• Last Seen: 6 yrs ago
  • Joined: 9 yrs ago
  • Posts: 64 (0.02 / day)
  • VMs: 0
  • Username history
    1. Trivval 9 yrs ago

Status

User has no status, yet

Bio

User has no bio, yet

Most Recent Posts

What do we know about the spooky stuff or just that people are missing at this point and we're investigating.

<Snipped quote by Trivval>

I've been thinking about that and it probably would make sense to have general kind of thrust in our troop composition/deployment, at the same time though I want to see what people want to play as well. I was thinking a small core of relatively disorganised mixed cavalry with infantry and ranged support? Something like a 50/100/100 split. Not massively historical I know considering the small size, but if we do well during the campaign the Company may grow and get more formalised.

The other option is that people who don't fit the companies troop composition could potentially play as members of other friendly units.


Historically, 250 is a pretty good size for your small/average company. Only the truly massive would top 1500. There was an excess of soldiers due to the crusades / 100 Years War, and they all fought in their small squads and would band together in smaller companies. After all the majority of locales didn't need massive numbers of troops.

Not every man-at-arms was nobility, but the typical 'squad' of guys (lance) was based around the man-at-arms who would pay the dudes that fought with him. Pretty much all infantry was mounted but wouldn't be mounted in combat. So in recounts of battles you'd see things like "50 Good Lances" or whatever. The free companies used to be pretty democratic about what they did, John Hawkwood (leader of the famous White Company) was elected.

A suggestion therefore could be that people apply as a lance with the man 'Man-at-arms' being your primary character and you've got a small host of hanger-on NPCs that you can do whatever with. Your 50/100/100 split seems fine, typically you'd see a 1/1/1 ratio or a 1/1/2 with most archers being infantrymen in their own right because they primarily used crossbows.

An interesting thing to note about most mercenaries in this era would go out of their way not to fight. This era was the birth of military science, you fought to outmanoeuvre your opponent and fight their ability to wage war, rather than that fight for valor, physical courage or chivalry. Why risk uncertain fortune - defeat, capture, death all could mean you wont get paid. It's all very cool stuff... but now I'm lecturing.
With regards to the company, are they organised around Lances (man-at-arms, squire, page, couple of other lighter combatants) or are we just going to be disorganised occasionally-mounted infantry? Late Medieval -> Early Modern military history is a hobby of mine.
This sounds cool. I'd be interested if it was to get rolling again.
Oh damn, this looked really cool but I only saw it just before going to bed. Keen to read.

@Leidenschaft Alright, updated. Anything else or is it good to go?
@Leidenschaft Ah okay, I misunderstood how much experience was sort of required to be picked up by the organisation. If possible I would to keep the prior action with Delta Green on his CV but as background support as a private military contractor, ie had very little to do with the operation just logistics / technical support / local knowledge. From there was recruited by Delta Green directly, that gives me an easy reason to explain the transition from Africa to the US.
Hey, it's been a while since I've done anything so I was hoping I could fit in here. It all sounds rather interesting. I tried to join an RP a while back but a bunch of stuff came up and I had to drop it. Hope everything in the character sheet is acceptable, let me know if I need to change anything.


© 2007-2026
BBCode Cheatsheet