Page 1 of 1

Killer & Filler

Posted: Mon Dec 18, 2006 12:02 pm
by list_lurker
There does seem to be a shift in the games we are playing, that units are being picked with no tactical role - other than boost the army unit value. Is this a desired 'feature' or the rules. It strikes me a easier to protect the filler than in DBM (generally AoW having less of a manouver phase)

what is you opinion?

Simon

Posted: Mon Dec 18, 2006 5:09 pm
by shall
I would defer to other testers for their views really. My own experience is that I can rarely afford filler sitting around doing nothing. It therefore tends to be hard to do relative to DBM but not sure how others find it.

Si

Posted: Mon Dec 18, 2006 9:01 pm
by list_lurker
This is true. I look forward to seeing how everyone else structures their army, and uses it. Usk will be interesting.

I'd hate to see a half dozen , 4 stand BG LI (~90pts) ,(+6 units), used just to bump up the army size and hide in terrain

Simon

Posted: Mon Dec 18, 2006 10:54 pm
by rbodleyscott
list_lurker wrote:This is true. I look forward to seeing how everyone else structures their army, and uses it. Usk will be interesting.

I'd hate to see a half dozen , 4 stand BG LI (~90pts) ,(+6 units), used just to bump up the army size and hide in terrain

Simon
If you can find a list that allows such a thing, let me know. The only "filler" BGs of 4 bases permitted should be in armies that are only allowed a maximum of 4 or 6 of that type.

Posted: Tue Dec 19, 2006 9:31 am
by shall
Interestingly the only true filler I have tried were families from the Ancient Britons...they proved to be a liability as Terry got his Roman Auxilia into charge reach of them. They were more than a bit of a worry.....

Si

Posted: Tue Dec 19, 2006 10:26 am
by hammy
shall wrote:Interestingly the only true filler I have tried were families from the Ancient Britons...they proved to be a liability as Terry got his Roman Auxilia into charge reach of them. They were more than a bit of a worry.....

Si
I have run Medieval French with two BG's of mob hiding at the back. As long as you don't let the enemy get near them you are fine but.....

I think one of the armies with the most potential filler will be Assyrian but in DBM they could have 50 Hd if they wanted.

Hammy

Posted: Tue Dec 19, 2006 11:28 am
by list_lurker
If you can find a list that allows such a thing, let me know.
There's a challange.... :P

So, from the first list I pick up....

Thematic Byzantine.

"archers in seperate units" : Light Infanty - Poor - Drilled - Unprotected - Bow @ 3 x 4 = 12
"archers in seperate units" : Light Infanty - Poor - Drilled - Unprotected - Bow @ 3 x 4 = 12
Javelimenmen : Light Infanty - Poor - Drilled - Unprotected - Javelin /Light Spear @ 2 x 4 = 8
Slingers : Light Infanty - Poor - Drilled - Unprotected - Sling @ 2 x 4 = 8

Theres 4 units for a princely sum of 40 points.

I suspect that Horse archers in units of 4 (avg / bow @5) are better 'value' - due to increased 'get out of the way ability'... Surely lots of armies with units like this!!

Simon

Posted: Tue Dec 19, 2006 11:37 am
by rbodleyscott
list_lurker wrote:So, from the first list I pick up....

Thematic Byzantine.

"archers in seperate units" : Light Infanty - Poor - Drilled - Unprotected - Bow @ 3 x 4 = 12
"archers in seperate units" : Light Infanty - Poor - Drilled - Unprotected - Bow @ 3 x 4 = 12
Javelimenmen : Light Infanty - Poor - Drilled - Unprotected - Javelin /Light Spear @ 2 x 4 = 8
Slingers : Light Infanty - Poor - Drilled - Unprotected - Sling @ 2 x 4 = 8

Theres 4 units for a princely sum of 40 points.
Fair enough. The list should not allow the archers to be in BGs of 4. (According to the usual list policy should be 6-8 ).

Can't avoid the slingers and javelinmen being in units of 4 as there are only 4 in the list.

So that would still be 3 BGs for 36 points.

The problem is while they may be a bit too effective as filler, we don't want to turn LF into suicide troops either by making their loss unimportant.
I suspect that Horse archers in units of 4 (avg / bow @5) are better 'value' - due to increased 'get out of the way ability'... Surely lots of armies with units like this!!
Except that average unprotected horse archers cost 8 points. Don't think there are many poor ones in the lists.

Posted: Tue Dec 19, 2006 11:46 am
by list_lurker
The list should not allow the archers to be in BGs of 4. (According to the usual list policy).
If its just a list design oversight then OK...

Posted: Tue Dec 19, 2006 11:49 am
by rbodleyscott
list_lurker wrote:
The list should not allow the archers to be in BGs of 4. (According to the usual list policy).
If its just a list design oversight then OK...
Yes it is. but there will still be lists that can have a few small units of 4 LF. The question is whether it is enough of a problem to be worth complicating the very nice simple attrition points system we have at present.

Posted: Tue Dec 19, 2006 12:01 pm
by list_lurker
Yes it is. but there will still be lists that can have a few small units of 4 LF. The question is whether it is enough of a problem to be worth complicating the very nice simple attrition points system we have at present.
Devil and the deep blue here...

Either that or count as naught for losses, and then become expendable (another foible)

Armati had the idea of 'core units' ,on a list by list basis, by which loss of those accounted toward defeat. Maybe you could do somethins like that? Not elegant though

Simon

Posted: Tue Dec 19, 2006 12:05 pm
by rbodleyscott
list_lurker wrote:Armati had the idea of 'core units' ,on a list by list basis, by which loss of those accounted toward defeat. Maybe you could do somethins like that? Not elegant though
And more scope for editorial errors.

Posted: Wed Dec 20, 2006 8:21 pm
by donm
Thematic Byzantine.

"archers in seperate units" : Light Infanty - Poor - Drilled - Unprotected - Bow @ 3 x 4 = 12
"archers in seperate units" : Light Infanty - Poor - Drilled - Unprotected - Bow @ 3 x 4 = 12
Javelimenmen : Light Infanty - Poor - Drilled - Unprotected - Javelin /Light Spear @ 2 x 4 = 8
Slingers : Light Infanty - Poor - Drilled - Unprotected - Sling @ 2 x 4 = 8

Theres 4 units for a princely sum of 40 points.
Best I can find is Seleucid

2 x BG's of archers : Light infantry -poor-undrilled-unprotected-bow @ 3 x 6 = 18 each
2 x BG's of slingers :Light infantry-poor-undrilled-unprotected-sling @ 2 x 6 = 12 each

4 units for 60 points (not bad).

Put these with a BG of Javelimen: Light infantry-average-drilled-unprotected-javelin @ 2 x 6 = 12 and you get 5 BG's for 72 points.

All you need is a flank with some terrain and its not such a bad choice.

Don M

Posted: Wed Dec 20, 2006 10:26 pm
by vincent
list_lurker wrote:Armati had the idea of 'core units' ,on a list by list basis, by which loss of those accounted toward defeat. Maybe you could do somethins like that? Not elegant though
I am very familiar with Armati and it does not work like that.
Armati separates troops in key units (their loss works for the army defeat) and non key units (whose loss is irrelevant).
This allows truly expandable troops, some of which can be reasonnably effective (e.g. peltasts in the hellenistic period).
On the other hand, it means that to defeat a medieval army requires to destroy at least some knight units.
The separation between core and bonus is irrelevant to being key or not. The role of core is more like the minimum number of units in an army list, the bonus being the optional and maximum number of troops for each type.