Darkage Danes Preview

[SicilianVespers]

The Darkage Danes are being reskined, based on Disgruntled Goats 1066 skins. Here is a small preview:

Hirðmenn (Bodyguard)




Riddarar


The normal map has been fixed in the final version.

Húskarlar


The normal map has been fixed in the final version.


Víkingr



Víkingr (upgrade 1)


The normal map has been fixed in the final version.

Boendr Archers




The Boendr are from Disgruntled Goat's 1066 mod, and the rest of the models are derivatives of DG's work.

[zmv]

Looking good

[DaVinci]

Yeah, cool.

[SicilianVespers]

First post updated with new Riddarar.

[DaVinci]

Troop number of such a Riddarar unit should be reduced, as for the Vikings is the same valid, what i described for the Saxons in regard of mounted units.

[Gwyn ap Nud]

Nice! The Isles will be much more fun to play in now!

[SicilianVespers]

First post updated with new Hirðmenn bodyguard.

[DaVinci]

Actually i wouldn't make them double-handed axemen, and also not one-handed axeman (and if though, then mixed with sword-bearers).
Believe me, the viking warrior who was wealthy enough, had an excellent sword as his primary weapon.
Axes were also for the Vikings weapons that carried the most poor men in the field.
It is a myth, that Vikings were axe wielding warriors in the whole. This is only correct for just the warriors who hadn't money or just not the position to afford a fine sword ... often the so-called Vikingr who either used a one-hand axe (their rusty tool) or surely sometimes also a two-handed axe if they were usually people who had a lot to do with trees/wood
The double-handed battle-axe as the so-called 'dane-axe' came later into use, first in the 11th century, and not uniquely by Vikings.
Nonetheless some rich Vikings had as well fine ornamented expensive created one-handed battle-axes, but rather as 'prunk' weapon, just besides the highly honored and even "holy" sword, which was 100% primarily used in battles. Besides the sword, the spear was wide-spread used as well by Vikings. The axe-myth is caused by the merely poor Vikingr, who were indeed (partly) the "robbers" ... on "Viking campaign", what originally means something like "being on a raiding campaign" - so evolved the name 'Vikingr'.
Of course those men would make up the bulk of Viking or Danish armies in this time frame, but from up the Karlar unit, they wouldn't have a poor axe. I suggest to give the Karlar a spear or a sword as well, a poorer sword-version.
What i say here isn't a guess, it is historical fact, at least according to my book about the Viking culture.

[Vonwolfi]

Actually i wouldn't make them double-handed axemen, and also not one-handed axeman (and if though, then mixed with sword-bearers).
Believe me, the viking warrior who was wealthy enough, had an excellent sword as his primary weapon.
Axes were also for the Vikings weapons that carried the most poor men in the field.
It is a myth, that Vikings were axe wielding warriors in the whole. This is only correct for just the warriors who hadn't money or just not the position to afford a fine sword ... often the so-called Vikingr who either used a one-hand axe (their rusty tool) or surely sometimes also a two-handed axe if they were usually people who had a lot to do with trees/wood
The double-handed battle-axe as the so-called 'dane-axe' came later into use, first in the 11th century, and not uniquely by Vikings.
Nonetheless some rich Vikings had as well fine ornamented expensive created one-handed battle-axes, but rather as 'prunk' weapon, just besides the highly honored and even "holy" sword, which was 100% primarily used in battles. Besides the sword, the spear was wide-spread used as well by Vikings. The axe-myth is caused by the merely poor Vikingr, who were indeed (partly) the "robbers" ... on "Viking campaign", what originally means something like "being on a raiding campaign" - so evolved the name 'Vikingr'.
Of course those men would make up the bulk of Viking or Danish armies in this time frame, but from up the Karlar unit, they wouldn't have a poor axe. I suggest to give the Karlar a spear or a sword as well, a poorer sword-version.
What i say here isn't a guess, it is historical fact, at least according to my book about the Viking culture.

I have a personal library on the subject of vikings, and you are giving inaccurate info here.

The spear, is the most common weapon of the viking age.

Swords while widespread, were an expensive weapon, that was not nearly as widespread as the the use of the spear, one handed axes were relatively rare compared to either spear or sword. The Franks commonly used a one handed axe, but other cultures it would be relatively rare. Significant enough to have perhaps a unit that has them, but not a main unit type in england or scandia.

The biggest point you are incorrect on is the use of two handed axes.

It is COMPLETLY Correct for late viking age body guard units to be two handed axe-men, there should either be bodyguards or an elite unit that are heavily mailed two-handed, single bladed, axemen.

In the 11th century and arguablly the better half of the 10th century, the Danish 'bearded axe' (single bladed, 2-handed long handled) became a very effective weapon, that was used across the board in both Viking and Saxon armies, especially in wealthy or royal armies. They were NOT a 'poorman's' weapon; there were actually organized, well-outfitted 'elite' bodyguard units, designed around the effectivness of the weapon, Swords were for the leaders, Karls, and men who could afford them. THESE axemen were the chosen elites, chosen for thier prowess and effectiveness, and not necessarily thier social standing. It is arguable however that you would have to have some wealth to be a member of one of these units, as the armor for these units was the best regionally available mail at the time. The stats should make them 'stronger units' than the upper class 'sword units' that reflect wealth enough to wield them, and assuredly good equiptment, but not necessarily the superior physical uniformity, and hand-picked quality of these elite bearded axemen.

Its use is historical traceable, and is recorded in several historical records. It was thought to be introduced by the Vikings first, and bodyguards or elite units of these men ruled the battlefield, because they crushed spearmen and swordsmen, and when in tight formation, were able to repel cavalry, and take men off thier horses.

By 1020-1040, the ROYAL armies of the English, Danes , Norwegians, and probably the continental Saxons were using such men, as elite units, not just an effective, mixed in weapon choice. They are very simular to the levy saxon spearmen in Chiv 3.2, but better equiped. Men for these units were chosen for thier strength and height, since it took a certain amount of strength, stamina, and leverage to wield these weapons for any amount of time effectively on the battlefield.

It is currently the historical belief that the Saxon king Harold, had a bodyguard and elite of atleast 500 men that fought in this manner, and because of military discipline, and better outfitting, by 1066 his bodyguard of two-handed axemen, where superior too the vikings version. It is argued this may have been the 'real' reason Harald Hardrada of Norway lost at Stamford bridge - he underestimated his foe, who had been learning and improving on his enemies own tactics.

After the battle of Hastings however, and subsiquent Norman conquests, in northern europe focus shifted eventually, to Cavalry and armor, rather than heavy two handed mailed infantry, and the tactics that supported the bearded axemen, and the axemen themselves, fell out of favor as the Kings elite. Obviously armored 2handed axe wielding units continued on for some time as better units, but never were they again looked upon as the 'ultimate' unit , as they were in the 11th century.

They were real, they were often uniformed and familiar with multiple formations, and in the 11th century in England and Scandinavia, for a while considered the most dangerous unit in the field. But it was short time, and only in these 2 regions, specifically because neither was particulary proficient in thier Cavalry, as thier Continental neighbors already were, or were becoming.

So in Summary - late English, Norwegian, Danish, and scandio-baltic regions should either have bodyguard and or elite units that are top-outfitted, fully mailed, two-handed bearded axemen, in the late period, and is arguably as appropriate as any other weapon for the bodyguard in the middle era of the viking age as well, since uniformity itself of weapons in units is questionable in northern european armies anyway in the middle early viking age... The english ones should have a superior final upgrade to the scandinavian ones in the Late Age. Im not sure on the history of what I'm about to say, but I wouldnt be suprised t see the Rus, and the Byzantine Varangian Units also using the Northern Euro 2h axemen model themselves for elite units in thier armies of this time.

And one handed axes should not be a unit in either English, or Scandinavian armies. Maybe in the HRE, or Frankish armies but not in such numbers as this. Maybe as dismounted Ridarrar units or something if you want 1h axe men available, but not as a main/common unit type. It really bothered me in 3.2 that all my 'vikings' had one-handed axes. If you wanted it to be accurate it would be like 50% had a spear, 35% a sword, 10-15% 2handed axe, and at most 5-10?% a one handed axe... - Not always, there would be huge variants by army, but overall if you counted the heads of all Scando-warriors of the time, thats what you would get or something close to that. What I'm getting at is that for units, the 'viking' unit should be portrayed as either a spear and/or sword unit, and NEVER a one handed axe only unit.

And English units should be more Spear-heavy than the Scandinavian ones, as, the English made more use of levy spearmen, than the more mercanary/professional raiders/soldiers of the Scandinavians. Though the spear was the most common weapon in a Viking army, it was even moreso in the Saxon army of the time.

The most common weapon in the English King Harolds army at 'Hastings' against the Normans, was the Infantry Spear.

Any questions feel free to ask. I've been studying this era for years, and have access to alot of data.

[Vonwolfi]

So this is what I would do with the units if possible (I understand these are 1066 and Dg's skins/models, but hear me out)

The preview bodyguards are accurate for the LATE period. Except the Axe should not be double bladed. arguably good for the middle period as well. non-upgrade, you might use a chain-mailed sword unit if thats possible. but late should DEFINETLY be 2h single bladed axe. Armor looks good too. if the commander had a random weapon that would be great... if its even possible. If I had to choose, the commander model in this unit would have a sword.

The Huskarlar should be sword and shield, or a few 2h axes mixed in.
Mail upgrade 1 and 2, mail shirt early, - or some lighter varient of full mail.
These models are fine, but the axe is innacurate, swords for sure if possible.

Vikingr Model is fine, but should be spears and/or swords and shield, not 1h axes. or atleast not all one-handed axes.

If you wanted a 1h axe unit, may I suggest 'dismounted ridarrar'?

It actually makes sense, the franks and normans were both cav savy, and atleast in the Franks case it is assumed that 1h axes were common fare, most likely dating back to the Frankish peoples admiration of the axe as a weapon of war. The Scandinavians were intimate with how these cultures were outfitted (in this case frankish and norman dark age cav units), and would do the same if it were to an advantage for thier horse units.

Make a dismounted version, of what you have already, and voila! you have your 1h axe unit.

That way regardless of perfect accuracy (due to a limitation of game mechanics) you would end up with roughly appropriate weapon ratios in Scandia armies, and all your weapon choices covered.

Just my two cents, I know you may want to leave them the way they are but if you can change them, and you want accuracy...

[SicilianVespers]

The axe has the AP attibute, I am not sure that a sword bodyguard will be able to hold up vs the Knights.

I was also thinking they need a low level spear unit as well, I will bast it on the Vikingar above.

[DaVinci]

a sword bodyguard will be able

... just give 'em ap.
Naturally it is your decision, but at least you got above a proper historical advice in this matter

[Hengest]

Have to agree with DaVinci, your research in both unit qualities and names (name forms) is totally unhistorical I'm afraid. Perhaps you are not going for HA. They do look nice though, good work.

[SicilianVespers]

Have to agree with DaVinci, your research in both unit qualities and names (name forms) is totally unhistorical I'm afraid. Perhaps you are not going for HA. They do look nice though, good work.

Feel free to give suggestion, there is always room for improvement.

[DaVinci]

In addition to my general comment above:

Hirdmenn - extrafine-sword and shield, helm/mask, lamellar and mail armour

Riddarar - questionable unit(-name), not sure, perhaps a scouting mounted unit would be correct, but rather not such a high armoured one with axe.
Suggest to make him light armoured with spear and shield or sword and shield without mail hauberk, just leather and lamellar armour, if they are nobles

Húskarlar - ("professionals", nobles) similar to Hirdmenn, as Hirdmenn are just handselected Húskarlar, the absolute elite Húskarlar

Karlar - (free men, mainly with their own farms), medium-good equipment and skill, but mainly better than pendent units from other factions, as also these would have access to traditional Viking weaponry, just bit poorer than the Huskarls. Ie. simple helm, lighter armour (leather-lamellar-mix), shield, sword and/or spear

Vikingr - (most poor folks, but brave), no armour (upgraded yes, to reflect their raids), partly a helm, axe, shield. Pretty much as you have them now

Boendr - (i do not know the name, but might be correct), looking very cool as you have them, don't see a necessary change, but troop number would be lower, while Vikings were quite good archers. Eventhough they would have good melee capability.

[sirfiggin]

wada minute, these are the 1066 units! does that mean some of the features of that mod will be in the darkage era?

[SicilianVespers]

wada minute, these are the 1066 units! does that mean some of the features of that mod will be in the darkage era?

Actually, only the Boendr unit is 1066, I made the others based on Disgruntled Goats Saxons and the Norse models/textures. Unfortunately, the Norse Huntsmen (our Boendr) is the only Norse unit he finished.

I will use what I can, as I am a big fan of DG's work.

I was playtesting last night as the Danes, and we are in for some very bloody battles. It's a nice chnage to get away from cavalry.

In addition to my general comment above:

Hirdmenn - extrafine-sword and shield, helm/mask, lamellar and mail armour

Perhaps we can use the one handed animation, and add a sword as a second primary weapon?

Riddarar - questionable unit(-name), not sure, perhaps a scouting mounted unit would be correct, but rather not such a high armoured one with axe.
Suggest to make him light armoured with spear and shield or sword and shield without mail hauberk, just leather and lamellar armour, if they are nobles

There is already a scout unit, I for get what I called them. Just Scouts in danish. Spejder or somethinf to this effect.

After testing I am beginning to think we should unlock this unit later based on an event. They are the Mounted Huscarls of Early+. Riddarar means mouted Riders, and lated Knights or something to this effect

Húskarlar - ("professionals", nobles) similar to Hirdmenn, as Hirdmenn are just handselected Húskarlar, the absolute elite Húskarlar

I agree.

Karlar - (free men, mainly with their own farms), medium-good equipment and skill, but mainly better than pendent units from other factions, as also these would have access to traditional Viking weaponry, just bit poorer than the Huskarls. Ie. simple helm, lighter armour (leather-lamellar-mix), shield, sword and/or spear

This will be a new spear unit based on the Vikingr.

Vikingr - (most poor folks, but brave), no armour (upgraded yes, to reflect their raids), partly a helm, axe, shield. Pretty much as you have them now

I agree.

Boendr - (i do not know the name, but might be correct), looking very cool as you have them, don't see a necessary change, but troop number would be lower, while Vikings were quite good archers. Eventhough they would have good melee capability.

I usually see them as Bondi in English, I believe it was more a social class than a unit type. They were heads of households, like a small free farmer.

[DaVinci]

Some more info about the Skandinavian people in the Dark age, by other people called 'Vikings' or also 'Normans', in regard of their weapon and warrior cult:

- A real warrior, might be only a Huskarl (and of course the Hirdmenn and every nobleman). Those guys swore to die for their overlords, so these men wouldn't ever retreat in a fight.

- The common warrior deployed by them was after all a pagan. These pagans in old-germanic tradition wouldn't ever be cowards, because they thought, they would only have a good afterlife, when they die in battle, so never a Viking, equal which social class, would be a coward. This is, what made them that feared, in a time as every other europeans were already christians.

- All those real warriors were trained from childhood on, like it is known from later knights. They learned how to fight with sword, spear (trusting and throwing), axe, knife and bow.

- The sword and their spears were "holy", they have given their weapons even names!

- Very less of Skandinavian warriors would've ever fought mounted, whereas they had horses sometimes, but would have dismounted before the battle.

[Giovi]

excelent work as always

[thesmiter1]

looking good. i'm dying for the next release, but by all means, take as much time as you need to make it awesome. don't give in to impatient people and keep up the good work!

giovi that's a messed up quote in your sig. i'm armenian, among other things (we americans are usually muts ) and have relatives (well, had, they died a few years ago) that lived through the genocide and things like this must be remembered, so that the same thing doesn't happen to anyone ever again.