
Originally Posted by
econ21
One thing I could not get my head around in MTW was the difference between knights, men-at-arms and sergeants. In reality, was there such a distinction?
I'm guessing knights were distinguished primarily by social status, rather than military equipment per se. They would tend to have top of the line stuff, I suppose, but I'd reckon the warrior retainers of a top noble might be comparably equipped (and even skiled?) to a low status knight.
Men-at-arms in the historical references I've read tends to be a catch-all to include well equipped (ie armoured for melee) soldiers, including knights.
Sergeants - well, I just don't know what they are. In MTW, they seem to be fighters lacking the state-of-art armour and mounts.
I'm not sure how much it all matters for MTW2, although I have a hunch that in reality the knights and other men-at-arms would fight inter-mingled, rather than in separate units. And that men-at-arms should pretty much all have mounts (and be dismountable), as should knights proper. I guess all this is just a sacrifice we make for getting a more varied unit roster (and dealing with the problem of programming the AI to cope with dismountable units).
Bookmarks