sillypoint | 13 Apr 2017 9:58 p.m. PST |
I came into the period from Gush's rule set, I do miss "M" morale tests and the ability for cavalry to break through units. What is it for you? |
Herkybird | 14 Apr 2017 1:31 a.m. PST |
For me, Renaissance wargames are distinguished by early firearms and slashed clothing… |
MHoxie | 14 Apr 2017 1:35 a.m. PST |
Pikes, shot, cool formations. |
KTravlos | 14 Apr 2017 2:31 a.m. PST |
hmmm, for me it is the role of "Princes" while Kings and monarchs did play a role in the period starting with the Thirty Years War,the 1500-1600 period is that last imho were you have so many individuals that are both war-lords and political lords. |
sillypoint | 14 Apr 2017 2:44 a.m. PST |
I kind of like pursuits, like Prince Rupert would make, win the melee, then gallop off the battlefield….yeah thanks for that Rupert. |
bruntonboy | 14 Apr 2017 3:38 a.m. PST |
|
Elenderil | 14 Apr 2017 4:30 a.m. PST |
It's the slow transformation of infantry from being subordinate to cavalry to being the masters of the battlefield. That in turn comes from new weapons requiring new tactical responses. It's the modelling of those changes that makes the period interesting. The rise of the pike block, the increasing effectiveness of the shot and the slow decline of shock cavalry that's Renaissance warfare. |
79thPA | 14 Apr 2017 5:40 a.m. PST |
The soldiers dress like women on their way to church. |
Yellow Admiral | 14 Apr 2017 7:14 a.m. PST |
Bright colors and brutality. - Ix |
Pan Marek | 14 Apr 2017 7:49 a.m. PST |
The interaction of pike and shot in infantry formations. Most of us "get" that shot needed to be protected by the pike, and that the shot would need to move to be so protected when cavalry threatened. The trick is how to model that in wargame rules. |
Cyrus the Great | 14 Apr 2017 8:38 a.m. PST |
The apparent lack of good rules sets to choose from. |
Rich Bliss | 14 Apr 2017 8:39 a.m. PST |
Amateur(but occasionally talented) commanders, Experimental tactics, Mecenaries. |
Mr Medici | 14 Apr 2017 1:04 p.m. PST |
Knights (sort of) charging at men with guns, galleys co-existing with battleships (sort of); things that feel like they shouldn't go together, going together; the clash of political and religious ideas going on in history, that translate into actual moves you can play on the table (or can you? cf your favourite ruleset). That's the clever-clever answer. Also: played warhammer as a kid -> tried and failed to collect several armies -> thus feel slightly traumatised by 28mm for anything other than skirmishes -> decided this time round (as an 'adult') to do any 'big' armies in 6mm ----> find it easier to make 6mm renaissance stuff look good, tried a few strips of ancients and moderns and they came out a bit drab. That's the practical answer. |
Mike Target | 15 Apr 2017 8:53 a.m. PST |
|
miniMo | 15 Apr 2017 4:13 p.m. PST |
The painting style! |
Puster | 19 Apr 2017 2:25 a.m. PST |
Transformation. Hardly any majore war saw the same interaction of units then the war before. Apart from that: Landsknechts, Gensdarmes, blocks of pike, the introduction of field artilley (without cannister). We start at the medieval world and end up in the "modern" age of the bayonetted musket – at the pretty stable interaction of infantry, cavalry and artillery that would last for almost 200 years and that only the rifle would end. Less visible on the battlefield: ships, fortresses, economical globalization and conquest. |
1905Adventure | 19 Apr 2017 11:20 a.m. PST |
For the early part, mercenaries. Well, I guess for the later parts as well. They're everywhere. |