
Originally Posted by
Tim_H
In ancient times (maybe even into modern times with insurgencies...), many armies, especially those of the early Roman republic and definitely the Celtic and Germanic tribes, were not standing armies of the type the TW vanillas model.
A nation or confederacy or warlord would recruit beginning in the early spring, do what he sought to do over the summer, and his men would disperse in the fall or winter (or begin deserting him if he prolonged his campaigning).
Whereas, TW follows the traditional board game model--you "buy" "units", and the units remain "forever" until they've been depleted through combat, unit-mergers, or manual disbandment.
In other words, TW states recruit permanent standing armies, which didn't exist through most of the world (the histories I've read the most about, feudal England, early republican Rome, and early "medieval" Japan, describe war campaigning that was very dependent on the seasons, on the reliability of vassals and allies, of soldiers getting good payouts from plunder, and on soldiers and subordinate leaders remaining confident that they had something to gain. And, after all of that, the majority of soldiers still expected to return home for the harvest, and the warlord likely could not have funded them through the winter anyway.
I suspect that modeling this via a TW game would be hard--and possibly make the game less fun (though the vanilla Rome: Age of the Barbarians expansion did an adequate job modelling migrant armies with no home country). I mean, seeing your army dissolve every September or melt away as your campaign stretched out or after you lost too many battles would tie players' hands mightily. However... TW's mercenary recruitment engine... isn't so incompatible with this game play style--provided the mercenaries (in this case, seasonal musters) disbanded automatically in winter).
I dunno how playable such a feature would be. It does pique my interest, though, because in general vanilla TW gives you the impression that ancient and medieval warlords had standing armies, with nearly absolute loyalty, at their disposal.
[EDITED to be more concise]
Bookmarks