Best army for a defensive / offensive player
Moderators: philqw78, terrys, hammy, Slitherine Core, Field of Glory Design, Field of Glory Moderators
Best army for a defensive / offensive player
Hi All,
I'm wondering on opinions on different armies.
I've mentioned before that sometimes having an army that you like isn't one that suits your personality.
For example, I absolutely love Hoplites and Vikings, but I'm a player who likes to plan ahead calmly and move into position and wait for my enemy to make a mistake and pounce! I'm not the kind of player who will say 'well, to hell with it, I might as well go in and hope for the best'. The attitude of the latter is more suited to Hoplites and Vikings than it is for my style of play. Shock troops don't do well in this regard as they get their hand forced more quickly.
So, I discussed this with one of my regular opponents and he suggested 'shooty foot'.
Any other suggestions?
Longbow and/or bow armed shooty foot armies for a defensive player?
Shock mounted/foot for an offensive player?
Out of the armies on my list currently, I'd have to say the quickest to turn into one of the 'shooty foot' armies would be 'Palmyran' with as many unprotected foot bowmen as possible - which is quite a lot.
I might have to give it a go.
Any other thoughts?
Ian
I'm wondering on opinions on different armies.
I've mentioned before that sometimes having an army that you like isn't one that suits your personality.
For example, I absolutely love Hoplites and Vikings, but I'm a player who likes to plan ahead calmly and move into position and wait for my enemy to make a mistake and pounce! I'm not the kind of player who will say 'well, to hell with it, I might as well go in and hope for the best'. The attitude of the latter is more suited to Hoplites and Vikings than it is for my style of play. Shock troops don't do well in this regard as they get their hand forced more quickly.
So, I discussed this with one of my regular opponents and he suggested 'shooty foot'.
Any other suggestions?
Longbow and/or bow armed shooty foot armies for a defensive player?
Shock mounted/foot for an offensive player?
Out of the armies on my list currently, I'd have to say the quickest to turn into one of the 'shooty foot' armies would be 'Palmyran' with as many unprotected foot bowmen as possible - which is quite a lot.
I might have to give it a go.
Any other thoughts?
Ian
Viking (15mm)
Syracusan (15mm)
Palmyran (10mm - 15mm basing)
Horse Nomad (15mm)
Syracusan (15mm)
Palmyran (10mm - 15mm basing)
Horse Nomad (15mm)
-
- Sergeant First Class - Panzer IIIL
- Posts: 394
- Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2006 10:01 am
- Location: just slightly behind your flank
I feel your pain
I want to use Anglo Danish, Sarmatian, Hoplites, LRR, but they I just dont enjoy playing them on the table.
I have gone for shooty foot - HYW English. dance like a mad man and shoot like a machine gun.
problems - if your opponent manages to fill the table you are a bit stuffed.
brief run down from Britcon - 60 elements of longbow, 8 elements of MAA, 4 elements of LH, 4 TCs
game 1 vs Crown of Aragonce
I had to run around a lot and dance like a ballerina , but managed to shoot them to pieces, even after losing a few Bgs to Almughavers
game 2 vs Catalan
I had to run around a lot and dance like a ballerina , but managed to shoot them to pieces, even after losing a few Bgs to Almughavers
game 3 vs Ottoman
I ran around a lot, did lots of damage but got got by the even better janissaries.
game 4 vs Swiss
I ran around a lot and made a swiss cheese sandwich attacking the swiss pike from behind while they ploughed through the longbow
game 5 vs WOTR with
I want to use Anglo Danish, Sarmatian, Hoplites, LRR, but they I just dont enjoy playing them on the table.
I have gone for shooty foot - HYW English. dance like a mad man and shoot like a machine gun.
problems - if your opponent manages to fill the table you are a bit stuffed.
brief run down from Britcon - 60 elements of longbow, 8 elements of MAA, 4 elements of LH, 4 TCs
game 1 vs Crown of Aragonce
I had to run around a lot and dance like a ballerina , but managed to shoot them to pieces, even after losing a few Bgs to Almughavers
game 2 vs Catalan
I had to run around a lot and dance like a ballerina , but managed to shoot them to pieces, even after losing a few Bgs to Almughavers
game 3 vs Ottoman
I ran around a lot, did lots of damage but got got by the even better janissaries.
game 4 vs Swiss
I ran around a lot and made a swiss cheese sandwich attacking the swiss pike from behind while they ploughed through the longbow
game 5 vs WOTR with
-
- Sergeant First Class - Panzer IIIL
- Posts: 394
- Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2006 10:01 am
- Location: just slightly behind your flank
(does anyone else have the problem that once you fill the text box you cant see what you are typing)
WOTR with enough troops to fill the table 2 deep.
I couldnt break through to make a gap, so couldnt dance, so died horribly.
game 6 vs Merovingian
danced to get a really good advantage, but then couldnt make my opponent immolate himself. damn
I dont think im defensive - I normally attack recklessley with my screaming hordes of drilled bowmen - most amusing.
WOTR with enough troops to fill the table 2 deep.
I couldnt break through to make a gap, so couldnt dance, so died horribly.
game 6 vs Merovingian
danced to get a really good advantage, but then couldnt make my opponent immolate himself. damn
I dont think im defensive - I normally attack recklessley with my screaming hordes of drilled bowmen - most amusing.
-
- Sergeant First Class - Panzer IIIL
- Posts: 396
- Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2008 2:37 pm
-
- General - Carrier
- Posts: 4962
- Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 12:41 am
happens all the time that the text runs off the bottom of the box and can't be seen as you type.
I would say any army would work as a stand and wait force, just depends on how much enemy you want to face after the waiting part is over your enemy is across the table.
Playing anceint spanish against LRR we usually wait with the center, and try to crush the flanks. Reason behind this, once the Romans arrive if you don't do it during impact its all over but the bloodshed as the combats will be ++/-- for the Romans with re-rolls to boot. Being undrilled makes falling on the exposed flanks next to impossible but thats the way it usually works out.
I would say any army would work as a stand and wait force, just depends on how much enemy you want to face after the waiting part is over your enemy is across the table.
Playing anceint spanish against LRR we usually wait with the center, and try to crush the flanks. Reason behind this, once the Romans arrive if you don't do it during impact its all over but the bloodshed as the combats will be ++/-- for the Romans with re-rolls to boot. Being undrilled makes falling on the exposed flanks next to impossible but thats the way it usually works out.
-
- Master Sergeant - U-boat
- Posts: 528
- Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2009 9:32 pm
- Location: Dixie
-
- Master Sergeant - U-boat
- Posts: 528
- Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2009 9:32 pm
- Location: Dixie
I am your inverse. I love the disciplined juggernaut armies of the Hellinistic and Roman times, and have repeatedly and tenaciously tried to run them. I suck with disciplined, balanced armies. Period. The results are usually abject failures that would make Cannae look like a brilliant and heroic stand. I have to own disaster with disciplined, cerebral armies. Howling barbarians on the other hand, and thriving in the midst of broken, bleeding chaos - that I do quite well. I have had my best results with Danish axes, Scythian bows, and Welsh spears . . .
So I understand your dilemma, from a mirror image perspective. I have thought about it quite a bit.
There are several armies out there that from a historical point of view seem to split the difference or synthesize the contradictions of the howling warrior and the disciplined soldier. Mongols, Byzantines, post-Diocletian Romans, and Swiss come to mind. Similarly, the FoG Abbasid list looks very tasty to me for the Byzantine-ish mix of troops, in abundance, with the fact that the bulk of the cavalry may be used as uber-dragoons if the tactical developments require it. I am sure the various Chinese list may fit the hybrid, or primarily drilled models.
From what you describe as your preferred play style and mindset, it is hard to beat Byzantines of one sort or another. They enjoy multiple lists, with a wide range of choices within each list. Hell, if you enjoy Byzantine plotting the Byzantine lists may be a perfect fit. I don't know why they are not popular. They look good, have a potential for foot base, cav base or balanced at the player's discretion, and really had an outstanding track record. For some reason the Byzantines are associated with defeat, because they fell so utterly in the end . . . But they held the line for 800 years, in a state of nearly perpetual warfare.
How many others could boast this?
Just my two cents, since you asked.
So I understand your dilemma, from a mirror image perspective. I have thought about it quite a bit.
There are several armies out there that from a historical point of view seem to split the difference or synthesize the contradictions of the howling warrior and the disciplined soldier. Mongols, Byzantines, post-Diocletian Romans, and Swiss come to mind. Similarly, the FoG Abbasid list looks very tasty to me for the Byzantine-ish mix of troops, in abundance, with the fact that the bulk of the cavalry may be used as uber-dragoons if the tactical developments require it. I am sure the various Chinese list may fit the hybrid, or primarily drilled models.
From what you describe as your preferred play style and mindset, it is hard to beat Byzantines of one sort or another. They enjoy multiple lists, with a wide range of choices within each list. Hell, if you enjoy Byzantine plotting the Byzantine lists may be a perfect fit. I don't know why they are not popular. They look good, have a potential for foot base, cav base or balanced at the player's discretion, and really had an outstanding track record. For some reason the Byzantines are associated with defeat, because they fell so utterly in the end . . . But they held the line for 800 years, in a state of nearly perpetual warfare.
How many others could boast this?
Just my two cents, since you asked.
Perhaps for you the Arab Conquest would be worth a look? They have the 'discipline' style of troops (Spear) with both shock foot and mounted!Skullzgrinda wrote:So I understand your dilemma, from a mirror image perspective. I have thought about it quite a bit.
Paint up nice too!
Ian
Viking (15mm)
Syracusan (15mm)
Palmyran (10mm - 15mm basing)
Horse Nomad (15mm)
Syracusan (15mm)
Palmyran (10mm - 15mm basing)
Horse Nomad (15mm)
-
- 2nd Lieutenant - Elite Panzer IVF/2
- Posts: 705
- Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 2:55 pm
I generally prefer manouverable (drilled) armies with punch:
- later hungarian, seleucid, Assyrian
But have since almost finished a skythian army to break that mould and try something different.
I've only had one game but find them quite Flaccid. Whosoever wins with skythians is a more patient man than I.
The other army I am about half way through is spartan. I love the look and history of them but am thinking that I might be underwhelmed by the gaming experienced. Being drilled and superior they wont fill the table and will be too slow to catch anything silly enough to fight them frontally.
My latest completed army Latin Greek is a lot more fun - particularly with either or catalan or seljuk allies both of which add a few more options for fighting style.
- later hungarian, seleucid, Assyrian
But have since almost finished a skythian army to break that mould and try something different.
I've only had one game but find them quite Flaccid. Whosoever wins with skythians is a more patient man than I.
The other army I am about half way through is spartan. I love the look and history of them but am thinking that I might be underwhelmed by the gaming experienced. Being drilled and superior they wont fill the table and will be too slow to catch anything silly enough to fight them frontally.
My latest completed army Latin Greek is a lot more fun - particularly with either or catalan or seljuk allies both of which add a few more options for fighting style.
-
- Master Sergeant - Bf 109E
- Posts: 492
- Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2007 1:54 am
- Location: Searching for the meaning of "Authors Intent"
Perhaps combine the Skythians with the Greeks...
I was looking at a list with 2 BGs of drilled OS Mercs plus a cav BG for rear support and they rest Skyth's mounted without any foot....
Test driven in theory only...
Madcam.
I was looking at a list with 2 BGs of drilled OS Mercs plus a cav BG for rear support and they rest Skyth's mounted without any foot....
Test driven in theory only...
Madcam.
There goes another crossing the Rubicon!
W/D/L
2008
CoA - 3/0/0
C.I. - 1/1/1
2009
Ottoman - 6/0/1
Khurasian - 3/5/2
2010
Catalan - 4/0/0
W/D/L
2008
CoA - 3/0/0
C.I. - 1/1/1
2009
Ottoman - 6/0/1
Khurasian - 3/5/2
2010
Catalan - 4/0/0
-
- Field of Glory Moderator
- Posts: 10287
- Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 9:30 am
- Location: LarryWorld
Being protected the Greeks are a truly awful part of a Skythian army.
They do provide a good lump of the army that your opponents can catch and when they get there they are normally a POA up. They can't resist shooting and can't fight for toffee.
They typically hid in a table corner and hoped the enemy ignored them.
There aren't enough to make a fight and just enough to be worthwhile killing. Which isn't difficult.
They do provide a good lump of the army that your opponents can catch and when they get there they are normally a POA up. They can't resist shooting and can't fight for toffee.
They typically hid in a table corner and hoped the enemy ignored them.
There aren't enough to make a fight and just enough to be worthwhile killing. Which isn't difficult.
-
- Captain - Bf 110D
- Posts: 870
- Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 4:11 pm
- Location: San Lazzaro (BO) Italy
More than a specific army a matter of propensity
I was an all out player in my youth. Now, with aging, I turned to a more prudent behaviour. It's difficult to point out an army perfect for your intent. Shooty foot are good for defensive games, but it's hard to take advantage of a mistaken of your opponent because you must take a CMT to charge, so you can waste an opportunity. I like a lot Macedonian style armies, with pikes and good cavalry, because I can place my pikes in a suitable position, flanked with LF or MF, and then attack opponent wings with my cavalry. The key is delaying the fight of pikes till cavalry get a significant advantage. In the next weeks I want to try also Persian army, which seems to me also suitable to a such tactics and with many interesting variants. I'm working on a campaign in Asia Minor and I would like to play the Persian role.
Mario Vitale