Looking at the OneDrive folder that is indeed the case (at the time I type this).

All 2026 army lists now drafted.  Will take another look at Canari and Inca.

The Italian Wars PDF lists appear to be the 2025 versions - it may not have updated properly.

Quote from: nikgaukroger on September 24, 2025, 07:50:57 AMThe Italian Wars PDF lists appear to be the 2025 versions - it may not have updated properly.

Corrected.  Pushed the buttons in the wrong order....

Revised the draft Canari, Kingdom of Cusco and Inca Empire lists.

A couple of small things I noticed while going over the newly-posted/changed lists, most of which are probably just noticing intentional decisions, but... no harm, no foul, I hope?


[6102: Columbian Indian]
Maximum for Elite Warriors (16 stands) is based on two UGs of 8, instead of UGs of 9. (Regular warrior minimum is based on UGs of 9)
This is probably intentional, but I thought I'd bring this up to double-check.

[6110: Canari]
I missed this earlier. Maximum for Best Warriors (32 stands) is based on four UGs of 8, instead of UGs of 9. (Regular warrior minimum is based on UGs of 9)
This is probably intentional, but I thought I'd bring this up to double-check.


[7101: Late Swiss]
Lorrain Alliance Pikemen are in UGs of 8 only, and have maxima of 16/8 for militia and mercenary pikes respectively. Should these be 18/9 to accommodate UGs of 9?

[7107: Maximilian German]
Militia Pike maximum is 32 bases, allowing for 4 TUGs of 8 bases, but only 3 TUGS of (if you'll forgive the presumptive word) default 9 base UGS. Is this correct?

[7108: German States]
Typo in name of City crossbowmwn.
(With how often I make typos, I'm impressed that this is the first one I've found!)


[7201: Sengoku Japanese]
Maximum number of Bushi and Ashigaru with Yari reduced from 12 to 9.
(This is probably intentional, but thought I'd double-check since the reduction wasn't noted in the army's change list.)

[7202: Nobunaga Japanese / 7203: Takeda Japanese]
Unit sizes for long-spear equipped troops are 6,8 (with no 9s allowed). Is this correct?



Also, I noticed that post-Hundred Years' War English men-at-arms are classed as Polearm now? Not brining it up as a problem, but just noting that 'tis odd.

List 7113 James IV scottish : Pike/pavise do they move "normally" 3 MU and no shield cover correct ? ( it's the wording Pike pavise )

For the 1513 option if you choose to not use Shield Cover when shot at there is no slowing so would move "normally". If the Shield Cover is used there is a 1 BW slowing effect and this cannot be prompted through - so, for e.g. if in good going the maximum move is now 2 BW and cannot be prompted back up to 3 BW.

Quote from: Doomsmile on September 26, 2025, 07:20:23 AM[7201: Sengoku Japanese]
Maximum number of Bushi and Ashigaru with Yari reduced from 12 to 9.
(This is probably intentional, but thought I'd double-check since the reduction wasn't noted in the army's change list.)

[7202: Nobunaga Japanese / 7203: Takeda Japanese]
Unit sizes for long-spear equipped troops are 6,8 (with no 9s allowed). Is this correct?

Suspect errors here - the Nobunga "Bushi and ashigaru with yari" numbers have also changed in an (IMO) odd way.

Quote from: Doomsmile on September 26, 2025, 07:20:23 AMAlso, I noticed that post-Hundred Years' War English men-at-arms are classed as Polearm now? Not brining it up as a problem, but just noting that 'tis odd.

I'd not noticed that one and not sure why this should be. The Edward IV list is an exception where they are still 2HCC.

Men-at-arms backed up by billmen.  Makes the men-at-arms no more vulnerable to mounted than billmen which seems correct.

The vulnerability argument can apply to earlier men-at-arms as well - and Edward IV of course, which is contemporary with the lists where the change is.

Quote from: nikgaukroger on September 26, 2025, 10:02:28 AMThe vulnerability argument can apply to earlier men-at-arms as well - and Edward IV of course, which is contemporary with the lists where the change is.

Am correcting Edward IV - this was an error (the infantry had already been changed - just missed it off the dismounting knights).

Quote from: lionheartrjc on September 26, 2025, 10:13:41 AM

Quote from: nikgaukroger on September 26, 2025, 10:02:28 AMThe vulnerability argument can apply to earlier men-at-arms as well - and Edward IV of course, which is contemporary with the lists where the change is.

Am correcting Edward IV - this was an error (the infantry had already been changed - just missed it off the dismounting knights).

Thanks.

The infantry versions in the Edward IV list are missing the optional Melee Expert that the ones in Kings in the North have BTW.

Quote from: Doomsmile on September 26, 2025, 07:20:23 AMA couple of small things I noticed while going over the newly-posted/changed lists, most of which are probably just noticing intentional decisions, but... no harm, no foul, I hope?


[6102: Columbian Indian]
Maximum for Elite Warriors (16 stands) is based on two UGs of 8, instead of UGs of 9. (Regular warrior minimum is based on UGs of 9)
This is probably intentional, but I thought I'd bring this up to double-check.

<Corrected>

[6110: Canari]
I missed this earlier. Maximum for Best Warriors (32 stands) is based on four UGs of 8, instead of UGs of 9. (Regular warrior minimum is based on UGs of 9)
This is probably intentional, but I thought I'd bring this up to double-check.

<Corrected, also Inca Empire maximums from 24 to 27>


[7101: Late Swiss]
Lorrain Alliance Pikemen are in UGs of 8 only, and have maxima of 16/8 for militia and mercenary pikes respectively. Should these be 18/9 to accommodate UGs of 9?

<Corrected>

[7107: Maximilian German]
Militia Pike maximum is 32 bases, allowing for 4 TUGs of 8 bases, but only 3 TUGS of (if you'll forgive the presumptive word) default 9 base UGS. Is this correct?

[7108: German States]
Typo in name of City crossbowmwn.
(With how often I make typos, I'm impressed that this is the first one I've found!)

< Corrected>

[7201: Sengoku Japanese]
Maximum number of Bushi and Ashigaru with Yari reduced from 12 to 9.
(This is probably intentional, but thought I'd double-check since the reduction wasn't noted in the army's change list.)

[7202: Nobunaga Japanese / 7203: Takeda Japanese]
Unit sizes for long-spear equipped troops are 6,8 (with no 9s allowed). Is this correct?

<My copy has 6,8,9?>

Also, I noticed that post-Hundred Years' War English men-at-arms are classed as Polearm now? Not brining it up as a problem, but just noting that 'tis odd.

<See below>