Slitherine

peterrjohnston wrote:Dio has the Romans forming a camp for the night on the spot of the first attack. That's an odd pursuit...

Thought that was west of the 'battle' as the auxilliary cavalry escaped.

They have found a site at Kalkriese with a lot of evidence of a major battle having taken place there, although it's open to debate if it was the final engagement or the initial one. There are also burial pits, which would seem to confirm Tacitus's account of Germanicus finding the site.

Of course, we'll never know what really happened, but Tacitus also mentions the remnants of a camp, and remains scattered over a plain - which also agrees with the archaeological evidence from the site. This doesn't quite match with the traditional picture a massacre along a narrow path through dense woodlands, sounds more like open woodland with clearings.

Perhaps there was only one battle, and Dio is wrong, with just remnants of the army left trying to escape. Or he was right, and this was only one of several battle sites (Germanicus may not of found the others), either the initial ambush or final destruction.

Thought that was west of the 'battle' as the auxilliary cavalry escaped.

Yes, they did leave the pbi in the lurch, according to Dio

lawrenceg wrote:

ethan wrote:

philqw78 wrote:After all the droning on this thread Picts are a good army against Romans, but shit against most other stuff, Romans is all they can fight. perhaps unprotected MF undrilled Offensive spear need a boost more than other troops?

Picts aren't impact foot, they are spearmen. If spearmen can survive impact in good order they fight the Romans on even PoAs.

That was Phil's point. They are good against Romans, not good against anything else. Therefore they need a boost against everying else, or a points reduction. (On paper, they ought to be as good against knights as against Romans, but I suppose knights usually come with accompanying shooty stuff that will rip unprotected MF to shreds )

If "usually" means facing knights with lots of MF LB/Sw. But there are plenty of knight armies that only get MF - Xbow. Another poor point to value troop type. (Except for those Scandanavian armored Xbow/Sw, with a front rank of armored HF-HW. They rock!)

gozerius wrote:Except for those Scandanavian armored Xbow/Sw, with a front rank of armored HF-HW. They rock!

IMO they don't. by a long way

philqw78 wrote:

gozerius wrote:Except for those Scandanavian armored Xbow/Sw, with a front rank of armored HF-HW. They rock!

IMO they don't. by a long way

They'll go through Picts like corn through a goose!!! Crossbows make excellent clubs.

philqw78 wrote:

azrael86 wrote:two questions
1. how do you get this terrain

Still waiting for the promised scenario and campaign book for that

I like these reminders. Phil. I think we should post them in a regular basis because that book was supposed to satisfy all gamers that were not into this game only for tournament purposes. Indeed it can help to solve many situations in the game with non tournament specific rules.

I think that too much attention is given to the fact of being skilled swordsmen, ignoring that the real advantage for Barbarians was within the initial clash (and now they are disadvantaged against Romans in impact!). At least that is how it is described in the sources. Rarelt Germans or Gauls are described as fleeing at first clash, but rather after the Romans took control of the situation. Make Barbarians more powerful at impact and you will see them more on the tabletops. And in my opinion it has to be done through a PoA for larger depth as if not we would see some BG of Barbarians in a single line looking for lucky dice

gozerius wrote:

lawrenceg wrote: That was Phil's point. They are good against Romans, not good against anything else. Therefore they need a boost against everying else, or a points reduction. (On paper, they ought to be as good against knights as against Romans, but I suppose knights usually come with accompanying shooty stuff that will rip unprotected MF to shreds )

If "usually" means facing knights with lots of MF LB/Sw. But there are plenty of knight armies that only get MF - Xbow. Another poor point to value troop type. (Except for those Scandanavian armored Xbow/Sw, with a front rank of armored HF-HW. They rock!)

Therefore players usually use the knight armies which have plenty of LH, LF or MF bow or longbow.

Simpistically, are undrilled MF and HF just too expensive?

azrael86 wrote:Simpistically, are undrilled MF and HF just too expensive?

The more this issue gets discussed, the more I agree that this may just be the most elegant solution.

Peter C
Sword and Sandal Gaming Blog
http://swordandsandalgaming.blogspot.com/

pcelella wrote:

azrael86 wrote:Simpistically, are undrilled MF and HF just too expensive?

The more this issue gets discussed, the more I agree that this may just be the most elegant solution.

Peter C

There's a lot of truth in that. I'd add cavalry into that too. Compared to drilled equivalents the undrilled guys have a number of problems. Shock are much more likely to charge stupidly. Manouver is much more difficult. The handy in close jinking around manouvers (turn 90 and move, expand and move) aren't allowed at all.

However, I don't think that's the whole problem. There are some types of drilled MF/HF that are too expensive. Generally, you'd want them either armoured or superior. e.g. Protected average drilled HF are weak in open play (though I like them in biblical games). The prolem otherwise is that you can do all the fancy manouver but there aren't too many targets to manouver towards!

pcelella wrote:

azrael86 wrote:Simpistically, are undrilled MF and HF just too expensive?

The more this issue gets discussed, the more I agree that this may just be the most elegant solution.

The problem there is that Barbarians, to win over legions, should manouver and outflank them more than try to win by brute force and that is not how historically they performed. If the AP for those troops are reduced, then their numbers have to increase (not many other options in those lists). It is not only a problem of playability of a certain number of lists, but the way in which the historical performance of those troops could be better depicted.

Here are some crazy ideas for the hairy demographic:-

Shooting cohesion tests required on 1 hit per 2 bases.
Undrilled Impact Foot get 3 dice per base at impact.
Skilled swordsman PoA negates unsteady swordsman PoA.
Spear/Pike PoA negates unsteady swordsman PoA.