Romans what are they good for absolutely nothing

[hammy]

Looking at the list of troops your legionaries fought very few of them are troops where the Roman advantages actually count for anything. As a result you are right that the Romans seemed underpowered.

If you change your opponents to Light spear/swordsmen or barbarian impact foot the whole thing changes massively in favour of the legionaries.

See a lot of those at tournaments, do you, hammy? I beat barbarian impact foot are real popular, as they can't even beat Romans...

Well I have used an army that is essentially made up of barbarian impact foot swordsmen and I am seriously thinking of using such an army in a Legions Triumphant theme. Against Roman auxilia (which comprise the bulk of the Pinner mob) legionaries are just fine.

[grahambriggs]

Looking at the list of troops your legionaries fought very few of them are troops where the Roman advantages actually count for anything. As a result you are right that the Romans seemed underpowered.

If you change your opponents to Light spear/swordsmen or barbarian impact foot the whole thing changes massively in favour of the legionaries.

See a lot of those at tournaments, do you, hammy? I beat barbarian impact foot are real popular, as they can't even beat Romans...

You don't see a great number of them but i think that's because they were rare in DBM and people are just using their existing armies. I know a few people are using barbarian impact foot in Roman armies though.

I was tempted to use them at Warfare next weekend but didn't have the time to work an army out. The general theory being blocks of 12 hairy screamers led by generals and with rear support. Scary in the charge and enough mass to hold for a while after it against quality troops while chums destroy the weaker support troops.

Maybe once I'm done with the persians.

[hammy]

I was tempted to use them at Warfare next weekend but didn't have the time to work an army out. The general theory being blocks of 12 hairy screamers led by generals and with rear support. Scary in the charge and enough mass to hold for a while after it against quality troops while chums destroy the weaker support troops.

Slave revolt are after all just up market hairys.....

I have used early Visigoth a couple of times and it isn't a shabby list at all.

What I was trying to point out is that Romans are not the best troops against everything. That said legionaries have a decent chance against armoured spear and protected spear are road kill for them, it is only pike (among foot) that pose a major problem and there is still a better chance that legionaries will disrupt pike at impact rather than be disrupted in return.

[footslogger]

I've done the legions vs pikes things a lot. I'm always on the pikes side with successor pike armies. The legions have been mid and late republican.

My experience basically tells me that if the legions win at impact the pikes are toast. If the pikes win at impact they have a good chance of getting through the legions but the legions may recover. If it's a push at impact, the legions usually win eventually. The pike armies win the battle two ways, beating the legions which is the unlikely way, or holding up the legions while something (like cataphracts) win elsewhere. The Romans win the battle by beating the pikes or beating the supports.

These games are never predictable and always really interesting.


I'm pretty interested in huge hairy warband armies and look forward to hearing about people's experience with using them.

[firefalluk]

I was tempted to use them at Warfare next weekend but didn't have the time to work an army out. The general theory being blocks of 12 hairy screamers led by generals and with rear support. Scary in the charge and enough mass to hold for a while after it against quality troops while chums destroy the weaker support troops.

Well I must admit I'm tempted by bulk hairies (as you may be able to tell from another current thread), but from my fairly limited experience, I've seen almost noone else running them, or running auxilia spear/sword in large numbers (except where there are lots of legionaries also present).

Things are obviously different in the UK

[Omar]

So, what I am getting is that the Legionaries from the mid to late republican period (guessing.. HF/Armored/Superior/Drilled/ImpactFt,SupSwords? I dont have the Rise of Rome book), which are probably the same as the later Roman Legionaries, do well against other foot that they are not equally matched with? Its only matched armies or cavalry that give them fits.. but those armies (lots of horse) tend to be very popular right now?

I would think with all of the options available to a Roman army (Principate at least) that you could deal with just about any situation?

[madaxeman]

Romans have handed my Carthaginians their butts on a plate most times I have played against them. They beat spears every time, and have a good chance against pikes. The superior sword ability may not count much, but their special ability never to die and to recover from fragmented at any opportunity seemed to do for me most times.

I'm taking Romans to a comp this weekend partly because I have struggled to beat them so many times I thought I'd give it a go.

But at 550 points in an open comp with pre-set terrain even I'd not touch them.

tim
www.madaxeman.com

[Omar]

Romans have handed my Carthaginians their butts on a plate most times I have played against them. They beat spears every time, and have a good chance against pikes. The superior sword ability may not count much, but their special ability never to die and to recover from fragmented at any opportunity seemed to do for me most times.

That gives me some hope for the future. Of the three confirmed FoG players at my store, one wants to do Crusaders, another Carthaginians.

Guess I need to get in gear and get these models assembled and painted.

[timmy1]

Interesting Phil. At the same time as this there is another thread about Galatians possibly being too strong as all Superior. I also believe that Mr Evans won a small local tourney with a Roman army - not the same one granted - but given the cries of 'small battle groups are too powerful', you might find Barbarian Impact foot becoming the anti-anti Small BG Roman army.

Romans may be crap but I have gone out and purchased loads more since FoG came out and I am willing to give them a run, just so long as they don't have to play with Thracians in the nasty stuff.

[donm]

Doesn't appear to be a problem with Romans in 25mm, 7 out of 18 players at Warfare have chosen them.

My experience of Romans in 25mm is don't fight them. My Medieval german pikemen have lost to them far too many times.

My Swiss Allies have done better, but still not a certainty.

550 points is very low if 15mm on a 6 x 4. You get 650pts on a 6 x 4 in 25mm here in the UK.

An expensive foot army would not be my first choice in either scale at those low points.

Have chosen Thracians for Warfare to try something different, it will be interesting to see how they do.

Don

[bilugo]

The board size was small 4 foot x 3 foot so that wasn't a real problem at all, I don't think I got out flanked in any game. Rather they ran straight through me.

Well others might say that Romans will roll over pike and beat spear but I beg to differ.

The impact phase you are evens with four dices each,

But melee you are actually at a negative POA which is becomes a big difference.

The odds are are against you end of story. Even if you disrupt the pike or spear you are now evens. But the fundamental point it cost you more to get there.

Yes romans are good against barbarian foot, but so to are pike and spear men, so we go around again in a circle.

I might not be the most experienced person on the block, but I've played ancients for a few years as well, that is not the issue. There was no rules issue which changed the game one way or the other.

So the message that I understand is that Romans are just a luck factor roll above the odds in melee and hope for the best.

As other have stated or go around the enemy, which I find hard as the legions cost more than the pike or spearmen.

It comes down to the costing of legions to other units, simple as that.

As I stated before I read those AAR and they basically confirmed my opinion, they got nailed by pike units.

PS
I did break 1 unit of pike average with my elite legions. A unit costing 48 points vs a unit costing 68 points.
That was the only pike unit that broke.

[carlos]

Far more experienced and more successful players have explained to you how to use legions and why you failed at the tournament. If you are always right why do you bother asking other people? The fact you went to a tournament thinking your legions would beat same number of pike and knights frontally tells me you didn't prepare properly. So go out there and play some games, you don't seem to be learning anything here.

[Scrumpy]

Spot on Carlos, every army has it's strengths and weaknesses, and fought a historical way for a reason.

I stick to the old maxim, pick an army you love even when it hates you

[Omar]

Far more experienced and more successful players have explained to you how to use legions and why you failed at the tournament.

I read through the replies, but I didnt come off with how to use the legions, just that it is better against a few types. Maybe I missed something?

[daleivan]

Far more experienced and more successful players have explained to you how to use legions and why you failed at the tournament.

I read through the replies, but I didnt come off with how to use the legions, just that it is better against a few types. Maybe I missed something?

Assuming superior grade, most folks would advise a four-base BG of legionaries for more flexibility. Overlaps against the phalanx are your friend. Terrain does not discomfit legions as much as pike so uneven ground is good against pike (or lance cavalry). The smaller legionary BGs mean you can more easily flank. Interspersing them with cavalry (LRR mounted would be german/gallic/ etc) can work as long as the small legionary BG doesn't wind up all alone

Mainly (IMHO) their value lies in their grade, their armor and their impact and sword ability, and thus overall flexibility.

Mind you, I don't play out of period (period in this case means mainly historical opponents but also theme ("Legions Triumphant" , "Rise of Rome," etc.)

Cheers,

Dale

[philqw78]

read through the replies, but I didnt come off with how to use the legions

Using MRR, LRR to beat pikes and Kn next.(not just the legions)

Well pikes. Use your better, more manouverable, LF. BGs of 4 velites and some Cretans. Small units are unlikely to take shooting base losses. Your velites are protected so + POA in impact and melee agains most other LF. Cretans are superior so can shoot better than most LF/LH and can stand combat against LF if supported by the velites. Use these to break up the enemy pike line. If he wants to fight you with his LF you should win, easy AP. If he doesn't you can then get his pike to charge when he doesn't want and pull him out of line. terrain can be used by the legions, not to sit in and hope Sp/Pike come in but at the end of the line. Put one end of the line in. When he conforms he will be dragged in. Neither of you lose a dice, but he will lose a POA or 2. If he is not dragged in during conform, a mistake which you should have set up for, you have the overlap, with no loss of dice still. If you can split the pike formation up. You will get overlaps in the open, this is vital with average legions. Your 40 pts of Av against his 48 pts worth, you with 6 dice him with 4. Even on the dice, looks like a good buy to me. If at any point he loses a base he is dog meat. On your flanks get plenty of terrain. If not use your horse to refuse those flanks. Don't fight there, with MRR especially you will be beaten.

[philqw78]

Knights

As above use terrain to protect your flanks, he can expand into it but will lose dice. Again use your LF to break up his line, force them to charge early and break their formation. Never ever charge him unless he is fragmented, or disrupted and down 25% casualties, this is still dodgy. At impact ensure maximum bases in contact. This is where you are at evens and have the best chance of winning, and he has most chance of losing a base. He will wish to expand his line after impact, when he is +POA, so you need a big line or something like terrain or other units to stop this. Its a hard fight, but at 92 to 104 points for his unit it costs him a lot more than you, so you should also be picking on his weaker troops elsewhere.

These are the basics and take no account of individual games, deployment, fancy manouvers on to flanks or the better ability of the Romans to get there.

Obviously Romans can take on protected Imp Ft Sw, just line up with them and go straight in. Which makes Gauls, Brits and Germans worthless points wise. If thats the way you want to play against Knights and Pikes, well good luck, you'll need it.

I think the Romans are worth the points because they are very hard to disrupt as superior and have a good chance of climbing back up the cohesion ladder and pass most CMTs so are more manouverable than most HF. Their problem, especially with MRR is the lack of support troops around the fringes. If I was fighting against M/LRR I would ignore the legions and pick on the flanks and would certainly do my best not to allow any of the above to happen. But thats why it takes experience to play a good game.

[philqw78]

So the message that I understand is that Romans are just a luck factor roll above the odds in melee and hope for the best

As are all my armies, its just I've been consistantly luckier than most other people this year.

[hammy]

The board size was small 4 foot x 3 foot so that wasn't a real problem at all, I don't think I got out flanked in any game. Rather they ran straight through me.

Well others might say that Romans will roll over pike and beat spear but I beg to differ.

The impact phase you are evens with four dices each,

You are even on POA but the Romans are likely to be superior so have the reroll advantage. Should the Romans win then the pike have an extra -1 on their CT for losing to impact foot. In my book this is a definite advantage for the Romans, not a huge one but still one that is there.

In hard numbers on a 2 base frontage of superior legionaries vs average pike:

27.57% Pike win
26.69% Draw
45.73% Legions win

In terms of remaining steady:

13.62% Legions disrupted
51.22% Nothing
35.16% Pikes disrupted

There is a 5.70% chance the pike will fragment at impact compared with a 0.58% chance the legions will FRG

But melee you are actually at a negative POA which is becomes a big difference.

The legions are only at - if they fail to disrupt or better the pike.

Assuming nothing happens at impact the numbers are:

24.94% Legions disrupted
59.80% Nothing
15.25% Pike disrupted

The odds are are against you end of story. Even if you disrupt the pike or spear you are now evens. But the fundamental point it cost you more to get there.

If that is what you like to think then fine but I would suggest that it is not as one sided a combat as you think.
Once the pike or spear are disrupted they are in BIG trouble, less dice and a -1 on CT. There is a good chance they will have been disrupted at impact and then the melee will be short and brutal.

Also legionaries are not just for fighting pike, if they were then there would be no point in skilled swordsman so you can reduce the cost of the legionaries by a point a base. If the Romans should get disrupted they are nowhere near as badly hurt as pike or spear.

Also if the pike lose a base they lose a POA on one file. If the Romans lose a base they don't lose a POA (OK they lose a dice but if you have deeper formations of Romans base losses are less significant). Pike are more vulnerable to shooting etc.

Yes romans are good against barbarian foot, but so to are pike and spear men, so we go around again in a circle.

I suspect you are letting the results of one game significantly affect your judgement. If you have 4 bases of superior legionaries against 8 bases of average pike the Romans will win signifiantly more often than they lose. That doesn't mean they will always win, but I think it is at least 60-40 to the Romans if not 70-30.

So the message that I understand is that Romans are just a luck factor roll above the odds in melee and hope for the best.

On average dice Romans will beat pike more often than not. If you don't believe me just try running through the matchup say 20 times rolling dice.

It comes down to the costing of legions to other units, simple as that.

Points are not based on one interraction. Legions have significant advantages that are not called into play if they fight pikes in the open.

As I stated before I read those AAR and they basically confirmed my opinion, they got nailed by pike units.

I fear you are working on a rather small sample size. The numbers aren't trivial to crunch but when you do you will find that while pikes can nail legionaries it certainly does not happen all the time or even more often than the legionaries nail the pikes.

[grahambriggs]

In my last outing against romans I managed to lose all my generals in the first hour and a half as the IF/SSw cut through my best troops like they were tissue paper.

A couple of factors others have not mentioned:

The Pike are quite likely to lose a base at impact, and hence that file loses a POA in the melee.

In a line of say 6 BGs each average Pike vs superior legion the likeliest result is that each side will lose somewhere at impact - perhaps the legion win three to the Pike 2. The pike are more likely to fail their test (average and an extra -1). So the likelihood is that a pike BG will break before a legion does. The pikes either side of the breakthrough are then in real trouble - cohesion test and overlapped.