Slitherine

Chr-st on a bike, they are hard as nails, aren't they?

Whats the answer ?

Avoid them?

(or get lucky with a combined elephant and armoured superior cavalry charge - as I did last night?)

Cataphracts, lead by a general, give them a hard time

yes but only one BG can be let by a general in melee ... You have to use other BG arond hem por overwelm them with what you have

Of course every time you inflict 2 or more hits on them you get a decent chance of killing the general. So while they are very tough, they have to take a fair risk to get there.

Try using an elite unit with a general in the front rank- you get to re-roll everything 3 and under!

The way to beat really tough BG's is to force them to make death rolls. They are rarely in big BG's so try to pick on them with lots of numbers or if they are in the middle of a battle line just ignore them and hope they go away.

Elite legionaries led by an inspired commander are VERY hard.

If you want to fight legionaries head on the best troops against them are armoured spearmen. Early Spartans are actually probably their better in a drawn out combat.

I do agree

Greetings

My favourite encounter to run Republican Roman legions against hoplites is the Battle of Messana (modern Messina) in 264 BC which was the first action of the First Punic War. There is some scepticism as to whether this was actually a large battle - despite Plutarch's comments - but it is an interesting encounter. There is also some basis for having the Syracusan citizen foot as better than they usually were (poor) because they had allegedly been extensively trained by Hiero for operations against the Mamertines.

We don't know what other troop types were engaged - there is mention of Syracusan cavalry causing difficulty.

Regards

I think next time you should put something decent in front of them! We had 3 BGs of 8 Sup Legionaries and 2 generals in there. That's a whopping 406 pts (nearly half the army) for a frontage of 12 stands. You put in front of us 1 general, 8 sup spearmen in 2 ranks, some gaul garbage, 2 elephants and 4 sup cavalry. You were lucky not to lose the lot!

Pike!

If they don't lose the first round - even except for quality/general leadership - and fail any test, then they are a value for money option against cohorts in the open. Add some elephants for good measure but better as o'laps.

Steve

The other option is of course knights (superior of course) caddied by a general. They will run over the legionaries in most situations.

carlos wrote:The other option is of course knights (superior of course) caddied by a general. They will run over the legionaries in most situations.

Can't see any "Knights" in either "Rise of Rome" or "Legions Triumpant" list books, so that may not be an option in a themed competition.

4 deep Pike and/or Elephants are probably the best counter in period.

Spike

Not all comps are themed, you know?

Pikes and nellies are fine, or you can just overwhelm them w/ numbers and caving their flanks in. 8 Sup Legionaries cost 112 pts, making it one of the most expensive BGs in the game.

I wrecked a legion with HYW English - shot the support troops to pieces, hid in terrain and stood up to the final crunch with Superior, Heavily armoured, heavy weapon men at arms

Ive also had my legions shot to pieces by super shooty cav, which is really annoying.

All true

But Hey top notch Roman Legionaries ought to tough to beat...

Si

basically a lot less paper - scissors - stone in the troop types

to beat top quality troops you need your own top quality troops, or bucket loads of OK troops to get those death rolls going.

a wall of pants troops probably wont do it though

In the games we play now everyone is migrating to better quality troops in general. The 'quality of quantity' seems to be a principle that is hard to apply in these rules.

Simon

list_lurker wrote:In the games we play now everyone is migrating to better quality troops in general. The 'quality of quantity' seems to be a principle that is hard to apply in these rules.

Simon

Hmm this bodes for my poor Slaves next weekend

I think that nearly 60 bases of heavy foot should have some value (I hope)

list_lurker wrote:In the games we play now everyone is migrating to better quality troops in general. The 'quality of quantity' seems to be a principle that is hard to apply in these rules.

Simon

Right. Especially--as in FoG--when the price differences between quality levels aren't all that great. In DBM, for instance, the better troops cost significantly more than the cheap ones, and the larger number of elements--as opposed to BGs--allows players to maximize the utility of masses of cheap troops. The Wall-o-Crap theory. The good side of this is that DBM allows a wide variety of armies to be playable in game terms; the down side is that some historically bad-ass armies that relied heavily on elite troops get short shrift. See, e.g., Mongols.

Marc

Actually I have found wall of crap to be pretty effective overall as long as you don't just sit there and take a superior troop charge without grabbing some initiative. The Britons have always done well in FOG but are really quite unplayabel in DBM. Ditto several other armies.

Large quantities of skirmishers can be irritating in extreme. I find it pretty balanced but the wall of weak troops does I think need more thought as its not resilient to mistakes in the way that tight blocks of uber troops are.

The other thing I am fnding with weak troop is to take and army that can have them in 12 so your general give a bigger upgrade and rebalance the quality - i.e and army of Kn Bgs in 4s can only get 4 bases of upgrade per general, britons with 3 BGs of 12 can cause a full 36 bases to be upgraded using 3 TCs. If you put rear support behind 2 of these (a BG of 6 say) you can effectively create 24 superior IF Sw with a +1 for rear support and a general out of your 7pt per base junk. Not bad value for money as long as his nibs doesn't get a pilum in his midriff.

Also try standing back a bit and flank marching with lots of troops - it gets a lot of fun when the smaller army is facing 2 or 3 directions at the same time!!!

Si

can effectively create 24 superior IF Sw with a +1 for rear support and a general out of your 7pt per base junk.

Si, are you going wide or deep with these?

I used to think that going deep was the answer to minimize contact and therefore losses (1p3 etc), but it just doesn't work. Deep (4 bases), you are spending as much as the Romans and they will chomp you.

Going wide sounds great, and if the stupid Romans come at you piecemeal then you stand a chance with overlaps. I don't see this very often. Games I'm seeing now are romans going deep. Giving away 2/3rds of the table with a few delaying troop and then fanning out once the encirclement begins. It starts to look like Custers last stand then once engaged usually the Romans 'break out'

I wonder how many people are taking barbarian armies to Usk (at 1000pts)... Maybe we should have an award!