Velites and Peltasts

[pinwolf]

...are there other lights ... which might deserve some upgrading? Just curious.

Only ones that I can think of at the moment are Euzonoi (skirmishing Thureophoroi with javelin instead of spear).
But iirc they are only in TTmod. Or got they patched in the base game lately?

[SnuggleBunnies]

I would be in support of testing out Lightly Protected and 50% Swords.

[rbodleyscott]

30 points for lightly protected/50% swordsmen seems fine.

On the side note, it feels like armor pricing is a bit off (in this case at least) - as for the same price you get +37,5 melee POA while only loosing some shooting mitigation (pretty sure it still would take the same number of volleys to cause a cohesion test on average).

Other similar case is brythonic foot (lightly protected, 100% swordsmen) compared to massed peltasts (protected, 50% swordsmen) - both cost 33 points, but one is clearly superior to other.

You are right. Something to think about, certainly. It is a side effect of reducing the effect of Armour Advantage in FOG2 compared to Tabletop FOG.

[rbodleyscott]

...are there other lights ... which might deserve some upgrading? Just curious.

Only ones that I can think of at the moment are Euzonoi (skirmishing Thureophoroi with javelin instead of spear).
But iirc they are only in TTmod. Or got they patched in the base game lately?

We just represent them as Greek Peltasts in the vanilla game, because we lack a Euzonoi model. The effect is the same even though the shield is wrong.

Would could look at bringing Euzonoi across from TT Mod. They might have to be Protected, 50% swordsmen to reflect their larger shield.

[desicat]

...are there other lights ... which might deserve some upgrading? Just curious.

Only ones that I can think of at the moment are Euzonoi (skirmishing Thureophoroi with javelin instead of spear).
But iirc they are only in TTmod. Or got they patched in the base game lately?

We just represent them as Greek Peltasts in the vanilla game, because we lack a Euzonoi model. The effect is the same even though the shield is wrong.

Would could look at bringing Euzonoi across from TT Mod. They might have to be Protected, 50% swordsmen to reflect their larger shield.

That would be great, the Euzonoi look great in action on the field of battle.

[GeneralKostas]

How would people feel about Velites, Thracian peltasts and Greek peltasts being upgraded to 50% Swordsmen capability, to improve their role as skirmisher hunters? This would of course also affect their points cost, which would increase by 3.

Do you mean, that they are going to have three capabilities? Javelins, Light Spear and Swordsmen?

I suppose then, that the javelins will be only for 5 rounds shooting and then they can use only Light Spear and Sword.

[rbodleyscott]

How would people feel about Velites, Thracian peltasts and Greek peltasts being upgraded to 50% Swordsmen capability, to improve their role as skirmisher hunters? This would of course also affect their points cost, which would increase by 3.

Do you mean, that they are going to have three capabilities? Javelins, Light Spear and Swordsmen?

Yes, although only half-effect Swordsmen capability.

I suppose then, that the javelins will be only for 5 rounds shooting and then they can use only Light Spear and Sword.

The javelins will be the same as other units, 5 rounds shooting at full effect, and after that shoot at half effect.

[Athos1660]

Those LF will use :
- javelins as missile weapons at a distance (shoot).
- Light Spear at the Impact.
- 50% of them will use their sword during the Melee.

[pinwolf]

...Euzonoi...

Iberian light Caetrati could also be worth a look for swordsmen capability + some protection (Falcata + Caetra).
-> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caetrati

[GeneralKostas]

I support this change. I am sure that it going to give more interest to the game and allow more brutal fights between light foot units. A light foot unit can be more useful in flanking movements and hit from behind with the sword.

[klayeckles]

I wouldn't mind if velite/peltast armor was returned to protected level though. The 50% swordsmen ability would have more noticeable impact on melee (I think?) and better highlight the "heavier" nature of peltast/velite. The small armor advantage tends to disappear very quickly when fighting light infantry.

I presume you mean Unprotected, they are already Protected.

That would probably make them too cost-effective, as they would actually be cheaper than they are now.

I guess they could become Lightly Protected with Swordsmen 50%. (Like Irregular Foot, and with much the same logic).

That would leave them costing 30 points, but give them +62 POA in melee vs other lights, instead of the current +25 POA.

Against Massed Archers they would have +62 POA in melee, but 50% Combat strength disadvantage, which more than compensates.

the armour they sport already makes them pretty good hunters (they are more resilient to missiles and have advantage in impact and small poa in melee) i like the idea of the 30pt for lightly + 50% swd. captures all the nuances. against initial msl fire they'll probably need 3 shots for a check most of the time, just like the current peltasts....which means i'd probably choose them over the current design.

[SimonLancaster]

Well, I was in support of the change when it was Peltasts like Thracian and Greek Peltasts. Then I realised that it was going to include Velites for the Roman army. The Romans are already quite overpowered and this change will make them stronger, I think.

Maybe just upgrade Peltasts only? Maybe limit the number of Velites for the Romans?

[rbodleyscott]

Maybe limit the number of Velites for the Romans?

The problem with that is that we know the historical proportion of Velites in a Roman legion - 1200 velites to 2400 hastati/principes and 600 triarii.

i.e. 5 units of hastati/principes, 5 units of velites, 2.5 units of triarii.

There is therefore no historical justification in restricting the number of velites further.

And anything that encourages the Romans to field a historical proportion of Velites has to be considered good.

(And although their heavy infantry are tough, they aren't in the top 10 tournament armies anyway).

However, this might be an argument for making them more expensive, by making them Protected, 50% swordsmen along with Euzonoi at 33 points.

The velite shield was called a parma and was about 36 inches (91 cm) across (though it could be less) and had iron in its frame.

The pelte carried by peltasts was similar in diameter, but crescent shaped and made of wicker.

Sounds like we could justify:

Velites and Euzonoi: Protected, Javelins, Light Spear, 50% swordsmen @ 33 points.

Greek and Thracian peltasts: Lightly Protected, Javelins, Light Spear, 50% swordsmen @ 30 points.

[SimonLancaster]

I think that could be a good idea....! 33 for Velites and 30 for Greek Peltasts.

[MVP7]

Sounds good. Those should definitely play a bit differently from regular skirmishers. Getting into melee with another skirmisher unit isn't risk free either so I don't think they would be too powerful either.

[MikeC_81]

My only concern is that Velites are overly expensive as it is. From extensive first-hand tournament experience, paying 30 points for a skirmisher that is marginally better than 24 point javelins brutally hurts. I bought them anyway because I need lights to screen so that enemy lights can't block Principes with immunity since they run away anyways and often forces chasing Principes into terrible positions. Most skirmishers already flee with regularity when I charge Velities into them. The odds of being caught and punished for this behaviour is well under sub 50 percent. Making Velites even more expensive would not be an upgrade for the Romans, it would be a significant downgrade as they would now have to pay even more to get the minimum number of skirmishing units required to cover the army with little gain. Unless you somehow make the Velites be able to consistently catch lights so that they can be punished or adjust the game logic so that lights wouldn't flee vs other lights nearly as often, this is a bad change.

[SnuggleBunnies]

33 is a lot. I prefer the 30pts as originally proposed, but hopefully either way it gets some testing before getting patched in.

[MikeC_81]

Or we need the 50% swordsman needs to confer capabilities to interact with formed units in a way that the other lights don't. Like ZoCing or something. You can't make another skirmishing unit more expensive by almost 40% without giving them a very tangible and reliable advantage that they can convert game after game. The worst units in this game are always the ones that are bloated points-wise by unit capabilities that they can't reliably leverage.

[MVP7]

I think both 30 and 33 point skirmishers would be better value for points than the current protected 30 pointers. If the suggested 50% swordsmen can make contact they should win against any other skirmishers pretty reliably.

The 33 pointers might not be worth it compared to 30 pointers though (unless the discussed basic unit cost is introduced). It's still worth testing both in beta I think.

[melm]

I prefer cheap skirmishers.

Indeed, and would still be able to have them, except for Romans in a narrow period from 219-106 BC (The 280-220 BC Romans have normal light javelinmen).

What I am concerning is the stalemate of the game. One side camping on the slope waiting for the opponent to attack, or camping between woods or mountains. Sometimes it is not a big issue if there's enough space to manoenuvre. However, sometimes there's not enough space, or your manoenuvre is hindered by the army list, for example, not having enough medium foot to outflank a piece of woods while opponent's do. In current system, I can't find a more feasible solution other than making plenty of cheap skirmishers to negate the camping behavior. So basically I only love any change that makes skirmishers more and cheaper. I could be wrong. And to be honest, I don't really know the purpose of such change. Maybe it is not just for the variety of units for different flavor.