Slitherine

The new Dragon lists I think skimmed over the Chola too easily.
If someone knows the author's thoughts I would be interested.

Using the Army design criteria. How did it perform versus its historical foes...which are mostly also the Southern hindu list.

The Chola were a major sub continent Empire and there army advantages are:
2-3 BGs of Drilled as opposed to undrilled swordsmen
3-4 BGs of Drilled as opposed to undrilled bowmen.

In other lists you can see why an Empire had better troops than the people they conquered. Do the authors beleive the Chola were just marginally better or do they think being drilled is that huge?

I am not suggesting they become super troops, but rather should have been a notch better. ie additionally one of: light spear or impact or superior for the swordsmen. Protected is probably not historical. The Chola foot were considered the best in the region.

But the lists best troops are the optional spearmen who are protected light spear/sword

Again I am viewing this as relative to their historical foes.

Drilled is pretty big as undrilled foot find it virtually impossible to manouvre. This makes getting favourable match ups easier and unfavourable ones easier to avoid. Light Spear would need to be justified by equipment (which is quite likely to be almost identical. A grade improvement would probably be too much. Empires tend to conquer their neighbours by better organisation, logistics and leadership so drilled troops are a likely advantage.

hazelbark wrote: Again I am viewing this as relative to their historical foes.

Now go and read some big thick books on the history of the period and you'll understand why they didn't need any great and wonderful advantage - although a chunk of drilled MF as opposed to Undrilled is a pretty useful difference IMO and I'd take it any day.

nikgaukroger wrote:

hazelbark wrote: Again I am viewing this as relative to their historical foes.

Now go and read some big thick books on the history of the period and you'll understand why they didn't need any great and wonderful advantage - although a chunk of drilled MF as opposed to Undrilled is a pretty useful difference IMO and I'd take it any day.

Yea but do you think the drilled BGs are that decisive relatively speaking in game terms?

hazelbark wrote:

nikgaukroger wrote:

hazelbark wrote: Again I am viewing this as relative to their historical foes.

Now go and read some big thick books on the history of the period and you'll understand why they didn't need any great and wonderful advantage - although a chunk of drilled MF as opposed to Undrilled is a pretty useful difference IMO and I'd take it any day.

Yea but do you think the drilled BGs are that decisive relatively speaking in game terms?

For anything other than skirmishers or cavalry, being drilled is a pretty big advantage over undrilled. How useless would the Dom Rom swarm be if all those MF BGs were undrilled . . .

Spike

For the 6-8 points per unit certainly money well spent. Doubt you could get much more than an extra bg or 2 in most armies by going undrilled.

I'm wondering what the Chola offers that the Maurayan Classical Indian option can't beat. But knowing Dan as the sneaky, cunning player he is, no doubt it is something nefarious.

spikemesq wrote: How useless would the Dom Rom swarm be if all those MF BGs were undrilled . . .

Spike

If only!

spikemesq wrote:
For anything other than skirmishers or cavalry, being drilled is a pretty big advantage over undrilled. How useless would the Dom Rom swarm be if all those MF BGs were undrilled . . .

Spike

I get that you ambulance chaser. I mean is the few drilled units decisively enough relative to their historical foes?