by Mythic Games, Inc.
I have to agree with @Danny. These sculpts are amazing, but... When we look at the sum of everything contained in the core box, the add-ons and the stretch goals (including what is expected in Apocalypse), it seems to me that there is only a few missing elements needed to give the Joan of Arc Universe a sense of completeness. I mean, we still do not have scouts and Burgundian characters, and I am sure we could use a few nuns or religious sisters, a minstrel, and a few characters for the role players (male and female rogues, etc…). I will be extremely happy if we can, unlock a new expansion addressing the invasion of Eastern Europe by the Turks, but I cannot help but feel that Mythic is going too fast and skipping the last few elements that could complete their Hundred Years war setting. Just my two cents… Despite all that I am still going all-in and I am convinced that Iwill have fun with the sipahis!
Not in Europe.
Though, trying to argue with every voice of dissent is indicative of poor customer service. What exactly are you trying to achieve?
@Christopher I think it's because they know they are heard that some feel entitled to try to steer the game to their own personnal vision. I'm all for expressing your opinions, but let's all remember that we're in a good place, and that your opinion is not the only one and threatening to remove your pledge because of a few minis the actual developpers thought were a good idea to GIVE for free is childish at best.
I've seen that yesterday too, people ask for more coops and solos when in the first live of this campaign, Leo clearly said no coops were planned because this game is all about scenarios. Now they give a few per add on because it's a popular demand, which is great, but people now ask for 10+ as if this game was made for solo and coop in the first place!
@Lachlan So it would be better if he didn't read anything and never answered? In fact, that would be like most of the KSes I've seen lol...
@Lachlan. Look up nicopolis crusade at the end of 14th century. French Knights vs jannisaries.
That said, while it's great to have another faction, I hope they do them enough justice.
Such fantastic minis! These last two stretch goals are two of my favorite.
@Jean Haha, no not that! I meant his tone in this instance (Such as calling Danny’s view narrow minded).
@Tungsten I don’t believe Janissaries were present at Nicopolis.
That being said, my comment wasn’t intended to be interpreted negatively. I love the minis.
@Lachlan - Wikipedia lists the Battle of Nicopolis as one of the engagements that Janissaries took part in. Wikipedia is not always the most reliable of sources, but it's probably listed in there for a reason. :)
Well, I can't blame QW, he does over 12-14 hours of this every day for the last 3 weeks taking in opinions, and people like Danny straight up say they OBJECT to getting gifts in the form of stretch goals because they would rather have other things. I mean, it has to be insulting to give good news about giving more for the same amount of money and having people just say I'd rather not have that, like AT ALL. It's sad really...
@Danny - It's possible that the reason for their inclusion will make more sense when we see the entire expansion that is being unlocked for us through stretch goals (we will unlock the last of this expansion at 1.5 million). At this point we are just looking at a couple of pieces of the puzzle.
I think Lachlan might in some way be right. Trying to engage with everyone who complains about concerns that sound petty is not constructive, and only seems to encourage them. I think it's great that Jake and Leo go out of their way to talk to everybody, but not everybody returns the favor of engaging reasonably, stating their opinion in one or two conversations and then moving on. We saw the same thing in Mythic Battles Pantheon, once people saw they would be rewarded with attention when they complained about the female outfits, it lasted all campaign. Perhaps it is a sign of how inoffensive this game is that it's only really started now, over contemporary soldier miniatures by people who view Eastern Europe as not part of Europe, but it also shows it doesn't take much to wind some people up.
@Frank I agree. Now that people saw their opinions are listened to and even answered individually, some people are shifting their phrasing from opinions to actual demands. It's a testament to how good this campaign is run that we haven't seen this behavior pop up earlier!
@ All - Thanks all for your comments pertaining to me expressing my opinion, especially those so infantile to feel threatened enough by a freely expressed and reasonably put opinion, that they then in turn feel the need to counter them :)
@ Jake - Thanks for your replies mate, much appreciated. My views aren't narrow minded, let-a-lone *extremely* narrow minded, they are quite simply views that would focus on and add to the theme of the game, in my opinion of course :)
Well my vote is they are awesome and I am glad to have them. I think its great that QW addresses people that have a concern or complaint and not just positive comments. That is exactly what makes great customer service. And QW said Danny had a narrow view (of what this game can contain), not that he is a narrow minded person (which is a form of an insult). Very different.
@Frank Thanks, that was exactly what I was thinking (but put forth much more eloquently!).
It is great the effort they put in trying to respond to everything. But there are some things that just aren't worth responding to.
@Absolem Well there you go, I was wrong! Sorry guys :)
Fascinating discussion! Here's an theory, perhaps the inclusion of these Eastern emissaries were a ploy all along to rally the backers into a great debate! Come on, these are free models and help expand the game to regions beyond France. Better still they will allow gamers to enjoy what if style campaigns and battles. I for one am brushing up on my history in light of these recent additions and if Mythic Games encourage others to do likewise I don't see that as a bad thing.
@Jean-Sebastien Lemieux: I think that your comment below was very thoughtful and well written, and I agree with you. I am also very happy with this campaign as a whole, but would have much preferred to see some other additions like the ones you suggested before branching out into other completely new factions. Keep in mind though that there’s nothing stopping MG from creating more new additions to the game after this KS campaign ends!
@Lachlan - No need to be sorry! :) I'm actually glad you suggested that they may not have been involved in that engagement as it was the catalyst that caused me to learn a bit more about that period. Thank you for voicing your concerns. :)
Also, it might have been a bit silly to debate historical nuances, and yet let dragons and demons get a free pass ;P
And in my opinion, QW has done a particularly excellent job in responding to backers. I dropped another pledge on a recent KS campaign specifically because the creators did not do a good job responding to backers.
@Lachlan - lol Great point. I am thinking these Ottomon minis are part of a story line that introduces Vlad the Impaler into the game. :)
I really love the expandation to the ottomans, so much more variety to play with. The only think I am missing for the core elements are alternative sculpts for the knights. Everyone else got 2 alternatives, the knights got none. What's the reason behind it?
@Mattes - Good point! An alternative sculpt for mounted knights would be really nice.
I have mixed feelings about this SG. The Ottomans minis are great and will be a pleasure to paint, and as it has already been stated, they come as a free bonus, so I don't have any complaint about this. On the other hand, I would also have been happy with the game staying focused on the France/England conflict with mythical enhancement. So I guess I would have preferred some more Holy/Unholy figurines. I hope some of them will appear in the next SGs. Anyway, it's already almost 400 figs for the maiden pledge, which gives some kind of vertigo. I do think like many others that MG has done a great KS so far and a game that will become a reference.
These guys are deformed more than the others, give them some legs!
This minis are very nice.. happy to get them.
Guys, keep in mind that the last add'on is called "Apocalypse" .. everybody is concerned !
I think there are two story levels in JoA : the Hundred Years War, and above this historical context, the final fight between good & evil, the fight for humanity's salvation.
MG did the same thing with Mythic Battle, first it was more or less a fight between gods and/or hereos and at the end of the KS campaign, this was the whole titanomachy to replay.
Each time they open background to something wider.
The yenicheri corps were first founded in 1362 during the reign of Murad I and there were only a thousand yenicheries. Their numbers were around five thousand until the mid-15th century, and their numbers were rised to eight thousand after the Conquest of Istanbul in 1453. During their peak, their numbers never exceeded 12.000, but began to rise after Suleiman I's death. In 1595, their numbers became 45.000, in 1789 110.000 and rose up to 140.000 in 1808.
The Kapikulu Corps that included the Yenicheries were founded by the Grand Vizier Chandarli Kara Halil and Kara Rustem of Karaman during Murad I’s reign. These corps were the Ottoman version of the Seljuk Ghulam Guards, who were founded by the Abbasids and were in use since the 8th century. “Kapi”, originially used as Kapu, meaned “The Gate” in Turkish but represented the Palace, while “Kapikulu” meant “Palace Guard”. The Kapikulu Corps were the first permament army of Europe, and they got regular monthly payments called “ulufe” or “mevajib” in three months. The Kapikulu Corps were divided into Kapikulu Infantries and Kapikulu Cavalries; while the size of these corps increased as time passed. During the 16th century, the total number of Kapikulu guards were barely 30.000; during the late-16th-17th centuries, the number rose up to 75-80.000. Since the number of janissaries rose up so rapidly that during the early-19th century, there were more than 150-160.000 Kapikulu troops.
Good morning everyone. I really like the new stretch goal. I can't wait to see this intrige unfold.
@Quirkworthy Looking at the cards, shouldn't the infantry picture in the upper right corner be a cavalry picture?
I love the cavalry models, beautiful design.
So I'm not just a negative Nancy, the cavalry look fantastic
Great models! The only thing I am afraid of, is if we manage to unlock the full free expansion with only 5 days left :(
@Nick the 48 day mark brings a lot of backers ;)
@Danny - sorry, I think you misread my message there. I did not call you narrow minded. That's a presumptive and rather rude thing to say when I don't know you. What I said was:
"OK. I think that's an extremely narrow view, but you're welcome to it. I also think the comments below yours suggest that you're in a minority on this one."
Holding a narrow view is very different from having a narrow mind. At least, it it in my understanding.
For me, a narrow view is a very highly focused one that rules out anything beyond it. Your previous happy assertion that these SG were "wasted" and that less than a dozen figures out of over 700 was still too many to divert from what you perceive as the only permissible subject of this game pretty much define a narrow view. You allow no other option beyond this very limited breadth of options.
And like I also said, I have no problem with you holding that view. I just think it's a bit sad that you can't see beyond it. I feel like you're missing out on some of the possibilities.
The Voice in Her Head
@Lachlan - I'm trying to answer all the questions people raise, and address any misunderstandings. If someone dissents because of what I perceive as a misconception you think I should just ignore them? Now that is what I call poor customer service - letting people go unanswered and make assumptions based on misconceptions and false information.
I don't have a problem with people disagreeing about the best choice for us to make. There are way too many people involved here for everyone to agree on anything. Imagining otherwise would be delusional. But ignoring dissenting views seems very foolish.
My experience tells me that many people are unaware of important facts when they make their statements, which is hardly surprising as we're part way through stories and are deliberately keeping you in suspense. Plus, Ottoman history is hardly top of most school agendas.
As to "not in Europe", I think you are misinformed. A contemporary chronicler described the French army at Morlaix, in Brittany, at the battle against the English in 1342, as including 1,500 Janissaries. Some modern views suggest that this may not have meant Ottomans, but nobody can prove either way.
Then we have the battle of Nicopolis of 1396, and the rest of that campaign. Hundred Years' Wars period French and English armies fought on crusade against the Ottoman forces. We can easily include those battles in this set, and why not add more variety? We think options are good things in games.
@Joe - thanks for noticing the difference. That is exactly what I meant.
@Benjamin Kubczak - as you say, we don't plan to stop when the KS campaign ends. We are going to put JoA into retail, and as long as people keep are interested, we need to be making new stuff. So the fact that there are hundreds more interesting troops and characters of this period than we are likely to get to in 3 KS, should not worry you unduly. I have my own list of stuff I'd like which we won't get to this time, but I also really like the Ottomans :)
@David Smith - a scale accurate mini has a head that is 2mm tall. We have to distort the anatomy (like every other gaming mini does) to be able to get character (and moustaches) into the figures :)
@ Jake - No problems mate, all understood :) I 100% agree with your thoughts on addressing peoples comments, whether they are positive or not, and it is definitely good customer service, and you excel at interacting with the community. Although I posted on your QW blog under a different name (Mack from memory), when you were working on Dungeon Saga (excellent game 10/10 from me), your enthusiasm in interacting with the community there was very much appreciated, as are your interactions here, thanks :)
Nothing worse than people who are so fragile and infantile that they can't allow others their views/opinions (when they are put forth in a reasonable manner of course.). Please continue to interact with us :)
@Danny - my blog, yes. One day I must revive the old dear.
@Dora Cornelisse - you're right. They shouldn't have the foot symbol on the cards. I've asked our graphics guy for updated ones for when they unlock.
@Nick Kalagkias - I have faith we will see the whole of this expansion :)
It's great you respond to messages, but you need to be conscious of your tone and how you communicate. Your recent response to myself was unnecessary, and didn't add anything to a discussion that had already concluded (a perfect example of when not to engage).
I could debate history further, and draw on my history degrees (of which I attended at least 50% of the lectures!). But that, again, wont accomplish anything.
I said I liked the minis, and naturally I think variety is good. There is literally nothing to discuss here, but thanks anyway.
I agree with Jack and others. This game, among other things, brings history up for discussion.
In moderating and communicating around this the team are doing just this.
Teaching and learning history is a great thing, now and forever.
PS. Of course there are other (probably more important) aspects of this boardgame. Bit the historical aspect/discussion is still very interesting.
Further down (I think it was a comment by J.-S. Lemieux) the question of "Burgundians" was raised. As far as I remember the history of la Pucelle, she was captured by the Burgundian allies of the English and handed over to them (for a large ransom / bounty), then tried and burnt at the stake.
So Burgundians did play a large rôle in the conflict. Anyway, since neither knights' nor other warriors' models are either specifically "English" or "French" (I think peasants are logically all "French" when the war has been waged on continental soil) and they can be used for representing either side, the only recognisable difference would be in their coat of arms, wouldn't it?
Shield and banner transfers are announced to be part of the core game, so will there be "Burgundian" designs amongst them, by any chance?
Yenitchery (janissary) corps appeared in history during the reign of Murad I in 1362, therefore it was not only a geographical but also a historical impossibility for them to show at Morlaix in 1342. The chronicler misused the term Janissary probably meaning the Genovese and Briton mercenaries.
@der stille Don - there will be Burgundians, and others too. Potentials include Genoese, Navarese, gascons, etc. For much of the war, the average soldier fought for money, even if they weren't technically a mercenary. You could get very rich of a good ransom. This brought in soldiers from all over Europe.
@Alex the Barbarian - what is intriguing is that the chronicler in question died in 1347. So why did he use a term which is, as far as I can see, based on a Turkish word? Very strange.
I know the popular version is to suggest that he was wrong, but it's a very peculiar way of being wrong, especially when he could have simply said Genoese. Genoa was famous for providing mercenaries, and was far less obscure. They are never called Janissaries in any other account I have heard of, and they turn up all the time.
How would you explain it?
@ Alex : according to David Nicolle in The Janissaries - Janissaries could have appeared earlier. English Wikipédia says "The corps was most likely established".. which is not something clearly sure.
Anyway they were present at the battle of Nicopolis.
IMHO, it's enough to get them in JoA.
@Ukail - I'm not really arguing about JoA's inclusion of them, I'm more intrigued about the chronicle listing their supposed appearance at Morlaix, and what the chronicler was talking about if it wasn't Janissaries. Alex seems to have done some research on this, so I thought he may be able to shed some light.
It seems really weird that he should use a Turkish term for troops who were not formed until after his death to refer to a really common form of mercenary. There may well be no good explanation at this temporal remove, or it may simply need research I have not yet done. I just find it interesting.
@ QW : I didn't see your answer before posting - If I had seen it, I wouldn't answer (useless to speak over the voice in her head ^^ ..)
In the french Wikipédia, there is the statement that the Janissaries could appeared during the reign of Orhan which started in 1324 or 1326.
The word "Janissaries" may have spread through Europe, before the troops really appear on the battlefield.
The source of the french Wikipédia is the book of David NICOLLE, page 7 .. (the same book is also listed on the englsih Wiki). Some answers are probably there :-)
In my opinion there are two issues artificially compounded into one:
1. Linguistics and etymology: we have on one side the mentioning of the French word "Janissary" by a French chronicler as name for some units that participated at the battle of Morlaix, Brittany in 1342 and other side the Turkish term Yeniçeri designing an elite guard corps that is recorded in all Turkish sources I have consulted as created in 1362 under sultan Murad I whom reformed the Ottoman army.
In French we have janissaire, in Italian giannizzerro terms which are first recorded as used as early as the 16th century. Again another temporal contradiction. I don't know who this French chronicler was, but if he wrote in the 16th century he may have been under the influence of the fame of the Yenicery on battlefields, by now known and dreaded in the entire Europe. Retrospectively he may have assigned by literary association the meaning of elite and guard infantry to the units of Genovese and Bretons that indeed participated at the battle of Morlaix. I know is speculative, but at least is not twisting entire chapters history as recorded.
2. Now from a geo-historical point of view is an absolute fantasy to place an elite Turkish unit designed to guard the sultan all across Europe in a rather obscure battle, that even before the recorded time of its creation. Reminder: at the time of the battle of Morlaix the Ottoman Turks under Orhan were still fighting the Byzantines in Asia Minor and securing the border in the East. Orhan was a mere local contender for the assets of the recently demised Seldjuk Empire. Quite far from the Ottoman Empire of later. He lacked any major deep seagoing able naval assets as all their armies were land based and the Anatolian coast was still under Byzantine control.
So my question to you is:
- How would a sane Orhan send his own guard elite corps (arguably non existent at that time) across three seas with a navy he didn't have, to fight in a war between Christians he didn't have any interest in or benefit from? I may even dare saying that he had no clue what was going on in West Europe nor did he care. Remind you that Turks were Muslims and sworn fanatic enemies of Christianity, much like ISIS nowadays.
David Nicolle is a historian I minimally respect based on what I believe by now to be intentional misconstrues of parts of the history of my own people, therefore I am not surprised at distortions of historical reality he may have done to other nations as well. He is actually the only one that disagrees with a larger majority that state differently. Hey, even English Wikipedia is quoting a Turkish source for the date not Mr. David Nicolle.
I am only a history buff not a historian, but I always try to sip through sources of information favoring those closest to the root of the matter at hand, in this case the Turkish sources. Please visit the Museum of Military History from Istanbul, also Topkapi Palace and if you believe the Turks got their own history wrong and a British scholar knows better, oh well. That's how history is "written" and re-re-recorded, some people achieving fame and academic titles only from quoting quotations.
Do we have any Turkish backers here that can shed some new light on this debate?:)
@ Alex > The chronicler was not french he was english : Adam Murimuth 1274/75 - 1347
Please note that Janissairies were not turkish, but former young christian captured and forced to convert to Islam.
Btw, I dislike the way this discussion goes. We don't want to re-write any history there, it's a boardgame, and its story will not be teached in university.
If I hurt you national feelings in anyway, please forgive me, it was unintentional. I won't post anymore on this subject.
@Ukali: Please don't take this personally, God knows I didn't:) It's a friendly debate between amateurs in history. I found Adam and I was reading about him. My national feelings can't be treated in public forums like this one:) lol So don't worry about hurting them, as stated is a mere discussion about the possible presence of Turks in France during the 100 years war. Based on a singular mentioning from a contemporary scholar and cleric. What's interesting is that the other two chroniclers Geoffrey le Baker and Henry Knighton also contemporary with Adam don't give any information about the significant presence of Muslim Turks siding with Catholic French against Catholic English. According to Adam one third of the French army was formed by Janissaries, which couldn't have been overlooked, could it?
Another thing is that the book Continuatio Chronicarum. Robertus de Avesbury de Gestis Mirabilibus regis Edwardi tertii[...] was printed sometimes in the 15th-16th century and this gave me the idea that maybe the term was introduced by the publisher not by the author. If you read the introduction (page xxv) you can see the freedom taken with various parts of the original material and apparently the survival in folio of only 106 pages. No copy paste back then:).
My personal dislike of mr. Nicolle it's just that. Nothing to do with my co fellow KS backers:) After all this is a GOOD PLACE isn't it?
Imho a lot of the history as we know and learn in schools and universities should be rewritten and long time hidden truths and actual historical facts revealed freed from political agendas and games of power. Time will tell.