Warbook 1 - Errata Type Comments

Having been through the book now, I have a small lists of points that may or may not require errata

List 1.15 Hittite - the Syro-Canaanite allies list FL without javelin (in their own list they have it) – allies also have T archers which don’t appear in their own list, seems odd.

List 3.1 EA Persian - Assyrian T archers are listed without a shortbow note

List 5.1 Early Etruscan - Cavalry CM listed with javelin, highly unusual

List 5.5 Syracuse - Thureophoroi listed with no Long Spear, seems unusual

5.6 Later Etruscan - Gallic allied skirmishers S are listed with no weapon note (could be sling, javelin or shortbow but having nothing seems unusual)

6.6 MR Roman - Numidian CL upgrade takes away the javelin, seems unlikely as it doesn't in any of the other lists where the upgrade is available

If that is it then well done Lorenzo!

Thank you Zippee. I will see every single case and elaborate a document with errata where required.

Thanks Lorenzo,
all-in-all not much to report, so very well done.

If I note anything else I'll post it here (others should too).

hello Lorenzo, using warbook 1 for a Antigonus v Early Selucid 600pt set to. Noticed that Antigonus list 4.11 has Persian and Cretan archers (S) units armed with comp bow B should this be short bow B for 11 & 13 points respectively as per other armies? Regards Eric

6.17 Later Republican Rome, 'Eastern Foot Archers', T, Short bow B? Most T units get Short bow A. They could possibly be downgraded to VBU 3.

Hello loenzo list 1.16 middle assyrian. I see you've amended Ashsharitu from beta list which showed them armed with short bow B to warbook 1 for supports armed with short bow A. The peasants/ levy T still shows them with short bow B was that intentional or should they also have been changed to short bow A. Regards eric

@Aurelius. They should have Short Bow A at 16 pts

@ejc
That's is wanted. So this troops (very fragile) is cheap enough

ejc wrote:hello Lorenzo, using warbook 1 for a Antigonus v Early Selucid 600pt set to. Noticed that Antigonus list 4.11 has Persian and Cretan archers (S) units armed with comp bow B should this be short bow B for 11 & 13 points respectively as per other armies? Regards Eric

Hello Lorenzo, think you may have overlooked above query I posted. Reminding you in case its a typo to add to your list. Regards Eric

Yes, they have Short bow B and at the usual cost (11 and 13)

Not really an erratum as such.
Why can't the Civilians in the 6.2 Gauls list make Large Units? Given they are mobs and reasonably without form, it seems reasonable to me. Or is it assumed that these are always behind fortifications?

well, to make LU it is supposed that troops can give some kind of support. Usually hordes cannot make LU in Impetus.

Middle Assyrians:

The forum errata in October stated that Levy Support Archers ought to be Short bow A with a cost of 16pts. That makes them more expensive than the Ashsharitu support archers despite having worse discipline i.e. C not B.

How is this correct?

Don't know what you are looking at bayleaf. I haven't seen any changes to Levy Support Archers. Short Bow B and 5 points. A very cheap large unit at 13 points.

On Fri Oct 16 Eric asked:

"Hello loenzo list 1.16 middle assyrian. I see you've amended Ashsharitu from beta list which showed them armed with short bow B to warbook 1 for supports armed with short bow A. The peasants/ levy T still shows them with short bow B was that intentional or should they also have been changed to short bow A. Regards eric

ejc"

To which Aurelius answered on Tues Oct 20:


"@Aurelius. They should have Short Bow A at 16 pts"

Who are the 'They' mentioned in Aurelius' answer? If it is the Ashsharitu support archers then I take it that it is just the cost in the list (13pts) that is incorrect and should be 16pts."

If this is correct and the Levy Support Archers are correct in list 1.16 how does that make a Large Unit at 13 pts i.e. Levy (10pts) plus Support Archers (5pts); 10+5 = 15, not 13!

Of course, I could be missing something, but clarification would be welcome.

In the published errata (as of NOV 2020) the only amendment to list 1:16 Middle Assyria is:

0-10 Levies FL 4 1 C 1 (remove javelin) 8

the change being to remove the javelin and reduce cost to 8 points.

there is no mention of any changes to any archers

I'd strongly suggest that the published errata overrides and takes precedence from any comment on the forum.

'They' refers to the archers in the question I had raised further up the thread, list 6.17 Later Republican Romans, Eastern Foot Archers. They should have Short Bow A.

Cheers

Zippee wrote: I'd strongly suggest that the published errata overrides and takes precedence from any comment on the forum.

Not only should, it does!

Thanks for the clarifications.

is everything been cleared?

On the 4th October Zippee mentioned EA list 3.10 (not 3.1) the Assyrian or Chaldean T are shown as: T 4 1 C 1 cost 8pts with no weapon (e.g. bow) indicated this doesn't look right and is not changed in the errata sheet.

They have no weapon as the front rank of the Unit of a compulsory Large Unit and shooting is done with the rear weapon. Basically in this way they are less effective but cheaper than other T+T both with shooring weapons (like Immortals).

Understood but in that case probably worth a line in the errata to explain its not an oversight and why.

Thureophoroi Cost

In the 6.6 Middle Republican Romans list the Thureophoroi have a listed cost of 21 (FL 5 2 B 2 long spear). With those stats, the cost should be 22. I take it that the Thureophoroi should have an impetus value of 1 like the Thureophoroi in other lists, and thus have a cost of 21. Is that correct?