Should there be limits on Superior and Exceptional Romans?

[badhabum]

Ok so yes and yes

[accard]

Should Roman veteran legionaries all have the option to upgrade to superior?

Veterans in other armies don't necessarily get that choice.

Alexanders army in the east, Pyrrhus' forces for much of his campaigns, plenty of Hellenistic mercenaries would all have been veterans, yet none of those get an upgrade to superior option.

Possibly there is a slight anomaly there?

[nikgaukroger]

Quality upgrades for being a veteran do not (just) represent length of service. They need to reflect those troops actual effect in relation to their historical enemies and give the army they are in the right feel on the table top.

It is, necessarily, a somewhat subjective thing - and I'm glad that RJC has the thankless task of being the final arbiter* of that and not me   



* FWIW I think he gets it pretty right; there is the occasional case where I don't agree, but hey, thats life 

[LawrenceG]

Quality upgrades for being a veteran do not (just) represent length of service. They need to reflect those troops actual effect in relation to their historical enemies and give the army they are in the right feel on the table top.

It is, necessarily, a somewhat subjective thing - and I'm glad that RJC has the thankless task of being the final arbiter* of that and not me   



* FWIW I think he gets it pretty right; there is the occasional case where I don't agree, but hey, thats life 

What historical cases lead to Romans getting it?

I note that Alexander's veterans, who beat everyone they met, including elephants, even when they were past retirement age, don't get upgrades.

[accard]

That's a good argument.

But do the Romans, then, need the option of so many superior legionaries to get historical results against their enemies?

[Robin]

Personally I think you are making hard work of something that is ok at this present time. You literally already get what you pay for 🤷‍♂️If you want expensive legionaries you get a small army that will be swamped. If you go for a load of average legionaries you will be swept from the table. I'm in favour of leaving alone and let the players choose the quality of the legions they choose.

[nikgaukroger]

Personally I think you are making hard work of something that is ok at this present time.

OK, but maybe can be made better than OK. The question has merits; it may, or may not, lead to change but is worth a discussion IMO.

[badhabum]

Personally I think you are making hard work of something that is ok at this present time. You literally already get what you pay for 🤷‍♂️If you want expensive legionaries you get a small army that will be swamped. If you go for a load of average legionaries you will be swept from the table. I'm in favour of leaving alone and let the players choose the quality of the legions they choose.

Why not, but as in some cases, UGs that can be upgraded to veteran get to be superior which allows them a better impact, some protection vs skilled shooters but they often loose their melee expert ..and it is discussed on the forum .

I would endorse the upgrade to SUP but loose the melee expert ( perhaps not for the mysterious famed supranatural Xth legion @nik )

[PUNCH]

option 1: if you find that there is too much superior or exceptional ones, try to play games at 8000 points instead the common 10 000 points, perhaps your choices of armies and troops inside it should be very different,the very expensive and good will certainly far less numerous.

option 2:restrict the number of superior and exceptional in the lists

option 3: let the lists like they are ( they are great !) the players will decide where they put their bet ( on the good, the bad or the ugly

[lionheartrjc]

We are going to implement option 1 and not option 2.

Richard