All or nothing

[BlackPrince]

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?

[dave_r]

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]

Dave, just who could that simley be aimed at?

[philqw78]

Not me

[timmy1]

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

[madaxeman]

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

[david53]

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]

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?

[SirGarnet]

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]

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.

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.