and would like to know roughly how many archers would be required for a 800pt army? Would they be mixed in with the main troops are separate in their own units?

Also are berserks getting their own unit of say 4 elements?

Actually if anyone has a draft list they could point me too that would be great.

hammy · Post by **hammy** » Thu Mar 13, 2008 9:15 am

The lists are not yet finalised but it looks like the archers will be a 0 or 1/3 option on a BG by BG basis.

There are no BGs of berserkers simply because on the scale of a FoG battle they didn't opperate as a BG. You could use a single berserker in the front rank of a BG of Huscarles as a bit of colour and to distinguish the Huscarle from the Bondi.

Quintus · Post by **Quintus** » Thu Mar 13, 2008 9:49 am

hammy wrote:There are no BGs of berserkers simply because on the scale of a FoG battle they didn't opperate as a BG.

Hooray!

The old idea of units of beserkers used to annoy me quite a lot.

madmike111 · Post by **madmike111** » Thu Mar 13, 2008 10:16 am

thanks for the info

hammy · Post by **hammy** » Thu Mar 13, 2008 11:34 am

Quintus wrote:
hammy wrote:There are no BGs of berserkers simply because on the scale of a FoG battle they didn't opperate as a BG.
Hooray!

The old idea of units of beserkers used to annoy me quite a lot.

What! you mean you didn't like 6 figure wedges of Irr A LMI 2 side arms???

shall · Post by **shall** » Thu Mar 13, 2008 11:53 am

I used to play those a lot with my Irr A LHI samurai 2hct weapon

Chaos ... but nice fantasy

Si

batesmotel · Post by **batesmotel** » Fri Mar 14, 2008 6:48 pm

hammy wrote:
Quintus wrote:
hammy wrote:There are no BGs of berserkers simply because on the scale of a FoG battle they didn't opperate as a BG.
Hooray!

The old idea of units of beserkers used to annoy me quite a lot.
What! you mean you didn't like 6 figure wedges of Irr A LMI 2 side arms???

Some how those wedges sound like good raw material for command stands at this point. Probably live a lot longer that way, too, than they ever did in a WRG 5th or 6th ed. game as shieldless LMI.

Chris Burr

Fenton · Post by **Fenton** » Sun Mar 16, 2008 12:33 am

I was wondering what the rules are going to be if there are any special ones regarding shieldwalls , and if Norse troops and their opponents ( Alfred etc) would be classed as Drilled for the training they did in forming these walls under battle conditions?, and of course during the battles themsleves?

RichardD · Post by **RichardD** » Sun Mar 16, 2008 9:31 am

Isn't "drilled" an indicator of how well troops could manouvre on the field of battle, though? A shieldwall yells "static defensive spears" to me, not something that's going to be wheeling, expanding and contracting a lot.

Ironhand · Post by **Ironhand** » Sun Mar 16, 2008 11:56 am

Glad to hear that units of berserkers have been removed. Actually, as I think about it, I think Vikings would be better represented as Impact foot, leaving "defensive spearmen" to the Saxons.

nikgaukroger · Post by **nikgaukroger** » Sun Mar 16, 2008 6:09 pm

Fenton wrote:
I was wondering what the rules are going to be if there are any special ones regarding shieldwalls

There are not going to be any special rules - all the rules are already in the rule book.

nikgaukroger · Post by **nikgaukroger** » Sun Mar 16, 2008 6:11 pm

Ironhand wrote:
Actually, as I think about it, I think Vikings would be better represented as Impact foot, leaving "defensive spearmen" to the Saxons.

Personally I'm not sure there was any material difference in the fighting methods of Vikings and Anglo-Saxons.

Ironhand · Post by **Ironhand** » Sun Mar 16, 2008 11:20 pm

That could very well be the case.

Jhykron · Post by **Jhykron** » Mon Mar 17, 2008 5:12 pm

nikgaukroger wrote: Personally I'm not sure there was any material difference in the fighting methods of Vikings and Anglo-Saxons.

Agreed, especially after the Danish conquest.

I'd also just as soon not see the old "loose order army-sized raiding party" option for the early period either.

rbodleyscott · Post by **rbodleyscott** » Mon Mar 17, 2008 5:22 pm

Jhykron wrote:I'd also just as soon not see the old "loose order army-sized raiding party" option for the early period either.

Don't worry, you won't.

vsolfronk · Post by **vsolfronk** » Thu Mar 20, 2008 9:23 pm

Actually I am sort of sad to see the Beserkers go...

I realize that there were never enough to be a BG historically, but they were a fun sideshow, especially as the shieldless LMI with 2SA. Perhaps there should be some mechanism to give one Viking BG an extra POA (impact foot, skilled swordsmen, Crazy Drugged Fanatics charging at you) for having Beserkers in their midst. Just an opinion....

madaxeman · Post by **madaxeman** » Fri Mar 21, 2008 5:48 pm

So there's going to be no medium foot in the Vikings then?

Might have to make some fairly impressive command stands methinks....

tim
www.madaxeman.com

Quintus · Post by **Quintus** » Fri Mar 21, 2008 6:01 pm

Jhykron wrote:
nikgaukroger wrote: Personally I'm not sure there was any material difference in the fighting methods of Vikings and Anglo-Saxons.
Agreed, especially after the Danish conquest.

I'd also just as soon not see the old "loose order army-sized raiding party" option for the early period either.

It's nice to know I am not alone in thinking that. The differences may have been more to do with experience, equipment and leadership.

vsolfronk · Post by **vsolfronk** » Fri Mar 21, 2008 8:47 pm

Wouldn't a raiding party (I agree not an army) more than likely be in a looser formation? Probably the army would be a mixture of both- some in a closer HF formation in the center or verses an opponent, with looser formations in wings or within difficult terrain- probably a case of the Viking being able to adopt to both kinds of formations when needed.

I am just wondering what is a distinguishing difference between a Viking Army and a Saxon army.... I think that it would be a detriment to both lists if they are too similiar.

Just a bunny opinion,
Vincent

nikgaukroger · Post by **nikgaukroger** » Fri Mar 21, 2008 9:06 pm

vsolfronk wrote:
I am just wondering what is a distinguishing difference between a Viking Army and a Saxon army.... I think that it would be a detriment to both lists if they are too similiar.

A bigger one if any such differences were spurious ...