Tsardoms Total War - General Discussion & Progress

[Son of Serbia]

Check out this thread. It will either be red and blue flag along with white eagle on a red field as Coat of Arms (the Nemanjic house CoA), or Dušan's imperial yellow flag with a red eagle on it. My personal suggestion was to use both - for example, the former for common units, and the latter for comanding units. As for your other concern, the starting date of the mod is the period of Serbian medieval state's peak. Dušan is to become a Tsar at the start of the game, afterall. You'll be having lots of mines (ya know - Saxon dudes being present, Serbia and Bosnia producing one third of European silver supply at the time and such), so if you play it smart, you ought not to run outta cash - become bankrupt, as you put it, and armies you'll be fielding will definitely amount to more than 8 units. Serbia is not a minor faction in this mod. On the contrary - it's really important. Cheers.

[Alucard666]

Hey TeamTsardom I have a question regarding to unit armor, when you posted of Serbia, there was a unit picture of the Bashtniks, one seems to be wearing a Morion, a typical Spanish Conqusitador helmet, I tried looking it up to see i it was involved in the Byzantine/Balkans, but it has no info on it, what gives? Is it a Morion or a different version of a Kettle hat?

[Son of Serbia]

As you know, I'm not a member of the Team, but if you had this picture in mind:

I can definitely say it's a kettle hat, both the one on the soldier on your right-hand side, and the one on the soldier on your left-hand side.. Aside from Spaniards, the English, the Germans, the Swedes, the Italians... also used morion helmets, but it was put in use in XVI century, and Tsardoms pretty much... ends then.

If the pointy tip on the top of the leftmost helmet is what got you thinking there's a morion on this picture, then check out this XV century kettle hat:


If the slope on the rightmost helmet's brim is the reason - well, the morion is normally taller and it's supposed to have a crest or a tip on the top. Kettle hat again.

Cheers.

[Alucard666]

As you know, I'm not a member of the Team, but if you had this picture in mind:

I can definitely say it's a kettle hat, both the one on the soldier on your right-hand side, and the one on the soldier on your left-hand side.. Aside from Spaniards, the English, the Germans, the Swedes, the Italians... also used morion helmets, but it was put in use in XVI century, and Tsardoms pretty much... ends then.

If the pointy tip on the top of the leftmost helmet is what got you thinking there's a morion on this picture, then check out this XV century kettle hat:


If the slope on the rightmost helmet's brim is the reason - well, the morion is normally taller and it's supposed to have a crest or a tip on the top. Kettle hat again.

Cheers.

Da, its the slope to the right that got me thinking of the Morion, it just looks super close to that of one does anyone have any evidence or pictures on that one, because that is a very rare find for a Kettle Hat in the Byzantines

[Son of Serbia]

Here's the actual reference picture for that kettle hat, from an Osprey book:
*removed due to copyright issue, I was unaware of it*

[Alucard666]

Here's the actual reference picture for that kettle hat, from an Osprey book:

Beautiful, thank for that enlightenment, will rep you when I reach to 50 posts

This is kinda off topic but since your online did you get my PM?

[Son of Serbia]

I got it when I first replied to your question here, but had to go offline. Then I got back and saw your other post here, and decided to first reply to it, then to your PM.

[Alucard666]

I got another question TeamTsardom, I looked up Medieval Serbian Army, and it says that theres another type of infantry called a Voynici, am I mistaken as another unit that you guys covered or what?

[phoenix[illusion]]

I got another question TeamTsardom, I looked up Medieval Serbian Army, and it says that theres another type of infantry called a Voynici, am I mistaken as another unit that you guys covered or what?

serbian: vojnici ; english: voynitsi were freemen who had their own land and had to provide military service, but were not nobility. they are equal to serjeants from england. so, there is no really need for unit such as vojnici, since vojnici could be bowmen, spearmen etc. (mostly those two in medieval serbia). on serbian word vojnici was delivered from word vojina, vojevati, which means wage war, serbians translate vojnici as soldier on english.

[Alucard666]

serbian: vojnici ; english: voynitsi were freemen who had their own land and had to provide military service, but were not nobility. they are equal to serjeants from england. so, there is no really need for unit such as vojnici, since vojnici could be bowmen, spearmen etc. (mostly those two in medieval serbia). on serbian word vojnici was delivered from word vojina, vojevati, which means wage war, serbians translate vojnici as soldier on english.

So basically its not a considered unit right?

[phoenix[illusion]]

So basically its not a considered unit right?

well, they do in medieval serbia, but it can't be represented in mod. vojnici in nowadays means soldiers, but in those days it was hierarchy status. i said, they were similar to english serjeants, if you know about them, freemen with their land, but as there was no dressing code for them (and many others), vojnici could be dresses in any kind of armor, what suits that freemen, usually they were bowmen or spearmen, but they could also be crossbowmen, king only demanded of vojnici to serve serbian army. in serbia there was sebri (serfs in medieval england, they divide onto meropsi, vlasi, zanatlije, sokalnici and otroci (slaves)), vojnici (serjeants in medieval england), baštnici (lower nobility with small landhold), pronijari (same as pronoia in byzanitine army, men with no hereditary on gain land by fighting), vlastela (high nobles)

so basically, vojnici would be all three units, spearmen, bowmen and crossbowmen. it can't be represented as one unit, but three, or even more (swordsmen which we don't have, cause it was more nobility thing)

as for that helmet, that is probably bent kettlehat or two piece helmet. it was quite popular in serbia, and you have it on this fresco, look at soldiers in the middle, not those in red block. 13th century fresco

http://www.kazic.org/Velika%20Freska%20Internet%202.jpg

[Gravedigger 1970]

Will Tsardom of Serbia have unit of cavalry streltsy(Dusanovi strelci) ???

[Wallachian]

Hmm I doubt Serbia will be getting any more units. But there will be more upgrades of the units already shown. Phoenix would know better. What are the streltsy? Always thought of them as the XVIth century Russian guys.

[Gravedigger 1970]

Hmm I doubt Serbia will be getting any more units. But there will be more upgrades of the units already shown. Phoenix would know better. What are the streltsy? Always thought of them as the XVIth century Russian guys.

I think that they were also Serbian guys, but i am not sure about that. Some historians mentioned a unit who Dusan led in battle of Velbuzd and after when he came to power. It was unit of Dusan's streltsy, so because that i ask about them. For them they are cavalry with bow(or crossbow) who after releasing arrows go against enemy with sword(or with mace or axe) and with shield, but others say that it was other name for infantry, i don't know what is correct, so because that i ask this.

[Son of Serbia]

Serbian "strelci" can mean shooters or bowmen ("strela" meaning arrow, like in Russian).

Personally, I never heard of some "special" unit marked strelci in the battle of Velbužd. Perhaps (or instead: most probably) the author(s) of the text(s) you've read referred to bowmen. Maybe there was intent to point out their excellence in archery (in authors opinion), thus they were distinguished amongst the other army branches.

On the other hand, I do recall reading about the Serbian medieval state employing horse archery in warfare, on more than one occasion, so this might be an interesting topic to think about. Let's see what do the team conclude.

Edit: I know you folks here are not all too excited with the Osprey books, (and yet they're often found as a source of inspiration in unit making ), but you all certainly remember this picture:
*removed due to copyright issue, I was unaware of it*
I do remember some Bulgarian fellows disputing the origin of the warrior labeled "1", but here's the related description:

l: Serbian auxiliary, 14th century
The frescoes of c. 1309-14 on which this figure is based demonstrate that 14th century Serbian equipment, like 14th century Bulgarian, differed little from that of Byzantium, though the Serbs, whilst making some use of the triangular shield by then preferred in the Empire, continued to favour the almond-shaped variety. Their preferred weapon combination appears to have been lance (still often wielded overarm), sword, mace and composite bow. The fact that Serbian armoured cavalry of the 13th and 14th centuries were prepared to fight as horse-archers is confirmed by Kantakouzenos' military memoirs and pictures in Serbian manuscripts. Certainly the Serbs in the Nicaean army at the Battle of Pelagonia in 1259 were horse-archers.

[Gravedigger 1970]

Maybe they were like russian dvor calvary, heavy horse archers. But despite they were horse archers they had a heavy armor and was very good in melee fight. This is my view of Dusans's streltsy, so i think that they were similarly to Serbian auxiliary on that picture.

[2Shy]

#SoS
We better not continue the old discussion (this is not the place to do that) but I was active participant in it so I will do a summary for you- there weren't so big differences in the armies of Serbia,Byzantium and Bulgaria at that time. We have multiple frescues that shows bulgarian cavalry using the same equipment (even the bow(proniari)).May be the only thing that distinct them was the shield type (and the helmets at some point).
More diverce were the nobles and thats where was the western influence- the strongest was in Serbia and weakest in Byzantium. But this kind of western armor was very expensive so almost noone could aford it- only the nobles (and even not all of them).
Btw Ofsprey make lots and huge mistakes- from the big mistakes about important people/events to mistaking hungarian,bulgarian,byzantine and serbian warriors.

[Son of Serbia]

We better not continue the old discussion

Nor am I quite interested in it. Plus, I wasn't an

active participant

I just wanted to put in the quickest example of mentioning of horse-archery in the ranks of the Serbian medieval armies.

there weren't so big differences in the armies of Serbia,Byzantium and Bulgaria at that time.

Which is exactly what the so much criticized Osprey says on the matter (check the description).

We have multiple frescues that shows bulgarian cavalry using the same equipment (even the bow(proniari)).May be the only thing that distinct them was the shield type (and the helmets at some point).

Not sure if you want to say that there were similar fashioned horse-archer warriors in medieval Bulgaria and Serbia (which fits in with the previously quoted stance of yours), or if you're implying that there were no horse-archers in Serbian army.

Honestly, I am in quite a mess with the exams these days, so I'm currently unable to go hunting for evidence, but I'm pretty sure I did read about Serbian horse-archers somewhere. Now, whether it's a trustworthy source is something I can't claim at the moment. What I would like to know is if there were indeed this type of warriors in the armies of Serbian crown during the mod time (which I myself would highly expect, considering 1. the significant number of horse-archers (and skirmishers) the Byzantium fielded, 2. the game of "copy-paste" that Bulgarians and Serbs played with the Byzantine, 3. utilization of the bows - composite ones included by the infantry branch of the army, 4. importance of (if non-missile) cavalry in the Serbian army, etc), was their sway (be it in numbers or otherwise) significant or not, and if the answer is affirmative - why aren't they included in the roster. If there's a possibility (validated by the historical facts - which I would much like to hear from the team, those members that did the research of the Serbian army in particular) to add some type of missile cavalry, I would've been much happier with the roster - it would've been all-round that way.

As for the picture - I see no reason for it to be inaccurate - pteruges, scale armor, lamellar armor, almond shields, triangular shields, lances, composite bows, swords, sabres, mail armor, various helmet types - you name it - could've been found throughout the Byzantine, Bulgarian, and Serbian armies - I think there's no arguing that.

Btw,

Btw Ofsprey make lots and huge mistakes

and yet it is quite often used as a source in these parts.

Oh, and thanks for the reply.

Edit:

Gravedigger

Maybe they were like russian dvor calvary, heavy horse archers.

Maybe, but I don't think they wouldn't have been too much armored. Anyway, this is where some historical source would come in handy. Perhaps you could share those texts that you mentioned before with us, if you still think the authors were not referring to footmen, but to cavalry.

[2Shy]

As far as I know there were serbian horsearchers. Usually the historians try present that the bulgarians didn't have missile cavaly (because of the huge number of nomad horsearchers used by the bulgarian tsars as merceneries- cumans,tatars, etc).But in fact there were as we see here:

Btw I have the impresion that you think that the serbian rooster lack of missile cavalry, but the proniari are in fact 2 different units- one missile and one melee.

And yes- I was trying to say that there were similar fashioned horse-archer warriors in medieval Bulgaria and Serbia.

I was just trying to say that the origin of the so called "warrior labeled "1"" can be both serbian,byzantine and bulgarian- the proniari(the local land owners) where basicly the same everywhere.

Osprey have unique pictures with incredible art and thats the reason almost all unit makers use them as base material. Sadly some of them are wrong and when they talk about eastern europe/balkans there are more mistaken than correct facts.

Edit- even if the horsearchers on the picteres are almost identical ironicly the "serbian auxiliary" looks more like the bulgarian counterpart then the serbian (osprey rlz )!

[Son of Serbia]

The general answer to your post: we're cool, then.

Now with the details:

Usually the historians try present that the bulgarians didn't have missile cavaly

Sincerely, I'm not in the course with this question, but didn't the old Bulgars make a significant use of missile cavalry? One would expect the tradition to live on, right?

Btw I have the impresion that ou think that the serbian rooster lack of missile cavalry, but the proniari are in fact 2 different units- one missile and one melee.

I was indeed under that impression - I thought that I would succumb to the Ottoman arrows fired from upon the horses, with no real means to stop the tragedy! How did I miss this piece of information? Were the pronijari archers previewed? I don't think I saw 'em. Yay, missile cavalry!

And yes- I was trying to say that there were similar fashioned horse-archer warriors in medieval Bulgaria and Serbia.

I was just trying to say that the origin of the so called "warrior labeled "1"" can be both serbian,byzantine and bulgarian- the proniari(the local land owners) where basicly the same everywhere.

Agreed.

Osprey have unique pictures with incredible art and thats the reason almost all unit makers use them as base material. Sadly some of them are wrong and when they talk about eastern europe/balkans there are more mistakes than correct facts.

Agreed. Though the picture in question doesn't seem to have major flaws.