Quantcast
[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

Due to resource constraints, /g/ and /tg/ will no longer be archived or available. Other archivers continue to archive these boards.Become a Patron!

/tg/ - Traditional Games


View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
[ERROR] No.16974572 [Reply] [Original] [4plebs] [archived.moe]

Alright, /tg/. We do knights vs. Samurai all the time. That shit's got real, real old.

But you know what we haven't done? Light cavalry battles.

Like all Americans, I love the idea of Asians and Europeans fighting to the death. So that's the subject of this thread.

A 16th century Hungarian Hussar versus a 16th century Ming Dynasty cavalryman.

Both are light cavalry from the early gunpowder era. They can be assumed to have common equipment from their time.

Who wins, /tg/? Is it the west, or is it the east?

>> No.16974588

I've got to give this one to the Ming. Their 'light cavalry' just meant that they were fucking cataphracts with super heavy armor for their horses. The cavalrymen still wore lamellear suits of armor which gives them an unbeatable edge over the Europeans even with inferior horses.

>> No.16974637

I honestly think it would depend solely on who's flanking who.

>> No.16974641

"The armour used at this time was mostly lamellar. A simple leather lamellar cuirass was common for infantry, often with iron plates added on the chest in the pattern of a brassiere :huh: For cavalry, either leather or iron lamellar could be worn, including a full suit for the horse and an apron and shoulder guards for the rider. The horse would also often have an iron chanfron (face protection). The cavalry armour, especially the iron type, was very effective protection against both swords and arrows, and was only vulnerable to a hard spear/lance thrust or a stroke of the zhanmajian to the horse's unprotected legs."

"Over the course of the 16th century hussars in Hungary had become heavier in character: they had abandoned wooden shields and adopted plate metal body armour. When Stefan Bathory, a Transylvanian-Hungarian prince, was elected king of Poland in 1576 he reorganised the Polish-Lithuanian hussars of his Royal Guard along Hungarian lines, making them a heavy formation, equipped with a long lance as their main weapon. By the reign of King Stefan Batory the hussars had replaced medieval-style lancers in the Polish-Lithuanian army, and they now formed the bulk of the Polish cavalry. By the 1590s most Polish-Lithuanian hussar units had been reformed along the same 'heavy' Hungarian model. These Polish 'heavy' hussars were known in their homeland as husaria."

Early 1600's Hussars would probably be in-between.

Meaning that they'd have light metal armor. So the edge isn't really in favor of the Ming.

>> No.16974689

The filthy gaijin will never defeat the honoroable samura -

oh wait.

Wrong thread.

>> No.16974708

>>16974572
Stat them up for Riddle of Steel.
Fight them to the death.
It's the only way to be sure.

>> No.16974767

>>16974708
Someone do this.

I don't have the game books.

>> No.16974803

What, even though I fucking scanned them for /tg/? Look on /rs/. See also http://knight.burrowowl.net/doku.php

Son, I am disappoint.

>> No.16974809

Being a Hussar gives you wings!

>> No.16974936

I m not the Hungarian LARPfag but as someone from Hungary I can tell you hussars did not look like that.
Traditional Hussars in Hungary were strictly light cavalry with no wings or armor those were from Poland. They were mostly raiders and quick strike forces.

Also the while origin of the word is lost nobody knows where it came from, here it is spelled "huszár" in hungarian. >>According to another theory, the word is derived from the Hungarian word húsz "twenty", suggesting that hussar regiments were originally composed of twenty men. Or the term huszár probably signified 'one in twenty' as selected for service by ballot."

>> No.16974941

Here's something i think you might enjoy fa/tg/uys a hussard regimen charging should look like that.
It probably doesn't help OP's question but looks rad

>> No.16974950

>>16974941
forgot the video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-1HBbqcOqVI

>> No.16975093

I wish to train in horse back archery, swordplay and lancework. I have a horse, a bow and many, many sticks. What do?

>> No.16975217

I can only help with the sword-play side of things. What is your location, anon?

Also, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cne_caMZNpc

>> No.16975231

>>16975217
England, Essex

>> No.16975250

It's a shame there's not many reasily available sources on Chinese military in that period.

>> No.16975257

According to what I heard, Hussars were originally Serbian nobles who fled their country after the Nth horrible disaster befell it, and served as mercenary cavalry in nearby countries.

Fact: Serbs have never won anything ever, except that one time in Scottland.

My money's on the Ming.

>> No.16975283

>>16974708
RIDDLE OF STEEL GENERAL?

I MISS THOSE THREADS.

>> No.16975326

>>16975283
I'm in, but damn if the last few didn't go poorly. Without Galt nothing moves. I've been waiting for him forever, but it's like waiting for Godot.

>> No.16975338

>>16975231
Congradulations, you're in the South East, which is Historical European Martial Arts central for the UK.

http://www.communitywalk.com/european_martial_arts_group_finder_the_british_isles/map/942724

Looking at the SE/London Groups:
The Exiles - I think a fairly old school group. Haven't had much contact with them, but I get the impression that they're pretty scholarly/emphasise the 'Art' side of things. Study Fiore (c. 1410s Italian stuff)
London Longsword Academy/Boar's Tooth Fight School - Run by Dave Rawlings, who is a very good Martial Artist, but sometimes not the world's best instructor/coach. He's taken a business like approach to HEMA, and his classes can be a bit pricey even if they are more professional. He mostly does German Longsword, Rapier Stuff and I.33 Sword and Buckler.
European Historical Combat Guild - I don't know too much about them. Generally get the feeling that they emphasise the 'Historical' and the 'Art' at the expense of the 'Martial' and 'fucking fighting someone'.
Schola Gladiatoria - Quite a large group, and pretty prominant in the UK scene thanks to Matt Easton. Personally, I think that whether or not you'll enjoy it will boil down to whether or not you enjoy Matt's company. He's probably the best for Victorian Sabre stuff, but I tend to dislike his Fiore interpretations.
Schola Saint George - Never heard of them. Looks like an offshoot of one of those Yank groups that are all about chivalry and shit. Not my cup of tea.
London Sword and Dagger Club - A nice bunch of guys, but I have no idea what their classes are like (I've heard mixed things). However, there is a pretty hardcore group of Liechtenauer's KdF-ers in there.

Another one of the Anons might be able to give you more info. Will prod.

>> No.16975351

>>16975326
Well, you were all absent/silent cunts when I tried to run one. At least the brvtal d20 version got a little bit of playing in.

>> No.16975403

Hussars. Better horses, almost guaranteed to have better armor and I don't doubt that you'd get more hussars in a given battle, compared to the size of the army.

>> No.16975436

>>16975351
I must not've been there. I'd drink fire and piss axe handles before I stayed quiet during a riddle of steel thread.

>> No.16975524

>>16975338
Thank you very much. Sadly it seems London and Norwich are the nearest places, which means a sizeable commute. Still, it is good information to have.

>> No.16975564

No worries. Sorry I can't help you any further - the only HEMA-ist I know from Essex recently moved to London.
If you're looking at a more-than-an-hour commute, you might want to look at setting up a study group/getting some likeminded guys together at some point.

>> No.16975596

>>16975564
This is what I was thinking. I know a few people interested in this stuff and through the power of the internet I have access to so many resources. Kit is going to be so horrendously ghetto though, why must nice things be so expensive?

>> No.16975717

>>16975596
I can only speak for longsword, but you'll need:
Head protection. I'd SRSLY recommend a fencing mask. Check ebay, but failing that Leon Paul cheapo mask is £60 - I'd recommend http://www.leonpaul.com/acatalog/Standard_Sabre_Masks.html
Hand protection - for nylons/synthetics the minimum I can recommend is a pair of £40 lacrosse gloves. http://www.uklacrosse.com/adrenaline-x-gloves-i2295.html For shinai, fuck it, I started sparring with a pair of rigger's gloves. For steel, if you want to fight all out, you're looking at a £200 pair of Ensifer gloves really.
Weapons - Shinai are cheap and crap, but hey. You can at least add weights and crossguards to them. Nothing's more fun than sitting outside melting down some old lead piping and sand-casting it into shinai weights. Nylons/Synthetics have their flaws, but they're more sword like and come in at about £50. http://www.theknightshop.co.uk/catalog/synthetic-waster-sparring-swords-complete-sparring-swords-c-8
57_563_573_836.html?osCsid=220a14e244c1a5bd98c692ade976d236 For steel, the cheap and not very cheerful are Hanwei Federschwerts, although they have an unfortunate habit of snapping into sharp points. They come in at £110 - http://www.theknightshop.co.uk/catalog/practical-federschwert-p-1271.html?osCsid=220a14e244c1a5bd98c
692ade976d236

So you're looking at £150 a head to get to the stage where you can spar.

Yes, that's expensive. Imagine how bad it was fifteen years ago. Fucking hell, I've done this hobby on a shoe-string. It's possible.

Also, register at and read the Schola Gladiatoria and the HEMA Alliance forums.

Any other questions before I go sleep? Otherwise you can contact me at [email protected]

>> No.16975727

Why do we even have these threads? This board always opts for the Western option and in absence of one, they'll go for the most Western-sounding option.

>> No.16975740

>>16975727
The conclusion i had in this thread was that Ming cavalry was superior

>> No.16975743

>>16975727
If you disagree with something someone says, speak up.

>> No.16975749

Because people don't want news, they want olds.

And because they tend to attract the fech/tg/uys and grognards.

>timblo becauſe
Do you want me to type that in as an s or an f CAPTCHA? My keyboard lacks a long s button...

>> No.16975754

>>16975596
>Kit is going to be so horrendously ghetto though, why must nice things be so expensive?

'cos it takes an age to make the good stuff.

I make swords for the WMA'ers and reenactors, and they 'aint cheap... but I can look at burger flippers in MacDonald's and say "oh, I wish I made that much per hour".

that said, for basic WMA/HEMA/Trollhoffering you can get a decent 1600n mask for £120, a pair of gloves for a tenner, and a box for a fiver from a cricket store.

and making custom swords for people, my advice is, dont get a custom sword. its not worth it as a first purchase.

once you know exactly what you want, and how you want it to handle, then's the time to start thinking about getting a custom weapon. Getting a custom weapon as your first purchase will be a waste in the long run, unless you end up with a weapon that by pure chance turns out to really suit your style of movement.

>> No.16975779

>>16975717
>I'd SRSLY recommend a fencing mask. Check ebay,

note that a lot of the 1600N fencing masks from sellers in singapore or the likes on ebay are mislabelled, and are often 350 or 800N FIE rated masks.

Personally, I would say that the mask is the one thing you should get from a trustworthy dealer, 'cos its too easy to get a crappy one and be ripped off.

>> No.16975796

>>16975727
Don't be an idiot. /tg/'s Eurocentrism does not color its every action and opinion, only some. And much of it has sense behind it.

For example, for the last eight hundred fucking years, Hungary has bred the best warhorses in the world.
NO, France, I don't want to hear it. I do not. I have seen the feathering, it is all very nice, but it is not a warhorse. That is a cart puller.

>> No.16975839

>>16975796
Oh it is on, mon ami.

>> No.16975840

>>16975754
Guten Morgen mein Cutleranon.
I'm getting a steel at long last. You can probably guess who from, since it's a federschwert. Purpose is drilling and eventually sparring Liechtenauer longsword, 1389-1520.
It'll have some customisability, although the details are down to the smith.

I'm thinking cord wrapped grip, pear pommel, 102 cm blade, 25 cm guard, 32 cm hilt with a pear pommel. PoB would be 8-11 cm out and up to the smith, total weight 1.3-1.4 kg.

Does that strike you as a sensible sword for a pretty tall guy?

>> No.16975881

Of course, the Newton rating only applies to the bib, not to the mesh of the mask itself, which is pretty much up to the makers until you reach Olympic competition standard.

And again, the broken main-gauche through an Olympic fencing jacket and plastron incident.

Then again, my mask's LP competition level, but after six years of being used several times a week I wouldn't want to go fight at Swordfish in it, even if it is 1600N

Equally though, I hate the aesthetic of the Yankee fencing-barbute things.

>> No.16975919

>>16975881

Yeppers - I'd point out the Knight Shop do an adequate mask for £50. The N rating on the bib isn't relevant to WMA risks, imhotep. We're not worried about a snapped epee becoming a smallsword, we're more worried about blunt trauma collapsing the windpipe or a larger jagged edge.

>> No.16975964

>>16975257
>Serbs have never won anything ever

Tennis. They've got a lot of tennis players for some reason.

>> No.16975973

>>16975840
>I'm getting a steel at long last. You can probably guess who from, since it's a federschwert

Ensifer/Jan Chodkiewicz? Hanwei? Albion? Arms and Armour, Minneapolis? Me?

Sure there's someone else making them now too...

I keep trying to persuade Armourclass to make one, but they mostly go "eh? this looks weird." when I suggest 'em.

wouldnt reccommend cord wrapping, its ugly as sin and comes off too easily. go for a nice plain calf leather skived thin, glued, and bound while it dries so its really pressed in tight. it'll last longer, and feel better.
Blade's a wee bit long, I'd say 97cm is a good figure for anyone that's not over 1m 90cm/6 foot 2ish. longer hilts tend more towards later styles, shorter for earlier.
cross might be slightly long, I prefer shorter since I sometimes do grappling, and then they're easy to catch on things and cause injury.

main thing for a feder is to get the points of flex right, so it'll bend safely, and not wobble in the bind. Ever seen the gen 1 hanwei feders? they're comical.

>> No.16975995

>>16975727
The general consensus was that the Hussars have much better horses, but the Ming have generally better armor for the period.

Both are light cavalry with a strong emphasis on mobility, and used fairly similar equipment.

That being said, no one has compared the weapons yet.

What weapons did each side use regularly?

>> No.16976005

>>16975964
It doesn't help that the olympic record looks as bad as Barbados's, since the huge bulk of the country's competitions were done as part of Yugoslavia.

>> No.16976017

>>16975995
My guess would be lances and sabers, with the sometimes-addition of a bow. Armament-wise, the two look very similar.

>> No.16976059

Peter Regenyei. Leather grips are 10 Euroschmucks more, but I have no idea how well he does them.

I'm 6ft 2, and the guys I know have all gone for 102 cm blades, although most are about the same height. I might drop it down to 100 cm then, but I'm worried about giving them a 5cm reach advantage. Sports fencer that I am.

His waiting time is 'till April, but then again I haven't heard a single bad thing about his products. Also, Eastern European wages mean it's cheap as an Armour Class.

>> No.16976065

http://www.chinahistoryforum.com/index.php?showtopic=224

This site has some posters who talk about it. Don't know about their credibility, but whatever.

This is a lance-type weapon I've heard the Ming cavalry used.

>"6. Another weapon that evolved to counter cavalry charges was the horse-chopping blade (zhanmajian). The zhanmajian was (according to one theory) a large single-edged blade with a shaft as long as the blade itself, similar to the Japanese nagamaki, and was probably wielded by specialised elite units. In the Tang dynasty it came to be known as the modao, and in the Song dynasty it was revived in a modified form known as the zhanmadao. I have found that in 10th-century Byzantine Empire armies (around the same time as the beginning of the Song dynasty), a similar formation evolved to counter armoured cavalry: "troops wielding thick-stocked, long-necked javelins or pikes, whose task it was to face and turn back enemy heavy cavalry attacks." 10% of a Byzantine infantry unit (100 out of 1,000) would consist of such troops, with the other 90% comprising 400 ordinary spearmen, 300 archers, and 200 light infantry."

I'll look up the swords.

>> No.16976115

A pic of Peter's leather grip.

>> No.16976130

I don't know if they'd have used halberds, but the Ji, Chinese Halberd, looks like this and would have been around at the time.

The Dao sword is a term that covers a lot. The Jian is another sword style commonly used. However, I don't think either was a cavalry sword.

Ah, wait. Wikipedia has this to say:

>"Ming Dynasty (1368 - 1644)

>1) In early Ming, the process of making twist-core Damascus steel is transmitted to the Chinese sword-making world, most likely from Indonesia and the Southern Philippines (thanks to Philip Tom's hypothesis)

>2) Use of clay in differential heat-treatment is not as common as in the Tang, smiths seem to prefer the non-clay method

>3) Mass importation of Japanese swords (Wodao) to China in the early Ming

>4) Revival in the use of the ridged cross-section (a specific type known as shinogi-zukuri to the Japanese) in Chinese dao, spurred by exposure to Japanese swords used by the pirates. General Qi Jiguang introduces the Changdao for use in the Ming Imperial Army, a saber 2 meters long overall that is modelled after the nodachi used by the Japanese pirates

>5) By the middle-to-late Ming, technical quality of Chinese dao made for northern border soldiers has been compromised by inferior workmanship, resulting in these dao being of poor quality. General Qi Jiguang specifies higher standards to bring quality up"

In general, Chinese blades seem to have been of good quality and, unlike the Japanese, their weapons saw about as much variation as European ones.

>> No.16976134

>>16976059
>but I'm worried about giving them a 5cm reach advantage. Sports fencer that I am.

unless you're spending your time constatly doing strikes in ort, I find that a faster shorter weapon is actually a bigger advantage than the reach.

when I'm using wasters, for instance, most of the other people in my group use 95-105cm blade hand and a halves... I use a 78cm with a hand and a half grip, and its so much quicker in winden and bind that I'm usually considered the guy who's the greatest threat in sparring contests, as it can get in and under the other guy to land and ward before they can place onto me.

>> No.16976174

http://www.chinahistoryforum.com/index.php?/topic/13165-ming-dynasty-military-garb-and-weapons/

According to this, the most common cavalry sword was the yanmao dao, or Goose-Quill Saber. Primarily a slashing weapon, it was not spectacular for piercing attacks.

>> No.16976188

>>16975717

>Recommending a Sabre mask

Why? If you're not actually fencing electric sabre then you're just wasting money. An Epee mask would be the way to go.

And seconding the notion of getting a mask from a reputable dealer. On eBay, who knows. Maybe their mask failed a check at a tourney and is unsafe to use. And unsafe mask can = death or serious injury

>> No.16976211

>>16975995
>>16976017
I can only speak of the Hungarian hussar. Depending on the period, these fuckers were either seriously armed (light lance+pistols and/or speacialized swords to deal with armor after the initial charge+saber) with a somewhat ragtag armor (early hussars traditionally armored themselves, which means some less fortunate schmuck would wear chain, while some more wealthy ones would invest in half plate or heavier), or a very light force with saber+pistol combo with almost no armor by the late 19th century.

16th century would be more on the medium armored with heavy weaponry type I think.

>> No.16976215

>>16976134
I am, if only because my technique sucks and nylons introduce artifacts...

>> No.16976222

So putting this together, the Ming-Dynasty era Chinese typically used a polearm with a long blade, the Yanmao Dao sword, and wore light lacquered leather or metal armor.

I have no idea how the Hussars were equipped, though. I suppose a traditional cavalry saber of some sort, which would be lighter than the Yanmao Dao. Don't know about polearms or armor. They have superior horses.

And of course I don't know about ranged weapons for either one.

On the face of it it would seem that the Ming have the edge, though.

>> No.16976240

>>16976211
Wasn't the 16th century the era of the arquebus?

Their pistols would probably not be a game breaker. But then, the Ming cavalry probably had bows. They trained to fight mongols and other horse archers, too.

What did their lances look like? What kind of swords?

>> No.16976268

>>16976188
Sabre masks have a thicker rubber rim around the join between the convex face and the rim, which makes cuts less jarring.
I use an epee one, but then again I'm a poorfag.

Also, I want a http://gesellschaft-lichtenawers.eu/tsc/en/home/news/55.html more than your mum wants pie.

>> No.16976271

[spoilersdon'tworkon/tg/]This guy isn't Chinese.[/spoilersdon'tworkon/tg/]

>> No.16976294

>> No.16976309

http://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php?topic=56604.0

>The Ming employed a vast number of weird and wondrous firearms and siege weapons. Perhaps the most important fire-arm was the fire lance--essentially a spear packed in a disposable launch tube and fired from the shoulder, like a modern anti-tank weapon. It filled broadly the same role as the latter, being able to penetrate just about any armour, and, according to the claims of some contemporary Chinese sources, several soldiers in one go (take this with a barrow-load of salt, however). Fire arrows (rocket-propelled arrows), various types of gonnes (including repeating ones), hand grenades, large rocket-missiles and a miscelleany of light and very light cannons were also common. Grapeshot was known and often fired from light, tripod-mounted guns that could be carried around by a two-man team. It should be noted that the Ming usually made use of iron bullets. Compared to lead projectiles, this made for smaller holes in people but superior armour-piercing abilities. In addition to killing people, the firearms were also extremely scary, especially for the Sout-East Asian elephants that had long been the bane of Chinese armies.

FUCKING MISSILE LAUNCHERS.

I give this to the Ming.

>> No.16976352

>>16974950
I say, that was a fascinating watch. Thanks for posting it.

>> No.16976365

>History on TaleWorlds Forums
>6,000 post thread on whether or not Dual Wielding should be in a medieval vidya.
mfw

>> No.16976389

>>16976240
From what I remember, lances were somewhat shorter than heavy lances and often had flags attached which looks cool and is somewhat confusing. Their swords were made for stabbing to get through chain/mail with sometimes with weird (triangular, half moon) cross sections. And of course the saber. Pretty standard, functional design for cutting down infantry.

Their pistols were mostly not great, but they were meant to be used in close to melee ranges to get through armor, and from those ranges it functioned. They also had time to reload between cavalry charges which is pretty nice. The wealthier ones carried 3-4 of these and instead of reloading just pulled another one.

I'd also like to mention that we have been always pretty damn proud of both our horses and horsemanship. May be just pathos though. Still, most cavalry recruits had been handling horses their whole damn life, but I'll go ahead and assume that the chinese did the same.

>> No.16976395

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMzZ3CPgMrg

A Chinese firearm being tested.

>> No.16976443

>>16976389
As far as I know, the Chinese during this period had caste-based military, but saw their military as dirt. They conscripted soldiers from specific families in times of need.

During other periods they had volunteer armies or general conscription, but this period would have had people who trained for most of their life with their mounts.

Horses were considered extremely valuable at the time. They probably would have bee fairly similar to the horses the mongols used, whatever those were like.

And they were experienced at fighting horse archers.

>> No.16976532

>>16976443
I'm pretty sure by 16th century horse archers had been out of style for a while in Europe. By late 16th most everyone was using guns.

Hussars were heavy to medium cavalry. Actually, 16th century seems to be the period where they lose most of their armor and morph into a more light skirmish type of thing due to the Ottoman influence.

>> No.16976603

>>16976532
The early 16th century was the era of the Tercio, the arquebus and pike.

Cavalrymen had pistols, but they were one shot poor-accuracy affairs.

Mostly, it still came down to melee. Cavalry mostly was used for raids.

>> No.16976647

>>16976603
We are in agreement then. That's hussars. Early 16th century ones had more armor and heavy weapons, late 16th century hussars wore almost no armor, and were armed with saber+pistols, both used in melee.

>> No.16976745

By Ming the horses can't be that small. They had already met Mongols and Turks, and they did have regions for breeding horses.

>> No.16976766

>>16976647
So where does this really put us in our comparison of soldiers?

The Ming had consistently heavier armor, though still in the light cavalry category. They used long-bladed polearms, and the yandao saber. They used firearms, in a wide variety. Most likely you'd see the one shot fire lance.

The Hungarian Hussar had light to no armor, superior horses, and pistols. They used cavalry sabers and lighter lances with a smaller head. Their pistols would have probably been superior to Chinese firearms by the late 16th century, but equal or inferior early on.

Between the two I think the Yandao would be a superior blade, and the chinese polearms would be superior. Armor wise, I think the chinese again take it.

However, horse wise the hussars are better, and firearms wise I'd give it to them overall.

At range I'd say Hussars more often than not. In close, Ming cavalryman all the way.

>> No.16976870

>>16976766
I'm in agreement. I'd say it probably comes down to who can outmanouver the other one, as both forces seem to be equally good against each other in a charge. That is, as long as they stick to light cavalry tactics and don't stay to fight it out, in which case the Ming probably have the edge, but that'd imply the hussars standing still, which probably just won't happen. In this case, with their lighter armor and equipment, and probably a bit better horses, the hussars seem to have a slight upper hand.

Now, from how this actually seemed to work (based on illustrations) the two forces would try to simultaneously outmanouver and charge each other, resulting in a kind of spinning "S", like a whirlpool of horses and gore, occasionally breaking away to regroup, until one gets the upper hand and drives the other away.

>> No.16976889

>>16976870
Ha. Well, a giant whirlpool of men and horses and weapons is a pretty awesome outcome, when you think about it.

Any objections? Rabid Chinese Nationalists? Angry hungarians?

>> No.16979498

How about this one then - Byzantine Kataphracts vs. Polish Winged Hussars?

>> No.16979515

rolled 16 = 16

>>16979498
Hussars due to their tech and tactics. Cat's were shock calvary against infantry, Hussars were light enough to go toe-to-toe with Calvary.

>> No.16979638

Bumping due to interest and originality. Perhaps night time /tg/ will be better able to discuss it.

>> No.16980812

Of course, I guess it partly depends on the terrain etc. But these things always do.

Personally, I think that the fact that Polish hussars were famed for working well in group maneuvers would play a big part.

>> No.16982149

And a polite bump, because I think that this was an interesting thread.

>>
Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Name
E-mail
Subject
Comment
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.
Captcha
Action