EARLY ACHAEMENID PERSIANS (550-420 BC) Questions

How do you figure Tarty that the back unit should be charged as armed with nothing? That is not how large units of spear and pike work. Why would it be any different with missile fire weapons?

Sparabara 6 4 1 B Palvese and Short Bow A 24 points

Sparabara 6 4 0 B Short Bow A 18 x .75 = 13 points.

Grand total of 37 points.

Tarty wrote:Oh your not giving them bow that's right.

With bow and 0 impetus minus the 25% comes to 13 pts as per the list for the rear.
Don't know how you could get around not giving them a bow considering the other concession   hehe

Could be a can of worms ? don't know how a change like this could effect other armies.

I argued that point before ...but Cyrus pointed out that they don't shoot per se. It's something that would have to be considered I know. Anyway we'll see how it plays on the table to start with then take it from there.

Gaius Cassius wrote:How do you figure Tarty that the back unit should be charged as armed with nothing? That is not how large units of spear and pike work. Why would it be any different with missile fire weapons?

Sparabara 6 4 1 B Palvese and Short Bow A   24 points

Sparabara 6 4 0 B Short Bow A 18 x .75 = 13 points.

Grand total of 37 points.  

Because in all other cases of large units they contribute materially to the unit by adding a depth bonus of some sort, or have an additional function. Deep T do not, nor do they actually shoot Additionally the current entry does not point out a Shortbow for the front rank, just the pavais, so only one shot per LU = only one set of bows paid.

Paying for a second bow but not getting the benefit is not viable either. If they added dice to the firing that would justify it bit would also make the unit a machinegun, which it shouldnt be

I agree that if the rear rank doesn't shoot there is no cost for weaponand no weapon will be indicated (classed as T but with no weapon).
Anyway probably I would not make the 25% discount that is not a must. But before I wait for some additional test.

Yes, the 25% discount IS a must - it is applied in all other cases, why not this one? The problem with exceptions is they rapidly become general.

there are case were the discount is not applied (see Wars of the Roses). Let's see how it works.

The War of the Roses troops have the option to fight in one or two ranks - hence the reason you pay full price.  Sparabara etc do not

Of course the easiest solution is to do what GC suggested and keep the points etc the same - less confusing and less amendments - so it simply reads as GC suggested

Byzantine Kataphraktoi units are the only others I can find that are effected ( as Gaius has already alerted us to ) ...don't get many of them though. They are also fall under the ' can create ' banner.

Reminds me the 'possible' addition of some subject foot is a good idea Cyrus I've got some fabulous  satrapy figures that just don't fit in anywhere ....subjects would fix the problem.

FL Mv 6 VBU 4 I 1 VD1 Disc C 9pts

This would be my pick ...could be a stretch to call subjects FPs perhaps ? could have an either or option.

I have some beautiful Kushites that I would love to use - actually I already do as I use them as proxies for Peltasts in the current list. Jim and I tried to get a Satrap list together to represent troops that fought in the many civil wars or out in the borderlands but we sort of got mired in trying to interpret the slim historical evidence and ground to a halt

well Impetus 2 can include some (not many, I would say 6 to lists, that can be alternative and official lists to some already released in the supplements.

No need - I'm sure we can iron the bits out when we get the time

So we have a large unit of Sparabara with 24 points for the front rank and 9 points (?) for the back rank. Total 33 points. That seems a fair price for what you get.

Still a bit weak against hoplite infantry but with some staying power for missile fire and very strong against cavalry. I like this because it creates another very different unit type in Impetus. The early Persian army will feel different from other army lists.

32 pts - the rear rank round down

We played a game last night with the new combination for Sparabara.
Couple of things came up sustainable shooting was a big improvement ...this was the goal and job done here I think.

The big one for us was the melee side for these guys still and their ability to go on the offensive....doesn't quiet feel right. ( historically )

To put the emphasis back onto their shooting strength and the way they fought reducing their Impetus to 0 might rebalance things ?

Immortals would keep their Impetus of 1 however.

I dont think that will work - they need Impetus 1. Historically they didnt stand around waiting - for example they attacked at Plataea, which they would have been unable to do with I 0, and there are a number of reports in the Cyropaedia of them attacking too. Taking the I value will throw the baby out with the bathwater

These guys were not contact troops they planted their shields and let loose mostly ( the large cumbersome shield supports that ) Plataea was an advance with cavalry support....but the damage was done with shooting.

Problem is in our last game for example we had them attacking like large hoplite units that could shoot ..... not at all how they operated. Should be a defensive formation really.

Anyway something that should be considered I think to encourage historical tactics.

The shooting is an improvement though and certainly a step in the right direction for them.

I have to disagree - and in fact the stats on Spara have always included impetus, even under beta. Yes they could set up their Spara wall, but they also could advance to contact and fight. The Spara is a defensive shield but not designed for melee -but the historical record has then sortieing out to attack opponents - if you don't have impetus you can't do that. There is a balance to strike - but anyone trying to use them as hoplites that shoot will lose

Put it another way, if you take the impetus off them they may as well just be VBU4 archers and forget about the depth

Yes they have always had Impetus.... there's not much point having a non missile unit without it. Their loss of missile capability has left them with contact as their only choice often. ( something that has never sat well with me )

If they are changed to a T however they don't need impetus and the burden of making contact is up to their opponent.....plenty of fire power there to ensure they keep coming on

The depth makes them no pushover once they are in melee either unlike single T units....very much a different kettle of fish.

Sorry Tarty but you really need to think that through - Firstly they ARE and have always been a T unit - there is no change suggested there. Secondly a VBU4 deep T unit is almost as useless in melee as a single depth one - almost, if it takes a hit it will still implode with a loss 50% of the time with the opponent almost always following up and finishing the job. On occasion of course Ahura Mazda smiles on you..............Remember you dont get any advantage as T troops in melee - no depth bonus

Maybe our problem is we see these troops differently - you see them as wholly defensive, I see them as having some offensive capability. I think my version is more historically correct. I'd also add Lorenzo also has that view, just to a different degree/ My worry is that we had seemed to reach a consensus and Lorenzo was prepared to accept, and now you are proposing a totally new proposal that radically changes the capability of these core units

The other problem with not giving them impetus is that they cannot force S and other troop types out of the way as they advance.

VBU4 units on the face of it are not very formidable in melee. Yes, they can sometimes win a melee but they usually lose and sometimes with big effects. So I am a bit surprised at Tarty`s concern about people using Spara too aggressively.

Yes I do see them historically as defensive T units pretty much your right. Head high wicker shield isn't  particularly handy on the attack

I'm happy to accept I=1 on the front unit no problem certainly gives them more capability that's for sure and as someone with a EAP army you won't hear another peep from me ...... 1pt well spent.

Just brought up something that I thought needed airing. If Lorenzo as fine with it then all good

well I would like to give a try. No problem for them to have I=1 at the same time don't want them to be superior in melee to hoplites.
How about the cannot shoot and charge in the same round?

I can't see a justification - no other troops are similarly restricted, and they're never going to be superior to Hoplites. Given the current version and the proposed version fight exactly the same where is the problem?

"No other troops are similarly restricted."  Yes, but we are in a way creating a new troop type. Personally I don't see large Sparabara challenging Hoplites in melee. VBU 4 units, large or small, die fast in melee and Hoplites with two units of 5 are going to win the vast majority of melees with them. On the other hand, I don't see a problem saying that Sparabara can only move and shoot, not shoot and move (which gets at the idea of melee and shooting being not possible in the same turn.)

As an aside, the I see large T units are being more effective primarily against other missile fire troops and mounted units. Nothing in the proposed changes really effects the Hoplite/Sparabara contest.

Sorry GC we are not = large Ts already exist - what we were trying to do was fix an anomaly. Why can other missile armed troops shoot then move and other can? Creating new rules and restrictions is counter intuitive and also I would ask, if I cant use my missile weapon the same as everyone else, why should I pay for it?