Muster Armies Action (was Merce

[Craig Greeson]

Morg wrote:
> I think I am turning into Craig's 'Yes' man. I agree 100% with him again.
> You might want to take a look at a strategy game called 'Empires in Arms.' It's
> produced by Avalon Hill, and is basically a historical strategy game based around
> the Napoleanic (SP?) era.
>
> The time required to raise new troops is staggering, and causes a regent to think
> ahead (way ahead.) IE: - A ship takes an entire year to build. - Cavalry takes 6
> months - Infantry takes 3 months (IIRC) etc.
> There is none of this 'overnight drafting' which occurs in Birthright.

Kenneth Gauck wrote:
> I prefer long times of mobilization because its historically acurate. If
> your inclined that way as well then mobilization times should take d6 months
> (each unit checks individually), and requires no training. Units don't
> learn to follow their new commander, and this is one of (but certainly not
> the only reason) they disband when the army retreats.

Hmm, the 6 month's figure came up in both posts by these illustrious
gentlemen. This points to a flaw in the Muster Armies action. I always
wondered if anyone else felt the fact a unit could be formed and available
in 1 month was awfully kind to realms with small standing armies. What to
do about this? It seems like the more it costs to muster a unit, the more
specialized the unit is. How about if each unit took as long to form and
become available as its GB cost, measured in months? Irregulars (1GB)
would be available in 1 month, infantry (2GB) in 2 months, etc..., all the
way up to knights (6GB) which would not be available until 6 months after
they were mustered?

This change would A- force regents to make military plans well in advance
(as they should) and B- make regents rely on mercenaries for conflicts they
were not properly prepared for (again, IMO, as they should). This might be
a bit of an oversimplification, but it's at least quick and easy to
implement. Coupling this change with limiting the number of "hits" worth
of units in a domain to 2X the total province levels and limiting the
number of mercenaries available might help make troop availability in
Cerilia a bit more realistic. Any support for this idea (besides from
Morg/Keith, who we all know is my "Yes" man)?

Regards
Craig

[Gary V. Foss]

Craig Greeson wrote:

> This change would A- force regents to make military plans well in advance
> (as they should) and B- make regents rely on mercenaries for conflicts they
> were not properly prepared for (again, IMO, as they should). This might be
> a bit of an oversimplification, but it's at least quick and easy to
> implement. Coupling this change with limiting the number of "hits" worth
> of units in a domain to 2X the total province levels and limiting the
> number of mercenaries available might help make troop availability in
> Cerilia a bit more realistic. Any support for this idea (besides from
> Morg/Keith, who we all know is my "Yes" man)?

How about this as a house rule: It takes the cost of the unit in months for a unit to
be formed after the regent pays the cost of raising it. That is, if someone wanted to
raise a unit of elite infantry he would pay the 4GB cost for it and the unit would not
"appear" until four months later at which point it could be moved normally.

That should keep people from "instantly" raising troops and give them some pause when
disbanding the more expensive ones as it will take so long for them to be reformed.
The only exception to this, I think, should be levies which should get paid for and
raised in the same month because they are pretty much already existing militias and
such and so should answer the call to arms whenever it is issued.

Gary

[Craig Greeson]

Gary V. Foss wrote:
> How about this as a house rule: It takes the cost of the unit in months for a unit to
> be formed after the regent pays the cost of raising it. That is, if someone wanted to
> raise a unit of elite infantry he would pay the 4GB cost for it and the unit would not
> "appear" until four months later at which point it could be moved normally.
>
> That should keep people from "instantly" raising troops and give them some pause when
> disbanding the more expensive ones as it will take so long for them to be reformed.
> The only exception to this, I think, should be levies which should get paid for and
> raised in the same month because they are pretty much already existing militias and
> such and so should answer the call to arms whenever it is issued.

This is what I was trying to suggest in my first post on the subject. I
agree with Gary that levies should be available almost instantly.
Actually, this is already implied by our proposed house rule because levies
have no muster cost. Perhaps there should be a 1 War Move (i.e. week) lag
between them dropping their hoes, kissing their wives, and arriving for
duty?

Regards
Craig

[Gary V. Foss]

Craig Greeson wrote:

> This is what I was trying to suggest in my first post on the subject. I
> agree with Gary that levies should be available almost instantly.
> Actually, this is already implied by our proposed house rule because levies
> have no muster cost. Perhaps there should be a 1 War Move (i.e. week) lag
> between them dropping their hoes, kissing their wives, and arriving for
> duty?

Oops. I was thinking it cost 1GB to raise levies. Silly me, not referring to the Rulebook
when making such a reference....

The only times I've ever had someone raise levies was in the case of an invasion, so perhaps
my view of them is colored by that fact, because I think levies should be available pretty
much at command. I see them as being sort of like Minute Men, the standing constabulary or
the posse deputized by the sheriff in order to go chasing out after the bank robbers.

Gary

[Craig Greeson]

Gary V. Foss wrote:
>
> Craig Greeson wrote:
> > This is what I was trying to suggest in my first post on the subject. I
> > agree with Gary that levies should be available almost instantly.
> > Actually, this is already implied by our proposed house rule because levies
> > have no muster cost. Perhaps there should be a 1 War Move (i.e. week) lag
> > between them dropping their hoes, kissing their wives, and arriving for
> > duty?
>
> Oops. I was thinking it cost 1GB to raise levies. Silly me, not referring to the Rulebook
> when making such a reference....
>
> The only times I've ever had someone raise levies was in the case of an invasion, so perhaps
> my view of them is colored by that fact, because I think levies should be available pretty
> much at command. I see them as being sort of like Minute Men, the standing constabulary or
> the posse deputized by the sheriff in order to go chasing out after the bank robbers.

Actually, a lot more levies will probably be raised if the delayed Muster
rules are used. They're the only thing (besides big-GB mercenaries) that
will be available to a realm in a short period of time. Levies may not
have much chance against a proper army, but they're better than nothing.

Craig

[Jim Cooper]

Craig Greeson wrote:
> This change would A- force regents to make military plans well in advance (as they should) and B- make regents rely on mercenaries for conflicts they were not properly prepared for (again, IMO, as they should). This might be a bit of an oversimplification, but it's at least quick and easy to implement. Coupling this change with limiting the number of "hits" worth of units in a domain to 2X the total province levels and limiting the number of mercenaries available might help make troop availability in Cerilia a bit more realistic. Any support for this idea (besides from Morg/Keith, who we all know is my "Yes" man)?<

Yes, this is basically what I have done IMC. Regents can only muster
troops (regular units) only once every four turns (the winter, in these
cases) and they arrive 1d3+3 months later. In effect, regents must make
a call to arms during the winter phase (since commoner men would never
respond during planting and harvest seasons), which they can then expect
to have show up in the spring or summer (never, ever, would men leave
their fields in the fall).

But they still have to fork over the money in the winter turn! < heh,
good DM plot device that: "Oops, uh, sorry boss, the money promised to
the muster seems to have disappeared over winter!" :) >. Now regents
can also 'speed' this up to ensure they arrive in the next domain turn
by spending 1 GB for every month they want the troops to arrive early,
except it always takes AT LEAST 3 months. Mercenaries the same, except
they can be hired in any domain turn (and they can reduce the time taken
down to one month to arrive, otherwise same rules).

This makes mustering more historically accurate (like others have
posted) - because seasons were very important back then - men were
required to work the fields from spring to fall or administer/garrison
their lands (in the case of knights). People just couldn't up and let
the fields lie fallow! How would armies eat then?!? And that's why
mercenaries came about - men made a profession outta fighting to make a
living.

I have also increased the time domain actions take in other cases too -
like increasing the time to create holdings, increasing the time to
build fortifications to years --- heck, now that I think about it, I
have generally increased just about EVERY domain action time! :)

Oh, P.S:

Keith is MY 'yes' man - the Grand Vizier doesn't appreciate people
muscling in on his slave lab--- er, ahem, BROCP graduate apprentices!
:)
(At least, he *better* still be my lapdog ...

[Pieter Sleijpen]

> I have also increased the time domain actions take in other cases too-
> like increasing the time to create holdings, increasing the time to
> build fortifications to years --- heck, now that I think about it, I
> have generally increased just about EVERY domain action time! :)
>

The building time is 1d6 GB per turn, with that rate a lot of things
actually take a lot of time to build. A lvl 1 castle took me 1 year to
build and there was no sabotage and the weather was good. That sounds
more or less reasonable to me.

[Pieter Sleijpen]

Except off coarse levies for the Khinasi, that because the Khinasi do
not have a militia. They believe only in profesional armies.