Re: Our choice of factions and models for games

textfilter: chose text/plain from a multipart/alternative

If you have different nations that developed independently and then came
into contact with each other it's quite common to get very different
technologies and units in amries of the same period.
 
Look at the renaissance period. You had English armies using longbows
and a long debate about whether lonbows or muskets were better. No other
nation in the renaissance period developed significant numbers of
longbows.
 
Many western european nations had knights, the Swiss didn't and the
Hussites fought from wagon laagers to protect themselves from knights.
 
Eastern nations had heavy cavalry with mail armour and bows, rather than
plate armoured knights and pikes so again a very different feel.
 
By the end of the 30 years war many of the western eurpoean had
standardised on weapons, tactics and doctrine based on the most
effective of those used by the participants.
 
Even at the start of Wrold War Two, tactical doctrines, political
philosopies and unit construction were quite different between the
different factions. Take aircraft carriers the US aircraft carriers had
light deck construction because they were expecting to be protected by
their fighters. UK carriers realised that their planes were rubbish and
so designed their carriers to take hits from 500 pound bombs. So a quite
different philosophy and play in a game.
 
Even aircraft design at the start of WW2 was very different, you had
biplane fighters, monoplane bombers, 2 and 4 engine designs.