"Triumph! Rules now Available" Topic

Hi guys, a couple of quick questions regarding the lists on Meshwesh.

Early Achamenid Persian, lots of info points to the use of bows by their Med cav, but training and combat not too good.
Listed as Jav cav, shouldn't they have the Bad horse option?

Description needed for the various troop types especially the ones with date restrictions, for the above list.

Skythians, only have mounted in their list, why no infantry, foot bows, skirmishers are in most army lists, but there is none.

Cheers Andy

Thanks for the replies re chariots and how they are interpreted in TRIUMPH. Sounds fair enough. Although I can see the downcast look on the faces of some gamers sitting proudly behind their Assyrian Monster Chariots if they get beaten by light Egyptian ones (all things being equal). ;)

Cheers

@Snowcat -- any bitching that Assyrian four-man chariot owners do about being beaten by Egyptian chariots of 700 years earlier with much simpler military technology can be consigned to the same folder as bitching that Burgundian Ordonnance knights do if beaten by Carolingian knights of 700 years earlier, as far as I'm concerned.

There is no evidence of any dramatic change in chariot tactics or military effectiveness in the Kushite Egyptians, Libyan Egyptians, or Saitic Egyptians in the 50-ish year period where they switched from two-horse chariots to four-horse chariots; there is certainly no evidence that Hittite chariots were massively more aggressive, smashed foot much better, or anything similar at Qadesh where they are (probably in error) assigned 3-man crews.

@Andyfb -- that's an artifact of the way the Ally lists are implemented. Allies are a component of Meshwesh where the data already exists, we're just coding in how they will be presented, and adding the use of allies to the rules. Should be up fairly soon -- perhaps in a few weeks, depending upon the free time of our main database coder.

The problem with the Skythian list (and several others, including various Chinese lists and many other Nomadic lists) is how best to represent a list where the Skythians could be all mounted, or alternatively could have a foot component. Rather than having two separate lists (who would share a very similar name, something like "Skythian-all-mounted" and "Skythian-with-foot") we decided to have a single Skythian list, but represent the foot component as an internal ally, in a sense.

So looking at the database, the "Tribal Foot Contingent" of the Skythians is as follows:
2-4x Bow Levy (Tribal bowmen)
0-1x Skirmisher (Tribal slingers)
1-3x Horde or Light Foot (Tribal or subject tribe infantry)

And the way you should read it for now (until we get the internal ally part up and running, a few weeks or a bit more) is that you can run your Skythians as all mounted as shown, or you can run them with the Tribal Foot Contingent I've given above in addition to their normal 0-2x Elite Cavalry (Noble armored horsemen) and 6-12x Horsebow (Horse archers).

Hope this helps.

I won't have the time to look up answers to your EAP question for a day or two -- I'm teaching tonight until 10pm and I've got a hockey game right after that.

@Andyfb -- text descriptions exist, we're just buffing them right now. Should be up fairly soon. See examples in the previous message with Skythians.

Thanks David

Great ideas for the Skythians, looking foreword to the info for EAP.

Cheers Andy

Hey Andy,

All of the info I've been able to find so far about Achaemenid Persian horsebow is focused upon Dahai and other Skythian/Saka, not native Persians. There is some talk about small numbers of bow-armed Bactrian cavalry as well, but I haven't seen anything about native Persian horsebow. If you've got some data I'm not aware of, I'd like to see it. The EAP and Transitional AP both have 0-1 Skythian horsebow represented in their armies; the LAP have 0-2, so that is covered.

Regarding Bad Horse, the LAP have 0-3 Bad Horse as an option to represent "hastily mounted levies" (representing Darius at Gaugamela mounting a bunch of his foot to supplement his cavalry) or colonist cavalry. We don't have any Bad Horse represented in the EAP or TAP at this point, but if you've got good support for cavalry of unusual incompetence, it would be easy to change one of their Javelin Cavalry to "Javelin Cavalry or Bad Horse."

Note, however, that to some extent the statement "some of their cavalry wouldn't have been as good as the average" is true for every force of cavalry on the planet, throughout history. We only want to rate a cavalry unit as "Elite Cavalry" if they really fought, were armed and armored, or were considered by contemporaries as much better than normal. Same thing for "Bad Horse" -- that rating is a judgement call (and therefore it's easy to poke at any particular decision) but we want to keep that restricted to mounted units that were really significantly (and uniformly) worse than the normal expectation for a mounted unit.

Hope this helps,

DK

Thanks David, it's always good to get info as to where you are thinking in how you rate your troop definitions.

Played 2 games on Wednesday night, Selucid vs Parthian, the Parthian general (me) must have had a skinful in his tent before the battle as his tactics were not up to scratch :-)

2-0 to Shaun :-(

2nd game was very close, we both enjoyed the games and looking forward to our next clash!

Cheers Andy

I have read somewhere that a forum exists for Triumph. Can someone give me a link? I can't find it.

The Triumph! forum can be found here: forum.wgcwar.com

Bought and downloaded my copy of Triumph!. :-) I have had a quick flip through on the computer, but haven't printed them yet, and so haven't read them in detail. I have also joined the forum.

When the weather gets warmer here I will arrange a game with a live opponent, who may be interested in them.

There is also a FB page
link

for people that like that format, the forum is best for discussion.