Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

I would be interested in hearing other people's opinions on how to field
late Roman in 25mm too so I retitled the subject line to keep this subject
from the other thread. I haven't played much with late Roman in the new
list but I've always liked the army. I usually play down here in Florida
near Jacksonville, so 25mm is king in this area.

My experience has been the Auxilia with high morale and darts are the king
of the battlefield. At least with my style of play I've always gotten the
most bang for buck with the auxilia, even more than with the legionaires.
Artillery on carts is too expensive, but 4 light bolts shooters on foot are
cost effective. I usually try to avoid spending too many points on the
heavier calvary, I usually just get into trouble with the expensive calvary.
A typical list for me might run roughly like this:

CinC, single stand (if he's a single stand it's harder to use your CinC to
charge someone and get into trouble)
Sub, body guard element
HC JLS Sh (walking rout targets)
LC, JLS, Sh, RA or RB, more of these units the merrier
1 to 3 Legio, usually 24 man, 16 MI HTW JLS D Sh, 8 MI B Sh, RC or RD
Auxilia, 6 units of 16 RB LMI JLS D Sh (maximum aux, maximizes the groans
from a certain regional champ in Jacksonville)
Auxilia bow, 16 LMI B Sh
4 LI JLS Sh, more the merrier
boltshooters on foot

Optional units for me to get into trouble
EHC L B Sh (expensive walking rout targets)
RD LC B
artillery on carts
armenian ally
hun ally

I like to screen the whole table with 4 man units of LI or LC, then attack
with auxilia while holding with the legions. Lines of dart armed auxilia
are lots of fun.

I'm looking forward to hearing other people two cent's worth.

Jamie White





----- Original Message -----
From: "turner1118" <Turnerm@...>
To: <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 3:16 PM
Subject: [WarriorRules] Re: Advice on 3 Lists - Ming, Yuan, LTang


> Mark, I'd like your opinion as you seem to have done more analytical
> study than most.
>
> I've been trying to make LIR's work for a while and recently I did
> very well in a 15mm 1600 pt tourney. I took the Hun allies giving me
> 3x2EIrrB,HC,L,B, Sh and 2x4EIrrC,LC, JLS, B, Sh. This force seemed
> to compliment the Roman MI, LMI, LI mix the best. My question is how
> well will this convert over to 25mm?
>
> Mike
>
>
>
> --- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, Mark Stone <mark@d...> wrote:
>>
>> --- On November 1 I said: ---
>>
>> >>
>> >> "Given that an 8x5 25mm table is only 40 elements wide, you
> should have no
>> >> trouble covering the frontage."
>> >>
>>
>> --- To which Steve Hollowell replied: ---
>>
>> >
>> > Interesting... has anyone ever figured out the frontage on a 15mm
> table?
>> >
>>
>> A 6x4 15mm table is 45 elements wide.
>>
>> In my opinion, this sort of information is part of "Warrior
> Fundamentals", part
>> of the basics of figuring out your strategy and tactics that every
> Warrior
>> player should be going through.
>>
>> I always do an analysis of how much frontage I think any army I'm
> putting
>> together can comfortably cover, and what my plan is if the answer
> to how much
>> frontage is less than the whole table. Similary, I think carefully
> about how
>> much frontage a given piece of terrain occupies, along with the
> likelihood of
>> getting that terrain in a helpful place.
>>
>> From these considerations it isn't too difficult to take the
> analysis to the
>> next step and figure out if you're going to be able to play an army
>> aggressively, or if it will have to counter-punch from a more
> defensive
>> posture.
>>
>> With an answer to that question, you can return to looking at the
> composition of
>> the army list and see if it is well suited to being aggressive vs.
>> defensive/counter-punching, and then have a sense of whether you
> should really
>> pursue putting together the army in question.
>>
>> And a footnote to all this: in my experience, the most vulnerable
> points in any
>> army are the seams and the flanks. A flank is where your troops end
> and
>> unoccupied terrain begins. A seam is where two components of your
> line meet,
>> such as open terrain and rough terrain troops, or close/loose order
> troops and
>> light troops.
>>
>>
>> -Mark Stone
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

the way we live. spring 2005. new collection out now. www.freedom.com.au


Hi,
If your interest is the end of the empire, then perhaps look at the
Patrician list or even Early Byzantine. They offer better heavy cavalry
and slightly different foot combinations.

Cheers
Paul.


I would be interested in hearing other people's opinions on how to field
late Roman in 25mm too so I retitled the subject line to keep this subject

from the other thread. I haven't played much with late Roman in the new
list but I've always liked the army. I usually play down here in Florida
near Jacksonville, so 25mm is king in this area.

My experience has been the Auxilia with high morale and darts are the king

of the battlefield. At least with my style of play I've always gotten the

most bang for buck with the auxilia, even more than with the legionaires.
Artillery on carts is too expensive, but 4 light bolts shooters on foot
are
cost effective. I usually try to avoid spending too many points on the
heavier calvary, I usually just get into trouble with the expensive
calvary.
A typical list for me might run roughly like this:

CinC, single stand (if he's a single stand it's harder to use your CinC to

charge someone and get into trouble)
Sub, body guard element
HC JLS Sh (walking rout targets)
LC, JLS, Sh, RA or RB, more of these units the merrier
1 to 3 Legio, usually 24 man, 16 MI HTW JLS D Sh, 8 MI B Sh, RC or RD
Auxilia, 6 units of 16 RB LMI JLS D Sh (maximum aux, maximizes the groans
from a certain regional champ in Jacksonville)
Auxilia bow, 16 LMI B Sh
4 LI JLS Sh, more the merrier
boltshooters on foot

Optional units for me to get into trouble
EHC L B Sh (expensive walking rout targets)
RD LC B
artillery on carts
armenian ally
hun ally

I like to screen the whole table with 4 man units of LI or LC, then attack

with auxilia while holding with the legions. Lines of dart armed auxilia
are lots of fun.

I'm looking forward to hearing other people two cent's worth.

Jamie White

FREEDOM GROUP LIMITED (A.C.N. 051 493 764) ('the Company') DISCLAIMER: 1)
CONFIDENTIALITY: This email is confidential and may contain privileged or
copyright information. You may not retransmit or present this message to another
party without consent from the sender. If you are not the intended recipient
please notify the sender and delete this email, and be aware that you are bound
to confidentiality, may not copy, distribute or use this email. 2) LIABILITY:
This email is not a binding agreement and does not conclude an agreement without
the express confirmation by the sender's superior or a director of the Company.
3) VIRUSES: The Company makes no express or implied representation or warranty
that this electronic communication or any attachment is free from computer
viruses or other defects or conditions which could damage or interfere with the
recipient's data, hardware or software. This communication and any attachment
may have been modified or otherwise interfered with in the course of
transmission. 4) ADVICE: This email is the view/opinion of the sender and must
not be construed as either the view/opinion of the Company or as advice.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Jamie:

I've just started playing a Patrician Roman list. I unveiled it for
the first time at Tactical Retreat - where I finished dead last. It
wasn't the fault of the list - I'm just a relatively inexperienced
player who made some silly mistakes and then didn't roll a damn to
make up for it. I've made some adjustments to the list, and I am
convinced this can be a competitive army once I shake the wrinkles out.

Any how, for what it's worth, here is how I presently have the list
configured:

Cinc 1E RA HC Jls, Sh
Sub-gen 2E RA HC L,B,Sh
Equites 1X4E RC HC L,B,Sh
Foederate Cav 2x2E IB HC L,Sh
Equites Sagittarii 3x2E RD LC B,Sh
Equites Illyricani 3x2E RC LC Jls,Sh
Foedarati 2x6E 2/4 IB/C MI HTW,Sh
Auxilia 2x6E RC LMI 4 Jls,D,Sh, 2 B,Sh
Auxilia Bowmen 6E RC LMI B, Sh
Skirmishers 4E RC LI S,Sh
Skirmishers 4E RC LI Jls,D,Sh
Skirmishers 4E RC LI B,Sh
Legion 6E RD MI Jls,D,Sh

Seems to have a good mix to me for a variety of tactical uses - and I
would welcome comments and critisms from the esteemed experts on this
list.

But the thing you said that intriqued me Jamie,is using the Auxilia to
attack. How do you go about doing this. Do you put them in you main
line between the other foot units? Do you hold them back in reserve to
counter attack between gaps? Do you you concentrate them at a point or
send them around a flank? Just wondering how to go about this.

Peter

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "jamie white" <jamiep.white@c...>
wrote:
>
> I would be interested in hearing other people's opinions on how to
field
> late Roman in 25mm too so I retitled the subject line to keep this
subject
> from the other thread. I haven't played much with late Roman in the
new
> list but I've always liked the army. I usually play down here in
Florida
> near Jacksonville, so 25mm is king in this area.
>
> My experience has been the Auxilia with high morale and darts are
the king
> of the battlefield. At least with my style of play I've always
gotten the
> most bang for buck with the auxilia, even more than with the
legionaires.
> Artillery on carts is too expensive, but 4 light bolts shooters on
foot are
> cost effective. I usually try to avoid spending too many points on the
> heavier calvary, I usually just get into trouble with the expensive
calvary.
> A typical list for me might run roughly like this:
>
> CinC, single stand (if he's a single stand it's harder to use your
CinC to
> charge someone and get into trouble)
> Sub, body guard element
> HC JLS Sh (walking rout targets)
> LC, JLS, Sh, RA or RB, more of these units the merrier
> 1 to 3 Legio, usually 24 man, 16 MI HTW JLS D Sh, 8 MI B Sh, RC or RD
> Auxilia, 6 units of 16 RB LMI JLS D Sh (maximum aux, maximizes the
groans
> from a certain regional champ in Jacksonville)
> Auxilia bow, 16 LMI B Sh
> 4 LI JLS Sh, more the merrier
> boltshooters on foot
>
> Optional units for me to get into trouble
> EHC L B Sh (expensive walking rout targets)
> RD LC B
> artillery on carts
> armenian ally
> hun ally
>
> I like to screen the whole table with 4 man units of LI or LC, then
attack
> with auxilia while holding with the legions. Lines of dart armed
auxilia
> are lots of fun.
>
> I'm looking forward to hearing other people two cent's worth.
>
> Jamie White
>

Here goes nothing with a little text artwork, hopefully this will work:

LC LI Aux Aux AuxLI Aux Aux AuxLI Legio Legio
LI LC

Sub HC CinC foot bolt shooters

Assuming the terrain dice were reasonably kind, I would deploy something
like this and just go straight at most opponents with the line of Auxilia.
I like to throw terrain on the left side to clog up the table but usually
stay out the terrain with aux. Marsh I think is best because you can throw
darts full range if you do go in the marsh and that gives a huge range
advantage over javelinmen.






----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Celella" <pcelella@...>
To: <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 7:23 PM
Subject: [WarriorRules] Re: Comments on 25 mm late Roman lists


> Jamie:
>
> I've just started playing a Patrician Roman list. I unveiled it for
> the first time at Tactical Retreat - where I finished dead last. It
> wasn't the fault of the list - I'm just a relatively inexperienced
> player who made some silly mistakes and then didn't roll a damn to
> make up for it. I've made some adjustments to the list, and I am
> convinced this can be a competitive army once I shake the wrinkles out.
>
> Any how, for what it's worth, here is how I presently have the list
> configured:
>
> Cinc 1E RA HC Jls, Sh
> Sub-gen 2E RA HC L,B,Sh
> Equites 1X4E RC HC L,B,Sh
> Foederate Cav 2x2E IB HC L,Sh
> Equites Sagittarii 3x2E RD LC B,Sh
> Equites Illyricani 3x2E RC LC Jls,Sh
> Foedarati 2x6E 2/4 IB/C MI HTW,Sh
> Auxilia 2x6E RC LMI 4 Jls,D,Sh, 2 B,Sh
> Auxilia Bowmen 6E RC LMI B, Sh
> Skirmishers 4E RC LI S,Sh
> Skirmishers 4E RC LI Jls,D,Sh
> Skirmishers 4E RC LI B,Sh
> Legion 6E RD MI Jls,D,Sh
>
> Seems to have a good mix to me for a variety of tactical uses - and I
> would welcome comments and critisms from the esteemed experts on this
> list.
>
> But the thing you said that intriqued me Jamie,is using the Auxilia to
> attack. How do you go about doing this. Do you put them in you main
> line between the other foot units? Do you hold them back in reserve to
> counter attack between gaps? Do you you concentrate them at a point or
> send them around a flank? Just wondering how to go about this.
>
> Peter
>
> --- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "jamie white" <jamiep.white@c...>
> wrote:
>>
>> I would be interested in hearing other people's opinions on how to
> field
>> late Roman in 25mm too so I retitled the subject line to keep this
> subject
>> from the other thread. I haven't played much with late Roman in the
> new
>> list but I've always liked the army. I usually play down here in
> Florida
>> near Jacksonville, so 25mm is king in this area.
>>
>> My experience has been the Auxilia with high morale and darts are
> the king
>> of the battlefield. At least with my style of play I've always
> gotten the
>> most bang for buck with the auxilia, even more than with the
> legionaires.
>> Artillery on carts is too expensive, but 4 light bolts shooters on
> foot are
>> cost effective. I usually try to avoid spending too many points on the
>> heavier calvary, I usually just get into trouble with the expensive
> calvary.
>> A typical list for me might run roughly like this:
>>
>> CinC, single stand (if he's a single stand it's harder to use your
> CinC to
>> charge someone and get into trouble)
>> Sub, body guard element
>> HC JLS Sh (walking rout targets)
>> LC, JLS, Sh, RA or RB, more of these units the merrier
>> 1 to 3 Legio, usually 24 man, 16 MI HTW JLS D Sh, 8 MI B Sh, RC or RD
>> Auxilia, 6 units of 16 RB LMI JLS D Sh (maximum aux, maximizes the
> groans
>> from a certain regional champ in Jacksonville)
>> Auxilia bow, 16 LMI B Sh
>> 4 LI JLS Sh, more the merrier
>> boltshooters on foot
>>
>> Optional units for me to get into trouble
>> EHC L B Sh (expensive walking rout targets)
>> RD LC B
>> artillery on carts
>> armenian ally
>> hun ally
>>
>> I like to screen the whole table with 4 man units of LI or LC, then
> attack
>> with auxilia while holding with the legions. Lines of dart armed
> auxilia
>> are lots of fun.
>>
>> I'm looking forward to hearing other people two cent's worth.
>>
>> Jamie White
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>

[Ewan McNay]

Hey, here's one I can pick on with ease . [Sorry, Pete]

On Wed, 2 Nov 2005, Peter Celella wrote:
> Any how, for what it's worth, here is how I presently have the list
> configured:
>
> Cinc 1E RA HC Jls, Sh
> Sub-gen 2E RA HC L,B,Sh
> Equites 1X4E RC HC L,B,Sh

Taking these other than as 2E units seems to sacrifice their main virtue
of being regular, manouvreable and flexible.

> Foederate Cav 2x2E IB HC L,Sh

I don't see these as being worthwhile; can't fight well, can't run away,
can't manouvre. Designed to act as closers, in jon's terminology, but I
don't see it.

> Equites Sagittarii 3x2E RD LC B,Sh

No no no. Reg 2E LC units should take advantage of the superb JLS, Sh
guys in the LIR - as you do. Take B-armed in larger units or not at all.

> Equites Illyricani 3x2E RC LC Jls,Sh

OK, but make them B class for optimal countering. 3 units is probably
enough in this size list anyway.

> Foedarati 2x6E 2/4 IB/C MI HTW,Sh
> Auxilia 2x6E RC LMI 4 Jls,D,Sh, 2 B,Sh
> Auxilia Bowmen 6E RC LMI B, Sh
> Skirmishers 4E RC LI S,Sh
> Skirmishers 4E RC LI Jls,D,Sh
> Skirmishers 4E RC LI B,Sh
> Legion 6E RD MI Jls,D,Sh

Is the legion compulsory? If not, skip. I'd do the LI differently too,
but that's more debateable.

> But the thing you said that intriqued me Jamie,is using the Auxilia to
> attack. How do you go about doing this. Do you put them in you main
> line between the other foot units? Do you hold them back in reserve to
> counter attack between gaps? Do you you concentrate them at a point or
> send them around a flank? Just wondering how to go about this.

Use them as counter troops. Counter away to 161 p from cav, come back in
to dart range, then stand or evade as seems prudent. Tricky against very
heavy cav (K/SHC) which this list in general suffers against (that's when
the superior lights have to come into play; a knight - regular LMI
opponent is the worst nightmare).

E

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, ewan.mcnay@y... wrote:
>
>
> Hey, here's one I can pick on with ease . [Sorry, Pete]
>

Ewan - you're always apologizing when you give constructive advise.
There's no need - I appreciate the information.

> > Any how, for what it's worth, here is how I presently have the list
> > configured:
> >
> > Cinc 1E RA HC Jls, Sh
> > Sub-gen 2E RA HC L,B,Sh
> > Equites 1X4E RC HC L,B,Sh
>
> Taking these other than as 2E units seems to sacrifice their main virtue
> of being regular, manouvreable and flexible.
>

Gotcha - 2E units does sound reasonable. I was having trouble
manuevering at Tactical Retreat. I was thinking that the 4E
configuration might be more resistant to missile fire.

> > Foederate Cav 2x2E IB HC L,Sh
>
> I don't see these as being worthwhile; can't fight well, can't run away,
> can't manouvre. Designed to act as closers, in jon's terminology, but I
> don't see it.

Well, 2E of these are compulsory so I'm stuck with that. But I guess I
could drop one unit. I was playing these in reserve, in the hopes of
counterpunching.

>
> > Equites Sagittarii 3x2E RD LC B,Sh
>
> No no no. Reg 2E LC units should take advantage of the superb JLS, Sh
> guys in the LIR - as you do. Take B-armed in larger units or not at
all.
>

I can take a maximum of 6E of these - would you suggest one 6E unit,
or maybe just a single 4E unit and drop 2E?

> > Equites Illyricani 3x2E RC LC Jls,Sh
>
> OK, but make them B class for optimal countering. 3 units is probably
> enough in this size list anyway.
>

6E is my maximum - and I'll look at going to B class.

> > Foedarati 2x6E 2/4 IB/C MI HTW,Sh
> > Auxilia 2x6E RC LMI 4 Jls,D,Sh, 2 B,Sh
> > Auxilia Bowmen 6E RC LMI B, Sh
> > Skirmishers 4E RC LI S,Sh
> > Skirmishers 4E RC LI Jls,D,Sh
> > Skirmishers 4E RC LI B,Sh
> > Legion 6E RD MI Jls,D,Sh
>
> Is the legion compulsory? If not, skip. I'd do the LI differently too,
> but that's more debateable.
>

The legion isn't compulsory, but I'm still attached for sentimental
reasons - it just doesn't feel Roman without a single legion. I'll
think about it though.

How would you do the LI differently?

> > But the thing you said that intriqued me Jamie,is using the Auxilia to
> > attack. How do you go about doing this. Do you put them in you main
> > line between the other foot units? Do you hold them back in reserve to
> > counter attack between gaps? Do you you concentrate them at a point or
> > send them around a flank? Just wondering how to go about this.
>
> Use them as counter troops. Counter away to 161 p from cav, come
back in
> to dart range, then stand or evade as seems prudent. Tricky against
very
> heavy cav (K/SHC) which this list in general suffers against (that's
when
> the superior lights have to come into play; a knight - regular LMI
> opponent is the worst nightmare).
>
> E
>

Thanks Ewan

Hmm... so you're essentially using you're Auxilia to go straight up
the middle with. Did you see Ewan's response to my list, suggesting
their use as counter troops?

Peter

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "jamie white" <jamiep.white@c...>
wrote:
>
> Here goes nothing with a little text artwork, hopefully this will work:
>
> LC LI Aux Aux AuxLI Aux Aux AuxLI
Legio Legio
> LI LC
>
> Sub HC CinC foot bolt
shooters
>
> Assuming the terrain dice were reasonably kind, I would deploy
something
> like this and just go straight at most opponents with the line of
Auxilia.
> I like to throw terrain on the left side to clog up the table but
usually
> stay out the terrain with aux. Marsh I think is best because you
can throw
> darts full range if you do go in the marsh and that gives a huge range
> advantage over javelinmen.
>
>

[Ewan McNay]

Peter Celella wrote:
>>>Foederate Cav 2x2E IB HC L,Sh
>>
>>I don't see these as being worthwhile; can't fight well, can't run away,
>>can't manouvre. Designed to act as closers, in jon's terminology, but I
>>don't see it.
>
> Well, 2E of these are compulsory so I'm stuck with that. But I guess I
> could drop one unit. I was playing these in reserve, in the hopes of
> counterpunching.

That's their corect role. One unit may be as much as you want though.

>>>Equites Sagittarii 3x2E RD LC B,Sh
>>
>>No no no. Reg 2E LC units should take advantage of the superb JLS, Sh
>>guys in the LIR - as you do. Take B-armed in larger units or not at
> all.
>
> I can take a maximum of 6E of these - would you suggest one 6E unit,
> or maybe just a single 4E unit and drop 2E?

Well, if it were me I would probably drop them in favour of more LI. LIR
is not going to win a LC battle against any serious cav enemy, but will
(should) almost always be able to win a LI battle; to me, anyway. I think
that your 3 2E elements of RB JLS, Sh guys are enough (although I ould not
argue with a 4th were it available). Romans of any ilk win with their
foot or not at all.

>>>Legion 6E RD MI Jls,D,Sh
>>
>>Is the legion compulsory? If not, skip. I'd do the LI differently too,
>>but that's more debateable.
>
> The legion isn't compulsory, but I'm still attached for sentimental
> reasons - it just doesn't feel Roman without a single legion. I'll
> think about it though.
>
> How would you do the LI differently?

[Without the exact list] I take reg missile LI in 4E units, but JLS, Sh
guys - of which you should have lots - in 2E or 6E, usually (though 4E is
not bad). I would just have a lot more of it .

[Ewan McNay]

Peter Celella wrote:

> Hmm... so you're essentially using you're Auxilia to go straight up
> the middle with. Did you see Ewan's response to my list, suggesting
> their use as counter troops?

The two are not incompatible. One is strategic deployment, the other tactics.

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, Ewan McNay <ewan.mcnay@y...> wrote:
>
> >>>Equites Sagittarii 3x2E RD LC B,Sh
> >>
> >>No no no. Reg 2E LC units should take advantage of the superb JLS, Sh
> >>guys in the LIR - as you do. Take B-armed in larger units or not at
> > all.
> >
> > I can take a maximum of 6E of these - would you suggest one 6E unit,
> > or maybe just a single 4E unit and drop 2E?
>
> Well, if it were me I would probably drop them in favour of more LI.
LIR
> is not going to win a LC battle against any serious cav enemy, but will
> (should) almost always be able to win a LI battle; to me, anyway. I
think
> that your 3 2E elements of RB JLS, Sh guys are enough (although I
ould not
> argue with a 4th were it available). Romans of any ilk win with their
> foot or not at all.
>

I looked into what I can do with the LC. I can have a maximum 6E of
each of the bow-arned and javelin armed elements. I can only upgrade
1/2 of the total elements to morale C (and can't get to B). Therefore,
if I want 3x2E of RC Jls,Sh, I need to take 6E of the RD B,Sh. If
that's the case, would it be better to have a 6E bow unit, or
alternately have only a singel 4E bow unit to go with only 2x2E of
JLS, Sh?


> >
> > How would you do the LI differently?
>
> [Without the exact list] I take reg missile LI in 4E units, but JLS, Sh
> guys - of which you should have lots - in 2E or 6E, usually (though
4E is
> not bad). I would just have a lot more of it .
>

I'm maxed for LI B,Sh and LI S,Sh. I could have 2E more of the LI
JLS,D,Sh, and put them in either 1x6E or 3x2E unit - is either
preferable? Any other LI I could take would have to be staff slingers
or x-bows - I wasn't so hot on either. And I don't presently have the
figs for those.

[Derek Downs]

Patrician Roman won the NICT a few years back.
So it must work.

Derek


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Ewan McNay]

Peter Celella wrote:
> I looked into what I can do with the LC. I can have a maximum 6E of
> each of the bow-arned and javelin armed elements. I can only upgrade
> 1/2 of the total elements to morale C (and can't get to B). Therefore,
> if I want 3x2E of RC Jls,Sh, I need to take 6E of the RD B,Sh. If
> that's the case, would it be better to have a 6E bow unit, or
> alternately have only a singel 4E bow unit to go with only 2x2E of
> JLS, Sh?

Huh. Rough choices . Play a different army? [That may be part of my
problem here - I have just never rated this army as other than bad. Yes,
even when Chris won the NICT with it .]

> I'm maxed for LI B,Sh and LI S,Sh. I could have 2E more of the LI
> JLS,D,Sh, and put them in either 1x6E or 3x2E unit - is either
> preferable? Any other LI I could take would have to be staff slingers
> or x-bows - I wasn't so hot on either. And I don't presently have the
> figs for those.

Well, yuck. This seems to be a Roman with none of the good points! I
think I echo myself - this is clearly just not a list for me.

[Mark Stone]

Peter Celella wrote:
>> I looked into what I can do with the LC. I can have a maximum 6E of
>> each of the bow-arned and javelin armed elements. I can only upgrade
>> 1/2 of the total elements to morale C (and can't get to B). Therefore,
>> if I want 3x2E of RC Jls,Sh, I need to take 6E of the RD B,Sh. If
>> that's the case, would it be better to have a 6E bow unit, or
>> alternately have only a singel 4E bow unit to go with only 2x2E of
>> JLS, Sh?

To which Ewan replied:
> Huh. Rough choices . Play a different army? [That may be part of my
> problem here - I have just never rated this army as other than bad. Yes,
> even when Chris won the NICT with it .]

I'm with Ewan here. Late Romans and Patrician Romans have never held the
slightest appeal to me. I don't find anything appealing about Roman history in
these periods, and from a competitive standpoint these armies are memorable
only as the soft, squishy stuff under my horses' hooves when I'm playing a
knight army.

To be fair, the original question had to do with suitability in 25mm vs. 15mm,
specifically with Late Romans. With respect to _that_ question, Late Romans are
not a scale sensitive army. They play equally well (or equally badly) in either
scale.

The strength of the Later Roman armies, without a doubt, is their excellent
light infantry. Take all you can get. The light infantry is strengthened by the
fact that you can back it up with lance-armed cavalry. That makes it very
difficult for all but the most skilled light cav player to take down your
skirmish line, meaning you should be able to shield more vulnerable troops
behind, and line them up where they can then press forward to best advantage.
Sadly, those "best troops" are probably the auxilia: some combination of armor
and morale class armed with JLS,D,Sh. That's not a troop type that will be
potent against very many opponents. Elephant armies will hate you, pike and
elephant armies will have to be very careful, but armies with substantial shock
mounted -- even just EHC -- should roll you over.

One of the things I really like about Imperial Warrior is that it actually makes
the Roman armies that have the greatest historical appeal also the most
playable. I've played Rich Gagliasso's Early Imperial Romans several times, and
they are a tough opponent. I'm still waiting for someone to field a Marian Roman
army and really do justice to it, as I think that's an army with great potential
despite the high minimums in HI legionaries.

But, as I've said (and Jon has said) before, it takes time to think through all
the implications of the Roman list rules, and players just haven't progressed
very far with that yet (that I can see).


-Mark Stone

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, Mark Stone <mark@d...> wrote:
>
> I'm with Ewan here. Late Romans and Patrician Romans have never held the
> slightest appeal to me. I don't find anything appealing about Roman
history in
> these periods, and from a competitive standpoint these armies are
memorable
> only as the soft, squishy stuff under my horses' hooves when I'm
playing a
> knight army.
>

Okay guys, discouraging points well taken. But I do intend to soldier
on with this list.

Actually Mark, my historical perspective is just the opposite to
yours. I've always been fascinated with 5th century Roman history as
opposed to the typical 1 century BCE stuff you see in Hollywood epics.
Something about the 5th century does it for me - maybe the scarcity of
sources, the hordes of barbarians, the struggle to keep the lights on,
I don't know, (did you ever read 'The Latern Bearers' by Rosemary
Sutcliffe when you were young) makes it a period I keep reading about
and researching.

Thanks for the help though - short of ditching an army that I really
want to make work, your comments have been very useful.

[Ed Forbes]

Peter,
I am with you. I play Roman off and on and I enjoy doing do. Playing an army
in a period that interests you and losing is much more enjoyable than playing an
army that does not interest you and being competitive.

Ed

-- "Peter Celella" <pcelella@...> wrote:

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, Mark Stone <mark@d...> wrote:
>
> I'm with Ewan here. Late Romans and Patrician Romans have never held the
> slightest appeal to me. I don't find anything appealing about Roman
history in
> these periods, and from a competitive standpoint these armies are
memorable
> only as the soft, squishy stuff under my horses' hooves when I'm
playing a
> knight army.
>

Okay guys, discouraging points well taken. But I do intend to soldier
on with this list.

Actually Mark, my historical perspective is just the opposite to
yours. I've always been fascinated with 5th century Roman history as
opposed to the typical 1 century BCE stuff you see in Hollywood epics.
Something about the 5th century does it for me - maybe the scarcity of
sources, the hordes of barbarians, the struggle to keep the lights on,
I don't know, (did you ever read 'The Latern Bearers' by Rosemary
Sutcliffe when you were young) makes it a period I keep reading about
and researching.

Thanks for the help though - short of ditching an army that I really
want to make work, your comments have been very useful.










Yahoo! Groups Links







[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]