We all know that some games are completely asymmetrical. Some armies are not being played because they do not stand a chanve especially vs the type of heavy armies usually played.

I tried "Lusitanians", "Incas" and wanted to test the "Canari" but due to latest changes might forget the Canari .

The incas were mostly maneable  thanks to their shooting, being drilled, some ME, guards units and LS Canari contingent that could hold vs mounted CL/DC at least a bit( that will be shelved )

The lusitanians was the most catastropgic test . Yes they are mE but even a basic CL does charge them in red if in open terrain .

I asked why those lusitanians could not have SP ( which they lack they have no impact weapons ), the answer was a question of "balance" . Well regularly faced with red dice opponents at impact it might be hard to find the game funny. Yellow has one less skull and skull is often shove or shatter . I tried to mitigate that by having terrain but you all know how it could go , I used DC mercenaries but no other spanish allies as I wanted to go full lusitanian .

IMO the simple answer is give the spears but that would resolve part of the lusitanian problem bot other armies.

I know Lusitanian all shoot javelins but 2 MU is easily avoided .

I know a paeonian army managed a good scoring but how many american or lusitanian armies do we meet ?

So I was wondering if a more general answer might be an army "defender" type caracteristic that wouldallow those armies to automatically defend and try for terrain . That does not mean you have to play defensively but you get some cover vs mounted opponents or heavy infantry opponents .

There are other possibilities such as as an army caracteristics have the terrain in the center area on 2/3/4/5 or have magnificent white and black dice but as there is know much discussion about amendments why not open the discussion

Finding a way to have more americans or lusitanian army types on table

This is an issue with non-historical match-ups.  None of these armies faced opponents with lancers.

For the Lusitanians, may be there is an argument for making them flexible? Being close is as good as short spear against mounted in the open (and counters shove against other close infantry).

Richard

Quote from: lionheartrjc on September 21, 2025, 01:02:46 PMThis is an issue with non-historical match-ups.  None of these armies faced opponents with lancers.

For the Lusitanians, may be there is an argument for making them flexible? Being close is as good as short spear against mounted in the open (and counters shove against other close infantry).

Richard

Must say that I am happy enough with the current classification and am happily painting up Lusitanians at the moment as it happens. A Lusitanian army can have a pleasing number of Celtiberians (internal and as allies) to provide Close troops (as they are Flexible) if you so wish (and you probably would in more open type themes I think).

If they were Flexible you go down the route where you ask why not the Iberians, or Thracians, or Dacians, or ... and I'm not sure that is a good thing.

Well, I suppose you could make flexible an optional upgrade for those that want it.

The question is, what armies are rock to these paper armies? IF there aren't any, they need a points reduction.

We do not know that much about the "lusitanians" even reading Weapons,Warriors & battles of ancient Iberia by Fernando Quesada Sanz does not provide many answers. Flexible might be the solution as it makes them more resilient vs mounted or heavy infantry in the open . Nik, one  other Spanish armies the celtiberian is "flexible" .I used the celtiberians to help but it does not really work vs the potential  historical opposition . What I want is to be able to field a lusitanian army . If it's to be regularly trashed there might be a problem . one of Fernando's book conclusion is that spanish armies were able to fight in close order, pitched battles. 3 spanish list, one exception .

QuoteIf they were Flexible you go down the route where you ask why not the Iberians,

the iberians could be flexible

Otherwise just SP would balance things . One I hear : it must be balance another timle it's : it must be historical . It's a game do not forget it

QuoteThis is an issue with non-historical match-ups.  None of these armies faced opponents with lancers

I know but why do you think they are so uncommon. Perhaps some balancing is needed

I'm gonna have to side with the cavalry on this one.

Assuming you both have melee expert the cavalry are 77% more expensive per base, it kind of feels like they deserve to win that fight. Especially when you consider all of the relative drawbacks. Can't go in terrain, forced charges, bad relative match-ups against a whole slew of categories. If they can't expect to win a fight in the open against light foot then what good are they?

If anything this just highlights that 'medium' cavalry (which I'll define as no ranged weapon, 2 charge claims, 0-1 melee claims) is a really lack luster unit category. It's 50% more expensive than a comparable infantry unit with a mixed bag of benefits and drawbacks which, IMO, net to a drawback.

Quote from: lionheartrjc on September 21, 2025, 01:02:46 PMThis is an issue with non-historical match-ups.  None of these armies faced opponents with lancers.

For the Lusitanians, may be there is an argument for making them flexible? Being close is as good as short spear against mounted in the open (and counters shove against other close infantry).

Richard

Having had a bit of a look at this I'd note that the Iberian infantry do seem to have been a bit vulnerable to Roman cavalry so I'm still comfortable by the current classification. Specifics for the Lusitanians is rather rare but I'd expect them to be close to the Iberians so am also comfortable with their current classification (their Experienced Javelins help when charged as against historical opponent cavalry they are going to be 2 x White dice in the charge phase against 1 x Green).

Quote from: LawrenceG on September 23, 2025, 09:54:26 AMThe question is, what armies are rock to these paper armies? IF there aren't any, they need a points reduction.

What kind of armies can Lusitanians beat(other than other similar armies)?

Not a proposal for this year - but I like the idea of certain armies that occupied mountainous terrain getting a trait that allowed them to select one additional area of rough terrain in the optional terrain phase unless the terrain is already Very Dense.  Regardless of whether they are defending or invading.

Quote from: LawrenceG on September 25, 2025, 10:57:15 AM

Quote from: LawrenceG on September 23, 2025, 09:54:26 AMThe question is, what armies are rock to these paper armies? IF there aren't any, they need a points reduction.

What kind of armies can Lusitanians beat(other than other similar armies)?

While I don't think there are any armies that Lusitanians hard counter (maybe an elephant heavy army), they are a perfectly competent army. Certainly on the higher end of the classical 'barbarian' armies by dint of their universal melee expert. 13 TuGs of competent melee infantry is a perfectly respectable build. They are at a type disadvantage against cavalry armies but that can be mitigated by terrain, numbers, the ability to take allies (Iberian impact weapon infantry), taking your own cav to run interreference, and clever play. (It's pretty game-ist, but something I've done is put an infantry TuG behind the line, perpendicular to the fight. When cav break through they are forced to pursue and you can easily get a flank charge.)

There are certainly armies and builds that need help, but I don't think Lusitanians are one of them.

Quote from: lionheartrjc on September 25, 2025, 07:21:50 PMNot a proposal for this year - but I like the idea of certain armies that occupied mountainous terrain getting a trait that allowed them to select one additional area of rough terrain in the optional terrain phase unless the terrain is already Very Dense.  Regardless of whether they are defending or invading.

I would second that

Quote from: Manzikert on September 25, 2025, 08:18:31 PM

Quote from: LawrenceG on September 25, 2025, 10:57:15 AM

Quote from: LawrenceG on September 23, 2025, 09:54:26 AMThe question is, what armies are rock to these paper armies? IF there aren't any, they need a points reduction.

What kind of armies can Lusitanians beat(other than other similar armies)?

While I don't think there are any armies that Lusitanians hard counter (maybe an elephant heavy army), they are a perfectly competent army. Certainly on the higher end of the classical 'barbarian' armies by dint of their universal melee expert. 13 TuGs of competent melee infantry is a perfectly respectable build. They are at a type disadvantage against cavalry armies but that can be mitigated by terrain, numbers, the ability to take allies (Iberian impact weapon infantry), taking your own cav to run interreference, and clever play. (It's pretty game-ist, but something I've done is put an infantry TuG behind the line, perpendicular to the fight. When cav break through they are forced to pursue and you can easily get a flank charge.)

There are certainly armies and builds that need help, but I don't think Lusitanians are one of them.

Did you play that army ? I did and they need help    I had to take a legendary CIC in order to pray for terrain , hope to avoid too many loses at impact vs opponents mostly enjoying red dice  and hope a green vs green at best would help . Yes they need a bit of help .

Quote from: badhabum on September 25, 2025, 08:52:00 PMDid you play that army ? I did and they need help    I had to take a legendary CIC in order to pray for terrain , hope to avoid too many loses at impact vs opponents mostly enjoying red dice  and hope a green vs green at best would help . Yes they need a bit of help .

I've proxied them a few times. I'm trying to get 1 army per period and they're a candidate for classical. I've also taken a legendary CIC, partially for more terrain control, but also just to get the command needed to control an army of that size. I do however have a lot more experience with Sohie who are a pretty similar army.

I completely agree they're weak to cavalry. But weighed against all of their advantages I don't think that's a deal breaker. Typically I'll deploy light infantry narrow and deep and then try to double-up against a cav unit. It spreads out the damage and prevents early break throughs.

But also consider it from the cav players perspective. If you get the terrain you want he's even more screwed than you are without it. And his cav units are 75% more expensive, he's going to need to kill 2 of your TuGs with each of his; and he has to do it before you can get the 2-4 TuGs he can't even contest into his weak points.

I feel like there's a disconnect here.
Contribution to break point isn't scored by a UG's points cost in MeG; a TuG is a Tug for break point purposes, no matter what you paid for it.

Unless the Lucitanian player has more TuGs than their opponent (remember, Caetrati and other SUGs don't count), only half of their adversary's TuGs need to break one Iberian TuG to break the Lucitanian army.