Post your suggestions for new units !

[Ludens]

Correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't the term cataphract simply mean "armoured"? I am under the impression that in history it was used for heavy cavalry as well as the completely-armoured cavalry we now associate with cataphracts. Historically, camels weren't used in close combat, and Herodian's text also suggests they skirmished rather than performed charges, so it wouldn't make sense to weigh them down with armour. Most likely their riders wore armour, but not the camels. The same goes for the Galatian cataphracts.

Incidentally, there are little unit slots left and EB2 will include 10 new factions that need unique units as well, so I'll doubt we'll see many new units in EB2 that are not related to those factions. Just posting suggestions is not enough, you'll have to make a good case when, where and why they should be implemented.

[Tellos Athenaios]

AFAIK, Cataphract as in kataphraktos means 'fully covered', whereby 'covered' impicitly requires substitution, e.g. "nees kataphraktoi" (fully decked ships). This is in case of armour, obviously, part of debate: for instance if anyone said "hippeis kataphraktoi" (litt.: fully armoured horsemen) should that suggest the horse was covered also?

[BozosLiveHere]

Incidentally, there are little unit slots left and EB2 will include 10 new factions that need unique units as well, so I'll doubt we'll see many new units in EB2 that are not related to those factions. Just posting suggestions is not enough, you'll have to make a good case when, where and why they should be implemented.

Actually, not needing to use the merc trick to recycle models freed a lot of unit slots. I don't know if even most members realize this.

[chairman]

Do you mean to say that the total limit in EBII could be higher than 500? Because if you do, this is news to not only me but also just about every member of these boards that I know of. However, I have heard that the higher model limit will allow EBII to different looking soldiers for each unit as well as maybe more officers per unit. There was another cool trick for the new model limit that I can't remember but it was much less ambitious than what I think you are suggesting.

Chairman

[Foot]

No, he's saying that in EBI we had to waste unit slots on using the merc trick to give certain units to certain factions. This saves about 12 units (if I remember correctly - or something like that number). Spendios, our unit hoarder, has recently freed up a further 7, I think.

Foot

[General Appo]

Good man Spendios. Have a manly pat on the back.

[Foot]

The man knows his EDU.

Foot

[a completely inoffensive name]

No, he's saying that in EBI we had to waste unit slots on using the merc trick to give certain units to certain factions. This saves about 12 units (if I remember correctly - or something like that number). Spendios, our unit hoarder, has recently freed up a further 7, I think.

Foot

I was trying to tally the number of free unit slots so far, in the quote above Foot has given 12 and 7 making 19 new unit slots for 10 new factions so far.

I just going through the EDU and searched for the highest number listed for the unit slots and got to 548. I was confused by this because I thought the max # of unit slots was 500. For some reason I also recall reading somewhere that stated EB uses 460 slots which would make the count 40+12+7=59 new units slots for ten new factions or just under 6 specific units a faction.

Could someone clarify what the max is for the EDU?

[Foot]

500. It has always been 500, and always will be. Do not believe those putrid liars who would tell you otherwise. They lie.

Foot

[Majd il-Romani]

Ok, please don't flame me for this, but,when you guys have released EB2, if there is 1 unit slot left free (i doubt it but still) you guys should put a totally over-the-top unit like Unicorn Cataphracts or Flaming Elephants

*runs away*

[a completely inoffensive name]

500. It has always been 500, and always will be. Do not believe those putrid liars who would tell you otherwise. They lie.

Foot

Why are units numbered up to 548 then?

[Tellos Athenaios]

Actually, not needing to use the merc trick to recycle models freed a lot of unit slots. I don't know if even most members realize this.

Yeah, in EB1 for instance; we have one slot 'wasted' on having both a rebel (slave) Ioudaioi Taxeis *and* and a rebel (slave) Peltastai Indohellenikoi.

[chairman]

EBII :

Name: Numidian reformed infantry (wip)

Factions: Numidia (and Massaesyli if included) with reforms; as local unit at high MIC level for at least Romani and Qarthadast, maybe some hellenistic nations as well

Equipment: rounded scutum, short gladius-like sword hung from baldric, simple helmet of greek or roman types, short spear, maybe javelin, linothorax of leather or chainmail with leather or cloth pteruges, short tunic and trousers, sandals

AoR: Kirtan, Siga, Ippone, Utica, Kart-Hadast, and Adrumento; possibly Lixus and Sala as well

History: based on the Syphax's infantry trained by Scipio's centurion in the Second Punic war

Sources: Osprey MAA 121 Armies of the Carthaginian Wars 265-146 BC by Terence Wise, pg.14, and Osprey MAA 243 Rome's Enemies (5): The Desert Frontier by David Nicolle, plate A1.

........

I know that this is not enough to completely convince the team to add this unit, though I guess that you may already be considering this unit. Either way, I hope this helps you make a decision. I apologize that my only sources are Osprey, but those are the ones I have on hand, and the 2nd source includes a picture of a Numidian prince with heavy Greek, Carthaginian or Roman influence on armor and weapons that I thought fit the general concept.

Chairman

[Skandinav]

What is wrong with Osprey books - now that it has been mentioned a few times in this thread - I´ve always thought they were of good enough quality but please enlighten me if I´m mistaken ? Or did you mean you wanted more sources than only Osprey ?

[MeinPanzer]

What is wrong with Osprey books - now that it has been mentioned a few times in this thread - I´ve always thought they were of good enough quality but please enlighten me if I´m mistaken ? Or did you mean you wanted more sources than only Osprey ?

The problem with Osprey books is often one of transparency- most of the time, the books are too short to include extensive citations, and so sometimes some reconstructions or claims, which are often objectionable, cannot be fully investigated. Nicolle's Desert Frontiers title is a prime example of this; his Herodian soldier reconstruction is as fanciful as any vanilla RTW unit.

[Ludens]

What is wrong with Osprey books - now that it has been mentioned a few times in this thread - I´ve always thought they were of good enough quality but please enlighten me if I´m mistaken ? Or did you mean you wanted more sources than only Osprey ?

Also, Osprey are limited by their format. Their goal is to give a quick overview of the subject in a limited number of pages, so there is little space for details or to discuss the uncertainties and contradictions that plague classical military history. In addition, popular history can lag quite a bit behind the real thing.

[Skandinav]

Of course it was only quality as opposed to format or function that I questioned, never should a comparison be made on different terms.
But thank you for some clarification on what was meant ( I have a few Osprey books on my shelves and couldn´t agree more ) as I clearly mistook the resentment, or caution rather, as founded in something less central than the obvious.

[Atilius]

EBII :

Name: Numidian reformed infantry (wip)

Factions: Numidia (and Massaesyli if included) with reforms; as local unit at high MIC level for at least Romani and Qarthadast, maybe some hellenistic nations as well

Equipment: rounded scutum, short gladius-like sword hung from baldric, simple helmet of greek or roman types, short spear, maybe javelin, linothorax of leather or chainmail with leather or cloth pteruges, short tunic and trousers, sandals

AoR: Kirtan, Siga, Ippone, Utica, Kart-Hadast, and Adrumento; possibly Lixus and Sala as well

History: based on the Syphax's infantry trained by Scipio's centurion in the Second Punic war

Sources: Osprey MAA 121 Armies of the Carthaginian Wars 265-146 BC by Terence Wise, pg.14, and Osprey MAA 243 Rome's Enemies (5): The Desert Frontier by David Nicolle, plate A1 Livy (XXIV.48)

Here is the reference in its entirety:

And Statorius out of the mass of young men enrolled infantry for the king, organized them almost in the Roman manner, taught them in formation and evolution to follow standards and keep their ranks, and to such an extent accustomed them to fortifying and other regular duties of the soldier that in a short time the king had as much confidence in his infantry as in his cavalry, and in a regular engagement in formal array on level ground he defeated the Carthaginian enemy.

All that tells us is that they were organized "almost" like Romans and that they had at least one success in battle; it tells us nothing about equipment. Livy mentions later that Massanissa brought 6,000 foot to Zama, but it's not clear if these guys were among them.

[Mithridates VI Eupator]

Here is the reference in its entirety:

Originally Posted by Titus Livius
And Statorius out of the mass of young men enrolled infantry for the king, organized them almost in the Roman manner, taught them in formation and evolution to follow standards and keep their ranks, and to such an extent accustomed them to fortifying and other regular duties of the soldier that in a short time the king had as much confidence in his infantry as in his cavalry, and in a regular engagement in formal array on level ground he defeated the Carthaginian enemy.

All that tells us is that they were organized "almost" like Romans and that they had at least one success in battle; it tells us nothing about equipment. Livy mentions later that Massanissa brought 6,000 foot to Zama, but it's not clear if these guys were among them.

That Livy states that Statorius "taught them in formation" and "to follow standards and keep their ranks" seems to imply that it was not merely light infantry, but some sort of heavier troops. The fact that the Crathaginians were beaten in a battle "in formal array on level ground" also seems to point to this conclusion.

That they fortified camps etc. also implies that the force was romanized in its tactics and orgainzation.
But to what extent they carried roman-ish equipment can not be derived from the text though. They might as well have carried a spear and aspis, instead of gladius and scutum, however, I would guess that they wore some kind of armour, of a better type that the hardened-leather that, for instance, the mauri wore. Helmets also seem quite likely.

The bottom line being; some form of armoured melee line-infantry (though quite posibly carrying javelins), arranged in, at least to some extent, coherent formations.