MIN/MAX exceptions in armies

A quick question. The half MIN/MAX in 350 pts competitions is fine but I am a little confused by the "most common type" exception.

The prime example is the Mid-Republican Roman list (Bk 4, Vol 5, list 5).

Is it possible to have two hastati units in the same command even though the MIN/MAX restriction allows for only one? It's certainly a most common type and could be considered an exception.

I need a quickish answer as I'm trying to check some lists for Cancon

In the Mid-Republican Roman list doesn't one one "buy" legions. In the legion there can be one or two Hastati but I think the MIN/MAX restrictions apply at the level of legion.

That's at the heart of the thing, GC. I am easy either way although I tend to your interpretation.

As they are, the Mid-Republicans are a ludicrously over detailed list.

the reason behind this excpetion is that halving the maxima some armies could not have enough good troops. So the typical troop type should have not much limits.

In case of the Romans this troop is the legionaries, but the Roman list is made in a different way, so it is the legion as a whole to be counted.
I don't think there are not enough legions to reach 350pts(once halved), but if it is the case then the number of legions should be not halved.

Thanks, Lorenzo.

Come on Felix, MRR are simply awesome!

Even halved you have 2-4 legions which works well as an army.

My only issue with the MRR is that some of the Allies are so small as a list that you effectively can't take them if each of them has to have a command structure of their own.

Not a criticism of them, GG but more of an observation that because we know such a relative lot about them that they have become one of those hyper-specific golf bag armies where you pull out whatever you want. Carthaginians are similar and your strange Yorkist infatuation which seems to be derived almost from late afternoon Bosworth alone.

These are observations not criticisms. I find it a challenge that my Mycenaeans cover so much historical ground with so little variation (and thank you Lorenzo for the new Beta lists although they have just cost me a lot of money as I will need to rebase or paint new almost all of my archers) while MRRs get two pages and special tactical advantages.

A pilum is just a heavy javelin, after all. I thought I'd throw that in just to get the hate going.

They're not quite that flexible but I do find that list vs Carthaginian to be a very good battle in Impetus. When you get down to list making the point cost per unit and making the mandatory legion structure minima you quickly run out of points.

And they don't have a lot of cavalry support options. Most of the Allies are too small to bother with unless you want a 3 command army, which is interesting but ultimately a very fragile option.

As for the "Yorkist Death Star", we shall see. Get a genuine scenario based campaign going and I'm a White Man all the way!!!

And yes, if MRR get line relief then Yorkists should get "ecky thump".

I still hear about the Yorkist phenomenum. I repeat if necessary: CP cannpt form LU with FP!!

stardakker says
"and thank you Lorenzo for the new Beta lists although they have just cost me a lot of money as I will need to rebase or paint new almost all of my archers)"

I will not rebase mine. If Archers are S, use them as T if you want to form the rear rank.

In general, there are armies we know more about and they get more details. Sometimes these details are not helpful in competitions, but this is beacuse competitions distort many things and must be taken for what they are: an additional occasion to play with different opponents/armies.

Back to MMR now using longer lines with legionaries, as Scipio did, could work better.

The Death Star was blown up a while back, Lorenzo.

It's still scary to a CL Turkoman army though. I have beaten it in the past but there was much ululation through the camps at the butcher's bill.

" If Archers are S, use them as T if you want to form the rear rank."

That's what I plan to do, Lorenzo but it looks odd to me.

AS GG knows, I am a fan of the MMRs. I've only used them twice but, having studied the period closely at uni, I found them very easy to use. I can't stand people who use triarii as assault troops though.

The legend of triarii as camp guards is overblown.

But nor should they be shock troops.

Flank guards, deliverers of the final blow, but most certainly not thrown away casually in the first assault nor ignored and left like women to mind the curtains and trinkets...

I've never thought of them as camp guards. Last red line of defence or dealers of the coup de grace, yes.

Veterans aren't stupid. They're bloody cunning just to last that long.

Triarri in my opinion are one of the most overrated troops in ancient rules. They should be 5 5 2 B 3 17 in my opinion. Their big benefit should be VD to keep the command in play.