 |
Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules
A Four Horsemen Enterprises Rules Set
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Mark Stone
Moderator
Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 2102
Location: Buckley, WA
|
 Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2007 7:37 pm Post subject: Nikephoran Byzantine |
 |
|
| Scott Holder wrote: |
| One thing that I'd like to see (and yes, this requires work on somebody else's part) would be for someone to take the craptacular lists (Swiss for example) and write up a "good" one. I think everybody would benefit (without giving away too many secrets) seeing some of these lists optimized. |
Well, I don't know that Nikephoran Byzantine counts as "craptacular". I think it's a fine list, certainly "A list" or very close to it. But it has been
criticized repeatedly of late, so it seems only fair to offer up the way I run it for criticism.
So here's my current version, together with some explanation:
2 x 2 stands Rg A EHC/Rg B HC L,B,Sh (1 w/CinC, 1 w/Sub)
1 x 2 stands Rg B HC L,B,Sh
1 x 2 stands Rg A/B SHC L,Sh
3 x 4 stands Irr B LHI 2HCW,JLS,Sh/JLS,Sh
That's the shock portion of the list. This is the minimum of cav one can take, and I favor taking the minimum. These guys are very expensive, and don't hit as hard as more points-efficient knights. So don't waste points taking more than you need. The Varangians are the reason to play the list, so take them all. The Vrrangians lead the attack, and the EHC/HC play strictly a supporting role: covering flanks, charging into enemy disrupted by the Varangians, etc.
The main thing you want to set up is a combined charge with the SHC and impetuous Varangians charging the same (foot) opponent. There really isn't any foot that will stand up to that combination.
2 x 6 stands Rg C LMI B,Sh/B
2 x 6 stands Rg D (1 elem C) LI B,Sh/B
1 x 4 stands Rg D (1 elem C) LI S,Sh
2 x 4 stands Rg D (1 elem C) LI JLS,Sh
This is the foot part of your skirmish line, and in effect your main battle line. This is some of the best light infantry in the game, being regular, shielded, and with a choice of weapons, and very efficient in terms of points with no shields where you don't want them and no morale upgrades that you don't need. The two LMI units can be very handy against certain troop types -- like elephants -- that are vulnerable to dense shooting. They'll also be key against a knight army, as you want to get the knights to hit tired and/or disordered before your cav has to tangle with them.
2 x 6 stands Irr C LC JLS,B,Sh/B
1 x 6 stands Rg C LC B
2 x 2 stands Rg B LC B
Not the premier light cav it used to be before everyone in an open tourney had cav who could fight rank and a half, but still very respectable light cav. The regulars are there to maneuver and shoot. Since they can't get JLS you don't really want them fighting other lights frontally, so no point in paying for the shields. The irregs are there to run down enemy light infantry when your opponent gives you the chance. And with this strong a skirmish line, you should have lots of chances to aggressively take on enemy light troops.
So there you have it: 19 units, 2 commands, 84 scouting points, and not one stand of close order foot. Some games you'll win on the strength of your light troops alone by beating your opponent's lights and/or exposing enemy flanks after driving back his lights. Some games you'll win with shooting alone, as almost everyone has a missile weapon and you have 48 figures of dense shooting. Other games you'll have to find some place to drive home the Varangians in a successful and supported impetuous charge. But you have enough lights to screen and pin your opponent that the Varangians should be able to pick their point of attack and match only against what they want to match up against.
This is a very different look from the plodding, Skutatoi look of the Byzantines. But this approach can play very aggressively, get across the table in a hurry, and really force decisive action in short order. There should be no low scoring games with this lineup.
-Mark Stone |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
wargame692000
Recruit
Joined: 19 Apr 2006
Posts: 34
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 10:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I agree with Mark that this is a very solid list. I have used it in several social games with a similar pick. I also maxed out on Varangians and did not use any close formation foot.
Unlike other well balanced armies like Alexandrian Imperial, this army is balanced across more than one theme. This is the critical strength of the army. The ability to win via shooting, HTH, light troop skirmishes or the exploitation of gaps.
However, without any close formation foot, the army will never win in a long fight with tough foot opponants. Shieldless LHI (2nd round) in 12 man units dont hang on for many bounds!
Paul Collins. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Todd Schneider
Centurion
Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 904
Location: Kansas City
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 08, 2007 2:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
Against a list like Jons Welsh, how exactly would this army win the fight? Or one of the Medieval Spanish lists out there?
To my amateurs eye, the shock portion of the army isn't big, and the rest of the army is a waver test waiting to happen.
What am I missing here? 
Todd
_________________
Finding new and interesting ways to snatch defeat from the jaws of Victory almost every game! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Todd Kaeser
Centurion
Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1213
Location: Foxborough, Massachusetts
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 08, 2007 5:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Against a list like Jons Welsh, how exactly would this army win the fight? Or one of the Medieval Spanish lists out there? |
Well... that's the interesting part of the NICT. Some lists, even my KoSJ list struggle in the matchup. Welsh pose a problem b/c of massed knights, but they'll also suffer from a faster more flexible army in front of it. Asking instead, what can the welsh knights catch? Both sides need to get points here. The Byzantine army can effectively tire out and kill most of the light troops of the Welsh (or at least try to  ) - same w/ the Spanish whose lights are even worse.
Yet vs. a macedonian the close foot would be in dire straits vs. mass pike. The balanced list would be difficult for the macedonians to come to grips with in the right terrain.
| Quote: |
| To my amateurs eye, the shock portion of the army isn't big, and the rest of the army is a waver test waiting to happen. |
It is the balance that is most wanted in the Byzantine armies. Most of the board will be screened off and focus will have to take place for the attack to happen. Ewan's Sassanid army is also like this in some ways - he'll hit you on a narrow frontage and the rest of his army will be opportunistic - which he is excellent with BTW.
Close foot is very servicable in 25mm, BUT if it is limited (like the Byzantine lists) it serves a poor role. You can't push w/ a limited frontage, so why bother??? Mark's Chinese army has a plethora of close foot with a very distinctive purpose - move forward and shoot. There is enough to push across the board. My KoSJ army, if I chose to get close foot, would suffer like the Byzantines because I would be unable to push and the close foot would not serve an effective purpose.
Just my thoughts.
Todd K
_________________
Nolite te Bastardes Carborundorum
"Don't let the Bastards Grind You Down" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Todd Schneider
Centurion
Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 904
Location: Kansas City
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 09, 2007 2:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Todd Kaeser wrote: |
Both sides need to get points here. The Byzantine army can effectively tire out and kill most of the light troops of the Welsh (or at least try to ) - same w/ the Spanish whose lights are even worse.
|
I can't remember the conversation exactly, but we were sitting around the table one evening awhiles back, and someone made the comment that if all your doing is skirmishing, you aren't doing anything to inflict points on the other person.
I guess when I look at Marks list, I see 6 units that are trying to get into contact with the enemy, and the rest are skirmishing away trying to stay out of trouble and hold until those 6 units get to where they need to be and hit home. I think against an army with comparable LC assets, such as Timurid or even straight Mongol, while they may not catch all the LI or LC they charge, will certainly cause more than a few wavers, ecspecially against all those unsupported LI units. I just don't see this list getting a lot of 4 or 5 1 victories against many of the knight armies out there, but then I am a n00b at this so what do I know! 
I will admit I am not a fan of this list just because it's not my style, which is one of the reasons I have a hard time seeing it as effective. It would certainly be an interesting list to play against with my Berbers.
Todd
_________________
Finding new and interesting ways to snatch defeat from the jaws of Victory almost every game! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Todd Kaeser
Centurion
Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1213
Location: Foxborough, Massachusetts
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 09, 2007 6:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Style is what draws many to the types of lists we play. I personally like the flexibility of regulars w/ missile weapons. Probably why I choose the likes of Aztec, Knights of St. John, 100 years war.
Byzantines suffer from having too many choices. They would benefit greatly in a multi-list tournament. Alas, that is not the flavor of tournament currenly out there especially the NICT. If you try to mix in too many different aspects of the list you're left with an army that can't do anything effectively.
The list we're currenlty discussing has a distinct purpose. Hit in a small area w/ Varangians and cavalry - break upon that part and stall/skirmish elsewhere. You want to dominate the battle of the lights - Mark Stone's doctrine of lights is an excellent read BTW.
http://www.fourhorsemenenterprises.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=72
If I had the Byzantines vs. your Berbers I would attempt to establish light superiority and hit your line in one specific area. Not saying it would work - the Berber list is quite tough.
I personally found that the Berbers did not cover as much of the board as I needed. The lights were irregular and difficult to control as well as I wanted. I like your list a lot more than the one I ran 3 years ago. I would like some reg bow units to help establish control over more of the board. But again, that is a question of style.
_________________
Nolite te Bastardes Carborundorum
"Don't let the Bastards Grind You Down" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mark Stone
Moderator
Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 2102
Location: Buckley, WA
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2007 4:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Todd Schneider wrote: |
| Todd Kaeser wrote: |
Both sides need to get points here. The Byzantine army can effectively tire out and kill most of the light troops of the Welsh (or at least try to ) - same w/ the Spanish whose lights are even worse.
|
I can't remember the conversation exactly, but we were sitting around the table one evening awhiles back, and someone made the comment that if all your doing is skirmishing, you aren't doing anything to inflict points on the other person.
I guess when I look at Marks list, I see 6 units that are trying to get into contact with the enemy, and the rest are skirmishing away trying to stay out of trouble and hold until those 6 units get to where they need to be and hit home. |
Um, no. Not exactly. My light troops have won far more games for me than my shock troops over the years. If I have good quality lights, they aren't going to be "skirmishing away"; they are going to be in your face. If I play it well, your lights will be shaken, routed, or recalled/evaded back behind your line. At that point I'll be looking to exploit flanks and gaps from an under-protected line of close and loose order troops that no longer have a screen in front of them.
If you don't see that potential in light troops, then you should be playing a different style of army. But there's nothing timid or evasive about a quality skirmishing army. It is one of the fastest and most aggressive army styles one can pick.
-Mark Stone |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Todd Schneider
Centurion
Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 904
Location: Kansas City
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2007 5:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mark Stone wrote: |
Um, no. Not exactly. My light troops have won far more games for me than my shock troops over the years. If I have good quality lights, they aren't going to be "skirmishing away"; they are going to be in your face. If I play it well, your lights will be shaken, routed, or recalled/evaded back behind your line. At that point I'll be looking to exploit flanks and gaps from an under-protected line of close and loose order troops that no longer have a screen in front of them.
If you don't see that potential in light troops, then you should be playing a different style of army. But there's nothing timid or evasive about a quality skirmishing army. It is one of the fastest and most aggressive army styles one can pick.
-Mark Stone |
Mark, I don't doubt what your saying, but with a lot of players running armies out there with decent light troops, or lists with better and/or more light troops than what this list has, I also doubt this list will be able to be as effective. It's the standard PRS of warrior lists, against some it will do great, against others, not so well, and against some not good at all.
I've never equated "Skirmish" with "Aggressive", they are two different things to me, but thats just me. With any luck Steve will be playing his Byzantines in the near future, so I'll have the opportunity to see something comparable in action.
Todd
Todd
_________________
Finding new and interesting ways to snatch defeat from the jaws of Victory almost every game! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ewan McNay
Moderator
Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 2769
Location: Albany, NY, US
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2007 6:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Todd:
| Quote: |
| I've never equated "Skirmish" with "Aggressive", they are two different things to me, but thats just me. |
Yeah. I'm pretty heavily in the 'violently aggressive Warrior' camp - and that's the _reason_ I take such good light troops. They enable aggression. The two are parts of a whole. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
browntj007
Recruit
Joined: 07 Jul 2006
Posts: 21
Location: NY
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 14, 2007 3:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
I suddenly felt this sharp pain and thought Ewan must be making one of his definitive statements again. Sure enough, I log in from the depths of GA and I read:
| Ewan McNay wrote: |
Todd:
| Quote: |
| I've never equated "Skirmish" with "Aggressive", they are two different things to me, but thats just me. |
Yeah. I'm pretty heavily in the 'violently aggressive Warrior' camp - and that's the _reason_ I take such good light troops. They enable aggression. The two are parts of a whole. |
I had to go read his NICT list and lo and behold - EVERY single light troops is D morale, often shieldless. So...as one of the very few guys I haven't managed to beat ( why is that, I wonder? I gotta get the curse lifted, I guess  ), I'm thinking I surely must be missing something. Okay...I'll bite - what is it? Tim |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ewan McNay
Moderator
Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 2769
Location: Albany, NY, US
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 14, 2007 11:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
There are a couple of elements of C-class in there, Tim 
(And Tim knows everything I'm about to say - I suspect that occult intervention is as good a reason as any for my relative success against him. Especially if he's having mysterious twinges when I post. I knew that time spent learning the odder parts of php would come in handy..)
The Sass LC is not great for fighting, but is regular and reasonably numerous, and B-armed, so excellent at _either_ skirmishing away or taking opportunistic targets. The LI, though, is all shielded and has a bunch of regular JLS, Sh guys, and is again numerous; in combination, I basically never worry about losing light troops (and hence risking command structures) which means that both (i) I can [try to] beat up on the other guy's light troops and (ii) I can advance my strike force rapidly and to a place of my choosing, because my lights are creating the space and time in which to do so. Hence, I can both afford to be aggressive (because I'm not worried about losing light units) and am able to be aggressive (because I get to dictate the battle; that's aided by having a mostly-mounted army). In theory, anyway... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
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
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Album
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
![[ Hidden ]](templates/subBlack/images/lang_english/icon_email.gif "[ Hidden ]"){kind=icon}