RE: Heortling combat

From: bernuetz.oliver_at_...
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 10:36:55 -0400


Mikko replied to my message :  

> IMO (off the cuff)

> Hunters are archers and skirmishers, depending on how they are deployed.

> The fyrd is lightly armored heavy infantry (standing in shieldwalls /
> squares / charging en masse)
 

> The Warriors / Huscarls / Weaponthanes (and some carls) are heavily
> equipped warriors. Elite Heavy Infantry when leading the fyrd.

> The Orlanthi warriors are clad in chainmail (and propably some lamellar
> for limbs and metal reinforced helmets) and wielding swords/axes and
> shields, so I think one can't call them lightly equipped by any
> standards.
 

Afraid I'm permanently tainted with WRG terminology. That's where I'm getting the terms heavy, medium and light from as well as the light added to heavy and medium. The light in the case of light medium or light heavy refers to the fact that they don't fight in close formation and can move better on rough ground than close order infantry, it's not a reference to their armour.  

I wouldn't agree that the fyrd by itself would count as heavy infantry. They don't have the training or the armour for that classification level. I can't see them charging much either unless they get stiffened by the warriors or their side is winning. Now add the warriors to the front line and I can see them as heavies.  

Unfortunately as is all too obvious everyone seems to be using slightly different military/war games rules terminology.  

Oliver  

      -Adept

Yahoo! Groups Sponsor  

           <http://us.a1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/space.gif> Say you love them
with a DOMAIN NAME!

www.  

<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=201621.1431180.3015684.2/D=egroupmail/S=17 00057147:N/A=602159/rand=755927087>

<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .

Powered by hypermail