All or nothing

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

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

All or nothing

Post by BlackPrince » Fri Jul 02, 2010 6:14 am

I have been looking into the Central Asian City States a bit more and started thinking about the Later Horse Nomad ally option. The only reason to use this ally option is I think to allow your army the have mixture of;

3 BGs x 4Cav, arm, sup lance from CACS
3 BGS x 4Cav, arm, sup bow/ swordsman from Later Horse Nomad

Obviously there would be some LH and other glue to hold the army together but that is not important.
My question does it require at high level of skill to effectively use both lance and bow armed in the same army. Is it better for a mid level player to use just all lance cav or all bow/ swordsmen cav?
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).

dave_r
General - King Tiger
General - King Tiger
Posts: 3790
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 3:58 pm

Post by dave_r » Fri Jul 02, 2010 7:15 am

It's better to use all one or all the other no matter what level of player you are.

IF you have lance you need to charge if you have bow you don't want to charge. If you go half and half you will find your lancers getting swamped, which will force the bowmen to fight when it is something they aren't particularly cost effective at. I would definitely advise to go all one or the other.

Real men use lancers :)

timmy1
Lieutenant-General - Nashorn
Lieutenant-General - Nashorn
Posts: 3436
Joined: Fri Feb 29, 2008 8:39 pm
Location: Chelmsford, Essex, England

Post by timmy1 » Fri Jul 02, 2010 7:42 am

Dave, just who could that simley be aimed at?

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 » Fri Jul 02, 2010 8:11 am

Not me
phil
putting the arg into argumentative

timmy1
Lieutenant-General - Nashorn
Lieutenant-General - Nashorn
Posts: 3436
Joined: Fri Feb 29, 2008 8:39 pm
Location: Chelmsford, Essex, England

Post by timmy1 » Sat Jul 03, 2010 7:25 am

No Phil, not you, you are a man known for operating with lance in hand at all times...

madaxeman
Major-General - Jagdtiger
Major-General - Jagdtiger
Posts: 2968
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 5:15 am
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Post by madaxeman » Sat Jul 03, 2010 9:23 am

Armoured superior lancers have a reasonable chance of running down anything in the game other than pikemen or proper knights - I'd go for them every time
http://www.madaxeman.com
Become a fan of Madaxeman on Facebook at Madaxeman.com's Facebook Page.

david53
Major-General - Jagdtiger
Major-General - Jagdtiger
Posts: 2859
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 9:01 pm
Location: Manchester

Post by david53 » Sat Jul 03, 2010 10:04 am

dave_r wrote:It's better to use all one or all the other no matter what level of player you are.

IF you have lance you need to charge if you have bow you don't want to charge. If you go half and half you will find your lancers getting swamped, which will force the bowmen to fight when it is something they aren't particularly cost effective at. I would definitely advise to go all one or the other.

Real men use lancers :)
Not so sure if you could get drilled armoured bow/sword I think they are quite good but yes one or the other but not both.

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

Post by BlackPrince » Mon Jul 05, 2010 12:44 am

Thanks guys for your input and I will run with all Lancers.
Though as the army also has 4BGsx 4 LH uprot ave bow and 2BGsx 6 LF unprot ave bow, so I was hoping the some skirmishing was going to open up some good opportunities rather than just line up the armoured lancers and relying on speed of horse and some good dice rolling to get me through.

My next decision is do I go for 1xIC and 2x TC or 4x TC?
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).

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

Post by SirGarnet » Mon Jul 05, 2010 5:57 am

If you have a lot of lancers, you need to get them in the fight - they can't afford to lurk. There are, however, advantages to having a BG or two of lancers (or Knights) in a shooty cavalry army, usually in reserve, sometimes in ambush, but mainly targeted on the mind of the opponent as a threat in just being there until it's time for them to move into action (with a commander of course).

I suggest perfecting your shooty cav-only doctrine through practice first, however.

hazelbark
General - Carrier
General - Carrier
Posts: 4957
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 9:53 pm
Location: Capital of the World !!

Post by hazelbark » Tue Jul 06, 2010 5:01 pm

BlackPrince wrote:Thanks guys for your input and I will run with all Lancers.
Though as the army also has 4BGsx 4 LH uprot ave bow and 2BGsx 6 LF unprot ave bow, so I was hoping the some skirmishing was going to open up some good opportunities rather than just line up the armoured lancers and relying on speed of horse and some good dice rolling to get me through.

My next decision is do I go for 1xIC and 2x TC or 4x TC?
It depends. 8)

4 TCs allow you more opening manuver options and you shoudl combine with a pretty aggressive intention to commit generals at impact.

IC allows you to resist enemy shooting but does limit your ability to commit too many generals. The IC should not fight unless it is necessary to the outcome of the game.

Post Reply

Return to “Army Design”