The scoring system is as follows:

If you win the game (a triumph) you score 15 pts.
Your opponent will score 1pt for each SuG and 2 pts for each TuG, to a maximum of 10 pts.

If neither player gets a triumph, both score 1 pts for each SUG and 2 pts for each TuG, to a maximum of 10 pts, but add a further 2 points for not losing.

In the rare case of a mutual break at the same time, both sides score 12 points.

The scoring system is in the free introduction to MeG PDF.

Well done to Ian and Ian for organising a great event. 
Thank you to my opponents, Jason, Dave and Dave. Particular apologies to Jason for my outrageous luck in the first game where I had great cards and great dice - a difficult combination to face...
In the final game I lost 6 TUGs and had a 7th TuG one wound from breaking (my army would have broken!) before I finally won. Chandragupta Maurya would have been proud!

Richard

Treat the flank charge as if it is fighting a single rank of pike.  So a single rank cancels mounted CL, LSp, SSp and DC.

Seems very clear to me.

Quote from: Manzikert on May 15, 2026, 06:54:47 PMBut since we seem to have a consensus that there is an issue, what do you guys think of this as a fix:

Give all cavalry, camelry and chariots a native +1 charge claim against infantry in the open. But devastating charge on cavalry no longer gives a bonus when charging infantry, though it still grants shatter. This would give a bit of a boost to most 'medium cavalry' without also boosting cavalry that already have 3+ charge claims.

I do see a couple of issues. It doesn't give any net benefit to SSp, DC cavalry but it does improve ranged cavalry who don't need it.

For the ranged cavalry we could say this claim is lost if the cavalry takes a skirmish/run away action (ranged cavalry get's the bonus but doesn't get to benefit from it and from shooting) or alternatively cavalry with a ranged weapon (not including charge-only) doesn't get the bonus; though that's a bit complicated to add to the rules.

I am not sure what you think the issue is.  To me it is that cavalry who cannot skirmish/run away but don't have CL, LSp or SSp+DC are too expensive in points compared to cavalry who can.  I see this as a points issue, not a rules issue.

Quote from: Kokor Hekkus on May 13, 2026, 05:28:50 PMAde,

The list numbers/dates below are not correct, can you please update

Regional Support & Other Relevant Forces
3308 Komnenan Byzantine (1081–1204 CE)
3408 Capetian French (987–1328 CE)

Komnenan Byzantine is 5201.  Capetian French I assume is 5501 (to 1149 CE) and 5502 (from 1150 CE).   The Holy Roman Empire should be 5608 (Imperial German) I would suggest.'
The relevant Reconquista lists are 5805 Almoravid; 5807 Almohad; 5804 Feudal Castile and Leon; 5801 Early Catalan and Aragon; 5809 Early Crown of Aragon; 5806 Feudal Portuguese; 5810 Medieval Portuguese; 5812 Medieval Granadine; 5802 Taifa Andalusian and 5808 Taifa of Murcia.

Quote from: Manzikert on May 12, 2026, 10:27:43 PMI agree with badhabum that there's a balance issue, but I think it's in the other direction. The Javelin armed cavalry is worth the cost, it's the melee cavalry that are a bit underpowered.

While the 'Jav-Cav' are pretty expensive relative to their combat claims; they make up for it with a whole bunch of battlefield utility which make them worth it. I wouldn't take a whole army of them, but in small numbers they're absolutely worth the price. The melee cavalry don't have any of that utility, it's just a somewhat overpriced unit with lackluster combat claims.

In fact I'd go so far as to say thats the case for all of what I'd loosely call 'medium cavalry' (basically any cavalry with no ranged weapon, 0-2 charge claims, and 0-1 melee claims). Too expensive for their combat potential and without some other utility to make up for it. Not that I want to oversell it, they aren't totally worthless, just low enough down on the power curve to be worth improving in some way.

I agree it is that way round.

Quote from: Princeps on May 11, 2026, 08:16:40 PM

Quote from: lionheartrjc on May 11, 2026, 02:58:04 PMNo points system is perfect.

I can remember quite many people who argued to me that points alone balanced the system, it is refreshing to see such a radical departure.


As for the army as a whole, I believe that having units able to skirmish/run away to slow down potentially multiples UGs at low cost is exactly the kind of force multiplier that can allow an army to function (e. g. attack with a schwerpunkt and still not be flanked to quickly, slow down the enemy schwerpunkt while my massive tribal army redeploys, etc. etc.).

Therefore, why would it be a "worry over an individual unit" ? It affects the way the army functions a whole, it is not an insignificant matter.

Best,
Antoine

Most armies that have short spear only cavalry do not have that many.  A massive tribal army trying to re-deploy will probably take too long for the cavalry to hold up the enemy army.

We may have a solution for 2028 (and no, I'm not going to provide details at the moment).

Richard

Quote from: badhabum on May 11, 2026, 10:21:22 AMThank you

Harmonise based on CL or DC ?

There aren't that many examples in the lists.  I am looking at either Charge Only or dropping the missile weapon altogether for CL/DC cavalry for most.  One or two might lose the CL/DC and become SSp instead.

Richard

I agree that the Unskilled Javelin additional cost of 5 points is a significant benefit for the cost.  No points system is perfect.

Different armies have different strengths and weaknesses. It is about using an army effectively as a whole, not worrying over individual units.

No, the points cost of longbows is based upon the entire UG getting stakes.

Elements contacted on a flank or rear cannot align. 

Quote from: badhabum on April 23, 2026, 04:48:49 PMIf the generals from an army may be " any" and the CIC is chosen as professionnal, the internal allies should be professionnals as well or my they be "instinctive"

They can be either unless the notes specifically state differently (they do in one or two armies).

Yes

No, that rule only applies to charges.

Main list refers to the army list from which the allied contingent was drawn.  It may be badly worded, but that is what it means.

Richard