According to the following threads (and many others), the existing rear support rule appears to be providing for tactical reserves quite adequately: :D http://www.slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6832 (#211, #227, #240, #705, etc.) http://www.slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6844 http://www....

Deft use of humor... very well done!

Cheers,
Scott

Good call, Phil! :D So thus far we have MMR & LRR Romans, Hannibal at Zama, and Late Achaemenid Persians. We can add the Principate & Dominate Romans as well. That is still a very small list, comprising some of the most tactically complex armies of the ancient world. To return to the original topic,...

The teppo was a Japanese adaptation of the Portuguese arquebus: http://wiki.samurai-archives.com/index.php?title=Teppo One of the best (IMHO) FoG AARs to date features a unit of Ii ashigaru armed with the teppo: http://i290.photobucket.com/albums/ll269/wargameserize/fogargentina/sengoku0908/DSCN2631...

philqw78 wrote:By reserves I meant to hold the line, if the front line goes. To stop exploitation by the forward troops of others.

Then beyond the few examples I mentioned above (MRR & LRR Romans, and Hannibal at Zama), the use of tactical reserves was quite rare in ancient warfare.

Salve,
Scott

If by "reserves" we mean the intentional deployment of one or more large units held in the rear in order to exploit or fill gaps in the front line, or pick up enemy units who break through, then the practice was not at all typical for ancient and medieval battles. The Roman manipular and cohortal li...

Draka wrote:What is 400 AC? Is that BC or AD?

AC stands for the Latin "Ante Christum" and is equivalent to BC: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ante_Christum_Natum

Salve,
Scott

Great looking figures... many thanks for sharing!

Salve,
Scott

Just to clarify, cavalry and camelry are two separate mounted troop types (p. 14). However, camels that are not heavily armoured are indeed generally treated as if they were cavalry (p. 128). Camels that are heavily armoured are handled as if they were cataphracts.

Additional replies in Cassius' thread on the Seleucids: viewtopic.php?t=9975

Salve,
Scott

IIRC, the original WRG basing scheme was indeed meant to reflect the fact that heavy infantry would have been deployed in denser formations than other troops. However, the FoG rules do allow for deeper bases or fewer figures per base than the stated norms (p. 127). So as long as the base widths are ...

Some models of Assyrian lamassu entrance guardians: http://www.ancientreplicas.com/winged-bull-guardian.html http://www.ancientreplicas.com/winged-bull.html http://www.ancientreplicas.com/winged-human-headed-bull.html http://ancienttreasures.com/lrgtext.php3?product=M-9&CA=16 http://www.talariaenter...

Very nice painting job, Keith. At least your Celtic commanders all died gloriously!

Slantia,
Scott

The Dominate Roman list already includes the option of rating legionaries as Light Spear rather than Impact Foot.

Salve,
Scott

Do you mean "if I cheat and add 2 Units of knights and some triple armed protected LH this army gets better"...? That might be a popular answer :wink: It might be indeed. :wink: However, I was thinking more along the lines of: "if the list was adjusted in future, to better reflect historical capabi...

A very nice way to poll players on the various armies. One other option might be "Could be better with a little tweaking."
Many thanks for providing such a great resource, Tim!

Slave,
Scott

The FoG rule book includes only four sample 'starter' armies (Mid-Republican Roman & Carthaginian, HYW English & HWY French). The army lists proper are published in a series of separate books, organized by period: http://www.fieldofglory.com/catalogue/

Salve,
Scott

I have been trying out a few historical additions the EG list, and I have been pleased with the results thus far. The proposed changes are posted in a dedicated thread in Player Designed Lists forum: http://www.slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=9644 Any additional feedback would be greatly apprec...

I agree, Mike. The phrase "force a consensus" is particularly off-putting.

But I'll choose to think of it as a popularity poll for ancients tournament rules, and then move on.

Cheers,
Scott