"Baroque for the Italian Wars" Topic
9 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
In order to respect possible copyright issues, when quoting from a book or article, please quote no more than three paragraphs.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Renaissance Discussion Message Board
Areas of InterestRenaissance
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Link
Top-Rated Ruleset
Featured Showcase ArticleThe Acolyte Vampires return - based, now, and ready for the game table.
Featured Workbench ArticleAdam loves Scorched Brown...
Featured Profile ArticlePart II of the Gates of Old Jerusalem.
Featured Book Review
|
Henry Martini | 10 Feb 2017 5:14 p.m. PST |
I have a large 15mm IW collection, and recently purchased a copy of Baroque. Now, the putative time-span covered by the rules starts in 1550, so the final decade of the IW sneaks in, but… for the sake of simplicity and consistency I'm thinking of using Baroque for all my IW gaming, which means back-dating the rules a few decades. It should be easy enough: the pikemen (PK) and shooters(T) designations cover most of the infantry, and all the early IW cavalry types can be slotted into existing Baroque troop categories. Only swordsmen and crossbowmen need to be reinterpreted from their Impetus equivalents. There's also the question of how to treat the colunela: Baroque-style single mass unit, or Impetus-style aggregate formation. The early tercio (ETE in Baroque terminology) was introduced from 1535 (according to WRG), so is very much a feature of the later IW. Translation issues should be greatly simplified with the – imminent – release of Impetus 2. Interestingly, although Impetus is promoted as covering the IW, and despite the potted history in Extra Impetus 1 relating the story up to the end of that conflict, the army lists in the supplement end at 1529 – suggesting that there was always a plan to leave the era of the tercio for a later rule set. On a related note, it seems odd that PK units aren't rated as massed (unless it's an error). |
Puster | 11 Feb 2017 11:36 p.m. PST |
Not sure wether it makes sense to use Baroque for the pre 1530-battles, as this era of the Italian wars was one of the main eras that Impetus was designed for. Being an Italian ruleset, they did playtest the rules with these battles. Afaik the Tercio did not play a role in any of the Italian battles – and after Pavia we have few major engagements anyway. The battle of Ceresole 1544 does not seem to have Tercios but is rather a final hooray for the pikeblock – though both sides acted with imbedded shot within the blocks. As I have not actually played Baroque I cannot judge wether there are any features that make its usage atypical, but when you want to play Italian wars, I would go for Impetus. |
Henry Martini | 12 Feb 2017 7:32 p.m. PST |
Well, I've bought it, so the temptation to use it for all my Renaissance gaming is powerful. The only other army I have that's adaptable to the 1550 – 1700 period is Ottoman Turks, and at this point I don't feel inclined to invest in yet another army to oppose it. I do like to be able to field both sides rather than be dependent on someone else – although for now they could face off against a friend's TYW Imperialists, I suppose. |
Puster | 13 Feb 2017 5:51 a.m. PST |
Just play these battles out with Baroque – perhaps they will work fine, and if they make for a fun game who cares for authenticity. Its a game, not a simulation anyway. BTW: One of the biggest battles never fought was the non-engagement of the Ottoman main army with the Imperials in 1532, with a strength of more then 100000 on both sides. Just a raiding force of some 10000 Acinci got trapped and annihilated after doing much to earn that fate. Suleiman did not manage to lure out Charles, and hesitated to move so close to Vienna that he would forced him. |
Henry Martini | 14 Feb 2017 4:01 a.m. PST |
I suspect that Baroque will work perfectly well for the entire Italian Wars. On the question of the presence/use of tercios in Italy, on page 61 of Oman's 'A History of the Art of War in the Sixteenth Century' is an extract from the muster-roll of the Spanish army in July 1536, which lists amongst the units of the Imperial Army of Italy the tercios of Naples and Sicily, with a combined strength of 5000 men. |
Puster | 14 Feb 2017 6:32 a.m. PST |
They certainly were there when they were formed – but played no role – "active" role, I should have said. After the siege of Naples 29 and Florence 30 there was, afaik, only one major engagement in Italy proper, the battle of Ceresole, with no participation of Tercios. Once your first games played out I would be interested in your estimation on how this system "feels" for the period. Its unlikely I will get Renaissance games in myself this year (alas – my Club is currently concentrating on other systems) |
Henry Martini | 14 Feb 2017 12:17 p.m. PST |
I supppose the point is that tercios were deployed in Italy, and therefore could conceivably have seen action there at this time. |
RNSulentic | 19 Feb 2017 8:26 p.m. PST |
I've been playing both Impetus and Barque, and it feels to me that there is a big stinking hole between the rule sets, roughly the 1530s to the 1590's. My own inclination is to push Impetus up through the French Wars of Religion and early Dutch Revolt. Only real change would be to come up with stats for pistolier cavalry. |
Henry Martini | 20 Feb 2017 2:39 p.m. PST |
Why, in your opinion RN, doesn't Baroque handle this period well? |
|