Hi,

So, I've fallen off the fence, and landed on Late Romans. While I wait for my figs to arrive, I thought I might spark a discussion about the army, it's strengths and weaknesses, and how it might be used.

At first glance, the LRs have some clear strengths. There's a good variety of troops, including decent defensive line troops (the legion), mobile infantry (palatina / comitensis), skirmishers, decent horse in the equites, and good light cav in the Illyricani and Sagittari. The option to include allied contingents also gives variety and flexibility.

The list does seem to lack a real killer unit - the highest VBU is 5, IIRC, so there's nothing equivalent to, say, elephants or French knights. While the legion units (with darts) are relatively secure from high Impetus troops, the rest of the infantry and cavalry are vulnerable to attack from units with high VBU and Impetus.

So how to use it?

First off, it seems critical to deny enemy units Impetus advantages. That means using missile troops and skirmishers to whittle down enemy units before they attack. It also means using mobility to ensure the LR player determine the conditions of battle. The light cav, skirmishers, and even FL units would be critical here. If an opponent is allowed to strike with Knights etc at a point of their choosing, the LR line is going to fold.

Allied contingents can also help here. Allied nomads radically expand the LR lists ability to screen and shoot. Fast moving horse archers can plink away at opposing units, and break up enemy formations by moving to threaten flanks, etc. Allied warband and cavalry adds some Impetus punch to the army. I can see two roles for them, either as an early game "fire and forget" move to spoil the enemy's plans, or as a late game death blow to finish an opponent off.

Any responses, thoughts, ideas?

FMB

I will upload this week an updated version of the Late Roman lists. There are few small corrections in points and also the possibility to upgrade Catafractarii to Clibanarii so to VBU=7 (with more in the Eastern army). BTW this changes not to much your analysis.

I think it is an army with many possible responses to differente menaces. The combination of solid foot and mobile light cavalry and many resources to contain a frontal charge are 2 important features. Artillery is very precious to disrupt a Warband charge, for example.
Anyway I think it is an army in which correct timimg is fundamental and it is importan not to risk troops with no high VBU unless in the right moment.

Let's see also when the Sassanid list will be out by the end of this week

I created the late roman lists for some friends of mine to get into the rules. And as such are very much a 1st Draft. The first major change is the Clibanarii have been added.
I would say that there is no agreement between scholars that there is actually any difference between Cataphractarii and Clibanarii. Roman sources use Cataphractarii for all heavy armoured cavalry and Clibanarii for heavy armoured cavalry in the east. According to Dixon & Southern, there was little in the way of actual difference except possibly the clibanarii may have had bows, but that appears very speculative. Use the clibanarii option if in your views are the Romans should have a greater offensive capacity.

I think the joy of late roman armies is the fact that no particular part is dominates. Defiantly the sum being greater than the parts. Do not forget that adding the allies, which gives greater offensive strength to the army, degrades the command and control. The variability however allows you to build an army which fits your style of play. If anyone actually uses the lists let us know how they work.

If you wondering, once I gave them the lists, they immediately started to paint stuff that was in the list which they could not field but wanted to!! So no game yet

Hi,

Stuff that was in the list but that they could not field? I'm confused . . . .

FMB

They had decided to do a Late Roman civil war as they both had some Romans and asked me to put together a list. The list was not tailored for what they owned but for general publication. When they saw the list, they got inspired and wanted to field more stuff than they owned mainly allies I think. This has lead to a painting war!

Hi,

So, I've been doing a little reading, and had some questions about the differences between the auxilia and legion in the LR lists. From what I understand, the main troop types in the LR period were the auxilia comittatensis, which were the posted garrisons, and the auxilia palatina, which were the mobile armies attached to emperors, governers etc. "Legion", as a distinct unit, don't seem to be discussed at all. Given this, how am I to interpret the lists? You've got legion, AC, and AP in there - what differentiates them?

The problem carries over to figures. The gear carried by Roman troops in the period seems pretty standard - oblong sheild, spear, helmet. What differences, if any, should show up in the figures?

Thanks for any help,

FMB

Hello,

Excuse me but i'm French with a poor english language.

I think you can soluce your problem with figures on shield which are very "personnals" if I remember well.

Good luck.

Papy

the lists made by Mike is are beta developed from the BI lists and we are further developing these lists for their final version that could be included in the second supplement (maybe out by January 2009).

An option we are working at is that heavy infantry (by this period Auxilia were probably more a FP to all effects) could be as follow

0-4 FP Palatina infantry(*) 5 6 2 B 3 31 Long spear/pilum
0-6 FP Comitatenses infantry(*) 5 5 1 B 2 24 Long spear/pilum
0-3 FP Pseudocomitatenses infantry(*) 5 4 1 C 1 12 Long spear