Re: [SGII] Furry troopers

Beth Fulton wrote:

> G'day Donald,
>
> >Ahhh, today, I watched a documentary about the ancient Roman Empire. 
They
> were
> >discussing the attitudes of the Roman Army.	Besides the training,
excellent
> >equipment (for the period), they had a standing order...no retreats.
> >This stems from the fact that two well trained warriors with shields
had a
> real
> >problem seriously hurting each other.  Only the man who turned and
ran,
> could be
> >easily hurt.  So hense the standing order.
>
> I'd heard this before, but wouldn't actually mind knowing how often
the
> rule was broken -  did they have organised withdrawals? Or is their
decided
> lack of a "lets get out of here tactic" part of the reason they're not
> still here? <And before I get a lecture on the finer points of the
fall of
> the Roman Empire I do know there was a HELL of a lot of other factors
> involved, thanks.>
>

I believe there were retreats, but like Thomas Barclay says, they were
not that
common.  According to the show, some battles were won by a very small
margin
because the romans didn't retreat.

> Mmm guess I'm being picky as we'd probably only see the military types
on
> the board anyway, but I'd say that that was a characteristic of the
> military of that race not of the race itself. Bet not to many roman
> merchants had a "no retreat rule" ;)
>

I think most civilians of that (and most periods/places) would move the
out of
the way when two armies were having a battle...

>
> >Perhaps a race with the "no retreats" attitude could do quite well,
if
> properly
> >organized and supplied.
>
> That'd be the key here.
>

Yep.

>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
> Elizabeth Fulton

Donald hosford