my top 5 male film crushes

1. Sam (Johnny Depp) in Benny & Joon:


before I loved Chaplin or Keaton or vintage, there was Sam.



2. Rob Gordon (John Cusack) in High Fidelity:


John makes the anti-hero from Nick Hornby's novel my most realistic crush.



3. Peter Wright (Robert Downey Jr.) in Only You:





4. Chris Knight (Val Kilmer) in Real Genius:





5. Ferris (Matthew Broderick) in Ferris Bueller's Day Off:

Oceanology: Robot 'Gliders' Swim The Undersea World

Engage the wave drive (Image: Liquid Robotics)

From New Scientist:

THE way we study oceans could be transformed by a high-tech "surfboard" that generates its own power from sunlight and water waves. The device is capable of navigating at sea for months at a time and recently completed a 4000-kilometre trip from Hawaii to San Diego, California.

Read more ....

With Processor Speeds Stagnating, Researchers Look Beyond Silicon Toward Computing's Future

Flexible Silicon More flexible circuits can help silicon stay relevant in the future of computing Science/University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

From Popular Mechanics:

After a breathless race through the '80s and '90s, desktop computer clock speeds have spent the last decade languishing around the 3 gigahertz mark. That stagnation in processing speeds has prompted scientists to debate whether it's time to move beyond semiconductors -- and what better place to debate than in the journal Science? Ars Technica gives a top-down overview of several future paths laid out in the journal's latest issue by researchers such as Thomas Theis and Paul Solomon of IBM.

Read more ....

Portfolio Workshop






We did a portfolio making workshop at Hotbed Press this Saturday, everyone made an array of beautiful cardboard portfolios to display their work. Click here to see there rest of the photos from the day.

Chrystal by Jak Spedding



D&D Game Day


An elaborate dungeon setup, originally uploaded by Benimoto

Warning: nerd talk ahead!

I've been DMing 4e Dungeons and Dragons, on and off, with various family members for about a year now. I enjoy running these games, but I've also been anxious to try playing from the other side of the table. Last weekend I got my chance during Worldwide D&D Game Day.

I invited my youngest brother and his girlfriend (my two most consistent players) to join me at The Source so that we could play together. After a hilarious sequence of events, I arrived late, with only two open spots remaining. I signed up, sat down, and then... they were nowhere to be found. They were waiting for me to show up before they registered. Ironically, if they had, then I wouldn't have been able to participate. Instead I bumped them out. Too bad about that, but on to the game!

We played through three encounters in as many hours with a group of six PCs and one DM. Playing one role was a much more relaxing experience than orchestrating an entire game world while keeping tabs on everyone else. With a full group I also got a feel for the intended application of different class types, and understood why combat is so awkward with only two or three PCs. Overall, I had a blast, and I hope to do it again soon!

A Kinder, Gentler Slavery

He was analytically brilliant - almost to a fault. John Caldwell Calhoun (1782-1850) possessed one of the finest political intellects of his generation and stood a heartbeat away from the presidency at the apex of his career before fatally succumbing to a strong bout of sectionalism and southern nationalist sentiment. Due to his divisive politics, Calhoun is little known and completely uncelebrated in American history. Despite his fall from grace, one of Calhoun's more famous (or infamous) speeches in the Senate chamber has disquieting resonance to our world today.
.
Born in the backwoods of South Carolina in 1782, Calhoun managed to get elected to the US Congress and became instrumental in winning support for a declaration of war on England in 1812. His patriotism and leadership was awarded by President James Monroe with an appointment as Secretary of War for his two terms in office (1817-1825). In 1828, Calhoun received enough broad support to earn second place to the wildly popular military hero Andrew Jackson from Tennessee.
.
As Vice-President four years later, Calhoun did the nearly unthinkable. He openly opposed a newly proposed tariff, supported by the President, claiming the financial bill favored of Northern industrial interests at the expense of South Carolina and the South. Rather than simply voice an alternative opinion, the Vice-President went so far as to promote the idea of 'nullification' whereby states had the right to 'nullify' federal laws against their interests. In short, this was a slippery slope recipe for dissolution of the union on latitudinal lines. Jackson, already alienated from his Vice-President for other reasons, would have none of it, and Calhoun wisely left his post after one term and successfully ran for US Senate in 1832.
.
As the rift between the North and the South continued to grow throughout the course of the early and mid-19th century, Southerners began to expostulate their views on 'the peculiar institution' ('peculiar' meaning 'unique') - as slavery was often called by its proponents. Indeed, a whole new body of apologetic literature was emerging to defend slavery, and politicians followed suit in the halls of Congress to act as spokesmen for their passionate constituents.
.
In February 1837, Senator Calhoun rose in the Senate chamber and delivered one of the most famous speeches on behalf of slavery to ever be uttered onto the public record. Although his justifications for slavery were (of course) specious, an unsettling grain of truth existed in his contrasting analysis between wage-labor (capitalism) and slave labor. Declaring slavery as a 'positive good', Calhoun stated,
.
'Compare his condition with the tenants of the poor houses in the more civilized portions of Europe - look at the sick, and the old and infirm slave, on one hand, in the midst of his family and friends, under the kind superintending care of his master and mistress, and compare it with the forlorn and wretched condition of the pauper in the poorhouse.'
.
Was Calhoun correct in making a comparison between chattel slavery and the poor in industrial Europe? Regardless of how exploitative and demeaning wage-labor has been through the years - especially in the late 19th and early 20th centuries - it simply does not hold a candle to a life devoid of rights, dignity and personal identity. Furthermore, Calhoun clearly misrepresented the reality of many or perhaps most slaves. A slave was often not 'under the kind and superintending care of his master and mistress' or in 'the midst of his family and friends'. Black families were frequently broken up by slave traders according to gender, age and physical strength. Masters and mistresses could also be cruel. Whippings and beatings of every sort were common means used to coerce slaves into picking more cotton, picking more vegetables or just obeying the rules to the letter. Recalcitrant slaves could be - and indeed were - murdered on the spot. Slave owners rarely faced justice for crimes committed against slaves. And why should they? If a slave was not a human being, then no one could be said to be killed. If not murder, a slave owner could sell his feisty African laborer 'down the river' to New Orleans or Mississippi where sadistic overseers were known to use torture techniques to quash any independent thought or action.
.
The part Calhoun got partially right was in his comparison to the paupers of Europe. London, in particular, defined the socio-economic nadir of the industrial revolution. During the rise of the factory system, the city experienced an unprecedented influx of people from the countryside and immigrants from abroad. The result was massive overcrowding, unsafe tenement housing and a state of utter squalor for much of the population.
.
Henry Mayhew, a reporter for the Morning Chronicle, painted a vivid (and disturbing) description of a 'tidal ditch' - the catch-all sanitation drain in the poorer areas of the city - writing, 'As we gazed in horror at it, we saw drains and sewers emptying their filthy contents into it...We heard bucket after bucket of filth splash into it.' One can imagine the putrid odors and germ-infested air over an above-ground sewage 'system'. Near these tidal ditches stood a ragged population begging or stealing anything possible in order to survive one more day - all only a few miles away from some of the richest people (captains of industry) in the world.
.
Some slaves did indeed have better lives than some of the wretched souls in London from a purely economic standpoint. A 'house' slave could be treated as nearly one of the family and might be offered three meals a day for his (or more likely 'her') work. Thomas Jefferson's inner circle of slaves were certainly treated well. When the master returned to his beloved Monticello from the grueling politics of Washington, his 'closest' slaves would run towards him screaming 'Masa, Masa' with nothing but joy. Hence, it could be reasonably argued that the best treated slaves in the United States were indeed materially better off than their white counterparts in London. Once again, however, a slave, who possessed no rights and was traded as a commodity, was the unique object of total debasement. No matter how poor, a white pauper still had a name, rights under the law and a shred - if only one shred - of dignity.
.
The fact that a comparison between wage-labor and slavery can be made - even to the smallest degree - ought to haunt us today. Approximately 1 out of every 6 persons lives in poverty worldwide. In the richest country in the world, the United States, 13% of its citizens are impoverished. Another significant percentage of people work two and three low-paying jobs just to survive from day to day.
.
While these people do have rights under the law, are they not living in an economic system akin to 'a kinder, gentler slavery'?
.
(Portrait: John C. Calhoun)
.
J Roquen

Eyetracking 'spontaneous' theory of mind in Asperger syndrome

According to the theory of mind account of autism, the social difficulties experienced by people on the autism spectrum arise because they are unable to understand their own or other people's behaviour in terms of motivating mental states such as beliefs, desires, intentions, and so forth.

The prime evidence to support this account comes from studies showing that children with autism tend to perform badly on tests of false belief understanding. In the standard false belief task, a story is told or acted out whereby a character has a mistaken belief about the location of an object or the contents of a container. Children with autism on average perform worse than non-autistic kids on these kinds of tasks. They will tend to say, for instance, that the character will look for the object in the place where it really is rather than the place where the character thinks it is.

However, not all kids with autism fail. Indeed, by adulthood, many people with autism pass the tests fairly easily, although their social difficulties remain. Some of these individuals struggle on more advanced tests of theory of mind including tests of 'second-order' theory of mind (e.g., John thought that Sue thought that the icecream van was still in the park). It's not clear whether these tests are more difficult for them because they tap more sophisticated theory of mind skills or because the stories are just harder to comprehend or remember. In any case, there are still plenty of people with autism who can pass these tests too.


Advocates of the theory of mind account often play a kind of "Get Out of Jail Free" card, arguing that the people who passed the false belief test somehow did it in an abnormal way, perhaps by treating it as a logical reasoning problem rather than relying on more spontaneous intuitions. But, until now, there has been little evidence to back this assertion up.

This brings us to Senju et al.'s recent paper in Science. These authors attempted to bolster the theory of mind account by providing evidence that adults with Asperger syndrome have difficulties with theory of mind, even though they are able to pass traditional theory of mind tests. Asperger syndrome is related to autism and many people assume that it is really a mild form of autism. Indeed, Senju et al provide no evidence to show that their participants met criteria for Asperger syndrome rather than high-functioning autism.
The researchers monitored participants' eye-movements while they watched a series of video clips. In each clip a puppet placed an object in one of two boxes before leaving the scene briefly. A chime then sounded and the puppet returned to retrieve the object. By the fourth video clip, when they heard the chime, all the participants anticipated the puppet's return, looking towards the box containing the object.


The fifth trial was critical. The object was moved in the puppet's absence, so the puppet now had a false belief about its location. If a participant was tracking the puppet's beliefs then, when the chime was played, they should look towards the now empty box because the puppet did not know that the object had been moved from it. Otherwise, they should look towards the box where the object really was (as they had all done on the previous 'true belief' trial).

8 of the adults with Asperger's looked at the 'correct' box but the other 11 looked at the incorrect box. This compares with a group of non-autistic adults, of whom 13 looked at the correct box and only 4 looked at the incorrect box.

Senju et al. conclude on the basis of these findings that:
  • adults with Asperger syndrome do not spontaneously anticipate others’ actions
  • individuals with Asperger syndrome have a persistent impairment in spontaneous mentalizing
  • compensatory learning might explain the apparent paradox between success on explicit false belief tests and continued difficulty in everyday social interaction for individuals with Asperger syndrome
The results certainly suggest that there are problems with theory of mind that traditional tests aren't sensitive to. But it's important not to assume from this that all individuals with Asperger syndrome are affected in this way.

Senju et al's argument seems to be that, because the Asperger group was split roughly 50:50 between passers and failers, they were probably all guessing. It would be like each person tossing a coin and guessing heads or tails - you'd expect about half of them to be right just by chance, even though nobody actually has any idea what's going to happen. But this logic doesn't follow. On the previous trial, participants with Asperger's had unanimously looked towards the box containing the object. So why would they start guessing now? If their eye-movements were driven by their own knowledge of reality rather than the puppet's (false) belief then they should always look to the box containing the object. In other words, there's no reason to think that the 8 individuals in the Asperger group who looked in the correct location just 'got lucky'.

It's also worth remembering that 4 of the 17 non-autistic control participants also looked in the wrong location too. If we assume that these people were generally able to track the puppet's beliefs, this suggests that the test isn't completely reliable. In other words, even if you have a fully functioning theory of mind, you still only look in the correct location about a quarter of the time. So we can't even assume that all the 'failers' in the Asperger group lacked a theory of mind either.

To sum up, Senju's study suggests that there may well be some people with Asperger syndrome or autism who can pass standard theory of mind tests but don't spontaneously use theory of mind to anticipate other people's actions. This could perhaps explain their lingering social difficulties. However, this still leaves unaccounted for a large proportion of people with Asperger syndrome who pass standard theory of mind tests and can use theory of mind to anticipate other people's actions, but yet still face serious challenges in their everyday social interactions. This is not to diminish the importance of theory of mind. But it shows once again that we need to move on from one-size-fits-all theories of autism and Asperger syndrome.

Reference:

Senju, A., Southgate, V., White, S., and Frith, U. (2009). Mindblind Eyes: An Absence of Spontaneous Theory of Mind in Asperger Syndrome. Science, 325, 883 - 885.

Autonomous Submarinebot Heads Down on Deepest-Ever Undersea Search For Undiscovered Life

Autosub6000 via The Register

From The Popular Science:

While some scientists resort to undersea drilling to find undiscovered forms of life, a new group of researchers has decided that piloting a robotic submarine into a submerged volcano was the way to go. By exploring the deepest, hottest, undersea volcano ever probed, the researchers hope to find clues to both the beginnings of life on Earth, and the possible forms of life on other planets.

Read more ....

FOG Timeline

http://www.fieldofglory.com/file/fog_armies_timeline.pdf

A useful little document - it basically shows what army was round when (and so who realistically could have fought who).

Useful for knowing exactly which army could fight which in an historical context.

Off on my holidays! Painting ahoy!

We're off to Scotland for half-term, staying in a little cottage on the West Coast.

As its going to be wet this week and we'll have long nights to fill, I'm taking the opportunity to take a big chunk out of my unpainted troops (mainly the Macedonian / Seleucids) by carting my paints, brushes and inks up with us. 

It shouldn't take up too much space in the boot and will mean that I've got something constructive to do at nights (apart from read) rather than just watch the box.

As I've finished my first BG's of pikes, psioli and thorakitai it should mean I'll have a full army to combat Russ' Persians on our return.

There is a whopping amount of cavalry to knock out as well as the hoplites and pikes (plus the theurophori and Thracians with rhomphaia - a tidy unit as they get a + against swordsmen AND cancel out better armour POA's).

I'll also be taking my FOG rule book for a bit of light reading!

What's one of them? Carthaginian Sacred Band

Army : early Carthaginian

FOG Book : Immortal Fire

Description
The Sacred Band of Carthage is the name used by Greek historians to refer to an infantry unit of Carthaginian foot citizens that served in Carthaginian armies during the fourth century BC. The presence of Carthaginian citizens fighting as infantry in these armies is unusual as Carthaginian citizens usually only served as officers or cavalry in the Carthaginian armed forces and the bulk of Carthaginian armies were usually made up of mercenaries, infantry from allied communities (who might be Punic colonists) and subject levies.


Trained from an early age to be tough phalanx spearmen, these men were from wealthy Carthaginian families, and as such had extremely good equipment. They were trained from birth to be great warriors and they were able to afford high quality armor and weapons. They fought as a traditional phalanx organized in the Hellenic style.

The "Sacred Band" consisted of a small heavy infantry unit of 2000-3000 men, who were "inferior to none among them as to birth, wealth, or reputation" and distinguished by "the splendour of their arms, and the slowness and order of their march".

At the Battle of the Krimissus in Sicily in 341 BC, the "Sacred Band" fought as a well organized phalanx. It was destroyed utterly. Two thousand citizen troops (perhaps a similar unit), are recorded as being in Sicily in 311 BC, the last time that citizens troops are recorded as being overseas. By 310 BC, the Sacred Band appears to have been reformed, only to be destroyed in battle against Agathocles at Tunis.

After its destruction in 310 BC, the "Sacred Band" disappears from historical record. When Carthaginian citizen infantry turn up in the historical sources during later wars, their numbers are significantly higher implying a levy of all available citizens due to crisis. Larger citizen forces turned out at the Battle of Bagradas during the First Punic War, the Mercenary War, and the Third Punic War, but the "Sacred Band" is not mentioned in any of the surviving accounts we have of these wars.

"It was composed of young nobles, who wore dazzling white shields and breast-plates which were works of art; who even in the camp never drank except from goblets of silver and of gold. But this corps had apparently become extinct, and the Carthaginians only officered their troops, who they looked upon as ammunition, and to whom their orders were delivered through interpreters. The various regiments of the Carthaginian army had therefore nothing in common with one another or with those by whom they were led. They rushed to battle in confusion, "with sounds, discordant as their various tribes," and with no higher feeling than the hope of plunder or the excitement which the act of fighting arouses in the brave soldier".

They are also sometimes depicted as cavalry as well as infantry.


Use in FOG
The Sacred Band is Superior, Armoured, Drilled Heavy Foot - Offensive Spearmen.

Operating alongside their more numerous (but less well armed) African Spearmen, the Sacred Band is a useful unit to have.  The ability to re-roll 1's and with being Armoured makes them likely to win at Impact and (in 2 ranks of 3 bases) certainly pack a hefty punch unless coming up against a numerically superior force - but even then their POA's should count (in a practice session, a unit of Sacred Band mashed an 8 base average unit in just 3 rounds!).

As usual with Offensive Spearmen they are effective against most cavalry and so could flank the African spearmen quite securely (not many cavalry will fare well against spears and better armour) or act as a line breaking shock unit (especially against sword-armed opponents). 

Their Drilled training belies the suggestion that they were unruly and difficult to control - but in FOG it does make them an effective back-up unit as well (i.e. to shore up any gaps in the line or protect the rear).


What's one of them? Thureophoroi

Army : Seleucids, Attalid Pergamene, Hellenistic Greeks, Pontics (amongst others)

FOG Book : Rise of Rome, Immortal Fire


Description
The Thureophoroi (singular: Thureophoros) was a type of infantry soldier, common in the 3rd to 1st Century BCE, who carried a large oval shield called a thureos ('door') which had a type of metal strip boss and a central spine. They were armed with a long thrusting spear, javelins and a sword. They also usually wore an iron or bronze Macedonian helmet.

The thureos was probably originally an adapted form of a Celtic shield. Thracian and Illyrian infantry probably adopted the shield before the Greeks. However it has been suggested that the thureos was brought to Greece after Pyrrhus of Epirus' campaigns in Italy, as his Oscan allies and Roman enemies used the Scutum.


Role
Thureophoroi (or Thyreophoroi) are usually distinguished from both skirmishers and the phalanx and seem to have operated in a role intermediate between the two types. They often supported light troops and seemed to be capable of operating in a similar manner to peltasts. The Thureophoroi were well suited to the tactical needs for smaller states, mainly border defense. They were mobile and could rapidly advance over varied terrain. According to Plutarch, they could fight as skirmishers and then fall back, assume spears and tighten the ranks, forming a phalanx.

Development
In the 4th century BCE, the main type of mercenary infantry was the peltast to the extent that this became a synonym for mercenaries in general. A few illustrations of the early 3rd BC still show a small round peltai shield in use but by the mid 3rd century BCE it has been replaced by the thureos.

The thureos was adopted by the Achaean League and by the Boeotians in the 270's BC. Plutarch describes Achaean citizens equipped with the thureos as skirmishing at a distance like peltasts but also as having spears for hand-to-hand combat. Despite their spears, we are told that the thureophoroi were not reliable in hand-to-hand fighting due to their nature as light troops. Mercenary thureophoroi were not only Greek but could be from other areas such as Anatolia.

Alongside this form of fighting the thureomachia, fighting with swords and the thureos, was developed into an athletic event in many Greek competitions. The Achaean League under Philopoemen abandoned the thureos around 208-207 BC in favor of the Macedonian sarissa, although the citizens of Megalopolis, an Achaean city, had adopted the Macedonian style in 222 BC after Antigonus III Doson gave the city bronze shields to form a contingent of epilektoi armed as Chalkaspides ('Bronze-Shields'). By the end of the 3rd century BC the thureophoroi was no longer the dominant troop type in the smaller Greek states, having been replaced with the Macedonian style phalanx. A related troop type was the thorakites.




Use in FOG
Thuerephoroi can be Medium of Heavy Foot, Protected, Average, Drilled Offensive Spearmen.
 
The FOG rules do not allow for the Thureophoroi's potential as super-skirmishers, emphasising more their melee capability (a contradiction of Plutarch's view and which would have made them a more interesting unit to play).  As such they should therefore be viewed as a more mobile melee unit than the phalanxes they would usually accompany.
 
As such they should be used to flank pike phalanxes as a more mobile alternative to Thorakiti. 
 
As Offensive Spearmen they receive POA's in impact and melee against most troops (including mounted) making them formidable opponents and therefore another reason to use as flank protection for their heavier colleagues in the middle.

masquerade

Went to a masquerade last night.
I wore my fancy coat and old top hat.



(me, my boyfriend Devon, our friend Edward)

If I had face paints available to me, then I would have painted a mask on.
I found a lot of neat ideas at Make-up Geek,
and there are some incredible faces here.



















Opportunity Mars Rover Gets Artificial Intelligence Upgrade, Decides For Itself What to Explore Next

Opportunity Target Selection Opportunity scans the Martian terrain for rocks meeting specific criteria – shape, size, coloration – set by scientists on the ground. When it finds what it's looking for, it sets a course for the point of interest. NASA/JPL-Caltech

From Popular Science:

NASA's Opportunity Rover, now in its seventh year of roaming the Martian surface, just got a little smarter. Like parents giving their growing child a little more autonomy, engineers updated Opportunity with artificial intelligence software this past winter that allows the rover to make its own decisions about where to stop and which rocks to analyze during its travels. Now the first images of Opportunity picking and choosing where to investigate have been released.

Read more ....

What's one of them? Hypaspist

Army : Alexandrian Macedonian

FOG Book : Immortal Fire

Description
A "hypaspist" (shield bearer, or "shield covered") a squire, man at arms, or "shield carrier". In Homer, Deiphobos advances "ὑπασπίδια" or under cover of his shield. By the time of Herodotus (426 BCE) the word had come to mean a high status soldier as is strongly suggested by Herodotus in one of the earliest known uses:


"Now the horse which Artybius rode was trained to fight with infantrymen by rearing up. Hearing this, Onesilus said to his hypaspist, a Carian of great renown in war and a valiant man..."

A similar usage occurs in Euripides play "Rhesus" and another in his "Phoenissae". Xenophon was deserted by his in a particularly sticky situation. A hypaspist would differ from a skeuophoros in most cases because the "shield bearer" is a free warrior and the "baggage carrier" was probably usually a slave. The word may have had Homeric and heroic connotations that led Phillip and Alexander of Macedon to use it for an elite military unit.

This unit, known as the Hypaspistai, or hypaspists were probably armed as hoplites rather than as phalangites or pikemen in Alexander the Great's Macedonian army. In battle they were probably armed with the Greek aspis (shield), spolas or stola body-armor, helmet, greaves and a xiphos although their equipment might be more ornate than main-line soldiers.

It is worth noting that all the references to a unit called "hypaspists" are much later than the period of Alexander, and modern historians have to assume that later sources like Diodorus Siculus (1st C. BCE) and Arrian had access to earlier records.

Arrian's phrase 'tous kouphotatous te kai ama euoplotatous'  has frequently been rendered as 'lightest armed' although Brunt concedes it is more properly translated as 'nimblest' or 'most agile'.

There has been a great deal of speculation by military historians since the late Hellenistic period about the elite units of Alexander's army. The hypaspists may have been raised from the whole kingdom rather than on a cantonal basis; if so, they were the King's Army rather than the army of the kingdom.

In the Hellenistic period the hypaspist apparently continued to exist, yet in different capacities and under different names. The name lived on in the Seleucid, Ptolemaic and Antigonid kingdoms, yet they were now seen as royal bodyguards and military administrators. Polybius mentions a hypaspist being sent by Philip V of Macedon, after his defeat at the Battle of Cynoscephalae in 197 BC, to Larisa to burn state papers. The actual fighting unit of hypasists seems to lived on in Macedonia as the corps of 'Peltasts', whose status, equipment and role seems to be almost exactly the same as that of the hypaspist under Alexander. Originally consisting of 3,000 men by the Third Macedonian War they were 5,000, most likely to accommodate their elite formation, the Agema.


Hypaspists in FOG

Hypaspists are Heavy Foot, Superior, Protected, Drilled Offensive Spearmen.

Given that they almost always operate alongside pikemen (Foot Companians or otherwise) it is probably best to use these to anchor one flank of the pike phalanx as it moves to meet the enemy (the phalanx's flanks being the most vulnerable part).

Therefore expect to see hypaspists close to the phalanx on one side or the other. 

Movement
Hypaspists move at 3MU

Impact / Melee
As Protected they may only receive a +POA in melee but will still pack a punch (carrying 6 bases or more into combat per BG).  The Superior quality element means re-rolls on 1's and being spear-armed in 2 ranks makes them feared by cavalry as much as by foot troops.

What's one of them? Triarii

Army - Mid Republican Roman

FOG Book - Rise of Rome

Pronunciation - Tri-arr-ee-eye

Description
Triarii (Singular: Triarius) were one of the elements of the early Roman military Manipular legions of the early Roman Republic (509 BC – 107 BC). They were the oldest and among the wealthiest men in the army, and could afford good quality equipment.

They wore heavy metal armour and carried large shields, their usual position being the third battle line.

During the Camillan era, they fought in a shallow phalanx formation, supported by light troops. In most battles triarii were not used because the lighter troops usually defeated the enemy before the triarii were committed to the battle. They were eventually phased out after the Marian reforms of 107 BC.


History and deployment

Triarii may have evolved from the old first class of the army under the Etruscan kings.

The first class comprised the richest soldiers in the legion who were equipped with spears, breastplates and large shields, like heavy Greek hoplites. They served as heavy infantry in the early Roman army, and were used at the front of a very large phalanx formation. After a time, engagements with the Samnites and Gauls appear to have taught the Romans the importance of flexibility and the inadequacy of the phalanx on the rough, hilly ground of central Italy.

Camillan era
By the 4th century BC, the military formations the Romans had inherited from the Etruscans were still in use. Though their efficiency was doubtful, they proved effective against Rome's largely local adversaries. When Gauls invaded Etruria in 390 BC, the inhabitants requested help from Rome.

The small contingent Rome sent to repel the Gallic invaders provoked a full-scale attack on Rome. The entire Roman army was destroyed at the Battle of the Allia. This crushing defeat prompted reforms by Marcus Furius Camillus. Under the new system, men were sorted into classes according to wealth, the triarii being the richest after the mounted equites. 

Triarii were armed with spears, or hastae, about 2 metres (6½ feet) long. They also carried swords, or gladii, about 74 centimetres (29 inches) long, in case the spear broke or the enemy drew too close. They fought as hoplites, usually carrying clipei, large round Greek shields, and bronze helmets, often with a number of feathers fixed onto the top to increase stature. Heavy plate armour was favoured, with mail also being popular. Many would paint or engrave portraits of ancestors onto their shield, believing that it would bring them luck in battle.

In this type of new Roman legion, the 900 triarii formed 15 maniples, military units of 60 men each, which were in turn part of 15 ordines, larger units made up of a maniple of triarii, a maniple of rorarii and a maniple of accensi. 

The triarii stood in the third line of the legion, behind the front line of hastati and the second line of principes, and in front of the rorarii and accensi.  In a pitched battle, the leves, javelin-armed skirmishers who were attached to maniples of hastati, would form up at the front of the legion and harass the enemy with javelin fire and cover the advance of the hastati, spear armed infantry.

If the hastati failed to break the enemy, they would fall back and let the principes, heavier and more experienced infantry, take over. If the principes did not break them, they would retire behind the triarii, who would then engage the enemy in turn—hence the expression "rem ad Triarios redisse "  - it has come to the triarii - signalling an act of desperation.

The equites, cavalrymen, were used as flankers and to pursue routing enemies. The rorarii, the poorer reserve soldiers, and accensi, the least dependable troops armed with slings, would be used in a support role, providing mass and supporting wavering areas of the line.

Polybian system
By the time of the second Punic war of the late 3rd century BC, this system proved inefficient against enemies such as Carthage. After a series of more "organic" changes as opposed to a single intentional reform, a new system gradually came into being. Infantry were sorted into classes according to age and experience rather than wealth, the triarii being the most experienced.  Their equipment and role was very similar to the previous system, except they now carried scuta, large rectangular shields that offered a greater degree of protection than the old round clipeus.

The number of triarii had been reduced to 600 per legion, now forming 10 maniples of 60 men each.  The triarii still made up the third line in the legion, behind the front line of hastati and the second line of principes, but the rorarii and accensi had been phased out. Leves had been replaced with velites, who had a similar role but were also attached to principes and triarii. 

Pitched battles were conducted in a similar fashion: the velites would gather at the front and fling javelins to cover the advance of the hastati. If the hastati failed to break the enemy, they would fall back on the principes, who now carried swords rather than spears. If the principes could not break them they would retire behind the triarii, who would then engage the enemy.

This order of battle was almost always followed, the battle of the Great Plains and the battle of Zama being among the few notable exceptions. At the Great Plains, Scipio, the Roman general, formed his men up in the usual manner, but once the hastati had begun to engage the enemy, he used his principes and triarii as a flanking force, routing the opposing Carthaginians.

At Zama, Scipio arranged his men into columns, side by side, with large lanes in between. The opposing Carthaginian elephants were drawn into these lanes where many were killed by velites without inflicting many casualties on the Romans. Once the surviving elephants had been routed, he formed his men into a long line with his triarii and principes in the centre and hastati on the flanks, ready to engage the Carthaginian infantry.

Marian reforms
With the formal military reforms of Gaius Marius in 107 BC, implemented to combat a shortage of manpower due to wars against Jugurtha in Africa and Germanic tribes to the north, the different classes of units were scrapped entirely.

The wealth and age requirements were removed; anyone could join as a career, rather than as service to the city, and all would be equipped as milites, with the same, state-purchased equipment. Auxiliaries, local irregular troops, would fulfill other roles, serving as archers, skirmishers and cavalry. Sallust, in his Jugurthine War, describes several instances in which Roman or allied regular heavy infantry were equipped with light equipment and used as light footsoldiers.  This was supposedly a common practice.


Triarii in FOG

Triarii are very different troops to the hastati / principes. 

Heavy Foot, Armoured, Superior, Drilled, Offensive Spearmen.

Triarii can be upgraded to Elite (and are worth doing so).

The main drawback to triarii is their small number (often 2 bases per BG) - making them very vulnerable despite their advantages.  Many generals therefore push their hastati BG's together - making them a formidable group on the battlefield.

Many generals keep the triarii in reserve or behind the main line to protect from rear or flank cavalry attacks or to step up to support wavering hastati / principes BG's.

Movement
Triarii move at 3MU's so they're not very mobile.  They are best kept close to the action in the middle so they can step in and help tip the balance when required.

Impact / Melee As Offensive Spearmen, triarii bring all the advantages of that class (as long as they stay in 2 ranks).  They usually get a + at Impact (whether charging or not) and in melee they often have a ++ against opponents (spears in 2 ranks, better armour etc.).

Where the triarii also score is as Superior or Elite.  As Elite they can re-roll 1's AND 2's and with ++ means they will hit on a 3 - so a number of hits is virtually guaranteed while being hard to hit in return.

Their disadvantage is in numbers of bases per BG.  But as long as they fight in a battle line or alongside other troops they pack a huge punch.  Isolated, they're a different proposition as they are easy to outflank.

They do better against elephants and chariots than the hastati, and against cavalry as well (those long spears, you see).

They are best used (as the Romans did) as a unit of last resort - to plug gaps, tip the balance in a tight melee or to protect the rear in the event that the Roman cavalry have been run off the field.

What's one of them? Principes

Army - Mid Republican Rome

FOG Book - Rise of Rome

Pronunciation - Prin-kip-ais

Description
Principes (Singular: Princeps) were spearmen, and later swordsmen, in the armies of the early Roman Republic. They were men in the prime of their lives who were fairly wealthy, and could afford decent equipment. They were the heavier infantry of the legion who carried large shields and wore good quality armour. Their usual position was the second battle line. They fought in quincunx formation, supported by light troops. They were eventually done away with after the Marian reforms of 107 BC.

History and deployment

Principes appear to have been born remnants of the old second class of the army under the Etruscan kings when it was reformed by Marcus Furius Camillus. The second class stood in some of the first few ranks of a very large phalanx were equipped in a similar manner to principes, and would support the heavier first class in the front ranks. It is probable that engagements with the Samnites and a crushing defeat at the hands of the Gallic warlord Brennus, who both used lots of smaller military units rather than a few very large ones taught the Romans the importance of flexibility and the inadequacy of the phalanx on the rough, hilly ground of central Italy.


Camillan system
In the early Camillan system of organisation of the 3rd and 4th centuries BC, men were sorted into classes based on wealth, the principes being the wealthiest after the triarii. Principes were armed with short spears, or hastae, up to 1.8 metres (6 ft) long.

They fought in quincunx formation, usually carrying scuta, large rectangular shields, and bronze helmets, often with a number of feathers fixed onto the top to increase stature. They wore heavier armour types, the most common form being chainmail, which offered a good degree of protection without hindering movement.

In this type of legion, the 900 principes formed 15 maniples, military units of 60 men each. The principes stood in the second battle line, behind hastati of the first line and in front of the triarii in the third. In a pitched battle, the leves, javelin armed light infantry would form up at the front of the legion and harass the enemy with javelin fire to cover the advance of the hastati, light spearmen.

If the hastati failed to break the enemy during their engagement, they would fall back and let the heavier principes take over. If the principes could not break them, they would retire behind the heavy triarii spearmenwho would then engage the enemy in turn. The equites, cavalrymen, were used as flankers and to pursue routing enemies. The rorarii and accensi in the final battle line were some of the least dependable troops, and were used in a support role, providing mass and reinforcing wavering areas of the line.
Polybian system
By the time of the Punic wars of the 2nd century BC, this form of organisation was found to be inefficient. In a new Polybian system, infantry were sorted into classes according to age and experience rather than wealth, the principes being older veterans with a greater degree of experience. Their equipment and role was very similar to the previous system, except they now carried swords, or gladii, instead of spears. Each princeps also carried 2 pila, heavy javelins that bent on impact to prevent them being removed from the victim or thrown back.

The principes had been increased in number to 1200 per legion, and formed 10 maniples of 120 men each.The rorarii and accensi had been done away with. Leves had been replaced with velites, who had a similar role, with forty of them being attached to each maniple in the legion.

Pitched battles were conducted in a similar fashion; the velites would gather at the front and fling javelins to cover the advance of the hastati, who had also been re-armed with swords. If the hastati failed to break the enemy, they would fall back on the principes. If the principes could not break them, they would retire behind the triarii who would then engage the enemy.

This order of battle was almost always followed, the battle of the Great Plains and the battle of Zama being among the few notable exceptions. At the Great Plains, Scipio, the Roman general, formed his men up in the usual manner, but once the hastati had begun to engage the enemy, he used his principes and triarii as a flanking force, routing the opposing Carthaginians.

At Zama, Scipio arranged his men into columns, side by side, with large lanes in between. The opposing Carthaginian elephants were drawn into these lanes where many were killed by velites without inflicting many casualties on the Romans. Once the surviving elephants had been routed, he formed his men into a long line with his triarii and principes in the centre and hastati on the flanks, ready to engage the Carthaginian infantry.
Marian reforms
With the formal military reforms of Gaius Marius in 107 BC, intended to combat a shortage of manpower from wars against Jugurtha in Africa and Germanic tribes to the north, the different classes of units were done away with entirely. The wealth and age requirements were scrapped. Soldiers would join as a career, rather than as service to the city, and would all be equipped as miles, or soldiers, with the same, state purchased equipment. Auxiliaries, local irregular troops, would fulfill other roles, serving as archers, skirmishers and cavalry


Principes in FOG
Principes and hastati are interchangable in FOG and are essentially exactly the same troops.  For the purists, principes make up the second rank of any BG (with hastati in the front rank).  But use of the principes essentially mirrors use of the hastati.

What's one of them? Hastati

Army : Mid-Republican Roman

FOG Book - Rise of Rome

Pronunciation - has-tar-tea

Description
Hastati (singular: Hastatus) were a class of infantry in the armies of the early Roman Republic who originally fought as spearmen, and later as swordsmen. They were originally some of the poorest men in the legion, and could afford only modest equipment — light armour and a large shield, in their service as the lighter infantry of the legion. Later, the hastati contained the younger men rather than just the poorer, though most men of their age were relatively poor. Their usual position was the first battle line. They fought in a quincunx formation, supported by light troops. They were eventually done away with after the Marian reforms of 107 BC.



History and deployment
Hastati appear to have been remnants of the old third class of the army under the Etruscan kings when it was reformed by Marcus Furius Camillus. The third class stood in some of the last few ranks of a very large phalanx were equipped in a similar manner to hastati, but more often than not were relegated to providing missile support to the higher classes rather than fighting themselves. It is probable that engagements with the Samnites and a crushing defeat at the hands of the Gallic warlord Brennus, who both used lots of smaller military units rather than a few very large ones, taught the Romans the importance of flexibility and the inadequacy of the phalanx on the rough, hilly ground of central Italy.


Camillan system
The war against the gauls forced the romans to reform their army.By the 4th century BC the military the Romans had inherited from the Etruscans was still in use. Though its efficiency was doubtful, it proved effective against Rome's largely local adversaries. When Gauls invaded Etruria in 390 BC, the inhabitants requested help from Rome. The small contingent Rome sent to repel the Gallic invaders provoked a full scale attack on Rome. The entire Roman army was destroyed at the Battle of the Allia in a crushing defeat that prompted reforms by Marcus Furius Camillus.

Under the new system, men were sorted into classes based on wealth; the hastati were the third poorest, with the rorarii being slightly poorer and the principes slightly wealthier. Hastati were armed with short spears, or hastae, up to 1.8 metres (6 ft) long, from which the soldiers acquired their name. They fought in quincunx formation, usually carrying scuta, large rectangular shields, and bronze helmets, often with a number of feathers fixed onto the top to increase stature. They wore light armour, the most common form being small breastplates, called "heart protectors".




In this type of legion, the 900 hastati formed 15 maniples, military units of 60 men each. Attached to each maniple were about 20 leves, javelin-armed light infantry. The hastati stood in the first battle line, in front of the principes of the second line and the triarii of the third. In a pitched battle, the leves would form up at the front of the legion and harass the enemy with javelin fire to cover the advance of the hastati. If the hastati failed to break the enemy during their engagement, they would fall back and let the heavier principes take over. If the principes could not break them, they would retire behind the triarii spearmen, who would then engage the enemy in turn. The equites, cavalrymen, were used as flankers and to pursue routing enemies. The rorarii and accensi in the final battle line were some of the least dependable troops, and were used in a support role, providing mass and reinforcing wavering areas of the line.

Polybian system
The hastati were replaced by legionaries. By the time of the Punic wars of the 3rd century BC, the Camillan system of organisation was found to be inefficient. In a new Polybian system, infantry were sorted into classes according to age and experience rather than wealth, the hastati being the youngest and least experienced. Their equipment and role was very similar to the previous system, except they now carried swords, or gladii, instead of spears. Each hastatus also carried 2 pila, heavy javelins that bent on impact to prevent them being removed from the victim or thrown back.

The hastati had been increased in number to 1200 per legion, and formed 10 maniples of 120 men each. The rorarii and accensi had been done away with. Leves had been replaced with velites, who had a similar role but were now also attached to principes and triarii. Pitched battles were conducted in a similar fashion; the velites would gather at the front and fling javelins to cover the advance of the hastati. If the hastati failed to break the enemy, they would fall back on the principes, who had also been re-armed with swords. If the principes could not break them, they would retire behind the triarii, who would then engage the enemy.

This order of battle was almost always followed, the battle of the Great Plains and the battle of Zama being among the few notable exceptions. At the Great Plains, Scipio, the Roman general, formed his men up in the usual manner, but once the hastati had begun to engage the enemy, he used his principes and triarii as a flanking force, routing the opposing Carthaginian troops.

The hastati disappeared with the creation of professional legions. At Zama, Scipio arranged his men into columns, side by side, with large lanes in between. The opposing Carthaginian elephants were drawn into these lanes where many were killed by velites without inflicting many casualties on the Romans. Once the surviving elephants had been routed, he formed his men into a long line with his triarii and principes in the centre and hastati on the flanks, ready to engage the Carthaginian infantry.


Marian reforms
With the formal military reforms of Gaius Marius in 107 BC, intended to combat a shortage of manpower from wars against Jugurtha in Africa and Germanic tribes to the north, the different classes of units were done away with entirely. The wealth and age requirements were scrapped. Soldiers would join as a career, rather than as service to the city, and would all be equipped as medium infantry with the same state-purchased equipment. Auxiliaries, local irregular troops, would fulfill other roles, serving as archers, skirmishers and cavalry


Use in FOG
Hastati (and their interchangable chums the Principes) are the core unit of the MRR army.

They are Heavy Foot, Protected, Average, Drilled, Impact Foot Swordsmen.

They can be upgraded to Armoured and Superior.  Both upgrades are highly recommended.  Although the points tally can rise from 8 per base to 14 per base, the POA for being better armoured and the ability to re-roll 1's makes them virtually unstoppable against any but the best opposing units on the field.

Their disadvantage is the small number of units per BG - although as Superior they can go on until they lose the 3rd base.  As a consequence the Roman commander should consider placing his hastati / principes in an area where both flanks are protected and encourage the opposition to come onto them. 

The small numbers and slow movement (3MU's) means that caught in the open by more flexible troops can make them vulnerable.  But in a head on fight they are tough opponents.

Movement
Hastati only move at 3MU and so aren't going anywhere quickly.  They are drilled and so can move around relatively easily - just not very quickly.

Laying the troops out in the traditional Roman checkerboard formation allows for easier movement before battle is joined (such as aligning troops against units they'll get a better POA against) and - when battle is joined - to move units up to prevent overlaps and present a solid line.

As an example, a BG of 4 bases of hastati with a BG of 2 triarii behind and to the right engages a BG of 6 bases of Gallic warriors.  The Roman general can move the triarii into line next to the hastati OR wait until after the impact and melee.  If the hastati are doing well (say the Gauls are disrupted) then the triarii can move in and Impact the Gauls while they are at a disadvantage.  Similarly if the hastati fared less well at impact they can move up to support the hastati.  Or they can stay where they are and threaten / intercept a flank attack should one look likely.


Impact / melee
Hastati are armed with pila and short sword.  They are Impact Foot (++ against any foot and + against most mounted).

Hastati suffer against elephants who get a + against them so it is worth screening hastati with velites where elephants are present or (if possible) lining your triarii up against opposing elephants. 

They also suffer against chariots in open terrain at Impact so if your opponent has chariots you will want to place your hastati in a position where the chariots are less effective (e.g. behind terrain or on a hill).

Hastati do very well against foot swordsmen (usually getting ++ in melee when their better armour is taken into account).  As a consequence Roman commanders should aim the hastati at any medium or heavy sword-armed troops in preference to any other.  They also do well against Heavy Weapon armed troops in melle (being Skilled Swordsmen).

They do quite well against most cavalry in impact and hand-to-hand (usually having a + POA) unless facing lancers.  With a BG of triarii in close attendance, this makes a cavalry attack on hastati a very high risk strategy.

Skirmish troops shooting at hastati tend to be ineffective - the armour + usually means that missile fire has little if no impact.  But the velites should keep skirmishers away in any case.

Hastati do less well against spears (I always try to avoid Carthaginian African Spearmen for this reason) as they lose a + at impact and their + in melee (indeed they can often fight at a disadvantage).  This includes pikes, offensive spearmen and light spear.   The drilled nature of the hastati may make it possible to move them away from the threat of a spear charge.

A usual counter to the hastati is to throw cheap impact troops (gallic warriors, scutarii) at the hastati in the hope of wearing them down before the 'better' units (such as spearmen) arrive on the scene.  This is a high risk strategy because if the hastati survive the Impact in good shape, then the attacking BG is likely to suffer heavy casualties and be routed.  However, if successful then the small numbers of Romans can be quickly whittled down.

What's one of them? Velites

Army : Mid-Republican Rome

FOG book : Rise of Rome

Pronunciation - well-it-ease (apparently!)

Description
Velites (singular: veles) were a class of infantry in the Polybian legions of the early Roman republic. Velites were light infantry and skirmishers who were armed with a number of light javelins, or hastae velitares, to fling at the enemy, and also carried short thrusting swords, or gladii for use in melee. They rarely wore armour, as they were the youngest and poorest soldiers in the legion and could not afford much equipment. They did carry small wooden shields for protection though, and wore a headdress made from wolf skin to allow officers to differentiate between them and other heavier legionaries.


Velites did not form their own units; a number of them were attached to each maniple of hastati, principes and triarii. They were typically used as a screening force, driving off enemy skirmishers and disrupting enemy formations with javelin fire before retiring behind the lines to allow the heavier armed hastati to attack. They were normally the ones who engaged war elephants and chariots if they were present on the field; their high mobility and ranged weaponry made them much more effective against these enemies than heavy infantry. An early Roman legion contained approximately 1,000 velites. Velites were eventually done away with after the Marian reforms.

Organisation and armament
Velites were the youngest and usually the poorest soldiers in the legion, and could rarely afford much equipment. They were armed with hastae velitares, light javelins with tips designed to bend on impact to prevent it being thrown back, similar to the heavier pila of other legionaries. As a backup weapons, they also carried gladii, relatively short thrusting swords 74 centimetres (29 inches) in length that were the main weapons of the hastati and principes. They fought in a very loose, staggered formation like most irregular troops and carried small round shields, 90 cm (3 feet) in diameter.

In the legion, the velites were attached to each maniple of hastati, principes and triarii.  They usually formed up at the front of the legion before battle to harass the enemy with javelin fire and to prevent the enemy doing the same before retiring behind the lines to allow the heavier infantry to attack. In a pitched battle, the velites would form up at the front of the legion and harass the enemy with javelin fire and cover the advance of the hastati, who were armed with swords, and were the first line of attack. If the hastati failed to break the enemy, they would fall back and let the principes, similarly equipped though more experienced infantry, take over. If the principes failed, they would retire behind the triarii, heavily armoured, spear armed legionaries and let them carry on.

 

History
Velites were descended from an earlier class of light infantry, leves, dating from the Camillan legion of the 5th century BC, who had a very similar role to the velites. They were also the poorer and younger soldiers in the legion, though the rorarii and accensi classes were considerably poorer and were eventually done away with, having insufficient equipment to be effective soldiers. Leves were likewise armed with a number of javelins, but carried a spear rather than a sword. Like the velites, leves did not have their own units, but were attached to units of hastati.

Velites were first used at the siege of Capua in 211 BC, and were made up of citizens who would normally be too poor to join the hastati but where called up due a shortage of manpower. They were trained to ride on horseback with the Equites and jump down at a given signal to fling javelins at the enemy. After the siege, they were adopted into the legions as a force of irregular light infantry for ambushing and harassing the enemy with javelins before the battle began in earnest.

With the formal military reforms of Gaius Marius in 107 BC, designed to combat a shortage of manpower due to wars against Jugurtha, the different classes of units were done away with entirely. The wealth and age requirements were scrapped. Now soldiers would join as a career, rather than as service to the city, and would all be equipped as medium infantry with the same, state purchased equipment. Auxilliae, local irregular troops would now be used to fulfill other roles such as archery, skirmishing and flanking


Use in FOG
Velites are the standard skirmishing troops of the Mid-Republican Army. 
 
They are Light Foot, Unprotected, Average, Drilled.  They are armed with Javelins (2MU range) and Light Spear.

4-8 bases per BG.  1 base per 2 Hastati / Principes on the field.

Velites can be upgraded to Protected for 1pt per base.  This is recommended as it gives them an edge in melee when combatting other skirmishers (their principle role).

Velites should be used primarily for engaging other skirmish units.  Their main problem is that they usually consist of a small number of bases (4) compared to their typical opponents (6-8).  The way around this is to band your velites BG's together. 

If they are Protected they can get +POA against most skirmish units - being armed with the light spear gives them an additional bonus in Impact.

Movement
They move at 5MU and are less encumbered in difiicult terrain than heavy troops (and so can be used to lure troops into a nasty piece of turf then skip away leaving the unit 'bogged down' - especially useful against 'shock troops').

This mobility - allied with the Drilled training - allows you to move them in all directions quickly and effectively. 


Shooting
Velites are effective against elephants (where they get a + in shooting)

They are also effective against unarmoured cavalry where they get a ++ and against Protected cavalry where they get a +. 

They also get a + against unprotected medium or heavy foot. 

Their movement rate of 5MU's gives them a great opportunity to strike at medium and heavy infantry - run away then turn and strike again (presuming no other opposing troops can interfere, of course).  But shooting at a - against armoured foot makes this a less effective option. 

Impact / Melee
If Protected (and in numbers) velites have significant advantages over most skirmish troops.  They will get a + against most skirmishers except those similarly armed in the Impact pahse, but by being Protected they also get a + against units such as Gallic javelinmen, Numidian javelinmen, Balearic slingers etc. in the Melee phase.

Being armed with a light spear makes them useful in the Impact phase with a + against most skirmish units

They are one of the few units that do not suffer a -POA when fighting elephants (although they do lose 1 dice in 2 in close combat, getting sufficient numbers around isolated elephants can negate this).  They can certainly hold elephants up if the need arises - by shooting and then closing in on the flanks and rear for ++ POA.

As with most Light foot they fight at half-dice against most troops and so should avoid direct combat UNLESS they have the opportunity to attack a Fragmented enemy or if they have the opportunity to engage the flank or rear of an enemy already engaged in combat.

What's one of them?

While building up my armies for FOG, I do realise that I have only a rough grasp of what the troop types under my command actually are - and the grasp of my opponents even less so.

So I'm developing a new section of the blog - called 'What's one of them' to find out more about the troops available - how they were armed and used in ancient times and what role they played in their specific army.

In addition, I'll also highlight the FOG perspective on each troop type so the information can be used on the wargaming battlefield more effectively.

As each troop type is completed, the link will be posted on this page for easier access.

Mid Republican Rome
Velites
Hastati
Principes

Thinking of boots today.

All kinds.

Old boots:




Van Gogh's boots:




Vintage-inspired boots:




One of the boots John Wilkes Booth was wearing when he shot lincoln.
He then jumped 12 feet down to the stage, which broke his leg.
Later that night, it got so swollen and painful, that the boot had to but cut off:




Tacky boots:
(check out the couch!)





Hot boots:




Impeccable boots: