Mongol Captives?

[The_Bishop]

G’day Guys,

I’ve been looking pretty seriously at the Mongols recently and have looked into both the Ilkhanid and Tartar lists, but one of the things I have noticed about both the lists is a lack of captives. From what little research I’ve done it seems that the Mongols were famous, not only for their fairly poor treatment of prisoners and captive civilians, but also for using them quite ruthlessly in battles. The other thing I noticed was that the rating the captives would most likely get, Mob, doesn’t really reflect their use or effect on the battlefield.

After a little bit of thought into this and consideration of different unit types in the books I believe the best fit would be Scythed Chariots. Although it was not obvious at first the more I looked at it the more it made sense, almost everything in the rules about the Scythed Chariots fits in with the use of the captives.

I like the Tartar list as it stands, however I think the exclusion of the captives is a bit of an oversight. So from this a couple of questions:
Would anyone have a problem with me using Scythed Chariot rules for bases that clearly look like a bunch peasants with a couple of Mongol Captors?
Would anyone have a problem with the addition of the Captives as optional troops in the Tartar list for local/tournament games?
What are the chances of captives being included in future Mongol lists either as revisions or separate parts of the Mongol expansion?

Regards,
The Bishop.

[The_Bishop]

As mentioned here are the specifics of why I think Scythed Chariots are the best representation of Mongol Captives.

Starting with the Scythed Chariot heading in Special Features:
* Are shock troops.
- The Captives were, when they were used, forced straight into enemy formations in an effort to make a gap for the real Mongol troops to exploit.

* Can never be part of a battle line.
* Can only make moves as permitted in the “Charges” or “Advances” sections of the simple and complex moves chart
- The Captives are herded, with minimal supervision by Mongol troops, as such they are not going to be able to execute any but the simplest of moves and are certainly not going to form part of a cohesive body of troops.

* Cause a -1 modifier on the cohesion test when enemy loose lose close combat against them
- Fairly straight forward; when women, children, beggars and other random civilians (some of whom you probably know) crash into your line and try to force their way through you’re probably not going to be all that happy about it. When they actually start breaking through you have a choice between killing fellow countrymen or letting them make a gap for the Mongol hordes to flood through.

* Are removed from the table at the start of the joint action phase if they remain in contact with any unbroken enemy they fought this turn.
- This rule shows one of a number of things happening after the first wave has hit, but the enemy has maintained discipline and formation. Either the soldiers have overcome their consciences and easily slaughtered the poorly equipped captives, or (we hope) they have allowed the captives to pass through their ranks without becoming disordered and not allowed a gap to be formed. If the Captives do break their enemy then the drivers are able to maintain control over the (now slightly bigger) horde.

* Do not count towards their army’s battle group count for attrition purposes and never count as attrition points when lost.
- This is probably the biggest thing that suggests Scythed Chariots as the best representation of the Captives. The Mongols intend for all of the captives to die either breaking the line or at least distracting some of the enemy for a while and thus wouldn’t be bothered when the group was destroyed. Similarly it wouldn’t be much inspiration to them if the captives were still alive at the end of the battle.



Similarly the other aspects of the rules reflect their effect fairly accurately:

Impact POAs –
They are at a plus against most; however skirmishers are in too loose a formation to be effected by the captives who will just run through and around, lancers are usually higher class citizens and will be less concerned about killing the rabble, and are also fighting at lance length rather than arm length, Elephants and Battle Wagons are obviously unaffected, and non-charging steady pike/spear present a wall of weapon tips that will negate much of the force and surge of the captives initial impact.

Against them advantage is had by; non-charging impact foot who are suited to forceful impacts and the press of bodies, formed spear or pike once again suited for close combat, non-charging light spear foot, elephants and battle wagons who as well as not being effected by the wave of bodies are pretty good a squishing them too, extra deep pike formations giving extra resilience to the first hit of the Captives.

So overall in the impact they are at an advantage against non-combat troops and mounted light spear, even with most close combat troops, and at a disadvantage against Battle Wagons and Elephants. Both of whom the captives can run around and escape between, as well as the fact that both of these can kill the captives fairly impersonally, and with relative impunity.


Melee POAs –
They have an advantage against all except for once again skirmishers, Elephants, Battle Wagons, and Steady Pike/Spear. Those with an advantage against them are swordsmen, Spear and Pike, Heavy Weapons, Elephants, and extra deep Pike. In addition artillery is at a disadvantage and armour does not count, the Captives aren’t trying to kill anyone and thus armour isn’t much protection, they’re just trying to push through the formation.

Overall again Elephants have an advantage as well as most Battle Wagons (armed with Heavy Weapon), at evens with most combat troops and have an advantage over most noon-combat troops. It may seem odd that they have such an advantage in the melee because after the initial impact and surprise wear off they are nowhere near as effective, and quite poorly equipped; however considering if they don’t break the enemy in this round they are removed the first melee is more of an extension of the first impact phase.


Movement –
In addition to their restriction to straight-forward moves the movement rate of the captives is different to what it would otherwise be (i.e. for Mob). When in the open the Captives move at the same rate as medium infantry, they may not be fit or trained, but their captors also don’t particularly care what condition they arrive in and wouldn’t mind running them into the ground. In terrain their movement quickly deteriorates, the captors are on horses and must control and herd the captives, so going into loose brush where an enterprising captive could out maneuver a horse and hide fairly easily makes a captors life difficult. Any difficult terrain such as forests is completely off-limits as it would be too easy for all of the captives to disappear without a trace.

I assume there is no problem with quoting rules on the forum, if there are any problems with this post please (Moderators) let me know and I will endeavor to change it.

Regards,
The Bishop

[OhReally]

G’day Guys,

I’ve been looking pretty seriously at the Mongols recently and have looked into both the Ilkhanid and Tartar lists, but one of the things I have noticed about both the lists is a lack of captives. From what little research I’ve done it seems that the Mongols were famous, not only for their fairly poor treatment of prisoners and captive civilians, but also for using them quite ruthlessly in battles. The other thing I noticed was that the rating the captives would most likely get, Mob, doesn’t really reflect their use or effect on the battlefield.

After a little bit of thought into this and consideration of different unit types in the books I believe the best fit would be Scythed Chariots. Although it was not obvious at first the more I looked at it the more it made sense, almost everything in the rules about the Scythed Chariots fits in with the use of the captives.

I like the Tartar list as it stands, however I think the exclusion of the captives is a bit of an oversight. So from this a couple of questions:
Would anyone have a problem with me using Scythed Chariot rules for bases that clearly look like a bunch peasants with a couple of Mongol Captors?
Would anyone have a problem with the addition of the Captives as optional troops in the Tartar list for local/tournament games?
What are the chances of captives being included in future Mongol lists either as revisions or separate parts of the Mongol expansion?

Regards,
The Bishop.

You already have the Tatar list? I thought it was not out until the end of the month? I know my copy has not arrived yet!

[nikgaukroger]

To be honest I thought the use of captives was to absorb enemy missiles. Human shields with no fighting quality at all ...

[Scrumpy]

If you are going to allow these troop types in where do you draw the line ?

Flaming pigs should be included as the anti-elephant weapon they were meant to be, Khmer artillery elephants and you go down the dbm path of having weird troop types.

I suppose there is no objection to having local rules to support peoples tastes for the bizarre, but the rules themselves should be kept as simple as they are for my money.

Cheers

[daleivan]

To be honest I thought the use of captives was to absorb enemy missiles. Human shields with no fighting quality at all ...

That's my take on it as well. Frankly, rating such captives as a mob, poor, undrilled seems overly generous

I also agree with Scrumpy that its best to avoid including odd-ball things like flaming pigs, khmer artillery elephants and the like.

Cheers,

Dale

[durrati]

That's my take on it as well. Frankly, rating such captives as a mob, poor, undrilled seems overly generous

I also agree with Scrumpy that its best to avoid including odd-ball things like flaming pigs, khmer artillery elephants and the like.

Cheers,

Dale

I would also agree. However, as the rule writers have included rules for scythe chariots it seems that there has been a design decision to include rare oddball weapons of dubious effectivness. If you are going to cross this line might as well do it properly and come up witth some rules to let the Mongols have the captured civilians, or the Romans the flaming bacon.

[Redpossum]

Ugh, you start down that road and next thing somebody is going to want a "War Rhino", because they saw it in 300.

[carlos]

Difference between the captives and the Khmer artillery elephants, is that the former actually existed. I can just imagine how boring the Timurid list is going to be compared to DBM: no captives, no stampeding cattle. Just a bunch of ghulams and random foot. *Yawn*

[DataBob]

cool , War Rhinos !!

"reaches for Greenstuff and sculpting tools"

now which armies used them ?

[nikgaukroger]

Difference between the captives and the Khmer artillery elephants, is that the former actually existed.

There is good pictoral evidence of artillery on the backs of elephants for Khmer, one at least, IIRC, can be interpreted as it being shot ...

[philqw78]

I have a cunning answer. Use the PoW as moving Fortifications, except:

Deploy upto 15MU on table
They only protect against missile fire
They can only move directly forwards, 3 MU per move, no double moves
Any troops can move through them in any direction, dropping a cohesion level themselves and destroying the the hostages.

Simple, until you add the rest of the rules

[nikgaukroger]

I must admit to not being sure what to do about the hostage screen. If they are Mob they will be used as filler rather than a missile absorbing screen which is contra to history.

Phil's suggestion works but needs special rules and so is a no go.

Maybe they are a campaign stratagem and, therefore, will not appear in the lists. Maybe we'll think of something ...

[grahambriggs]

You could perhaps have them as mob but with a BG size of 12. Would then cost 24 points so not the cheapest filler. Could be deployed 12 wide as a screen or charged into the enemy to pull them out of position?

[carlos]

Make them as Poor, undrilled, unprotected Mob w/ no combat capabilities that don't count for AP. Come in BGs sized 8-12, total 0-24. There, done. Then add a bunch of random foot and ghulams and it's done. *yawn*

[nikgaukroger]

Need to see somebody about that narcolepsy ...

[Redpossum]

cool , War Rhinos !!

"reaches for Greenstuff and sculpting tools"

now which armies used them ?

Dude, the Spartans! Didn't you see the movie?

And no need to sculpt the whole thing, there's probably one for sale somewhere among all the animals that go with the "Sword & Flame" style colonial wars miniatures lines. Failing that, I'm pretty sure I can find one among a bag of plastic animals at the local Toys-R-Us.

Now, your greenstuff would be useful to add the armor...

OK, Irregular Miniatures makes a 15mm Rhinoceros, and Eureka has them in stock under part number "IRR-HornHorn18", although there is, sadly, no picture.

But we'd probably better stop now before someone takes us seriously and bans us both from the forums

[OhReally]

I thought the hostages were more used against forts and in sieges?

[nikgaukroger]

I think you're correct.

[durrati]

Phil's suggestion works but needs special rules and so is a no go.

Why a no go? Scythe Chariots, a rare and unusual troop type had to have special rules and have them, why not others?