Slitherine

I hope v.2 and perhaps amended lists will rectify the huge error of this army having heavy chariots - no less than upto 30 in the lists. They are totally incongrous with other chariots of the Late Bronze Age and therefore distorts the play balance between them and other Light Chariot states of the period. After all, these chariots have 2 men with unarmoured horses. How is this a Heavy Chariot? (a man in the Dendra armour with a spear does not constitute a heavy chariot). Even the rules themselves say heavy chariots should have 3 or 4 men and therefore would exclude the Minoan chariot as in that category.

While on the subject (again) of chariots. All sources point to the Light Chariot as a troop class used to outmaneouvre the enemy with the intention of attacking the flanks and rear. Essentially they were the Light Horse of the Biblical era - before the ability to ride horses proper. As such they should be more in line with Light Horse. For example, so that they perform their correct role on the flanks of the battlefield they should not be penalised for being 6" to the table edge.

While I don't toally agree with Player (my NKE LCh are really looking forward to playing with the Minoans) I do think he makes one vital point.

'
For example, so that they perform their correct role on the flanks of the battlefield they should not be penalised for being 6" to the table edge.
'

I think that would give them a much better feel based upon what I have read (which is really just AANE by Tallis).

But that is what cavalry do for most of our period, until, after the invention of the lance, they dominate, better than the romans

player wrote:I hope v.2 and perhaps amended lists will rectify the huge error of this army having heavy chariots - no less than upto 30 in the lists. They are totally incongrous with other chariots of the Late Bronze Age and therefore distorts the play balance between them and other Light Chariot states of the period. After all, these chariots have 2 men with unarmoured horses. How is this a Heavy Chariot? (a man in the Dendra armour with a spear does not constitute a heavy chariot). Even the rules themselves say heavy chariots should have 3 or 4 men and therefore would exclude the Minoan chariot as in that category.

So Light Chariot, Lance, Sword, then?

Certainly Light Chariot without question. Interesting about the Lance but I think just the straight Light Spear as many of the other Light Chariots of the day. This still gives good close combat ability against bow armed Light Chariots and provides that distinction.

While on the subject of chariots I would then see the 3 man Hittite chariots as heavy but downgraded to Average, light spear.
This would then allow for a proper distinction of later real Heavy chariots.

The 4 horse 3 man chariots of the Neo-Assyrians, Urartians, Later Hebrews, etc. should therefore also be considered as Average but with Light Spear and Bow, hence the extra man

The 4 horse 4 man chariots should then be considered as superior, light spear and bow. Why else would these extra horses and men be added if not for advantage against foes. As it currently stands there is no difference between the various chariots.

Simple changes such as these would not require any re-working of the rules. I have tested average light spear vs average light spear, bow chariots and the fight just keeps going longer than with superiors.

A change such as this would also allow a fair fight between the new kingdom egyptian chariots as bow superior and hittite heavies as light spear average. This would lessen the big difference which currently exists and the issue of whether the Hittite chariots really were heavies relatively or just light chariots with an extra crewman.

player wrote:While on the subject of chariots I would then see the 3 man Hittite chariots as heavy but downgraded to Average, light spear.
This would then allow for a proper distinction of later real Heavy chariots.

Pete, don't try and put early and late troop types in the same battle to make the troop type. If the early 3 man chariots were heavy in their time period they are heavy. Comparing them to later chariots is pointless as they then do not work in their own period.

I do though agree that some of the later chariots should get Bow and Lt Spear

lawrenceg wrote:So Light Chariot, Lance, Sword, then?

That would be to all well most intents and purposes a heavy chariot then.

Phil, this is not comparing chariots from widely differing periods as there are light chariots in some armies at the same time as heavy chariots in others (and even in the same army at the same time), so it is important that they all fit in together as some nations develop more advanced designs or tactics against others in the same time frame.

So only a few years later whilst the early crap is still in use/under refit. OK thats more sensible since I'm not a chariot expert

For example the Minoan and early Mycenaean 2-man, 2 unarmoured horse chariot (purportedly heavy) is before the later 3 man Hittite Chariot (Kadesh and after c. 1276 BCE) but around at the same time as the early new kingdom chariot (say 1500- 1400 BCE).
The Mycenaeans then chose to go light (according to FOG rules) at the time the Hittites were using the new style "Heavy" chariot?
In the new millenium - 1000 BCE on, the light chariot remained until the late 9th century at the earliest and not until the 8th century did the proper 4 horse heavy chariot appear, when some weaker nations were still using lighter chariots, either because the heavies hadn't caught on or were used tactically different had still had a role to play on the battlefield (like light horse).
This is why the Mycenaean chariot and to an extent the Hittite are anomolies in chariot development and therefore interpretations as heavy is perhaps flawed, despite being relative to who they were fighting at the time.
My view is that the Mycenaean should be completely downgraded to Light Chariot, sup, light spear
and the later Hittite (after 1275), light chariot, sup, bow and light spear (to give the edge in close combat against just bow light chariots) or if the rules must, a downgraded heavy chariot to average, light spear, so the close combat edge is not too much against the egyptian superior bow light chariots, which is the classic match-up.
I prefer the former as the earlier Hittites and the Neo-Hittites were using the bow in their chariots and there is therefore no reason to think that they dropped the bow for Kadesh and then picked it up again in the later period?