Edwardian Conquest English c.1270-c.1330- for Armati

[Flaminpig0]

I  have created an Edwardian Conquest English c.1270-c.1330 list for Armati that I hope people will find useful or at least interesting. Armati is my preferred set of ancient/medieval rules but I often find myself dissatisfied with the army lists, the Age of Chivalry English list being a case in point.

[Mark G]

Did you consider making the maa an alternate to one of the other mounted bonus troops, rather than just adding more choices?

The new troop type is a difficulty, but then so are lb in general

[aligern]

Didn't Edward have Irish Infantry as well?
R

[Flaminpig0]

Didn't Edward have Irish Infantry as well?
R

I think he did but in Armati terms I am not sure that they would be any different from the 5/1/1 English Infantry- some of the Si could be considered Irish.

[Flaminpig0]

Did you consider making the maa an alternate to one of the other mounted bonus troops, rather than just adding more choices?

Originally yes but I thought it ws easier to present troop types separately- my actual view is that the MAA shouldn't exist at all so their inclusion is a sop to those who have appropriate figures and wish to use them.

The new troop type is a difficulty, but then so are lb in general

It is a a compromise as by giving the army LB as a troop type makes it functionally identical to 100 years War English and I  am really unconvinced by the longbow Si in the A2 list. My more radical option was to drop the to being bow armed on the basis that Lb is far too effective in Armati and Edward 1 era longbow men were not as  good as their later cousins; they would still be effective  against  other British Isles Armies.

[Erpingham]

My more radical option was to drop the to being bow armed on the basis that Lb is far too effective in Armati and Edward 1 era longbow men were not as  good as their later cousins; they would still be effective  against  other British Isles Armies.

Don't know much about Armati but this would I think be my preference on the basis of history.  While what we would call longbows do seem to have existed at the time, only the minority of archers who were professional archers used them.  Arrow supply per archer was much lower too, suggesting different actical usage.

[Mark G]

You can predicate the number of on and maa chosen from the bonus as being no greater than 2 .
And say if any one maa is taken then both must be.

(or hobikars if you prefer)

[Flaminpig0]

The new troop type is a difficulty, but then so are lb in general

One problem I see is that they can evade which I am not sure fits in with their battlefield role.

[aligern]

The Irish are not FT , they are mire lije LHI with spear and knife.
R

[Flaminpig0]

The Irish are not FT , they are mire lije LHI with spear and knife.
R

I haven't found any info on numbers and type for Irish foot - which of of course isn't the same as saying they didn't exist.

There is an option for LHI spear  to represent Welsh allied and Marcher foot in the Welsh campaigns one, could assume some of them are Irish if one wished.

[Erpingham]

The Irish are not FT , they are mire lije LHI with spear and knife.
R

I haven't found any info on numbers and type for Irish foot - which of of course isn't the same as saying they didn't exist.

Morris Welsh Wars gives a maximum of 361 Irish infantry for the Caerlaverock campaign in 1300.  This is from a combined infantry force of 9,093. 

[Flaminpig0]

The Irish are not FT , they are mire lije LHI with spear and knife.
R

I haven't found any info on numbers and type for Irish foot - which of of course isn't the same as saying they didn't exist.

Morris Welsh Wars gives a maximum of 361 Irish infantry for the Caerlaverock campaign in 1300.  This is from a combined infantry force of 9,093.

I wonder if Irish in this context means troops provided by the Anglo-Irish Lords  than the  possibly wilder and woollier Irish proper?

[Erpingham]

I wonder if Irish in this context means troops provided by the Anglo-Irish Lords  than the  possibly wilder and woollier Irish proper?

A good question.  They were provided by Anglo-Irish lords but whether they were "wild and woolly" I don't think we can tell. 

[Mick Hession]

The contingents supplied to the Scottish wars by Anglo-Irish lords consisted of men-at-arms (with increasing numbers of hobilars from 1296) while infantry were mostly archers from their "routes" or retinues. Native Irish, if present, were in relatively small numbers IIRC.

The largest native Irish contingent that served overseas was 3,000 men under Felim O'Connor that served in Henry III's Welsh campaign in 1245, so before the period under discussion. They missed the sharp end of the campaign, having stopped off to plunder Anglesey en route, but accompanied the main army for its conclusion.   

Cheers
Mick

[Flaminpig0]

The contingents supplied to the Scottish wars by Anglo-Irish lords consisted of men-at-arms (with increasing numbers of hobilars from 1296) while infantry were mostly archers from their "routes" or retinues. Native Irish, if present, were in relatively small numbers IIRC.

The largest native Irish contingent that served overseas was 3,000 men under Felim O'Connor that served in Henry III's Welsh campaign in 1245, so before the period under discussion. They missed the sharp end of the campaign, having stopped off to plunder Anglesey en route, but accompanied the main army for its conclusion.   

Cheers
Mick

That is really useful info as I hope to create an Armati list for Henry III in the not to distant future- my hope is that it will provide me with an excuse to field the  large number of unused crossbow figures I own.

I trust you realise that my description of  the 'proper' Irish as 'wild and woolly' is not meant as a pejorative. It is merely a recognition of their independent yet productive life choice combined with an admiration for their unconventional yet stylish and eminently practical attire.