King Herod the Great

by Zippee Mon Sep 22, 2014 3:44 pm

Should the Jewish legionaries not have Pilum? If not perhaps call them something different?

Thureophoroi typically have Long Spear not Javelin

I don't understand the Royal Guard (*) entry.

The Roman Command I assume is an ally.

by Guest Tue Sep 23, 2014 7:59 am

TheJewish Legionaries are by way of being pseudo-legionaries. They may have had the pilum but I doubt it.
I leave them to stand as they are.
The Royal Guard is based on the works of Josephus [both The History of the Jews and The Jewish Wars] who I recommend.
The Roman command is not an ally. It is Sebaste and Roman soldiers under Roman commanders within the Jewish army.

by **dadiepiombo** Tue Sep 23, 2014 9:09 am

the Roman form a separate command?

Command structure from Good to Poor? Probably Average is a good compromise?

by Jim Webster Tue Sep 23, 2014 9:57 am

Vegetius wrote:Here's one I prepared earlier-----
King Herod the Great.
Revised 9 February 2014 including the suggestions and corrections made in the separate thread.

1-6 CM Jewish cavalry ; 10 ; 5, 2 ; B ; 3. 23
2-8 CL Babylonian Horse Archers ; 12; 3. 0; B ; 1. 22; Comp bow B
0-4 CL Ituraeans - 12; 3, 0 ; B; 1, 22 ; javelin

1-5 FP Jewish legionaries; 5; 5, 2; ;B; 3. 26
0-4 FL Theorophanos /Idumanaeans; 8; 4, 1; B; 2, 15; javelin
0-5 T Syrian archers; 6; 4, 0; B; 2. 18 short bow A
1-4 S Jewish slingers; 8 ; 2,0 ; B; 1,12; sling
or
1-4 S Jewish javelin ; 8 ;2,0 ; B; 1,12
or
1-5 S Ituraean archers; 6; 3,0; B; 1.16; short bow A

0-3 FL Idumaean settlers; 8; 3, 1 ; C; 1,19.

Roman Command
0-6 CM Roman auxiliary cavalry; 10; 5, 2; B; 3, 23
0-2 CM Samaritan/ Sebastenos Cavalry ; 10; 5, 2; B ; 3, 23
0-5 FP Roman Legionaries; 5; 6, 2 ; B; 3, 28; pilum
0-5 FP Samaritan/Sebastenos infantry ; 5; 5,2 ; B; 3, 26

Royal Guard (*)
0-2 FP Doryphoros; 5; 5, 2; A; 3.31; long spear
0-1 CM Thracians ; 10; 4,1; B; 3,20 javelin
or
0-2 FP Thracians; 5; 5,2; B; 3,19
0-1 FP Galatian Celts, ex-Cleopatra ; 5; 4, 3; B; 3,17
0-1 FP German mercenaries[ after Augustus] 5; 4, 3; B; 3, 17

For one Ituraean CL you may substitute
1 Ituraean CL ;12; 3,1; B; 1, 21; Camel.

For one CM Jewish cavalry you may substitute
1 CM 10; 5,2; C; 2,19 impetuous.

Command is good or poor.
King Herod the Great, King of the Jews is charismatic.

The Herodian army had a much higher ratio of cavalry to infantry than most other armies of the period.
Occasionally it was as high as 1:4.

I'd scrap the Romans, just allow a Roman ally. Herod could fight battles without Romans in his army so I don't think they need to be an 'indented list' as it were.

We aren't absolutely certain his men were legionaries. They probably were but they could have been Thureophoroi
You've probably got too many Babylonian horse archers. 8 bases is 2,400. I'd go for 0 - 4. Remember they were settled in an area and so might not have been called out for some operations being too busy keeping peace in their own area. Also Herod had an army before the Babylonians joined him.

Jim

by Guest Tue Sep 23, 2014 12:36 pm

The Roman command within the Herodian army I stand by. Herod was greatly favoured by Augustus, the Roman Governer of Syria was told to consult with Herod on political matters. Herod was the third most influential man of his age after Augustus and Agrippa [which makes him so interesting]. The Sebastian Roman command is accurate. The horse archers are also OK- the Herodian army had more cavarly to infantry than almost any other comparable army.
The Legionaries were almost certainly such.
The Command of Good to Poor is because the command was inconsisitant and is intended to allow a player to buy whar command he wants.

by Jim Webster Tue Sep 23, 2014 1:08 pm

According to The Army of Herod the Great By Samuel Rocca, Zamaris led 500 Babylonian Horse. That is two bases, not eight

Looking at the proportion of infantry to cavalry, (ignoring Romans and the Guard) you can actually field an army with this army list where the cavalry outnumbers the infantry 4 to 1 all you're doing is allowing an even more unbalanced force. The Romans can apparently supply another six cavalry units

If you ignore the Romans and the Jewish Guard (who both have their own cavalry anyway) the maximum number of infantry you can raise is 30, the maximum number of cavalry you can raise is 18.

I'd suggest that
1-2 CM Jewish cavalry ; 10 ; 5, 2 ; B ; 3. 23
0-2 CL Babylonian Horse Archers ; 12; 3. 0; B ; 1. 22; Comp bow B
0-4 CL Ituraeans - 12; 3, 0 ; B; 1, 22 ; javelin

Would still let you get 1:4 for your cavalry.

As for the Romans, they're just letting you supply even more cavalry. A maximum of 8 cavalry to a mere 10 infantry. That's why I suggest you use the Roman ally because then it will at least have proper Roman proportions.
As it is you've got an army here which can out-cavalry the Parthians

Jim

by Guest Wed Sep 24, 2014 6:12 am

Jim- I think your suggestion about the Romans is one I cannot accept as you are bending the historical facts to fit the rules rather than applying the rules to reflect the historical facts. This is a road down which we should not go.
Overall however that is I feel a very thorough, detailed and lengthy analysis of a problem which doesn't exist.
You play to what 300 /350 pts and have an army where the maximum ratio of cavalry to infantry is no more that 1:4. Sorted.
So I have tried to provide choices within that. The consistution of the army presumably changed according to use- from invading Nabatia to ridding the Eastern frontier of bandits.

by Jim Webster Wed Sep 24, 2014 6:39 am

Ignoring any historical details your maxima and minima are out.
You can field an army with
1 Jewish cavalry
2 Horsearchers
1 Jewish legion
1 Jewish light infantry
8 Roman and Samaritan cavalry
1 Thracian cavalry

This isn't any sort of Jewish army whatsoever.
Your army list if for a very flexible Roman army which can bring along a few Jewish allies if it wishes

Jim

by RogerC Wed Sep 24, 2014 6:38 pm

It seems the question here is what the list is for.

If it is to provide an interesting historical list, which may involve house rules, or other variants, and which will be used by players familiar with the period to form a historically balanced army, within the limits of the list, then that is one thing.

On the other hand, if the aim is to work out a new beta list, that may one day be formalised in a list in one of the supplements, then that is something different. Beta lists may be used by those with little or no knowledge of what the forces actually were. That means the list must be 'balanced' against other lists, and must keep within the rules.

Vegetius, you say that you don't want to bend historical facts to fit the rules. That is fine, but means this can't be a beta list. The rules don't allow for different command structures within an army (whether they should is a different question). You also say that people should play the list with a cavalry/infantry ratio of 1:4; again that is fine as a 'house' rule but isn't something that can readily be carried over to a beta list.

I know nothing about the army of Herod the Great, but this list looks like it can be made to be unbalanced relative to other armies of the period. If unbalanced armies get in the beta lists, tournament organisers end up having to exclude all the beta lists, which would be a shame in my view.

If this list is the 'historical' one, what would a beta list look like?

RogerC

by Gaius Cassius Wed Sep 24, 2014 9:10 pm

Like RogerC I don't know a lot about the army of Herod the Great but going through the commentary I think the changes suggested by Jim give the right feel for an Impetus list. I do agree that a Roman Ally is the appropriate way to go in allowing Roman troops into the list. I think an Average army command is sufficient to account for the command and control of Herod's forces.

8 units of CL with bow is excessive.

by Guest Fri Sep 26, 2014 4:11 pm

I have felt that it is wrong that the Beta lists do not include the army of a Ruler as important, brilliant, charismatic and admirable as King Herod the Great of Judaea. So I proposed a list. Having spent my working life in a very competative profession I have no interest now at all of being involved in tournaments [ although I do intend to attend Donnington probably on the Sunday to watch]. My approach therefore is and will be historical. That the list is not balanced for tournament purposes comes as no surprise, indeed I anticipate that. I hope that those of you who do that sort of thing may make sensible suggestions to adjust the lists accordingly. I accept that Zamaris' horse archers are too large- it should say 0-2. The Roman cavalry are correct Ventidius alone supplying 1,000 cavalry.
However by 'sensible' I do not mean comments such as ' this isn't any sort of Jewish army wharsoever. It's a Roman army that can bring along a few Jewish allies,' -a remark that is incomprehensibly ridiculous.

by Jim Webster Fri Sep 26, 2014 4:52 pm

No it isn't ridiculous, that is the list you've created.

Note with the Romans, under the rules, medium or heavy cavalry units represent 400 to 800 men. So Ventidius should be bringing two units

Also most of the battle accounts I remember where Romans are present include legionaries in the force. Are there any recorded where there were no Roman infantry present?

Jim

by Zippee Fri Sep 26, 2014 5:58 pm

Trouble is it just comes over as a fanboy fantasy list.

Not a single question, suggestion or comment has been addressed or accepted, for instance you have an entry for Royal Guard (*) and no stat line which you defend with some pseudo mumbo jumbo. It has no meaning in the game as you have it, nor does having differing command values, or insisting on non-allied defined commands.

This just isn't the basis for a publishable list - what you do yourself, for your own enjoyment is absolutely fine but if you seriously want a Herodian list to be available you need to construct it within the model that is Impetus.

That you would find Jim's remarks on armies of this period laughable I find astonishingly naïve!

by Sponsored content

King Herod the Great

King Herod the Great

Re: King Herod the Great

Re: King Herod the Great

Re: King Herod the Great

Re: King Herod the Great

Re: King Herod the Great

Re: King Herod the Great

Re: King Herod the Great

Re: King Herod the Great

Re: King Herod the Great

Re: King Herod the Great

Re: King Herod the Great

Re: King Herod the Great

Re: King Herod the Great

Re: King Herod the Great

Mon	Tue	Wed	Thu	Fri	Sat	Sun
1	2	3	4	5	6	7
8	9	10	11	12	13	14
15	16	17	18	19	20	21
22	23	24	25	26	27	28
29	30