One thing I really like from the FoG computer game is that it categorises armies and their historical enemies.
So if I pick Republican Roman for example, it won't try to match me up versus Vikings. (it can be overridden of course but by default I'll get a historical matchup)

Is it something that might be added to the lists in future?
Yes we can all do the research but if it's there in black and white we won't need to - just an idea.

Yes please.

This is a nice feature of the DBA lists. It shows Allies and Enemies (not 100% certain of accuracy but still useful) for each army listed.

Older versions also had  6 army "campaign" groupings for different historical periods.  e.g Crisis of third century or 1066.

Probably quite a lot of work involved though.

It is something I would really like to add to the army lists, but the sheer amount of work involved is daunting.  If we could recruit enough people to each take a smaller section then I think it is more feasible.

The DBMM and DBA lists have a list of enemies which is helpful, unfortunately their lists don't always match our lists in terms of era/scope.

Richard

It is a heck of a lot of work, but is also a nice idea. I'd certainly help out but only as part of a team 

Glad to help out if needed.

Just to give an indication of the scale of the task, I have so far worked through the 3 Chariot list sets and the first 3 Classical list sets (i.e. about 1/6 of the list sets) and have come up with 1,000 entries.

It is sometimes more arbitrary than you might expect.  I have found plenty of examples of armies that may have fought each other but we have no details of this in the historical record.  An example is the Huns and some of the Germanic tribes.  We know they followed Attila at Catalaunian Fields, but how did they get incorporated into the Hunnic Empire.  Did they fight or did they just submit? Should they be included or not?

Proof-reading the list will be a bit of a nightmare... 

Richard

Its a BIG job to be sure and the more informed persons - particularly in niche areas - on the bus the better.  Would it be worth labelling enemies as A (actual) and P (potential). An example of P being Rome and China where one might construct a method, motive and opportunity?

Quote from: Hunter on June 28, 2020, 08:37:31 AM
Its a BIG job to be sure and the more informed persons - particularly in niche areas - on the bus the better.  Would it be worth labelling enemies as A (actual) and P (potential). An example of P being Rome and China where one might construct a method, motive and opportunity?

I am not even going into the area of potential enemies.  Any army is a potential enemy by that logic.  Bantu Tribes vs Early Carthage (assuming the Phoenicians sailed around Africa) anyone?

An example of the complexity of the topic is Achaemenid Persian and Cyrene.  The king of Cyrene actually supported the Persian invasion of Egypt.  He was then overthrown and his wife asked the Persians to send an army.  So while the invasion of Egypt was by the Royal Army, the invasion of Cyrene was by a Satrapal army.  Cyrene then became the satrapy of Libya.  It is assumed that Cyrene regained its independence when the Egyptians revolted against Persian rule.  There is no evidence of the Persians invading Cyrene after they recaptured Egypt (a Later Achaemenid Persian army), all we no for sure is that when Alexander arrived there were no Persians left in Cyrene and that Cyrene maintained its independence until acquired by Ptolemy.

This is why army lists are fun!

Richard

How about a less ambitious approach.

Perhaps picking some of the obvious classics (Sumer, Ancient Egypt, Alexandrian, Various Romans, Carthage and so on). Maybe we could produce a paragraph or two for some of these; with some idea of the evidence. Maybe a dozen or two across all of the lists.

Alternatively, pick on some of the classic campaigns - Alexander, Successors, 2nd Punic war, Atilla, Justinian revival, Arab Conquest, Emergence of the Swiss  etc and list the combatants (real or adjacent) for those. I Can see potential for things like - Carthage Vs Rome with the main combatants allied with and/or fighting - Spanish, Numidians, Ligurians, Gauls, Celtiberians etc; with the Romans adding Hellenistic states - sort of a domino effect(?).

Would really help people new to period.

Perhaps a good approach would be an excel cross table with shading where they were opponents and allies.
it would stop needing to amend every list and act as a receptacle for all the data.
Spolit into time periods so not too heavy.

So something like this with a for ally E for enemy and x for neither. Maybe in colours of Green, Red, Grey

    A B C D
A  -  a a E
B  a  - x E
C  a x  - x
B  E x. x -

I've found the maps on this website very useful for sort of mentally registering opposing forces in an easily visible way:
https://www.worldhistorymaps.info/maps.html

so perhaps it could be the basis of something similar for MeG army lists.

 

New rule - Anyone who wants to make a suggestion on how to go about compiling this list of historical enemies has to do an entire list set first before they make their suggestion.  I don't want to be told how to do this sort of thing by people who just sit on the sideline and don't get stuck in.

My thanks to Gower and Nik Gaukroger for actually helping out.  Any other volunteers welcome!

Richard Jeffrey-Cook

Quote from: sultanbev on June 28, 2020, 10:43:10 PM
I've found the maps on this website very useful for sort of mentally registering opposing forces in an easily visible way:
https://www.worldhistorymaps.info/maps.html

so perhaps it could be the basis of something similar for MeG army lists.

These maps are an excellent resource.

Sorry if this thread has upset somebody.

I am brand new to MeG and this area is for player discussion. So, I thought we were having a discussion about this concept. I don't get the impression that there is any pressure to get people to do something. BTW the language of my last post was "we" not "x person".

Happy to help - but would need guidance; as I said, brand new; have not played a proper game yet.

Mark

Quote from: getback on June 29, 2020, 08:29:38 AM
Sorry if this thread has upset somebody.

I am brand new to MeG and this area is for player discussion. So, I thought we were having a discussion about this concept. I don't get the impression that there is any pressure to get people to do something. BTW the language of my last post was "we" not "x person".

Happy to help - but would need guidance; as I said, brand new; have not played a proper game yet.

Mark

Mark,

Please be reassured I was not getting upset with you, sorry if it came across this way.

I should explain that I edited the army lists which have taken four years to get to the position that they are in now.  I have actually made good progress and hope to publish the first lists of historical enemies for the Chariot period army lists within the next couple of weeks.  I intend to initially publish them in a similar fashion to the master index as a PDF with an entry for each army and a list of its historical enemies.  I am sure that this will provide an opportunity for plenty of debate and discussion.

Regards

Richard Jeffrey-Cook