Slitherine

Looking for folks to try this one out. If you have any historical notes to add or critique with information you can provide please fire away. Files can be found here:

http://myweb.cableone.net/williampeters ... cum-DF.zip

Goes in your "My Documents\Slitherine\FieldOfGlory Scenarios" folder. Or wherever you put Custom Scenarios to get them to work right.

Sides are VERY even. Persians have a quality advantage.

There are a couple of typos in the battle description.

Herogenes = Hermogenes

advaned = advanced

Moreover, did Hermogenes bring more forces from Rome? Or from Constantinople?

I haven’t played the scenario yet, but I’ve had a peek at the armies and battlefield. I noticed there was a typo amongst the Persian units = Sligners. I look forward to playing the scenario this weekend.

Thanks for picking up on those errors. I have posted the updated scenario to the same link.

I have a challenge up on the MP queue so if you want to pick it up that is great. I am listed as wanting to play it Hotseat so I can try out either side.

Troops are listed in the article I used as just being from "the Emperor" so I changed that part of the text too.

It does not say WHAT he brought but a nice article on the battle is included in the zip file. Just look down to page 26 to pick up where you can read up on it. Nice battle map included.

Hi Bill

Nice scenario, some suggestions on your images if that’s ok. The image you have used for the Cataphract units on the Byzantine side is a 10th Century one. You might want to swap in with the “Imp Roman Cav Cavalry g” battle group on the “roman-imperial” sub folder in the “Legions Triumphant” image folder which you also have access to in the beta.

Also and this is perhaps more a question of my personal taste, for your lancer battlegroups, you might what to think about using “byzantine Cav cavalry lancer h” was more suitable for this early period, (giving all troops in the unit bow as well as lance). Finally for my money for your “Cavalry Archers” units, and the unhistorical bare legs not withstanding “Imp-Roman Cav cavalry archer a” from the “roman-imperial” sub folder in the Legions Triumphant” image folder, would be a better bet.

For the Persians as you have chosen not to classify your Clibanari as lance armed. (for which I think ther are good arguments at this time) You might want to think about using “Persian Cav cavalry b drilled” in the “persian-islamic” sub folder in the “Decline and fall” image folder for bow armed Clibanari. There is also a very nice associated (with general) command group that can be used as well. Thanks again for the scenario.

Thanks for the suggestions.

When would the unit graphics for the Early Byzantine list kick in? The book listing says it is from 493-550. I had better check with Keith on this before I make the changes.

Because of the way the game works there is nothing to stop you from putting forward scenerios including graphics from earleir modules like LT for a new one like D_F. Everboday with D_F and the baisc game (which they will need in any case to run D_F should be able to see them and play the scenerio even if they don't have othose earlier modules such as LT.

Hope this helps.

Old Warrior,

I have just played your scenario as the Persians vs the Byzantine AI (because I have not yet played a FoG multiplayer game ). I had a very enjoyable battle. Thanks. Thanks too for your journal upload - which was an interesting read.

I noticed during my game that some Ghassanid allied cavalry – under AI control – rode off through a gap in the impassable hills and played no part in the fighting. Perhaps you could get rid of the impassable hills?

I also noticed that my Persian army included some infantry. From your interesting journal article I got the impression that the Persian forces were all mounted. Perhaps you could remove the infantry? If you need to make up the numbers you could add some more cavalry.

Regards redcoat

In the Persian army listing that I used there was infantry listed but it was a minor contingent. I added them in based on that. If I find the account I will post it here.

I will remove the Impassable terrain so that the AI-cavalry do not run away.

Thanks.

I forgot to mention earlier that when I was playing I noticed a small typo with the Byzantine forces. Issaurian = Isaurian.

Will you be uploading your Battle of Dara scenario?

Thanks for noting the typo. I will fix that up. Yes, I just updated the Dara scenario and corrected some things. Will repost it later.

Thanks for uploading your Dara scenario. I look forward to playing it.

I would just like to make a small suggestion regarding your Belisarian scenarios. Have you considered using infantry figures from the early Byzantine (493-550 AD) list. I think they may be more suitable for the period - in my personal, humble opinion.

Thanks for your hard work.

I will check that out but I go with whatever is in the DAG Early Byzantine list. I also note that some of the sources I used did not agree with how the infantry was armed. Some said spear and sword.

But I use whatever is listed in the XTML Early Byzantine list. If it says it uses the LT Imperial Roman folder then that is what I use as well.

Someone commented that the Clibinarii had Bow rather than Bow*. This is what the defeault Sassanid Persian listing has from the LT module:

<unit>

Note that the Ranged Weapon listing is "8" - this is Bow*.

Either they need to fix it or they are correct. Can someone check this out?

The 1.6.3 DAG list in the beta shows the Clibanarii as bow, not bow*. I haven't checked the XML files yet to see what they show.

Chris

Scenario was updated. Get the update at:


http://myweb.cableone.net/williampeters ... Update.zip