Rather than removing ME I would prefer to see a restriction on the proportion of Sup/Exc legionaries allowed - eg no more than half  the bases.

Certainly in the player pool I am in, the most common Roman armies normally have greater than 50% legionaries sup/exc. Certainly the ones I take do.

Split off a digression on cost of Exceptionals. A valid topic, but not really part of this topic per se.

[quote'll chip in straight away to say that I think if Superior legionaries cannot have Melee Expert the interaction with catafracts goes wrong][/quote]

Ok but what about interaction with all other type of UGS ?

Quote from: SteveO on November 14, 2023, 10:16:22 PM
I agree with Robin - if it's not broken don't fix it. With the possible exception of the Praetorian Guard, which is likely over-rated for much of the Imperial period, I am not seeing implausible historical outcomes in games. Furthermore, competitions are not being dominated by successful Roman armies so I don't believe they are overpowered.

Are they dominated by successful Greek hoplites armies or gallic ones ?

QuoteAs for Exceptionals there is only Caesar's Xth that are both Exceptional and have ME (IIRC) - whilst it may be a bit of an exaggeration they do appear to have a reputation well above even other good legions and, as Jacques often says (well, a paraphrase anyway), we should have a bit of "fantasy"/leniency in lists for interest.
R

I fully agree when do we add some women on horses to the Trojan list ?

Quote from: badhabum on November 15, 2023, 07:55:01 PM

QuoteI'll chip in straight away to say that I think if Superior legionaries cannot have Melee Expert the interaction with catafracts goes wrong]

Ok but what about interaction with all other type of UGS ?

Well looking at what might be "the big 2" for wargamers.

For "barbarian foot" broadly no change and a bit of mitigation for the barbarians which is no issue.

Pikes I am quite undecided about. The more I have delved into this the less certain I am that we have a clear picture, at some point we're going to have to make one of those leaps of faith and make a call as to how we see it. At present I am suspicious of confident assertions as to which way it should go.

The problem I am finding is that unlike some other interactions the "big fights" all seem to have factors significantly affecting the outcome so working a probable desired outcome of a straight up fight is problematical IMO.Kynoskephalae and Pydna, for example, were both sorts of "meeting engagements" and at Magnesia the battle was essentially over before the Romans turned on the phalanx which then formed square and retreated. I wonder if Thermopylae is the nearest of the battle against the Hellenistics to a straight up fight? There the Romans pushed the Argyraspides back, but did have numbers on their side IIRC.

Quote from: badhabum on November 15, 2023, 07:56:51 PM

Quote from: SteveO on November 14, 2023, 10:16:22 PM
I agree with Robin - if it's not broken don't fix it. With the possible exception of the Praetorian Guard, which is likely over-rated for much of the Imperial period, I am not seeing implausible historical outcomes in games. Furthermore, competitions are not being dominated by successful Roman armies so I don't believe they are overpowered.

Are they dominated by successful Greek hoplites armies or gallic ones ?

I would suggest they are dominated by good players, I don't think any particular army or type of army dominates. We are blessed with a nice variety in the UK; we're lucky in that.

QuoteI wonder if Thermopylae is the nearest of the battle against the Hellenistics to a straight up fight? There the Romans pushed the Argyraspides back, but did have numbers on their side IIRC.

Last time I read about the Thermopylae, the romans were beaten by the Argyraspides and could not break them. But the pikemen were "outflanked" and then lost as every phalanx that was outflanked by nellies, cavalry, infantry ..

Is my memory wrong ?

Not quite correct.  The Romans were able to force the Agyraspides behind the rampart before the wall of sarissa proved impenetrable.  Then the Romans manage to outflank the Seleucid position and the Seleucid army broke.

At no point could the Agyraspides break the Romans.

Richard

Quote from: badhabum on November 16, 2023, 04:10:18 PM

QuoteI wonder if Thermopylae is the nearest of the battle against the Hellenistics to a straight up fight? There the Romans pushed the Argyraspides back, but did have numbers on their side IIRC.

Last time I read about the Thermopylae, the romans were beaten by the Argyraspides and could not break them. But the pikemen were "outflanked" and then lost as every phalanx that was outflanked by nellies, cavalry, infantry ..

Is my memory wrong ?

A quick check in Head has a hard fight pushing the phalanx back. He suggests the Argyraspides may have been in front of the wall if that is what is meant by "peltasts" - that is probably why they sprang to my mind.

BTW have you read this recent article on Pydna? https://www.academia.edu/76265133/Reconstructing_the_Battle_of_Pydna

Nice piece of work IMO.

Whilst we're here, and as I reread the section last night, Richard Taylor's "The Macedonian Phalanx: Equipment, organization and tactics from Philip and Alexander to the Roman conquest" has a good (IMO) chapter assessing the Hellenistic phalanx vs. the Roman legion.

Quote from: nikgaukroger on November 16, 2023, 05:47:01 PM

BTW have you read this recent article on Pydna? https://www.academia.edu/76265133/Reconstructing_the_Battle_of_Pydna

Nice piece of work IMO.

it is interesting read, sadly the phalanx was taken on the flanks so it does tell that perhaps it should not be able to turn bases to face ennemies in the flank. And that the Romans were better at deploying, so perhaps these Macedonian phalanxes were much more cumbersome, perhaps even to reflect this they should be in blocks of 12 bases.

There is merit I think in placing a restriction on the number of Melee Expert Legions in the Early Imperial Roman list that is similar to the allowance of Superior or Exceptional Tugs allowed in the Imperial Roman list but instead of cutting the number of Melee Expert Legions to 1/2 or fewer, allow 2/3 of the Legions in the EIR to be Melee Expert. I think the LRR being allowed all Melee Expert is perfectly reasonable, as indeed is having the MRR Legions as all optional Melee Expert to counter the fact they're close Legions.

Quote from: nikgaukroger on November 15, 2023, 08:33:36 PM

Quote from: badhabum on November 15, 2023, 07:56:51 PM

Quote from: SteveO on November 14, 2023, 10:16:22 PM
I agree with Robin - if it's not broken don't fix it. With the possible exception of the Praetorian Guard, which is likely over-rated for much of the Imperial period, I am not seeing implausible historical outcomes in games. Furthermore, competitions are not being dominated by successful Roman armies so I don't believe they are overpowered.

Are they dominated by successful Greek hoplites armies or gallic ones ?

I would suggest they are dominated by good players, I don't think any particular army or type of army dominates. We are blessed with a nice variety in the UK; we're lucky in that.

+1

We won't be making any changes in this regard.