Warrior Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules
A Four Horsemen Enterprises Rules Set
 
  FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups AlbumAlbum   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Nothing to do with NICT

 
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules Forum Index -> Egroup Archives
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Ewan McNay
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 2778
Location: Albany, NY, US

PostPosted: Wed Apr 21, 2004 6:36 pm    Post subject: Nothing to do with NICT


...which should be a relief.

This weekend at PointCon I bought the two army list books I didn't
have, Holy and Imperial.

[Side note: apparently, those of you who are NASAMW members are
entitled to get a 10% discount when buying from FHE, if you mention
it, but only from FHE. Buying from Jake doesn't count. I only
discovered this yesterday Smile]

Of the various lists, two inspired different degrees of interest
(neither was Later Paleologan Byantine, although I know several
players think very highly of it. I think it would do exceptionally
well against my Seleucids, alas, but not necessarily otherwise). The
two were Early Visigothic and Sassanid.

The Visigoths get an interesting combination of (i) close javelin foot
with IrrA upgrades and (ii) loose Dacian 2HCW/JLS, IrrB guys. I think
this has potential.

What really piqued my interest, though, were the Sassanids. Goood
elephants, good el-proof cavalry to run alongside, *and* regular cheap
support/skirmish troops.

So a la John Murphy, I'm hoping that people will tear this list apart
for me. I suspect that there are potential problems against the
missile vogue, something that the SHC (yes, me, suggesting SHC) are
intended to alleviate. And there may be too few elephants to deal
optimally with knights. Don't know. And there are no troops to
actually fight in terrain. All of that said, it seems that there are
enough troops to get to a point and demolish it while avoiding
fighting elsewhere; that's the plan.

List draft:

CinC on IrrB elephant, 2 additional IrrB El, 4 with B on each (223)
3 Irr B Elephants, 4 with B (187)
Sub as IrrB EHC L, B, Sh, + 1 element IrrB HC L, B, El-proof (102)
Sub ditto (102)
Sub as Reg B SHC L, B, Sh + 1 el Reg B EHC L, B, Sh, El-proof (155)*
4E IrrB HC L, B (121)
4E Hc ditto (121)
2 x 6E Reg D LC B (70, 70)
6E LC ditto but El-proof (82)
2E Reg D LC B, 1/2 JLS, Sh also (3Cool
2 more 2E ditto (38, 3Cool
8E Reg D MI; 4E LTS, Sh/4E B, 2E caltrops (9Cool**
12E IrrD LI B, 1/2 Sh (61)
12E ditto (61)
2 x 4E Reg D LI 1/2 Sh (could be JLS/S/B or combination) (30, 30)

I think that's 1597 points. There's a lot more I'd like more of -
this may be a better 2000 point army, in fact - but seems like a
plausible start. * I think is legal (the SHC/EHC combo) but could be
wrong. I could also have this unit as Irr with a rear HC L, B rank,
which would save I think 26 points (an extra LI unit). ** These
troops are compulsory and would not otherwise be taken; this is the
minimum.

As you prepare to savage this, I am pondering in particular:
* EHC vs. SHC? Reg vs Irr? what combination(s)?
* Any plausible role for the MI?
* Can I expect to survive competition terrain?
* Can I win fast enough to avoid losiing?

Thanks!

Oh, and a serious p.s.: anyone have this army and willing to lend it
to me? Smile Like, maybe for the NICT? Smile)

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
joncleaves
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 29 Mar 2006
Posts: 16447

PostPosted: Wed Apr 21, 2004 7:00 pm    Post subject: Re: Nothing to do with NICT


I have just begun collecting the figures for this list, Ewan, so if you don't
mind taking some comments from me, I have given it some thought.

> List draft:
>
> CinC on IrrB elephant, 2 additional IrrB El, 4 with B on each (223)
> 3 Irr B Elephants, 4 with B (187)
> Sub as IrrB EHC L, B, Sh, + 1 element IrrB HC L, B, El-proof (102)
> Sub ditto (102)
> Sub as Reg B SHC L, B, Sh + 1 el Reg B EHC L, B, Sh, El-proof (155)*
> 4E IrrB HC L, B (121)
> 4E Hc ditto (121)
> 2 x 6E Reg D LC B (70, 70)
> 6E LC ditto but El-proof (82)
> 2E Reg D LC B, 1/2 JLS, Sh also (3Cool
> 2 more 2E ditto (38, 3Cool
> 8E Reg D MI; 4E LTS, Sh/4E B, 2E caltrops (9Cool**
> 12E IrrD LI B, 1/2 Sh (61)
> 12E ditto (61)
> 2 x 4E Reg D LI 1/2 Sh (could be JLS/S/B or combination) (30, 30)
>
> I think that's 1597 points. There's a lot more I'd like more of -
> this may be a better 2000 point army, in fact - but seems like a
> plausible start. * I think is legal (the SHC/EHC combo) but could be
> wrong. >>

Without a list exception, generals can only be combined in units of the same
order, which EHC and SHC are not.

>
> As you prepare to savage this, I am pondering in particular:
> * EHC vs. SHC? Reg vs Irr? what combination(s)?>>

I am taking mine with a great deal of Irr B HC L B Sh and one maybe two units of
EHC. Without K of your own, your cav are closers - something I am getting
better and better at as I play. EHC are good closers on B/D missile troops, but
I have found I can more often get the enemy disordered or disadvantaged in some
other way that I don't need to send in a lone EHC unit but rarely.

> * Any plausible role for the MI?>>

The B back rank helps split fire greatly and the JLS + actually makes the right
kind of difference against El and barbarian foot. You'll still recoil to SHK,
but when facing those I treat this as a sponge and plan for the recoil with
something nearby that can kill the K. El with this unit next to them are a good
combo.

> * Can I expect to survive competition terrain?>>

The lack of loose order is the biggest weakness in my mind. Personally I don't
plan to win in terrain, as even if you do, it takes too long and I am a fast
player by style. I'll be taking 1 road, and three open and using my LI to
mitigate the terrain he does manage to get.

> * Can I win fast enough to avoid losiing?>>

You have the tools to win the screen battle if he tries to dance and 7
elephants, while not the 10 of your seleucids, can force the issue where he has
to stand and fight.

I haven't played with this new list yet, so this is all conjecture - but I have
moved the figs around in some exercises and feel that, while it does not play as
fast as something like Feudal French, it counter-punches very hard. I plan to
make bound three positively HURT. lol

I hope we can share notes if you take this one on. Two of us in KC are adding
this army to our collections in 25mm in the next few months.

J


_________________
Roll Up and Win!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
John Murphy
Legate
Legate


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1625

PostPosted: Wed Apr 21, 2004 8:30 pm    Post subject: Re: Nothing to do with NICT


--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "ewanmcnay" <ewan.mcnay@y...>
wrote:
> So a la John Murphy, I'm hoping that people will tear this list
apart
> for me.

No, Ewan, you have it all wrong. You have to post a much worse list
to get that kind of response. <g>

I have, much to everyone's relief, given up on this practice to look
instead more closely at the particular troop types where I really
have important questions. More focused that way but it does not
generate the same blood-lust (or humor) from the list sharks which is
too bad!

Here's my 20-year rookie analysis, and I'll do my best to shred for
you, for whatever its worth...

I see a lot of light troops and some decent but not great dual-armed
cavalry, both almost Byzantine-ish, less maneuverable shock elements
but with the added force multipliers of the elephants and
impetuosity. Anyway, the type of army you are going to be able to
pick your battles.

I still do not think the El will let your cavalry tackle knights head-
on but you have plenty of options to skirmish them or beat them after
they are engaged with your other units. So with good play which I am
sure you will manage I think you can handle them - but you already
know that. I ain't scared of no kiniggits with my Byz and this army
you've listed out is better with the El and Irregs (though the non-
skirmish cav still bugs me I understand why you need that against
other opposition like Bows and Darts).

The two types of armies I do not see this matching up as well against
in open competition are either (a) a real elephant army (do you
really see much stuff like Indians or Southeast Asians though) as
even if your cav is not disordered by them there is nothing I see
that obviously really kills elephants here (?) like JLS foot (you
will probably though be able to shoot them to a halt while you figure
it out - but it could be tricky), or (b) an army with a horde of
dense missile troops (more the Mesoamerican or medieval S, LB, CB
types than the B, D types) as much of your army might not be able to
get close enough to them. Against the latter there are probably some
LI skirmishing and 1-2 combination effects you can work with if the
enemy units are big enough.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  

Centurion
Centurion


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1373

PostPosted: Fri Apr 23, 2004 4:40 pm    Post subject: Re: Nothing to do with NICT


--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "ewanmcnay" <ewan.mcnay@y...>
wrote:

> List draft:
>
> CinC on IrrB elephant, 2 additional IrrB El, 4 with B on each (223)
> 3 Irr B Elephants, 4 with B (187)
> Sub as IrrB EHC L, B, Sh, + 1 element IrrB HC L, B, El-proof (102)
> Sub ditto (102)
> Sub as Reg B SHC L, B, Sh + 1 el Reg B EHC L, B, Sh, El-proof (155)*
> 4E IrrB HC L, B (121)
> 4E Hc ditto (121)
> 2 x 6E Reg D LC B (70, 70)
> 6E LC ditto but El-proof (82)
> 2E Reg D LC B, 1/2 JLS, Sh also (3Cool
> 2 more 2E ditto (38, 3Cool
> 8E Reg D MI; 4E LTS, Sh/4E B, 2E caltrops (9Cool**
> 12E IrrD LI B, 1/2 Sh (61)
> 12E ditto (61)
> 2 x 4E Reg D LI 1/2 Sh (could be JLS/S/B or combination) (30, 30)
>
> As you prepare to savage this, I am pondering in particular:
> * EHC vs. SHC? Reg vs Irr? what combination(s)?
> * Any plausible role for the MI?
> * Can I expect to survive competition terrain?
> * Can I win fast enough to avoid losiing?

First, the EHC cannot mix with SHC, as close and loose order do not
mix unless attachments.

Second, with this army if possible I'd run all HC as irreg and all
SHC/EHC as reg. The HC pound in and need the impetuousity to stick
more than likely while the SHC or EHC can hit as second wave to
finish off the target.

Third, the MI are your elephant guards. Keep them close to the
Elephants in order to force shooting bleed off. Also the occasional
charge will make the enemy loose order skirmishers run away and have
to reset. Also the MI are excellent lures for SHK type thingees, not
to mention regular LMI LTS/JLS/sh types.

Forth, forget terrain but fear a minor waterfeature! Well at least
the elephants can still shoot while fording ;)

Fifth, fighting this army would be a straight up dual for
Nikephorians the way I run them. The First crusaders would I think
have it easier, since only the masses of LC could force it to
contract. With all shooting elephants (no JLS or P) I think your
beasties will suffer in HTH against vikings, or even JLS armed close
order that shoot from a second rank.

Sixth, this army flies in the face of current trends, which is good
IMO. the trick is LB range right now. With full effect at 120p, LB
still hits @2 on elephants. This is a key consideration that needs
to be minumized. Even SHC suffer vs LB. You shooting 3@1 to his 6@2
per element frontage is deadly. The MI can help on one side, but the
other side will require some of your screen. This factor, IMO
weakens your ability to screen effectively since the elephants will
need to remain covered to shooting as long as possible. Being that
elephants are a higher shooting priority than nearest in arc and they
are shooters, they will draw fire often unfavorably. If you cover
with LI JLS/sh for example at 41paces away, the enemy can shoot the
elephants standing behind the LI!

Seventh, you are a far far better player than I, so I know you've
looked at all of this. Against you, I would try to force you to
commit mounted to my close order, then send in my kniggits or SHC to
push you off; your elephants would receive LMI B, LMI 2HCW, LI B.
More likely, you would win the LI fight somewhere important and
disorder my kniggits with your beasties, then your SHC would punish
my LTS armed close order by charging 8@4 +1 charge +1 impetous -2
facing steady LTS to my 6@2 +1 receiving impeous mounted: 24 F or 1
CPF and more to my close order with 15 to your SHC or 1 CPF. Foot
are now disordered and here comes your MI to find closing work in
that sector, which forces me to start sending my IrrgA HC into a
breach too near the elephants and I roll down 3 :)

In the hands of a club player, I would become very agressive against
the LC with either Nikephorian or Crusader since your LC is
vulnerable two different ways. I would screen off the elephants, LI,
and MI, and push everything mounted into one of your mounted flanks
to crush it--which would also stall your main thrust, then I would
turn and begin rolling up units with my close order and HC
combination charges.

In the hands of a novice, I would run up and shoot the elephants
disordered, then charge them with LMI 2HCW/sh and rout them back
through the jumble of units that novice elephant players always seem
to have lurking behind the elephants :)

A tough nut army in any event, but I would say lacking some of the
cute things the Selucids have like P on the elephant or peltast.

I do note, that Sassanids were popular for a while in the cycle back
in the early 7th days. Perhaps more because the elephant models were
so nice and the onion dome hats were so stupid looking on the
infantry :)

Wanax

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
Ewan McNay
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 2778
Location: Albany, NY, US

PostPosted: Fri Apr 23, 2004 6:40 pm    Post subject: Re: Re: Nothing to do with NICT


Wanax Andron wrote:

> --- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "ewanmcnay" <ewan.mcnay@y...>
>>List draft:
>>
>>CinC on IrrB elephant, 2 additional IrrB El, 4 with B on each (223)
>>3 Irr B Elephants, 4 with B (187)
>>Sub as IrrB EHC L, B, Sh, + 1 element IrrB HC L, B, El-proof (102)
>>Sub ditto (102)
>>Sub as Reg B SHC L, B, Sh + 1 el Reg B EHC L, B, Sh, El-proof (155)*
>>4E IrrB HC L, B (121)
>>4E Hc ditto (121)
>>2 x 6E Reg D LC B (70, 70)
>>6E LC ditto but El-proof (82)
>>2E Reg D LC B, 1/2 JLS, Sh also (3Cool
>>2 more 2E ditto (38, 3Cool
>>8E Reg D MI; 4E LTS, Sh/4E B, 2E caltrops (9Cool**
>>12E IrrD LI B, 1/2 Sh (61)
>>12E ditto (61)
>>2 x 4E Reg D LI 1/2 Sh (could be JLS/S/B or combination) (30, 30)
>
> First, the EHC cannot mix with SHC, as close and loose order do not
> mix unless attachments.

...or Tibetans. All of which is too bad; and makes me wonder
very strongly about taking the generals as single elements and
then attaching them to HC units. Costly, but provides a bit of
extra bulk in compensation, and gets me where I want to be (I
think). I might well do this with one general only. If I ever
run the army in fact rather than imagination Smile.

> Second, with this army if possible I'd run all HC as irreg and all
> SHC/EHC as reg. The HC pound in and need the impetuousity to stick
> more than likely while the SHC or EHC can hit as second wave to
> finish off the target.

I agree with your conclusion but not your axioms Smile. I consider
the HC to be the second wave (as I mentioned to Jon) - but buy
them as Irr because cheaper and not intended for manouvre really.
I would send in a SHC or EHC unit first in most cases, I think.

> Third, the MI are your elephant guards. Keep them close to the
> Elephants in order to force shooting bleed off. Also the occasional
> charge will make the enemy loose order skirmishers run away and have
> to reset. Also the MI are excellent lures for SHK type thingees, not
> to mention regular LMI LTS/JLS/sh types.
>
> Forth, forget terrain but fear a minor waterfeature! Well at least
> the elephants can still shoot while fording ;)

!! I know of no-one other than me who places those in
competition Smile.

> Fifth, fighting this army would be a straight up dual for
> Nikephorians the way I run them. The First crusaders would I think
> have it easier, since only the masses of LC could force it to
> contract. With all shooting elephants (no JLS or P) I think your
> beasties will suffer in HTH against vikings, or even JLS armed close
> order that shoot from a second rank.

I agree with the potential of those matchups, but it seems to me
that in such cases that's why I am hitting with cav from 121p and
then following up with El/HC.

> Sixth, this army flies in the face of current trends, which is good
> IMO. the trick is LB range right now. With full effect at 120p, LB
> still hits @2 on elephants. This is a key consideration that needs
> to be minumized. Even SHC suffer vs LB. You shooting 3@1 to his 6@2
> per element frontage is deadly. The MI can help on one side, but the
> other side will require some of your screen. This factor, IMO
> weakens your ability to screen effectively since the elephants will
> need to remain covered to shooting as long as possible. Being that
> elephants are a higher shooting priority than nearest in arc and they
> are shooters, they will draw fire often unfavorably. If you cover
> with LI JLS/sh for example at 41paces away, the enemy can shoot the
> elephants standing behind the LI!

Yes, I agree that the elephants being bow-armed may not be best
choice; I would consider having 4 JLS on them if it were not for
the reasonable bowfire I can put out. Frankly, though, a
stake-equipped LB unit is a big elephant target; I'm going to
take my IrrB waver and charge right on in over the irrelevant
stakes Smile. Plus, the LC are excellent anti-LMI missile troop
units; they walk right on up to close range and dare the LMI to
drop their shields! And further, of course, as the mounted
player I never expect to be 120p and unscreened from a fooot LB
unit if I can avoid it, and certainly not with the cav. The
elephants as noted may well be trying to get there, and we'lll
see who is right about this being a good idea! :)

> Seventh, you are a far far better player than I, so I know you've
> looked at all of this. Against you, I would try to force you to
> commit mounted to my close order, then send in my kniggits or SHC to
> push you off; your elephants would receive LMI B, LMI 2HCW, LI B.
> More likely, you would win the LI fight somewhere important and
> disorder my kniggits with your beasties, then your SHC would punish
> my LTS armed close order by charging 8@4 +1 charge +1 impetous -2
> facing steady LTS to my 6@2 +1 receiving impeous mounted: 24 F or 1
> CPF and more to my close order with 15 to your SHC or 1 CPF. Foot
> are now disordered and here comes your MI to find closing work in
> that sector, which forces me to start sending my IrrgA HC into a
> breach too near the elephants and I roll down 3 :)

I think this army vs army analysis is a useful tool. And I have
not given this anywhere near the level of thought that you've
given 1st Crusade. I agree that I'm likely to win the skirmish
against you, which will be important. I honestly expect to be
able to largely ignore your close order unless I feel like going
into them. Even the elephants if JLS-armed come in against them
with 10@2* and 4@3 (total 30) facing 12@1 (1Cool and then roll over
them next bound. [*This might be 10@1, and I should know this,
but the rust, the rust... if 10@1 then 25 to 18 but outcome the
same] Second bound I have 10 @ 5 or 6 plus 8@3 for a waver or
rout; and I'm IrrB so not rolling down much.

> A tough nut army in any event, but I would say lacking some of the
> cute things the Selucids have like P on the elephant or peltast.

Agreed. My early impression is that it hits faster than the
Seleucids, though, and possibly with more focus. Different style
of win.

Thanks, Boyd.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
joncleaves
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 29 Mar 2006
Posts: 16447

PostPosted: Fri Apr 23, 2004 7:01 pm    Post subject: Re: Re: Nothing to do with NICT


In a message dated 4/23/2004 11:40:05 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
ewan.mcnay@... writes:

> > First, the EHC cannot mix with SHC, as close and loose order do not
> > mix unless attachments.
>
> ...or Tibetans. All of which is too bad; and makes me wonder
> very strongly about taking the generals as single elements and
> then attaching them to HC units. >>

Um, you certainly *can* have an SHC/EHC unit - if the troop type is on the same
line or if there is a list rule.

You can't put a general in a unit of a different order (like close in loose)
without a list rule. Scott is looking at the lists now to see if there are
generals that should be able to mix that didn't get a list rule to cover them

So, tibetans could be SHC/EHC, HC, MC whatever if the troop type gave all these
options on the same line...

J


_________________
Roll Up and Win!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
Bill Chriss
Centurion
Centurion


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1000
Location: Texas

PostPosted: Fri Apr 23, 2004 7:31 pm    Post subject: Re: Nothing to do with NICT


--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, Ewan McNay <ewan.mcnay@y...>
wrote:
> > Forth, forget terrain but fear a minor waterfeature! Well at
least
> > the elephants can still shoot while fording Wink
>
> !! I know of no-one other than me who places those in
> competition Smile.
>

I do it all the time, not to avoid combat but to secure one flank for
my Greeks. Placing a minor river is the only way to create a more
than 17% chance of placing difficult terrain in the forward central
zone (a marsh) because marshes can be placed not only in flank
sectors but anywhere under a minor river (I believe on a roll of 3-6,
don't have my rules handy).

This means I can effectively anchor one flank of 90% of my troops,
who then only need to fight over half the table. A couple of peltasts
in the marsh and a LI and/or LC unit or two on the far side to slow
any attempt to ford the river and outflank the marsh, and I'm set.

Without this terrain technique, my Greeks would be much, much less
playable, more easily being outflanked unless unreasonably lucky in
terrain rolls. When you're Greek, you have to figure out stuff like
this to survive...and flamin' bacon...and avalanches...and fire
arrows, etc.....


Greek


_________________
-Greek
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  

Centurion
Centurion


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1373

PostPosted: Fri Apr 23, 2004 8:09 pm    Post subject: Re: Nothing to do with NICT


> > Second, with this army if possible I'd run all HC as irreg and
all
> > SHC/EHC as reg. The HC pound in and need the impetuousity to
stick
> > more than likely while the SHC or EHC can hit as second wave to
> > finish off the target.
>
> I agree with your conclusion but not your axioms Smile. I consider
> the HC to be the second wave (as I mentioned to Jon) - but buy
> them as Irr because cheaper and not intended for manouvre really.
> I would send in a SHC or EHC unit first in most cases, I think.

Either way. I tend to want the SHC, EHC types of higher moral to be
the second wave since ther is the off chance of a -4 roll with the HC
and some waver testing to be done. Also I like the regulars to hit
second since I can manuver into the perfect position sometimes to not
only hit the target but to cancel opponant's charges. Since you also
have generals on the regulars, you'll get the impetuous charge off if
they have avoided undue missile fire. Of course, your way gives
greater initial impact so is perhaps better depending on nearby
threats.

> > Fifth, fighting this army would be a straight up dual for
> > Nikephorians the way I run them. The First crusaders would I
think
> > have it easier, since only the masses of LC could force it to
> > contract. With all shooting elephants (no JLS or P) I think your
> > beasties will suffer in HTH against vikings, or even JLS armed
close
> > order that shoot from a second rank.
>
> I agree with the potential of those matchups, but it seems to me
> that in such cases that's why I am hitting with cav from 121p and
> then following up with El/HC.

I'm always leary of "D" LC B 1/2 sh. They just go away so fast,
never wanted to be there, and fail wavers all day long. This is
mainly what I'm refering to. A 2E RgC LC J/B/sh unit will be able to
hold up 2 6E IrgD LC units long enough to get some nasties IrgA HC
L/sh into action. The elephant changes the equation somewhat, so I'd
have to gain a little reminder time of elephant proof LC and elephant
coordination. HC L/sh is a push against itself in most cases, but
the elehpant's disordering would force the infantry into proximity.
I think it would be fun in both cases and an excellent quirk to gain
experience in prior to the NICT.


>
> Yes, I agree that the elephants being bow-armed may not be best
> choice; I would consider having 4 JLS on them if it were not for
> the reasonable bowfire I can put out. Frankly, though, a
> stake-equipped LB unit is a big elephant target; I'm going to
> take my IrrB waver and charge right on in over the irrelevant
> stakes Smile.

I would agree but for people like Ambrose who don't set the stakes,
go into skirmish at 120, shoot full effect, then run off as you
charge. Chances are in such cases, the elephants halt or waver, hit
tired and disordered if at all, and the nearby IrgC HI 2HCT,Pa guys
will absolutely punish the elephants in the next bound. However, if
you were to use a 3 peice combo of LI screen on the LB, HC or EHC
pound in on the HI 2HCT at the halt impetuously, then come at the LB
in the next bound with El and more HC after the LI rally back. This
could be good! The LB are uneasy if the HC win against the HI 2HCT.
Not sure on factors, but perhaps a second HC unit into the HI in the
second bound while the elephants are chasing the LB.


Plus, the LC are excellent anti-LMI missile troop
> units; they walk right on up to close range and dare the LMI to
> drop their shields! And further, of course, as the mounted
> player I never expect to be 120p and unscreened from a fooot LB
> unit if I can avoid it, and certainly not with the cav. The
> elephants as noted may well be trying to get there, and we'lll
> see who is right about this being a good idea! :)

All good points. I tend to hunt down LC with my armies, so looking
at yours I lick my lips. Only the proximity of elephants would ward
off my efforts against what are essentially sheildless LC.

> I think this army vs army analysis is a useful tool. And I have
> not given this anywhere near the level of thought that you've
> given 1st Crusade. I agree that I'm likely to win the skirmish
> against you, which will be important. I honestly expect to be
> able to largely ignore your close order unless I feel like going
> into them.

Agreed! my LI are going to loose. :)

The close order will get into battle since the LI will not be able to
keep them back with all of my mounted assets and LMI. A true worry
for 1st Crusade is trying to get the close order near the elephants
and avoid a hanging flank. But you do have close order killing
mounted with SHC and EHC L/sh. Even HC may get a lucky shot in, but
the second rank bow will punish them wildly.


Even the elephants if JLS-armed come in against them
> with 10@2* and 4@3 (total 30) facing 12@1 (1Cool and then roll over
> them next bound. [*This might be 10@1, and I should know this,
> but the rust, the rust... if 10@1 then 25 to 18 but outcome the
> same] Second bound I have 10 @ 5 or 6 plus 8@3 for a waver or
> rout; and I'm IrrB so not rolling down much.

Yes the bow armed elephants will also have to endure 2 shots 2@3 and
4@1 per element frontage. Typically for a 3 elephant unit like
yours, you will shoot at 120p with 8@1 for no CPF and I will return
fire with 6@3 for 1 CPF to you. Your support will then be 15@-1 and
mine will be 12@1 for another CPF to the elephants. The HI fight per
element with 6@3 or 15 fatigues, so the elephants if all is even will
take 3 CPF on the initial combat. The elephants will dish out 5@3
and 2@1 (I think) for 14 fatigues per element. I think I would give
1 crewman a JLS given these factors. You will not shoot the close
order down with less than 15@2. There is no break between @1 and @2
there, nor between 12 and 15 factors. If in 6E blocks, seems to me
the close order will win this unless the elephants have a JLS armed
crewman in which case it is 1 factor in favor of the elephant.

> Agreed. My early impression is that it hits faster than the
> Seleucids, though, and possibly with more focus. Different style
> of win.

yes the key is as you say, I think. Get there now and start killing
before anything ugly can happen. This tactic would do well in
forcing my crusader knights to attack prematurely thus stripping the
close order of any support and effectively controlling the LI game
for you.

I would still want to work the factors on elephant/cav coordination
more before I considered how best to use Nikephorians against it.
Off the top of my head, I know I would go after your MI and
elephants with Varangians, LMI B and SHC, and I would run down your
LC with my superior LC, EHC closers, and IrgA HC shock troops. I run
no close order at all in my latest list (going back to the old ways
of Byzantines), so I would get there just as quick with more of
everything but elephants....maybe a fire syphon...nah! Just a waver
test waiting to happen ;)

Anyway, again the disordering effect of elephants on horses seems to
be a key focus for your tactical considerations.

> Thanks, Boyd.

No; thank you! I enjoy contemplations such as these.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
Display posts from previous:   
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules Forum Index -> Egroup Archives All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group