See here (https://mortem-et-gloriam.co.uk/smf/index.php?topic=3779.0).
Change "At the end of any turn in which another friendly UG is closer to enemy rear table edge than the scythed chariots, the scythed chariot unit is withdrawn and removed from the table."
Players have been using Scythed Chariots as mobile reserves. Scythed chariots always led an attack.
Note: Withdrawn UGs do not cause KaB tests.
I read a few account from Mithridate wars.
At amnias river the war chariot were used for a flank attack.
It took place well after the front lines clashed
Source:
https://www.livius.org/sources/content/appian/appian-the-mithridatic-wars/appian-the-mithridatic-wars-4/
At cheronee they were used to delay the enemy and cover the retreat.
Source wrg : armies and ennemies of imperial Rome page 45.
It doesn't click with the always front line, I think.
At Chaeronea (86 BCE), the Romans opened the battle attacking the Pontic right flank which retreated. In response, the Pontic chariots charged against the Roman centre. I don't see that as incompatible with the new rule.
The idea in the Armies and Enemies of Imperial Rome that the chariots "covered the retreat" of the Pontic forces doesn't seem to me to be justified. The chariots attacked to try and take pressure off the Pontic forces that were retreating.
At the Battle of the River Amnias (89 BCE), the battle started with the Pontic forces attacking the Bithynians. They (twice) repelled the attack of Neooptolemus, but then Archelaus attacked with the scythed chariots leading against the flank of Neoptolemus.
I accept in the case of the River Amnias, a bit of geographical distortion might be required. However the fundamental point is that the chariots led the attack.
In any case, the rule is to prevent complete misuse of scythed chariots in tournament games by introducing a simple, easily played, restriction.
To have them disappear if they are not the most front line of the whole table is harsh.
If any cav on the wings tempt a swing movement on a wing the chariot disappear because some units are ahead of them.
I am surprised that such a finicky approach won't be taken for a notoriously ineffective troop type. These boys almost never see the table anyway except as color or as a joke. Why make them almost impossible to field?
Quote from: AntiokosIII on September 02, 2025, 06:43:41 AMI am surprised that such a finicky approach won't be taken for a notoriously ineffective troop type. These boys almost never see the table anyway except as color or as a joke. Why make them almost impossible to field?
Actually, they are being increasingly taken as a mobile reserve. Against weakened UGs they can be quite effective, are relatively cheap and even if broken can prevent the enemy UG from returning to the fight in time.
As an alternative, how about a requirement to complete a full move towards an enemy unit. To balance points, this could be a free move?
Then one may ask how to use unarmed driven civilians ( expendables ) ? can those be used as rear reserve ( driven ? ) List 4502
Stampeding herd ?
Not affected by this proposal as it only applies to Scythed Chariots (quite deliberately).
Yes but those units are not always used as they should and can also serve a mobile reserves :-) which is how twice players did use them vs me .
I guess an eternal discussion :)
I believe the civilian screen was a siege thing not a battle thing and so they probably should be removed from the lists anyway.
Richard found (IIRC) evidence of cattle herds used in different ways (ambush for one, again IIRC) and that is why they are not included. I'm sure he can elaborate.
Civilians screens will probably become a scenario rule. As Nik indicated, they seem to be mainly a siege thing.
Cattle (and similar) herds, generally, but not exclusively, appear to have been used from ambush (a gorge or somewhere similar where they are hidden out of site). They are tribal (unliked Scythed chariots that are formed) so more difficult to manoeuvre.
Again, they probably could be a scenario rule and not for tournaments.
My feeling is : realism vs playability / History vs Game
That's the final choice but whatever the choice the same principle must then be applied troughout the rules and proposed changes
Fall back is the same
LS the same
There must be constitency in the choices
Quote from: Rino on September 01, 2025, 02:50:16 PMTo have them disappear if they are not the most front line of the whole table is harsh.
If any cav on the wings tempt a swing movement on a wing the chariot disappear because some units are ahead of them.
I agree that must be the most forward unit on the table is harsh: How about the most forward unit within 8BW?
I would have preferred in their sector ( flank, centre ) but what about cheesy situations.
Flaming pigs, stampeding cattles should be to the front as well but do seem to be protected by Gaia
So should we go historical or keep fun and playability ?
I have an alternative suggestion that may achieve the desired effect. What if scythed chariots (and maybe expendables in general) have to be attached to a TuG at the start of the game. From there they operate like a skirmisher being dragged by the other unit. This way they can't be held in reserve unless the player is willing to commit another unit to doing the same job.
Or mandate a CAB test on any unit that has a "friendly" scythed chariot behind it.
Quote from: Manzikert on September 17, 2025, 05:29:19 AMI have an alternative suggestion that may achieve the desired effect. What if scythed chariots (and maybe expendables in general) have to be attached to a TuG at the start of the game. From there they operate like a skirmisher being dragged by the other unit. This way they can't be held in reserve unless the player is willing to commit another unit to doing the same job.
But scythed chariots were never held in reserve. They always led an attack.
As indicated elsewhere, they weren't always the first into the attack but all the other suggestions we looked at had loopholes that competition players would exploit. The proposed amendment has the virtue of simplicity.
The other possibility would be "At the end of any turn in which another friendly UG is closer to enemy rear table edge than the scythed chariots and within 10 BW, the scythed chariot unit is withdrawn and removed from the table."
Quote from: lionheartrjc on September 17, 2025, 10:33:52 AMQuote from: Manzikert on September 17, 2025, 05:29:19 AMI have an alternative suggestion that may achieve the desired effect. What if scythed chariots (and maybe expendables in general) have to be attached to a TuG at the start of the game. From there they operate like a skirmisher being dragged by the other unit. This way they can't be held in reserve unless the player is willing to commit another unit to doing the same job.
But scythed chariots were never held in reserve. They always led an attack.
As indicated elsewhere, they weren't always the first into the attack but all the other suggestions we looked at had loopholes that competition players would exploit. The proposed amendment has the virtue of simplicity.
The other possibility would be "At the end of any turn in which another friendly UG is closer to enemy rear table edge than the scythed chariots and within 10 BW, the scythed chariot unit is withdrawn and removed from the table."
This is much better
Another suggestion. If a TuG breaks within X base units of a scythed chariot (and again maybe extend to all expendables) they're picked up. X could be the whole table if you want to force scythed chariots to be aggressive, or limit it to 10 or so if you want it to only apply to their portion of the battlefield.
Quote from: Manzikert on September 17, 2025, 04:51:33 PMAnother suggestion. If a TuG breaks within X base units of a scythed chariot (and again maybe extend to all expendables) they're picked up. X could be the whole table if you want to force scythed chariots to be aggressive, or limit it to 10 or so if you want it to only apply to their portion of the battlefield.
We want the scythed chariots to lead the attack. This doesn't really do that.
Richard
Quote from: lionheartrjc on September 17, 2025, 04:59:34 PMQuote from: Manzikert on September 17, 2025, 04:51:33 PMAnother suggestion. If a TuG breaks within X base units of a scythed chariot (and again maybe extend to all expendables) they're picked up. X could be the whole table if you want to force scythed chariots to be aggressive, or limit it to 10 or so if you want it to only apply to their portion of the battlefield.
We want the scythed chariots to lead the attack. This doesn't really do that.
Richard
It means that a Scythed chariot can't be held in reserve since they have to be committed before a TuG is lost. And any significant delay in using them risks losing them altogether.
I suppose you could just cut out all the complexity and say 'expendables are removed at the end of the 2nd turn'. That's it, double move them forward and charge because they're gone regardless.
Quote from: Manzikert on September 18, 2025, 06:53:10 AMIt means that a Scythed chariot can't be held in reserve
Which they weren't.
Quote from: nikgaukroger on September 18, 2025, 07:42:07 AMQuote from: Manzikert on September 18, 2025, 06:53:10 AMIt means that a Scythed chariot can't be held in reserve
Which they weren't.
That was the intention of the proposal. They can't be held in reserve because they're gone as soon as you lose a TuG.
I vote against that change with the backing of the amnias river battle as explained in page 1.
(https://i.postimg.cc/wtcKw2YR/Screenshot-20250919-201245-com-android-chrome-Chrome-Tabbed-Activity.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/wtcKw2YR)
(https://i.postimg.cc/pydNBKGy/Screenshot-20250919-201350-com-android-chrome-Chrome-Tabbed-Activity.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/pydNBKGy)
Seems that Cyrus the great is holding scythe chariot in reserve as well
Source xenophon - cyropaedia
The Battle of Thymbra. Don't agree that the account suggests that the chariots were held in reserve. Can make the argument that the camels were sent forward first - perhaps more than 10BW away.
We are still in a situation where we do not want scythed chariots to be used as some sort of mobile reserve which is what is happening.
Richard
What about 4501 Goryeo Korean Battle Chariot
Quote from: lionheartrjc on September 20, 2025, 07:01:06 AMThe Battle of Thymbra. Don't agree that the account suggests that the chariots were held in reserve. Can make the argument that the camels were sent forward first - perhaps more than 10BW away.
We are still in a situation where we do not want scythed chariots to be used as some sort of mobile reserve which is what is happening.
Richard
Reading the xenophon account
1) Cyrus sent the cav
2) Cyrus sent the infantry
3) Cyrus sent the camel
4) Cyrus sent the scythed chariot
In that order.
If you want to represent them this way, take them as Persian chariots, not as the Expendables.
Quote from: Rino on September 20, 2025, 10:47:54 PMReading the xenophon account
1) Cyrus sent the cav
2) Cyrus sent the infantry
3) Cyrus sent the camel
4) Cyrus sent the scythed chariot
In that order.
No.
1) Cyrus and his cavalry went first
2) Camels advanced on the other flank, but had a disruptive effect at a great distance before reaching contact.
3a) Cyrus' infantry advance
3b) Artagerses and his "men" fell upon the enemy and
at the same moment the chariots charged on left and right.
(we can't tell the order of 3a and 3b)
4) Artagerses cavalry follow up the chariots.
Quote from: LawrenceG on September 23, 2025, 10:13:16 AMQuote from: Rino on September 20, 2025, 10:47:54 PMReading the xenophon account
1) Cyrus sent the cav
2) Cyrus sent the infantry
3) Cyrus sent the camel
4) Cyrus sent the scythed chariot
In that order.
No.
1) Cyrus and his cavalry went first
2) Camels advanced on the other flank, but had a disruptive effect at a great distance before reaching contact.
3a) Cyrus' infantry advance
3b) Artagerses and his "men" fell upon the enemy and at the same moment the chariots charged on left and right.
(we can't tell the order of 3a and 3b)
4) Artagerses cavalry follow up the chariots.
= scythed chariot not front line
"At the end of any turn in which another friendly UG is closer to enemy rear table edge than the scythed chariots, the scythed chariot unit is withdrawn and removed from the table."
Makes things complicated, as the player cannot even use sugs to outflank or simply screen other parts of the batle line, before the chariots advance. thus the chariots must move forwards first and if the sugs doublemove the chariots might get eliminated.
If the command with the chariots cannot advance due to cards then the whole army cannot advance.
If you want to compel the player to put the chariots forward have the chariots deploy forward 4 MU or 5 MU from the enemy deployment line.
i understand the aim is to avoid using them as reserve. It is more historical, or perhaps gives more the feeling of historical situations.
But then why allow other unhistorical deployments? one can then go to a more Reg-like deployement restriction as a whole.
but that is me ranting.
Also this colorful unit will dissapear, and sadly so as it is a fun type of unit.
Perhaps bolster them to average, unprotected, tribal instead of making a new rule.
it then becomes more combat effective at impact, less so at melee, it will mostly go forwards and will be vunerable to shooting.
Quote from: Jilu on September 24, 2025, 07:31:15 AMIf you want to compel the player to put the chariots forward have the chariots deploy forward 4 MU or 5 MU from the enemy deployment line.
i understand the aim is to avoid using them as reserve.
Tested the idea of deploying the chariots forward. Just became an effective technique to prevent the enemy double-moving forward. Also didn't prevent the chariots being wheeled round and moved to a reserve position. Created many more issues than it solved.
Do you think they will disappear as they will not be worth the points value, or because the restriction makes the unusable?
There was this alternative option you mentioned:
QuoteThe other possibility would be "At the end of any turn in which another friendly UG is closer to enemy rear table edge than the scythed chariots and within 10 BW, the scythed chariot unit is withdrawn and removed from the table."
Would mean that it does not restrict a whole battleline.
Quote from: lionheartrjc on September 24, 2025, 07:49:04 AMDo you think they will disappear as they will not be worth the points value, or because the restriction makes the unusable?
I think both reasons will see them unused
Quote from: nikgaukroger on September 24, 2025, 08:33:29 AMThere was this alternative option you mentioned:
QuoteThe other possibility would be "At the end of any turn in which another friendly UG is closer to enemy rear table edge than the scythed chariots and within 10 BW, the scythed chariot unit is withdrawn and removed from the table."
Would mean that it does not restrict a whole battleline.
This is the current proposed amendment.
Of course it is - I confused myself somehow :o
Ok, someone take pity on me as mentally impaired. Someone found a tabletop use for a nearly useless but colorful troop type, and that's...bad.Could you clarify for us idiots? I sincerely doubt that scythed chariots or indeed expendabes of any sort have turned many games around.The only use I ever found for them was using a cattle stampede to slow down enemy foot in the center while my Timurids pushed on the flanks with real troops. It bought perhaps 1-2 turns and did me little good.
Expendable units are in the game for the 'cool' factor.As a mobile reserve they are about as bad as it gets. Let's stop clutching our pearls over unhistorical play, which is very common, and let people play the game as they wish.