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 

Lose the battle, win the War

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


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1170
Location: Orange County California

PostPosted: Thu Apr 06, 2017 7:09 am    Post subject: Lose the battle, win the War

I have experimented with different configurations of infantry recently, MesoAmerican, Zulu, Norse Irish...

Some part of the army dies (lose the battle)...while often given your uniform front you can defeat the enemy elsewhere.

If your losses are significantly less than your victories you...win the war.

This is very different from armies that seek to skirmish and delay on much of the table and devote a strong attack at one point...which is much more how I have played in the past.

Shifting modes of play took a lot of battles.

Organizing an army to fight uniformly across a wide area requires particular care in the selection of morale and placement of units.

I've learned through painful experience that having lots of 'efficient' low morale units next to each other can cause cascading waver failures and a great situation for my opponent!

So, you at least have to devote thought to high morale units in between your lower morale ones...and the lower morale units at least have to have good resilience (pike, or LTS, or shield wall, dense Shooting, being Close order, or some combination). Your high morale units need to be pretty tough, too!

I'd like to hear some other thoughts on this...particularly from players who shift between types of armies frequently.

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


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1024
Location: Foxborough, Massachusetts

PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2018 5:42 pm    Post subject:

My own theory of how I like to run things...

I personally like shooting armies. I've tried Macedonians and some barbarian type armies in the past, but they've left me unsatisfied. Probably one of the many reasons why, despite a huge love of the army, I have never painted a 25mm Swiss army - even though it would look so cool with all the banners I do love to paint....

So - I've typically chosen armies with a good amount of shooting - Aztec/Tepanec, KoSJ, even Abyssinian has a fair amount but stinks, Christian Nubian, 100YW. In each of those armies I also like to have a "decisive" group of units that can change a battle through a charge - Tepanecs have Otomi, KoSJ/100YW have knights, Nubians have elephants and EHC (weaker for sure than other choices). I figure that the army can create a trouble spot through shooting (disorder/shake/etc) and that creates opportunity for a break through - shake and brake that gives the victory. The line troops have to be able to fight as well or at least hold on in combat in order to get a result - there is nothing I dislike more than a 1-1 game. I would rather lose 3-5 any day and it also keeps me in the running winning a tournament. That and it is typically a lot more fun to have lots of combat.

Those armies also have a fair amount of loose troops allowing for terrain and increased movement. 40p over 6 turns is pretty significant in bringing about a result. I also like regular troops.

Todd

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


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 989

PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 2:51 am    Post subject:

OK!!......I know that this might be a big shock to all the players that play me. But crazy Ed does TRY TO HAVE A PLAN before he starts a game.
I know it usually does not work MOST of the time. However, this is my usual plan. I try to find a part of the army I think I can beat and attack there. I tend to use my Light troops to skirmish and hold the rest of the line. Many times I tend to have a small command of Cavalry (Knight w/Feudal Germans, EHC/HC with Byz) to charge through an opening or circle a flank or create an opening.
With Hoplites, Just have good morale troops and large units.
EK
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
Frank Gilson
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1170
Location: Orange County California

PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 8:51 am    Post subject:

Shooting does offer the option of three attacks.

1) Prep fire
2) Support fire
3) Hand to Hand

Also, troops fire the same regardless of their morale, unlike hand-to-hand...so D class dense shooting is just as good as A class.

The above gives you a lot more opportunities to get that big plus die roll. A huge prep shot can turn what would have been a winning attack from your opponent into your victory.

Frank
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
lilroblis
Legionary
Legionary


Joined: 24 Apr 2006
Posts: 407
Location: Cleveland Ohio

PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:36 pm    Post subject: Choice of armies

So I have played a number of strictly combat oriented armies in the past and expect to play more - I like shooting, but having dual purpose troops shrinks army size as a rule - so I go with Pike, Elephants etc.
Basically I believe that you have to play armies that fit your style - and some people are really good at multiple styles - some are not. I enjoy the skirmish armies, but like Todd, feel you must be able to push your advantage - we are currently in the age of the shooter - but the stongest army in the game (by far) is Byzantine, and what wins is not a shooting army. So it will come back, its all about how you best play what works for you - and the list rules which clearly provide huge advantages to some troops.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
Frank Gilson
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1170
Location: Orange County California

PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:50 pm    Post subject: Re: Choice of armies

lilroblis wrote:
So I have played a number of strictly combat oriented armies in the past and expect to play more - I like shooting, but having dual purpose troops shrinks army size as a rule - so I go with Pike, Elephants etc.
Basically I believe that you have to play armies that fit your style - and some people are really good at multiple styles - some are not. I enjoy the skirmish armies, but like Todd, feel you must be able to push your advantage - we are currently in the age of the shooter - but the stongest army in the game (by far) is Byzantine, and what wins is not a shooting army. So it will come back, its all about how you best play what works for you - and the list rules which clearly provide huge advantages to some troops.


First off, which Byzantine? I'm assuming you mean Komnenan, which Derek won the NCT with twice.

I'd say that Derek is one of our best players, not necessarily that Komnenan is the best list by far. It has its constraints. Note that I beat Derek 4-1 with Koryo Korean...which is certainly not the best list either.

Frank
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 -> Tactics 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