Army characteristic, must invade.
what about :
Alexandrian Macedonian
Arab Conquest
Vikings
Mongols
Later replublcan Roman
Hunnics
Early crusaders
Should they not have the same characteristic ?
******
Moderator comment - separated from potential changes topic to keep things as tidy as possible for easier reference :)
My thoughts:
Alexandrian Macedonian - runs from the time of Philip II who I am pretty sure had to deal with invasions of Macedonia, plus it covers the army left at home by Alexander when he went east.
Arab Conquest - suspect you mean the Early Arab Conquest (3101) and in which case possibly as long as you treat the Ridda Wars as invasions and not putting down dissent.
Vikings - probably but not the Normans options I think.
Mongols - which Mongol list? Suspect you mean Mongol Conquest. Complex is the answer to that one as the list covers an ever expanding territory rules by the Mongols and there were rebellions within that and, IIRC, some invasions by rump Chinese and similar polities. However, in favour of Must Invade is that the Mongol Conquest only has Plains as a territory type.
Later Republican Roman - wouldn't the various civil wars argue against it plus, I think the back end of the Cimbrian War was still fighting off invaders from Roman controlled territory.
Hunnic - No. There was an invasion of Hunnic controlled territory by the Roman empire in the east at one point for example, and the fighting after Attila's death would probably count as defending.
Early Crusaders - if you mean the 1st Crusade it is one of those who must invade. Or do you mean one of the others? Seventh Crusade would be a candidate I suppose, but it spent so long actually in Egypt it could be debatable.
Hello,
Quote from: nikgaukroger on October 23, 2023, 09:37:41 PM
Mongols - which Mongol list? Suspect you mean Mongol Conquest. Complex is the answer to that one as the list covers an ever expanding territory rules by the Mongols and there were rebellions within that and, IIRC, some invasions by rump Chinese and similar polities.
Rebellions certainly, but Genghis Khan and his generals probably dealt with them in line with their usual ruthlessness, so why not. As for Chinese invasions, that is indeed a thornier issue.
Quote from: nikgaukroger on October 23, 2023, 09:37:41 PM
However, in favour of Must Invade is that the Mongol Conquest only has Plains as a territory type.
Plains is certainly the only territory they should have, but I I am not certain of why only having one territory (or only having Plains, which is different) should weigh on the issue. What is you reasoning behind this, Nik ?
Best,
Antoine
Quote from: Princeps on October 26, 2023, 07:01:24 AM
Quote from: nikgaukroger on October 23, 2023, 09:37:41 PM
However, in favour of Must Invade is that the Mongol Conquest only has Plains as a territory type.
Plains is certainly the only territory they should have, but I I am not certain of why only having one territory (or only having Plains, which is different) should weigh on the issue. What is you reasoning behind this, Nik ?
Best,
Antoine
I don't think Plains is the only territory they could have but it is more complicated to have different territories at different times - but some other lists do have variable territory.
The idea that only plains may support Must Invade is that Plains would mainly represent the steppe areas where the Mongols would be the invader - it is, IMO, a bit of a weak argument but wanted to mention it.
Thank you for the explanation. I would agree with you it is not a very compelling one :D
Best,
Antoine
There is a definite subjective element to this list.
I think there is a strong argument that Alexandrian Macedonian must invade if Alexander is present and the army is from 334 BCE.
I think there is a good argument that Viking must invade if you don't take the Norman options. An invasion of Viking territory would be the Leidang list.
I think there is a good argument for Early Arab Conquest.
I think there is a good argument for Mongol Conquest if it uses any allies or contingents.
I think there is an argument for 7th Crusade in Egypt. My view is they never settled down to rule what they had. They were defeated by troops defending Egypt, not troops invading territory they ruled.
I would reject Later Republican Roman as there were plenty of invasions of Roman controlled territory.
Hunnic is a close call. I would reject Hunnic as there was an invasion of Hunnic territory by the Eastern Romans and with the disintegration of the Empire after Atilla's death you get the Gepids and others grabbing what they can. Any real Hunnic general should choose to invade if they win the dice roll!
Civil wars (i.e. where opponents are both the same army list) can still result in the must invade characteristic, as if both armies have the characteristic then you roll as normal.
Richard
Xenophon's Greeks?
Regards
Matt
Quote from: lionheartrjc on October 26, 2023, 10:00:48 AM
I think there is an argument for 7th Crusade in Egypt. My view is they never settled down to rule what they had. They were defeated by troops defending Egypt, not troops invading territory they ruled.
Having a 7th Crusade army I'd be happy with this.
Quote from: lionheartrjc on October 26, 2023, 10:00:48 AM
There is a definite subjective element to this list.
I think there is a strong argument that Alexandrian Macedonian must invade if Alexander is present and the army is from 334 BCE.
I think there is a good argument that Viking must invade if you don't take the Norman options. An invasion of Viking territory would be the Leidang list.
I think there is a good argument for Early Arab Conquest.
I think there is a good argument for Mongol Conquest if it uses any allies or contingents.
I think there is an argument for 7th Crusade in Egypt. My view is they never settled down to rule what they had. They were defeated by troops defending Egypt, not troops invading territory they ruled.
I would reject Later Republican Roman as there were plenty of invasions of Roman controlled territory.
Hunnic is a close call. I would reject Hunnic as there was an invasion of Hunnic territory by the Eastern Romans and with the disintegration of the Empire after Atilla's death you get the Gepids and others grabbing what they can. Any real Hunnic general should choose to invade if they win the dice roll!
Civil wars (i.e. where opponents are both the same army list) can still result in the must invade characteristic, as if both armies have the characteristic then you roll as normal.
Richard
Others lists i think would fit:
Sea peoples
Galatians
Galatians were invaded by the Romans post Magnesia and I believe at other times.
Quote from: nikgaukroger on October 26, 2023, 11:54:31 AM
Galatians were invaded by the Romans post Magnesia and I believe at other times.
Yes, Pontus invaded on at least one occasion.
Sea Peoples however does seem a logical choice for a must invade characteristic.