Mortem Et Gloriam Army Lists Use the Army Lists to Create Your Own Customised Armies Using the Mortem Et Gloriam Army Builder

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Mortem Et Gloriam Army Lists Use the Army Lists to Create Your Own Customised Armies Using the Mortem Et Gloriam Army Builder Army Lists GREECE AND MACEDON Contents Classical Greek 670 to 275 BCE Thracian Hill Tribes 670 BCE to 25 CE Spartan 668 to 394 BCE Early Macedonian 500 to 357 BCE Illyrian 500 BCE to 20 CE Mercenary Greek 401 to 298 BCE Later Spartan 393 to 228 BCE Alexandrian Macedonian 356 to 323 BCE Alexandrian Expeditionary 334 to 324 BCE Macedonian Successor 323 to 280 BCE Thraco-Macedonian 323 to 281 BCE Coalition against Antigonus 302 to 301 BCE Pyrrhic 294 to 272 BCE Later Macedonian 279 to 168 BCE Hellenistic Greek 275 to 146 BCE Hellenistic Spartan 227 to 195 BCE Version 2020.01: 1st January 2020 © Simon Hall Creating an army with the Mortem et Gloriam Army Lists Use the army lists to create your own customised armies using the Mortem et Gloriam Army Builder. There are few general rules to follow: 1. An army must have at least 2 generals and can have no more than 4. 2. You must take at least the minimum of any troops noted and may not go beyond the maximum of any. 3. No army may have more than two generals who are Talented or better. 4. Unless specified otherwise, all elements in a UG must be classified identically. Unless specified otherwise, if an optional characteristic is taken, it must be taken by all the elements in the UG for which that optional characteristic is available. 5. Any UGs can be downgraded by one quality grade and/or by one shooting skill representing less strong, tired or understrength troops. If any bases are downgraded all in the UG must be downgraded. So Average-Experienced skirmishers can always be downgraded to Poor-Unskilled. Where allies are allowed, they must conform to the following rules: 1. They must be a minimum of 2 and a maximum of 4 UGs. 2. They must take enough UGs to get them to at least 50% of the minimums in the list being used. 3. They can thereafter take any troops up to the maximum to create the rest of the allied contingent. 4. Unless specified in the notes, the general must be the same type as the army commander in the main list but cannot be legendary. Usually this results in 1-3 UGs being compulsory and you having full flexibility on the rest. Where an internal ally is allowed, and no contingent is specified they must conform to the following rules: 1. They must be a minimum of 2 and a maximum of 4 UGs. 2. The total number of troops taken of each type in the entire army must not exceed the maxima for that troop type. 3. They must take enough UGs to get them to at least 50% of the minimums in the list if there is enough allowance for a UG after the core army itself has taken the minimum. For example: An army has 4-12 cavalry (UG size 4,6) and 18-32 spearmen (UG size 6,8,9) as compulsory troops with 2 internal allies. The core army must take 4 cavalry and at least 18 spearmen. The first ally must take 4 cavalry and at least 9 spearmen. The second ally must take 4 cavalry but cannot take the 9 spearmen as this would exceed the 32 spearmen limit for the army. 4. They can thereafter take any troops up to the maximum to create the rest of the allied contingent. Usually this results in 1-3 UGs being compulsory and you having full flexibility on the rest. As a courtesy to your opponent, when you deploy your troops you should describe it fully; type, training, quality, protection, melee weaponry, shooting skill and weaponry, characteristics and which ally if appropriate. You should also explain how any unusual troop types in your army function and any special rules including Stakes, Caltrops, Barricades and Obstacles and troop types such as Battle Wagons. Version 2020.01: 1st January 2020 © Simon Hall Historical Introduction In the 8th century BCE, Greece began to emerge from the Dark Ages which followed the fall of the Mycenaean civilization. Rapidly increasing population in the 8th and 7th centuries resulted in emigration of many Greeks to form colonies across the Mediterranean. In Sparta, the Messenian Wars resulted in the conquest of Messenia and enserfment of the Messenians. The subjugated population, farmed and laboured for Sparta, whilst every Spartan male citizen became a soldier of the Spartan Army in a permanently militarized state. By the 6th century BCE four cities had emerged as dominant in Greek affairs: Athens, Sparta, Corinth, and Thebes. The intervention of Sparta in 510 BCE in the affairs of Athens led to a revolution and Athens became a “democracy”. Around 540 BCE the Persians conquered the Greek cities of Ionia in Asia Minor. In 499 BCE the Greek cities revolted against the rule of Darius I. The cities received help from Athens and Eretria. After supressing the revolt in 493 BCE. Darius decided to conquer the whole of Greece. Thrace and Macedonia were conquered and an expedition sent against Athens. This expedition was defeated at the battle of Marathon in 490 BCE. Ten years later Xerxes I, son and successor of Darius attempted a second invasion. Leonidas with 300 Spartans and various allies attempted to hold the pass at Thermopylae which was bypassed. The Spartans were surrounded and died fighting to the last man. The Persians were able to march unimpeded through Boeotia and Attica, but the Persian navy was defeated at Salamis. The following year the Greeks defeated the Persians at Plataea and the Persian threat was eliminated. The following 50 years saw the dominance of Athens and the creation of the Athenian Empire. The dominant position of Athens was a threat to Sparta and led to the Peloponnesian War. This lasted from 431 to 404 BCE. A disastrous expedition to Syracuse (415 to 413 BCE) weakened the Athenian position and in 404 BCE they sued for peace. Sparta dominated Greek affairs for the next thirty years until they were defeated by the Thebans at the battle of Leuctra in 371 BCE. A further battle at Mantinea in 362 BCE was won by the Thebans but their leader, Epaminondas, was killed. The Greeks remained divided for the next thirty years. Power was now to shift to the northern kingdom of Macedon. In 359 BCE Philip II came to the throne and set about reforming the army. He conquered the surrounding territories. In 338 BCE he defeated an alliance of Thebans and Athenians at the battle of Chaeronea. His son, Alexander, played a prominent part in the battle. Philip planned to lead an invasion against the Persians. He was however assassinated in 336 BCE and was succeeded by Alexander. Alexander defeated the Persians in three major battles, conquered the Persian Empire and reached as far as India. Alexander died in 323 BCE at the age of 32. Version 2020.01: 1st January 2020 © Simon Hall Almost immediately the Greeks attempted to throw off Macedonian rule, but were defeated in the Lamian War. Alexander’s generals fought for control of his Empire. In the next forty years a series of wars were fought on Greek and Macedonian territory. In 281 BCE Celtic tribes, invaded Macedonia, killed the current king Ptolemy Ceraunus and devastated Macedonia, Thrace and northern Greece. Some were invited by the king of Bithynia to Asia Minor where they established a kingdom in Phrygia which was subsequently known as Galatia. Antigonus Gonatus, grandson of one of Alexander’s generals, defeated a group of Celts that had remained in Europe and seized the throne of Macedon. Hiring more Galatians as mercenaries he established stability. His successors ruled Macedon until 168 BCE. Antigonus also controlled Corinth and Chalcis and was thus able to influence affairs in Greece. Greek affairs became dominated by the Aetolian and Achaean leagues. In 235 BCE a Spartan king, Cleomenes III, came to the throne of Sparta. He reformed the Spartan state which had been short of manpower ever since Leuctra. From 229 BCE he fought a war against the Achaean League until he was defeated by an allied army of Macedon and the Achaean League at Sellasia in 222 BCE. The end of the Second Punic War saw the Romans turn their attention to Greece. During the Second Punic War, Philip V of Macedon had offered an alliance to the Carthaginians. Invited by the Aetolian League, the Romans declared war on Macedon and defeated Philip at the battle of Cynoscephelae in 197 BCE. A further war against Macedonia resulted in the Macedonian defeat at Pydna in 168 BCE. Roman rule of Greece and Macedon was established permanently after the sack of Corinth in 146 BCE. Carthage was sacked in the same year. Greece and Macedonia remained under Roman rule for the next six centuries until the collapse of the Western Roman empire. Troop Notes At the start of our period the dominant troop type in Greece was the hoplite. The hoplite was equipped with helmet, a large round shield, metal or linen body armour, greaves and a long spear 8 foot in length. Formed in a rigid formation typically 8 ranks deep known as a phalanx they dominated Greek warfare. Hoplites were supported by peltasts, javelinmen carrying a pelta shield and psiloi, equipped with bows and slings. During the Peloponnesian War, larger numbers of troops were required. Not all troops could afford full hoplite panoply so hoplite equipment generally became lighter. The role of the peltast became more important. In the 4th century BCE Iphicrates introduced reforms, doubling the length of the spear and replacing the hoplon shield with a smaller pelte shield.
Recommended publications
  • Faunal Remains
    This is a repository copy of Faunal remains. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/169068/ Version: Published Version Book Section: Halstead, P. orcid.org/0000-0002-3347-0637 (2020) Faunal remains. In: Wright, J.C. and Dabney, M.K., (eds.) The Mycenaean Settlement on Tsoungiza Hill. Nemea Valley Archaeological Project (III). American School of Classical Studies at Athens , Princeton, New Jersey , pp. 1077-1158. ISBN 9780876619247 Copyright © 2020 American School of Classical Studies at Athens, originally published in The Mycenaean Settlement on Tsoungiza Hill (Nemea Valley Archaeological Project III), by James C. Wright and Mary K. Dabney. This offprint is supplied for personal, noncommercial use only. Reuse Items deposited in White Rose Research Online are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved unless indicated otherwise. They may be downloaded and/or printed for private study, or other acts as permitted by national copyright laws. The publisher or other rights holders may allow further reproduction and re-use of the full text version. This is indicated by the licence information on the White Rose Research Online record for the item. Takedown If you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing [email protected] including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. [email protected] https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ Copyright © 2020 American School of Classical Studies at Athens, originally published in The Mycenaean Settlement on Tsoungiza Hill (Nemea Valley Archaeological Project III), by James C.
    [Show full text]
  • Philip of Macedon Kindle
    PHILIP OF MACEDON PDF, EPUB, EBOOK Nicholas Hammond | 270 pages | 01 Apr 2013 | Bloomsbury Publishing PLC | 9780715628294 | English | London, United Kingdom Philip of Macedon PDF Book Philip stood up, drew his sward, and charged at Alexander, only to trip and fall on his face in his drunken stupor at which Alexander shouted:. Becoming convinced that Rome intended to destroy him, he extended his authority into the Balkans in three campaigns , , Why were the Macedonians styled as "Greeks" in the 19th Century? To achieve this, he needed to control the sea, and he therefore had to take action against Athens, which had a navy and had supported Egypt on more than one occasion. The Road to Hegemony. Macedonian Symbols. Twitter Facebook Pinterest Google Classroom. He was the 18th king of Macedonia and ruled from to B. He organized all Greek states into a Greek league. Five years after his return to Macedon, Philip became regent for King Amyntas IV but he was able to secure the crown for himself within a few months. Yet, the seeds of change had been sown. Yet then and now, questions arose as to whether there was more to the story—whether Pausanias acted alone or whether someone used this traumatized young man as a pawn in some larger game. Philip already had plans for invasion of the Persian Empire, which would crown his career as world conqueror. He refused to wear the insignia of rank and in the early years of his command, Philip led from the front. Commander of the Greeks, Illyrians, and Thracians.
    [Show full text]
  • Archaic Eretria
    ARCHAIC ERETRIA This book presents for the first time a history of Eretria during the Archaic Era, the city’s most notable period of political importance. Keith Walker examines all the major elements of the city’s success. One of the key factors explored is Eretria’s role as a pioneer coloniser in both the Levant and the West— its early Aegean ‘island empire’ anticipates that of Athens by more than a century, and Eretrian shipping and trade was similarly widespread. We are shown how the strength of the navy conferred thalassocratic status on the city between 506 and 490 BC, and that the importance of its rowers (Eretria means ‘the rowing city’) probably explains the appearance of its democratic constitution. Walker dates this to the last decade of the sixth century; given the presence of Athenian political exiles there, this may well have provided a model for the later reforms of Kleisthenes in Athens. Eretria’s major, indeed dominant, role in the events of central Greece in the last half of the sixth century, and in the events of the Ionian Revolt to 490, is clearly demonstrated, and the tyranny of Diagoras (c. 538–509), perhaps the golden age of the city, is fully examined. Full documentation of literary, epigraphic and archaeological sources (most of which have previously been inaccessible to an English-speaking audience) is provided, creating a fascinating history and a valuable resource for the Greek historian. Keith Walker is a Research Associate in the Department of Classics, History and Religion at the University of New England, Armidale, Australia.
    [Show full text]
  • Mortem Et Gloriam Army Lists Use the Army Lists to Create Your Own Customised Armies Using the Mortem Et Gloriam Army Builder
    Army Lists Syria and Asia Minor Contents Asiatic Greek 670 to 129 BCE Lycian 525 to 300 BCE Bithynian 434 to 74 BCE Armenian 330 BCE to 627 CE Asiatic Successor 323 to 280 BCE Cappadocian 300 BCE to 17 CE Attalid Pergamene 282 to 129 BCE Galatian 280 to 62 BCE Early Seleucid 279 to 167 BCE Seleucid 166 to 129 BCE Commagene 163 BCE to 72 CE Late Seleucid 128 to 56 BCE Pontic 110 to 47 BCE Palmyran 258 CE to 273 CE Version 2020.02: 1st January 2020 © Simon Hall Creating an army with the Mortem et Gloriam Army Lists Use the army lists to create your own customised armies using the Mortem et Gloriam Army Builder. There are few general rules to follow: 1. An army must have at least 2 generals and can have no more than 4. 2. You must take at least the minimum of any troops noted and may not go beyond the maximum of any. 3. No army may have more than two generals who are Talented or better. 4. Unless specified otherwise, all elements in a UG must be classified identically. Unless specified otherwise, if an optional characteristic is taken, it must be taken by all the elements in the UG for which that optional characteristic is available. 5. Any UGs can be downgraded by one quality grade and/or by one shooting skill representing less strong, tired or understrength troops. If any bases are downgraded all in the UG must be downgraded. So Average-Experienced skirmishers can always be downgraded to Poor-Unskilled.
    [Show full text]
  • The Ubiquity of the Cretan Archer in Ancient Warfare
    1 ‘You’ll be an archer my son!’ The ubiquity of the Cretan archer in ancient warfare When a contingent of archers is mentioned in the context of Greek and Roman armies, more often than not the culture associated with them is that of Crete. Indeed, when we just have archers mentioned in an army without a specified origin, Cretan archers are commonly assumed to be meant, so ubiquitous with archery and groups of mercenary archers were the Cretans. The Cretans are the most famous, but certainly not the only ‘nation’ associated with a particular fighting style (Rhodian slingers and Thracian peltasts leap to mind but there are others too). The long history of Cretan archers can be seen in the sources – according to some stretching from the First Messenian War right down to the fall of Constantinople in 1453. Even in the reliable historical record we find Cretan archer units from the Peloponnesian War well into the Roman period. Associations with the Bow Crete had had a long association with archery. Several Linear B tablets from Knossos refer to arrow-counts (6,010 on one and 2,630 on another) as well as archers being depicted on seals and mosaics. Diodorus Siculus (5.74.5) recounts the story of Apollo that: ‘as the discoverer of the bow he taught the people of the land all about the use of the bow, this being the reason why the art of archery is especially cultivated by the Cretans and the bow is called “Cretan.” ’ The first reliable references to Cretan archers as a unit, however, which fit with our ideas about developments in ancient warfare, seem to come in the context of the Peloponnesian War (431-404 BCE).
    [Show full text]
  • Nicholas Victor Sekunda the SARISSA
    ACTA UNI VERSITATIS LODZIENSIS FOLIA ARCHAEOLOGICA 23, 2001 Nicholas Victor Sekunda THE SARISSA INTRODUCTION Recent years have seen renewed interest in Philip and Alexander, not least in the sphere of military affairs. The most complete discussion of the sarissa, or pike, the standard weapon of Macedonian footsoldiers from the reign of Philip onwards, is that of Lammert. Lammert collects the ancient literary evidence and there is little one can disagree with in his discussion of the nature and use of the sarissa. The ancient texts, however, concentrate on the most remarkable feature of the weapon - its great length. Unfor- tunately several details of the weapon remain unclear. More recent discussions o f the weapon have tried to resolve these problems, but I find myself unable to agree with many of the solutions proposed. The purpose of this article is to suggest some alternative possibilities using further ancient literary evidence and also comparisons with pikes used in other periods of history. 1 do not intend to cover those aspects of the sarissa already dealt with satisfactorily by Lammert and his predecessors'. THE PIKE-HEAD Although the length of the pike is the most striking feature of the weapon, it is not the sole distinguishing characteristic. What also distinguishes a pike from a common spear is the nature of the head. Most spears have a relatively broad head designed to open a wide flesh wound and to sever blood vessels. 1 hey are usually used to strike at the unprotected parts of an opponent’s body. The pike, on the other hand, is designed to penetrate body defences such as shields or armour.
    [Show full text]
  • Ideals and Pragmatism in Greek Military Thought 490-338 Bc
    Roel Konijnendijk IDEALS AND PRAGMATISM IN GREEK MILITARY THOUGHT 490-338 BC PhD Thesis – Ancient History – UCL I, Roel Konijnendijk, confirm that the work presented in this thesis is my own. Where information has been derived from other sources, I confirm that this has been indicated in the thesis. Thesis Abstract This thesis examines the principles that defined the military thinking of the Classical Greek city-states. Its focus is on tactical thought: Greek conceptions of the means, methods, and purpose of engaging the enemy in battle. Through an analysis of historical accounts of battles and campaigns, accompanied by a parallel study of surviving military treatises from the period, it draws a new picture of the tactical options that were available, and of the ideals that lay behind them. It has long been argued that Greek tactics were deliberately primitive, restricted by conventions that prescribed the correct way to fight a battle and limited the extent to which victory could be exploited. Recent reinterpretations of the nature of Greek warfare cast doubt on this view, prompting a reassessment of tactical thought – a subject that revisionist scholars have not yet treated in detail. This study shows that practically all the assumptions of the traditional model are wrong. Tactical thought was constrained chiefly by the extreme vulnerability of the hoplite phalanx, its total lack of training, and the general’s limited capacity for command and control on the battlefield. Greek commanders, however, did not let any moral rules get in the way of possible solutions to these problems. Battle was meant to create an opportunity for the wholesale destruction of the enemy, and any available means were deployed towards that goal.
    [Show full text]
  • Philip V and Perseus: the Twilight of Antigonid Macedonia Philip V of Macedonia Was a Shrewd and Effective Leader. He Proved Ev
    Philip V and Perseus: The Twilight of Antigonid Macedonia Philip V of Macedonia was a shrewd and effective leader. He proved even more adept than his predecessors at dealing with the Greek city-states, Illyrian invasions, and the other traditional concerns of his kingdom. Unfortunately for him, he was forced to deal with a completely new threat, for which he was unprepared—the rising power of Rome. Philip V and his son and successor Perseus failed in their conflicts with Rome, and ultimately allowed Macedonia to be conquered by the Romans. Since the wars they fought against Rome were recorded by Roman historians, they are known as the Macedonian Wars. Early Life and Reign of Philip V Philip V was the son of Demetrius II, who died in battle when Philip was nine years old. Since the army and nobility were hesitant to trust the kingdom to a child, they made Antigonas Doson regent, and then king. Antigonas honored Philip’s position, and when Antigonas died in 221 BC, Philip ascended smoothly to the throne at the age of seventeen. As the young king of Macedonia, Philip V was eager to prove his abilities. He defeated the Dardians in battle. When hostilities broke out between the two major leagues of Greek cities—the Achaean League and Aetolian League—he sided with Aratus and the Achaean League. Thanks to Philip’s intervention, the Achaeans achieved major victories against the Aetolians, and Aratus became one of Philip’s advisors. First Macedonian War (214–205 BC) In 219 BC, Demetrius of Pharos, the king of Illyria, fled to Philip’s court after being expelled by the Romans.
    [Show full text]
  • Politics and Policy in Corinth 421-336 B.C. Dissertation
    POLITICS AND POLICY IN CORINTH 421-336 B.C. DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University by DONALD KAGAN, B.A., A.M. The Ohio State University 1958 Approved by: Adviser Department of History TABLE OF CONTENTS Page FOREWORD ................................................. 1 CHAPTER I THE LEGACY OF ARCHAIC C O R I N T H ....................7 II CORINTHIAN DIPLOMACY AFTER THE PEACE OF NICIAS . 31 III THE DECLINE OF CORINTHIAN P O W E R .................58 IV REVOLUTION AND UNION WITH ARGOS , ................ 78 V ARISTOCRACY, TYRANNY AND THE END OF CORINTHIAN INDEPENDENCE ............... 100 APPENDIXES .............................................. 135 INDEX OF PERSONAL N A M E S ................................. 143 BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................... 145 AUTOBIOGRAPHY ........................................... 149 11 FOREWORD When one considers the important role played by Corinth in Greek affairs from the earliest times to the end of Greek freedom it is remarkable to note the paucity of monographic literature on this key city. This is particular­ ly true for the classical period wnere the sources are few and scattered. For the archaic period the situation has been somewhat better. One of the first attempts toward the study of Corinthian 1 history was made in 1876 by Ernst Curtius. This brief art­ icle had no pretensions to a thorough investigation of the subject, merely suggesting lines of inquiry and stressing the importance of numisihatic evidence. A contribution of 2 similar score was undertaken by Erich Wilisch in a brief discussion suggesting some of the problems and possible solutions. This was followed by a second brief discussion 3 by the same author.
    [Show full text]
  • Failure in 1813: the Decline of French Light Infantry and Its Effect on Napoleon’S German Campaign
    United States Military Academy USMA Digital Commons Cadet Senior Theses in History Department of History Spring 4-14-2018 Failure in 1813: The eclineD of French Light Infantry and its effect on Napoleon's German Campaign Gustave Doll United States Military Academy, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.usmalibrary.org/history_cadet_etd Part of the European History Commons, and the Military History Commons Recommended Citation Doll, Gustave, "Failure in 1813: The eD cline of French Light Infantry and its effect on Napoleon's German Campaign" (2018). Cadet Senior Theses in History. 1. https://digitalcommons.usmalibrary.org/history_cadet_etd/1 This Bachelor's Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of History at USMA Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Cadet Senior Theses in History by an authorized administrator of USMA Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. United States Military Academy USMA Digital Commons Cadet Senior Theses in History Department of History Spring 4-14-2018 Failure in 1813: The eclineD of French Light Infantry and its effect on Napoleon's German Campaign Gustave Doll Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.usmalibrary.org/history_cadet_etd UNITED STATES MILITARY ACADEMY FAILURE IN 1813: THE DECLINE OF FRENCH LIGHT INFANTRY AND ITS EFFECT ON NAPOLEON’S GERMAN CAMPAIGN HI499: SENIOR THESIS SECTION S26 CPT VILLANUEVA BY CADET GUSTAVE A DOLL, ’18 CO F3 WEST POINT, NEW YORK 19 APRIL 2018 ___ MY DOCUMENTATION IDENTIFIES ALL SOURCES USED AND ASSISTANCE RECEIVED IN COMPLETING THIS ASSIGNMENT. ___ NO SOURCES WERE USED OR ASSISTANCE RECEIVED IN COMPLETING THIS ASSIGNMENT.
    [Show full text]
  • Syria and Asia Minor
    Army Lists Syria and Asia Minor Contents Asiatic Greek 670 to 129 BCE Lycian 525 to 300 BCE Bithynian 434 to 74 BCE Armenian 330 BCE to 252 CE Asiatic Successor 323 to 280 BCE Cappadocian 300 BCE to 17 CE Attalid Pergamene 282 to 129 BCE Galatian 280 to 62 BCE Early Seleucid (02) 279 to 167 BCE Seleucid 166 to 129 BCE Commagene 163 BCE to 72 CE Late Seleucid 128 to 56 BCE Pontic 110 to 47 BCE Palmyran 258 CE to 273 CE Version 2019.02: 1st January 2019 © Simon Hall Creating an army with the Mortem et Gloriam Army Lists Use the army lists to create your own customised armies using the Mortem et Gloriam Army Builder. There are few general rules to follow: 1. An army must have at least 2 generals and can have no more than 4. 2. You must take at least the minimum of any troops noted, and may not go beyond the maximum of any. 3. No army may have more than two generals who are Talented or better. 4. Unless specified otherwise, all elements in a UG must be classified identically. Unless specified otherwise, if an optional characteristic is taken, it must be taken by all the elements in the UG for which that optional characteristic is available. 5. Any UGs can be downgraded by one quality grade and/or by one shooting skill representing less strong, tired or understrength troops. If any bases are downgraded all in the UG must be downgraded. So Average-Experienced skirmishers can always be downgraded to Poor-Unskilled.
    [Show full text]
  • Central Balkans Cradle of Aegean Culture
    ANTONIJE SHKOKLJEV SLAVE NIKOLOVSKI - KATIN PREHISTORY CENTRAL BALKANS CRADLE OF AEGEAN CULTURE Prehistory - Central Balkans Cradle of Aegean culture By Antonije Shkokljev Slave Nikolovski – Katin Translated from Macedonian to English and edited By Risto Stefov Prehistory - Central Balkans Cradle of Aegean culture Published by: Risto Stefov Publications [email protected] Toronto, Canada All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or by any information storage and retrieval system without written consent from the author, except for the inclusion of brief and documented quotations in a review. Copyright 2013 by Antonije Shkokljev, Slave Nikolovski – Katin & Risto Stefov e-book edition 2 Index Index........................................................................................................3 COMMON HISTORY AND FUTURE ..................................................5 I - GEOGRAPHICAL CONFIGURATION OF THE BALKANS.........8 II - ARCHAEOLOGICAL DISCOVERIES .........................................10 III - EPISTEMOLOGY OF THE PANNONIAN ONOMASTICS.......11 IV - DEVELOPMENT OF PALEOGRAPHY IN THE BALKANS....33 V – THRACE ........................................................................................37 VI – PREHISTORIC MACEDONIA....................................................41 VII - THESSALY - PREHISTORIC AEOLIA.....................................62 VIII – EPIRUS – PELASGIAN TESPROTIA......................................69
    [Show full text]