HYW English 800pt

A forum for any questions relating to army design, the army companion books and upcoming lists.

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

lonehorseman
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz 251/1
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz  251/1
Posts: 142
Joined: Mon May 03, 2010 10:01 pm
Location: Pretoria, South Africa

HYW English 800pt

Post by lonehorseman » Thu Jun 03, 2010 9:53 am

Ok so on the advice of many gamers I have decided to stay clear of the Medieval and Later Welsh and instead to use HYW English.

This is my first attempt at a list:

Henry V 1x IC
Duke of York and Lord Camoys 2x TC

Dismounted English Men-at-Arms 3x4 HF, Armoured, Average, Drilled, Heavy Weapon
Welsh and English Longbowmen 6x8 MF, Protected, Average, Drilled, Longbow, Swordsmen
Stakes to cover half of each Longbow BG 6x4 PF
Irish Kerns (Point Filler) 1x4 LF, Unprotected, Average, Undrilled, Javelin, Light Spear

793AP 10 BGs PBI: +2

Idea was to do the whole

MFHFMF MFHFMF MFHFMF
TC IC TC

deployment described in the book (hopefully this comes out right). The Kerns are going to guard the camp

Thoughts?

Cheers
D
15mm: Painted: Late Republican Roman
Medieval Welsh
WIP: Ivan the Terrible's Russians
Later Ottoman Turkish

lonehorseman
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz 251/1
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz  251/1
Posts: 142
Joined: Mon May 03, 2010 10:01 pm
Location: Pretoria, South Africa

Post by lonehorseman » Thu Jun 03, 2010 9:59 am

Nope my digram failed bigtime. Its meant to be a MFHFMF battleline with a general behind the HF. then the same thing another 2 times, IC is in centrel Battleline
15mm: Painted: Late Republican Roman
Medieval Welsh
WIP: Ivan the Terrible's Russians
Later Ottoman Turkish

madmike111
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz 232 8Rad
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz 232 8Rad
Posts: 167
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 4:20 am
Location: West Aussieland

Post by madmike111 » Thu Jun 03, 2010 10:15 am

I would change the IC for 2 TC, with that many longbows you are going to out shoot everyone so really don't need the IC benefit for cohesion testing.

Also could consider fielding the HF in a column placed behind the MF, with half a base split behind 2 BG of MF. That way you get the rear support, also the HF is allowed to move through the MF so can move forward and exploit gaps in the enemy line.

Dareun
Corporal - Strongpoint
Corporal - Strongpoint
Posts: 59
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 6:56 pm

Post by Dareun » Thu Jun 03, 2010 11:29 am

no horsemen at all? why not!

sounds like a good list.
Won't you need some reserve to avoid being taken on the flank? As you are supposed to outshoot your opponent, is the IC bringing you truly something?

footslogger
Sergeant First Class - Elite Panzer IIIL
Sergeant First Class - Elite Panzer IIIL
Posts: 412
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2008 5:50 pm

Post by footslogger » Thu Jun 03, 2010 11:35 am

Any reason your prefer 6x8 longbow groups rather than 8x6?

SirGarnet
Brigadier-General - Elite Grenadier
Brigadier-General - Elite Grenadier
Posts: 2186
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2008 10:13 am

Post by SirGarnet » Thu Jun 03, 2010 11:36 am

I agree regarding the IC - with drilled shooters, you don't need him much for CMTs, and you will be giving rather than receiving shooting tests.

One structural issue involves BG size. Although having all BGs of a type be the same type is simpler, varying their size can enable you to economize on troops for particular needs and squeeze out another BG for Attrition Points and flexibility. Shooters generate shooting dice most efficiently in multiples of 4, but that is not a big issue since the longbows will be operating together.

Madmike's suggestion of holding the men at arms in reserve in a good one, one in the center, one on either wing.

You are rather light on the number of men at arms, which is not wrong - but it does mean they have a supporting role and your toolkit of options is more limited. Average and Armoured is substantially less reliable than Superior and Heavily Armoured in bearing the brunt of assault from the enemy's best troops or recovering a bad situation, although perfectly serviceable as rear support. You might consider upgrading one of those BGs.

You might also want to check out the tactical tips sticky in general discussion for a variety of other ideas that might be helpful.

Cheers,

Mike

nikgaukroger
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 10287
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 9:30 am
Location: LarryWorld

Post by nikgaukroger » Thu Jun 03, 2010 1:01 pm

footslogger wrote:Any reason your prefer 6x8 longbow groups rather than 8x6?

Yup, go for the larger numbers of BGs, it works well with this army - although there is an argument for have an 8 base BG to stick on an exposed end of a line as it is more resilient.

Also when you've got the hang of the army you can drop the stakes and spend the points on something more useful :)
Nik Gaukroger

"Never ask a man if he comes from Yorkshire. If he does, he will tell you.
If he does not, why humiliate him?" - Canon Sydney Smith

nikgaukroger@blueyonder.co.uk

petedalby
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Posts: 3036
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 5:23 pm
Location: Fareham, UK

Post by petedalby » Thu Jun 03, 2010 1:09 pm

As Nik says - in time you will wish to drop the stakes. The points saved will enable you buy a BG of 4 LH and upgrade your HF to Superior.

Personally I prefer LBs in 8's but others have done very well with them in 6's - again it is a case of personal preference. Or you could have some each.

I would also stick with the IC - gives you a good chance of repelling enemy Knights even without stakes - and having a +2PBI is quite handy too.
Pete

zeitoun
Major - Jagdpanther
Major - Jagdpanther
Posts: 1046
Joined: Mon May 05, 2008 6:31 pm
Location: poitiers FRANCE

Post by zeitoun » Thu Jun 03, 2010 1:33 pm

Hi ,

What do you think of that list

1 * IC
2 * TC

4 BG of 8 MF longbow
1 BG of 6 MF longbow
2 BG of 4 HF sup Heavy weapon
1 BG of 6 HF average Heavy weapon
1 BG of 6 LF jav light spear
1 BG of 4 LH jav light spear
1 BG of 4 KN sup undrilled

Dareun
Corporal - Strongpoint
Corporal - Strongpoint
Posts: 59
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 6:56 pm

Post by Dareun » Thu Jun 03, 2010 2:20 pm

petedalby wrote:
I would also stick with the IC - gives you a good chance of repelling enemy Knights even without stakes - and having a +2PBI is quite handy too.
commit IC to impact and mélée? sounds juicy. The IC wont be able to leave the unit until the end of the fight, right? Why not getting 2 TC instead and spend the point left on something else?

philqw78
Chief of Staff - Elite Maus
Chief of Staff - Elite Maus
Posts: 8701
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 11:31 am
Location: Manchester

Post by philqw78 » Thu Jun 03, 2010 2:35 pm

Dareun wrote:
petedalby wrote:
I would also stick with the IC - gives you a good chance of repelling enemy Knights even without stakes - and having a +2PBI is quite handy too.
commit IC to impact and mélée? sounds juicy. The IC wont be able to leave the unit until the end of the fight, right? Why not getting 2 TC instead and spend the point left on something else?
Don't commit him. Put him in the rear to add the +2 for chesion tests
phil
putting the arg into argumentative

petedalby
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Posts: 3036
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 5:23 pm
Location: Fareham, UK

Post by petedalby » Thu Jun 03, 2010 4:40 pm

The addition of the Knights changes the dynamic of the army considerably - and they really need a TC with them - most enemy Knight BGs will have one.
Pete

nikgaukroger
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 10287
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 9:30 am
Location: LarryWorld

Post by nikgaukroger » Thu Jun 03, 2010 5:18 pm

petedalby wrote:The addition of the Knights changes the dynamic of the army considerably - and they really need a TC with them - most enemy Knight BGs will have one.
I don't think the Kn add to this army - I wouldn't take them.
Nik Gaukroger

"Never ask a man if he comes from Yorkshire. If he does, he will tell you.
If he does not, why humiliate him?" - Canon Sydney Smith

nikgaukroger@blueyonder.co.uk

lonehorseman
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz 251/1
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz  251/1
Posts: 142
Joined: Mon May 03, 2010 10:01 pm
Location: Pretoria, South Africa

Post by lonehorseman » Thu Jun 03, 2010 5:22 pm

Ok so what I reworked it to is...

1xIC
2xTC

6x6 Protected Average Drilled MF Longbowmen with Stakes
2x4 Heavily Armoured Superior Drilled HF English Men-at-Arms
2x4 Armoured Superior Undrilled HF Gascon Men-at-Arms
1x4 Unprotected Average Undrilled LF Irish Kerns
1x4 Unprotected Average Undrilled LH Irish Horse

796pt, 12 BG PBI:+2

I personally do not want the knights, this is my "see that shiny bloke on a shiny horse, yea, peg him" army. I think that amount of longbow with stakes can handle any mounted enemy and there is enough superior armoured foot to handle enemy foot (or at least vs armies I have seen so far). Taking them as Heavily armoured is a waste for me as they already cancel out enemy armour POA in melee, but I took 2 just to test em out.

I agree with Pete on the IC, that +2 helps and the +2 on cohesions is a lifesaver.
15mm: Painted: Late Republican Roman
Medieval Welsh
WIP: Ivan the Terrible's Russians
Later Ottoman Turkish

nikgaukroger
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 10287
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 9:30 am
Location: LarryWorld

Post by nikgaukroger » Thu Jun 03, 2010 5:52 pm

lonehorseman wrote: I personally do not want the knights, this is my "see that shiny bloke on a shiny horse, yea, peg him" army. I think that amount of longbow with stakes can handle any mounted enemy and there is enough superior armoured foot to handle enemy foot (or at least vs armies I have seen so far). Taking them as Heavily armoured is a waste for me as they already cancel out enemy armour POA in melee, but I took 2 just to test em out.
However, they can still gain the PoA for having heavier armour than the enemy - and as they give shooters negative PoAs when shot at they can be very useful, I always took a BG of heavily armoured in my WotR.

I agree with Pete on the IC, that +2 helps and the +2 on cohesions is a lifesaver.
As this is an army that will quite often need to manoeuvre, the extra on CMTs can be a real help as well - and an IC covers a circle with a 24MU diameter for that :D
Nik Gaukroger

"Never ask a man if he comes from Yorkshire. If he does, he will tell you.
If he does not, why humiliate him?" - Canon Sydney Smith

nikgaukroger@blueyonder.co.uk

LambertSimnel
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz 232 8Rad
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz 232 8Rad
Posts: 152
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 12:33 pm
Location: Leamington, Warks, UK

Post by LambertSimnel » Thu Jun 03, 2010 8:14 pm

nikgaukroger wrote:
lonehorseman wrote: I personally do not want the knights, this is my "see that shiny bloke on a shiny horse, yea, peg him" army. I think that amount of longbow with stakes can handle any mounted enemy and there is enough superior armoured foot to handle enemy foot (or at least vs armies I have seen so far). Taking them as Heavily armoured is a waste for me as they already cancel out enemy armour POA in melee, but I took 2 just to test em out.
However, they can still gain the PoA for having heavier armour than the enemy - and as they give shooters negative PoAs when shot at they can be very useful, I always took a BG of heavily armoured in my WotR.
I nearly replied 'but guys with shooters have a negative PoA against all foot.'

I might have been watching too much of The Sweeney,

BlackPrince
Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
Posts: 269
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 12:34 pm

Post by BlackPrince » Fri Jun 04, 2010 6:34 am

I agree with some things skip the knights - with only one BG you will spend most of your time protecting it. Some heavily armoured foot I have found are good espically against Roman legionnaires.
I disagree about longbows in 6s I like 8s as it maximizes your shooting dice and this army is all about shooting.
Keith

It was better to leave disputing about the faith to the theologians and just run argumentative non-believers through with the sword (Louis IX).

Polkovnik
Major - Jagdpanther
Major - Jagdpanther
Posts: 1004
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 10:16 pm

Post by Polkovnik » Mon Jun 07, 2010 9:29 am

BlackPrince wrote:I disagree about longbows in 6s I like 8s as it maximizes your shooting dice and this army is all about shooting.
Doesn't make any difference to shooting dice if they are lined up next to each other. A BL of 24 longbow will shoot with the same dice whether it is 4 BGs of 6 or 3 BGs of 8.

As mentioned previously, a BG of 8 is useful on a flank to be more resilient to shooting, but also because you might want to angle it to shoot at a flank threat, and then you wouldn't be maximising shooting if it was a BBG of 6.

IanB3406
Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
Posts: 340
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2007 6:06 am

Post by IanB3406 » Mon Jun 07, 2010 10:31 am

So what if you only have 20 stands of longbow......How would you configure this army? (how many superior heavy foot can you take?)

Ian

BlackPrince
Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
Posts: 269
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 12:34 pm

Post by BlackPrince » Mon Jun 07, 2010 11:44 pm

The thing with the BL is your opponent is going to try to break it up, no one with they have other options are going to charge a BL 24 longbow head on. If your BL is forced to wheel at different angles you end up with a lot of 6 base BG shooting at single targets.
Keith

It was better to leave disputing about the faith to the theologians and just run argumentative non-believers through with the sword (Louis IX).

Post Reply

Return to “Army Design”