Vaegirs vs. Swadians

[CptSalty]

I feel like the vaegirs really get the short end of the stick here. I have two characters, one on each side, each at about lvl 14-16. With the swadians, I see 5-10 enemies just fall from crossbow pepperings. The vaegirs may be better at melee, but the player character usually just distracts them. I think the vaegir ranged aspect should be improved. Comments? Complaints? Rants on how I'm a homosexual and how I should fall of t3h intran3t?

 

[NikkTheTrick]

Rants on how I'm a homosexual and how I should fall of t3h intran3t?

You are the first one confessing

 

[Narcissus]

Actually, CptSalty ... I think that the Vaegirs are supposed to be the 'under-dogs' in this conflict. I like to see them as the more barbaric of the two sides ... the 'regular guy' as it were.

I do think that the Swadians have an advantage over the Vaegirs ... I'm just unsure as to whether it was intentional or not.

Narcissus

 

[Dynamite_cow]

A real vaegir hero can easily fight with 50 crossbow bolts in him. Actually, they make him stronger, because he looses the remaining mind control and goes berserk!

Well yeah, they are a bit disadvantaged. Maybe the vaegir parties should be bigger then?

 

[Oggy]

Dynamite cow's got the right idea

 

[NikkTheTrick]

Introduce archers to Vaegir parties. That will make them even.

 

[Elias_Maluco]

Swadians are in advantage for sure. They have the best armor and horses, and their crossbow men are the devil.

Still, I like the Vaegirs better and I always choose their side.

 

[Vitas]

Well, swadians may have plate armours and whatever they want, but we vaegirs have big axes and large amounts of ale always ready, so we crush every Swadian iron-clad cryboy anytime we want

 

[sooch90]

ah, well I see vaegirs as like more nomadic people. Kinda reminds me of Rohan, which makes me like them. So their horseman aren't so much of knights with heavey armor, but more like a nomadic group of horseman. Which I think fits better for this game.

1) Because of the limited number of soldiers.

2) Because when you have a party of horseman, their armor looks different from eachother. So when you have vaegirs, who look more like nomads, it fits to them. It makes them look like each soldier bought his own armor. But with Swadian horseman or whatever, they wear heavy armor that looks very professional, but their armor differs from eachother. So it doesn't exactly look like they're proffessional soldiers because their armor is all different, but yet it's very heavy looking, so it doesn't fit.

that's why i think vaegirs are better.

 

[Sir Prince]

I see the vaegirs, well, look it up in the gizillion other threads about this same bloody topic that I've posted my idea in.

 

[Tarrak]

In general the Swadians are heavier and will normally defeat their direct counterpart in the Vaegir army. So indeed the Swadians are stronger.

 

[Mablung]

Tarrak - that may be true but in terms of who is up in the war it could be rather different. If we look at historical examples, the Hundred Years War, we can see that smaller, less heavy armies have triumphed over heavier, technologically advanced armies.

 

[Vitas]

Indeed... and also heavyarmour is quite uncomfortable when fighting in tundra or deserts... that's why swadians could never conquer curaw or khudan, because they'd freeze to death

 

[Luthius]

It's more than equal when i'm fighting for the Vaegirs.

I's the biggest and the baddest ofs all dem Vaegirs! Dat's why i's the boss!

On a side note, a warhammer setting would be ace for a mod

 

[Gilrain]

I believe that Swadians have the advantage, however the underdog does normally come out on top in the long run though.

 

[CptBarnaclebeard]

I would certainly have to agree with those saying the Vaegirs are the underdogs. The Swadian units are usually more heavily armored and have better weapons. To put it into perspective, when I look at a Vaegir prisoner train I think,"Ooohhh sweet prisoners to free." On the other hand, when I look at a Swadian prisoner train I think,"Damn, they have a lot of knights and those damned men-at-arms always manage to nail me or my party members with a couched lance, I think I will let them be."

 

[PersianPaladin]

If you look at the map and the amount of towns that each owns; you will notice that the Vaegirs and Swadians own 8 settlements each.

When it comes to battles; i think Swadians do have some advantages in melee; however Vaegir's can be a crafty bunch and fight like barbarians and move very quickly in light-armored horses.

 

[Nasrudin]

Maybe the Khergits could come into play as auxiliaries or (touch-and-go) allies of the Vaegirs?

 

[graphia]

I guess no-one else has noticed that whenever you join a battle between Vaegirs and Swadians that the Swadians are usually outnumbered quite significantly in the knight and horseman department? Maybe it's just me, but Swadian scout parties are often a couple knights and some footmen and crossbows, but Vaegirs are usually 10~ knights plus and equal number of horsemen.


Gilrain: You *are* kidding, right? I think you've been reading too many books

 

[Tarrak]

Tarrak - that may be true but in terms of who is up in the war it could be rather different. If we look at historical examples, the Hundred Years War, we can see that smaller, less heavy armies have triumphed over heavier, technologically advanced armies.

Sure... But there are no 'bright' commanders to help the Vaegirs out, and no foolish Swadians to help even more. And the two sides use the same tactics (CHARGEEEEE!!!!).
So everything else even, the Swadians are stronger.

But graphia might be onto something. The Vaegirs do tend to be a little stronger in numbers of cavalry, but they hardly bring any ranged troops, which mught explain why I constantly find Sea Raiders with Vaegir prisoners but not so many Swadians, and few Sea Raiders as Vaegir prisoners while a few more as prisoners of the Swadians.
In all it seems like the Sea Raiders do better aginst the Vaegirs.