Thanks for the info Frostwulf.

Let me ask for a bit of clarification on a few points.

Would it be accurate to characterize the use of the double rider as a cultural norm among native Germanic cavalry? Should the Ridoharjoz in fact be represented this way...technical limitations not withstanding?

There seems to be conflicting accounts. Were these two men sitting in tandem atop the horse? Or, was there a single rider alongside which ran another? Tacitus' account seem to suggest the latter. In the case of Caesar we have the Sweboz specifically mentioned as frequently dismounting from their horses to engage the enemy, conspicuously absent is the mentioning of a second rider or galloper. However I have a feeling I'm missing a source...in fact I know I am.

Also, what are your thoughts on the evolution of arms and armament among the German cavalry as frontier tribes increasingly found themselves rendering military service to Gallic and Roman employers? More specifically, within the EB time frame would it be accurate to characterize the standard Germanic cavalry in use as lightly equipped? Or, do you see a trend toward, or is there evidence to suggest the existence of more heavily armored (i.e. expensive) Germanic cavalry?


Quote Originally Posted by Zero1
Well, I'm back after having been gone for a very long time 'looong story, don't need to bore the EB team and others with details' but I'm here to lend my weight to this particular issue.

Now, my knowledge of the early Germanic peoples is modest in comparison to many here but I daresay I have something of a working knowledge, that said, I think it would be fair to give the Sweboz a significant bump in calvary and I more or less echo Frostwulf's sentiments/arguments on this point.

I also think it makes sense for the Sweboz as a faction to have a rather large berth of sorts between their units I.E. well armored heavies and not so well armored lights with little in between. I feel this would best echo how the Germanic peoples tended to fight and operate I.E. with a large number of light infantry/calvary/general soldiery supporting a smaller 'core' armored noble elite. If one examines how the Germanic peoples of later ages fought and how that tradition influenced the later medieval periods they more or less followed that model, and I see no reason why earlier 'proto' Germanic peoples would deviate much from that, indeed, there is even evidence supporting just an assumption.

I bring this up also because it makes sense from a gameplay standpoint, having a sort of tribal and forested faction centered around northern Europe with a force consisting of a large number of unarmored but nevertheless skilled and reliable light infantry supporting a crack force of heavily armed/armored nobility would balance out the region nicely with the more 'balanced' infantry-centric Romans to the south and less extreme in their unit division Celtic counterparts to the west.

To address this issue I would suggest leaving such units as the Gastiz and Sweboz general as-is, maybe even make them a little stronger, BUT, making them FAR FAR FAR more expensive to reflect how rare and valuable they were as well as their noble status, as well as adding a similarly armed/armored calvary compartment which is equally expensive. Personally, I'd like to see this as more of something you have to 'build up' to and less of a 'reform', it seems to me that the development of these forces could be better represented through old-fashioned building upgrades, time and effort rather then with a hard capped 'reform date' as such.

Just two cents from a long time fan coming back from a far too long absence =D.
I'll respectfully disagree, a reform suits the situation better I should think. If a sudden pronounced increase in material wealth and the concentration of that wealth in the hands of an aristocracy was made possible by increased contact with Celtic neighbors then we are talking about sudden external stimuli and not a natural progression of the earlier social customs.

The egalitarian nature of early Germanic society and the rudimentary nature of Germanic agricultural practice made it very unlikely that an affluent land owning aristocracy could have emerged and amassed the personal wealth required to field such infantry as the current Gastiz and Herthoz without this external stimuli. It's only after this stimuli that we begin to find signs of the immergence of a priveleged aristocracy, and then only in those tribes that occupied the frontier with Celtic lands.

The "pre-reform" nature of germanic society would also suggest less of a gap between the haves and have nots in terms of how warriors were equipped on the battlefield. Small but significant differences probably abounded, such as sword and horse ownership. But I doubt differences in armament were that severe. Just my opinion though!


P.s.
welcome back!