Early Libyan Defence League.

[teenage visigoth]

So as to take it out of the realm of the Uber Book I 3.0 talk, I thought I'd call for thoughts on a list near and dear to my heart and to many other thoughtful, loincloth obsessed people on this forum.

Early Libyan I/7a-d.

So yeah, what do people think? I'm thinking playability mostly...and modelling. We can talk cave painting till be expire...

My thoughts;

-The b list is still suicidal glory. With an extra LCh it gives the army a little more punch. Not sure if the Ax are any help...gain speed but lose punch.

-As far as the c list I assume that's a typo (should be Ps not Sp)... or else it appears the Early Libyans adopted hoplite tactics... ok then...
But the option of mixing Wb or Ax is nice as is the pure glory of the 11 Ps army.

- And hoooray for a Garamantes list. For reasons that will become evident soon, I am stoked to see the recognition and adaptation of these peeps into the list.:up

Let the rest battle over Sumer and Kish like a hairy man from the mountains and 2/3s godling... I've got a new phallus sheath to pick out.

-tv

[Martyn]

Unfortunately it would appear that the 11xSp option is not a typo.:eek So no more 11xPs glory

In the a) list you lose the 11xPs option and have to take Ax or Hd, don’t fancy your chances much except against historical opposition like the Nubians.
b) list - extra LCh and option for Wb/Ax but are going to struggle, most historical opposition have more mounted or Bd/Sp, so Wb is better option. Phoenician look like an interesting match up.
c) list - no more 11xPs but 6xWb could make a difference. 11xSp? No, not right.
d) list – no more 11xPs, bit more balance, but lightweight without the advantage of flee outcomes to save you.

Looking to get b and c lists to fit in with my Sea Peeps and Punic period armies. I like the look of the Mag Mil figs but they don’t do Spears for these guys. These plans are on hold until the list is published as there are too many changes to risk it.

[teenage visigoth]

Unfortunately it would appear that the 11xSp option is not a typo.:eek So no more 11xPs glory



:eek:eek:eek:

I would love to hear the rational on this...are these guys supposed to Punic influenced Libyans with day jobs?

Mind you, a Lch and 11 SP in Dry, hahahahaha car accident!
But against another EL force of Wb and Ps, what a cool matchup!

Perhaps I need to convince to the CCFer's to join me in 'Son of Hoggar Massif'

This is indeed interesting.

-tv

[Redwilde]

-The b list is still suicidal glory.

I don't know. I think the a list is the best glory or death option (not necessarily in that order). With an imptuous Warband General, 4 Horde, and 7 Psiloi it has more tools for it's mission -- a more entertaining Swiss Army Tantô than 11 Ps can provide.


Un sabre court japonais (Tanto) prêt pour un suicide rituel (seppuku)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Wakisashi-sepukku-p1000699.jpg

[Inanna'sBoyToy]

Unfortunately it would appear that the 11xSp option is not a typo.:eek




,lol

:300Qadaffis:

[Si2]

It's definitely not a typo, I got a mail from Sue this morning confirming it.

There's been a bit of banter on the Yahoo list about this today and the state of play when I left it was that the spears were what the Libyans were doing around the time of the Punic wars.
That's probably why Hannibal employed them.

Although the debate still rolls on.

I lament the death of the 24 figure army, but live in hope that another will spring forth from the 3.0 cornucopia.

Si2

[Andreas Johansson]

I lament the death of the 24 figure army, but live in hope that another will spring forth from the 3.0 cornucopia.
The latest draft of Bk III has III/41b Chichimec or Pueblo fieldable as 1xPs (Gen), 11xPs.

[teenage visigoth]

Assuming this wacky 11Sp thing holds ground, how does one go about portraying a 7thC BCE Libyan spear dude?

I know Herodotus writes about the Greek influence on some of the tribes on the section on Libya (isn't that one of the best parts of the Histories? '...And in this tribe the chicks are totally easy and hot!' love that book) :silly

On the whole the reasons Si2 relates is a curious causation. I thought (obviously erroneously) the Carthies (under Spartan tutelage) got the mohawk and miniskirt brigade to settle down, get jobs and fight in phalanxeses. Hmmmm. The discovery of the past continues... ;)

The Early Elamite a list sits at 25 figs...:up

[pozanias]

I don't know. I think the a list is the best glory or death option (not necessarily in that order). With an imptuous Warband General, 4 Horde, and 7 Psiloi it has more tools for it's mission -- a more entertaining Swiss Army Tantô than 11 Ps can provide.


Un sabre court japonais (Tanto) prêt pour un suicide rituel (seppuku)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Wakisashi-sepukku-p1000699.jpg

I agree, if one is looking for the ultimate death or glory list it would be hard to beat Wb general, 4 horde, and 7 Ps. That is classic!!!!

I have to say, though, that all of the sub-lists have respectable possibilities. Its a little disappointing. For some reason it seems easier to take a bad list (with no good options), than to choose the worst possible options from a list that could otherwise be competitive.

[pozanias]

On the whole the reasons Si2 relates is a curious causation. I thought (obviously erroneously) the Carthies (under Spartan tutelage) got the mohawk and miniskirt brigade to settle down, get jobs and fight in phalanxeses. Hmmmm. The discovery of the past continues... ;)



I'm not sure that you are wrong (I haven't read the rationale on the yahoo list). Is it possible that the spear option is really only intended for Lybian armies fielded after the period of Cathoginian influence??? In other words, it should only be fielded during the final 1/3rd of the (c) list range?

[Martyn]

I'm not sure that you are wrong (I haven't read the rationale on the yahoo list). Is it possible that the spear option is really only intended for Lybian armies fielded after the period of Cathoginian influence??? In other words, it should only be fielded during the final 1/3rd of the (c) list range?

The (c) list ends only just after Zama so for all but the last couple of years of the list the Carthos are in charge.

[Andreas Johansson]

I'm not sure that you are wrong (I haven't read the rationale on the yahoo list). Is it possible that the spear option is really only intended for Lybian armies fielded after the period of Cathoginian influence??? In other words, it should only be fielded during the final 1/3rd of the (c) list range?

If anything, it's intended for armies during the period of Carthaginian influence. That's, AFAIK, the only one for which we have actual evidence of Libyans fighting in spearwall style (and even that concerns them fighting in Carthaginian armies, not the independent ones covered by this list).

[Martyn]

If anything, it's intended for armies during the period of Carthaginian influence. That's, AFAIK, the only one for which we have actual evidence of Libyans fighting in spearwall style (and even that concerns them fighting in Carthaginian armies, not the independent ones covered by this list).

Is that the problem, the lack of evidence of the Libyans as independent armies rather than as part of a Cartho one. Certainly as part of a Cartho army there would be Libyan Sp (and Ps), but no evidence that the independent Libyans would fight that way.

My thoughts are that the Carthos recruited Libyans into the army and trained them to fight in the manner of Hoplites, it is not necessarily their natural method of fighting.

[pozanias]

The (c) list ends only just after Zama so for all but the last couple of years of the list the Carthos are in charge.

Right, but I think the first 100 or so years of the (c) list, there isn't much Carthaginian influence at all. And it would have taken them at least some time to impose their influence.

So assuming it was the Carthos that introduced "spear" fighting to the Lybians, perhaps the Sp option is only really valid for a portion of the (c) time frame.

That would be a way to reconcile the list with TV's history. Otherwise one would have to argue that either a) the Carthaginians were "in charge" of Lybia from before 665BC, or b) that the Lybians adopted a "spear" style prior to Carthaginian dominance.

[pozanias]

If anything, it's intended for armies during the period of Carthaginian influence. That's, AFAIK, the only one for which we have actual evidence of Libyans fighting in spearwall style (and even that concerns them fighting in Carthaginian armies, not the independent ones covered by this list).

Sure, I meant they period after Carthaginians began their influence over the Lybians, not the period after it ended. I wasn't clear. But that's why I would allow it for the last several hundred years of the list and not just the last several years.

[Andreas Johansson]

Is that the problem, the lack of evidence of the Libyans as independent armies rather than as part of a Cartho one. Certainly as part of a Cartho army there would be Libyan Sp (and Ps), but no evidence that the independent Libyans would fight that way.
Precisely - there's no direct evidence independent Libyans fought that way, but there's close to no evidence they fought any other way either for this period.



On a wholly different tack, the Hd in the (a) list are probably a mistake. In the 'MM list they're Hd (S), who normally become Wb (2.2 5Wb) in DBA, because, unlike DBA Hd, they're more than willing to fight, just not very good at it.

[Martyn]

Right, but I think the first 100 or so years of the (c) list, there isn't much Carthaginian influence at all. And it would have taken them at least some time to impose their influence.

So assuming it was the Carthos that introduced "spear" fighting to the Lybians, perhaps the Sp option is only really valid for a portion of the (c) time frame.

I misunderstood your comment. Yes I would agree unless they developed Hoplite warfare themselves there was no body else around to teach them until the Phoenicians established outposts along the African coast. Although Carthage was established circa 800BC.

That would be a way to reconcile the list with TV's history. Otherwise one would have to argue that either a) the Carthaginians were "in charge" of Lybia from before 665BC, or b) that the Lybians adopted a "spear" style prior to Carthaginian dominance.

How long would it take for Cartho influence to spread? My feeling is that the Hoplite style was a result of training by the Carthos of new recruits rather than reflecting a natural fighting style.

[Andreas Johansson]

I misunderstood your comment. Yes I would agree unless they developed Hoplite warfare themselves there was no body else around to teach them until the Phoenicians established outposts along the African coast. Although Carthage was established circa 800BC.
There were Greek colonies in Libya from the seventh century, so whether they practiced it themselves or not, some Libyans should have been aware of hoplite warfare from then on.

[ferrency]

Sure, I meant they period after Carthaginians began their influence over the Lybians, not the period after it ended. I wasn't clear. But that's why I would allow it for the last several hundred years of the list and not just the last several years.

I'll be happy that there's an army list suitable for playing the Mercenary War. I've always thought it odd that the DBA army lists claimed Libyans couldn't find pointy sticks and stand in a line without a Carthaginian general holding their hand.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercenary_War

Alan

[Jeff]

Maybe the original PS was a typo that should have been SP all the time. ;)

Man that sucks, I love having 11 Ps and a LH general

Jeff

[teenage visigoth]

...

Man that sucks, I love having 11 Ps and a LH general



Agreed.

Best. Army. Ever.

[david kuijt]

I'll be happy that there's an army list suitable for playing the Mercenary War. I've always thought it odd that the DBA army lists claimed Libyans couldn't find pointy sticks and stand in a line without a Carthaginian general holding their hand.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercenary_War

Alan

Reading about the Mercenary War, it seems those are ex-Cartho mercs -- not native troops. So they should be represented by some transformation on the Cartho army, not by some transformation on native Libyans.

[Martyn]

Reading about the Mercenary War, it seems those are ex-Cartho mercs -- not native troops. So they should be represented by some transformation on the Cartho army, not by some transformation on native Libyans.

The Mercenary War was a result of troops returning from Sicily at the end of the 1st Punic war but not being paid. These troops were a mix of the various mercenary elements of the Punic army which on the whole did not include Libyans.

The Mercenary army took up arms in the interior initially and tried to raise the local Libyan population to revolt, but the Libyan population do not seem to have been over enamoured with fighting but certainly supported the mercenary forces (probably had little choice). There does not seem to be any evidence that the Libyan forces within the Cartho army (the African Sp) joined the revolt.

[peachy]

My understanding is that Libyans formed the single largest chunk of the Sicilian field force & garrisons, but fought in Cartho style & equipment, like their descendants under Hannibal. So I'd field the mercs as a tweak on Later Cartho - light on the mounted (the Numidians seem to have stayed mostly loyal to Carthage, and I'm guessing the Sicilian forces were largely foot by the end of the war), maybe heavy on the Wb & Ax & Ps.

[Martyn]

My understanding is that Libyans formed the single largest chunk of the Sicilian field force & garrisons, but fought in Cartho style & equipment, like their descendants under Hannibal. So I'd field the mercs as a tweak on Later Cartho - light on the mounted (the Numidians seem to have stayed mostly loyal to Carthage, and I'm guessing the Sicilian forces were largely foot by the end of the war), maybe heavy on the Wb & Ax & Ps.

An alternative list for the Early Carthos was proposed on the Yahoo group. I have copied the post below. Check out the link to Polybius.

Re: [DBA] Re: II/32 Later Carthaginian Army:

So really we need 4 lists, I've put down the two you felt were OK, plus
mine, and I've put together one for the truceless war after reading
http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Polybius/1*.html#82

Up to 1st Punic war
1xCv (Gen), 1xLH, 3xSp, 1xAx, 3x (Wb or Ps), 1x (El or Cv), 1x (El or LH),
1xPs

Truceless war
1xCv (Gen), 1xCv, 1x(LH or Sp), 1x (LH or EL) 4xSp, 1 (Ax or Sp) 3xPs

2nd Punic War
1x(Cv or Sp (Gen)), 1xCv, 1xLH, 2xSp, 1xAx, 3x (Wb or Ax), 1x (El or Sp),1x
(El or LH), 1xPs.

Post Zama
1x(Cv or Sp (Gen)), 1xCv, 1x(LH or Sp), 6xSp, 3xPs

Jim

This allows for the Truceless War (or The Mercenaries War) with the Carthos having to rely on the Punic and North African troops (Libyan and Numidian) to combat the Greek, Spanish, Gallic etc mercenaries.

Unfortunately although Sue did split the list she only did so to provide pre and post Zama lists replicating the 2nd Punic and Post Zama lists as above.

[Andreas Johansson]

In Sue's updated draft, the later (non-Garamantean) Libyans are now:
I/ 7c Early Libyan Army 665-200BC: 1xLCh (Gen), 1x(LCh or Sp), 5xWb or 5xAx or 5xSp, 3xPs, 2x(Ps or Bw)
This is much closer to the 'MM list (and my proposals), tho the 1x(LCh or Sp) puzzles me a bit.

[Inanna'sBoyToy]

Agreed.

Best. Army. Ever.

The Angry Illyrians (I/47) look to be able to do the LhGen + 11 Ps schtick now...:up

[Andreas Johansson]

The Angry Illyrians (I/47) look to be able to do the LhGen + 11 Ps schtick now...:up

Horses are for weaklings. Real men use the 12xPs version of the Chichimecs. :silly

[Martyn]

Andreas, good call on the Libyan List.

It's just a pain that the 'c' list has gone from really simple to a major pain in proverbial with alternative troop types, five Wb or five Ax or five Sp. I suppose I can get away with the AX or Wb being the same (assuming that they are Wb(F) in MM).

It looks like the list goes from one LCh and 22 figs to two LCh and 70 figs, for all the options. :sick

[Andreas Johansson]

I suppose I can get away with the AX or Wb being the same (assuming that they are Wb(F) in MM).
Hd (S) in 'MM I'm afraid.

Not that I'd complain if you used the same figures for Ax and Wb in this army anyway.

[Martyn]

Hd (S) in 'MM I'm afraid.

So that is 5Wb in v2.2 (I like to keep the element basing compatible with DBM/M)

Not that I'd complain if you used the same figures for Ax and Wb in this army anyway.

It is an army I am considering in order to complete a Punic campaign collection. If 5Wb that makes the count up to 95 figs. :eek

[Redwilde]

It is an army I am considering in order to complete a Punic campaign collection. If 5Wb that makes the count up to 95 figs. :eek

Punic Wars is my biggest Big-Battle/Campaign collection of armies. It's very nice to see that it might finally be worth adding a playable Libyan army into the mix.

[teenage visigoth]

The Angry Illyrians (I/47) look to be able to do the LhGen + 11 Ps schtick now...:up

Indeed. Indeed....

(tugs beard and goes into reminiscent mode)

Ay-yup. I re-member back in the Grand ol' Days of V1.0 the Eye-llyrians had plenty o' warband. Charge at ye as soon as buy ye a drink. Now it seems they just want to stand back and throw them pointy sticks and run to hills like a goat being chased by a lonely Thracian.

I reckon, I'd ask a wise feller, 'does history change, or does we'?

(snaps out, disoriented)

[Inanna'sBoyToy]

Indeed. Indeed....

(tugs beard and goes into reminiscent mode)

Ay-yup. I re-member back in the Grand ol' Days of V1.0 the Eye-llyrians had plenty o' warband. Charge at ye as soon as buy ye a drink. Now it seems they just want to stand back and throw them pointy sticks and run to hills like a goat being chased by a lonely Thracian.

I reckon, I'd ask a wise feller, 'does history change, or does we'?

(snaps out, disoriented)

I'm not sure of the answer but my best gaming pal has both Phyrric lists and the AAA (Angry Ancient Albanians) are right up my unhinged alley..plus I got bags of 'em coming in from the Essex Blowout in Tennessee so once 3.0 gets set in stone I'm gonna join the club...:D

[David Constable]

PART CUT

I reckon, I'd ask a wise feller, 'does history change, or does we'?

(snaps out, disoriented)

:DHistory does not change, it is always fiction, with enough truth to make it look real.

Historians distort to suit their own ideas, and wargamers bend to suit their own armies and ideas.

If you want history go to the fiction section, it has more chances of being historical.

David Constable