*
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
June 21, 2024, 04:18:34 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Donate

We Appreciate Your Support

Members
Stats
  • Total Posts: 1698512
  • Total Topics: 118912
  • Online Today: 598
  • Online Ever: 2235
  • (October 29, 2023, 01:32:45 AM)
Users Online

Recent

Author Topic: I am planning on getting 28mm Warring States Chinese, what rule sets work?  (Read 3149 times)

Offline bvandewalker

  • Schoolboy
  • Posts: 7
So I bought $75 worth of Wargames Atlantic store credit via their Vox Populi, which I am saving for my voted topic Warring States Chinese*. I have been  wanting these or one of the other post bronze age Chinese dynasties for fantasy gaming for years (OG universe non-WFB related gaming at that), however I am playing with the idea of duel using these fellows for history gaming once I have them since Warring States is one eras of that actually looks fun to game to me and I already have RGD Scythians that could theoretically stand in for Nomad tribes in the area  (not well, but workable).

So to the point, I am think about rulesets. I do own a copy of  Warhammer Ancients  (not the Art of War, just the basic) and I do have KoW history (which is probably what I will look at), but I would like to know if there are any better or more thematic rulesets for the Warring States era.



*(you can look them over here: https://wargamesatlantic.com/collections/vox-populi/products/warring-states-infantry-1-vote)

Offline SJWi

  • Mastermind
  • Posts: 1721
My "go to" ancient big battle ( ie not skirmish) set are Simon Miller's "To the Strongest" which work for most armies 1200BC - 1485AD. I think they are available from Wargames Vault and have separate books of army lists for the ancient and medieval periods.

Offline SJWi

  • Mastermind
  • Posts: 1721
By the way I've just checked the Ancient Army list book for TTS and there is a whole section for "ancient armies of the Orient" which includes Warring States. 

Offline Keeper Nilbog

  • Scientist
  • Posts: 280
I use "Swordpoint" for my Warring States/3 Kingdoms Chinese armies (though I use the now defunct MM 10mm range, and reduced base sizes). The lists seem fine, and are separate for Warring States and 3 Kingdoms - the end of one is the beginning of the other (move away from Chariots towards Cavalry, and Cavalry becoming a more important arm).

Watching the WA Chinese range (they planned Cavalry and Chariots along with the Infantry - but when we see those is anyone's guess). If you can get a copy of "Art of War", I'd recommend it as it's the best "army/faction" book in my opinion.

Offline FreyaSophie

  • Lurker
  • Posts: 2
There is a ruleset for 28mm titled "Warring States" by Chris Peers that is available from Brigade Games in the US

Offline bvandewalker

  • Schoolboy
  • Posts: 7
These all seem like great suggestions 

I use "Swordpoint" for my Warring States/3 Kingdoms Chinese armies (though I use the now defunct MM 10mm range, and reduced base sizes). The lists seem fine, and are separate for Warring States and 3 Kingdoms - the end of one is the beginning of the other (move away from Chariots towards Cavalry, and Cavalry becoming a more important arm).
 
Didn't know Swordpoint had Chinese lists though I should have figured.

Also believe it or not, while its true chariots where no longer a main weapon or a force measurement for China after awhile, apparently they continued to use them all the way to the Tang Dynasty at least as a large force organizer if the great commander Li Ching account of his own campaign against the Turks is to be believed:

When I conducted the punitive campaign
against the Tu-cheh we traveled westward several thousand li. Narrow
chariots and deer-horn chariots are essential to the army. They allow controlling
the expenditure of energy, provide a defense to the fore, and constrain the
regiments and squads of five.
- Li Ching quote is taken from an  article written by Mitch Williamson found here https://weaponsandwarfare.com/2019/12/19/chinese-chariots/

Watching the WA Chinese range (they planned Cavalry and Chariots along with the Infantry - but when we see those is anyone's guess). If you can get a copy of "Art of War", I'd recommend it as it's the best "army/faction" book in my opinion.

I have been keeping an eye out for that book (we are talking the WHAB book and not the book it takes its name after right?), good to hear a recommendation on it. I am not sure when WA's Chinese Cavalry or Chariots will be a thing though I am kinda of hoping they do the Chariots as the next thing for the Warring States Chinese after the infantry, from what I have read and watched it seemed like getting ride able breeds of horses for cavalry was an ongoing struggle for the Ancient Chinese Empires.
« Last Edit: April 02, 2024, 10:33:18 AM by bvandewalker »

Online jcspqr

  • Librarian
  • Posts: 181
I use WAB.  There is a dedicated warring states supplement. or updated lists in Armies of Antiquity 2.  All available on line. 

For chariots, you might look at the the John Jenkins Designs figures now sold through Eureka.

Offline gregmita

  • Librarian
  • Posts: 144
    • My Gaming Blog
I think those later instances are more appropriately translated as "wagons" or "carriages". From Li Jing's original text, the "narrow chariots" were 偏箱(車), which was more of a mobile pavise, or wooden pavises affixed to a wagon. "Deer antlers" was a term for chval de frise, which could be fixed on the ground or on wagons. In general, he was talking about using wagon forts and other such static defensive lines to stop Turkish cavalry.

This is what the "narrow chariot" is supposed to look like. Basically all shields. It's from a later dynasty, but the same idea. A good discussion of that is here.

https://greatmingmilitary.blogspot.com/2017/02/qi-ji-guangs-che-ying-p1.html



Also believe it or not, while its true chariots where no longer a main weapon or a force measurement for China after awhile, apparently they continued to use them all the way to the Tang Dynasty at least as a large force organizer if the great commander Li Ching account of his own campaign against the Turks is to be believed:

When I conducted the punitive campaign
against the Tu-cheh we traveled westward several thousand li. Narrow
chariots and deer-horn chariots are essential to the army. They allow controlling
the expenditure of energy, provide a defense to the fore, and constrain the
regiments and squads of five.
- Li Ching quote is taken from an  article written by Mitch Williamson found here https://weaponsandwarfare.com/2019/12/19/chinese-chariots/

Offline vodkafan

  • Scatterbrained Genius
  • Posts: 3570
DBA
I am going to build a wargames army, a big beautiful wargames army, and Mexico is going to pay for it.

2019 Painting Challenge :
figures bought: 500+
figures painted: 57
9 vehicles painted
4 terrain pieces scratchbuilt

Offline Cat

  • Mastermind
  • Posts: 1305
  • All Purpose Neko-Sensei
    • Goblinhall
DBA works quite well for Warring States.  If you go with that, figure out what size square base your chariots fit on, and use that for the base width of everything.

Offline bvandewalker

  • Schoolboy
  • Posts: 7
I think those later instances are more appropriately translated as "wagons" or "carriages". From Li Jing's original text, the "narrow chariots" were 偏箱(車), which was more of a mobile pavise, or wooden pavises affixed to a wagon. "Deer antlers" was a term for chval de frise, which could be fixed on the ground or on wagons. In general, he was talking about using wagon forts and other such static defensive lines to stop Turkish cavalry.

This is what the "narrow chariot" is supposed to look like. Basically all shields. It's from a later dynasty, but the same idea. A good discussion of that is here.

https://greatmingmilitary.blogspot.com/2017/02/qi-ji-guangs-che-ying-p1.html



Sorry for being late on this but I think given the single axle, that the Han used them same way, the look of Warring States era chariot designs, and the fact that all chariots are basically just carts that tended to fill the same niche as multi-roll  APCs do today, I feel your trying to mark a difference when there actually is none. Also if the translation I quoted is correct I get the the feeling it was also used as a "pace car" for infantry charges, which is actually something you would want when using formation combat.  But lets agree to disagree.   

Offline WuZhuiQiu

  • Mastermind
  • Posts: 1201
Sorry for being late on this but I think given the single axle, that the Han used them same way, the look of Warring States era chariot designs, and the fact that all chariots are basically just carts that tended to fill the same niche as multi-roll  APCs do today, I feel your trying to mark a difference when there actually is none. Also if the translation I quoted is correct I get the the feeling it was also used as a "pace car" for infantry charges, which is actually something you would want when using formation combat.  But lets agree to disagree.   

I wouldn't impose wargamers' simplifications on China's sophisticated military history...

Offline bvandewalker

  • Schoolboy
  • Posts: 7
That isn't a wargamer simplification, its IRL engineering simplification or more accurately abstract thinking, the sort of thought process my computer engineer father taught me. Its not even that extreme a simplification in this case and a fairly accurate assessment.

Whats more I would say its far less imposing on China's sophisticated military history than the popular but remarkably questionable Eurocentric idea that when the Hellenist world abandoned chariots for warfare everyone else in the world quickly followed suite, particularly given the fact Greece and much of the Mediterranean was kinda of rocky terrain for chariot warfare in first place. 

Offline WuZhuiQiu

  • Mastermind
  • Posts: 1201
That isn't a wargamer simplification, its IRL engineering simplification or more accurately abstract thinking, the sort of thought process my computer engineer father taught me. Its not even that extreme a simplification in this case and a fairly accurate assessment.

Whats more I would say its far less imposing on China's sophisticated military history than the popular but remarkably questionable Eurocentric idea that when the Hellenist world abandoned chariots for warfare everyone else in the world quickly followed suite, particularly given the fact Greece and much of the Mediterranean was kinda of rocky terrain for chariot warfare in first place.

The Chinese character that would have been employed subsumes many kinds of wheeled vehicle. That the word "chariot" appears in both cases in that quote from a translation does not mean that the vehicles were the same as each other, nor that they were the same as chariots from much earlier dynasties.

Again, China's long tradition of sophisticated military doctrine implies that different types of wheeled vehicles would have had different uses.

I would not use modern day simplifications to infer that ancient Chinese military doctrine was simple, and I do not see how such simplifications could be deemed "accurate" without considering Chinese military tradition and archaeology...

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
36 Replies
17981 Views
Last post April 09, 2015, 10:28:13 PM
by robh
1 Replies
1687 Views
Last post February 26, 2015, 08:44:16 AM
by LotB
6 Replies
3754 Views
Last post April 22, 2015, 02:03:48 PM
by WatchfuliStudio
8 Replies
2673 Views
Last post March 23, 2015, 06:15:35 PM
by WatchfuliStudio
4 Replies
876 Views
Last post June 30, 2022, 01:13:53 PM
by YPU