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 

2007 NICT List Commentary
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules Forum Index -> List Lore
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Mark Stone
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 2021
Location: Buckley, WA

PostPosted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 2:24 pm    Post subject: Re: Jamie White Khmer

Frank Gilson wrote:
Now Khmer is a list that you put near the top in power, but not necessarily for obvious reasons. Derek has used it to great effect.

It has access to perhaps the 'most' elephants you could run, and most of them are high morale. They can have or be detachments in order to render them nearly immune to shooting, the traditional defect to elephants. There are some useful support troops too.

CinC JLS,B w/PA on Irr B El w/ armed crewman JLS
2 units of 2E Reg C LC JLS,Sh El proof
2 units of 2E Reg A/B HC JLS,Sh El proof
3 units of 2E Reg A LMI JLS,Sh as parent of 2E Irr B El JLS,B/JLS

2E Reg D LMI B as parent of Sub JLS,B w/P armed crewman JLS and another such elephant
4E Reg D LI B
4E Reg D LI B
4E Reg C LI JLS,Sh
4E Reg C LI JLS,Sh

2E Reg D LMI B as parent of Sub JLS,B w/P armed crewman JLS and another such elephant
4E Reg C LHI JLS,B,Sh
4E Reg C LMI JLS,Sh
4E Reg D LMI B
8E Irr B LMI JLS,Sh

I like the several elephant units with very high morale parent units so that if a waver is necessary due to shooting they should pass and be able to charge.

I don't like that the CinC is all alone, he should be in a 2 El unit, perhaps as a free body able to staff move productively.

I also don't like that the Sub generals are in overall poor morale units. Typically your generals are acting as a mobile reserve and may have to take a waver or two for routers.

I think a little more LI is needed. I really hate the Irr B LMI JLS,Sh unit. Such a unit is too expensive for its benefit and screams out 'kill me and cause wavers' to the enemy.

Frank


I agree with everything Frank says here. I'll stress the point about subgenerals a little further: with subs you're getting a free command factor for your unit; to then spend 10 points to make it a detachment seems like a waste. And if you are going to do that, put the generals with the Reg A guys so they have the necessary morale.

This is a list that can definitely be a 10 if bought properly. I give this version a 6.


-Mark Stone
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message   MSN Messenger
Mark Stone
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 2021
Location: Buckley, WA

PostPosted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 5:51 pm    Post subject: Re: Bill Low Countries

Frank Gilson wrote:
How 'Low' can you go?

Bill Low ran Low Countries, and here is his list.

CinC w/PA 2E Irr B SHK/EHK L,Sh
Sub similar
2 units of 2E Irr C SHK/HC L,Sh
3 units of 8E Reg C HI/MI P
2 units of 4E Reg C HI/MI 2HCT,Sh
3 units of 4E Reg C LHI CB
2 units of 2E Irr A LMI JLS,Sh
2 units of 4E Reg C LI B
2 units of 2E Reg C LI B
18 units, 2 commands, 8 scouting

Bill didn't select and run this list because he felt it was 'killer' and would 'dominate'. He had other reasons. It has a lot of flaws from the standpoint of 'best lists'.

Frank


Well, kudos to Bill for running a list that cannot seriously be called competitive and that can have only personal appeal.

I feel like I'm stating the obvious, but here are the negatives:
* Depends on C-class knights backed by HC, who have lousy morale and want to avoid charging in brush;
* Depends on Pike units with no special list rules - they don't move faster, don't circulate combatants, don't have any special resistance to missile fire, nothing;
* The pike are, additionally, shieldless which makes them highly vulnerable to missile fire;
* To try and make the pike amount to something, a large number have to be upgraded to HI, making them both vulnerable and expensive.

I do think the 2HCT units have some real value on this list (being shielded HI in the front), and can help mitigate some of the problems with the pike. Ideally you want to hit with the 2HCT, and then charge the pikes next bound into an exposed overlap. The small use of Irr As here is also appropriate, as they are strictly reserve/supporting troops designed to pass wavers and fill in a gap, rather than main line combat troops you're going to try and use to lead the attack.

This list has a max potential value of 3, and I give Bill the full 3 points for it.


-Mark Stone
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message   MSN Messenger
jamiepwhite
Recruit
Recruit


Joined: 21 Apr 2006
Posts: 187
Location: Florida

PostPosted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 5:52 pm    Post subject: CinC in combat?

The great oracle has successfully beaten into my head that the CinC should stay out of combat units, and after seeing the disasters strike my opponents at the NICT, I think he's right. An irregular CinC has a 1/18 chance each round of rolling a catastrophe, the Khmer elephant units often stay in combat for three to five bounds in a game. Up to 25 bounds of combat in a 5 round tournament, I'm being a chicken and keeping the CinC out of the combat units.

The RA troops would be very offended by your mistaken reference to their gender. As an equal opportunity commander, I don't recommend offending them.

I stuck with a restriction I think from an older version of the list that the Maiden Guard troops should all be in CinC's command. Might not be required any more but I went with it. This did affect the subgeneral's morale at times, I did my best to avoid them taking waver tests.

As for the more light infantry, avoiding the irregular LMI, and I should have fielded more regular LMI, yes that's true. My Khmer army is over 15 years old though and age has been taking it's toll on my figs. I fielded the troops in the box that were in the better shape.

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


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 2021
Location: Buckley, WA

PostPosted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 7:35 pm    Post subject:

Quote:
Scott MacDonald, Mongol

1 Cnc +1 R A/B HC, B, L, 1/2 SH 191
2 Sub +1 R A/B EHC, B, L, 1/2 SH 131
3* Sub +1 R A HC, B, L, SH Gd 130
4 2 R A/B HC, B, L, 1/2 SH 85
5 2 R A/B HC, B, L, 1/2 SH 85
6 2 R A/B HC, B, L, 1/2 SH 85
7 2 R A/B HC, B, L, 1/2 SH 85
8 2 R A/B HC, B, L, 1/2 SH 85
9 2 R A/B HC, B, L, 1/2 SH 85
10 2 R C ARTY, 3 Bolt 70
11 4 R B LC, B, JLS, 1/2 SH 90
12 2 R B LC, B, 1/2 JLS-SH 46
13 2 R C LC, B 34
14 2 R C LC, B 34
15 2 R C LC, B 34
16 2 R C LC, B 34
17 2 R C LC, B 34
18 2 R C LC, B 34
19 2 R C LC, B 34
20 2 R C LC, B 34
21 6 R C LC, B 82
22 4 R B Det* LC, B, JLS 77


I'm very interested in the Mongol list. The list rules make it a much better list than it used to be, and I've explored it in depth since Alex and I played it at Cold Wars last spring. One of my conclusions: it's a very hard list to construct.

I also think the list is still limited by the lack of solid foot troops. Your best foot are dismounted cav, giving you something like HI LTS,B,Sh. That's a very servicable troop type against enemy cavalry, elephants, and a lot of irregular loose order foot. However, that's a troop type that's no help at all against Romans, Phalangites, or Swiss. It's pretty marginal against the Han / Knights of Saint John / Italian Condotta CB,2HCT guys as well.

So you're trying to win on a wide open table by stretching a guy beyond the frontage he can cover, and/or by creating an exposed flank that will enable you to start rolling up the enemy line. That's not so easy. Even with all the list rules, your opponent can probably get down a couple of steep hills -- one in a flank and one in his rear zone -- which is all he needs to create a defensible corner.

The other problem, which I had not forseen and which Alex and I experienced at Cold Wars, is that there are many cavalry armies who are just plain cheaper than Mongols and can swarm you. Skythians come to mind as one example, and Ewan has demonstrated what one can do with a really cheap Hun army.

So there are lots of problems that Mongols face. They also present a lot of problems for opponents. This is an army that could easily end up in a lot of 1-1 or 2-1 games, not what you want in a tournament format.

Scott has been tinkering with this list for several years, and had some modest success. I'm not terribly happy with the way this list is bought, however.

Problems:
*There's no reason to buy shields for the rear ranks of your loose order cav units;
*There's no reason to make these units HC throughout - back ranks of MC will generally be fine;
*Too many small LC units - you need maybe 3 or 4 of these, and Scott has 8;
*The artillery is too expensive for what it does;
*There are no Chinese here, denying the army the use of shielded light infantry, and meaning that all dense shooting will have to come from very expensive dismounted cav units;
*Not enough JLS-armed LC here - you need more to quickly dust off enemy LI;
*There's no non-Mongol irregular LC here, which is a really cheap way to get a sizable LC unit (say, 6 stands) that operates as a mounted shooting platform.

I also think the Mongols have one gimmick up their sleeve that Scott does not use here: camels. You can get a couple of small units of light camels, and then spend some points camel-proofing a few units. This provides a fairly potent cavalry wing that can ride up to enemy mounted, disorder them with the camels, and then shoot the now-disordered mounted with good opportunities to cause some waver tests.

Let's say the Mongols have a maximum potential of about 7; unfortunately, I can only give Scott's list a 4.


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


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1197
Location: Orange County California

PostPosted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 8:26 pm    Post subject: Tim Grimmett - Ghaznavid

CinC w/PA in 2Elephant unit Irr B JLS/P/JLS,B
Sub w/P in 3El unit
Sub w/P in 3El unit
3Elephant Irr B JLS/P/JLS,B
4 units of 2E Reg A/B HC L,B,Sh
2 units of 6E Irr C LC JLS,B,Sh/B
6E Irr B LC JLS,B,Sh/B
4E Reg C HI JLS,B,Sh
4E Reg C LI B,Sh
2 units of 4E REg B LI B,Sh

This is only 15 units...which is 2 or 3 units too few. It really does matter.

Ghaznavid is a list that you'd really like to make work. It has Irr B pike crew elephants...but they can't have guys on base or detachments. It has L,B,Sh cavalry, but they can't be elephant proof. It has decent well costed LC, but they can't fight 1.5 ranks and can't be elephant proof. It has a required clunky unit of infantry.

I think Tim buys too much HC and should toss two units back, as well as drop one LC unit. He should split the Reg B LI up into 2E units and get a couple extra larger LI units to work with the LC as his screen, supported by the remaining two units of HC.

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


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1197
Location: Orange County California

PostPosted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 8:33 pm    Post subject: Dan Woyke Inca

CinC w/PA in 2E Reg A LMI 2HCT,S,Sh
Sub w/P in 2E Reg A LMI 2HCT,S,Sh/JLS,S,Sh
2 units of 4E Reg A LMI LTS,S,Sh
3 units of 6E Reg B LMI LTS,S,Sh
2 units of 4E Reg C/D LMI HTW,JLS,S,Sh
3 units of 4E Reg C LMI HTW,S,Sh/JLS,S,Sh
6E Reg D LI B
2 units of 4E Reg D(1C) LI JLS,D,Sh/D,Sh
6E Reg D(1C) LI S,Sh
16 units, 2 commands, 10 scouting

Lots of high morale, lots of shooting. What are the problems?
Inca don't get to use the circulating combatants rules several other NWW lists get...a major negative. They also have no mounted, as usual for such lists. Dan himself said that he didn't hit hard enough. He found it difficult to rout the enemey...even with all his HTW (which only matters on bound one of a combat, of course.)

I would perhaps get more LI and reconfigure it, but Dan did a good job pointing out his Inca army.

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


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1197
Location: Orange County California

PostPosted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 8:40 pm    Post subject: Charles Yaw Tartessian (Ancient Spanish)

Charles has used this list before.

Carthaginian CinC 1E Reg B HC JLS,Sh
Sub 2E Reg B HC JLS,Sh
2 units of 4E Irr C LC JLS,Sh (Numidians)
6E Irr C LC JLS,Sh (Spanish)
with 6E Irr B LI JLS,Sh detachment
2E Reg C LI JLS,Sh
4E Reg C LI JLS,Sh
7E Irr C LI B
2 units of 2E Irr B LMI HTW,JLS,Sh
4 units of 4E Irr C(1 A) LMI HTW,JLS,Sh
2 units of 8E Reg C MI LTS,Sh (African Spearmen)
2 units of 2Elephants Irr C JLS/JLS
1 Incendiary Ox Cart
18 units, 2 bodies, 2 commands, 54.5 scouting

Ancient Spanish seems attractive, with very hard hitting barbarian foot and a bunch of goodies. However, it's very very hard to organize and use properly.

I agree with using the Tartessian option to get access to regulars, but Charles doesn't use many regulars. I would especially use Reg B LC JLS,Sh that's brush-proof. He puts his barbarian foot units mainly in 4E units, begging for them to be shot up, ruined by Lancers, etc. The Ox cart is also hard to use here without lancer mounted to work with it. Combining it with an Elephant unit might work, but is tricky.

Frank
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
Bill Chriss
Centurion
Centurion


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1001
Location: Texas

PostPosted: Sat Sep 15, 2007 3:48 am    Post subject:

I would like to insert the comment here that this sort of analysis is incredibly educational for those of us who do not get to play much, or who are in groups that are a bit eurocentric and therefore see much the same type of opponent. It is very helpful to have someone explain how other armies work, for example, something like Toltecs or Chinese, and how players play to the strengths of these armies. SOm of Mark's comments re: 2HCT have caused me to post a question or two under the tactics topic if he or Frank get a chance to respond there between list analyses. Keep it coming, boys.
_________________
-Greek
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
Mark Stone
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 2021
Location: Buckley, WA

PostPosted: Sat Sep 15, 2007 7:06 pm    Post subject: Re: Tim Grimmett - Ghaznavid

Frank Gilson wrote:
CinC w/PA in 2Elephant unit Irr B JLS/P/JLS,B
Sub w/P in 3El unit
Sub w/P in 3El unit
3Elephant Irr B JLS/P/JLS,B
4 units of 2E Reg A/B HC L,B,Sh
2 units of 6E Irr C LC JLS,B,Sh/B
6E Irr B LC JLS,B,Sh/B
4E Reg C HI JLS,B,Sh
4E Reg C LI B,Sh
2 units of 4E REg B LI B,Sh

This is only 15 units...which is 2 or 3 units too few. It really does matter.

Ghaznavid is a list that you'd really like to make work. It has Irr B pike crew elephants...but they can't have guys on base or detachments. It has L,B,Sh cavalry, but they can't be elephant proof. It has decent well costed LC, but they can't fight 1.5 ranks and can't be elephant proof. It has a required clunky unit of infantry.

I think Tim buys too much HC and should toss two units back, as well as drop one LC unit. He should split the Reg B LI up into 2E units and get a couple extra larger LI units to work with the LC as his screen, supported by the remaining two units of HC.

Frank


Frank is dead on here. The cav available on this list is decent, but not overwhelming. Since it can't be elephant-proof, it should be used with care. A modest amount of LC, useful for rapid early bound advance and for harrassing enemy LI; a couple of HC units to back up your own LI units can keep enemy LC honest; the rest of your screen should be foot (LI, etc.).

The elephants are great, no doubt about that. Arguably the best in the game. But if you're going to put up with all the other hassles of playing Ghaznavids, you must use the elephants aggressively. Don't be afraid to take a waver test or two to get to grips with the enemy; that's why you're paying for that Irr B morale class.

A tempting army to play, a tough list to construct, and a challenging army to win big with. I give the list a 7 potential overall, and I rate this take on it about a 5.


-Mark Stone
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message   MSN Messenger
Mark Stone
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 2021
Location: Buckley, WA

PostPosted: Sat Sep 15, 2007 7:20 pm    Post subject: Re: Dan Woyke Inca

Frank Gilson wrote:
CinC w/PA in 2E Reg A LMI 2HCT,S,Sh
Sub w/P in 2E Reg A LMI 2HCT,S,Sh/JLS,S,Sh
2 units of 4E Reg A LMI LTS,S,Sh
3 units of 6E Reg B LMI LTS,S,Sh
2 units of 4E Reg C/D LMI HTW,JLS,S,Sh
3 units of 4E Reg C LMI HTW,S,Sh/JLS,S,Sh
6E Reg D LI B
2 units of 4E Reg D(1C) LI JLS,D,Sh/D,Sh
6E Reg D(1C) LI S,Sh
16 units, 2 commands, 10 scouting

Lots of high morale, lots of shooting. What are the problems?
Inca don't get to use the circulating combatants rules several other NWW lists get...a major negative. They also have no mounted, as usual for such lists. Dan himself said that he didn't hit hard enough. He found it difficult to rout the enemey...even with all his HTW (which only matters on bound one of a combat, of course.)

I would perhaps get more LI and reconfigure it, but Dan did a good job pointing out his Inca army.

Frank


I disagree about needing more LI. You have no cavalry with which to back it up, meaning in open or in brush your opponent can ride it down with impunity. What you want is some rough terrain like steep hill, marsh, or woods to anchor your flank and to be able to throw enough LI in there that it will take your oppoenent all game long to dig out your LI. This is plenty for that purpose.

The main line of this army -- the LTS,S,Sh guys -- can only hold about 20 elements' frontage, which is half the table. So you definitely need to cut down the frontage with terrain, and be prepared to operate in a counter-punching fashion.

I think the way the list has been bought is just fine. For your line troops, you want to arm them in such a way as to minimize casualties taken, hence LTS. For your strike troops, you want to arm them so as to maximize casualties put out, hence 2HCT and HTW.

This army faces all the Meso-American challenges: inability to catch cavalry, lights, and other skirmishers, inability to back up its own lights with cavalry, and high expense per unit making for a compact army with vulnerable flanks.

There are other armies Meso-American armies that can get sling and circulating combatants, so I have to rate Incans below those other choices. But for Incans, this is a good a way of buying it as any.

I give th Incans a potential of 5, and rate this version a 5.


-Mark Stone
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message   MSN Messenger
joncleaves
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 29 Mar 2006
Posts: 16447

PostPosted: Mon Sep 17, 2007 9:05 pm    Post subject:

I think everyone would appreciate seeing these armies listed with the name of the army and the player....
_________________
Roll Up and Win!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
Ewan McNay
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 2734
Location: Albany, NY, US

PostPosted: Mon Sep 17, 2007 10:34 pm    Post subject:

Jon -

- read each message's subject...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
Frank Gilson
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1197
Location: Orange County California

PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2007 4:10 pm    Post subject: Subjects

Yes...I put the player and army names in the subject...unfortunately, our subjects are in tiny type!

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


Joined: 29 Mar 2006
Posts: 16447

PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2007 4:15 pm    Post subject:

Indeed, there it is - for Mr Magoo to see. Something a brain surgeon or a code writer would notice, but us guys used to dealing with larger objects, not so much.. Smile

I'll have to speak to Scott about Subject having a font above 6...

_________________
Roll Up and Win!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
Ewan McNay
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 2734
Location: Albany, NY, US

PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2007 4:26 pm    Post subject:

Quote:

Tim Brown, Tarascan
1: 2 CIC w/ PA & 7 LMI, 2HCT, D, Sh R/A - B 182
2 LMI, B, 2HCT ( detachment unit 1) R/B 53


…and lots more similar detachments: I suspect that there may not have been that much more to these than maybe ability not to buy shields for back ranks?? Which is not as silly as it might initially seem: if you're going into skirmish then you're shieldless anyway, given that you're bow-armed, and the D-armed units can always separate into shielded-skirmish if needed, I guess. Tim's a tricky guy Smile.

Quote:

8: 4 LMI, B 1/2 Sh R/C 66
9: 4 LMI, B 1/2 Sh R/C 66
10: 4 LMI, B 1/2 Sh R/C 66
11: 4 LMI, B 1/2 Sh R/C 66
17: 4 Peasants LMI 1/2 S,Sh 1/2 B R/C 66
18: 4 Peasants LMI 1/2 S,Sh 1/2 B R/C 66


I don't think I would have picked so many missile-only units; they *are* damn cheap, but mean that you have to be very careful about getting good matchups where one of the virtues of Meso armies is that you *don't* need to worry so much about that with a homogenous line *and* making them fighting troops isn't that much more expensive. Not terrible, though, and does make the armie's frontage bigger.

Quote:

12: 3 priests LMI, 2HCT, D/1HCW, B, Sh I/A (2)-B 79
13: 2 priests LMI, 2HCT, D /2HCT, B, Sh I/A-B 64
14: 4 scouts LI, 1/2 1HCW, S,Sh 1/2 B R/C 42
15: 4 scouts LI, 1/2 1HCW, S,Sh 1/2 B R/C 42
16: 4 scouts LI, 1/2 1HCW, B,Sh 1/2 B R/C 42


I think that the levels of IrA types and LI are about right, too. Tim's lists are always a joy to see, frankly; almost always a nuance no-one else has yet seen. Or as Mark put it:
Quote:
Tim excels at finding the nooks and crannies in the rules that allow for both tactical innovation and the element of suprise that comes from having your opponents not know entirely what you're up to.


Yep.

The circulating combatant thing for the New World was a big deal this year, even though it's been true for a while. Scary stuff for an opponent. Mark's comments about Tarascans being a better army for using those rules than Romans are spot on.

Quote:
Tarascans is a tough army to beat, but also a tough army to win big with.
This is maybe the biggest problem for the list, but maybe not: a *lot* of firepower to make things happen even if you're not getting into hand-to-hand.

***
Quote:

Quote:
Todd Kaeser, Knights of Saint John
Grand Master Pierre d’Aubusson w/ 5 Knights of Justice Reg A SHK L,, 1⁄2 Sh + PA (229)
Fra’ Antoine Gautier w/ 2 Knights of Justice + 3 Serving Brethren Reg A/B SHK L, 1⁄2 Sh + P (156)
Turcopiler John Kendal w/ 2 Knights of Justice + 3 Serving Brethren Reg A/B SHK L, 1⁄2 Sh + P (156)
2E Knights of Justice Reg A SHK L, 1⁄2 Sh (130)
4E Marinarii Reg C LHI CB,2HCT, 1⁄2 Sh (130)
4E Marinarii Reg C LHI CB,2HCT, 1⁄2 Sh (130)
4E Marinarii Reg B LHI CB,2HCT 1⁄2 Sh (146)
6E Rhodian Militia Reg D LMI CB 1⁄2 Sh (70)
6E Rhodian Militia Reg D LMI CB 1⁄2 Sh (70)
4E Rhodian Skirmishers Reg D LI CB (26)
2E Rhodian Skirmishers Reg D LI CB (1Cool
6E Greek Bowman Reg C LMI B 1⁄2 Sh (94)
6E Greek Bowman Reg C LMI B 1⁄2 Sh (94)
2E Turkopoles Reg C LC Jls,B,Sh (50)
2E Turkopoles Reg C LC Jls,B,Sh (50)
2E Turkopoles Reg C LC Jls,B,Sh (50)

The key is to realize that this is really an infantry army masquerading as a knight army. You attack with the Marinarii, and the knights play only a supporting role. This army also puts out a tremendous amount of shooting; Todd is over my benchmark of 120 figures just on loose order foot alone, and the lights through in another 24 figures of shooting.

There isn't a lot I would change here, but I do have a few quibbles. You can get 2 more stands of LC and probably should. While the LC doesn't fight in a rank and a half, it is regular, and armed with both B and JLS, so very capable. None of the LI here is bought with Sh, which I also think is a mistake. Shields make LI dramatically more durable against LC, and also mean you can push away shieldless enemy LI on your own. Todd has also bought more than the minimum of LMI CB, which I think is a mistake. These are your least useful shooters, so take the minimum and put them all in one big unit.


I get to disagree with Mark somewhat here, and with the benefit of having played the army with Todd at CW, albeit at 2000 points. There's nothing I would sacrifice for the additional LC Mark wants, and 3 units seems to be enough (not that I would regret having a 4th, just not willing to lose anything else). I wouldn't sacrifice any of the cheap CB LMI - the army has slight frontage issues already, as the SHK are *so* expensive, so losing units of line foot (or even elements) is not great. And the LI are *so* bad that I don't see them as worth strengthening - go ahead and charge me with your LC, because I'll shoot you into oblivion with the LMI. In short, I would buy Todd's army essentially exactly the way he does. It's a lot better at 2000 - where you get to add 3 units of Colonist SHK/HC, exactly what is missing here - and I don't actually rate it as a 10, quite, but I think this is the optimal configuration.

Mark is quite right about the Marinarii being the key strike force, however, and the pairing with SHK is a potent one.

Quote:
There are some other options that are more a matter of taste. I try to have points available for a stone wall to put the LMI CB guys behind. That really anchors one flank very cheaply. And I actually take some LMI handgunners. They can do real damage to close order foot who aren't properly screened, they drive off enemy lights, and ratchet up the shooting power of the army a bit.
Mark, do you have a list that you like to hand? Would be interesting, perhaps, to see what you give up.
***
Quote:

Matt Kollmer ran Toltec.
CinC Reg A/B w/PA standard 2E LMI LTS,S,Sh
Sub Reg A/B w/P standard 2E LMI LTS,S,Sh
3 units of 2E Irr A LMI 2HCT,JLS,Sh/1HCW,JLS,Sh
6E Irr C LMI JLS,Sh
4E Reg C LMI 2HCT,JLS,Sh
6 units of 4E Reg B(1E A) LMI LTS,S,Sh
2 units of 4E Reg C LMI LTS,S,Sh
2 units of 2E Reg C LI 1HCW,S,Sh
4E Reg C LI 1HCW,S,Sh


That IrrC LMI unit is compulsory Otomi. I think it's a good enough reason not to play the list, frankly. Matt seems to have fewer troops than he should for such relatively low-armour, cheap foot, and I don't see this being as capable as either of the previous Meso lists we've seen. Sorry.

***
Quote:
Kelly Wilkinson, Camillan
CinC 1E Reg A HC JLS,Sh
2E Reg B HC JLS,Sh
7 units of 4E Reg C MI HTW,Sh
4E Reg B HI LTS,Sh
4 units of 6E Reg C MI LTS,Sh
3 units of 6E Reg C LI LTS,JLS,Sh
2E Reg C LI LTS,JLS,Sh
2E Reg C LI LTS,JLS,Sh/JLS,Sh
2 herds of flaming pigs


I think that this is worse than Frank does - why take 6E units of regular close foot? Why so homogenous on a set of poor troop types? What are you hoping to achieve? - but it does have some of the game's best LI. [Even there, why not take it all as half-LTS?] Given that latter, should probably never lose badly, but has no chance of actually winning against essentially anything: slow, can't shoot, no mounted, no terrain troops… why? If I were giving scores this year, this'd be a 1.

***
Quote:
Frank Gilson wrote:
Steve Hollowell, Han
CinC w/PA on Reg A 4h LCh
Sub similar
2 units of 2E Reg C HC L,CB
4E Reg C LC B
4 units of 4E Reg B(1 A) LHI 2HCT,CB,Sh/2HCT,CB
2 units of 4E Reg D MI LTS,Sh/CB Caltrops
4 units of 2E Reg D LI B
2 units of 5E Irr D LI JLS,Sh/JLS
2 units of 4E Reg B LMI JLS,B,Sh/JLS,B
2E Irr A 2HCT,Sh/JLS,Sh
4E Irr A 2HCT,Sh/JLS,Sh
I think the generals on lone light chariots are a mistake. They can't do anything other than provide some unease here and there...not a good value for points spent. I'd put them in heavy chariot units (although I'd likely have one light chariot unit for swift unease generation and to charge unsupported LI.)

I don't like the HC L,CB...and you can get Irr C LC B without incurring that requirement.

Quote:
Mark:


<snip> lots of stuff that I basically agree with, siding here with Mark against Frank. Partly because I don't think I have ever used a non-scythed chariot in anger under Warrior, but I agree with everything he says, including the 'haven't yet found a Han list I actually like' part. I don't like Steve's LI arrangement much, but it's not a huge deal. Those LHI units, though - *so* expensive and so easily isolated, in my (limited) experience - just don't yet form an army, and there's not much else here; just not enough elements in the army for a foot army.

***

Quote:
Scott MacDonald, Mongol


I love Mongols; I also hate to face them (unless using Hun!) which means that I expect others to hate facing me when I use them. I think Mark's concerns over terrain are probably slightly overblown, especially if the Mongol is at home, *but* in those cases where terrain dice hate you Mongols are totally hosed - so beware.

Quote:
So you're trying to win on a wide open table by stretching a guy beyond the frontage he can cover, and/or by creating an exposed flank that will enable you to start rolling up the enemy line. That's not so easy. Even with all the list rules, your opponent can probably get down a couple of steep hills -- one in a flank and one in his rear zone -- which is all he needs to create a defensible corner.


Together with the fact that you're trying to win a battle of finesse, not power, this leads to the problem of 1-0 and 2-1 results that as Mark notes is death in a tournament (although pretty good in real life!)

Quote:
The other problem, which I had not forseen and which Alex and I experienced at Cold Wars, is that there are many cavalry armies who are just plain cheaper than Mongols and can swarm you. Skythians come to mind as one example, and Ewan has demonstrated what one can do with a really cheap Hun army.
I don't think that this is a big deal, honestly; I mean, who else have you ever seen take a Hun? My Sassanids are probably the closest of the other NICT armies to the point of trying to out-cav a Mongol, and we'd have trouble.

Mark's other concerns I sometimes agree with:
Quote:
Problems:
*There's no reason to buy shields for the rear ranks of your loose order cav units;
*There's no reason to make these units HC throughout - back ranks of MC will generally be fine;
*The artillery is too expensive for what it does;
*There are no Chinese here, denying the army the use of shielded light infantry, and meaning that all dense shooting will have to come from very expensive dismounted cav units;
*Not enough JLS-armed LC here - you need more to quickly dust off enemy LI


although I wouldn't take much more JLS. I think bigger improvements would come from making some of the HC into 4E units (also good for dismounting), and making the small LC units most or all B class (because you are going to want them to be making as many counters as possible!) And a couple of Mark's suggestions I dislike:

Quote:

*There's no non-Mongol irregular LC here, which is a really cheap way to get a sizable LC unit (say, 6 stands) that operates as a mounted shooting platform.
*Too many small LC units - you need maybe 3 or 4 of these, and Scott has 8;


I think that regularity and small units are what being a Mongol is about, and I'd play to it. The worry for your opponent is that *any* gap at any time is going to find a 2E LC unit sliding through it onto a flank. Don't give that up.

Mark's right about camels, too, though. I fought my Huns against Frank Gilson using this trick, and it's a neat one.

***

Otherwise, I'm pretty much out of peanuts. The comments on later lists that have thus far been posted seem sensible to me; I especially echo the thoughts on Ghaznavid organisation (and have yet to see a list I'd be happy to play, despite the uber-elephants; I personally find it hard to get past that required expensive close foot unit.
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 -> List Lore All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 2 of 5

 
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