Best commander in CK

[unmerged(19226)]

re Ladislav

i think Jan Ziska the commander of the Hussite armies of Bohemia will be an excellent commander!

You're absolutely right. As I know Hussites has invented new kind of tactics, very effective against catholic chivalry, it was named probably tabor?

 

[unmerged(19226)]

Some brief informations about Boleslaw II Smialy (Bold)

Boleslaus the Bold (1039-1081)
Boleslaus was the eldest son of Casimir the Restorer. He did not gain the throne without assistance of the pope (probably as a diplomatic move to counter the growing independence of German emperors like Henry VI). Gniezno was restored with the help of papal legates who also established a new bishopric in Plock. Boleslaus followed an expansionist policy and intervened in dynastic conflicts in Hungary and Rus. Like his predecessors he had opposition from the nobles because of these military policies. Boleslaus also provoked opposition from the Bishop of Cracow whom he put to death for treason. As a direct result Boleslaus faced a revolt by the nobles. He was excommunicated and died as an exile in Hungary.

Reigned 1058-1072

https://www.greatestbooks.org/visitorlibrary/polish/kings/pages/boleslawii.htm

 

[Earl Uhtred]

Originally posted by Dzoser
So much precisive post, so I say all historians which I heard/read would agree with me :rofl:

Yeah, I'd have said more but I was knackered at the time of writing.

What I understood you as having said was that leadership and 'strategic thinking' were less important between the fall of Rome and the Renaissance. Having just come away from reading a book devoted to the career of Edward the Elder I disagree wholeheartedly. They had a sound grasp of grand strategy and logistics, even if battle tactics were limited by social factors.

 

[unmerged(8915)]

Originally posted by Dzoser
re Ladislav:
You're absolutely right. As I know Hussites has invented new kind of tactics, very effective against catholic chivalry, it was named probably tabor?

tabor? that is the name of the city the hussites founded. but close the name was "vozova hradba" or wagenburg.

even though the hussites used to great effect against heavy horse charges, it was probably developed by russians against the golden horde. ziska became acquinted with the tactic when he was a mercenary in the polish/lithuanian army in the early 1400's.

 

[Ichabod]

Louis IX and Jeanne d'Arc would be at the top of my list for the time period

 

[unmerged(485)]

Originally posted by Ichabod
Louis IX and Jeanne d'Arc would be at the top of my list for the time period

St. Louis was not too successful on his two crusades.

 

[Ichabod]

That wasn't really his fault, but I don't have time to get into that right now. Most historians agree that had he continued his wars with England, France could have completly avoided the hundred years' war.

 

[unmerged(485)]

Originally posted by Ichabod
That wasn't really his fault, but I don't have time to get into that right now. Most historians agree that had he continued his wars with England, France could have completly avoided the hundred years' war.

Had he been more successful earlier (i.e. had he not died on his second crusade) he might have been able to do just that. But alas...

 

[CarcassDK]

ABSALON!!! THE FIGHTING BISHOP

 

[unmerged(15606)]

Saladin.

 

[Damocles]

Originally posted by King of Croatia
Saladin.

Richard the Lionheart's achievement was just a touch more spectacular. I mean, in the 12th century...managing to transport an army from England to the Levant and then fighting successfully against one of best commanders to ever emerge in the Muslim world, while caught between the latter's home bases of Egypt and Syria. Amazing!

 

[unmerged(485)]

Gotta admit though that Saladin uniting the Islamic middle east long enough to crush the Christians in battle and then take avery major Christian city in the Levant except Tyre is quite a feat. Don't know if it comes under the heading/job of a commander but certainly as the leader of a faction it was quite a deed.

 

[unmerged(6779)]

Philippe Auguste. He crushed the armies of the Emperor, the King of England and the Count of Flanders at Bouvines. One of the most important battle for the Capetian Kingdom. His son Louis VIII was maybe even better. He successfully invaded England but died very young.

 

[Damocles]

Originally posted by Sonny
Gotta admit though that Saladin uniting the Islamic middle east long enough to crush the Christians in battle and then take avery major Christian city in the Levant except Tyre is quite a feat. Don't know if it comes under the heading/job of a commander but certainly as the leader of a faction it was quite a deed.

Geopolitcally, the Crusader States were doomed. It was a wonder and an anomaly they lasted as long as they did, given the great odds surrounding them.

 

[Abdul Goatherd]

Originally posted by Damocles
Richard the Lionheart's achievement was just a touch more spectacular. I mean, in the 12th century...managing to transport an army from England to the Levant and then fighting successfully against one of best commanders to ever emerge in the Muslim world, while caught between the latter's home bases of Egypt and Syria. Amazing!

Richard I is very over-rated. "Spectacular"? What did he do, exactly? The fall of Acre was not purely Richard's "genius". He came late -- the French & German knights were already there and more than holding their own. The siege had been on for a while.

As far as "transporting" his army, well, how do you think the others did it? Took a direct Lebanese International Airways flight?

If anything, Richard's presence in the Levant was divisive. Let's see what Richard did there: split the entire Crusader party by stubbornly refusing to recognize Conrad of Monteferrat, openly violated the compact of Vezelay by not sharing the Cypriot booty, started a stupid quarrel with Phillipe Auguste over the inheritence of Flanders, blatantly maneouvred the Austrians out of their stake in Acre, massacred 5,000 Muslim prisoners cause he didn't want to feed them, offered Saladin his own sister Joana in marriage, saw a few belly-dancing shows in Saladin's tent. And then he went home.

What's so spectacular? In fact, I wonder if things might not have gone better had he not been there.

As far as ranking him above Saladin -- that is risible. Remember Saladin started off from the bottom, a Kurdish warrior of relatively humble background, rising on his own, conquering Egypt Syria & the Latin Kingdom on his own account. And he held it together, despite being a "foreigner" and having a very dubious legitimacy among his own supporters.

In contrast, Richard was born with a silver spoon in his mouth, had his little Angevin empire basically handed over to him. He was also a criminal. He can be justly accused of being a traitor, a parricide and a war criminal among many other unspeakable things. But he never had to worry too much about anything because mommy was always batting in his corner.

Both as warrior and monarch, I not only rank Richard much, much lower than Saladin, I also rank him quite below Philippe Auguste.

I am exaggerating, but not by much.

 

[Damocles]

LOL

Saladin was hardly a lowly Kurdish warrior. His father and uncle were extremely powerful men, and all but set the stage for many of his exploits.

 

[unmerged(485)]

Originally posted by Kort
Philippe Auguste. He crushed the armies of the Emperor, the King of England and the Count of Flanders at Bouvines. One of the most important battle for the Capetian Kingdom. His son Louis VIII was maybe even better. He successfully invaded England but died very young.

But Philippe II did not crush the King of England while Richard was on the throne.

 

[saskganesh]

a lot of great leaders in this period were just the best men to have in a fight on your side. having a grasp on combined arms, using terrain, and doing little things like scouting and having a reserve were marks of genius.

 

[unmerged(673)]

Originally posted by Odin1970
Subotai the Mongol war chief who serving under Batu was for intent and purposes the tactician of the invasion of Europe in 1241.

He should be in the game....

I agree with you Odin. Subotai in the CK it's a Must.
Maybe the title of the thread is a mistake, because it's very difficult to range the leaders in an appropriate way to elect the 'best' of them. In fact, if someone of the commanders mentioned before like guiscard or Karol Chodkiewicz is over-rated in the game, I'll have to modify their stats in order to play an Historical game.

 

[unmerged(19226)]

re Blas de lezo

Maybe the title of the thread is a mistake, because it's very difficult to range the leaders in an appropriate way to elect the 'best' of them. In fact, if someone of the commanders mentioned before like guiscard or Karol Chodkiewicz is over-rated in the game, I'll have to modify their stats in order to play an Historical game.

I think that better than Subotai should be Chinggis Khan, after all he was able to achieve more than any single commander after Alexander the Great.

PS Jan Karol Chodkiewicz won't be included in CK game. Don't worry about him, he lived from 1560 to 1621. And I don't think that he is overrated in EUII. Someone who received letters (after his victory of Kircholm) of congratulation from the pope, all the Catholic potentates, of Europe, and even from the sultan of Turkey and the shah of Persia can't be overrated :rofl: