Spezielle Regelsystem > Warhammer Ancient Battles und WHW

Mycenaean/Trojan swordsmen?

(1/2) > >>

Axebreaker:
In my studies of this civilization I\'ve noticed the CW supplement left out a complete class of warrior that seemed to play an important role on the battlefield.The class they left out was an elite swordsman that operated as light infantry and is not to be confused with Javelinmen who were missile troops,while the swordsmen were for close combat only.
These swordsmen were armed with long swords and daggers.They carried no shields,but did wear boar tusk helmets and leather kilts.They operated on the flanks and did take heavy infantry on when needed and were very effective vs a disorganized heavy infantry where they could get in among them and create a deadly havoc.They could also drive off enemy skirmishers due to their agility and speed.
They seemed to have been held in high regard for their willingness to take on heavy infantry without shields and were viewed as one step down from a chariot warrior in status.
I\'m very curious why this was over looked.
Any opinions on my view would be welcomed. :)

Cheers
Christopher

Wellington:

--- Zitat ---The class they left out was an elite swordsman that operated as light infantry and is not to be confused with Javelinmen who were missile troops,while the swordsmen were for close combat only.
These swordsmen were armed with long swords and daggers.They carried no shields,but did wear boar tusk helmets and leather kilts.They operated on the flanks and did take heavy infantry on when needed and were very effective vs a disorganized heavy infantry where they could get in among them and create a deadly havoc.They could also drive off enemy skirmishers due to their agility and speed.
They seemed to have been held in high regard for their willingness to take on heavy infantry without shields and were viewed as one step down from a chariot warrior in status.

--- Ende Zitat ---
From where do you draw your informations? Its very detailed for a time where no written sources are existing and only a few pictures or did I misss something?

Cheers

Bernhard

Axebreaker:
Osprey\'s \"The Mycenaeans\" c. 1650 -1100 BC by Nicolas Grguric.Also,bear in mind he didn\'t write it down as a simple footnote,but went into some compelling detail into the matter.

I just looked at the publishing date of 2005 and so in Nigel\'s defense this book was not published yet and perhaps this might have had an influence if he had access to it at the time of writing the CW supplement.

Hmm.I need to add this to my other posting.

I also wish to make absolutely clear that they replace no troop type,but rather are in addition to known troop types.

Cheers
Christopher

Wellington:
I just studied the chapter about this type of light infantry, but the conclusions are not very convincing for me. Ok, he might be right that this type of sword armoured light infantry existed. And its true that light infantry is very useful on the flanks. But using this picural example for \"creating\" a kind of elite infantry which was high regarded is not convincing. For me its more likely that it a mythical scene, remind me to this ninja-style fighting Archilles from the movie :D

Always keep in mind that even a Osprey writer could be taken away by his fantasy.

Axebreaker:
That\'s not how he defined them and he did make sense.He said they were effective vs a disorganized heavy infantry formation or a fleeing heavy infantry and guarding the flanks and this is all very probable and not fantasy like at all.I found his conclusions to make sense and not fantasy like.Heavy infantry was effective when they were fully formed and shoulder to shoulder,but were vulnerable if opened up due to the encumbrance of their large shields.This very vulnerability lead to the lightening up of the heavy infantry in later periods as described in later chapters in the book.

So,I recommend reading the book from cover to cover(or re reading) before saying a writer is dipping into fantasy in which I believe he in no way did so. ;)If your still not convinced it just goes to show two people can read the same thing and arrive at different conclusions. :)

Navigation

[0] Themen-Index

[#] Nächste Seite