Armies > Book 4

Book 4 errata

(1/16) > >>

Barritus:
List 48 - Yuan Chinese: - The Kan-t'ao-lu ally general is costed at 1AP when he should be 6AP;
- The Kan-t'ao-lu ally general is compulsory from 1265 to 1274, yet although he can only command Kan-t'ao-lu troops, the KTL troops themselves don't have a compulsory minimum (commands must contain at least 4ME of troops in addition to the general).

(Already mentioned on the DBMM list):
List 3 - Anglo-Norman: - The mercenary sub-general William of Ypres can only command mercenaries, and two mercenary troop types are listed below him. But the general list's Irr Kn(F/O) and Irr Sp (I) (and Irr Bw (O) after 1150) include troops described as mercenaries. Can William of Ypres command them too?

List 66 - Later Polish: - After 1454 you replace the Rycerz (7-16 Irr Kn (O)) with 4-12 Hussars (Reg Kn (F)). Does this mean you choose 7-16 Irr Kn (O), then replace 4-12 of them with Reg Kn (F)? Or does it mean that after 1454 you can no longer select Irr Kn (O), and instead choose only Hussars? I suspect the former, on the grounds that the notes speak of the army transitioning, with the process not complete until around 1560. But if that's the case, why was the word "replace" used instead of "upgrade" or "regrade" as is used in so many other similar cases?

Barritus:
List 64 - Medieval French: King John II is available as an Inert C-in-C in 1356, and the Jacuerie allies are available from 1356 to 1360. The notes say the Jacquerie revolt started after the defeat at Poitiers. So does this mean you can't use them with Inert King John II?

LAP1964:
List 49 Anatolian Turkoman
Turkoman Ally-general Irr Lh(S) @ 12AP, should be  @11AP
LES

Barritus:
Ottoman Turks: should the Serbian sub-general really be allowed Regular Baggage?

Barritus:
Not errata so much as checking whether this is what the list writers intended...

- Burgundian Ordonnance militia/mercenary handgunners from 1478 to 1506 are listed as "1-2 per crossbowmen" [sic]. Is that per militia/mercenary crossbowman, or every crossbowman in the army, including Ordonnance crossbowmen?
 
- Why can't the Lancastrian Wars of the Roses English army field any Scots? They were available in the DBM list, and Scots were widely noted as being part of the Lancastrian army which won the Second Battle of Saint Albans.
 
Okay, this is an erratum...

- Hundred Years War English: Flemish communal allies, listed as Book 4/37, it's actually 4/57.
 

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page