Ghurids vs Inca - Beta Test.

Forum for anyone to post reports of their battles and pictures, otherwise known as After Action Reports.

Moderators: hammy, Slitherine Core, Field of Glory Moderators, Field of Glory Design

Post Reply
Brigadier-General - 15 cm Nblwf 41
Brigadier-General - 15 cm Nblwf 41
Posts: 1966
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2009 6:52 am

Ghurids vs Inca - Beta Test.

Post by ravenflight » Sat Jun 18, 2011 2:24 am

Hey All,

I had a game last night against a Beta tester.

I played the Ghurids with some slight modifications to the list from the army used at Melee:

1 x IC CinC
3 x TC
1 x 4 Undrilled, Unprotected, Average, Lighthorse, Javelin, Light Spear/Swordsmen
3 x 4 Undrilled, Protected, Average, Bow, Swordsmen
3 x 4 Drilled, Armoured, Superior, Bow, Sworsdmen (not that you'd think they were superior - one particular batch averaged about a 3 on both die for the entire game. The number of times I rolled a 2&1 to re-roll the 1 and get another 1... I thought the dice were against me)
1 x 6 Undrilled, Unprotected, Average, Lightfoot, Sling
3 x 8 Undrilled, Protected, Average, Defensive Spearmen
1 x 2 elephant.

I won initiative, and gave it to the Inca. Manco selected hilly.

The game started with us deployed on diagonally opposite corners. He on my far left, me on my near right. I anchored my left flank on an impassable terrain feature that was near enough to the middle of my long edge.

I placed my Karwah infantry behind my skirmishing cavalry and skirmished with my Ghilman in front of the Inca. The deployment could have been better. I think I would have been better to skirmish with my Ghilman in front of my Karwah infantry, and kept the cavalry in reserve behind my Karwah... this way I would have been able to adapt to changes quicker.

My plan (yes, I had one) was to defeat the Inca skirmishers in front of my deployment and completely dominate that side of the board. At the same time I would wheel the Karwah infantry around so that I would be fighting across the board from left to right, not from front to back... thereby increasing the effect of my solid line of spears. There was a steep hill almost directly opposite the impassable terrain feature, so whilst it would be dominated by his light infantry, I would be able to screen that off with my skirmishing cavalry and effectively have my left flank secure against the impassable terrain feature, and my right flank threatened by his skirmishers, but secure in that the cavalry would be shooting at him as much as he was shooting at my right flank.

For the most part the plan worked. Had I deployed better (as per my 'better deployment suggestion above') I would have had my Ghilman dominating my right flank and my skirmishing cavalry securing my left as I pushed into the Inca.

As it turns out a lot of very lucky dice rolls from my opponent's perspective destroyed one unit of Ghilman (who in 20:20 hindsight shouldn't have been there) and allowed his unprotected archers to harrass my left flank. My IC stopped my spear wall from disrupting from shooting, but the impact combat against the archers went badly for me and I ended up disrupting. When I fragged in melee we saw that the game was over. He had me beat.

I think that generally the new development rules worked.

I very much liked the overall effect of the new march moves for heavy foot vs skirmishers. If the game was a version 1 game I wouldn't have gotten into the position that I wanted to get into with my Karwah, and that would have been because of being slowed by a few guys with sling. The way it played out felt realistic to me. I was slowed, but not much. Often I'd 'march move' only 7" or 6.5" because the full 8" march move would have taken me within 4" of enemy skirmishers... so the skirmishers had an effect, but it wasn't the 'put my feet in mud' effect that it seems to be in version 1.

I liked the 'harassment' rule and it worked equally for me as against me. My Ghilman and light horse got into positions where they were 'harassed' and that caused some periods of problem. I believe that it would help people play a more historical battle and reduce 'Benny Hilling'.

I might be in the minority here, but I feel that the skirmish infantry shooting is about right. Perhaps there is some points adjusting to be done, but I do believe that skirmishing cavalry should be tougher than skirmishing infantry. If you want real troops to slow me down, put real troops there. The skirmishers slowed me down, and indeed had an effect with their shooting. They needed numbers and that, to my way of thinking, is realistic. Where I had equal or larger numbers I dominated the skirmish fight. Where he had larger numbers (and admittedly a bit of luck) he dominated the skirmish fight. That was true even though he only had a 2" effective range. I agree that there is a danger to the infantry being caught by going to the 2" range, but I believe the truth is that if they are out there on their own they would get caught by mounted. If you don't want your troops to be caught get them out of dodge, or put heavier troops behind them so they can run like cowardly cur's safely behind the others. To me, this is realism.

I remain a little disappointed in 'defensive spearmen'. I believe that they should get a POA against shooters in impact... perhaps something akin to the 'tie breaker' for 'light spear' in version 1. If the defensive spearmen initiate the impact against archers, the archers are better in impact than defensive spearmen and that seems 'wrong' to me. They are going to eventually get shot up, so must go into impact combat. This seems to make them a bit 'impotent' against shooting troops. I think the rules of defensive spearmen are right-on for other troops, but troops who shoot (with no impact weapon) seems to have an interaction error to my mind. Another thought would be to make defensive spearmen 'armoured' vs shooting, as most had a big shield of some description (I am probably not right in all instances here).

So, overall I believe the new rules are an improvement. There are things that I would have different, but that's always going to be the case. All in all, a better system IMHO.

Good gaming all...

Post Reply

Return to “Field of Glory AAR's”