zompist bboard

I was wondering if you had any information on the types of weapons used in Almea. It seems to be a very turbulent places with frequent wars, and I was wondering was they fought them with.

I thought I'd give this question a nudge, just in case some info was forthcoming...

Yanah wrote:I was wondering if you had any information on the types of weapons used in Almea. It seems to be a very turbulent places with frequent wars, and I was wondering was they fought them with.

Interesting; I wouldn't consider Almean history to be any more turbulent or war-torn than Earthly history -- the history of Europe, say, is easily as conflict-ridden as that of Erelae -- although it does have its fair share. (This is more prominent, I think, in the Historical Atlas of Skouras, which focuses on the wars and counter-wars among the Skourene city-states.) In some ways, it may even be better; Mark has said that he didn't have the heart to incorporate some of the worse atrocities of Earthly history into Almea (although the Munkhashi occupation of Eretald may be an exception.)

Since Almean history covers several millenia, weapons and warfare have naturally changed over time, and vary from place to place due to various factors (level of technology, climate, lifestyle (sedentary vs. nomadic), etc.) Some clues are visible in the Historial Atlas of Almea, which mentions the evolution of various tactics (the use of chariots and cavalry, the invention of the stirrup, the use of explosives, etc.). Mark writes the following:

The Historical Atlas of Almea wrote:Land warfare is still based on the sword and the horse; battle at sea, on the sail-driven wooden man of war (the plated vessels are still rare and have not been tested in battle). Gunpowder is known, but firing technology remains crude and dangerous. Cannon are now routinely used in seige warfare, but the few guns that exist are bulky, awkward to load, and almost as dangerous to the shooter as to the target.

(The current Verdurian vocabulary does include a few words related to warfare; they can be found here and here, in the Thematic Dictionary. I haven't looked for equivalents in the other languages.)

While it's not mentioned, I presume that land warfare also includes the use of mounted or unmounted archers, as well as polearms and similar weapons, and that the use of cannon apparently extends to ship-mounted cannon (although I'm not positive about this). As noted, firearm technology, especially hand-held weapons, is less advanced than it would be in most equivalent Earthly societies (closer to that of 14th-15th century Europe, say, while other aspects of Verduria are more reminiscent of the 17th-18th century); Mark noted once that this was partly due to the fact that Verduria has not fought any major wars in recent times, and that the situation would probably change by the time the eventual conflict with Dhekhnam came. (Extra-textually, I suspect that the lack of guns in Verduria makes it easier to set "classic" fantasy battles and swordfights there. )

One question that I do have involves the use of body armor; in European history, the rise of firearms contributed over time to the eventual disappearance of metal armor in warfare. Since guns are largely absent in Almea (and cannon are used more for siege than for mobile warfare), once might expect metal body armor (mail or plate) to be more in evidence in war, but I don't have a good sense of whether this is the case.
[EDIT: Such limited information as exists would seem to indicate that it is.]

Mark? Any comments?

p@,
Glenn

I'm curious as to how the Army is organized.

There are some old threads that may help shed some light on this:

http://www.spinnoff.com/zbb/viewtopic.php?t=20 (yeah, that's the 20th topic ever posted on this board. By constrast, this one is the 16,467th.)

http://www.spinnoff.com/zbb/viewtopic.php?t=336 (where Glenn quotes exactly the same source )

http://www.spinnoff.com/zbb/viewtopic.php?t=2688

http://www.spinnoff.com/zbb/viewtopic.php?t=1518

Lots of good information is provided above or in the referenced threads. For army organization, also see the Thematic Dictionary:

http://www.zompist.com/thematic.htm#38

My understanding is that European full plate armor was more a reaction to early guns than to swordfighting; Verdurian armor would probably be chain mail with added plates for vulnerable areas (chest, arms, legs).

However, I'm considering beefing up the role of gunpowder on modern Almea. I think the King's Guard will be equipped with muskets, for instance.

Rory wrote:http://www.spinnoff.com/zbb/viewtopic.php?t=20 (yeah, that's the 20th topic ever posted on this board. By constrast, this one is the 16,467th.)

Moreover, the thread Rory cites above was in fact a continuation of one of the last threads on the old Virtual Verduria Message Board (under the subject title "Uytai!").

http://www.spinnoff.com/zbb/viewtopic.php?t=336 (where Glenn quotes exactly the same source )

Yep; I'm good at that...

zompist wrote:My understanding is that European full plate armor was more a reaction to early guns than to swordfighting; Verdurian armor would probably be chain mail with added plates for vulnerable areas (chest, arms, legs).

That makes sense; in fact, while contemplating the use of armor in Almea, I found some info that reiterates your comments on the use of plate armor as a response to the rise of early firearms.

However, I'm considering beefing up the role of gunpowder on modern Almea. I think the King's Guard will be equipped with muskets, for instance.

That would create a different feel, I think (the Three Musketeers, perhaps? ), but I think that it's quite doable; as one of the most technologically advanced states, Verduria would likely be an early user of such newfangled weapons (especially for an elite defensive unit like the King's Guard), and they could easily be still rare and awkward enough not to be widely used or manufactured.

[According to an old source of mine, for the first couple of centuries that firearms were used, there were few official attempts to establish standard caliber or bullet sizes (which thus often varied from weapon to weapon), or to mass-manufacture firearms -- although I suspect that Verduria and the other powerful Erelaen states do have gun foundries of some kind already. And of course, the first muskets were very slow to load and difficult to aim, although they could do a fair amount of damage when they did hit. I rather suspect that Mark knows all this, however... ]

p@,
Glenn

Glenn wrote: And of course, the first muskets were very slow to load and difficult to aim, although they could do a fair amount of damage when they did hit.

Not even this was assured - there is the famous scene from the "Simplicissimus" (often dubbed the first modern German novel, written in the 17th century and relating the adventures of its hero, Simplicius Simplicissimus, in the 30-years-war) where a horseman is hit by a bullet from a pistol on his forehead from not very far and just falls unconscious - a slung stone would probably have done more damage.
Best regard,

Hans-Werner

hwhatting wrote:

Glenn wrote: And of course, the first muskets were very slow to load and difficult to aim, although they could do a fair amount of damage when they did hit.

Not even this was assured - there is the famous scene from the "Simplicissimus" (often dubbed the first modern German novel, written in the 17th century and relating the adventures of its hero, Simplicius Simplicissimus, in the 30-years-war) where a horseman is hit by a bullet from a pistol on his forehead from not very far and just falls unconscious - a slung stone would probably have done more damage.
Best regard,

Hans-Werner

Even as late as Waterloo, a Brown Bess Musket was so innacurate that beyond about 50 feet there is no accuracy. Effective range was about 200 yards though, which explains mass formations. the Baker rifles of the period show that sacrificing load times gives much better accuracy with the rifled barrels - one guy shot two frenchmen at about 400 yards with one in succession.

It was with the Minie ball in the 1840s that both killing power and loading speed jumped right up. (and it instantly meant line tactics were of little worth, as were cavalry charges)

I don't think plate armour WAS a reaction to firearms - I think it was earlier. What I've heard is that the increasing armouredness was a (futile) attempt to deal with longbows and crossbows and the like.

Full articulate plate developed between the mid thirteenth and mid fifteenth century. Firearms were not used on land, barring giant seige cannons, until the mid sixteenth century [Eg, the fifteenth century Wars of the Roses, where everyone was prancing around in full plate armour, did not involve guns, outside of some giant seige cannons oop north [well, guns DID exist, but they didn't really work, and they weren't used on any wide or systematic scale such as would merit the development of countermeasures]]. In fact, if anything the development of firearms STOPPED the development of armour, since at the same time as guns became common, armour regressed back to cuirasses and chest plates. (although pikes and halbards and swiss people and czechs were also factors there).

So yes, a pre-firearms Europe-like culture would have plate mail - unless it had something instead of firearms.


It should also be noted that it wasn't really until the nineteenth century that firearms became superior to bows, in almost all ways other than intimidation. The important thing was that they were relatively cheap and easy to use, and so could be employed by conscripted peasants int he new national armies - good longbowmen or bowmen with composite recurved bows continued to be more dangerous than musketeers for a long time, but it was far harder to find them in large numbers...







To drop into self-promotion, the situation in the main conculture of mine is that matchlocks are used in the army, but government restrictions keep them absent from the wider population. They aren't particularly good (unreliable, smokey, impossible to aim, limited range, don't work in the rain, and so on). Military elites use recurved bows, and also wheellocks [sooo much better than matchlocks - but expensive and high-maintanance]. Cannon are also widely used, but outside seiges and naval combat they're probably more for fear than for damage. Or to put it another way: sixteenth century, with better archery and better wheellocks. Flintlocks are about to be invented, but only in a peripheral culture, so they'll take a time to arrive.

Yei Cuetzpalin wrote:I don't think plate armour WAS a reaction to firearms - I think it was earlier. What I've heard is that the increasing armouredness was a (futile) attempt to deal with longbows and crossbows and the like.

I have to confess that I got that bit from Wikipedia:

Article on Armor wrote:Conventional wisdom says that plate armour faded away on the battlefield soon after firearms were introduced. This is very much not the case. Crude cannons were being used before plate armour became the norm. Soon, in the 1400s a small, mobile "hand cannon" was being used by horsemen. Improved cross bows, and the first pistols and pre-musket long arms, began to take a heavy toll on the mail clad, and partially plated knights and foot soldiers. Rather than dooming the use of body armour, the threat of small firearms intensified the use and further refinement of plate armour. [...]

In the early years of pistol and muskets, firearms were relatively low velocity,the full suits of armor, or breast plates actually stopped bullets fired from a modest distance. [...] In effect, (and this has long been misunderstood), plate armour actually came to replace chain mail because it was relatively, "musket ball proof".