Mixed BG's, field fortifications and rear charges

[Guthlaf]

I play a late Swedish Medieval army, which is mostly composed of mixed battle groups with heavy foot, armoured, heavy weapon backed up by medium foot armoured crossbow swordsmen. I want to try field fortifications, and have a question about being charged in the rear. I know there is no disadvantage for being charged in the rear, even if the front rank is fighting across the fortifications, because the rear ranks turn to meet the attackers, but my rear rank is the medium foot, so I just want to check that my Swedes would fight to the front with the heavy weapon POA's but to the rear with the crossbow swordsman POA, and I guess that they wouldn't get the shooting bonus when charged to the rear either, because the crossbowmen are in the front rank in that situation.

If that is the case then I guess my opponents would be better advised to charge my rear, assuming they can get to it, rather than the front. Most of my opponents have bibilical armies like Assyrians, Seleucids and the like, and I haven't worked out how to deal with their skirmishers and shooty horse yet. My infantry tends to do well, but my mounted crossbows are hopeless and the quantity of Light Horse and cavalry they can field play cat and mouse with my knights all too easily. Maybe I could try putting the crossbowmen in the front directly behind the fortifications and the heavy weapons at the back, so if I'm charged in the rear my opponent will be facing armouned heavy weapons, and they are not always keen to do that.

Any advice or pointers on how to defeat biblical armies with anything up to 20BG's with slow moving infantry and no more than 12 BG's will be gratefully received.

[SirGarnet]

Playing shooty horse I found those HW/XB Scandinavians disconcerting, particularly where they can manage decent terrain as flank cover when they move. It gives me a sort of 18th century feeling since a firefight between bow at 5-6 and crossbow at 4-6 is not attractive as they grind forward and if you have enough other good troops can exert a lot of pressure without leaving a good opening. Against shooty horse it's about protecting your flanks. Against the opponents you mention, charge or shoot their skirmishers, shoot their shooty horse, shoot most things, an advance using terrain as cover/anchor, maybe turning the table 90 degrees. I have an old prejudice against mounted crossbow, but I've seen them used well in conjunction with other troops since they can run down LF and shoot 4-6 against mounted. I don't mind fighting the knights if they can be drawn out and eventually flanked or shot up, so my suggestion is to use them conservatively and lead with the infantry firepower.

Very important not to get flanked since if hit by a legal flank or rear charge by non-skirmishers you drop a cohesion level on impact and are at -- POA with no support shooting at impact. Yes, you can turn around, and if you weather the first assault have swordsmen and maybe armoured POA against whatever they have, but weathering that first assault is the challenge, and if you are also engaged in the front you should be toast. Unless you are going to build a manned fort mid-table in lieu of terrain, I don't see FF doing much.

[philqw78]

There is a massive disadvantage becoming disrupted and fighting to the rear at impact. But against biblical troops after impact the Heavy weapon would be no better than armoured XBow swordsmen, as no biblicals are heavily armoured (though a few seleucids are, but he's very good if he can get cataphracts into your rear in 3 hours). Since the MF are part of a BG including HF they do not count the minus in CT for losing to mounted either. So keep them in the rear rank. Unless he hits front and rear in the same impact you should win any impact to front as you are adding the shooting dice and behind fortifications.

Dealing with skirmishers is your main problem. Sitting behind fortifications will not help you win, you will just sit there as he dances around and picks on stuff not behind them.

Keep the Knights and Cavalry to the rear and use them to protect your flanks and give rear support as you advance. Shooting should not be a problem for your foot as you are armoured, so try to ignore the skirmishers or shepherd/pin them into position where your Mtd XBow will be supported when catching them. Being armoured you can also go wide against skirmishers, 4 wide, 2 deep, to increase your frontage. Use rough going, your BG will be slowed but you will not lose much combat power since you are using Hvy Wpn. The only troops to fear then in RGo are Theurophoroi, Thracians and Medium Impact foot.

Are the Swedes drilled?

[Guthlaf]

Are the Swedes drilled?

Swedes are undrilled, great in a straight line, not so hot if you want to try wheeling an entire battle line in order to reduce the frontage. I've tried moving through terrain but it takes too long when you are down to 2MU per turn, my opponents generally have lots of LF that dance around less than 6MU away. Shooting at them isn't brilliant, crossbows are at - against almost anything, so even with an eight strong BG I only get four dice, not enough to cause a CT on an opposing eight strong BG of skirmishers.

Thanks for all the advice though, I'll definitely try keeping my cavalry out of the way to start with, using them to protect flanks. The infantry is quite capable of ignoring skirmishers, especially in eight's. I'm also going to try building a large U shaped fort with FF in the middle third of the table and just sitting behind it, bows will be almost useless as my opponents will need 6's to hit, so it'll be a bit of a mexican stand off, but it might stop me from being totally slaughtered.

I might even try half a table of infantry behind FF and leaving the other half clear, I can cover a fair amount of room if I use terrain and leave gaps between the BG's, as long as the gaps are too small to let an opponent through, and later in the battle I can abandon the FF and move forwards.

have fun out there

[SirGarnet]

I might even try half a table of infantry behind FF and leaving the other half clear, I can cover a fair amount of room if I use terrain and leave gaps between the BG's, as long as the gaps are too small to let an opponent through, and later in the battle I can abandon the FF and move forwards.

I would assume you would routinely deploy ionly on part of your potential frontage, ideally (like the opponent I faced) on one side of a large central wood and then advance and wheel out, shooting as you go. FF is not nearly as good as a terrain feature to block enemy movement, but it is always available and can serve much the same function. Daring? Stick a fortified camp behind the FF and it greatly extends the obstacle to a flank move.

[SirGarnet]

I might even try half a table of infantry behind FF and leaving the other half clear, I can cover a fair amount of room if I use terrain and leave gaps between the BG's, as long as the gaps are too small to let an opponent through, and later in the battle I can abandon the FF and move forwards.

I would assume you would routinely deploy ionly on part of your potential frontage, ideally (like the opponent I faced) on one side of a large central wood and then advance and wheel out, shooting as you go. FF is not nearly as good as a terrain feature to block enemy movement, but it is always available and can serve much the same function. Daring? Stick a fortified camp behind the FF and it greatly extends the obstacle to a flank move.