This list seems completely wrong, being as it is a list where all the opponents are loose troops and the infantry in this list is close.
There is no evidence they were any different in style of fighting than any of the opponents of the time including Syro-Hittites and Hebrews.
I think that the list has not been properly thought about and that it has just been basically transferred over from earlier rules such as WRG and DBM rules etc.
It needs changing as it is an anomaly.
Perhaps it was thought Phillistine foot was a bit better than other contemporary infantry (not unreasonable, IMHO) and thus should be close, and get 'shove' against other infantry, as well as be less vulnerable to mounted foes. I am no expert, but that explanation makes sense to me.
Quote from: AntiokosIII on December 09, 2019, 05:13:58 PM
Perhaps it was thought Phillistine foot was a bit better than other contemporary infantry (not unreasonable, IMHO) and thus should be close, and get 'shove' against other infantry, as well as be less vulnerable to mounted foes. I am no expert, but that explanation makes sense to me.
well then they could have been loose with shove....