Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Defeating the Mongols?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Triple C View Post
    To find the men for guerilla warfare or superb defensive terrain is easier said then done. Partisans would get squashed by the Mongols and one does not have the luxury to choose where the battle is for your attacking antagonist.

    Hence why I said burn/ remove the fodder. The huge remudas are the biggest asset and also the biggest weakness if you can get at it. Horses need a lot of grass, without it they can't sustain a siege and stay mobile.

    If they stay mobile, your doomed unless you get a pox infected ambassador to go among them.

    Comment


    • #17
      Forcing the Mongols into sieges is the best bet if one is out of nubile princesses and dunkey loads of gold. It would be better if one has spare cities for the Mongols to burn.
      All those who are merciful with the cruel will come to be cruel to the merciful.
      -Talmud Kohelet Rabbah, 7:16.

      Comment


      • #18
        Hence why I said burn/ remove the fodder. The huge remudas are the biggest asset and also the biggest weakness if you can get at it. Horses need a lot of grass, without it they can't sustain a siege
        Ghazan showed it was possible to carry ones own fodder.
        To sit down with these men and deal with them as the representatives of an enlightened and civilized people is to deride ones own dignity and to invite the disaster of their treachery - General Matthew Ridgway

        Comment


        • #19
          The Mongols don't ride specially bred warhorses like medieval chargers.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by troung View Post
            Ghazan showed it was possible to carry ones own fodder.
            But for what size army and for how long. His invasions of Syria didn't accomplish much in the end.

            Comment


            • #21
              Maeda,

              Originally posted by Maeda Toshiie View Post
              The Mongols don't ride specially bred warhorses like medieval chargers.
              I don't think what type of warhorse is the issue here. The Mongols rode the Steppe pony which is a hardier animal than most European or Aisan breeds. Even so, mobile war wore down horses very quickly, and the Mongols countered this need for logistics by giving each rider many horses.
              All those who are merciful with the cruel will come to be cruel to the merciful.
              -Talmud Kohelet Rabbah, 7:16.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Triple C View Post
                I don't think what type of warhorse is the issue here. The Mongols rode the Steppe pony which is a hardier animal than most European or Aisan breeds. Even so, mobile war wore down horses very quickly, and the Mongols countered this need for logistics by giving each rider many horses.
                A horse is strong, but not very robust and they break down quickly under work. They also do not eat as well as bits get in the way. There are two ways to combat this- do less work with fewer animals thus going slower and feed them high density foods like grain to make up for the lack of grazing. Or do less work with more animals so no individual animal gets over worked. The Mongols could ride a different horse each of the week so the horse had a long recovery period. However this approach has a couple of serious drawbacks and only 2 peoples ever used it. The Steppe tribesmen and the Plains Indians. Both had abundant fodder and a nomadic lifestyle.In fact the Mongol invasion of Russia used more horses than the 1941 German invasion. It was capable of astonishing movement as fresh horses allowed the rider to keep going. The Mongols didn't defeat the armies of Islam, China and Europe on a single mount. However if that mobility was constrained by a seige the lack of fodder and no grain supplements to fall back on could be a potentially huge problem for this type of army. That is why I suggested drawing in the stores and burning the grass. Will it work? Maybe, depends on what era Mongols.If your facing the hypothetical equivalent of one of the dogs of war- find a princess. If your the facing later Golden Horde descendant then probably.

                Civilized states on the other hand could not and would not support this number of horses for several reasons, A-their land was given over to agriculture so the herds were smaller, but given grain supplements. B-Grain also allowed a rapid human population explosion meaning even more land had to be farmed. C- the human is much more robust. D- The robust human infantryman can stay in the field longer and move faster than conventional cavalry over extended periods. E- the scarcity of military mounts meant horses were a status symbol and emblem of office or rank.

                This means a professional infantry based army has given up a measure of tactical speed and possibly the ability to achieve short term strategic and operational surprise through movement. I say possibly because a Byzantine army moving over roads will move fast, much faster than an equivalent army of Frankish knights and levies. But vs the Mongols, if your not late Republican-Early Imperial legions, your not going to move fast enough vs most Mongols armies.

                Since war is usually a battle of position, each side is going to try and stick to what it does best. For a mongol type army this means enticing the enemy into the field so you can defeat him and then overwhelm the city garrisons with a quick storm instead of a protracted siege. For an infantry-centric force your goal is to keep your army alive and fight from behind the battlements with full storehouses and let the Mongol army run out of fodder and either give up, or lose their mobility. The portion of your army that is mounted you want to keep out of harms way so it exists as a threat, serves as scouting force, forces the enemy to detach a guard, and can act as a relief force if a storming attempt seems about to carry the wall. Plus if the steppe army goes for an extended siege, eventually they have to move thier remuda out, or bring fodder in-both actions are targets.

                Comment


                • #23
                  However this approach has a couple of serious drawbacks and only 2 peoples ever used it. The Steppe tribesmen and the Plains Indians. Both had abundant fodder and a nomadic lifestyle.
                  People with lots of remounts used lots of remounts because they had lots of remounts.

                  But for what size army and for how long. His invasions of Syria didn't accomplish much in the end.
                  He moved over one hundred thousand cavalrymen, won a major engagement and raided a bunch of other things along the way.

                  For an infantry-centric force your goal is to keep your army alive and fight from behind the battlements with full storehouses and let the Mongol army run out of fodder and either give up, or lose their mobility.
                  Works the other way as well. And keeping them behind the battlements would open up the entire countryside. And this army would come back year after year, win or lose.

                  Steppe raids could be fast with large numbers of men put into the field who move rapidly, so they will catch plenty of supplies, slaves, and other booty long before an army is mobilized to come and meet them or to destroy their own farms. The Crimean Khanate was a very successful raiding state for just that reason. They could be gone with tens of thousands of slaves and other loot, after raiding for weeks, before an army could be marshaled to meet them.

                  The portion of your army that is mounted you want to keep out of harms way so it exists as a threat, serves as scouting force, forces the enemy to detach a guard, and can act as a relief force if a storming attempt seems about to carry the wall.
                  Ten thousand cavalrymen would either be run to ground or penned up behind city walls.

                  =======
                  Find your prettiest daughters and sit them down for a talk.... :))
                  Last edited by troung; 14 Dec 08,, 16:51.
                  To sit down with these men and deal with them as the representatives of an enlightened and civilized people is to deride ones own dignity and to invite the disaster of their treachery - General Matthew Ridgway

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by troung View Post
                    Works the other way as well. And keeping them behind the battlements would open up the entire countryside. And this army would come back year after year, win or lose.
                    That's what happened to the Chinese against the normadic tribes to their north. Even building a giant wall didn't help to stop them. The attackers would penetrate one section, make a mess of what lay behind it and then get out again.

                    Originally posted by troung View Post
                    Steppe raids could be fast with large numbers of men put into the field who move rapidly, so they will catch plenty of supplies, slaves, and other booty long before an army is mobilized to come and meet them or to destroy their own farms. The Crimean Khanate was a very successful raiding state for just that reason. They could be gone with tens of thousands of slaves and other loot, after raiding for weeks, before an army could be marshaled to meet them.
                    Like the way the Xiongnu preyed on Western Han, although that lack of response from the Han court was more due to the weakness of the state after the Chu-Han conflict. Even after Han Wu Ti took on the Xiongnu, the Han dynasty took a long time before it ended the Xiongnu menace.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by troung View Post
                      People with lots of remounts used lots of remounts because they had lots of remounts.
                      which requires lots of fodder hence only the steepe tribes and Plains Indians did it.



                      He moved over one hundred thousand cavalrymen, won a major engagement and raided a bunch of other things along the way.
                      In the end raids don't matter nealry as much as an invasion.



                      Works the other way as well. And keeping them behind the battlements would open up the entire countryside. And this army would come back year after year, win or lose.
                      Putting them in the field gets the chopped up. And maybe next year your allies send help, a rival tribe joins up with you to settle a score etc. Losing your army in a pointless battle is an end game move.

                      Steppe raids could be fast with large numbers of men put into the field who move rapidly, so they will catch plenty of supplies, slaves, and other booty long before an army is mobilized to come and meet them or to destroy their own farms. The Crimean Khanate was a very successful raiding state for just that reason. They could be gone with tens of thousands of slaves and other loot, after raiding for weeks, before an army could be marshaled to meet them.
                      If an Army has to be marshaled, standing forces can react pretty quickly. The OP said he had a certain force. Implying he already had it ready to go.

                      Ten thousand cavalrymen would either be run to ground or penned up behind city walls.
                      Depends on how big the invading force is. If the armies for the discussion are about the same size or even double then perhaps not. It depends on how wide of a screen the invaders throw out, and with what. Quick attacks and fades on the edge of the screen can pull pressure off a city. if its less than 40k vs 250k then its all over anyway. Just like if the invaders have a general equal to one of the dogs of war. But for the discussion to be meaningful, there has to be some sort of balance between the forces. The invaders have larger numbers and greater mobility but less supplies and no walled forts/castles/cities to fight from behind.

                      =======
                      Find your prettiest daughters and sit them down for a talk.... :))
                      I agree, but the OP's question implies you have to fight. Perhaps the emperor killed the ambassador. Although, if I could find a plague or pox victim, infect a bunch slaves and give them absolution and send them out with some gold as a "gift"... In the end the Black Death did what no army could.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        One question what if the Mogols would be present at current time in the form as they were at their prime? What are your comments on the issue? Please keep nukes out of discussion.
                        Here comes the silent killer

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          The Ming drove out the Yuan by liberal use of canon fire.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            The Ming drove out the Yuan by liberal use of canon fire.
                            Esen Khan also routed the Ming army and took an emperor hostage and Altan Khan burned the capital.

                            Oops you were responding to them today -

                            Pretty sure they would be handing over princesses...

                            In the end raids don't matter nealry as much as an invasion.
                            One raid doesn't, the cumulative effect does. Do it for several years; cities fall or switch sides, troops die, the peasants get forced off the land, nobles and peasants get restless, revenue dries up and support for the state plummets. People raping and pillaging across ones nation while the army does not give battle doesn't win converts. It adds up; weakening a state before the hammer falls.

                            If the armies for the discussion are about the same size or even double then perhaps not
                            Just talking from what was more likely, a large cavalry force.

                            If an Army has to be marshaled, standing forces can react pretty quickly. The OP said he had a certain force. Implying he already had it ready to go.
                            Ready where? All together? Spread out? How many men get sent to deal with a raiding party, which could cross as a massive host or link up at some pre-arranged spot (giving reports of an even larger force), and there could be several massive raiding parties - using the Crimean Khanate as an example, a plundering force could out number the 37k man army.

                            Doing nothing makes ruining your countryside really easy.
                            To sit down with these men and deal with them as the representatives of an enlightened and civilized people is to deride ones own dignity and to invite the disaster of their treachery - General Matthew Ridgway

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by troung View Post
                              One raid doesn't, the cumulative effect does. Do it for several years; cities fall or switch sides, troops die, the peasants get forced off the land, nobles and peasants get restless, revenue dries up and support for the state plummets. People raping and pillaging across ones nation while the army does not give battle doesn't win converts. It adds up; weakening a state before the hammer falls.
                              Get your army defeated, and all that happens even faster.

                              Ready where? All together? Spread out? How many men get sent to deal with a raiding party, which could cross as a massive host or link up at some pre-arranged spot (giving reports of an even larger force), and there could be several massive raiding parties - using the Crimean Khanate as an example, a plundering force could out number the 37k man army.

                              Doing nothing makes ruining your countryside really easy.
                              I am assuming 3 things. 1- he had warning perhaps the force is passing through pseudo-Georgia or pseudo-Armenia. 2- He got his infantry into the most threatened city. 2 his is marshaling his missile troops and cavalry near his pseudo-Byzantium as it is the logical place to pull all his troops together and then be able to launch a campaign. As they set out they can at least cover the retreat of the rural population.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by troung View Post
                                Pretty sure they would be handing over princesses...
                                yeah, yeah, yeah but the point was the Yuan read the defeat.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X