My understanding of skirmishers in this period comes from Goldsworthy's book on the Second Punic War. I hope I'm not just projecting Napoleonic skirmishing back 2000 years. But Goldsworthy, working primarily from Polybius, describes skirmishers operating between the lines just as I laid out ...

2. The end of the manipular legion, with its checkerboard formation designed to disrupt a phalanx by applying uneven pressure along its front.

3. The replacement of the maniple system with the cohort system and its solid front designed to deal with less-ordered opponents.


Not sure about this ...

In the "Rise of Rome" supplement it is stated that the the triarii/hastati/principes/velites system was brought to an abrupt end by the reforms of Marius. Is this the case? I always thought it died out gradually, and was extinct by the time of the 3rd Punic War.


I'm not sure we really have an ...

On the matter of consistency, however, I would have to say that if any list is out of sync with policy it is the Ancient Brits/Gauls, not the Germans. In general we have tried to avoid probably spurious distinctions between troops based on scanty evidence.

Yeah, as someone who is currently ...

No, Iphicrates was leading regular "run of the mill" light infantry peltasts here.

His rearming of Hoplites with oval "pelte" is a different occasion entirely, and all the Iphicratean hoplites/peltasts you see in other lists are based on a hypothesis that this style caught on, and is the "missing ...

Wow, this thread is getting a lot of views for something where the rules question was completely answered in the first couple of replies.


As a curiousity, what do you contend should be the optimal outcome? That Cv should always catch the Lf with a charge?


That probably would bother me less ...

Glad you like the rules overall. To help on your points (as we do agree in the main)....

The MU is NOT religiously fixed as it is not necesssary to do so, but of course has some broad calibration. 1MU is consderable more than 30 yards. Take historical max longbowrange as 6 MU and work backwards ...

Can't say I agree with you on much I'm afraid...

Obviously. BTW, just to clear the air, there are a -lot- of things I like about the rules too.

Ever ridden a horse

Yep

- they accelerate much much faster than you think. <100 yds is ample to get up to speed.

Yes, but 1 MU is <<<< 100 yards ...

If you try the games you don't need any of those to make it work - it already does and is quite carefully set up to do so.

Respectfully, we must be talking about a different game.

LF are not stupid - they don't by choice come so close to mounted that they are doomed to die...

Now that's ...

1. yes in this instance LF can out run Cav, however, think of them as using dead ground, obstacles etc to avoid being ridden over.

That would work if the cavalry burst through the enemy LF (probably not unjustified anyway), but they don't. They just chase them. Or conceed they probably can't ...

Odd that you think cavalry starting from a long way away should always catch foot.

Please do me the courtesy of not telling me what I think, so I don't have to get uncivil. (Edit: insert smiley here) Either that or point out when I ever said "always", or "a long way away".

Pretty obvious to me ...

Normally all that really matters is being within 1 MU but you can approach to within a gnats todger if you want.


Thanks.


All that skirmishers can do to cavalry is shoot them. If they don't then the cavalry will be able to carry on doing more important stuff like outflanking the enemy battle ...

LF can't take cavalry out of the battle unless you let them. Often the right answer is to ignore them, let them shoot at you,

That can be a pretty tough pill to swallow. Especially in a 4-stand cavalry unit.

and use your cavalry to support your plan. Accept that this is one matchup that favors ...

Yep you are missing something which is the right tactics under FOG

"Game" the system, then? I'd have thought something as simple as chasing down foot with cavalry would be more straightforward.

.... ride up closer and see what happens.

Stop 5 MU away.

If they come up to fire don't charge but ...

Hello,

The other day I witnessed a first game between the Later Carthaginians and Late Republican Romans, using the starter armies for each respective list.

Anyway, on one flank a unit of Carthaginian cavalry was facing a unit of Roman slingers, in open terrain. Naturally they charged... the ...

Clarification: Is 8 / 2 acceptable then? The lists say you must organize by legion (and upgrade by whole legion), but only give the examples of 4 4 / 2 and 8 8 / 4 legions.

As an aside, that's a pretty tight restriction, forcing a player to take legionaires in chunks of 10 stands (14 counting ...

On the other hand, I think it is a mistake to ignore metal armour altogether.


Unquestionably. If the evolution of armor in the medieval and rennaissance periods tells us anything, it's that the stuff works.


Armour isn't cheap, and if it did not convey a significant advantage, governments ...

True, but theoretical arguments aside, crossbows need to be outshot by longbows to simulate history. (I appreciate that even this is open to discussion and the Genoese at Crecy may have been having an off-day for various documented reasons). The present rules allow crossbows to be outshot by ...

Originally we had Protected Hastati and Armoured Principes, and a complicated system allowing them to operate separately but cooperatively. When we simplified the rules and combined the two into joint BGs we gave the option to have them as either.

Probably a better bet historically, anyway. The ...

I think most rules actually get too caught up in the comparative rate of fire between bows and crossbows, actually. While I understand the longbow can fire 5x to 6x as fast on the practice field, this gap is going to close in actual battle due to:

1. Ammunition availability
2. Fatigue
and 3. The ...