Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[AntiokosIII]

Back in the Olden Times, in TOG, when I last played a lot, my beloved Seleukids were considered a killer list, an A list. I started playing Seleukids in 4th Edition because their history is so romanitc, so exotic, and kept playing them because I fell in love with the hellenistic period.

I sort of quit playing Seleukids after awhile in TOG because I kept hearing people accuse me of playing them only because the list was so tough. Well, it was a very nasty list indeed. Now the army seems less well regarded. Has it slipped back to maybe a B? Is it safe to resume playing them without guilt? If I beat somebody with the army, do I now get more of the credit than the guy who wrote the list books?

[Frank Gilson]

Go ahead and play Seleucids regardless of what the folks trampled by your elephants, skewered by your pikes, and gored by your scythes say!

Truthfully...it's the army you play if you want lots of elephants ( plus some other Macedonian style troops...and is a solid list that can compete well.

It's not a super-duper-kill-everything list, but arguably it never was.

Frank

[Mark Stone]

My personal "A" list is very short:
* Alexandrian Imperial
* Khmer
* Knights of Saint John
* Later Carthaginian

Those are the lists that I rate as having "10" potential in the NICT. There are a number of lists that I rate in the "9" category, which probably don't fall all the way from "A" to "B" but maybe fall to "A-". Sassanid Persian is one I rate a 9, and Seleukids would be another.

Alexandrian Imperial is more balanced overall, and more importantly has the Hypaspists. Seleukids can get scythed chariots (which I would never take), and can get more elephants. The latter is its key differentiator. If you want to run a pike-elephant army with lots of elephants, then Seleukids is best of breed.

We see it occaisionally in national open tournament play, but not nearly as often as in TOG, and not as often as Alexandrian Imperial. I don't anyone would have a real basis for disparaging you for playing the army, particularly since you have the knowledge of and passion for its history.


-Mark Stone

[wargame692000]

Seleucid is played alot in Australia. This is possible due to the conditions of our comps. We play 2 25mm, 6' x 4', 1300 point comps per year. On these small tables, I find the combination of companions, elephants, pikes, scythed chariots and 1.5 rank LC to be quite effective.

That said, Alexandrian Imperial is still a more popular choice.

Go ahead and play it. I have enjoyed playing Seleucid for more than 15years.

Paul Collins.

[Ewan McNay]

I've also played Seleucids, on and off, for a long time. I like them a lot, in part because I like both scythed Ch and elephants .

The only thing that I thought was overly dubious under TOG was where comps would allow two lists: Seleucids were one of the most, and probably the absolute most, beneficiary of this, as your second list could have zero El and maxed out SHC, for running over barbarian foot that would kill El. That was sleazy (and a lot of fun!)

[AntiokosIII]

<takes bit between teeth> MMMMPH!! MMMMPH! <removes> I mean, I'll do it!! The Seleukid Dog ( as I was at one time called by Roman players from underneath my chariot wheels) rides again!!

[John Murphy]

[quote="Mark Stone"]My personal "A" list is very short:
* Alexandrian Imperial
* Khmer
* Knights of Saint John
* Later Carthaginian
[/quote]

Okay, I remember this from a few months back and it has been in the back of my mind bugging me. I have even poked around a bit to try and figure it out.

The rest I can kind of see, but what is the deal with the Carthaginians?

[Mark Stone]

[Martin Williams]

I've often wondered when fighting this army, how does Hannibal in Italy have 9 elephants? Even if all the ones that set out made it this would seem extreme.

This is a tough army i've fought on an number of occaisions with pretty limited success

Martin williams

[Tibor]

Very good point Martin.

Even if we use a scale of just 4 elephants per figure, that gives too many elephants for what actually survived into Italy (27!)

There is an excellent discussion of the trials and tribulations of Hannibal crossing the alps at http://www.livius.org/ha-hd/hannibal/alps.html

So - is there a case for errata on the number of elephants Hannibal used in Italy?

Tibor

[Mark Stone]

[Steve]

Hello Mark,

FWIW, I have posted my thoughts on this on the topic that has now split off as a discussion about the Carthaginians in Italy (the subject directly above or beneath this one in the index I think).

Steve

[John Murphy]

[quote="Tibor"]Very good point Martin.

Even if we use a scale of just 4 elephants per figure, that gives too many elephants for what actually survived into Italy (27!)

There is an excellent discussion of the trials and tribulations of Hannibal crossing the alps at http://www.livius.org/ha-hd/hannibal/alps.html

So - is there a case for errata on the number of elephants Hannibal used in Italy?

Tibor[/quote]


I just got back from Italia.
Flow over the alps, lots easier than walking. But had a window seat for that leg of the flight. Interesting to see how there are miles and miles of little windy passes without snow cover yet.

But I mention all this because when the bus was taking us thru the Umbrian forests past Lake Trasimene where a bunch of movie starts have their homes I was probably the only one who thought of Carthaginians ambushing the Republican Roman army in the woods. Must have been a scene I saw in a grade B movie.