Achaemenid Persian Infantry

[grahambriggs]

Placeholder to remind Simon of the conversation we had on the Facebook MeG Forum. Regarding the treatment of Persian, Mede, Cissian, etc. infantry in the rules. Heredotus describes these troops at Plataea "had made a barricade of their wicker shields and from the protection of it were shooting their arrows in such numbers that the Spartan troops were in serious distress". Later, "there was a struggle at the barricade of shields, ; then the barricade down, there was a bitter and protracted fight". And later at the battle of Mycale "the Persians, so long as their line of shields remained intact, successfully repelled all attacks" - this latter against the Athenians.

This suggests that theses troops should have the option of barricades capability rather than pavise. However, there is no evidence at Plataea for them using light spears - unknown why but perhaps they were used to brace the barricade somehow?. So it could be that an "either/or" option is needed? When it came to hand to hand "they would lay hold of the Persian spears and break them; in courage and strength they were the equal of their enemies but they were deficient in armour, untrained and greatly inferior in skill" Also, the troops should perhaps be close order rather than loose. There's no evidence that they are any less tightly packed than hoplites in any of the battles between the two types. So as a suggestion, perhaps these troops should be close order, and be allowed either pavise and light spear to go with their bows, or barricade and no light spear.

[nikgaukroger]

Graham, could you also post the info you mentioned from Duncan Head about how the "barricade of shields" was formed as it sounded pertinent.

Also it would be useful to know if there is any information of how useful the "barricade of shields" was against cavalry as there are substantial benefits against them for the Barricades characteristic.

I would also note that as it stands the Pavise characteristic makes the Persian infantry very tough - as the battle report from Ray and myself showed, and hoplites will generally do worse than legionarii - and probably gets an effect in line with the bits you quoted, the issue maybe that once placed the "barricade of shields" should be immobile. It could be a case for a Special Rule in the Achaemenid lists is needed to tweak it for these armies?

[lionheartrjc]

Not commenting on this historical accuracy here, but I am not a fan of the Barricades characteristic as it has problems from a gaming perspective (making troops too tough to attack and the game too static).

In terms of balance, the Immortals are already very effective against hoplites, possibly too effective - in fact I was already wondering whether they should count Short Spear and Pavise (only wondering before anyone goes ballistic), instead making the front rank Flexible and dropping the Short Spear. 

Richard

[Doomsmile]

I've not read Heredotus' account, so I'm sure I'm missing the wider context, but the parts of the description you quoted-- especially the "there was a struggle at the barricade of shields, ; then the barricade down, there was a bitter and protracted fight" part-- sounds pretty consistent with the mechanical effects of Short-Spear/Pavise.
(+2 claims during the charge phase, +0 in the melee)

From a purely mechanical standpoint, a TuG of foot charging SS/Pavise immortals would have a hard fight in the charge phase, followed by a drag-out brawl in the melee if they weathered the initial assault. Sounds a lot like the description from Heredotus you cited.
(Contrast with the Barricades characteristic-- the wall of wicker shields would hold for the entire duration of combat between the Greeks and Persians, and would remain a permanent fixture on the table, even after the immortals were routed.)


As a side note-- an utterly uninformed side-note as I don't speak ancient Greek-- if Heredotus didn't have a Greek word for Pavise, the Persians "making a barricade of their wicker shields" would be a pretty apt description of the sparabara formation. Pure speculation, but thought I'd throw that in.

[martymagnificent]

I suspect a big part of the issue with immortals is the, relatively, cheap access to massed skilled shooter on an effective platform.

I'm aware of no evidence that the immortals were particularly remarkable archers. Perhaps they should be superior instead of having skilled shooter?

Martin

[nikgaukroger]

I am not convinced there is an issue with them having faced them. Graham's main issue (from the FB page) is that the barricade can be moved, falling back especially.

As to the classification of their shooting, the bit Graham quoted from Herodotos "shooting their arrows in such numbers that the Spartan troops were in serious distress" indicates they are good shooters - in MeG terms we're talking shooting at Superior troops with Shield Cover which is tough for shooters, so to distress them you'd need to be pretty good shooters.

[Simon Meg-Meister]

Thanks Graham

I think Graham has a good point that is more about falling back. 
They are definitely not strong enough to be a barricades in the rules.
The Pavise classification as it stands is actually spot on for it other than the fall back.

POSSIBLE IMPROVEMENTS TO STORE
Two refinement for consideration in a few years time might make it more perfect for them:

a) putting into the Pavise classification that you cannot fall back of break off with them. So ...

14. PAVISE
Pavise covers troops who carry a large free-standing personal barricade for missile protection and as a minor obstacle to chargers. These were notably used by Persians, and Japanese and some Medieval Crossbowmen.
1. Pavise gives no benefit of any type if charging, countercharging or intercepting, (indeed it would be left behind) otherwise:
- pavise gives cover to those behind them when shot at by files who have all of their front edge ahead of the line of their front (so a benefit vs. anything except artillery).
- pavise gives a +1 bonus in charge combat against any infantry.
- troops with pave cannot use an M13 fall back more or F3 or F4 break off move.
2. Players are encouraged to represent pavise on the tabletop but this is not compulsory. All
distances are measured from the troop bases.

or

b) create a Pavise + which is as above and Pavise only gives protection from fire.  Immortals then Pavise+ and Genoans Bowmen Pavise.

I probably prefer b as adding to character of both troop types.

FALLING BACK

The rules are generous in movement options throughout with a different table on the website if you want a sense of what is probably closer to reality.  It is a bias that gives us the best balance of game fun and historical realism and by having both Prompted Action Tables people wanting historical refights can use that.  We then get the best of both worlds.

FWIW I haven't seen Fall Back being used excessively because the points system favours doing damage. Plus it is costly with Formed and Tribles as you often are using the Yellow and Red cards you need for so many other moves.  So it feels in game terms to set a fine challenge of decision making at present.  That said I am ot present at many competitions and that distance can give me a false impression so keen to hear if it does feel excessive as we move forward.  Always had a watching brief on it.

I will store for the future under a watching brief. Not changing anything for a few years from here as very well balanced overall.

Si

[sultanbev]

Pavises were still in use in the Napoleonic wars, Serbian irregular matchlockmen used them in the Balkans. Am not sure why it is considered that falling back with them is considered a problem, as they could be picked up and moved forward, so why not when going away? Obviously they wouldn't count cover if moving with them, in any direction.

In my own rules I just make the units move slower if carrying pavises, as they would be a bit cumbersome, and make keeping formation difficult - which makes them very vulnerable to cavalry even in rough terrain whilst moving.

So rather than change any rules perhaps just make them move slower, if they don't already do so??

Mark

[badhabum]

I am not convinced there is an issue with them having faced them. Graham's main issue (from the FB page) is that the barricade can be moved, falling back especially.

As to the classification of their shooting, the bit Graham quoted from Herodotos "shooting their arrows in such numbers that the Spartan troops were in serious distress" indicates they are good shooters - in MeG terms we're talking shooting at Superior troops with Shield Cover which is tough for shooters, so to distress them you'd need to be pretty good shooters.

It is just ONE quote ...should it be enough to make them all "skilled" shooters ...I remember other discussions we had and the answer was that one quote may be suspect . That and the tendancy for some antique historians to put things in a certain light so that their heroes would seem even better ...exagerating difficulties was a common thing . My point : you may change what you want  but be sure of what you want to do before changing it once again when a 5 year truce has been declared

[rayfredjohn]

I am not convinced there is an issue with them having faced them. Graham's main issue (from the FB page) is that the barricade can be moved, falling back especially.

As to the classification of their shooting, the bit Graham quoted from Herodotos "shooting their arrows in such numbers that the Spartan troops were in serious distress" indicates they are good shooters - in MeG terms we're talking shooting at Superior troops with Shield Cover which is tough for shooters, so to distress them you'd need to be pretty good shooters.

It is just ONE quote ...should it be enough to make them all "skilled" shooters ...I remember other discussions we had and the answer was that one quote may be suspect . That and the tendancy for some antique historians to put things in a certain light so that their heroes would seem even better ...exagerating difficulties was a common thing . My point : you may change what you want  but be sure of what you want to do before changing it once again when a 5 year truce has been declared

Agree.

Too soon after the Compendium edition being printed to start changing things.  This effect was well documented after the IWC in January, that was the time for change.  The Compendium is only just getting into the hands of players, don't change it. 

[nikgaukroger]

I am not convinced there is an issue with them having faced them. Graham's main issue (from the FB page) is that the barricade can be moved, falling back especially.

As to the classification of their shooting, the bit Graham quoted from Herodotos "shooting their arrows in such numbers that the Spartan troops were in serious distress" indicates they are good shooters - in MeG terms we're talking shooting at Superior troops with Shield Cover which is tough for shooters, so to distress them you'd need to be pretty good shooters.

It is just ONE quote ...should it be enough to make them all "skilled" shooters ...I remember other discussions we had and the answer was that one quote may be suspect . That and the tendancy for some antique historians to put things in a certain light so that their heroes would seem even better ...exagerating difficulties was a common thing . My point : you may change what you want  but be sure of what you want to do before changing it once again when a 5 year truce has been declared

You do realise I am suggesting the status quo is fine don't you?

[nikgaukroger]

Too soon after the Compendium edition being printed to start changing things.  This effect was well documented after the IWC in January, that was the time for change.  The Compendium is only just getting into the hands of players, don't change it.

Simon ruled out changes to the Compendium material "for a few years" above 

[rayfredjohn]

I am not convinced there is an issue with them having faced them. Graham's main issue (from the FB page) is that the barricade can be moved, falling back especially.

As to the classification of their shooting, the bit Graham quoted from Herodotos "shooting their arrows in such numbers that the Spartan troops were in serious distress" indicates they are good shooters - in MeG terms we're talking shooting at Superior troops with Shield Cover which is tough for shooters, so to distress them you'd need to be pretty good shooters.

It is just ONE quote ...should it be enough to make them all "skilled" shooters ...I remember other discussions we had and the answer was that one quote may be suspect . That and the tendancy for some antique historians to put things in a certain light so that their heroes would seem even better ...exagerating difficulties was a common thing . My point : you may change what you want  but be sure of what you want to do before changing it once again when a 5 year truce has been declared

You do realise I am suggesting the status quo is fine don't you?

Yes, I realised you weren't advocating changes.

[rayfredjohn]

Too soon after the Compendium edition being printed to start changing things.  This effect was well documented after the IWC in January, that was the time for change.  The Compendium is only just getting into the hands of players, don't change it.

Simon ruled out changes to the Compendium material "for a few years" above 

That's good for the growth of the game.

[martymagnificent]

There are any number of armies that some source describes as good shooters or shooting well in a particular instance but they don't get 40 bases of skilled foot shooters!

Martin