Some Book 2 errata

[Barritus]

I don't know whether these have been noted anywhere, so I thought I'd mention them.

1. Hellenistic Greek: The list says Athenian and Achaian C-in-Cs and ally generals can be upgraded to Kn (F). But the list doesn't provide for ally-generals any more - they should be sub-generals.

2. Chiang and Ti: Is the Inert C-in-C compulsory in the time he's available?

3. Patrician Roman: Is it intended that Patrician Roman armies based in Spain can't get any mounted whatsoever? Or was it simply left off the list by mistake?

[arnimlueck]

I have another suspicion, but I am not sure:

Book 2, L27 (Pyrrhos of Epeiros) has 4 Galleys. Crews can be Italian forces which fought for Pyrrhos (PsS, Ax, Sp). Strangely the Italiot hoplites may me Sp(I) or Pk(I). But as galley crew they are allowed only as Sp. So if the assumption is true that  all Italiot foot can crew the galleys then the crew list must read [Ps(S), Ax, Sp, Pk(I)] or [Italiot foot].

[Barritus]

Bithynian: When do Heraclian allies change from using the Later Hoplite Greek list to using the Hellenistic Greek list? The changeover isn't mentioned in the Bithynian, Later Hoplite Greek or Hellenistic Greek lists. However, it's important as some time during the period in which the changeover occurs, the Bithynians also change to getting regular generals. That is, the list might allow for irregular Bithynians with Hellenistic Greek allies, or regular Bithynians with LHG allies, or neither (if the changeover occurs in the same year as the Bithynian change).

Patrician Roman/Sub-Roman British: If you provide SRB allies for a Patrician Roman army (the Riothamus option), how is the SRB contingent chosen? Is the SRB allowed the full number of "Britannia Prima" elements (the Kn (X), the Kn (F), the Bd (O) etc) even though they're optional? A strict reading of the list rules would seem to limit Riothamus to his Bd (I/O) comitatus, the LH (I) and the Sp (I), which removes any colour available with the Riothamus option.

[Barritus]

Another SRB erratum...possibly.

The list allows FW as a permitted terrain type before 600AD. The list notes (second last paragraph) say that the FW is either Hadrian's Wall or earthworks such as Wansdyke.

I note that both those are in Britain. But the list makes no geographic distinction, suggesting that FW could be used with Armorican options, which doesn't seem quite right. Or is there evidence of such features in Brittany too?

So should the FW be limited to "Only in Britain"?

[toby]

Possibly, although I suspect that someone from Brittany will now pop up with an example of a earthwork there as well

[Barritus]

More of a clarification than an erratum...

In the Jewish Revolt list, it says that Zealot ally generals can only command Zealots, and must command them all.

Does this mean the ally minimums rule applies to them? That is, if you take two Zealot ally generals, must each command at least a quarter of the minimums of all compulsory troop types? For example, must each general take at least 3 Wb and 2 Bw?

[Orcoteuthis]

Yes, they'd have to each command the some of the zealot compulsories.

(You do not however have to have any Bw - you can take all the zealot archers ares Ps.)

[Barritus]

Ptolemaics: If you take an army in the year 274BC, you can field both the Asiatic and African elephants. I'm sure this isn't intended.

[LAP1964]

LIR and Patrician Roman,change "Numidian Allies" to "Later Moorish Allies".Due to date used.
LES

[Barritus]

LIR and Patrician Roman,change "Numidian Allies" to "Later Moorish Allies".Due to date used.
LES

I have a vague memory that I asked about this before Book 2 was published, and was told that The Powers That Be decided the Numidian list provided a more accurate contingent for the Romans than the Moorish list.

[Tim Child]

Possibly, although I suspect that someone from Brittany will now pop up with an example of a earthwork there as well

I've recently fought Riothamus against the Visigoths.  It's an interesting matchup that looks very hairy for the SRB when the troops go down on the table (Kn(F) and Wb(O) vs Sp(I) and mntd Bd(O), gulp), but can be made to work with some dice-luck.  )  I decided against including a portable Hadrian's Wall in the army-list!

Tim Child

[Orcoteuthis]

LIR and Patrician Roman,change "Numidian Allies" to "Later Moorish Allies".Due to date used.
LES

I have a vague memory that I asked about this before Book 2 was published, and was told that The Powers That Be decided the Numidian list provided a more accurate contingent for the Romans than the Moorish list.

Having searched my email archives, I find several people who've said on the DBMMlist that it ought be Later Moorish, and none who's argued that Numidian/Early Moorish is preferable.

[LAP1964]

I have a vague memory that I asked about this before Book 2 was published, and was told that The Powers That Be decided the Numidian list provided a more accurate contingent for the Romans than the Moorish list.

Is it specified that you can a Numidian ally outside of its list date,in either list?
LES

[LAP1964]

Palmyran
Caravan Guards Irr Cm (O) should be 5 AP not 6 AP.
LES

[Swampster]

I have a vague memory that I asked about this before Book 2 was published, and was told that The Powers That Be decided the Numidian list provided a more accurate contingent for the Romans than the Moorish list.

Is it specified that you can a Numidian ally outside of its list date,in either list?
LES

The Numidian list says it can be ised from 390 BC to provide allied contingents - it doesn't specify an end date 


However, it looks like the only reason for it not being changed is that it whad already gone to the printers.