Mid-Republican Roman Question

[BrotherCrow]

Hi folks, I need a bit of clarification with regard to the Mid-Republican Roman list.

It's the line about "only one nationality of allies" can be used......does this include troops from the optional list, or is it only where a proper ally (with allied general) is used, i.e., you can't use two....

Cheers.

[nikgaukroger]

Just troops listed in the Allies section IIRC.

[shall]

correct I think there are 2 specific ones it states can be used together, otherwise only 1 ally.

Si

[BrotherCrow]

Cheers folks, I suspected that was the case...

[BrotherCrow]

The dreaded follow up question.....

If you have two groups of 6 Hastari / Principes, can you have a group of 3 Triarii...not usually allowed I know, but I would assume that the exception (see page 69 of the Rise of Rome lists) applies in this case.

Thoughts anyone?

[rbodleyscott]

The dreaded follow up question.....

If you have two groups of 6 Hastari / Principes, can you have a group of 3 Triarii...not usually allowed I know, but I would assume that the exception (see page 69 of the Rise of Rome lists) applies in this case.

No. It doesn't, it only applies to mixed BGs.

You can have

4 4 / 2
8 8 / 4
or
4 4 4 4 / 4 (which I would not recommend as it forfeits full rear support)
6 6 6 6 / 6 (which I would not recommend as it forfeits full rear support)

[shall]

Answer rather than thought...

you have to keep to 2s and 4s - so it works most historically if you use 4s and 2s, or 8s and 4s

The odd no expection is there for when a single BG has 1/3 2/3 so 9s are common. eg. 6 legionaries and 3 LF

Si

[BrotherCrow]

Cheers for the speedy response.....ah well, back to the drawing board with my list - I'm facing Parthians tonight, scary Cataphracts et al !!!!!

[shall]

Well you've got scary Romans so not too bad

Si

[BrotherCrow]

Indeed, my Polybians have taken on a new lease of life in these Rules......loving them so far.....particularly with that Numidian Ally....

[Luddite]

Ha!

Footslogging PBI don't scare my magnificant Pathians one bit...Roman augers are predicting doom...

[dougredshirt]

Which is the better way to go 4 4/2 or 8 8/4. I am rebasing my Romans and have decided to redo shield colors while I am at it, so a legion will all have the same shield color to ease ID.

My second question is how do protected Romans do in combat. I know they lose the + for better armor, but they are cheaper. All my painted Romans have mail, but I discovered several legions worth of troops with the small breast plate in my unpainted lead pile. I figured it might be a good way to get decent BGs on the table and increase the frontage covered.

[sagji]

I would start with 4 4 / 2, I might have a non-upgraded legion as 8/2 with another as 4 4 /2 but protected - which can support the armoured front line, I might even take it them 8 4 4 / 4.

4 are more flexable, but a bit fragile if average, plus if you are going to add a general then you want to add him to an 8 so that he has more effect.

[Jhykron]

Clarification: Is 8 / 2 acceptable then? The lists say you must organize by legion (and upgrade by whole legion), but only give the examples of 4 4 / 2 and 8 8 / 4 legions.

As an aside, that's a pretty tight restriction, forcing a player to take legionaires in chunks of 10 stands (14 counting velites). Was any consideration given to loosening that restriction for overstrength legions, where all classes but the triarii recruited more (1500 or 1800 instead of 1200)? It would seem 6 6 / 2, 4 4 4 / 2, or even 8 8 / 2 might be justifiable in those cases, though rear support goes out the window.

[Luddite]

Organise them how you want...my Parthians still ripped them to shreds!

[rbodleyscott]

Clarification: Is 8 / 2 acceptable then?

Yes.

[rbodleyscott]

Clarification: Is 8 / 2 acceptable then?

No

That isn't supported by the wording in the book - which is "... could be organised as ...", you appear to be reading it as "... must be organised as ..."

Sorry, my mistake, it is permitted. I thought the proportions weren't right. Confusing resulting posts deleted.

[shall]

Not looked at the book for legality but

8 - 2 would be pointless as no rear support anymore - waste of points as a plan IMHO.

Si

[miffedofreading]

Si,

I fielded 2 legions last night. One veteran which was 16 hastati / 8 velites / 4 triarii arranged in the largest allowable BG sizes. The 2nd non veteran legion was 8 hastati / 4 velites / 2 triarii.

I was tempted to field the hastati as 2X4BG's but decided they were vulnerable to shooting and deployed them as a single 8 base BG. Of course this meant the tiny 2 base Triarii could not offer rear support, so I put them alongside the Hastati to counter some mounted troops

I prefer the legions of 16 hastati organised as I suggest above but that means you have to have 16 or 32 hastati. So 24 seems a more practical compromise in an 800 point army (I can do 32 but there is not much left for extras).

Presumably what I did above is perfectly reasonable from a rules point of view?

Andy

[durrati]

Not looked at the book for legality but

8 - 2 would be pointless as no rear support anymore - waste of points as a plan IMHO.

Si

Deploy it with another Legion of 4/4/2. The 8 in the middle and the 2 4s on the end. The 2 units of Triarii go at the 2 joints so everybody gets rear support.

The reason to do this is to put a general with the unit of 8 to get maximum effect from him.