Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 86

Thread: Faction Thread 9: Brettonnia

  1. #1

    Default Faction Thread 9: Brettonnia

    placeholder
    Careless Orc Costs Lives!

  2. #2
    Warhammer: Total War Team Member Krazysigmarite's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    114

    Default Re: Faction Thread 9: Brettonnia

    One T, two Ns
    Bretonnia

  3. #3
    RnJ PR Officer Member Eufarius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    331

    Default Re: Faction Thread 9: Brettonnia

    lol.


  4. #4

    Default Re : Re: Faction Thread 9: Brettonnia

    one unit proposition:
    Bretonnian Grail Pilgrims

  5. #5

    Default Re: Faction Thread 9: Brettonnia

    has this faction been started on yet or are you all busy on others?
    For Middenheim & The Empire!

  6. #6

    Default Re: Faction Thread 9: Brettonnia

    I think they have made the basic spearmen unit.

    I dont know why they stopped pruduction.

  7. #7
    Annoying Warhammer know-it-all Member DrZoidberg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    225

    Default Re: Faction Thread 9: Brettonnia

    Quote Originally Posted by A Norseman
    I think they have made the basic spearmen unit.

    I dont know why they stopped pruduction.
    But do they have any fancy pants units? Isn't it only down to simple re-skinning of banners and tabbards? Griffons are hardly in the pipeline are they? If so this faction should be the least to worry about?
    Sorry you must have been boring. -Dr Zoidberg

  8. #8
    is not a senior Member Meneldil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    France
    Posts
    3,074

    Default Re : Re: Faction Thread 9: Brettonnia

    Quote Originally Posted by DrZoidberg
    But do they have any fancy pants units? Isn't it only down to simple re-skinning of banners and tabbards? Griffons are hardly in the pipeline are they? If so this faction should be the least to worry about?
    Bwian stated that there wouldn't be simple re-skinning of vanilla MTW units in WTW.
    Furthermore, bretonnian armies don't really look like your average MTW army.

  9. #9

    Default Re: Faction Thread 9: Brettonnia

    I know that there is a men at arms unit done(not sure if 100% done).It should be somewhere in the first eye candy thread.

  10. #10
    Warhammer: Total War Team Member Krazysigmarite's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    114

    Default Re: Faction Thread 9: Brettonnia

    I posted a WIP of men-at-arms a while back, but paused production on Bretonnia due to the difficulty of making a variety of heraldry/colours without looking silly. Essentially, you can't make knights go to the correct horse, with the correct shield, with the correct colours - all the pieces are randomized.

  11. #11

    Default Re : Re: Faction Thread 9: Brettonnia

    there not a lot of units for this faction;how can we play with this bretonian army(only knight and poor infantry).It is very interesting to plays with this faction?
    there is not so much strategy w ith it!!!!!

  12. #12

    Default Re: Faction Thread 9: Brettonnia

    im sure when they are done they will have archers a variety of knights, Pegasus knights! and also trebaches (however you spell it)
    so they will be interesting to play
    For Middenheim & The Empire!

  13. #13
    Member Member Jonlissla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    43

    Default Re: Faction Thread 9: Brettonnia

    Quote Originally Posted by Enthes
    Pegasus knights!
    IIRC, flying units could NOT be added in the game.

    However, I'm also kinda worried about the Bretonnian unit list. They don't have excactly that many troops. Sure, they will problably own the battlefield with their knights, but I'm kinda curious about sieges instead. A bunch of Men-At-Arms climbing the ladders just to face a whole line of Black Orks will problably rout them, so sieges should be difficult for the Brets.

    One solution would be to add some kind of regional units for them as well. Or make their infantry very upgradable, OR, he could add dismounted knights (yes, they exists). That should take care of the infantry part, but it wouldn't make Bretonnia as the "Cavalry-Only" faction.
    "Life is pain, get over it."

  14. #14
    King of the Golden Hall Member Landwalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    273

    Default Re: Faction Thread 9: Brettonnia

    Bretonnia has access to siege equipment, in particular the trebuchet, and I don't think it would be unreasonable for them to have access to smaller-scale basic siege equipment as well (namely catapults). They could also employ sapping points, assuming this is possible. Between the two, I think Bretonnia has plenty of options for getting past the walls in a siege assault.

    The biggest problem I would foresee for Bretonnia in sieges has nothing to do with the walls, but with their roster. Urban pathfinding and maneuverability in Medieval II is abominable, and, as you pointed out, Bretonnia doesn't have the most impressive infantry roster and may have to rely on their cavalry. If the enemy has even a few spears, however, this can be disastrous.

    As you suggested, I think the best solution would be to include dismounted versions of the Bretonnian knights (Dismounted Knights of the Realm, Dismounted Questing Knights, Dismounted Grail Knights) to give the Bretonnians a bit of an infantry oomph for those situations when running around on horses might not be the most advisable course of action.

    Cheers.
    "ALLIANCE, n. In international politics, the union of two thieves who have their hands so deeply inserted in each other's pocket that they cannot separately plunder a third."

    "ARMY, n. A class of non-producers who defend the nation by devouring everything likely to tempt an enemy to invade."
    --- Ambrose Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary

  15. #15

    Default Re: Faction Thread 9: Brettonnia

    Or they will just have to starve out enemy settlements.

    I don't think Bretonnians should have dismounted knights. In Warhammer, there are no dismounted knights either, and by adding dismounted knights, bretonnians will lose their all-cavalry aura. They can blast like 6 holes in a wall before attacking, so you will need a lot of spears to stop them from charging through that.

    Fireblade

  16. #16
    Member Member Jonlissla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    43

    Default Re: Faction Thread 9: Brettonnia

    Quote Originally Posted by fireblade
    In Warhammer, there are no dismounted knights either, and by adding dismounted knights, bretonnians will lose their all-cavalry aura.that.
    That's one of the problems, but it's also perhaps one of the solutions. You could add dismounted knights, but perhaps at a very small amount. So you can only recruit, like, 1 every turn.
    OR, perhaps add some units that doesn't really exists in the Bretonnian roster, like Landwalker said.
    OR, you could leave it the way it is now (bad infantry, badass cavalry), as the Bretonnians made a vow to protect, not invade. GW (or the maker of the Brets) said it themselves; if the Bretonnians would forget their vows to their land, they would quickly stomp the other races, and prove to be a very powerful threat, IF they weren't so driven by honour, that is.
    "Life is pain, get over it."

  17. #17
    King of the Golden Hall Member Landwalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    273

    Default Re: Faction Thread 9: Brettonnia

    Quote Originally Posted by fireblade
    They can blast like 6 holes in a wall before attacking, so you will need a lot of spears to stop them from charging through that.
    Not so. Because of the layout of cities, you can simply plug the streets instead of the breeches. Because of the horrific urban pathfinding, cavalry have a hard time at best (and are utterly incapable, at worst) of charging down city streets, making them fodder for a decent spear unit barring the way to the town center.

    I don't think that, just because Games Workshop doesn't offer rules/models for unhorsed or dismounted cavalry, that it should be completely neglected. There has to be some small amount of common sense employed, and in the absence of a Medieval-I-style mechanic where you can dismount your cavalry during the deployment stage, that means that there should be at least some availability of dismounted knights in recruitment. As Jonlissa pointed out, an easy way to limit this would be to set the cap at one for a given foot knight type (much in the way the current game has caps of 3-4 for a lot of units, so no more than that is ever available at one time), and to give them a relatively long "recharge" rate (say, five turns).

    I don't know much about what typifies the table-top game, but Warhammer has never given me the impression (as an outsider to the game, at least) of being very focused on siege battles. It seems intended for field battles, and in this regard it would make sense for the Bretonnians to only use cavalry (and for only cavalry to be produced for them by GW). However, you'll have a hard time convincing me that they are so foolish and stubborn as to refuse dismounting during an assault when it would be to their advantage--and if the enemy can effectively wall off all avenues to the central square and stand, impervious to cavalry, that's exactly when it would be advantageous to go it on foot.

    I suppose the end result of all this ranting is this: If you look at the miniatures for Bretonnia, and discount all of the leaders and unit characters, as well as the pegasus knights, Bretonnia only has eight units (of which two are the Grail Reliquae and the Trebuchet). The average faction in Medieval II has something like 20+. I don't think that, just because a unit isn't produced by Games Workshop, it should be omitted in the face of reason if it would make sense for a faction to have it, nor should Bwian et al. feel wholly constrained by the fairly limited rosters typical of tabletop wargaming factions.

    Cheers.
    "ALLIANCE, n. In international politics, the union of two thieves who have their hands so deeply inserted in each other's pocket that they cannot separately plunder a third."

    "ARMY, n. A class of non-producers who defend the nation by devouring everything likely to tempt an enemy to invade."
    --- Ambrose Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary

  18. #18
    RnJ PR Officer Member Eufarius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    331

    Default Re: Faction Thread 9: Brettonnia

    Well mercenaries seems the only way to satiate this debate. I guess...


  19. #19
    Annoying Warhammer know-it-all Member DrZoidberg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    225

    Default Re: Faction Thread 9: Brettonnia

    Quote Originally Posted by Eufarius
    Well mercenaries seems the only way to satiate this debate. I guess...
    Bretonnia doesn't employ mercenaries. It's a special feature with them.
    Sorry you must have been boring. -Dr Zoidberg

  20. #20
    RnJ PR Officer Member Eufarius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    331

    Default Re: Faction Thread 9: Brettonnia

    Sorry about that I completely forgot, but then how do you solve the dilemma?


  21. #21
    King of the Golden Hall Member Landwalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    273

    Default Re: Faction Thread 9: Brettonnia

    I don't think mercenaries would really solve it anyway, as the point about limited tabletop rosters vs. mod-game rosters stands for all factions. The dwarves have 11 units, of which four are siege engines. The Empire has ten (of which two are siege engines and one is a tank). The Vampire Counts have twelve. The Skaven have thirteen (including all their warp artillery stuff). The Orcs have by far the most I can find, at 22 (four siege engines).

    The point is, if a faction in the tabletop game has such a limited number of unit types as Bretonnia, the Dwarves, the Empire, etc., I don't see any reason that the roster can't be expanded using a little creativity and common sense.

    Cheers.
    "ALLIANCE, n. In international politics, the union of two thieves who have their hands so deeply inserted in each other's pocket that they cannot separately plunder a third."

    "ARMY, n. A class of non-producers who defend the nation by devouring everything likely to tempt an enemy to invade."
    --- Ambrose Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary

  22. #22
    RnJ PR Officer Member Eufarius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    331

    Default Re: Faction Thread 9: Brettonnia

    I guess, well see what Bwian has to say. My opinion is to give them some more foot units (made up or actual ) so as to balance out the sieges( not just Knights attacking), but on the field Knights ALL THE WAY!!!


  23. #23

    Default Re: Faction Thread 9: Brettonnia

    Cruel as it may seem, to attack castles and cities, Bretonnian counts do sent their men at arms/ peasants forth to take the walls, even promising to knight them if they survive.(if they do however, they never get knighted)

    I think the knights are just too arrogant to ever dismount. Their horse is what separates them from peasants, after all.

    In warhammer, there are not as many sieges as in MTW2. And if their is a siege, the attacker always outnumbers the defender by 2:1.
    In MTW2 it's the same, how many times has the ai succeeded in capturing a fully garissoned city/castle? They only take them if they attack you where your defences aren't as strong.

    I think we can compare the bretonnians to the mongols, mostly cavalry. the mongols are far stronger on the field than when attacking a city, it's simply their strength/weakness.

    I would not like to see dismounted bretonnian knights, they just don't fit in my point of view. If there was to come another unit, then it could, maybe (don't like that much either) some improved men at arms for some reason (assigned to guard a grail chapel or something) and make them really rare.

    Fireblade

  24. #24
    Member Member Taranaich's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    The bleak moors of Scotland
    Posts
    491

    Default Re: Faction Thread 9: Brettonnia

    Why not split the Men-at-Arms into different divisions based on their weaponry? There'd be the base Men-at-Arms unit, but researching and buildings could offer more specialized variations to fill out the roster:

    Men-at-Arms
    Typical Man-at-Arms unit, armed with simple spears and shields. Jack-of-all-trades but master of none.
    Spearmen-at-Arms
    Men-at-Arms trained in the use of defensive and anti-cavalry tactics, with good defense but little attack value except against cavalry. Armed with spears and shields.
    Swordsmen-at-Arms
    Men-at-Arms specializing with swords, trained in flanking and assaulting formations. Armed with swords and shields.
    Heavy Men-at-Arms
    Men-at-Arms that specialize against heavily armoured foes. Armed with axes, maces, flails, hammers and shields.
    Halberdiers-at-Arms
    Men-at-Arms equipped with halberds and the bonuses and versatility the weapon offers, but without shields.
    Veteran Men-at-Arms
    Those Men-at-Arms who survive assaults but don't receive the knighthoods they deserve, very strong assault infantry. Armed with two-handed weapons like greatswords, warhammers, mauls and the like, but without shields.

    And there's an extra five units for Bretonnia without having to make up units, since they are all choices available for Men-at-Arms on the table top game.

    "Know, O Prince, that between the years when the oceans drank Atlantis and the gleaming cities, and the years of the rise of the Sons of Aryas, there was an age undreamed of, when shining kingdoms lay spread across the world, like blue mantles beneath the stars...
    Is fhearr fheuchainn na bhith san duil.

  25. #25
    RnJ PR Officer Member Eufarius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    331

    Default Re: Faction Thread 9: Brettonnia

    Good Lord Taranaich is a genius!


  26. #26

    Default Re: Faction Thread 9: Brettonnia

    Quote Originally Posted by Eufarius
    Taranaich is a genius!
    Couldn't agree more, a brilliant solution to a complex problem.

    THey shouldn't have a high morale though (except for the veterans, who believe they are close to being knighted, poor fellows)

    Fireblade

  27. #27
    RnJ PR Officer Member Eufarius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    331

    Default Re: Faction Thread 9: Brettonnia

    Quote Originally Posted by fireblade
    Couldn't agree more, a brilliant solution to a complex problem.

    THey shouldn't have a high morale though (except for the veterans, who believe they are close to being
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    knighted, poor fellows)


    Fireblade
    Too bad they won't !!!!!.. rite on to better matters, yes the veterans should have higher morale, the men-at-arms should have something near the M2TW's peasants morale( you know they themselves being peasants).
    The thing is that the specialists should have higher morale simply because they are specialists and have had better training in their weapon than the normal men-at-arms.


  28. #28
    Member Member Taranaich's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    The bleak moors of Scotland
    Posts
    491

    Default Re: Faction Thread 9: Brettonnia

    Well, if I'm such a genius, Eufarius, why didn't you vote for me? *shakes fist and grumbles angrily* I kid, I kid, I voted for Alletun too.

    I'd say the bonuses wouldn't be too pronounced, but enough that a sufficient number of them could be useful in situations, and offer more leeway for the player. For example, a unit of Heavy men-at-arms would not be able to defeat a unit of heavily-armoured professional soldiers on their own, but they'd offer much more damage than a regular men-at-arms unit before they route or are relieved by reinforcements. Similarly, Spearmen-at-Arms would hold a line a bit longer than regulars, swordsmen would have slightly higher fighting skill, and the like.

    Also, having looked at the models I noticed that the halberd figures have shields, so they'd still function like normal halberdiers, but use them as spears, or maybe in the same way as the Hallbruders in Kingdoms. There are also some halberdiers without shields here.

    I should add that the weapon choices I looked at were from Mordheim rules, so I'm not sure if they're supported by the main game: however, I have definitely seen miniatures with swords, maces, spears and halberds:


    Swords, spears and halberds


    Two men-at-arms with maces in the centre

    Since the Medieval engine can't have more than one animation for its units, it would actually be pragmatic to split up the men-at-arms into those using spear, sword and mace animations. I'm sure a few variants can be added (axes and flails for Heavies, bills, guisarmes and voulges for halberdiers etc)

    An alternative to "Veteran Men-at-Arms" would be a unit of Yeoman Wardens: normally a commander unit, since Total War boosts the numbers far beyond the tabletop game perhaps small units of them could be fielded. They'd therefore function as a quarter-way stage between knights and peasants.

    "Know, O Prince, that between the years when the oceans drank Atlantis and the gleaming cities, and the years of the rise of the Sons of Aryas, there was an age undreamed of, when shining kingdoms lay spread across the world, like blue mantles beneath the stars...
    Is fhearr fheuchainn na bhith san duil.

  29. #29
    RnJ PR Officer Member Eufarius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    331

    Default Re: Faction Thread 9: Brettonnia

    That's what I said...just WAy more detailed.
    btw I did vote for you.


  30. #30
    Member Member Taranaich's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    The bleak moors of Scotland
    Posts
    491

    Default Re: Faction Thread 9: Brettonnia

    Really? Oh, cheers big man!

    Another thought: While dismounted Bretonnian knights might be somewhat uncharacteristic, what about Yeomans?



    As they hold such privileged positions as head gaolers and militia sergeants, to become a yeoman is the highest rank to which a peasant can aspire. It takes many years of dedicated service for a man-at-arms to be so promoted, and even then only an act of bravery on the battlefield will guarantee his ascension. Though no peasant may ride the steeds of the Bretonnian lords, favoured yeomen are permitted to ride to battle on draught horses. Such troops will often scout ahead of the main army and keep the knights informed of enemy movements - a dangerous task, and one which earns no honour, so it is a task that the nobility believe is best performed by peasants.

    All men-at-arms dream of one day becoming a yeoman, possibly because of the folk stories that tell of yeomen being raised to knighthood after performing a great service or some brave deed. The truth is that it is almost unheard of for a peasant to be elevated in this way - the nobility have no wish to sully their ranks with low-born commoners.

    A unit of Mounted Yeomen may be included in your Bretonnian army as a Special choice.
    Maybe Yeomans could be a special infantry choice, perhaps as spearmen. Maybe even Yeoman Swordsmen, Heavy Yeomen, Yeoman Halberdiers etc... but I'm getting ahead of myself.

    "Know, O Prince, that between the years when the oceans drank Atlantis and the gleaming cities, and the years of the rise of the Sons of Aryas, there was an age undreamed of, when shining kingdoms lay spread across the world, like blue mantles beneath the stars...
    Is fhearr fheuchainn na bhith san duil.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO