Must be something wrong with me. Lol I’m looking at this from a neutral viewpoint, or at least I’m trying to. My original views are far too idealistic yet yours are far too self serving for a successful nation to rise.
I cannot play favourites nor can I needlessly kill those weaker than myself. So instead of the hero or the villain route I think I’m going with the Kingdom. My kingdom is all that matters. Those who oppose it will fall, if I need to marry into an enemy house just to get a cut of their land, I will. Sacrifice a regiment to kill a king.
Oh and that’s not entirely true. You can quite easily defeat those places. Start targeting civilian settlements instead of looking for a military and you’ll eventually draw the soldiers out. Only way to win a war like that is to wipe out the native population and move your own people there.
If you have too much slaves/peasants, it’s a way of population control. Turning them into a militia. Hahahahah…
True you lose potential farmers, craftstmen, holymen and other professions. But if you lack resources for proper soldiers, it is a way to go. Especially if it’s an emergency situation such as invasion of an enemy (or worst, a coalition).
And I disagree with Ragriz a little about the archers. Learning how to shoot short bows will still take long. If you’re going to use militia, it means the situation is dire. So not enough time to train. If you want to quickly build an army from peasants, arm them with crossbows instead.
Cheap materials, easy to make ammunition, and easy enough to train with, it’s a good knight-killer.
A group of pikemen in box formation supported by crossbowmen can stop heavy knight charges.
As for the Colosseum, maybe there is already an existing stadium. Like a facility left by a former empire. And you have a choice to make use of it or not.
It will boost your citizen’s morale by providing entertainment. Though it can also increase your enemies’ hate of you (since you’re making the prisoners fight). Also, the potential slave revolts.
Ah but crossbows are far more complex to make. I’m talking short bows. Essentially just a stick and a string that you can run from place to place with and fire at enemy soldiers very rapidly. Crossbows are slower albeit they pack a punch. And no it does not take very long to teach someone how to use a short bow. Give them half a day and you have a group of semi competent skirmishers. Crossbows able to punch through knights armour usually require you to hold position if you’re to reload and fire. Light crossbows can be rearmed during movement but they lack the one thing that makes them better.
If you’re in a bad situation where you need these troops, you’re going to need them to be able to fire and then fall back or to fire very very quickly. If every peasant fires three shots and only hits once then you’ve gotten more than what you’ve paid for. If you’ve invested in crossbows then you better hope at least half of those peasants have received extra training to make sure they’re able to line up a target, lead them and then hit them in a weak point in their armour. All the training you need a peasant to undergo is how to knock an arrow, pull back the string and fire in the general direction of the enemy. Accuracy isn’t very important, filling the air with an unnecessary amount of arrows on the other hand , is.
Crossbows are excellent if you have a good standing army and want a strong knight killing force. They aren’t good if you need a mobile militia garrison.
Also if you just start sending slaves or peasantry into a meat grinder how long do you think it will be until someone turns around and says,“The invaders can’t be worse than this guy.”
Why do you need a mobile militia in the first place anyway? They’re not regular soldiers. **They’re irregulars.**You don’t march with them and bring them into your invasions.
A militia is for emergency situation like when there’s an invading force in your lands.
If that is so, then you are on defense. Which means your goal is to hold your lands. Which again means the terrain is to your advantage.Which again means you don’t need mobile militia.
Find a good chokepoint, put your spearmen in there, and support them with crossbowmen. Or find a good terrain, put your spearmen in the middle, support them with crossbowmen and have the cavalry in the wings and in the rear in case someone wants to flank you.
Why would you want to run around in your own backyard? Let the enemy come to you instead.
And no they’re not. Unless you are talking about the ‘repeating crossbows/ Chu-Ko-Nu.’
A crossbow in the early to middle Medieval period is essentially just a small bow, with a trigger and attached horizontally to a wooden platform. Hence the name, 'crossbow.’ One shot, reload, One shot, reload. Rinse and repeat.
You’re correct that its strength is in its stopping power and not with accuracy. It’s other weakness is its slower firing rate and reloading time. Hence why crossbowmen should be support and not a main unit.
A group of pikemen in box formation, supported by crossbowmen against charging knights, you don’t need accuracy. Just tell the crossbowmen to keep firing at the horses and let the others do the rest.
So what you’re suggesting is to either A hide in your castle until your enemy marches forth with its war machines to tear down your walls. Also any archer or crossbowman they have will far out shoot your own. If you put a novice gunman up against a veteran there’s a very good chance the novice will lose. So you’ll be sieged in your castle with no where to run to and without the ability to harry the enemy supply train that would’ve made a wonderful target.
Or you plan on holding a natural defensive position such as a river crossing. Now at first this would be fine. You have your crossbows laying down heavy fire on the troops crossing the bridge and your infantry are holding the line. Now this is where the lack of mobility comes into play. The enemy decides that the bridge is too costly and begins to divert their forces. Left, right, and another assault on your bridge. Your crossbows won’t be able to fire at all of them and you can’t divert too many pikes to engage the enemy forces without weakening your hold on the bridge. Thus an enemy unit would cut around your flank and into your vulnerable crossbows.
Far more complex in comparison to a crossbow. A stick with a string is far less complicated than the crossbow which must undergo quite a bit of work before it’s complete. How can you tell me this,
Is easier to manufacture than this?
The crossbow requires a forge for the metal and its steel bolts,a carpenter for the wood, and a Fletcher for the bolts.
A short bow requires a carpenter and a Fletcher. For tasks much easier to replicate. The arrow head is the only thing that would even require a smiths attention.
So what happens if you’re not fighting cav or you don’t have the room to form a box formation. Both a box formation and a cavalry threat aren’t a part of your original plan if you’re trying to defend a natural defensive position.
Right now the story states that we do not have an extremely large army so if anyone attacks we’ll be outnumbered. If that’s the case then we’ll need special mobile tactics. We can’t turtle up and hope that they go away nor can we face an enemy head on as you suggest. The battlefield would have to be a very fluid one else we’ll be outpaced and our soldiers would be decimated.
Crossbows and the box formation has its place but not when you’re weak. Nor when your crossbows and skirmishers aren’t well trained. You would have to make the enemy chase you into a trap. Have them over extend their lines. If anything demonstrates what we’ll have to be fighting like then it is the Battle of Guagemela. Wherein Alexander the Great lead a much smaller force against around 200 thousand Persian soldiers. He won the day in the end by using his skirmishers and his pikemen to tear apart the Persian army.
It’s a river crossing, you have the advantage in terrain. Someone tries to cross, you shoot them. Someone has crossed? Push them back with spears.Someone tries to flank you, send your cavalry. Of course no plan is perfect, and every battlefield changes. You have to react with the situation. But that’s the idea.
If the enemy decides to go another route, you find another defensive position. You have the advantage in terrain, make use of them.
In regards to not having the ability to harry their supply train, why do you suspect that? I have a cavalry. I know the terrain. I know the routes they will have to pass through.
You use your unit’s strength to their advantage.
Spearmen for attack and defense. Crossbowmen for support. Cavalry for harassing and protecting the flanks and the rears.
My point was, why do you want to make spearmen and crossbowmen run around? They’re not meant to. You have the cavalry for that.
You mentioned Alexander the Great, it’s similar to his tactics. Foot companions (spearmen) as backbone of the army. Peltast for support (crossbowmen) and then Companion Cavalry for mobility. Use them for what they’re meant to be used.
I’m saying they’re not going to be useful because you don’t have enough men to actually hold any battle line. Which is why you’ll need to have mobile tactics and units. Your plan of battle is meant for large-scale combat where you have enough of a frontline to successfully hold in an engagement.
How will you make use of the terrain when once you’re engaged? you’re stuck. There’s no falling back without severe casualties.
You forget that the peltast were slingers,short bowmen and javelin hurlers. They can run and fight. Crossbows cannot do that. They can fire once then have to stop and reload which would take almost triple the time it took to knock an arrow and fire.
Which is why I’m saying that you’d rather not want crossbows as of now. Especially if they’re made of the peasantry. They’re expensive,they take longer to train someone with and they’re slow to reload, and their range is terrible. If you need a quick militia capable of assisting the main army repel an attack short bows are how you’re going to do it.
Yeah I was thinking of longbow men but in reality they’re in the same boat as crossbowmen ,except they’re more accurate ,so short is militia does seem like a good alternative .
If I could I would love to have longbowmen trained for my main army. They’re just so bloody useful. Especially if enemy general’s are attempting the crossbow tactic. They would decimate the enemy with their superior range.
As an added note, let’s not forget this is not merely a simple factor of warfare. This is Imortallia! Fear the inventors and their glass canisters, you know, the one with a strange liquid, divider, and swirly fumes inside? The one that erupts in flames when shattered? I’ll need a name for it…
Then there are the war beasts…
I hope to create tiers of weapons or armor for the game. Unique materials and all…
Higher grade weapon able to cut through the usual iron swords should put a…change into warfare. Though, can your forces afford it?
Note… this is still in the idea phase. An untested idea at that. (aka don’t get your hopes up)
And you can have Arcanian steel. Basically, ‘God Steel’ in an olden, forgotten language.
It will be like Damascus steel, only stronger and doesn’t rust. It will be your version of Valyrian blades.
It fits since you’re the creator of the story. You’re the god.
All that soldiers stuff is funny, but still could I cheat please? While all of them are being heroes with his armies I would use spies, traitors, courtesans and poison. And diplomacy, of course. I am a rogue , while all of you are soldiers. Also long bows are the best, you just need training for centuries to create something awesome, give them a horse and they will conquest the world. However, not everyone could be Ingland or Genghis Khan. I want to be Switzerland, so just a few years of amazing army until people discover how amazing is having a banker paradise on neutral ground. You want to stealing your neighborhood keep your gold save here. You need a loan , come here. or a clock . Or chocolate
I love how you think, milady. An army has its use, but I too prefer dancing with the ladies, mingling with nobles and suffocating my enemies while they sleep.
Long bows are awesome yes. Genghis Khan and his horde has proven it. But there’s a reason why crossbows are the fathers of muskets (repeating crossbow), and also one of the reasons why knights became obsolete. To be able to train mere peasants into a killing force, with less time compared to teaching men to shoot from a horseback which takes almost a lifetime.
Nobunaga Oda is a testament to the power of peasantry and mass units.
Yeah, but each country has it spirit, and no everyone could be Japan. If you tried do the same with my own country peasants Nobu would end slaughter by an angry peasant mob.
You sir, are a genius.
