Slitherine

I sat down this morning to work out an Indian army ready for my first 15mm game. I know that in general we have only discussed the rules on this forum, but if I was coming to AoW for the first time and looked at my ???favourite??™ well painted Indian army, the rules may not even leave the traders stand. ???They said no rebasing, so why pick on the Indians??™ will be the cry. I have 10 elements of Bd(I) that need rebasing and 15 x Hd(O) that will not see the light of day until the next set of rules.

I know you will say that all the previous army lists were probably wrong, but as one of the rule writers was involved in those, this is will not go down too well. Should not the current ???classifications??™ be taken into consideration in the lists, to avoid these situations?


Don M


Ps. Unfortunately my Indians are a bit old and tatty.
(I take it that expendables are treated as scythed chariots).

Hi Don,

Consideration is being given to "legacy" figures, however, some just don't fit it - DBE Kn(I) from DBM are another case in point.

However, I understand from comments on the list beta forum that some future rules version will include something about such legacy basing and give optional basing so that they can be used where possible - for example MF may have an optional 30mm base depth to cover the Hd.

We are having a troops type cxalled mob which is based as DBM Hd and fights as (generally bvery ppor poa thin) Mf. This will stop lots of rebasing ... including my own indians.

Si

I suspect that I probably found one of the lists that appears to suffer most. I do think that rebasing is a major issue to exsisting wargamers and so perhaps an out line of the proposals you are planning could find their way into the next version to ease the problem.

DBE Kn(I) from DBM are another case in point.

This is now not such a problem for Byzantines with the Cataphrates rule changes.

Don M