Back in my wargames heyday one of the 'gimmic' armies were the Seleucids. If you look at the 1977 WRG Army Lists, Seleucid armies could field Asiatic archers, 'Irregular D' MI bow@1 point - 20 to 75. The same army list Late Achaemenid Persian army could field Subject race archers 'Irregular D' LMI bow @ 1point - up to 50. Which meant you couldn't use the same unit in both armies - very unfair. Anyway, as Irregular units could be up to 50 strong, and as command points were 25 per unit, lots of armies had a 50 strong unit of cheap archers that would basically fire once but run away if challenged. They had their uses.
In the early days my levies were based on the S Range Mede archer - 50 of them, of course. However, I soon followed the trend, got rid of most of my S Range figures :( - a couple of hundred of the things overall - and replaced the levy with what was now becoming the 'standard' - PB24, Syrian Archer. I only bought 30 of them though and used them as MI in my Seleucid army - the Achaemenid force I fielded was early.
There must be thousands of these things out there and in recent years I've been quietly acquiring them - usually as part of other purchases. It then became possible to start thinking about the whole levy situation again - though of course I have done this at times in the past,
for example.
So I've been putting all the 'near right' figures together, mainly painting hats, bows and quivers so they more or less look compatible, and put it together.
I'm ignoring the MI option, LMI/Irreg Bw are already complete. This leaves LI and Hordes. LI in a couple of lists are an option instead of LMI. I had already acquired a dozen; I decided to double this. Meanwhile, Hordes - can have up to 20 elements of these in DBX, 100 figures of which I already had 30/6 bases, so double this up and do another 6 bases - should do for now.
 |
| 132 figures looks impressive but... WRG in those days would need to be 4 units, 100 points. Figures 1 point each, grand total 232 points - and a WRG army was between 900-1500 points! Cheap, but not very effective. |
 |
| This shows the clear difference between the later version in front and the slimmer less detailed first version behind. |
 |
| Stance is another difference - facing directly forward the later version is easier to put on bases compared to the shooting angle of the earlier one. |
Meanwhile, still got some that have been stripped/are being stripped, no doubt I'll get more... at some stage may even get round to the MI option!