No raw legions for 3rd century Romans?

[Gaznak]

Playing a campaign with them to try out the new clibanarii, and I noticed you can't buy raw troops. They are the only Roman list where this seems to be the case. Could they be added? Some cheap troops are useful for a list with pricey infantry and it seems appropriate for the Romans to have highly variable troop quality during one of their most turbulent periods.

[rbodleyscott]

Playing a campaign with them to try out the new clibanarii, and I noticed you can't buy raw troops. They are the only Roman list where this seems to be the case. Could they be added? Some cheap troops are useful for a list with pricey infantry and it seems appropriate for the Romans to have highly variable troop quality during one of their most turbulent periods.

By this period the Roman army was a fully professional army, with a highly institutionalised training system.

Can you provide actual evidence of hastily raised raw legions being deployed in this period - and not just "gone to seed" legionaries from cushier postings?

[Gaznak]

Not really no. If you feel the list is appropriate then I trust your judgement!

I have a copy of Patrice Southern's book on the the third century but never got around to it. I think I'll move it up the reading list for some perspective on the matter.

Thank you for the response Richard.

[TheGrayMouser]

The list in FOG 1 did allow for poor, average and superior Cataphracts in the Dominate lists (284-379) The poor ones were utterly useless!

[Gaznak]

The list in FOG 1 did allow for poor, average and superior Cataphracts in the Dominate lists (284-379) The poor ones were utterly useless!

Competitively I wouldn't take them, but they were fun for themed games.

I don't know if the performance of the late Roman heavy horse can be summed up really with "poor", "average", or "superior". Maybe "melodramatic"?

[TheGrayMouser]

The list in FOG 1 did allow for poor, average and superior Cataphracts in the Dominate lists (284-379) The poor ones were utterly useless!

Competitively I wouldn't take them, but they were fun for themed games.

I don't know if the performance of the late Roman heavy horse can be summed up really with "poor", "average", or "superior". Maybe "melodramatic"?

They seemed to fail miserably in several 4thc battles. I forget which emperor made one regiment parade around in women’s clothes due to cowardice.

[Gaznak]

The list in FOG 1 did allow for poor, average and superior Cataphracts in the Dominate lists (284-379) The poor ones were utterly useless!

Competitively I wouldn't take them, but they were fun for themed games.

I don't know if the performance of the late Roman heavy horse can be summed up really with "poor", "average", or "superior". Maybe "melodramatic"?

They seemed to fail miserably in several 4thc battles. I forget which emperor made one regiment parade around in women’s clothes due to cowardice.

That was Julian supposedly after Strasbourg. I think from Zosimus.

According to Ammianus Julian halts their flight from battle, gives a gallant speach, and leads them back to the fight. Though he gives them no mention for the rest of the battle...