--- In dbmlist@yahoogroups.com, "aynsley683" <aynsley683@...> wrote:
>
> Not sure about the old rules etc. and how they treated Wb(F), have used
them a few times in small and large numbers can not see me using them EVER again
because of them only using 2 ranks to mounted, the whole -1 if beat by 2 is not
even compensated remotly by the extra 50 paces. I have had a large (F) block
taken apart by 3 kn and Cv frontally.
> But if you change this then too much is going to get changed, would still
like to see the Batavians in the Early German list as Wb(O) ,why make them the
only (F) tribe and not others, all the tribes fought in woods or marshes so why
aren't they all (F) or (O)?
> Aynsley
>
> >
> > OK, so here's the airing. My view is that the rules for F troops are fine -
Richard omits to mention their other advantages such as moving faster, and not
recoiling on equal scores as I troops do. I've seen plenty of Kn(F), LH(F) and
even Wb(F) (in Carthaginian armies) recently. Anyone else have views on this
issue?
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > John GL
> >
>
I've played warbands religiously since dbm began. I've been through all the
changes. I played Dacians for over 5 years non stop with mixed results, and
little frustration, but after a few tournaments in 3.1 I got sick an tired of
hearing the phrase "Oh, that's right, they're fast, pick 'em up!". Especially
vs. BW.
So I have switched back to my Gauls as WB(o). Now, if the Gauls just had a
BW(I) option.......

My take on the entire warband issue is that WB(O) an (S) are way too good
against Cavalry, about right (maybe a bit too strong)vs KN.

WB(F) frustrate me under 3.1. They were strong vs BD, SP, PK under 3.0 and
even earlier versions IMHO, that's why I played them!. However, the 3.1
mitigating factor changes made many BD, SP and Pk better (a change I agree with)
vs WB, whilst at the same time diminishing WB(F).

As for other fast troops, the Dacian falx BD(F) work just fine. My Sarmatian
KN(F) work just fine. I don't use LH(F), but enjoy killing them tremendously
:).

I won't be playing massed wb(f) armies under the current rules. I think they
are fine as an ambush or rough terrain troop type. I have many other options.
After so many changes over the last 15 years, I think the "FAST" rating is about
as good as it will get. I will wait and see what happens with the proposed
"House Rules"n regarding WB(o,s).

As for Aynsley at the WIC.... I warned you about WB(F)! KN are supposed to mow
down WB(F). I've had a 24 block of wb(f) taken apart by 1 elephant!

Wayne Q Carter