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 

NICT Lists 2014
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
Ewan McNay
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 2714
Location: Albany, NY, US

PostPosted: Tue Apr 14, 2015 4:54 pm    Post subject:

Mark Stone wrote:
Moving on, we have:

Quote:

Seleucid - Robert Turnbull

CinC 2E Reg A EHC/HC L – 154
Sub 2E Reg A EHC/HC L – 104
2E Companions Reg B EHC/HC L – 76
2E Settlers Reg C EHC/HC L – 64

8E Agyraspids Reg B ¼ HI ¾ MI P,Sh – 186
8E Settler Pike Reg C ¼ HI ¾ MI P,Sh – 154
8E Settler Pike Reg C ¼ HI ¾ MI P,Sh – 154

4E Peltasts Reg C LHI/LMI LTS,Jls,Sh – 106
3E Elephants Ir C 1 P, 1 Jls – 145
3E Elephants Ir C 1 P, 1 Jls – 145
8E LI Ir D LI B – 45
8E LI Ir D LI B – 45

Scythed Chariort IrA HCh – 24
Scythed Chariort IrA HCh – 24

6E Saka Ir C LC Jls,Sh – 91
2E Tarantines Reg C LC Jls,Sh - 42
2E Tarantines Reg C LC Jls,Sh - 42


46 scouting points in total, which is a hefty number for a pike and elephant army.

Obviously one of the best lists in the game, played by one of our best players. Versatility and a lot of shock power, all in one list.


I think that Rob takes a wrong choice in LI - my preference is for 2E units of reg shielded javelinmen - but it's a personal choice and could be right. 3 units of LC is somewhat above average for a pike army but given that the Irr LC are I think compulsory, it's what I would do also.

I would like to see more peltasts, but they would come at the cost perhaps of fewer pike/El, and again that's an OK personal choice (and one that is better on preset terrain where you are unlikely to face too much terrain to play on. The LHI is a very good upgrade).

I differ from Mark on the next point, though:

Quote:

The scythed chariots are very hard to use. If I were playing this list, I wouldn't take them, opting instead for some additional light troops. But I've played against Robert playing this list, and he uses them very well. Because they have to be "defused" before you can do anything else, at a minimum they delay a desired assault on a weak flank. If you spend two bounds or so dealing with the chariots, there just isn't much time left to exploit any weaknesses behind them.

And in the new deployment system scythed chariots have a real purpose. Think of it this way: put them in the smaller of the two commands, so that that command goes down last. Now note that most armies in the nationals have (a) less than 46 scouting points and (b) no more than two commands. That means that most of the time you'll be placing the command containing the chariots after your opponent has set up his entire army. That means you can line them to lead the attack for maximum effect.


They also cause unease and are *great* at dealing with opposing LI, a weakness of the army potentially. So I would very much be taking them; I love scythed chariots and think that this army is one the very much benefits from their presence.

Mark's commentary on pikes is GREAT and everyone should read it twice:

Quote:

However, I would take the Reg B pike and split them into 2 16 figure units. Here's why.

Very few troop types can beat pikes straight up and sustain that advantage in follow up bounds. For example:
* EHC with firelance win at contact, but lose rank and a half in follow up
* HTW win at contact, but lose HTW in follow up
* 2HCW + JLS can win at contact, but become shieldless in follow up

No, the way to beat pikes is with combined arms: mounted and foot charging together, where the foot provide the margin of victory and the mounted assure that the pike not only become disordered but have to recoil. However, to pull this off you have to have at least 2 elements of pike frontage to attack: one for your mounted unit and one for your foot unit.

So in turn the way for pikes to address combined arms attacks is to operate in 16 figure units only one element wide.


This is a point that I have simply never considered. Mind you, very few of those mounted are going to want to be near elephants at all - so maybe having 3x2 El instead of 2x3 would be part of a counter? Move, counter-move...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
Ewan McNay
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 2714
Location: Albany, NY, US

PostPosted: Tue Apr 14, 2015 5:09 pm    Post subject:

Mark Stone wrote:
Next:

Quote:
Ghaznavid - Greg Hauser

CinC 1E Elephant Ir B 1 w/ Jls, 1 w/ B, 1 w/P – 127
Sub - 2 Elephants Ir B 1 w/ Jls, 1 w/ B, 1 w/P – 115
Sub - 2 Elephants Ir B 1 w/ Jls, 1 w/ B, 1 w/P – 115
2E Ghulam Ir B HC L,B,Sh - 85
2E Ghulam Ir B HC L,B,Sh - 85
6E Nomad Merc Light Cav Ir C LC 1/3 Jls,B,Sh 2/3 B - 85

3 Elephants Ir B 1 w/ Jls, 1 w/ B, 1 w/P – 169
3 Elephants Ir B 1 w/ Jls, 1 w/ B, 1 w/P – 169
4E Daylami Reg B LHI LTS,B,Sh – 138
4E Daylami Reg B LHI LTS,B,Sh – 138

7E Arab Archers Ir C LI B ½ Sh – 65
6E Arab Archers Ir C LI B ½ Sh – 61
2E Stone Throwers Reg C 4 Crew – 90
2E Indian Cav Ir C EHC/MC L,Sh – 79
2E Indian Cav Ir C EHC/MC L,Sh – 79

Scouting 32.5


Ghaznavids is a great list, fielding what are arguably Arguably? I guess Burmese would argue, OK - Ewan the best elephants in the game, and fielding them in quantity. Elephants witih pike-armed crew beat pikemen straight up, but barely. On the many Alexandrian and Successor lists on which this elephant type can be found, taking your chances with your elephants straight up against pikemen is perilous. Why? Because you're Irr C, with a comensurate volatility in die rolls. By contrast the Ghaznavid elephants are Irr B, making their melee performance much more predictable.


Yep. When I built my Sassanid list, this was a key alternative; I think that the elephant-proof cav in the Sassanids give it the edge, but the Ghaz foot are far, far superior and their elephants are the best. This army is all about getting the El into contact, using Daylami and maybe EHC to guard them.

Mark once again says sensible things Smile. If the artillery are effective at anchoring a flank - and that's an 'if' - then their cost is OK, because Ghaz will beat essentially anything on a 10E frontage but gets rapidly worse so if you can arrange to fight on that small frontage then do it. But there's a lot of stuff that beats artillery, and there's not much here to shield it - maybe one of the Daylami units, but now you're moving troops away from where you want them to try to protect a weakness, and that's a losing approach.

I would definitely take some Daylami LI as part of the delay-anchor approach; that seems like a miss here. (Also, I don't have the lists handy - are the Ghaz foot no longer compulsory? Really? That's a huge plus for the army!) In the context of no compulsory Ghaz foot, I am a bit more in favour of the Indian EHC than Mark is, and would probably stick with 2 units - I find the elephant-lancer combo to be ludicrously potent, and they will play a possible vital hinge role between the El and the other cav. Would be very interested in trying this list out, actually, sometime soon.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
Mark Stone
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1988
Location: Buckley, WA

PostPosted: Tue Apr 14, 2015 9:23 pm    Post subject:

Ewan McNay wrote:
I am a bit more in favour of the Indian EHC than Mark is, and would probably stick with 2 units - I find the elephant-lancer combo to be ludicrously potent, and they will play a possible vital hinge role between the El and the other cav. Would be very interested in trying this list out, actually, sometime soon.


Ewan is our resident authority on using lance-armed cavalry in tandem with elephants. If he sees strength in this approach, then that's advice worth heeding. I am personally lacking success against his Sassanids to counter his claim.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message   MSN Messenger
Ewan McNay
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 2714
Location: Albany, NY, US

PostPosted: Wed Apr 15, 2015 2:16 am    Post subject:

Mark Stone wrote:
Quote:
Koryo Korean - Frank Gilson

CinC w/PA 2E Reg A/B EHC/HC L,Sh/L- 185
Sub 2E Reg A/B EHC/HC L,Sh/L-115
Sub 2E Reg A/B EHC/HC L,Sh/L-115

6E Reg D LI B - 34
6E Reg D(1 C) LMI B - 62

2E Mongol Reg B LC JLS,B/B - 42
2E Mongol Reg B LC JLS,B/B - 42
2E Mongol Reg B LC B- 38
6E Mongol Reg C LC B – 82
6E Mongol Reg C LC B – 82
4E Mongol Reg B HC/MC L,B,Sh/L,B - 142

6E Reg D(1C) MI LTS,B,Pa/LTS,B,Sh - 110
6E Reg D(1C) MI LTS,B,Pa/LTS,B,Sh - 110
6E Reg D(1C) MI LTS,B,Pa/LTS,B,Sh - 110
6E Reg D(1C) MI LTS,B,Pa/LTS,B,Sh - 110
6E Reg D(1C) MI LTS,B,Pa/LTS,B,Sh - 110
6E Reg D(1C) MI LTS,B,Pa/LTS,B,Sh - 110

1599
17 units, 3 cmds, 67 scouting


I don't play this style of army at all. So comments here are even more than usually subject to error, idiocy, and/or blatant falsehood.

Everything shoots. That's the start and almost the end. The real end is that nothing dies easily: it's either running away or shielded close foot. [The pavise - meh. It's nice to have the *option* not to shoot, but it's also a lot of points; given the option I would just go half-shielded. If you're facing Aztec or something it'll save you from being shot up but that wasn't really a worry anyway, and they'll just kill you in hand-to-hand instead.] But not dying does not win games: killing stuff wins games. As Mark noted, this will kill enemy lights and cavalry easily, often; but I'm not sure that it's got enough kill power... again as Mark said. Derek uses this kind of army well, and I expect that Frank does also - if it were me I would lose a spear unit, four others would fail morale tests, and I would lose. Certainly when *facing* this my plan would be to kill a spear unit before losing anything significant, and I would expect to be able to do that, at which point there's at least a 6E wide gap assuming that one spear unit goes shaken... game over. OK, it's not quite that simple. But almost. The close foot can't catch anything that doesn't beat them. The LC are great but rely on flanks to kill things, and at NICT level that's a tough bet.

So I don't understand how you win with this or why you would want to play it - but I told you that. I'll shut up now.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
Ewan McNay
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 2714
Location: Albany, NY, US

PostPosted: Wed Apr 15, 2015 2:17 am    Post subject: Neo-Assyrians

Quote:

Neo-Assyrian – Late period - Larry Daum

CinC 2E HCh Reg B Jls,B + 2 Jls – 157
Chariot Runner Reg B LMI Jls,D,Sh – 53
2E Qurubuti Sha Pithalli Reg A EHC/HC L,B – 83
Sub 2E HCh Reg B Jls,B + 2 Jls – 107
Chariot Runner Reg B LMI Jls,D,Sh – 53
2E Qurubuti Sha Pithalli Reg A EHC/HC L,B – 83

2E Chariots Reg B HCh 1w/ Jls,B 2 w/ Jls – 92
Chariot Runner Reg B LMI Jls,D,Sh – 53
2E Kisir Sharruti Reg B EHC/HC L,B – 82
2E Kisir Sharruti Reg B EHC/HC L,B – 82
12E SabSarri Scouts Reg C LC B – 82
6E Kisir Sharruti LHI/LMI (or HI/MI) LTS,Sh - 154
The list recorded both close and loose so……?
4E Sab Sarri Reg C LMI Jls,D,Sh – 90
4E Sab Sarri Reg C LMI B – 53
2E Sab Sarri Reg C LMI Jls,D,Sh – 74
12E Sha Kutalli Reg D MI Jls,D,Sh – 202
8E Dikut Mati Ir D MI B – 57
9E Aramean Archers Ir C LI B – 43


Only 15 units, none of which has much in the way of armour or fancy weaponry (well, this *is* Biblical). That's not enough for a finesse army, which this is. I honestly don't get this list. Yes, the loose order troops are nice, but they can't win you a game. And your frontage is tiny - those 15 units are small to boot.

And... what the heck is a 12E unit of ***REGULAR*** LC doing in any list, anywhere?!

There, Todd: snarky enough for you? Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
Ed Kollmer
Centurion
Centurion


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 963

PostPosted: Thu Apr 16, 2015 12:53 am    Post subject:

Wow!
I have a lot to grok
I love the Byzantine remarks.
Ed the Byzantinophil will play again.

I did read Mark's response on Pikes.
I read it 3x's . I will use it.

Oh Ewan! We can try out your list on May 23 if
you want.
Ed the Rash
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
jamiepwhite
Recruit
Recruit


Joined: 21 Apr 2006
Posts: 175
Location: Florida

PostPosted: Thu Apr 16, 2015 11:38 am    Post subject: Byzantine question

Which aspect of the Byzantine lists do you emphasize? The kavalloroi, the Varangians, or the skutatoi troops and special rules are all differently useful for different play styles.

Obviously, from my list, I tend to emphasize the skutatoi and use them like all purpose legionaires.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
Ewan McNay
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 2714
Location: Albany, NY, US

PostPosted: Thu Apr 16, 2015 3:03 pm    Post subject:

Mark Stone wrote:
Quote:
Moldavian - Scott McDonald



So I love the list, but would strongly urge buying it differently than how Scott has bought it here.


I have essentially nothing to add here; I agree with everything Mark said. Mark, any chance you have a 1600-point list lying around that you would share? I wonder slilghtly how much you are giving up to accommodate the Mongols at 1600 rather than in the 2000-point teams setting.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
Ewan McNay
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 2714
Location: Albany, NY, US

PostPosted: Thu Apr 16, 2015 3:42 pm    Post subject:

Mark Stone wrote:
And now we come to our National Champion and his list.

Quote:
Komnenan Byzantine - Derek Downs

CnC 2E Reg A/B EHK/HK L SH RA/B – 204
2E Ir B HK L,Sh – 91
2E Reg B HC/MC L,Sh ??
2E Ir A/B HK L,Sh – 94
2E Ir A/B HK L,Sh – 94
8E Ir D (1C) LC B – 75
2E Reg B HC L,B,Sh – 88
2E Reg B HC L,B,Sh – 88
2E Reg C LC B – 34
4E Ir C LC B ½ Jls – 61
4E Reg D (1C) MI LTS,Sh – 62
4E Reg D (1C) MI LTS,Sh – 62
4E Reg D (1C) MI LTS,Sh – 62
4E Reg D LMI Jls,B,Sh – 74
2E Reg D LI S,Sh – 22
2E Reg D LI S,Sh – 22
2E Reg D LI S,Sh – 22
4E Varangians Reg B (1A) LHI/LMI 2HCW,Jls,Sh – 126
4E Varangians Reg B (1A) LHI/LMI 2HCW,Jls,Sh - 126
4E Varangians Reg B (1A) LHI/LMI 2HCW,Jls,Sh - 126

1603




First: note that there's nothing special about any of those troops in isolation. There's a fair number of units - 20 - but many of them are small with moderate armour and weaponry; there's not overwhelming missile power, and the morale largely sucks. But they apparently won an NICT. (OK, Derek might have something to do with that also).

I think that the key to this list was noted almost in passing by Mark, and that it's NOT the Varangians, even though the list is learly built as a vehicle for getting the Varangians into combat:

Quote:
To all of this you now add the fact that Kontaratoi always fight in two ranks and can use Crusader formation. So unless the pikes are deployed in depth, the Kontaratoi don't really fear them. And the Kontaratoi can also provide a rally point for native Byzantine cav when they adopt Crusader order, allowing the cav to interpenetrate them (and remember the Byzantine cavalry can always opt to rally back as a charge response).


It's the special list rules. That turns mediocre cav and poor foot, that would normally be difficult to use together, into something that's very very difficult to kill easily with anything other than elephants... and if you have elephants coming up, that's what the Varangians are looking for. Even in two ranks, LTS guys are not going to win, but now they will lose much more slowly because they can have a cav screen that takes no effort to get out of the way, the usual problem.

I think that there are still big negatives. The light troops are poor and will die rapidly to something like Moldavian; the list is built to accommodate that by only having one command, but that's something that comes with a lot of costs itself (especially when playing with a finesse army, where you are going to *need* those prompt points - I am surprised that there were no issues here) including having to deploy first and hence allow the other guy to set up in just the right way to kill those light troops. And winning is going to take a long time, if it happens at all, against someone competent - this is NOT a force-the-issue army - which is a potential problem. Rob mentioned playing 22 bounds; that's about 17 more than you can rely on against some players.

So: overall I am not as enthused. Shows what I know.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
Todd Kaeser
Centurion
Centurion


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1001
Location: Foxborough, Massachusetts

PostPosted: Thu Apr 16, 2015 4:36 pm    Post subject: Re: Neo-Assyrians

Quote:

Neo-Assyrian – Late period - Larry Daum


And... what the heck is a 12E unit of ***REGULAR*** LC doing in any list, anywhere?!

There, Todd: snarky enough for you? Smile


Obviously this is my conversion mistake. It is a 6E unit but I must have seen a 12 there from old school list writing. I was trying to make sure they all looked the same - Cleaves made a mocking point a few years ago that all the lists were presented in a variety of formats and I was trying to make them look uniform for ease of reading.

I LOVE the amount of interest this post has generated - the forum looks and feels active again. I will happily invest the time each year to post the NICT lists. Glad to get things going again.

Todd

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


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 2714
Location: Albany, NY, US

PostPosted: Thu Apr 16, 2015 5:36 pm    Post subject:

Mark Stone wrote:
Quote:
Inca - Dan Woyke

CinC 4E Reg A LMI 2HCT,S,Sh/Jls,S,Sh – 242
Sub 4E Reg A LMI 2HCT,S,Sh/Jls,S,Sh – 167

6E Reg B LMI LTS,S,Sh – 154
4E Reg C/D LMI HTW,Jls,S,Sh – 102
4E Reg C/D LMI HTW,Jls,S,Sh – 102

4 Reg B LMI LTS,S,Sh – 106
4 Reg B LMI LTS,S,Sh – 106
4 Reg B LMI LTS,S,Sh – 106

4E Reg C LMI HTW,S,Sh/Jls,S,Sh – 90
4E Reg C LMI HTW,S,Sh/Jls,S,Sh – 90
4E Reg C LMI HTW,S,Sh/Jls,S,Sh – 90

4E Reg D (1C) LI Jls,D,Sh/D,Sh – 40
4E Reg D (1C) LI Jls,D,Sh/D,Sh - 40
4E Reg D (1C) LI Jls,D,Sh/D,Sh - 40

6E Reg D (1C) LMI 2HCW,B,Sh/B – 84
2x 6 elements of walls – 40


Dan is one of two players who regularly play Meso American armies (Bill Low is the other). These armies really are a distinct type within Warrior, to the point of almost making it a different game.

All rely on a front line of LMI. All rely on dense shooting. All use shooters that primarily shoot shielded (dart and sling). So they put out a ferocious amount of shooting, are relatively impervious to return fire, can immediately charge any vulnerabilities that shooting exposes, and can skirmish away from any threats that are otherwise presented. I still vividly remember the first time I played a knight army against Aztecs (30 years ago) and got completely annihilated in about 45 minutes.


I played Aztecs under 7th for about there years solid back in the UK, a couple of hundred games. (Those were the days; at least one game and usually two per week, five or six tournaments per year. Roll on retirement and my kids growing up Smile ). All of these armies have the advantage and disadvantage of homogeneity: unlikely to be any special weak points, but your opponent can focus anywhere and have essentially the same thing to deal with. Mark again makes sensible comments (take this for granted, really; fun as it would be to have some twit commenting with whom I would often violently disagree, that's not happening here Razz ).

However, I retain more regard for the army type than Mark does, notably thinking that the current deployment system removes some of the issues with always being outscounted and the move to 25mm means that they are better able to force a battle.

I *do* think that circulating combatants are such an ENORMOUS advatnage that it would take a lot to make me choose an army of this type that doesn't have it; this one would not do the trick - because that rule is the third thing that I think makes the armies viable. Their bete noire is often massed strike cav, and the ability to take high-morale troops with LTS as their weapon goes a long way to negating that. For me, that means that the major issue other than homogeneity is density of high-cost troops: this is never going to cover the table and should not try.

Other than that, Dan makes some choices that I would not: more LI than I would pick, more HTW, and none at all of the Otomi whom I value highly as an added dimension to these armies.

{Nostalgia: my very first US tournament was I think Historicon in 1995 - I had moved here carefully to make the tournament in 1994 only to somehow mess up and miss it by a week! I was on track to win the 15mm event until the final bound of Todd Kaeser's game when he - running Aztecs - sent in both the Otomi strike units and rolled up on both, routing his opponent and grabbing the title. Not that I have remembered this at all...}

Quote:

Dan gets a bit more frontage covered here than other Meso American armies, but at the cost of morale. Many Meso American armies present nothing but A and B class troops, meaning you literally have to route them in detail rather than rely on the cascade of failed waver tests. Dan can intersperse his Cs and Ds between higher morale troops which will help some, but he is more vulnerable to taking wavers than most Meso American armies.


Yes - I think this is probably also a slight error: if you're going to fight on a reduced frontage *anyway*, make sure that you can do so optimally. There are cases where it will work, though, and it has an upside: your line is pretty potent, so the longer it is the greater the chance is that your opponent will be forced to face part of it with troops who don't want to be there. Potato, potahto.

Quote:

To my mind the biggest risk running a Meso American army is not the risk of defeat against a skilled opponent. No, the biggest risk is ending up with a bloodless draw against a timid opponent. It's very easy to end up with a 0-0, 1-0, or 1-1 result against someone who just doesn't want to engage. That's doubly hurtful in our scoring system: not only are you getting a low score in the game, but you're getting it against someone who's likely to have low scores overall.


I don't see this as a big risk, really. Good players are not timid; so such a matchup is likely to be one where skill and finesse can win, and this is an army that rewards manouvre.

A really tough opponent for MesoAms is a barbarian foot army: big blocks mean they don't get shot up, they can come to 40p and shoot you back, and you have to skirmish away from impetuous charges and risk being caught, plus they more than cover your frontage. There are few of those around in tournament play, though.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
Ewan McNay
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 2714
Location: Albany, NY, US

PostPosted: Thu Apr 16, 2015 5:50 pm    Post subject:

Mark Stone wrote:
Quote:
Medieval Irish - Jake Kovel

CinC 1E Ir B LC Jls,Sh + PA – 122
6E Kerns Ir C LI S,Sh/Jls – 55
6E Ir C LI B – 49
8E Bonnachts Ir C LMI 2HCW,Jls,Sh/Jls,Sh - 109
8E Bonnachts Ir C LMI 2HCW,Jls,Sh/Jls,Sh - 109
8E Bonnachts Ir C LMI 2HCW,Jls,Sh/Jls,Sh - 109

Sub Gen 8E Ir B HI/MI 2HCW,Jls,D/Jls,D – 225
8E Ir B HI/MI 2HCW,Jls,D/Jls,D – 201
8E Ir B HI/MI 2HCW,Jls,D/Jls,D – 201

Ally Gen 4E Ir B HK/HC L,Sh P – 178
4E Ir B HK/HC L,Sh – 145
6E Ir C LC Jls – 97



Jake loves this stuff; that's the biggest reason to play them. Also the best, and quite possible the only...

...ok, that's unfair. But the truth is that you're going to lose the vast, vast majority of games. Your strongest, expensive troop type is shieldless H/MI: it *is* going to die. Yes, it will go down swinging; I would bet that Jake's most common game result is a 4-3 loss closely followed by a 5-3 loss. So what's your goal? If it is to have fun and roll dice, go for it. If it's to win the tournament, no chance - which is why I would never ever play this.

Not even a question of skill: Mark is right that Ghaznavid would run in fear, but it's the only army that would. Everything else can out-fight and/or out-shoot most of this list, and they will get to pick where to fight. It's better than the biblical chariot list only because that was bought so poorly Smile.

Quote:

The three big Galloglaich blocks will cover almost half the table,


I think this is an error, right? 4E frontage is 24cm, so the three together cover 72cm or a bit less than 2.5' of an 8' table? Still, together with bonnachts that's a 5'-plus wall of combat foot, decent morale.

And I disagree with Mark again on the mounted: I think it's a distraction that risks you being tempted to run a mounted wing, which will be chomped up by the enemy's _better_ mounted wing. That plays into the weakness he identified of a low unit count: screen the infantry here and you're facing 3-4 units of mediocre cav, and after you kill two of them a third goes home. Too easy. I'd rather see a pure focus on the foot, so that at least you won't lose without fighting.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
Ewan McNay
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 2714
Location: Albany, NY, US

PostPosted: Thu Apr 16, 2015 5:56 pm    Post subject:

Mark Stone wrote:
Quote:
Early Byzantine - Jamie White

CinC 2E Reg A/B EHC/HC L,B,Sh PA – 201
2E Reg B LC Jls,Sh – 46
2E Reg B LC Jls,Sh – 46
2E Reg C LI Jls,Sh – 26
2E Reg C LI Jls,Sh – 26

4E Reg C HI/MI LTS,Jls,D,Sh – 122
4E Reg C HI/MI LTS,Jls,D,Sh – 122
4E Reg C HI/MI LTS,Jls,D,Sh – 122
4E Reg C HI/MI LTS,Jls,D,Sh – 122
2E Reg C HI/MI LTS,Jls,D,Sh – 66

4E Reg C LMI Jls,D,Sh – 90
4E Reg C LMI B ½ Sh – 66
4E Reg C LMI B ½ Sh – 66

Sub 4E Reg A/B EHC/HC L,B,Sh P – 215
2E Reg B HC L,B,Sh – 88
2E Reg B HC L,B,Sh – 88
2E Reg B HC L,B,Sh – 88


The difficulty is nonetheless similar to Meso Americans. This has to be a counter-punching army with a fairly short punch; neither dart nor close order foot charge can reach out and touch someone beyond 80 paces. This is in contrast to the more aggressive posture that Asian foot archer armies can establish by shooting out to 240p with concentrated bow fire. So there are the usual risks:
* A timid player without the shock troops to deal with the LTS foot can simply hang back, leading to a low scoring draw.


Yep: *this* is the list where I would worry about this. The close foot are numerous and potent enough that an enemy may not wish to fight them. That means your choices are:
(i) slow your whole advance to the pace of the close foot and risk a no-score draw, or
(ii) move ahead with the other troops and play the enemy's game without your 550 points of core foot. Especially with such expensive generals, that's a losing game also. And bingo, you're in a no-win situation.

(Contrast a list of LTS, B close foot: at least there it's likely that you can shoot away lights and combine better with your speedier troops.)

Quote:

Bottom line: a solid list that requires the opponent to think carefully about how to match up with it, but not one that can compete with the top tier of armies and one that will struggle to find a way to reach a decisive win against any solid player.


That's a fair summary, except that I think 'solid' is a little too kind. Sorry Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
Ewan McNay
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 2714
Location: Albany, NY, US

PostPosted: Thu Apr 16, 2015 6:20 pm    Post subject:

Mark Stone wrote:
Quote:
Tepanec - Bill Low

CinC 4E Reg A LMI 1HCW,D,Sh (1E S instead of D) PA – 151
4 Knights Reg B (1A) LMI LTS,S,Sh – 110
4 Knights Reg B (1A) LMI LTS,S,Sh – 110
4 Knights Reg B (1A) LMI LTS,S,Sh – 110
4 Knights Reg B (1A) LMI LTS,S,Sh – 110

4E Vet. Warriors Reg B (1A) LMI LTS,S,Sh – 110
4E Vet. Warriors Reg B (1A) LMI LTS,S,Sh – 110

4E Warriors Reg C LMI 2HCT,S,Sh – 106
4E Warriors Reg C LMI 2HCT,S,Sh – 106
4E Subject War. Reg C LMI 1HCW,Jls,Sh – 90
4E Otomi Ir C LMI 2HCW,Jls/Jls,Sh – 67

2E Otomi Ir A LMI 2HCT,Jls,Sh/1HCW,Jls,Sh – 64
2E Otomi Ir A LMI 2HCT,Jls,Sh/1HCW,Jls,Sh – 64
2E Otomi Ir A LMI 2HCT,Jls,Sh/1HCW,Jls,Sh – 64
2E Otomi Ir A LMI 2HCT,Jls,Sh/1HCW,Jls,Sh – 64

2E Skirmishers Reg C LI 1HCW,S,Sh – 30
2E Skirmishers Reg C LI 1HCW,S,Sh – 30
2E Skirmishers Reg C LI S,Sh – 26
2E Skirmishers Reg C LI S,Sh - 26
2E Skirmishers Reg C LI S,Sh - 26
2E Skirmishers Reg C LI S,Sh - 26

Scouting 6 points 1600


This is absolutely classic Meso American.



Yep. A few too many LTS for my taste, probably: I would often rely on morale and slings against enemy shock mounted if I got the matchups wrong, for the benefit of being better against foot. But it's another judgement call, not a mistake.

I like this list a LOT better than Dan's. It even has 21 units! Yes, many of those are 2E LI, and I would not take so many. And there's a 4E unit of IrrC Otomi that's both compulsory and of dubious benefit; find it a wood some place!

Quote:
Two armies that do match up very well against the Meso Americans are the Komnenans and the Koryo Korean.

In the case of the former, the Komnenan LTS guys all fight in two ranks all the time, making them solid troops against the main Tepanec line.


True, but that's a consequence of the choice to take LTS - see above. Against circulating Tepanecs with 2HCT, they'd be dead. This is an example of the main enemy these guys have difficulty with, though: a line of solid enemy foot *can* turn into the no-score draw of which Mark is afraid. Even there, though, you have the reason for Otomi: on even a +1 they rout essentially any foot opponent on their frontage, and that's a huge option to have in a skirmish-foot army. I would not buy the list quite this way, then; but I would not be unhappy if forced to play it. It's also a case where only one general is probably viable: very unlikely that you're going to need to do more than prompt two regular units per bound.


Last edited by Ewan McNay on Fri Apr 17, 2015 2:22 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
Mark Stone
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1988
Location: Buckley, WA

PostPosted: Fri Apr 17, 2015 2:05 pm    Post subject:

Ewan asked for an example of how to buy the Wallachian/Moldavian list, so here it is. This is the version that Dave Stier won the Nationals with in 2013:

CinC+ 5 HK, L, sh IrrA/B 172
SubG+ 5 HK, L, Sh IrrA 115
6 HK, L, Sh IrrA/B 94
6 HK, L, Sh IrrA/B 94
Hungarian AllyG+5 SHK, L, Sh IrrB 170
Hungarian 6 SHK, L, Sh IrrB 133
Vitej 12 LC, B, 1/2 JLS IrrC 79
Vitej 8 LC, B, 1/2 JLS IrrC 61
Vitej 8 LC, B, 1/2 JLS IrrC 61
Hungarian 8 LC, B, 1/2 JLS IrrC 61
12 LI, B, 1/2 Sh IrrC 55
12 LI, B, 1/2 Sh IrrC 55
12 LI, B, 1/2 Sh IrrC 55
Tartar AllyG+ 5 HC, L, B, Sh+ 6 MC, L, B RegB (3)/C (9) 205
Tartar 12 HC/MC, L, B, 1/2 Sh RegC 130
Tartar 8 LC, B RegC 58

1598 points
83 scouting points
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message   MSN Messenger
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 4 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