BETA: Catalan Company crossbow

Beta list 2

OR S - Crossbowmen 8 2 0 C 1 7 Short bow B

Is this a misclassification or is there a rationale for classifying crossbowmen as short bow B?

My guess is that it's a glitch. Not sure why Skirmishers should be C class, but that's obviously allowed for in the points

My Mycenaean slingers are also classed as C.

God knows why. So little is known of them and a decent ability in a slinger would be one of the base skills of almost all Bronze Age warriors even if only considered as a youthful pursuit.

I no longer care much about lists except for comps. The dominant driver would appear to be wish fulfillment.

starkadder wrote:

I no longer care much about lists except for comps. The dominant driver would appear to be wish fulfillment.

+1 but with less bile - if I can use that phrase. I get a bit fed up with (almost) every new beta being super soldiers

No bile here, Cyrus. Just an observation.

The Australian player base is fairly narrow. Historical match-ups are tricky to arrange.

I am used to playing Mycenaeans against Late Medieval armies with hyper-specific troop types and over-powered abilities. That's the luck of it.

It's only toy soldiers, after all. If you're upset about being thumped in a game of tin dollies, you don't have much else going on, do you?

Because of research, generally done by others or with a heavy reliance on <ptah> Ospreys, Late Medieval armies are a true golf-bag army. Pull out what you want for the situation. I am not worried by that. It's the landscape.

Everybody, I hope, has a reason for running their particular forces. Most have little obsessions with particular troop types. For instance, I love chariots and have had an interest in Mycenaean society since childhood. I'd love to see them toe to toe with a bunch of ridiculously undisciplined French knights or tactical dead-end formations like schiltrons. But they can't, so I deal with it and enjoy the game. Every now and then I sneak a win. That's enough.

Lol - Zombie thread and all that but I must have missed this. I play Persians because I was always struck by how they were portrayed as basically comedy baddies, somehow capable of ruling the largest empire in the world and at the same time unable to put their shirts on without getting them backwards. When I read into what little there is it struck me just how sophisticated, advanced and civilised they were.

I just wish they had plainer costumes as painting them is a bitch :-)

missed this discussione as well, I suppose the crossbowmen with bow is a typo.
I have to update the beta file (I made an error with an update) and going to fix also this

Cyrus The Adequate wrote: I was always struck by how they were portrayed as basically comedy baddies, somehow capable of ruling the largest empire in the world and at the same time unable to put their shirts on without getting them backwards. 

It's amazing, isn't it? Probably the most cosmopolitan civilisation at the time and all you see now are things like that ridiculous fascist paean "300". I have a small Persian army for a very similar reason, Cyrus. It has a very rough time against most opponents. I wonder how it performs in 15mm.

Thanks for looking at that, Lorenzo.

I think one problem they had was that their previous enemies had been based around second rate infantry and decent cavalry. The Persian infantry was good enough to stand in the face of the enemy infantry and the Persian cavalry was better.

When facing Greeks we don't know a lot about the battles in the Ionian Revolt, but the Greeks lost them. Once you got into Greece proper the Persians had no answer to good heavy infantry who wanted to get stuck in, and the terrain never seems to have let them use their cavalry properly
If you read Xenophon the Greeks, even under Agesilaus, were very wary of Persian cavalry. Indeed the Macedonians were and their Successors used as much of it as they could raise.