Book 4 errata

[Orcoteuthis]

List 18, Lithuanian and Samogitian: Lithuanian armies after 1360 can field Russian allies, including an ally general (commanding all and only Russians, 0 or 6-12 cavalry, 0-4 Irr Bw (I) and 0-2 Irr Sp (I). How can the cavalry be optional? If you don't take them the command will be illegally small (less than 4ME in addition to the general).

That's just one of oodles of examples of a list not being updated to reflect the introduction of that rule.

List 17, Later Crusader: How do you calculate Syrian allies for this list? In particular, how are Turkomans managed? The Syrian list provides Turkoman ally-generals which must command all and only Turkomans. But as the Turkoman ally-generals are optional, I assume that means the Turkomans can be fielded in a Syrian army under Syrian generals, which means in turn that they're automatically included in a Syrian allied contingent. (Just thinking out loud about a Later Crusader army of 1187 under Guy de Lusignan...)

You have to have them in  Syrian ally unless it represents an early Arab dynasty [who can't have Turcomans at all] or the Abbasids [who can replace them with ghazis on foot].

[Barritus]

List 23, Feudal English: the notes say that Welsh allies and standard wagons can't be used if the King is present in the army. What standard wagon? Is this a DBM fossil?

Also, as previously noted on the DBMM email list, the list provides for upgrading spearmen to North Welsh Irr Pk (F), but the only troops labelled "spearmen" already have that option. Presumably the reference is to the Levy.

List 43, Later Hungarian: from 1358 to 1390 this army can have Paduan Italian Condotta allies. How are these allies determined? That is, if you look at the Italian Condotta list, you can have Free Company allies in which the ally-general becomes the Italian army's C-in-C, commanding both Free Company and Italian troops. Would it be acceptable to calculate the Paduan allies as including Free Company troops, potentially including a Brilliant general in John Hawkwood? After all, the commander of an allied contingent can be selected from the C-in-C or sub-general options of the allied list.

(I just like the idea of Hungarians with Italian allies who happen to include English Free Company soldiers led by Sir John Hawkwood!)

List 3, Anglo-Norman: which troops count as mercenaries? With King Stephen you can optionally have a mercenary sub-general who commands all and only mercenaries, with Brabancon/Flemish mercenaries listed below. But the listings for Irr Kn (F) and Irr Sp (I) in the main list both allow for some to be mercenary.

[LAP1964]

List 3, Anglo-Norman: which troops count as mercenaries? With King Stephen you can optionally have a mercenary sub-general who commands all and only mercenaries, with Brabancon/Flemish mercenaries listed below. But the listings for Irr Kn (F) and Irr Sp (I) in the main list both allow for some to be mercenary.

List 3 – Anglo-Norman
William of Ypres may command Irr Kn(F) and Irr Sp(I) from the main part of the list if nominated as mercenary.
Genoese are mercenaries.

From ,

http://f1.grp.yahoofs.com/v1/0Kt-UDKfEY17fA60SBQVNLwkAoeJYszUfjT8VbgmqATEaA-cHZ1oBt0hvWZ1n5pl09bN5qvceLe3Y38We1_xbxHify2zeQ/DBMM%20List%20clarifications%20v2.0.1.pdf

LES   

[Barritus]

List 3, Anglo-Norman: which troops count as mercenaries? With King Stephen you can optionally have a mercenary sub-general who commands all and only mercenaries, with Brabancon/Flemish mercenaries listed below. But the listings for Irr Kn (F) and Irr Sp (I) in the main list both allow for some to be mercenary.

List 3 – Anglo-Norman
William of Ypres may command Irr Kn(F) and Irr Sp(I) from the main part of the list if nominated as mercenary.
Genoese are mercenaries.

From ,

http://f1.grp.yahoofs.com/v1/0Kt-UDKfEY17fA60SBQVNLwkAoeJYszUfjT8VbgmqATEaA-cHZ1oBt0hvWZ1n5pl09bN5qvceLe3Y38We1_xbxHify2zeQ/DBMM%20List%20clarifications%20v2.0.1.pdf

LES   

Ah, cool. Thanks.

[Barritus]

List 44, Post-Mongol Russian: From 1486 you upgrade militia Bw to shooters. Only the list specifies them to be Irr Sh (I) @ 5AP. The rules say all Sh (I) are Regular, and cost 5AP. So presumably these chaps should be Regular too.

[Quilts]

Book 4- Mongol Conquest

Do 'we' think it's intentional that Mongol LH(S) dismount as Bw(I)? 

Nothing specified and no normal reason to think otherwise, but within the list itself for some naval elements crew they are listed as LH(S) dismounted as Bw(O).....

Cheers,

Quilts

[Barritus]

Book 4- Mongol Conquest

Do 'we' think it's intentional that Mongol LH(S) dismount as Bw(I)? 

Nothing specified and no normal reason to think otherwise, but within the list itself for some naval elements crew they are listed as LH(S) dismounted as Bw(O).....

Oh dear. I wonder if that was a list fossil from DBM?

Otherwise, dismounting as Bw (I) makes me wonder if it'd be possible for Mongols to defeat Burmese elephants by dismounting and shooting?

[Barritus]

Morean Byzantines again: An Albanian ally general is compulsory if you have more than 12 elements on Albanians. Does that include the Albanians in the Acciajuoli Athenian allied command? I'd say no, as those Albanians are nothing to do with the self-directed Albanian contingent. But a strict reading of the list suggests the AA Albanians count towards that total of 12; which means that if you take the AA allies, you must also field an Albanian ally general.

[tadamson]

Book 4- Mongol Conquest

Do 'we' think it's intentional that Mongol LH(S) dismount as Bw(I)? 

Nothing specified and no normal reason to think otherwise, but within the list itself for some naval elements crew they are listed as LH(S) dismounted as Bw(O).....

Oh dear. I wonder if that was a list fossil from DBM?

Otherwise, dismounting as Bw (I) makes me wonder if it'd be possible for Mongols to defeat Burmese elephants by dismounting and shooting?

Yes it's a fossil, but they could be Mongol Cv dismounted as Bw(o) :-)
ps the shooting the elephants was a Yuan army in 1277 (and that was mostly local tribal allies)

[Barritus]

Book 4- Mongol Conquest

Do 'we' think it's intentional that Mongol LH(S) dismount as Bw(I)? 

Nothing specified and no normal reason to think otherwise, but within the list itself for some naval elements crew they are listed as LH(S) dismounted as Bw(O).....

Oh dear. I wonder if that was a list fossil from DBM?

Otherwise, dismounting as Bw (I) makes me wonder if it'd be possible for Mongols to defeat Burmese elephants by dismounting and shooting?

Yes it's a fossil, but they could be Mongol Cv dismounted as Bw(o) :-)
ps the shooting the elephants was a Yuan army in 1277 (and that was mostly local tribal allies)

Local tribal allies? Not Mongols getting off their horses?

If Mongols, however, the same issue arises as Quilts mentioned - Yuan LH (S) dismount as Bw (I).

[tadamson]

The Bt(s) [Europe option] represents Mongke who as C-in-C in Russia in 1237 AD dismounted 20,000 men and placed them on boats. They then rowed up the Volga fighting a series of land battles, naval skirmishes and amphibious assaults.

It should have been :

Only in Europe after 1213 AD:
Irr Bts (S) @ 3AP [LH (S) dismounted as Bw (I), or Cv (O) dismounted as Bw (O)]

but we all missed it...

Sorry...

As for the Burma incident Polo describe the whole Mongol force as dismounting, however Il Millione (his contemporary nickname) was writing a book of 'amazing tales' rather than something strictly accurate.  Chinese records show a local commander with 700 "Mongols"  and thousands of troops from allied "tribes".  Other records suggest the the "Mongols" were an ex Jin unit (two generations later!).

Tom..

[Orcoteuthis]

Anyway, in distant shooting, Bw (I) perform the same as Bw (O) against elements that don't shoot back.

[Mick Hession]

Just got around to applying for membership recently so sorry for the delay in responding. Way back in 2011, Barritus queried late Anglo-Irish Billmen - they should be Irr Bd(I) at 4AP. Essentially, they were the same as contemporary WotR Shire levy and undrilled.

Cheers
Mick 

[Barritus]

Book 4, List 1: Komnenan Byzantine: The list allows you to take Seljuk Turk allies from 1081 to 1116 (IIRC), but doesn't specify which versions of the list. On that basis, it seems I could take Inert Kerbogah's Hamadan Seljuk Turks as allies, which doesn't seem right.

Should there be a tighter definition of which Seljuks the Byzantines can take as allies?

[Barritus]

List 15, Qara-Khitan: Stuff about Khwarizmian allies doesn't make much sense.

Firstly, Khwarizmian allies are available from 1172, when the list itself doesn't start until 1186. Now there are many cases where a generic ally is available before the list itself (Numidians in a Syracusan list, for example), but in this case the Khwarizmian list notes clearly say the list starts with the foundation of the Khwarizmian state. How then can they be available as allies up to 14 years prior to the founding of their state?

Secondly, the allies are available until 1206. Yet the Qara-Khitan list notes say that "a Khwarizmian army helped the Qara-Khitai subdue a rebellion in Bukhara in 1207." So why aren't Khwarizmians available at least until then?

The next question would be, what troops can a Khwarizmian allied command include?