Briton 0 Report post Posted May 11, 2005 I choose Early- Middle Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PerfectimusPrime 0 Report post Posted May 11, 2005 Early Empire, under augutus and others, the Empire's armies were probably best... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
roman wargamer 0 Report post Posted May 15, 2005 there are the most battle tested and winnable at wars. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Valens 0 Report post Posted May 17, 2005 Early Republic. Not sure how early the topic creator meant, but I took the term to mean during the times of the manipular legion. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
roman wargamer 0 Report post Posted May 18, 2005 i forgot to mention late republic , there are the most battle tested and winnable at wars. like Scipio and Caesar . Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MARCELLVS 0 Report post Posted May 18, 2005 I 'd say Late Republic, (e.g. Lucullus, Pompeius, Caesar) the army then seems to me a truly Roman one, with all the virtues that had made it so great. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Spartan19 0 Report post Posted May 21, 2005 I say early republic, esp. under Octavian, where some experiance and knowledge was had, as well as advancing equipment and such. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Legate of XVPrimigenia 0 Report post Posted August 29, 2005 Wow Late Republic and dying days is popular Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Antonius Miles 0 Report post Posted August 30, 2005 I would say early empire. Weapons, tactics and disipline were all strong. One weakness however was the mass enlistment and discharge of leigons. A system continually infusing new men would have been better. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marcus brutus 0 Report post Posted September 2, 2005 id say bout 50\70 years after the marius reforms Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ursus 6 Report post Posted September 3, 2005 As far away from Rome is possible, keeping busy with various construction projects and serving as centers of Romanatis for the provinces. The army's value as a cultural weapon seems to be severely underrated.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Incitatus 0 Report post Posted September 16, 2005 I voted late republic because Caesar proved these work as the other guy has already said. Also because this was the dawn of Rome as the ABSOLUTE POWER! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tobias 1 Report post Posted September 17, 2005 I voted Early Empire. Rome when at it's peak could afford the most expansive military expeditions and ended up conquering a large amount of it's largest rival, the Parthians, as well as the Dacians. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Northern Neil 3 Report post Posted September 17, 2005 I chose Late Empire. My personal view is that the Army was more flexible in this period. The Legions fared better against the Persians as they now had effective cavalry to guard their flanks. Illyrian mounted infantry had the capacity to rapidly assemble a force just where the enemy didn't want it, and field armies did not degenerate due to being tied to a fortification for generations. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Imperator Marzullius 0 Report post Posted September 17, 2005 I chose middle empire. I think the main mistake is training non-italians instead of letting people govern themselves with a sword to their back in case they got any ideas. And the province can send tributes or get plundered for the tribute, their choice. No military training, no financial aid, not even a roman style provincial government. I consider everyone on the italian peninsula south of gaul and in sicilia...italian. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites