More Commoner Infantry!!!

**Necromancer** · February 27, 2007, 10:04 AM

If there's ONE thing that I wish CA included in M2TW, it's more commoner units. I'm talking about your average, professional soldier. Pretty much all of the swordsman and heavy-infantry of Western-Europe in M2TW are dismounted knights. Well I don't know about you, but I don't want an entire army made up of nothing but NOBLES. I think that they should've included more 'average' unit types such as ohhh... just for the hell of the topic of the title 'commoner swordsman' (

that's a pretty crappy name, but you get the jist).

Now I mostly play as England because they fit me like a glove, mostly hard-hitting, infantry-based armies with superb archers, and heavy cavalry used in a supporting role. My type of medieval army. But it seems like the ONLY commoner infantry units for England are the billmen, archers and spearmen. Everyone else is a noble. Now I know that in the medieval English military system, the nobility played a larger than average role in warfare... but still perhaps CA could've included more commomer units for England and the rest of Western-Europe??? Such as your average swordsman???

What do you think???

**Ahiga** · February 27, 2007, 10:13 AM

Burrek's mod features Sergeant Swordsmen.

**tommo_312** · February 27, 2007, 10:13 AM

great point mate, many soldiers farmed and fought but by no means were anything like a levy or saxon fyrd. they were the household troops of a local lord but they didin't do nothing all day, they were farmers and blacksmiths and tanners, etc. but according to the feudal system they had to fight and the turmoil of the middle ages meant that lots of farmers became soldier-farmers.

i love your idea

maybe this will get moved to the gathering and some cool modder will create a mod for it

tommo

**Soulghast** · February 27, 2007, 10:14 AM

I agree, but there are many other things that we would want CA to include and they didn't. There are mods, none of them to serious level by now, but be sure that, once the major mods are released, you'll find what you are looking for.

**Necromancer** · February 27, 2007, 10:39 AM

Originally Posted by RTR Fan

I agree, but there are many other things that we would want CA to include and they didn't. There are mods, none of them to serious level by now, but be sure that, once the major mods are released, you'll find what you are looking for.

Oh I'm not complaining or anything, it's just something that I noticed... that's all.

Knights of Honor does a wonderful job of showing a very wide variety of commoner infantry. Some of my personal favorites from the game are the Men-at-Arms (armoured swordsman) and the Roman (Byzantine) Infantry. Professional, but not nobility. To get a look at some of these guys, here's the game's official site, go to the 'Medieval' tab and look under the 'Unit Showcase'. They've got some pretty cool stuff.

http://knightsofhonor.com/

**Mega Dux Bob** · February 27, 2007, 11:51 AM

Originally Posted by Ahiga

Burrek's mod features Sergeant Swordsmen.

It is certianly "why not?" they were in MTW1. I think all the wierd and cheep dismounted units are odd.

**Lusted** · February 27, 2007, 11:56 AM

I think the reason for the lack of Men-at-arms type units from MTW, is the dismounted units. As there is no dismounting feature, the dismounted knight units in M2TW take the place of men-at-arm units from MTW. Otherwise you just end up with duplicated units.

**Condottiere SOG** · February 27, 2007, 01:15 PM

noted!

armoured swordsmen for england are not nobles.

swordsmen militia or even seargentry(sword-bearing) cost less to produce and upkeep than knights and were a logicla alternatives to the high costs of draining the countryside of available gentry needed to maintain law and order in a county's provinces!

What I like about seargents is that they typical carried both spear and sword, in reality. Why do they not in M2TW. That would solve the problem in a nutshell!

'seargent spear-men' would just be 'seargents'
'armored seargents would still have their qualities'

damn, good idea. I'll get right on this!

**twp127** · February 27, 2007, 02:17 PM

It would be nice with some cheap middleclassed unit medium infantry.
just to have some varied troops to look at.
Sometimes my armies are to alike.

**Firebat11** · February 27, 2007, 02:51 PM

I definitely recommend Road to Jerusalem v2.2

Here is the Link http://www.twcenter.net/forums/downl...o=file&id=1196

Its got a unit called Seargent Swordsmen. This unit is available for most western European countries, which adds a great aspect to the early campaign, since there are NO sword units for the early era.

This mod also adds a lot of other cool things, like the big map, countries building huge armies (full stacks), among other things.

I highly recommend this mod, and it is the best one I've tried so far!!!!!

GO TRY IT!!!

It also adds other units too which is also nice!!!!

**The Good** · February 27, 2007, 03:10 PM

Yeah, I noticed the lack of Men at Arms or Sergeant Units, especially swordsmen like those. CA should have made a weaker 'dsimounted knights' type unit, that would have lower stats.

**Condottiere SOG** · February 27, 2007, 06:46 PM

How about swords or daggers for seargent spear-men(to be called 'seargents' after that) and for armored seargents either swords or maces? That would clear up the missing middle man sword deal. Seargents carried two weapons, in history anyway. Usually this weapon was the sword. Yea or nea

. Or Nyikkh!

Or how about Dismounted_Seargents?

anything but give these guys swords....I may have to mod this in myself. Too good not to follow up on!

**craziii** · February 27, 2007, 06:57 PM

why do ppl keep on comparing m2tw to KOH? koh is an extremely n I mean extremely simple game compare to m2tw.

**zombieseatppl** · February 27, 2007, 07:15 PM

Swords are very exspensive, which is generally why you see them restricted to Nobles, and in later pre-gun powder the emerging middle class wanted to fight like the nobles too.

I don't ever recall reading of commeners armed with sword to any degree in medieval times. Commoners were mostly restricted to Axes, spears, pikes, and late period Halberds. Almost exclusively due to ecomonic factors, though at many times in many places it was prohibited for the common folk to have swords for various reasons. Of course there was the odd exception of the common man who could afford a sword.

NOw in the order of the Knights Templar a Templar Sergant would have been issued a horse, lance, several spears, and a sword, amongst other equiptment you were issues upon taking your vow of poverty, which amounted to 4 years freeman pay for a Knight and aproximatly 2 years pay for a sergeant.

I suppose other mounted sergants would have swords too. But for unmounted sergants to have a sword. I don't know. That seems prohibativly exspensive.

**Condottiere SOG** · February 27, 2007, 07:21 PM

Originally Posted by zombieseatppl

Swords are very exspensive, which is generally why you see them restricted to Nobles, and in later pre-gun powder the emerging middle class wanted to fight like the nobles too.

I don't ever recall reading of commeners armed with sword to any degree in medieval times. Commoners were mostly restricted to Axes, spears, pikes, and late period Halberds. Almost exclusively due to ecomonic factors, though at many times in many places it was prohibited for the common folk to have swords for various reasons. Of course there was the odd exception of the common man who could afford a sword.

NOw in the order of the Knights Templar a Templar Sergant would have been issued a horse, lance, several spears, and a sword, amongst other equiptment you were issues upon taking your vow of poverty, which amounted to 4 years freeman pay for a Knight and aproximatly 2 years pay for a sergeant.

I suppose other mounted sergants would have swords too. But for unmounted sergants to have a sword. I don't know. That seems prohibativly exspensive.

That is not true. They were no more expensive than halberds in many cases. The French and English certainly armed their Seargents with swords as did the EastEuroStates. Crusaders as well. It was about as easy to get as it is today. Not only that, but you only had to comb a battlefield to get one. Battles happened all the time.

I suggest Contamine's 'War int the Middle Ages'. You'll find you are way off base.

**Jackster** · February 27, 2007, 10:54 PM

but if you give the Sergeant both spear and swords, how do the AI decide when he is going to use which weapon?
is he like Roman legionary, use the spear on charge or against Cavalry, then fight with swords?
I am a English fan too!

**Necromancer** · February 28, 2007, 02:38 PM

Originally Posted by zombieseatppl

Swords are very exspensive, which is generally why you see them restricted to Nobles, and in later pre-gun powder the emerging middle class wanted to fight like the nobles too.

That was in the VERY early Medieval period. I'm talking about only DECADES after Rome fell. That's when swords were pretty much restricted to nobles and/or anyone who could afford them.

However during the main centuries of the Medieval period (c.900-1500) it wasn't uncommon to see your average nightwatch-men armed with a halberd or some other pole-arm, along with a long-sword as a side-arm. Also, many kingdoms (esp. England) often equipped their archers with long-swords for use in melee when needed.

Just as a side note: The long-sword was originally given to archers as it was longer than the average sword so archers could keep their distance in melee as they would only be wearing light armor (leather and/or light chain mail). after a while however, common infantry and nobles fell in love with the blade because of its added length and added weight due to the length which added to its killing power.

**Mega Dux Bob** · February 28, 2007, 03:12 PM

Originally Posted by Necromancer

However during the main centuries of the Medieval period (c.900-1500) it wasn't uncommon to see your average nightwatch-men armed with a halberd or some other pole-arm, along with a long-sword as a side-arm. Also, many kingdoms (esp. England) often equipped their archers with long-swords for use in melee when needed.

Nobody was equipped that the state's expense in the Middle Ages except maybe the larger town militias. Soldiers were required to equip themselves with such and such arms.. Early on the levies were to arm themselves with something like a spear and a shield as a minimum. Those who could afford more bought more but for the average commoner a suite of armor and a sword was a lot of money for something they would rarely need.

The English archers you are citing were well equipped because they made a lot of money off looting France and were semi professional soldiers so a sword was a good investment for them.