Another primary consideration in introduction & eventual disappearance of Segmentata?

[Nathan Ross]

Why would you assume a mobile force to be a lightly equipped force? Are you not confusing strategic mobility with tactical mobility?... there was no ''traditional legionary home base' anymore was replaced by regional production centres...

I'll address that, as the quote was actually from a blog post, not from CNV.

The original context was the change in legionary equipment - and therefore probably tactics - during the later third century. This was (probably) before the introduction of the regional fabricae, so most legions would presumably still have been officially based in frontier fortresses - although this was already changing, as we see quite a number of Danubian detachments apparently based at Aquiliea, for example.

The idea here is that the fabricae were intended to address the supply needs of pre-existing mobile detachments, who were unable to rely on the armouries in the fortresses (which still existed in the 3rd-4th centuries, as we quite possibly see at Leon, the 'traditional home base' of VII Gemina).

As for the 'lightly equipped' bit - it's an assumption, yes. Although I think, as you've said yourself, that we see a lot more flexibility (both tactical and strategic) in later Roman forces. Some equipment changes may have been directed by this need for relatively rapid movement over long distances (the Danube to Egypt or Mauretania, for example), far from reliable supply and repair opportunities.