|
|
Post by Laurent de Gouvion on Jun 25, 2017 13:54:10 GMT
How long would it take for a force of about 10,000 to be properly trained and armed(weapons & armor)? I suppose 1 year is long enough right? It's longer than needed IMO. Few points: 1. Size doesn't factor in that much to training time. The bigger they are, they could simply be trained together. 2. I suppose so on equipment. 1 year would fit if you smith it all yourselves, though if some reserves exist or you buy some from traders it would be faster. Yeah, it's quite logical. I assume you could raise more too. Still, highlighting some problems with that: 1. A standing army takes men permanently from the fields. You might be okay with that, but your vassals won't. Burgundy was still in the process of retaking ducal demesne. 2. A standing army is mad expensive. Anyway, IMO you're better off hiring mercenaries. They're experienced and equipped already. |
|
|
|
Post by Erich von Ludendorff on Jun 25, 2017 14:06:46 GMT
Erich von Ludendorff it is my (albeit limited) understanding that in this time period countries did not actually have standing armies (Execpt for maybe a few full time soldiers but only a tiny number) and that their admirers came from levies raised in times of war. Once the wads the levies go home. As for the ships keep in mind Venice is probably one of if not the stronkest naval power which focuses on navy stuff and is very experienced in ship buildings. It's my understanding that the Almohads are not a naval power at all nor are they experienced ship builders. And as Yi Sun Sin said Venice doesn't have an army to feed. Also Venice is filthy rich. sorry mate but dismissing the fact completely that the Almohads can make ships is ridiculous. How the heck do they transport men and cavalry to Spain then? I'm sorry to say but this reply of yours is unacceptable when we can CLEARLY see that the Almohads control two continents (like Egypt) and this same area of Africa (North West Africa) has attacked and taken a decent amount of land in Europe called Spain. |
|
|
|
Post by Hugh III of Burgundy on Jun 25, 2017 14:12:45 GMT
How long would it take for a force of about 10,000 to be properly trained and armed(weapons & armor)? I suppose 1 year is long enough right? It's longer than needed IMO. Few points: 1. Size doesn't factor in that much to training time. The bigger they are, they could simply be trained together. 2. I suppose so on equipment. 1 year would fit if you smith it all yourselves, though if some reserves exist or you buy some from traders it would be faster. Yeah, it's quite logical. I assume you could raise more too. Still, highlighting some problems with that: 1. A standing army takes men permanently from the fields. You might be okay with that, but your vassals won't. Burgundy was still in the process of retaking ducal demesne. 2. A standing army is mad expensive. Anyway, IMO you're better off hiring mercenaries. They're experienced and equipped already. I only have a small standing army of about 7,000. The rest of the peasants are given training each year. So, I have a peasant army of say 20,000. Then these forces would be trained in groups of 5,000 for a couple months each year. Or I suppose I could hire mercenaries. |
|
|
|
Post by Laurent de Gouvion on Jun 25, 2017 14:16:59 GMT
It's longer than needed IMO. Few points: 1. Size doesn't factor in that much to training time. The bigger they are, they could simply be trained together. 2. I suppose so on equipment. 1 year would fit if you smith it all yourselves, though if some reserves exist or you buy some from traders it would be faster. Yeah, it's quite logical. I assume you could raise more too. Still, highlighting some problems with that: 1. A standing army takes men permanently from the fields. You might be okay with that, but your vassals won't. Burgundy was still in the process of retaking ducal demesne. 2. A standing army is mad expensive. Anyway, IMO you're better off hiring mercenaries. They're experienced and equipped already. I only have a small standing army of about 7,000. The rest of the peasants are given training each year. So, I have a peasant army of say 20,000. Then these forces would be trained in groups of 5,000 for a couple months each year. Peasant armies would have been trained a month or more. I think you can train all 20,000 in a year. Still, to create cohesion, it is best to train all together. Basic training on weapons and stuff would probably take less than a month. I think if you want to train peasants the most efficient method would be training them a day every week, instead of taking them all for some time. They still get weapons experience. Cohesion would surely suffer, but it depends on what you want to achieve. Edit: My suggestion is based on the English law of two hours longbow training every week. |
|
|
|
Post by Quintus Fabius on Jun 25, 2017 14:52:08 GMT
Good! Mieszko III is a threat to all 1 point something million inhabitants of Poland, ME nations are a threat to all Christians, and Angevin dynasty is threat to Francja. WRONG. The Angevins are French just much as the Capets are. The weakness of the Capets is a threat to France's security right now. They need to move aside for a better dynasty to take up the reins. Plus if in this timeline, England and France are united, then... France will not be forced to fight their traditional arch-enemy for over 500 years of so many wars. Surely, that would've been more beneficial to France in that way? And a reminder... the English kings at this current timepoint actually speak French more fluently than the English language. But Capets rightful ruler of Francja. Angevin are just rebellious dukes, and should have Aquitaine taken and given to Francja. |
|
|
|
Post by Desophaeus on Jun 25, 2017 14:58:24 GMT
WRONG. The Angevins are French just much as the Capets are. The weakness of the Capets is a threat to France's security right now. They need to move aside for a better dynasty to take up the reins. Plus if in this timeline, England and France are united, then... France will not be forced to fight their traditional arch-enemy for over 500 years of so many wars. Surely, that would've been more beneficial to France in that way? And a reminder... the English kings at this current timepoint actually speak French more fluently than the English language. But Capets rightful ruler of Francja. Angevin are just rebellious dukes, and should have Aquitaine taken and given to Francja. "Rightful" is so subjective. They led France right into diaster. It's a pathetic decentralized kingdom, and the king is totally bankrupt. They also came into power ruling the Kingdom of the Franks by killing rivals in the first place. There's no practical reason to keep them propped up and your moralism disappoints yourself when you look a little too closely to everyone anyhow. Very few kings ever ruled with clean hands, so I really must inform you that your justification is a joke. |
|
|
|
Post by Hugh III of Burgundy on Jun 25, 2017 14:59:43 GMT
Would anyone like to trade for Burgundine wine?
|
|
|
|
Post by Hugh III of Burgundy on Jun 25, 2017 15:02:15 GMT
But Capets rightful ruler of Francja. Angevin are just rebellious dukes, and should have Aquitaine taken and given to Francja. "Rightful" is so subjective. They led France right into diaster. It's a pathetic decentralized kingdom, and the king is totally bankrupt. They also came into power ruling the Kingdom of the Franks by killing rivals in the first place. There's no practical reason to keep them propped up and your moralism disappoints yourself when you look a little too closely to everyone anyhow. Very few kings ever ruled with clean hands, so I really must inform you that your justification is a joke. Actually Phillip II, the Capet king who came into power in 1180 drove out the Angevins from France and defeated a coalition of his enemies(HRE etc). |
|
|
|
Post by Desophaeus on Jun 25, 2017 15:23:03 GMT
"Rightful" is so subjective. They led France right into diaster. It's a pathetic decentralized kingdom, and the king is totally bankrupt. They also came into power ruling the Kingdom of the Franks by killing rivals in the first place. There's no practical reason to keep them propped up and your moralism disappoints yourself when you look a little too closely to everyone anyhow. Very few kings ever ruled with clean hands, so I really must inform you that your justification is a joke. Actually Phillip II, the Capet king who came into power in 1180 drove out the Angevins from France and defeated a coalition of his enemies(HRE etc). Not quite out of France but Paris yes. |
|
|
|
Post by Hugh III of Burgundy on Jun 25, 2017 15:37:40 GMT
Actually Phillip II, the Capet king who came into power in 1180 drove out the Angevins from France and defeated a coalition of his enemies(HRE etc). Not quite out of France but Paris yes. Still, he's one of the best Capet kings. He stabilized France. |
|
|
|
Post by Desophaeus on Jun 25, 2017 15:44:05 GMT
Not quite out of France but Paris yes. Still, he's one of the best Capet kings. He stabilized France. (for now)  |
|
|
|
Post by Hugh III of Burgundy on Jun 25, 2017 15:49:52 GMT
Still, he's one of the best Capet kings. He stabilized France. (for now) Haha, if this was RL then your Angevin empire would have crumbled(Phillipe befriended your sons and incited them to rebel). Fortunately it's an RP. So anything could happen. |
|
|
|
Post by Antonio Santa Anna on Jun 25, 2017 18:06:42 GMT
Over half the 48 hour deadline is up, and only 2 people have made their turns. Get cracking, people. ( Stonewall Jackson, Laurent de Gouvion, Frederick the Great, Yi Sun Sin, Caesar, Mountbatten, Desophaeus, Von Bismarck jr, Quintus Fabius, Polenbal, Bismarck Jr) |
|
|
|
Post by Erich von Ludendorff on Jun 25, 2017 18:10:22 GMT
Over half the 48 hour deadline is up, and only 2 people have made their turns. Get cracking, people. tag em. Easy. |
|
|
|
Post by Imperial RomeBall on Jun 25, 2017 18:20:40 GMT
Would anyone like to trade for Burgundine wine? This is not a Crusader thing is it? I will certainly trade. Perhaps you would like some Greek wine, oldest in Europe. *+5 to economy*
And from that day onwards Greek merchants, and not Latins, travelled the breadth of Europe to deliver wine and olive oil to France, while Frankish merchants plied the high seas in search of the calmer ones.
Truly, it was a scene out of the Roman Empire. HELLENIC TRADERS COMING TO THEATERS AND IMAX |
|
