Covenanter and "horde" of poor units

[spring]

Hi all, i've always wanted to build a Covenanter or Montrose army for gush and thought i could give a try
with FoG:R.

i'm wondering whether an almost entire army of poor, musket, pikes could work if well suported by
PLENTY of medium and light artillery?

[Blathergut]

Try it and let us know!

[spring]

I probably will but could do with some beta datas on how poor units "en masse" behave in general.

[deadtorius]

I have heard a few people say that they have done well with poor mobs in FOG AM, I would think you would have a numerical advantage if it was full of poor cheap troops. I have a unit of poor offensive spear that once held back the Roman flank move long enough for me to force march my average armoured spears to take their place and won me the game.
Don't discount the poor troops. If you roll a 6 the first time, you get to keep the second one you roll regardless

[timmy1]

Spring, I have played many Beta test games but have never used any poor troops other than as support for an average army (with no superior troops). In that they work well if kept out of trouble. On their own, they are relatively cheaper than FoG:AM but I don't remember fighting against many (perhaps 2 BG in an Ottoman army). An army of almost entirely poor may be effective but no one that I am aware of has found it to be. However that may just be a case that the players I have seen are locked into one way of thinking. If you can get enough shooting dice on 4s, it MAY work given that more troops die in FoG:R than FoG:AM.

Like you. I have a Covenanter army for Gush that I will rebase now I have the army list for FoG:R. Maybe I will give it a run as Poor to see. I certainly will have at least one BG of frames backed by a Poor BG of Hackbutt and Pike.

[deadtorius]

other Scots question, I noticed Warlord has released some Scots, but it looks like they are in kilts. I could be wrong but I thought the kilt came after the ECW. I was thinking I could toss in some Scots for the Royalists, might eventually do a covenanter army, but its the whole kilt issue and painting time older eyes etc. Should they be in pants, light coloured ones at that?

[timmy1]

Derek, there is a print of Scots arriving in Swedish service in 1629 at Stettin (IIRC) in plaid. I think they have kilts. I will see if I can find a link to it online.

[david53]

other Scots question, I noticed Warlord has released some Scots, but it looks like they are in kilts. I could be wrong but I thought the kilt came after the ECW. I was thinking I could toss in some Scots for the Royalists, might eventually do a covenanter army, but its the whole kilt issue and painting time older eyes etc. Should they be in pants, light coloured ones at that?

Kilts were IIRC not done until the Victorian time what there was in the Highlands was a plaid which was used as a basic kilt without any tarten which was'nt around till Victoian times. Clans used plants to show differences so yes there would have been kilts worn but not what at the time was called a kilt ie they would'nt have a tarten more a check easier to paint as well.

As a borderer myself we never worn kilts, trousers would have been worn at that time as well if you were thinking of the covenant army except for the Campell levies.

[david53]

I have heard a few people say that they have done well with poor mobs in FOG AM, I would think you would have a numerical advantage if it was full of poor cheap troops. I have a unit of poor offensive spear that once held back the Roman flank move long enough for me to force march my average armoured spears to take their place and won me the game.
Don't discount the poor troops. If you roll a 6 the first time, you get to keep the second one you roll regardless

In FOG R I have only used the Regiments giving support as Poor but if they end up fighting it never lasts long.

[marshalney2000]

I have been painting some of the warlord stuff and they do not have kilts but in fact are wearing belted plaids.
John

[deadtorius]

That is good to know, I would like to add them in some day to my armies. Just not that excited about doing all that plaid stuff (should have a cross eyed emote here)

[SirGarnet]

I've been meaning to follow up on this threat by trying the Covenanters.

'Twas 19 BGs of Covenanters (including the mandatory 3 Poor Foot BGs and one optional Poor Pistol BG) vs. 15 BGs of Later TYW Catholic. The battle was hard fought and the Scots edged out a victory, mainly because the Highlanders, Light Artillery and some Poor Foot did a job on overexposed and overconfident lights on both flanks, and Highlanders + Detached Shot beat Detached Shot in the terrain around the near-central Enclosures.

The Poor Foot all served well. They were all farther back than the front line in a second line role across the open half of the field from center to the right. The right BG advanced into a support/flank guard role angled towards the flank to shoot at the enemy mounted wing and showed that 4 shooting dice are still 4 shooting dice, even if you rerolls 6s. Enemy horsemen bit the dust and a commanded shot was routed - the enemy LH retired, fragmented, and the Imperial horse continued past against the refused end of the line - lancers and pikes with light cannon. It's doom was the main line breaking, allowing Reiter a flanking position.

The middle Poor BG stood in support where it could shoot at little at long range, and then advanced to oppose the breaktrhough by the veteran Austrian foot after these routed the Campbells. These Austrians, having learned from their friends' experiences that Poor shooting is only 1/6th worse than Average, decided to force things with a charge that locked them in a 5 base/5 base fight for some turns, the Poor Scots passing most rolls they needed to take and the fight going pretty evenly. This BG also prevented enemy Commanded Shot from getting into flank charge position against the next centerward BG, for whom the tide had turned in its favour thanks to the the Poor Pistols in Support coming into the fight in the next gap in the line.

In the center, the leftmost Poor Foot BG backed the central gun battery to start and later advanced to provide an overlap and then wheel in to flank the rightmost Catholic foot on this side of the field. They were there to engage if the Average BG failed, but it held at 2 bases down and Disrupted until the Imperialist CinC fell in combat and their infantry line buckled.

These 3 Poor Foot were well worth their value in the battle. Having a GC in range to help with CMT and shooting CTs helped, but these BGs did the job - as well as one might hope on the far right against the Catholic horsemen, better than hoped against the veterans, and all asked on them in the central area (provided support, held under artillery fire, advanced and aided their fellows).

The Poor Pistols were chosen because they were a cheap mobile reserve Support, and could engage in combat by adding shooting without close combat. The Imperial charge denied them their shot, so they joined in close combat instead to reverse the enemy overlap advantage, but either way helped their neighbors. They disrupted, rallied with the GC, and eventually routed, down a base and on a dismal CT.

_______

(Note: The Covenanters were represented by later Scots, but that a Scot's a Scot be not forgot.)

[Blathergut]

Interesting. I may yet run a BG or 2 or 3 or 4 of poors.

[deadtorius]

I had to run some mandatory poors when we did the first year of the ECW, had to have 3 pike and shot of poor with musket* to boot. They did OK but the musket* hurts when you get to close range and you only get 3 dice to the opposing 4. I find they work well in the rear and if your dice like you that day they will do fine. If your dice are in a bad mood then they will just provide your enemies with a nice big gap to run through as they rout off, happened to me as I had 2 units rout on either side and they went fragged from seeing that then broke when charged, so much for the center and the rear support in that game but I was way way up on my die rolls of 1 that day

[hazelbark]

I too had a 30yw German Catholic vs Coventer 19 BG. Except the good germans were winning when we called time.

I think the poor suffer in the shooting frenzy. I think if you put poor in the front line, you have to have a plan to win elsewhere while they buy time.

Superior P+Shot+regimental gun tha's 3 dice at long range and 5 at normal will tear poor up pretty quikcly on kills if nothing else. Average as well.

[SirGarnet]

Agreed, Hazelbark - except for the rightmost one that caused some breakage, the Poor BGs pretty much helped by enabling the Averages to win. Concentrated firepower can make a difference, but recessed Poor means they are not the priority target at long range - they were used according to doctrine - second line until needed to step up and fill in, exposed with caution so the Superior and Average Scots took the brunt of the fire and combat as intended.

The Catholics at 800 points even were commanded by a GC+3 TCs
Horse: 3 BGs of Kurassiere, one of those Heavily Armoured, and 1 BG Avg Unarmoured Bandelier Reiter
Foot: 1 Veteran and 4 Avg BGs of Infantry, one of the Avg having Reg Guns, and 2 BGs Avg Cmd Shot
Auxiliaries: All average Dragoons (3), Crabaten, Schutzenkomp, Medium Field Guns (2)

The list seemed representative with the chrome and not tailored for the opponent The Schutzen have served well in the past and look very snappy so passed muster. Recall fun Sk(S) from DBR days?

However, giving those up and the Avg Reg Guns would have provided 49 points for upgrades to the fighting foot (to get a total of 2 Veteran Rgts with Reg Guns) plus 7 points left over, or just he Schutzen would get the 1 Veteran with Reg Gun and add a Reg Gun to another of the Average foot for 21 points, leaving 19 points tha could buy another Commanded Shot to keep the BG count (or serve some other purpose).

Was that your general approach to toughening up the Foot?

Further thoughts on Scots, or Catholics, or the virtues and vices of the Poor?