Thought I should open a separate topic rather than risk derailing another post linking to a League of Augsburg photo report. Like many of us, I consider the League of Augsburg to be a great range of figures. I so like that range of figures that at one point I was seriously considering using them as proxies for ECW (using FK&P) as well as their own period.
Have you guys ever had any thoughts about using/adapting these rules for any Pike & Shot era games for other conflicts in the 17th century? Thinking of Thirty Years War right up to the end of the War of the Grand Alliance (LoA).
I'm certainly thinking of using them for LoA. Not sure what I would change rules wise. The existing unit options cover a lot of the troop progression. The main addition is probably around bayonets.
Also thought about using them for a bit earlier - or just using TTS units in FKaP, as we certainly prefer the FKaP mechanisms to TtS. And having two similar but different rule sets is too much for our old heads.
I think there was talk of a variant for the late 17thC, but could be wrong. From memory you could make infantry shot heavy to reflect the lack of pikes.
I believe Mollinary is working on a WSS adaptation which would be pikeless and modifications made to musketry and possible movement. Likely he'll be along to explain.
I've used the rules for 1685 Monmouth Rebellion with no real problems (I don't distinguish matchlock from flintlock, however). As Dragoon's are beginning to be used in a cavalry role some work might be required there. I don't know what to do with plug bayonets at this point, likewise grenadiers.
I'd like to see transitional rules (between TtS! And FK&P) to cover 1500 - 16??.
Looking dangerous here, chaps! (my long overdue venture into the LoA range may happen yet). Other than the bayonets, flintlocks and grenadiers issues, FK&P looks like a viable option then.
p.s. a possible WSS version? Thinking The Great Northern War is contemporaneous* to that conflict and that has Pike & Shot units... :-\
* thank God for spellcheck. :-[
Hi Guys,
It is true I have looked at moving the rules on into the WSS to SYW periods, and my first experiments have been quote encouraging. However, the time consuming business is redoing the reading and research to ensure that I know what it is that I am trying to represent! It is this latter idea that has stopped me going into the TYW so far, as I await the work of Daniel S, who some may know from TMP, who is producing the seminal work on Breitenfeld taking advantage of his linguistic and scholarly skills, as well as his access to multiple archives. However, for those of you with a late 17th century bent (ooh, er Missus!), Simon has become intoxicated with period, and is collecting figures and looking at amendments as we speak!