Meshwesh minor errors and typos

[Andreas Johansson]

Your explanation is clear enough, but, as you say, hard to infer from Meshwesh itself. Not sure how to better communicate it there, short of a note saying something to the effect of "These are Type III allies, which means you don't get a full Polish army in Grand Triumph!".

[David Kuijt]

Your explanation is clear enough, but, as you say, hard to infer from Meshwesh itself. Not sure how to better communicate it there, short of a note saying something to the effect of "These are Type III allies, which means you don't get a full Polish army in Grand Triumph!".

Maybe changing the subordinate clause name to "Polish Mounted Dudes" to make clear that this is not a full Later Polish army ally component. That isn't a general solution, but it might do for this particular case.

[Andreas Johansson]

Perhaps not an error, exactly, but the Scandinavian Leidang list calls the rank and file Bondi. This is, I realize wargamer tradition, but in Old Norse it's a singular word (meaning "farmer, yeoman; husband") - the plural form is bœndr (or boendr with the ligature expanded).

Using the singular form attributively, as in "Bondi archers", is unexceptional, so one option that should satisfy both tradition and philological propriety would be calling the Heavy Foot "Bondi spearmen" or similar.

[David Kuijt]

Thanks, Andreas. Is the same thing true about Hird, or is that a plural noun?

[Andreas Johansson]

Hird is grammatically singular, but it means something like "retinue" - the armed companions of a leader as a collective - so using it to refer to a group of men is appropriate.

Basically the same goes for Slavic druzhina (drużyna, etc.) and Medieval Latin familia.

A single member is a hirdman, druzhinnik, or familiaris.

[Andreas Johansson]

What is dubious regarding hird is the distinction between "Huscarles" and "Hird" in the Viking lists: huskarl and hirdman are basically synonymous.

[Andreas Johansson]

The Medieval Swedish list has the general listed as Bad Horse or Heavy Foot, but the list has no Heavy Foot. It's probably meant to be Bad Horse or Elite Foot.

[David Kuijt]

The Medieval Swedish list has the general listed as Bad Horse or Heavy Foot, but the list has no Heavy Foot. It's probably meant to be Bad Horse or Elite Foot.

I'll glance at this, but I think we noticed that and fixed it when we went through the most recent update (fixing up the priorities for generals in the 30 or so lists who needed a more complex system than "X or Y"). That update hasn't been propogated to the list yet, I believe? Our time has been focused on final-version rules production issues.

[Andreas Johansson]

In the Classical Indian list, there appears to be a stray colon in the definition of the last troop type: ": Wild tribe bowmen".

In the Western Hunnic list, there appears to be something wrong with the Sciri allies: "No troop options entered"

[Andreas Johansson]

The Late Imperial Roman East list has:

Maneuver Rating
2 Normally
4 Under Constantine 324-337
2 Under Constantius 338-361 AD

The Constantius line seems a little superfluous, so I expect either it or the Normally line should have a different number.