I have a Later Crusader army for the Kingdom of Jerusalem in the 1170s which I have researched in some detail.
Norman knights tend to look a bit out of place in this army. Although armour had not changed much since 1066, the changes do affect the appearance of the knights. The round-topped kite shield was now untypical, being replaced mainly by flat-topped kite shields. Some of these shields were shorter from top to bottom than Norman shields, probably because of the related development in armour: most knights now wore leggings of mail. Figures in action poses can be especially difficult, because the use of the couched lance was now the normal tactic. Also the use of surcoats and round- or flat-topped helms was becoming more common towards the end of the 1100s.
The date of introduction of horse barding for Frankish knights is uncertain. Barding was certainly used by some Moslem cavalrymen and may have been copied from them by individual Franks during the 12th century, but it does not seem to have become common until the next century. (Based on the discussion in Heath "Feudal Europe", p.104). Having said that, nobody can prove you wrong if you outfit your Military Orders with bards (although I don't use them myself).
The introduction of the kettle hat is another area of uncertain date. The earliest illustrations are often said to be those of the Lewis chessmen which were made about AD 1200. A few kettle hats may well have been worn in the 12th century, but again they did not become common in illustrations and chronicles until the 1200s.
The ratio of crossbows to spears is really anybody's guess. Contemporary accounts are not very interested in the ratio of one type of infantry to another, or even whether there was a mixture of types within one unit. Among wargamers it used to be popular to think that crossbows and spears formed up in a single unit like the later Italians with their pavisiers, but the trend now seems to be to regard them as separate units. In Impetus terms a 50:50 ratio works well because of the ability of CP (spears) to pass through T (crossbows): this means that you can use the crossbows to soften up the enemy and then bring the spearmen forward for the melee.
Ratios of foot to mounted were highly variable, as these examples illustrate, but typically involved a high proportion of foot:
Ager Sanguinis (1119): Roger of Antioch is reported to have had 700 knights and 3-4000 foot.
Hab (1119): Baldwin II had 700 knights and 2-3000 foot
Azaz (1125): Baldwin II had 1100 cavalry and 2000 foot
Fons Muratus (1149): Raymond of Antioch had 4000 cavalry but only 1000 infantry
al-Babein (1167): Amalric I is said to have had only 374 knights in a force of 10,000 men
Montgisard (1177): Baldwin IV had 300-500 knights and 3000 foot
Hattin (1187): accounts vary, but according to the Historia Regni Hierosolymitani, Guy of Lusignan had 2200 knights, 4000 turcopoles and 32,000 infantry. The real numbers were probably a lot less, but the proportions are not implausible
Heath "Crusades", pp.112-5, analyses the records left by Jean d'Ibelin around 1265 (but referrring back to the 1170s) and concludes that the Kingdom at that time could muster between 600 and 750 knights and around 5000 sergeants (that is, footsoldiers).
In Impetus terms, however, you would probably do better to have a lot of CP !! My own 300-point army includes 5 CP (1 Royal Knights with VBU=7, 2 ordinary knights and 2 Military Orders), 2 units of spears and 2 of crossbows, and 2 of Maronite archers (S). So far it has had only one outing, which it won against Syrian Moslems (who are weak in missile troops).
The figures are mostly Legio Heroica, which are among the best 15mms I have ever seen and are of consistently high quality both in sculpting and casting. I was lucky enough to get a lot of these when they first came out and the pound was relatively healthy agaiunst the euro. Giuseppe's euro prices are in line with normal euro-zone figures (have a look at the Vexilla website, Italian version, for example): it is the exchange rate that's the killer. I don't know if he takes tax off for shipments out of the EU (but I don't even know whether he charges tax at all) - you might like to ask him. He is very helpful and his English is excellent.
Other figures I have used include Outpost and Black Hat/Gladiator. Outpost are well researched but I find the castings are often disappointing. BH are OK but lack some details. All three of these manufacturers make "large" 15mms, which I like but some people don't.
Of the "ordinary" 15mms I would usually go for Essex by default: their service is good, prices reasonable, and almost all their figures are illustrated on the website. Donnington and Minifigs I find to be of variable quality; I know nothing of Old Glory. Khurasan make some terrific figures (I especially like their Normans and Late Romans, and their Later Byzantines might be the basis of my own next army when i can afford it) but I am not a fan of their Crusades-period figures, which were some of their first ranges and not as good (IMHO) as their newer ones.
Googling "15mm Crusaders" will find most of the manufacturers.
Finally a few websites. Although I no longer use the Shattered Lances rules much, there is an excellent resource for Crusades-period armies at
http://shatteredlances.pbworks.com/. There is also a Yahoo group for Shattered Lances, on which you can find some learned discussions both of armies and of figure manufacturers.
Hope this helps.
Tede
