The Swiss Problem

[batesmotel]

dismounted superior knights with heavy weapon

The English experience this morning argues against that (see other thread). If I have time tomorrow I'll run some sample combats, ten Swiss pikes vs ten superior heavy armoured heavy weapons). In part, I think, it may be 'ganging up' that has an effect, though I'm not sure why that should effect the Swiss less.

If said knights are uphill then things are more even.

In the current 600 pt battle I'm playing against deeter, his knights have MASSES of room to turn the flank. More than could ever be wished for.

Sounds like a good test. I would think that in general ganging up on pikes should hurt them more given the sharp drop off for them below 75% strength. The key for the knights is surviving the impact without disruption although even then they should have a reasonable chance. Were the English knights in a position where they were checking cohesion tests with fewer pluses? That could make a big difference.

Chris

[deeter]

There are problems with relying on dismounted superior knights to counter Swiss pikes. As stated, you'll be down at impact and even in melee -- not a winning matchup.

In some lists, they cost the same (15 pts.) but you might only get 12 max vs. 40 potential pikes. I've killed many Paisley pikemen with them but when they're worn out, I had little to replace them with.

Furthermore, some lists charge you 19 pts. for mounted knights and then you dismount them and throw away 4 points. The points spent on heavy armor and heavy weapons are also wasted against protected troops.

Maybe the success of the Swiss was due to the fact that most of their opponents were equiped to fight against armored foes. I would think a Late Republican Roman army would be the best infantry answer to the Swiiss.

Deeter

(Oh and would stoop to use them in a mirrored match -- I just wouldn't pick them of my own accord.)

[Paisley]

Thing is though, even if the knights do hold their own (and my observation over the games thus far is they do not unless uphill) the most superior knights you can get is about 16. A few more maybe if fielded dismounted. And they cost a bit more than the Swiss too. But even if you say even points... that still means my Swiss have (at 600pts) 8 pikes and 9 halberds left over, plus 9 light infantry. And that's more than enough to deal with the troops supporting the knights unless (perhaps) they are lucky enough to be in terrain that allows them to shoot into the Swiss flanks.

[grumblefish]

*Cough* in our current Seleucid v. Swiss game, I engaged you in flat, clear terrain, and the game is neck and neck. I am 6 points away from breaking, and your Swiss soldiers are 3; however, 2 of my units are fragmented and looking the wrong way because they just recovered. Our armies are both beaten up and it is going to be a very close finish; maybe you'll win this turn, maybe I'll win next turn.

I agree it's a little ridiculous that Swiss get to be an all-superior force of pikes and halberds, without a single average soldier out of the lot of them. But on the other hand, the Swiss army is really restricted in the types of units it can deploy. If we fight again, there are many things I would do differently to take advantage that I didn't do in the current game; elephants are pointless against pikes, but I took two; I left a sizeable portion of my army in the forest which took them forever to walk over and join the battle; anarchy made my cataphracts charge your pikes four times in a row (that unit is also ready to rout on your turn) so I wouldn't take them again, either.

Seleucids are superior to the Swiss.

[Paisley]

As I've said elsewhere, the Swiss were undefeated in the SoA era and everything about their record suggests that to have their HF as anything but all superior would be a travesty.

Their troop types are restricted more than most and I'm not saying they can't be beaten at equal points (I've had three games that could have gone either way on the last turn, including the one against Grumbly's Seleucids) and a couple more that were reasonably close. But 17 wins in 17 games with one army is unusual for me to say the least. I didn't do anything like that well with Macedonians for instance...

[grumblefish]

turns out Paisleys low life Swiss beat my Seleucids 51/50 against 41/42

I just think that your victories with the Swiss can be attributed to the fact they excel in hand to hand, flat terrain combat, and need to be tackled by an army that focuses on troop diversity. My army wasn't perfectly designed, and our combat took place in the plains, but I'll be damned if a second rerun with that same army wouldn't have come out in my favour. Swiss aren't all that unbalanced in my eyes, it's just that people tend to play in a manner that lends itself to the strengths of the Swiss. I certainly did, although I was sure my sword-Agyraspides would carry the day (and they almost did; my commander was on the other side of your front line when the match ended).

Anyway, really close, and really good, game. I am going to make some adjustments to my army, but I thinkt he Swiss can be taken down fairly easily if you just build a diverse force and combat the Swiss in a manner that doesn't revolve around hand to hand fighting on flat terrain in a big battle line.

EDIT: Oh, such a bitter pill to swallow: My elite companion cavalry is directly behind, in charging range, of your disrupted Pikemen. If he could just move forward 3 squares, that'd be a draw.

[Paisley]

It was a great game. Very close.

I've beaten Scots Isles in the woods and Burgundians (who are well balanced) over streams and up steep hills. It's tougher for the Swiss in terrain, but they pull it out the bag somehow.

[grumblefish]

You know what I wish? That FOG allowed you to pay a premium in order to make an Average unit Superior, or to take more than the maximum amount of a certain unit. I really wouldn't mind sacrificing the two elephants for two more Agyraspides units, even though the Agyraspides are half the price, because those swordsmen are worth it.

Because of the double price or what not, it wouldn't lend itself to too much abuse, and perhaps you could have a regular maximum, and then a premium maximum.

[Xiggy]

The first victory or 2 in the SOA period by the swiss were with halberd's in a swamp or bog. So maybe the early swiss need superior or elite medium infantry to make them a little more accurate. Or LF with heavy weapon. To be fare, I gave the swiss a good match with a carthaginian army in italy. 1 light infantry hero, held out for a long time so my cav could not turn the corner. If they had, I may well have gotten rear attacks and rolled up his flank.

The swiss are slow, so if you can pin a corner, and engage frontally with decent infantry, you could single envelope them. The Later roman army with all elites and superior foot would probably win a good percentage of the time against the swiss. I would like to try them out. Saleucids have any unit you want. They would be good too.

You just cant run in and attack them frontally. If you do, you lose.

[Paisley]

I've run 8 combats as tests.

10 superior, drilled, protected pikes (in a continuous line) supported by 5 superior, drilled protected halberds (in a line one hex apart, immediately behind the pikemen) commanded by a field general (with the halberd unit in the centre of the second line. 245pts.

versus

15 superior, undrilled, heavily armoured dismounted knights with heavy weapon arranged in 2 lines as above with field general positioned in the centre of the second line. 235pts.

Swiss initiate contact. I have tried to optimise combats, including the order of combats, so far as possible (doubling up, especially on weak units, performing combat with units in good order before units in worse order, etc). I did not allow units at the edge to overlap the enemy line on initial contact, making the assumption that the battefield was ten hexes wide.

First ended in a 15/15 to 15/15 draw after 6 turns, both sides having 7 routed and one fragmented unit, with the knights in a slightly more parlous state with three units disrupted also.

Second ended a 14/15 to 15/15 win for the Swiss after 5 turns. Swiss 7 routed, knights 7 routed, 1 fragmented. Again the knights had more disrupted at the end, 3 units to the Swiss 2. After 4 turns the knights had been well in the lead.

The third was an absolute rout, a 5/15 to 18/15 win for the Swiss.

Fourth was a 14/15 to 15/15 win for the Swiss (again, a comeback from being down). The closest yet, with the Swiss having 4 disrupted units at game's end to the knights' three.

Fifth a Swiss win 9/15 to 17/15

Sixth. Swiss win 9/15 to 16/15.

Seventh. Knights win 7/15 to 15/15.

Eighth. Knights win 10/15 to 22/15. The Swiss leader died on the final turn, fragmenting/routing 3 of his units, but the knights would have won anyway.

[Paisley]

In addition to the 15 vs 15 combat above, I have also run two 5 vs 5 combats which Swiss pikes vs the same knights as previously but simple one on one combats with units separated so no cohesion tests would affect other combats.

The combined result was:

Swiss: 3 routed, 2 disrupted and at 75% strength
Knights: 3 routed, 4 fragmented and at 75% strength.

So... I think overall in the tests, knights do hold their own. So why do they fair badly in the games I've played?

Possible reasons:

1- opposing player does not optimise combat sequence.
2- the knights are not properly supported by a unit of equal quality to their rear (note, I know a crap unit can support a better one, but in this instance once the knight is gone, another needs to be able to take its place - an average or poor unit will just get minced - though you might get away with an average pike or HW if the Swiss unit was sufficiently weakened.
3- The knights do not have adequate flank protection and other Swiss units simply roll them up from the flanks. Given the Swiss will almost certainly be attacking, and from memory, this seems quite common, they can manoeuvre agasint whichever flank seems weakest. If you field 15 superior HW armoured/heavy armoured dismounted knights, then your other troops are likely only to be average and ill equipped to deal with the Swiss unless they are in terrain (and how often do you get good terrain on both flanks?)

[Morbio]

I've just completed my 1st game against the Swiss. It was an 800pt DAG challenge that I accepted (I didn't know it was the Swiss until I entered the deployment phase).

After 15 turns my Later Seleucids were victorious (Swiss 45/45 vs Seleucid 49/70).

The Swiss army is impressive, I think I was faced with about 20-30 Superior pike units and about about half a dozen LF and LH and some cavalry too (or maybe not, I can't remember... but I think so).

The key was to take out the Swiss skirmishers ASAP and cavalry and just leave the pikes alone.They move so slowly my skirmishers just had a fun time piking on single units until they dropped below 75% (thus reducing their effectiveness). My Cavalry, Elephants and MF kept out of reach and kept moving to get to the rear, which caused the Swiss to get reasonably dispersed until they broke into 3 units eventually - 1 chasing each of the flanking groups trying to stop them getting behind (and largely succeeding) and 1 moving after my HF (pikes and swords). By the time the group (about 1/3 of total strength) reached my HF it was more dispersed due to the anarchy charges against my skirmishers. So when it did reach my relatively solid line against my camp (I had nowhere left to run to) it didn't do so well. Meanwhile the pikes did catch a few of my Cats (thanks to anarchy) but usually they broke off after 1 or 2 turns, which really helped. I then fought a few battles with Cats and Heavy Weapon MF on Steep hills and the pikes fared worse than the cats. As the battles got more dispersed the cavalry which had finally seen of the enemy cavalry (I'm sure it was there, I remember now - my Companions could never engage because of the evades! Eventually I drove the last one off the map!) became a real factor by getting into the middle of the battlefield and inside all 3 battle groups. Rear charging engaged units brought a swift end to the Swiss threat.

The other amusing thing about this game was the handgunners. I'd never played against these before, and when I play I play with headphones on.... so when they fired for the 1st time I almost leapt out of my chair!

[deeter]

Good work. The Seleucids can take out anyone if handled right. I haven't tried them against the Swiss yet. Been trying to beat them with SOA armies.

Deeter

[jomni]

Historically the Swiss were really unbeatable during those times.

[pantherboy]

Personally I wouldn't go changing anything unless you feel they historically shouldn't be rated as such. From my experience I've been able to defeat them easily but using the Danish was a real uphill battle. I feel as long as the point system is balanced then it really shouldn't make too much a difference what you can field. The Swiss end up with a small army that is easy to avoid and defeat in terrain.

[Xiggy]

At 500 points, I think the swiss would lose to Spartacus slave army. (MF) version. Of sourse the slaves would have to be played by a decent player. In game terms they are very tough, but are not unbeatable.

[deeter]

It would appear Paisely, the chief proponent of the Swiss has gone AWOL.

Deeter

[76mm]

recently played my first game against the Swiss, using a Roman late Repub army. The Swiss beat my Romans fairly easily, I was surprised. While I could clearly have done some things better, the "all superior" phalanx is a very tough nut. As an aside, Iwas surprised that my Roman cav was able to easily rout his mounted knights.

[IainMcNeil]

All troops are rated vs historical opponents. The idea is too keep things playable across 300 years of history, otherwise medieval steel would obviously take apart any form of Bronze or early iron armour and weaponry.

[petergarnett]

All troops are rated vs historical opponents. The idea is too keep things playable across 300 years of history, otherwise medieval steel would obviously take apart any form of Bronze or early iron armour and weaponry.

Should that not read 3000 years of hisory?