Later Seleucid cavalry

[stevesykes]

I'm trying to get a Later Seleucid list I like. Currently I have one with a BG of four cataphracts, the Galatian cavalry, four Skythian LH and 6 Tarantine LH. I get the impression from other discussions on the forum that a single BG of cataphracts may not be particularly useful. Would it be better to swap them for a BG of four Companions, or possibly 2 BGs of 2 Companions?

[dave_r]

If you want more than one BG of Companians then they have to be 2 BG's of 2. Which IMO aren't particularly useful.

You could go for 1*4 of Companians and 1*6 of Cataphracts, which I have found both entertaining and useful.

[babyshark]

Based on my (limited) experience a single BG of 4 Cats is not much use to anyone. Go big or go home, as they say.

Marc

[stevesykes]

I guess it would be easier to judge what the better option for cavalry would be in the context of the complete list. My current version is:

4 x TC
1 X 4 Cataphracts Cat,HA, Sup, Dr, Lance,Sw
1 x 4 Galatian cavalry, Cav, Arm, Sup, Undr, Lt sp, Sw
1 X 4 Skythian cavalry, LH, Unp, Ave, Undr, Bow, Sw
1 x 6 Tarantine cavalry, LH, Unp, Ave, Dr, Jav, Lt Sp
3 x 8 Phalanx, HF, Prot, Ave, Dr, Pike
2 x 4 Roman Argyraspids, HF, Arm, Sup, Dr, Impact ft, SSw
1 X 6 Thorakitai, MF, Arm, Ave, Dr, Off Sp
1 x 6 Thracians, MF, Prot, Ave, Undr, HW
1 x 6 Cretans, LF, Unp, Sup, Dr, Bow
1 x 8 Archers, LF, Unp, Poor, Undr, Bow
1 x 8 SLingers, LF, Unp, Poor, Undr, Sling

What do you think of this as a list, and in this context are the Companions a better option than a single BG of cataphracts?

[nikgaukroger]

In the Later seleukid list you must have at least 4 catafracts - there is a "nested" minimum in the catafracts + companion options. If you want Companions they would have to be additional to these 4 catafracts.

Caught me out a few months ago ...

[stevesykes]

Ah. That answers the question, then - I must have known the cats were compulsory when I first started tinkering with the list and then forgotten Originally I had two BGs of cataphracts, but then thought the Galatian cav might be more useful. So I'd appreciate any thoughts on the list - should I go back to the two lumps of cataphracts and drop the Galatians?

[hammy]

I think the Galatians are an interesting option, they are cheaper than the cataphracts and if you put them in single rank can evade which is not to be sniffed at. To be honest I think your list is pretty decent.

[nikgaukroger]

I concur with Hammy, looks a solid list.

I'd give it a couple of run outs before fiddling any further - see how it does in real life and then adjust if necessary.

[stevesykes]

OK, thanks. I'll give it a go and see how I get on. Due to the scarcity of opponents round here, I've played one game in the last 10 months, so I think I'm going to be the army's problem, rather than the other way about.

[OhReally]

How can you not in good concience field Elite companions? Best 80 points you can spend in the army from my limited experience.

[sergiomonteleone]

I played a lot Later Seleucid using many BG's of mounted: 2 BG's of cataphracts (I comlpletely agree: 1 is not sufficient), 1 BG of Elephants supporting PK and HF, 1 BG of Companions (very good reserve in ordere to launch where you need) and 2 BG's of LH.
Sergio

[stevesykes]

I played a lot Later Seleucid using many BG's of mounted: 2 BG's of cataphracts (I comlpletely agree: 1 is not sufficient), 1 BG of Elephants supporting PK and HF, 1 BG of Companions (very good reserve in ordere to launch where you need) and 2 BG's of LH.

I'd be interested to see the list you used. To have a large mounted component to the army at 800 points, you must have cut out troops elsewhere so the balance of the army must be different. I was thinking that the aim was to deliver the pikes and argyraspids onto a target with the other parts of the army assisting. Your view seems to be more cavalry based. It's always intriguing to get someone else's view of an army you're interested in.

[sergiomonteleone]

You are completely right.

You have to consider that I like more armies with mounted troops so in my list I have the minimum of Pk (2 BG’s of 10 bases instead of 8 because of if you loose 1 base in combact in the following one you can count 3° and 4° rank) and I prefer to use HF superior instead of Pk superior.

I’m used to have 1 wing with Ct and Companions in reserve to support them or to launch them when you need.
Sometimes I deploy BG of Elephants in reserve with 1 General, in particularly if the opponent has Kn’s.

This is the last version I played (at the moment I’m focused in some Medieval Armies):

1 X FC
2 x TC
2 X 4 Cataphracts Cat,HA, Sup, Dr, Lance,Sw
1 x 4 Companions , Cav, Arm, Elite, Dr, Lt sp, Sw
1 X 4 Horse archers , LH, Unp, Ave, Undr, Bow
1 x 4 Tarantine cavalry, LH, Unp, Ave, Dr, Jav, Lt Sp
1 x 2 Elephant, Av, Undr
2 x 10 Phalanx, HF, Prot, Ave, Dr, Pike
1 x 6 Argyraspids, HF, Arm, Sup, Dr, Impact ft, SSw
1 X 6 Thorakitai, MF, Arm, Ave, Dr, Off Sp
1 x 6 Thracians, MF, Prot, Ave, Undr, HW
1 x 6 Archers, LF, Unp, Av, Undr, Bow

Regarding you list, good idea having 4 TC, in fact I’m testing some armies using 4 TC

Sergio

[Berserk27]

Hello,

I'm using this list:
1*IC
3*TC
1BG*4 CV elite armoured drilled lancer Sw
1BG*4 Cataphtact.
2BG*8 Pk Superieur protected drilled
1BG*8 pk average protected drilled
1 Bg*6 medium foot average armoured drilled off spear
1 Bg*4 Lh skitian
2 Bg*2 Elephant
1 Bg*4 Lf cretan bowmen
1 Bg*6 Lf average unp bowmen undrilled
1 fortified camp

[madmike111]

way too many pts wasted on lt foot, I always field the cheapest available. Poor Lt Jav are the killer troop type of the game, at 2pts each.

The expensive Lt never kill their weight in pts.

[hobbsy]

Hi, im new to FoG, played a couple of games with my pontic vs early imperial roman (won), ancient brits(draw) and early cathaginian (won)

Just looking at building a seleucid army

so far i got
1x IC
2x TC

1BG*4 CV elite armoured drilled lancer Sw
1BG*6 Cata
2BG*8 Pk Sup Prot Drilled
1BG*8 Pk Avr Prot Drilled
1BG*10 Pk Avr Prot Drilled
1BG*6 MF Prot Avr Drilled Off Spear
1BG*6 HF Prot Sup Undrilled Imp Ft Sw
1BG*6 LF Unprot Avr Undrilled Bow
1BG*6 LF Unprot Avr Undrilled Sling
1BG*4 LH Unprot Avr Undrilled Bow
1BG*4 LGH Unprot Avr Drilled Jav Light Spear

Would it be wise to take away some pike and put the points elsewhere? More MF or some elephants
This is the first time using a diffrent army so be kind,

Thanks

[expendablecinc]

The list I am workign towards doestn have any romanised pike as yet so has the following;

4 TCs

2 companions
2 companions
6 cataphracts
8 sup pike
12 avg pike
12 avg pike
12 avg pike
8 avg pike
8 avg pike
6 thereophoroi
2 elephants
2 elephants
2 poor slingers

[ethan]

way too many pts wasted on lt foot, I always field the cheapest available. Poor Lt Jav are the killer troop type of the game, at 2pts each.

The expensive Lt never kill their weight in pts.

I dunno, that is a preference/army composition thing IMO. I have played games and wished I had no lights and others in which they were very handy. Sometimes it isn't the actual killing - but forcing the enemy out of positoin when they can't counter the 8 LF/Bow in the RGo pelting their flank troops endlessly - so they move them and are in a sub-optimal position to receive your main attack.

[MarkSieber]

Has anyone used the 2-base BG's of Companions? I've played with the 2-base Triarii in the Mid Republican list, and they have turned the tide on occasion. They can support the 4-base BG's of Principes/Hastati, but in the Seleucid list the shock foot are large BG's. I gather that the cataphracts in the Byzantine lists will also be two bases--I'd like to hear how they play.