Art De La Guerre

[KevinD]

Should these weapons be treated like atlatls? They had significantly greater range than pila (or javelins) and could be used for more prolonged barrages at a distance rather than thrown just before contact like pila and don’t seem to have been very effective against armor (but not totally useless either). They were also too short to retain for use in melee against charging cavalry. This seems very similar to the effect of the atlatl and some later Roman and earlier Byzantine sources seem to have thought they were effective missile weapons used by sword and shield infantry.

Maybe MIR, LIR, Patrician, Justinian and Thematic HI (and maybe MIR, LIR and Patricuan MI) should have the option from about 284 to maybe 960 AD (or maybe only to 700 AD) to be reclassed as HI Sw Atlatl (if Roman or Byzantine HI Sw), HI Sp Atlatl (if native Byzantine HI Sp) or MI Sw Atlatl (if Roman MI Sw), retaining any elite, ordinary or mediocre status but not Impact or 2HW. (Did troops using these ever have armor?)

Should they be permitted Missile Support if the list otherwise allows it? Maybe but I think not as Vegetius (I think it was him) emphasizes these weapons as a substitute for archery - but maybe by Byzantine times Missile Support might be permitted if the Strategicon discusses such mixed formations with these weapons.

Should Byzantine troops with them continue to be Sp or change to Sw? I’d be inclined not to allow troops with them to be Impacted or 2HW - partly by analogy with the MesoAmericans where such dual armed troops are not permitted and partly show they specialized with one or the other weapon - but not sure if Byzantines with spears should switch to HI Sw Atlatl or retain their spears as HI Sp Atlatl….

[Mark G Fry]

[KevinD]

I think Mark’s comments on this are reasonable.

A couple of points:

1. I don’t think you should get Impact or 2HW in addition to Atlatl for these - both for play balance and because widespread training and arming with Plumbata to be effective probably also was accompanied by some reduction in the training with pila.

2. The Missile Support option instead of Atlatl is reasonable but I don’t like it as much because I don’t really like its focus on negating furious charge, especially by armored opponents - Plumbata seem to have been pretty poor against armored targets and more designed for (somewhat) prolonged shooting, perhaps to provoke charges rather than a final defensive fire against charging opponents. (As a technical matter these sorts of weapons are actually more effective if the user is advancing rather than simply standing still to hurl them while receiving a charge.) But perhaps this is all primarily due to my quibbles with missile support - I would prefer to see it as harassing fire versus slightly more distant targets (which was more effective versus less armored foes) rather than final protective fire right before impact which is relatively more effective versus heavily armored foes. (I would sort of like to see Missile Support replaced by allowing these troops to shoot as if LI Bw, and perhaps also allow shooting (perhaps with a penalty for) immediately prior to melee for (all bow/xb/firearm) troops receiving a charge (in place of their other benefits…)….)

The Herculiani and Joviani seem to have been particularly noted for being effective with these in the late 3rd century.

I do strongly agree with your point about avoiding multi-armed supertroopers which 6th-7th featured, hence my desire to limit swordsmen to only only extra weapon (Impact/Impetuous “or” 2HW “or” Atlatl but never “and”).

In any case I offer these as more ideas for the next edition/revision (or perhaps non-competition scenarios) rather than something that needs to be to implemented immediately or maybe just a desire by me to write some (half-formed?) thoughts about them down while I thought of them and see what others think….

[ethan]

Two items

-I think this could be an interesting option. It is at least a plausible interpretation of later Roman troops. It shouldn't include impact, I am agnostic on middle support - without missile support it might not be worthwhile.

- the Roman lanciarrii really should be MSw atlatl no one takes them as elite javelinmen just too expensive for too liittle value.

-I think changing missile support to shooting is probably a bad idea. It will encourage a less decisive style of play encouraging an ahistorical focus on Napoleonic style play with skirmishers "different up the enemy."

[Mark G Fry]