Later Ptolemaic (post 55BC)

[ianiow]

After a 10 year absence from wargaming, I have been tempted to dust off my old figures and give FOG a try. The dusty figures in question are my beloved Ptolemaics. I would be grateful if anyone could critique my attempt at an army list and give me a few tips on how to play them.

My army is Late Ptolemaic - the post 55 BC version with the Roman legions and the lovely Cleopatra standing in her NKE chariot, watching the battle from the relative safety of the camp

1x FC
3x TC

2x 4 Xystophoroi .........Cav,Arm,Sup,Dr, Lc/Sw
1x 4 Galatian Cavalry...Cav,Arm,Sup,Udr,LSp/Sw
1x 4 Light Cavalry........LH,UProt,Avg,Dr,Jv/LSp

1x 12 Phalangites.........HF,Prot,Avg,Dr,Pk
2x 6 Legionaries...........HF,Arm,Sup,Dr,ImpF,SSw

2x 6 Thorakitai.............MF,Arm,Avg,Dr,OfSp
1x 6 Archers................LF,UProt,Avg,Dr,Bw
1x 6 Javelinmen...........LF,UProt,Avg,Udr,Jv/LSp

Total 797pts, 11 Units

It seems a very tough army with high quality troops, but I am worried it may be a little on the small size with just 11 units?

[rbodleyscott]

I won the first 25mm FOG tournament (Clevedon 2007) with this army, though admittedly many of the contestants were very inexperienced with the rules.

It was 650 points. My army was essentially very similar to yours but with only one BG of Cavalry.

It worked very well.

[WhiteKnight]

I like these late "Successor" armies, too, and I would be happy to use the one you designed against similar or Roman opponents. I wonder if an FC is needed? Also, against those historical opponents/potential opponents, maybe three heavy cavalry units is one too many? Losing one of them plus the 18pts from the FC replaced by a TC should be enough for two BGs, of which one I would choose as more pike.

Martin

[AlanYork]

I played a 650pt version of Later Ptolemaic at Birmingham and got trounced every time. I had a couple of BGs of Xystophoroi, a BG of Greek mercenary cavalry, a BG of light horse, 2 BGs of pike, 2 BGs of Roman legionaries and a BG of thureophoroi.

Game 1 vs Parthians my slow moving foot were simply ignored, unless you count the Romans ridden down by some cataphracts whilst my outnumbered cavalry was shot to bits by Lord knows how many groups of horse archers. A last desperate charge by my lancers was easily dealt with by heavier armoured Parthian cataphracts. A massacre as half my army was simply useless against the enemy.

Game 2 vs Scots Highlands and Isles was more even and I was beaten by a combination of my opponents good play and good dice. He got his flank march on the table at the first attempt, killed my general on a double 6 and his last combat dice roll to clinch his win was four dice and they all came up 6s!!!! My pike couldn't pass more than a couple of Cohesion Tests all game, my opponent passed lots, even when his troops were fragmented his dice and generals saved him. In the end a narrow defeat for me.

Game 3 vs Later Crusader, I tried to keep most of my extremely outclassed and outnumbered cavalry out of the way by sending them on a flank march...it didn't turn up. Meantime his knights just rode over my infantry, the pike blocks failing yet more Cohesion Tests. Even the thureophoroi into his flank didn't score a single hit. Another massacre.

In retrospect I made the mistake of designing the army to be OK at lots of things but not brilliant at anything. Balanced armies may do well in big games but in smaller ones I think "one trick pony" armies will do better. Also it has to be said whilst without wishing to detract from opponents who won fair and square, that my luck was pretty wretched in games 1 and 3. In game 2 it was poor apart from the Cohesion Tests whilst his was pretty good throughout the game.

[ianiow]

Thankyou for your replies!

Richard: Congrats on the win I have looked at the photos of your games and you seem to favour starting your army in one corner of the board and spreading out diagonally down the length of the table. Interesting!

Martin: Yes, I too wondered about converting the FC into a TC and having fewer units of Heavy Cav. But looking down the list there is very little I can replace these with.. 4 more bases of pike .. 6 thracians .. 6 Cretan Archers .. or some Boltshooters. I am maxed out on almost everything else.

Alan: LOL, with your bad luck I doubt you could even get a victory if you armed your legionaries with AK-47's I can see how shooty horse armies would be a major problem though.

[rbodleyscott]

Richard: Congrats on the win I have looked at the photos of your games and you seem to favour starting your army in one corner of the board and spreading out diagonally down the length of the table. Interesting!

For this type of army it works well.

[WhiteKnight]

How about this for 800pts?

4 x TC
4 x Xystophoroi
4 x Galatian cavalry
4 x Light horse
16 x Phalangites in 2BGs
12 x Legionaries in 2/3 BGs
6 x Thorakitai MF
6 x Thureophoroi MF
6 x Thracian MF
8 x Cretan archers
8 x Slingers (or javelinmen)

Martin

[rbodleyscott]

I am fairly firmly convinced now that (given the maxima in this army list) it is better to field 1 x 12 pikes than 2 x 8 pikes. BGs of 8 pikes are far more likely to get into trouble with enemy overlaps - even if only late on in the game.

Thorakitoi are really really good, I would take the maximum allowed i.e. 12.

[philqw78]

the mamima