31/10/2015 at 00:00 #33565
Not me. It’s always looked like a giant mob of dusty, bewildered submensch led by a few units of overly perfumed bearded brodangos. But if you were so inclined, how would you build a viable one.31/10/2015 at 09:17 #33571
What’s not to like about that it after that description? Mass spectacle, lots of colour, varied troop types- a great Empire behind it’s history with ots of varied enemies and allies and best of all underdog status on the table- oh and..massed scythed chariots.
Go on, you know you want one really.31/10/2015 at 11:11 #33573
Well, the first thing I would want to do is narrow my focus just a bit. After all, the Achaemenid Empire lasted for 220 years, and the army of the Great King did not remain static during that time. Are you looking to represent the forces of Cyrus the Great, Xerxes, Artaxerxes II, or Darius III?
Or by ‘viable,’ are you perchance referring to some sort of generalised, points-based, tournament-oriented thingie?
"Ventosa viri restabit." ~ Harry Field31/10/2015 at 14:52 #33578
@GMinshaw: I admit it, it’s my secret purple shame! I kinda love the idea of a huge, sluggish herd of coerced homo troglodytus slumping toward Delphi. And, yes, as a custom motorcycle guy with a taste for flamboyant but user-repellent ergonomics I can’t say no to scythed chariots.
@ALoGaul: Good question. Since I despise “power armies” in general I’m assuming I’d go toward something after the failures in Greece. I’m fascinated with the kardakes, why they kept them (whatever exactly they were) when their performance was so reliably terrible. I’ve never understood the Achaemenid inability to maintain a solid core of close fighting infantry on the hoplite rather than the aristabara model when there were several groups within their empire that had either direct experience of the form or, in the case of the Egyptians, Indians and some Mesopotamians, roughly similar structures.31/10/2015 at 19:50 #33586
My own army is the army of that tactical genius that was Darius for facing off the invading barbarians of Macedon. Funnily enough it is over 25 years old and has actually only fought one battle- where they roundly thrashed a host of Spartans. Strangely enough I have actually added a couple of units to the army this week :- Some Phoenician marines and a large number of Scythian noble cavalry. I must have felt all colourful last week…first new figures for at least a decade.
To be fair the later army is in effect a variant of a Greek army seeing as the key units are Greek mercenary hoplites but unusually backed up by masses of cavalry. I think its a great combination. Probably won’t beat the trouser-less northern barbarians though.31/10/2015 at 20:52 #33588
I’ll admit that some Scyths in Graeco-Asiatic armor , howling Aethiopes and a mob of Egyptians with axes (hopefully still bronze) and huge leopard skin shields sounds tasty, but I’ve never been able to get my head around the visuals of a “Phoenician Marine”. Semitic-style armor or Greek influenced?31/10/2015 at 21:25 #33591sheepmanParticipant
Early 15mm Achaemenid army. I’ve fought using them a few times, generally if the Greeks don’t hang about and get stuck in thereby avoiding the Persians mass archery they will win. However the Persians can generally outmanouver the Greeks around their flanks so like most armies you should try to play to their strengths.
As I said, pretty boys but if handled correctly they are ok.
'The higher up the tree the monkey goes, the more of it's arse you can see'.
To bosses everywhere!
http://thenorthumbrianwargamer.blogspot.co.uk/31/10/2015 at 22:29 #33592
Phoenician marines look quite Greeky with almost Hoplon shields and classical helmets. However quilted armour and bare legs make them look quite different.
Mr Sheep, nice figures!02/11/2015 at 14:34 #33678
A satrapal army might be interesting, maybe a few gathered together as a sort of rebel state. You’d have all the usual Achaemenid floribunda without the showboat regiments like the huvaka.02/11/2015 at 15:10 #33680
A satrapal army might be interesting, maybe a few gathered together as a sort of rebel state. You’d have all the usual Achaemenid floribunda without the showboat regiments like the huvaka.
It sounds like an army centered around the ‘Revolt of the Satraps’ from the 370’s – 350’s B.C. would be right up your street, then.
"Ventosa viri restabit." ~ Harry Field02/11/2015 at 20:48 #33704
Well, up somebody’s street, anyway. I forgot that in your OP you indicated that you weren’t interested in building an Achaemenid army.
"Ventosa viri restabit." ~ Harry Field03/11/2015 at 02:12 #33731
Of course now I’m contemplating one, heavy on the satrapal and mercenary elements. Actually, what I may be wanting is actually a Saïtic Egyptian with a heavy mercenary presence. Or a Third Interrregnum. Or……
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.