Peltasts as variable fighting types
Moderators: philqw78, terrys, hammy, Slitherine Core, Field of Glory Moderators, Field of Glory Design
-
GHGAustin
- Sergeant First Class - Panzer IIIL

- Posts: 398
- Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2008 6:42 pm
- Location: Austin, Texas USA
- Contact:
Peltasts as variable fighting types
I would like to see Peltasts and allowed to be deployed either as LF or MF at the beginning of the battle, similar to the decision that you can make with regard to Makedonian Hypaspists. So, as long as you pay for the most expensive type, then after you have seen the terrain you can declare at the time of deployment whether they are acting in the LF or MF role. One might argue a similar thing for Thureophoroi and MF vs. HF.
Also, I wonder about making LF Peltasts protected, similar to Velites. This would give them an advantage over other javelinmen.
Also, I wonder about making LF Peltasts protected, similar to Velites. This would give them an advantage over other javelinmen.
-
nikgaukroger
- Field of Glory Moderator

- Posts: 10287
- Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 9:30 am
- Location: LarryWorld
Re: Peltasts as variable fighting types
For peltasts to have a MF option there would have to be evidence of MF behaviour - are you aware of any?GHGAustin wrote:I would like to see Peltasts and allowed to be deployed either as LF or MF at the beginning of the battle, similar to the decision that you can make with regard to Makedonian Hypaspists. So, as long as you pay for the most expensive type, then after you have seen the terrain you can declare at the time of deployment whether they are acting in the LF or MF role. One might argue a similar thing for Thureophoroi and MF vs. HF.
It would be an inappropriate option for thyreoforoi as the MF/HF option is really about backward compatability for existing figure collections rather than a belief they fought in 2 different ways. The writers actually think that HF is correct, but did not want to worry players with rebasing which might have proved a barrier to playing FoG.
Also, I wonder about making LF Peltasts protected, similar to Velites. This would give them an advantage over other javelinmen.
They are Average compared to the general Greek javelinman who is Poor - seems advantage enough against the troops they were superior to historically.
Nik Gaukroger
"Never ask a man if he comes from Yorkshire. If he does, he will tell you.
If he does not, why humiliate him?" - Canon Sydney Smith
nikgaukroger@blueyonder.co.uk
"Never ask a man if he comes from Yorkshire. If he does, he will tell you.
If he does not, why humiliate him?" - Canon Sydney Smith
nikgaukroger@blueyonder.co.uk
Well, Thracian "peltasts" are graded as MF with anything from light spear, to light spear w/sword, offensive spear or heavy weapon. The LF are simply "javelinmen".
Thracians
Classical Indians
Medieval
-Germans (many flavors), Danes, Low Countries
Burgundians
In progress - Later Hungarians, Grand Moravians
Classical Indians
Medieval
-Germans (many flavors), Danes, Low Countries
Burgundians
In progress - Later Hungarians, Grand Moravians
-
grahambriggs
- Lieutenant-General - Do 217E

- Posts: 3081
- Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2008 9:48 am
I imagine calling the Thracians "peltasts" ccame about because that was the nearest Greek troop type. Is there any information that these fierce Thracian warriors with close combat weapons would act as light skirmishers? In tribal societies that seems to have often been a role given to the youths.gozerius wrote:Well, Thracian "peltasts" are graded as MF with anything from light spear, to light spear w/sword, offensive spear or heavy weapon. The LF are simply "javelinmen".
-
rbodleyscott
- Field of Glory 2

- Posts: 28411
- Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:25 pm
Or more likely because they carried the pelta.grahambriggs wrote:I imagine calling the Thracians "peltasts" ccame about because that was the nearest Greek troop type.gozerius wrote:Well, Thracian "peltasts" are graded as MF with anything from light spear, to light spear w/sword, offensive spear or heavy weapon. The LF are simply "javelinmen".
-
grahambriggs
- Lieutenant-General - Do 217E

- Posts: 3081
- Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2008 9:48 am
Surely "pelta" is a Greek word, not Thracian? (desperate attempt at recovery...)rbodleyscott wrote:Or more likely because they carried the pelta.grahambriggs wrote:I imagine calling the Thracians "peltasts" ccame about because that was the nearest Greek troop type.gozerius wrote:Well, Thracian "peltasts" are graded as MF with anything from light spear, to light spear w/sword, offensive spear or heavy weapon. The LF are simply "javelinmen".
-
rbodleyscott
- Field of Glory 2

- Posts: 28411
- Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:25 pm
Indeed and so is peltastoi - it means "men carrying the shield called a pelta". i.e. the crescent shaped thingy in the 5th century BC.grahambriggs wrote:Surely "pelta" is a Greek word, not Thracian? (desperate attempt at recovery...)rbodleyscott wrote:Or more likely because they carried the pelta.grahambriggs wrote: I imagine calling the Thracians "peltasts" ccame about because that was the nearest Greek troop type.
Of course in Hellenistic times it came to have a somewhat different meaning, being used even for pikemen, and in any case Thracians by then used the thureos.
-
madaxeman
- Lieutenant-General - Do 217E

- Posts: 3002
- Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 5:15 am
- Location: London, UK
- Contact:
Re: Peltasts as variable fighting types
GHGAustin wrote:Also, I wonder about making LF Peltasts protected, similar to Velites. This would give them an advantage over other javelinmen.
Isn't there a Superior Cavalry thread where RBS says this isn't the rationale for grading troops in FoG though ?nikgaukroger wrote:They are Average compared to the general Greek javelinman who is Poor - seems advantage enough against the troops they were superior to historically.
http://www.madaxeman.com
Holiday in Devon? Try https://www.thecaptainscottagebrixham.com
Holiday in Devon? Try https://www.thecaptainscottagebrixham.com
-
nikgaukroger
- Field of Glory Moderator

- Posts: 10287
- Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 9:30 am
- Location: LarryWorld
Re: Peltasts as variable fighting types
Quite possibly, however, I can't be held responsible for what he saysmadaxeman wrote:GHGAustin wrote:Also, I wonder about making LF Peltasts protected, similar to Velites. This would give them an advantage over other javelinmen.Isn't there a Superior Cavalry thread where RBS says this isn't the rationale for grading troops in FoG though ?nikgaukroger wrote:They are Average compared to the general Greek javelinman who is Poor - seems advantage enough against the troops they were superior to historically.
Nik Gaukroger
"Never ask a man if he comes from Yorkshire. If he does, he will tell you.
If he does not, why humiliate him?" - Canon Sydney Smith
nikgaukroger@blueyonder.co.uk
"Never ask a man if he comes from Yorkshire. If he does, he will tell you.
If he does not, why humiliate him?" - Canon Sydney Smith
nikgaukroger@blueyonder.co.uk
-
hazelbark
- General - Carrier

- Posts: 4957
- Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 9:53 pm
- Location: Capital of the World !!
I think a lot of this idea being able to detach convert MF into LF goes to what are you trying to design in the game.
For me that rings of the napoleonic forces trying to deploy units in extended skirmisher order and not. A very common discussion in that period.
But for me that moves FOG AM down a rung to a more tactical level that has repeatedly been eschewed.
Heck I bet even in a pinch you can shake some of your phalanx into some LF worthless unit. But that is not the big picutre scale of the game. That is rung closer to more specailty rules all over.
For me that rings of the napoleonic forces trying to deploy units in extended skirmisher order and not. A very common discussion in that period.
But for me that moves FOG AM down a rung to a more tactical level that has repeatedly been eschewed.
Heck I bet even in a pinch you can shake some of your phalanx into some LF worthless unit. But that is not the big picutre scale of the game. That is rung closer to more specailty rules all over.

