Slitherine

Hi All,

Here is my (risky) version of the Romanesque Palmyrans used at BMW. I call it risky because I only realised afterwards that 4 base average are very risky for going 'autobreak' so whilst it worked, I protected the Romans very carefully. I wouldn't recommend the same again (essential bits bolded).

3 x Troop Commanders.
1 BG of 6 Cataphracts/Heavily Armoured/Superior/Drilled/-/Lance/Swordsmen
4 BGs of 4 Light Horse/Unprotected/Undrilled/Bow/-/-
1 BG of 6 Light Foot/Unprotected/Undrilled/Bow/-/-
2 BG's of 4 Auxilliaries/Armoured/Average/Drilled/-/Light Spear/Swordsmen
2 BG's of 4 Legionaries/Armoured/Average/Drilled/-/Impact Foot/Swordsmen
2 BG's of 4 Legionaries/Protected/Average/Drilled/-/Impact Foot/Swordsmen

I say that the Cataphracts must be drilled as their manouver was essential to my plan. I didn't want to have to pussy foot around with undrilled Cataphracts as I have in the past with Saka. I don't think I'll ever take Undrilled Cataphracts again (except maybe in the Persian types where you get drilled and undrilled.

I say that the Auxilliaries must be armoured as I wanted the advantage POA for melee against any one else trying to contest the terrain. It also gave me the ability to go out in the open if I felt the need.

I say that at least half of the legionaries must be Armoured as I wanted to be able to pick and choose where I put the Armour. Small BG's made monouver easy.


Interested in feedback.

Ian

P.S. - the bulk of the armies at BMW were Pike. I lost against one Swiss, won against one Macedonian and ran out of time with the other (but think I would have won that one eventually - terrain was on my side).

Hi Ian,
in a recent tournament I used the following army list

4 TC's
5 BG's of CT's (drilled)
2 BG's of LF (average, bow)
2 BG's of LH (average, light spear and bow)
4 BG's of LH (average, bow).

I used this list considering the tournament wasn't open (only Legions Triumphant, Declin and Fall and Wolves of the sea).
In my opinion, with drilled CT's you can manouvre easily.
If you use HF you should cover the wings with CT and also I guess it could be better using Dominate Roman because you have more options than Palmyran.

Palmyran is a nice army for themed tournament.

Generally speaking (obviously depending on the terrains) I deployed my CT's not in the middle of the table but close to one of my side edge, trying to attack one of the wing of my opponent and skirmishing with LH and LF.
Only in one match (against Indo-Skythian) as I lost the iniatiative I deployed 2 BG's of CT's on the other side far from my camp in order to avoid Elephants and attack the weak wing of my opponent (a very nice scottish player, Jim Gibson).

Sergio

Too few Cats is my feeling. I would check Mr Porter's excellent website to see what the general view of the Palmyrans is.

Scrumpy wrote:Too few Cats is my feeling. I would check Mr Porter's excellent website to see what the general view of the Palmyrans is.

Bloody hell... how many more Cats do you want at 600 AP?

If I had more Cats how would I have taken on the pikes?

I would take maximum 2 more Cats and make 2 BG's of 4, but that's 40 points and that means the loss of a BG of Romans at the very least. As it was I spent nearly 1/4 of my available points on one BG of Cats.

Ian

With so many Romans and so few cats you might as well take a roman army. The palmyran army is made up of cats and LH.

DaiSho wrote:

Scrumpy wrote:Too few Cats is my feeling. I would check Mr Porter's excellent website to see what the general view of the Palmyrans is.

Bloody hell... how many more Cats do you want at 600 AP?

If I had more Cats how would I have taken on the pikes?

I would take maximum 2 more Cats and make 2 BG's of 4, but that's 40 points and that means the loss of a BG of Romans at the very least. As it was I spent nearly 1/4 of my available points on one BG of Cats.

Ian

I dont think I'd plan to take on pike frontally with anything other than better pike and instead to plan to beat eveything else protecting the pike's flanks. Cats in period are great for this.

Irmin wrote:With so many Romans and so few cats you might as well take a roman army. The palmyran army is made up of cats and LH.

I completely agree, that's why I've suggested to use Dominate Roman (for example with Armenian Ally) if a player wants to ues Palmyran with footmen.
Sergio

Irmin wrote:With so many Romans and so few cats you might as well take a roman army. The palmyran army is made up of cats and LH.

Except of course that I:

would have to take allies to have as many Light Horse archers;
Don't particularly want to be foreced to take a fortified camp; and,
Don't want to run a Roman Army - much prefer to think of the 'Romans' as subjects.

In an in-period con or a friendly game I'm more likely to run more Cats, but in a period game I'm going to run a mixture as I did.

Ian

expendablecinc wrote:I dont think I'd plan to take on pike frontally with anything other than better pike and instead to plan to beat eveything else protecting the pike's flanks. Cats in period are great for this.

Well, in one game I held a central hill (with the Romans), and eventually (if we had time) would have inspired the pikes to charge up it. They were only 2 bounds away from the hill anyway. My light infantry were doing a great job of pulling him in to the front of my legionaries.

Yes, in this game, if I'd had more Cats I would have likely have beaten his other mounted, but in nearly every other game I had I managed to hold quite successfully with the Romans and beat the pike else-where.

I've taken a Saka army before. Did quite well with it until I went uncontrolled into some Pike. Sure, I wouldn't be at as big a risk with drilled Cataphracts.

I believe that I have more flexibility for the kind of army I want to run with the Palmyrans.


Ian