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 

Spear Bow

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules Forum Index -> Army Lists
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Frank Gilson
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1553
Location: Orange County California

PostPosted: Fri Oct 28, 2016 4:28 pm    Post subject: Spear Bow

I wanted to spur a discussion about...something Wink...so I thought I'd post why I have chosen to use Koryo Korean twice in NCT events.

I've been interested in the LTS,B armies and how they operate...sometimes mass shooting still just wins games. I'll go over the main three and their pros and cons.

10 Independent States
Mark Stone deserves credit for working out how to play this and assembling the necessary figures. It has a little less LTS,B than the other choices but has Irr D MI B,Sh/B and Reg D LMI B,Sh/B as frontage fillers that still pour out shooting.

It is also the only such list with Elephants...not very good ones, but Elephants. It has a solid anti-pike attack of the Elephant charging a pike unit along with some fire lance HI LTS.

Given the cheap cost of its shooters it also can fill the table frontage with dense shooting and still have a 6-8 unit reserve behind those troops.

It does have weaknesses...morale is generally low across the map, so a rout somewhere can be costly. If you've moved troops out of the way to avoid an upcoming rout, you can end up with frontage gaps for the enemy to exploit.

It also has very few scouting points and is routinely outscouted which has become more costly with our modern deployment rules.

Later Tang
Various folks have run this list over the years...it gets more play than the other versions. It can have a mix of morale grades from D, C, B and A. It can have LHI/HI. It gets a little LC for scouting. It has a large upper limit on the LTS,B. You can take Tibetans to have some SHC L,B,Sh along with your Chinese lancers.

If armor (HI/LHI and SHC) is good, this list is solid.

It can run afoul of enemy HI front pike and dismounted knights. Primarily regular, with the 'temptation' to use armor and higher morale troops, it fills less space than 10IS and its LC are not well suited to cover for that.

Koryo Korean
Mongols plus Pavise were my reasons for choosing this version. I reasoned that the Reg B Mongol LC and HC could provide substantial scouting and be an 'airy' part of my frontage that I fell back with, which could actually do some attacking sometimes. There was also the possibility of using some Irr C LC L,B for that purpose. So the best LC of the lot are to be found on Koryo.

Pavise turns contests where the 10IS and Later Tang must hold up shields into ones where the Koryo can still fire and win a contested shooting war.

Weaknesses include fighting high quality enemy infantry such as HI front pike or dismounted knights and some combined arms attacks.

There's another version of Koryo I have never run...the 'lots of Irr D MI B' version, backed up by Reg B HI/MI LTS,B,Pa/LTS,B,Sh.

Hopefully you find this interesting...and I'd like to hear from other folks with experience running these armies or fighting against them.

Frank
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
Mark Stone
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 2102
Location: Buckley, WA

PostPosted: Fri Oct 28, 2016 4:54 pm    Post subject:

A reasonable analysis, which we'd expect from Frank. Here are a few additional thoughts based on my experience. Context: I've run 10 Independent States twice in the NICT, with mediocre results one time and finishing 2nd the other time. Derek has also run 10 Independent States and finished 2nd.

I suspect that Frank's Koryo Korean deliver the steadiest performance. The LTS,Pa guys, with some selective upgrades to HI, are quite versatile. They'll win with outright shooting in many situations, and with Pa they can shoot at will in situations when other shooting armies must hesitate. I would, for example, be hard pressed to take 10 Independent States against Japanese or Late Imperial Roman, and one of my NICT losses was to Todd Kaiser's Knights of Saint John where he had a comparable number of shooters but better quality HtH foot in the form of LHI 2HCT,CB. The extra scouting the Koreans get definitely helps, and the presence of Mongol LC adds another threat.

What Koryo Korean lacks, however, is a legitimate shock troop. Sometimes you need to be able to just go right over the top of your opponent in a critical place on the battlefield, or at least present the threat of doing so and force him to respond. For this you need a real shock troop, preferably a mounted shock troop (the advantage of moving after all enemy foot is huge). So elephants, knights, or SHC provide that kind of shock power.

Tang offers SHC, and given how resistant these guys are to missile fire they work well in many situations. Tang doesn't fear Japanese or Romans the way that 10 Independent States does, since SHC (a) match up well against both Saumurai and Legionaries, and (b) SHC can draw fire away from Tang foot troops, creating more shooting opportunities for them in the face of enemy missile fire.

However, the Tang SHC are awkward to use in a combined arms capacity. They can't charge together with the regular foot. So you have to be able to beat enemy units with SHC alone (not a good matchup against pike), or you have to take the very risky Irr A LMI JLS,Sh guys and try to work them situationally in tandem with the SHC. The LMI also give you some sort of rough terrain presence (though Tang can use some regulars for that as well). On balance, I found the shock troops on Tang to be insufficient and the combined arms interactions unwieldy.

By contrast, 10 Independent States relies on elephants and fire-lance armed regular foot for shock troops. Neither of these is excellent on their own (both are C class, and the elephants lack pike). But in combination they are deadly. They will consistently roll right over the top of any pike unit that is at least two elements wide, and they will happily face all mounted troops except other elephants, which your abundant shooting can take care of.

In sum, both Tang and 10 Independent States deliver more variable results than Koryo Korean: bigger highs against good matchups, lower lows against poor matchups. So it comes down to the luck of the draw. When I finished second in the NICT with 10 Independent States I managed to duck all 5 Japanese armies that were entered that year, and faced nothing but knight armies and one Seleucid army. So the matchups I got were all matchups I was very happy to have.

I'd continue to favor 10 Independent States because I think variability is more important than consistency in our scoring system. You need to have a shot at a 5 point win in as many battles as possible. That's more important than avoiding a 0 or 1 point loss/draw in as many matchups as possible. So while Frank's Koreans are arguably the objectively better army, I'll continue to favor the army that I think has the biggest potential upside in some matchups, which is 10 Independent States.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message   MSN Messenger
Frank Gilson
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1553
Location: Orange County California

PostPosted: Fri Oct 28, 2016 4:57 pm    Post subject: Blowouts

I've been involved in various competitive gaming events...and there is truth to Mark's statement that you'd like to have a tool that generates blowouts, if even when you have a bad matchup, you get blown out.

A steady even has-no-bad matchups army in Warrior likely has few to no great matchups.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
lilroblis
Legionary
Legionary


Joined: 24 Apr 2006
Posts: 567
Location: Cleveland Ohio

PostPosted: Fri Oct 28, 2016 7:09 pm    Post subject: Shooting armies- LTS, B

Interesting philosophy as my preferred army at present has 200 shooters - combines lts, jls, d, sh with jls, HG/ jls, B with SHC/EHC and good light cavalry - I feel it does OK against any of the others - but may struggle against pike - though so far 4:0 vs Pike.
The armies that alsways give me fits are the hordes of reg cav - that can pick a point and hit- and avoid the fight. A few months ago I for the first time in 30 years just took the 0:0 draw and went about my life. That however is not my style normally.
I think the meso americans offer the best shooting army - because everything shoots and fights and can get out of the way- so the law of averages favors them against foot, and cav typically only get one shot at them and then get ground down.
and my take is they would love to face many of the other armies- maybe one of their exponents can talk about how they work.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
Frank Gilson
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1553
Location: Orange County California

PostPosted: Fri Oct 28, 2016 7:37 pm    Post subject: MesoAmericans

I have played MesoAmericans a few times...using various armies and fighting various.

Strengths include broadly high morale (with some exceptions), dense shooting including endless Slings, durability and some specialty units for key roles.

Weaknesses include the need to take a lot of LTS as you'll be facing lancers in the open...and other 'tricks' such as favorable terrain and temporary fortifications if you can get them.

However, the biggest weakness is the fact that you have to have a uniform frontage and deploy first, most likely, in a defensive posture under WAIT orders.

That allows your opponent to 'fluff off' 2/3 of your army with some skirmishers, and concentrate everything they've got on the remainder...the remainder they have chosen to fight.

So, the MesoAmerican army has to be able to take a major blow, pass some wavers, and retaliate, with redeployment of reserve in order to handle this.

There are also opposing armies that can't beat a MesoAmerican army, but can also not lose to one...resulting in 0-0 or 1-1 draws out of your hands.

There are also occasionally some enemy troop combinations that locally a MesoAmerican army just loses to (Varangians plus lancers is one example). Nothing you can do there.

I find this a 'bit' too passive/reactive for my tastes.

I did recently use the NWW Theme Post-Conquest Inca list because it has MI P,Sh and HK L,Sh in amounts sufficient to make a difference.

Frank
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
Todd Kaeser
Centurion
Centurion


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1211
Location: Foxborough, Massachusetts

PostPosted: Wed Nov 02, 2016 3:18 pm    Post subject:

Nice work gentlemen!

I am glad that there is still some discussion on the forum - I worry at times.

I will throw out a few of my thoughts (as a Meso player) on the discussion.

There are obviously a variety of shooting vs. combat type armies (knights/Macedonian) out there and obviously some mixtures (Anglo-Irish type)

Bow armies come in varieties of loose vs. close (HYW/Meso vs. Chinese) and some variety (Neo-Assyrian) or even cav based (Mongol or Yuan)

Our personalities and style often dictate what type of armies we like and/or are successful with - let's face it some of us play with armies we like but are not too successful with.... Abyssinian comes to mind Rolling Eyes

Frank - the same argument for Mesos being blocked off by lights and then being attacked on a small frontage could even more easily happen to Koryo - the foot is slower and has limited good rough terrain troops. I can't think of a more passive type army than close foot with LTS,B. But I also can see the benefits that those armies have vs. Meso. You are sturdier and don't take waiver tests for mounted charges. That being said you are also a target vs. knights/varangians as well I would imagine. I haven't done the math to see if your Korean foot hold up against the same combined arms you discussed.

One army that has not been discussed is Yuan (run in the style of Greg H). This army takes the close foot approach with LTS,B 1/2 sh 1/2 Pa and combines with 6 figure stone throwers. To boot the army also has a fair amount of "airy" units to hold off flanks or to exploit gaps. Eating that many rocks is certainly a challenge. There are also some lancers that can be the shock you need as well. I wanted to give Greg kuddos for figuring out how to run mass artillery and to run it so effectively.

I think the Meso choices out there depend upon style and personality as well. I fell in love with the color and exotic nature of the Aztec (now run as Tepanecs) and their ability to bend and flow as slings fire constantly at the enemy. There are a few Irreg A units as well to provide shock when needed (typically I seem to only need them in close games or when I'm losing - often the regular slingers can win battles all by themselves). There is sufficient good morale that allows troops to operate in the open - yes 1's do occur but that is true for all high morale armies. I can move reinforcements along internal vs. external lines - allowing quick redeployment (assuming I've done my set up and planning correctly) and often I can get to the desired opponents scwherpunk (sp?) at the right time.

Incas are different as they have better h-t-h weapons in 2HCT and HTW but do not typically have Irreg A shock troops. I guess had I seen/played with Inca I might be in this camp as it is an excellent army.

I haven't found many of my battles to be 1-0 or 0-0 with Tepanec/Aztec due in part to the slings. Those "fluff" units are often driven back mercilessly with slings and overlaps on the area where my opponent wants to hit occurs. I think the Mesos biggest area of concern are large barbarian armies (which absorb shooting and can fight in depth) and Macedonians with the pike who can absorb and ungodly amount of shooting backed with elephants with pike are the biggest worries. Even the Irreg A units can't break the pike which can also countercharge barbarian foot making them have to seek out elephants and avoid pike.

Frank - your post-modern Inca list with the MI P,Sh and HK is a really neat version of the list. It allows for everything you say is lacking in a Meso army. Alas it is only for use in Open tournaments as those lists haven't been cleared to play in the NICT and there are limited opportunities (sadly Crying or Very sad ) for open tournaments.

Robert's K-Borneo army is a hoot to play and has all that you could ask - shooters galore and decent shock. It is a little thin on lights but that is made up by the shooting. It has excellent rough terrain troops as well. I may go Nubian Christian with a Meso feel as well down the road.


Another list to consider is Timurid which has shooters and shock SHC and/or elephants.

a few thoughts - keep up the discussions.

Todd K

_________________
Nolite te Bastardes Carborundorum
"Don't let the Bastards Grind You Down"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message [ Hidden ]
Frank Gilson
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1553
Location: Orange County California

PostPosted: Fri Nov 04, 2016 4:42 pm    Post subject:

Todd Kaeser wrote:

Frank - the same argument for Mesos being blocked off by lights and then being attacked on a small frontage could even more easily happen to Koryo - the foot is slower and has limited good rough terrain troops. I can't think of a more passive type army than close foot with LTS,B. But I also can see the benefits that those armies have vs. Meso. You are sturdier and don't take waiver tests for mounted charges. That being said you are also a target vs. knights/varangians as well I would imagine. I haven't done the math to see if your Korean foot hold up against the same combined arms you discussed.

One army that has not been discussed is Yuan (run in the style of Greg H). This army takes the close foot approach with LTS,B 1/2 sh 1/2 Pa and combines with 6 figure stone throwers. To boot the army also has a fair amount of "airy" units to hold off flanks or to exploit gaps. Eating that many rocks is certainly a challenge. There are also some lancers that can be the shock you need as well. I wanted to give Greg kuddos for figuring out how to run mass artillery and to run it so effectively.

Todd K


There's some more material to discuss here...don't want to let Todd have the last word!

Most Meso-American armies have no mounted...so the only way for them to deal with being pinned by lights is to pour shooting into them. Certainly that can work as you yourself have experienced, however, the proper play by the pinner with LI/LC is to platoon them so that you don't get to shoot a disordered must rally unit but instead a fresh one, and then the formerly shot unit comes back up.

The 10IS states army is in a similar position, pinnable by lights, particularly 'platooned' in the above fashion. Later Tang has some LC and more lancers, so less so.

Koryo Korean has Mongol LC and HC, ideally suited to fighting, with shooting support, enemy lights...so in reality Koryo does some pinning of its own with LC and LI units, marching the MI LTS,B (as regulars getting 3 full march moves) as needed...unless the deployment situation favors the Koryo when then can just deploy the MI forward against suitable targets.

Thus another reason for my choice of Koryo...its light cav and deployment advantages...able to pin and back that up with shooting and win some lights on lights battles.

Now for Greg's Yuan...

Greg does deserve credit for learning how to employ and use artillery going back to his Ghaznavid days (and actually earlier, Sultanate of Delhi rockets, etc.)

Yuan does, however, have little ability to force a result and can be subject to the 0-0 draw I inflicted on us both in 2016 NCT.

In fact, I made a key mistake...I thought that the table plus Greg's greater scouting were detrimental enough to me such that I had to set up behind terrain and 'see what happened'...an almost certain recipe for a low scoring draw.

I re-played the battle solo at home and found that given my Koryo MI are regulars, they can start in column, expanding, turning, contracting as necessary to avoid concentrated artillery fire...which can be left to skirmishing lights.

The 'rest' of Greg's army is very vulnerable to dense shooting.

Of course everything I have said above is...theory...and it is our execution on the field of simulated battle that actually matters.

I have certainly made my share of mistakes.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
Mark Stone
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 2102
Location: Buckley, WA

PostPosted: Fri Nov 04, 2016 7:00 pm    Post subject:

Great discussion. A few additional thoughts, mainly on passive versus aggressive stances.

When playing 10 Independent States, I was routinely outscouted, and working primarily with close order foot. I never felt passive. I always felt I had the ability to push forward aggressively against my opponent. There are a couple of reasons for this.

First, firing to 240p is very different from firing to 120p. So B / CB / LB are much more aggressive missile weapons than sling. My opponent is either going to come to 240, where I can shoot at him, or he is going to let me march, which will also get me to 240. Put another way: with a 240p range, no one is able to counter back in skirmish out of shooting range. With sling, you're generally not in shooting range until you're in hand to hand range. Shooting becomes almost an extension of your hand to hand action. You have to be able to get that close to have impact.

Second, Todd mentioned interior lines of communication. This is crucial for these big missile armies. On 10 Independent States I had 2 units of EHC lancers, and 2 units of Irr A LMI. That gave me two pods of combined arms attackers that are reasonably mobile behind my line. I also had 2 units of elephants, and 2 units of regular HI with firelance. This was another pair of combined arms pods that are waiting in reserve. So while my oppponents routinely threw air at part of my line and a concentration of force elsewhere, I had these four pods that could go wherever my opponent's obvious concentration of force was and then push aggressively in that spot under the cover of shooting. There's nothing passive about this approach.

Third, having some mounted is key. In the configuration I just described I had 4 mounted units that always move after my opponent's foot, and 2 of them had 160p tactical move, meaning it wasn't necessarily easy to skirmish away from their threat. Bottom line: without mounted, it's hard to do anything other than counter-punch.

Fourth, 10 Independent States covers table edge to table edge in shooting, in any terrain (I took 48 figures of LMI B,Sh to deploy in bad terrain if necessary). Without flanks to worry about, it's much easier to be aggressive. It's really the need to support your flanks, not the fact that you are outscouted, that makes it difficult for Meso American armies to push forward aggressively.

So I guess my requirements for a shooting oriented army come down to this:
* Missilel weapons that reach out to 240p are preferable to missile weapons that only reach 120p.
* Real shock troops are preferable to "only if the enemy is tired or disordered" shock troops.
* Some mounted, including some that can move 160p, is preferable to no or slow mounted.
* Cheap, abundant shooters are preferable to expensive shooters on limited frontage.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message   MSN Messenger
Dan Woyke
Recruit
Recruit


Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 38

PostPosted: Tue Nov 08, 2016 9:17 pm    Post subject: Spear Bow

I decided that I would write a post (very rare for me)

I think Mark is correct in favoring the 10 Independent states insides the oriental warrior book. But I do like the Koreans (coreans) and I need to fiddle around with the lists. I have looked at the three kingdoms, but can't seem to get it to work. Biggest thing is that the frontage scares me. (like Todd stated)

I don't agree with Frank on the MessoAmericans (shockingly), and I honestly I am biased, because I play INCA fairly often and I have had some success. While there are clearly some troop types that can beat a Messoamerica straight up, and when facing them, you need to attack as a Messo-Player or it is pointless.

I don't really get this idea of playing against a Messoamerica army automatically = 1-0 or 1-1. I think thats more of a personal experience/or mind set...then actual facts. I went back and looked at 14 games I played with the Inca. Only one game was a 1-1! So I think that might be inside some people minds Smile

Also things have occurred that have allowed the MessoAmerican a better foot hold on the board and counters a lot of the Major Blow Frank is talking about, if anything I encourage a fight on a part of the board.

I think the Sling factor is a major variable, which you can't game against and is part of tactical game of the MessoAmericans, I look at it as two chances to change the out come via dice. (GOOD LUCK DAN)

Another Example (Pre-set terrain): seeing we have moved to this format, it actually tends to help MessoAmericans, instead of hurting them.. because we rarely face open boards now, to the point where we have a lot of terrain on the boards, which in turn allows the Messo to focus on area to fight.

When playing the Inca, I have good feel of where that fight is going to occur and how i think i am going to counter act it, does not mean I am going to win, but does I mean I am going to fight.

Bad battles occur for me with the INCA when facing another MessoAmerican (uggh) or someone who does not want to commit to attacking at all.

But that's my view...and take it with a grain of salt.

Dan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message   MSN Messenger
Frank Gilson
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1553
Location: Orange County California

PostPosted: Wed Nov 09, 2016 12:48 am    Post subject: 0-0 matchups

Note I said 'some' opponents of a MesoAmerican army may have no viable way to attack...and so yes, if you don't attack as the Meso player, it's a draw...low score.

Matchups...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
Frank Gilson
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1553
Location: Orange County California

PostPosted: Wed Nov 09, 2016 3:59 pm    Post subject: all credit though...

I do want to give Mr. Woyke all credit for his exploration of the Inca, use of Stone Walls, and the ability that I have personally witnessed to attack from his defensive posture.

Starting that off in a new thread, though, about MesoAmerican armies, seeing that Todd has just painted one.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
Todd Kaeser
Centurion
Centurion


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1211
Location: Foxborough, Massachusetts

PostPosted: Wed Nov 09, 2016 4:10 pm    Post subject:

I agree with Matchups - but more likely player matchups.

The current scoring system rewards aggressive play and not passive play. Some opponents would rather not lose and get 1-0 or 1-1 scores whereas many would rather lose 3-5 and get the 3 points.

I'll go through some of my history tonight and go over matchups vs. armies with Tepanec/Aztec over the past decades and see what appears from my perspective.

Todd

_________________
Nolite te Bastardes Carborundorum
"Don't let the Bastards Grind You Down"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message [ Hidden ]
Frank Gilson
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1553
Location: Orange County California

PostPosted: Wed Nov 09, 2016 4:16 pm    Post subject:

Todd Kaeser wrote:
I agree with Matchups - but more likely player matchups.

The current scoring system rewards aggressive play and not passive play. Some opponents would rather not lose and get 1-0 or 1-1 scores whereas many would rather lose 3-5 and get the 3 points.

I'll go through some of my history tonight and go over matchups vs. armies with Tepanec/Aztec over the past decades and see what appears from my perspective.

Todd


Make sure to respond in the new thread:

http://www.fourhorsemenenterprises.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=17579
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules Forum Index -> Army Lists 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