Later Ottomans compared to Mongols - what am I missing?

General discussion forum for anything related to Field of Glory Ancients & Medieval.

Moderators: philqw78, terrys, hammy, Slitherine Core, Field of Glory Moderators, Field of Glory Design

Robert241167
Lieutenant Colonel - Elite Panther D
Lieutenant Colonel - Elite Panther D
Posts: 1368
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2008 5:03 pm
Location: Leeds

Post by Robert241167 »

Move your frontal troops to their base edge and something else to their rear.

Rob
philqw78
Chief of Staff - Elite Maus
Chief of Staff - Elite Maus
Posts: 8842
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 11:31 am
Location: Manchester

Post by philqw78 »

Robert241167 wrote:Move your frontal troops to their base edge and something else to their rear.

Rob
But you cannot move in the turn they charge. This has to be done the move phase before.
phil
putting the arg into argumentative, except for the lists I check where there is no argument!
Robert241167
Lieutenant Colonel - Elite Panther D
Lieutenant Colonel - Elite Panther D
Posts: 1368
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2008 5:03 pm
Location: Leeds

Post by Robert241167 »

I know. :wink:

Rob
philqw78
Chief of Staff - Elite Maus
Chief of Staff - Elite Maus
Posts: 8842
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 11:31 am
Location: Manchester

Post by philqw78 »

I know you know, you know
phil
putting the arg into argumentative, except for the lists I check where there is no argument!
Robert241167
Lieutenant Colonel - Elite Panther D
Lieutenant Colonel - Elite Panther D
Posts: 1368
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2008 5:03 pm
Location: Leeds

Post by Robert241167 »

Now the question is would I be able to pull that off against you over the weekend. :?

Rob
hammy
Field of Glory Team
Field of Glory Team
Posts: 5440
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 2:11 pm
Location: Stockport
Contact:

Post by hammy »

Robert241167 wrote:Now the question is would I be able to pull that off against you over the weekend. :?

Rob
Pull what off :O

We will have no nudity on the bowling green gentlemen :shock:
philqw78
Chief of Staff - Elite Maus
Chief of Staff - Elite Maus
Posts: 8842
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 11:31 am
Location: Manchester

Post by philqw78 »

Hmm, getting a BG behind my LH before they charge your legions. It would be a challenge.
phil
putting the arg into argumentative, except for the lists I check where there is no argument!
Robert241167
Lieutenant Colonel - Elite Panther D
Lieutenant Colonel - Elite Panther D
Posts: 1368
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2008 5:03 pm
Location: Leeds

Post by Robert241167 »

Hey Hammy don't egg him on !! :twisted:

Rob
grahambriggs
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Posts: 3081
Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2008 9:48 am

Post by grahambriggs »

Robert241167 wrote:Now the question is would I be able to pull that off against you over the weekend. :?

Rob
I managed it when my EAP played Phil Latin Greeks or whatever. Get the hoplites nice and close, sneak round the back of the proper knights with 4 poor LF :P

He did ride straight through the rest of my army though :roll:
philqw78
Chief of Staff - Elite Maus
Chief of Staff - Elite Maus
Posts: 8842
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 11:31 am
Location: Manchester

Post by philqw78 »

grahambriggs wrote:
Robert241167 wrote:Now the question is would I be able to pull that off against you over the weekend. :?

Rob
I managed it when my EAP played Phil Latin Greeks or whatever. Get the hoplites nice and close, sneak round the back of the proper knights with 4 poor LF :P

He did ride straight through the rest of my army though :roll:
It was your single BG of LH that did it. The BG of knights eventually broke. They recovered when lancers charged the LH in the flank and the other 2 BG of knights rode over your hoplites, and supports, taking 3 generals with them. I was lucky to rally them before the end of the game your army fell apart so fast :D
phil
putting the arg into argumentative, except for the lists I check where there is no argument!
ottomanmjm
Senior Corporal - Ju 87G
Senior Corporal - Ju 87G
Posts: 99
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 4:25 am

Re: Later Ottomans compared to Mongols - what am I missing?

Post by ottomanmjm »

First of I would dispute the odds - if we assume both have a general (and that is reasonable considering how much Cavalry a Mongol army has), then the bowmen get 1.33 hits to the Bowmen and 1.78 to the Knights. So this is drawish or close.
I don't know what you consider close, but if a BG of knights 2 wide hits a BG of medium foot archers, both superior and both having a general then the foot will win 15.2% of the time, the knights will win 62.3% of the time and there ia a 22.5% chance of the combat being a draw. Of course if the bowmen lose they can still pass their cohesion test but that still leaves them with more than a 30% chance of becoming at least disrupted.

If you are dismounting Mongols then you want to avoid enemy knights and stick to the non-open terrain. Chances are you can beat any Ottoman foot in non-open terrain. Let the LH lead the knights a merry dance around the table.

Regards
Martin
lonehorseman
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz 251/1
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz  251/1
Posts: 142
Joined: Mon May 03, 2010 10:01 pm
Location: Pretoria, South Africa

Post by lonehorseman »

In the end it is really a personal thing for me. Have played with both and have won with both. That said, I love Mongol history much more so it is always enjoyable to pack them up even after a right drubbing. But I have to say the Kn and Handdgunners make Ottoman a more viable tournament choice.
15mm: Painted: Late Republican Roman
Medieval Welsh
WIP: Ivan the Terrible's Russians
Later Ottoman Turkish
Fluffy
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz 251/1
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz  251/1
Posts: 136
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2010 11:52 pm
Location: Canada

Re: Later Ottomans compared to Mongols - what am I missing?

Post by Fluffy »

Skullzgrinda wrote:I am not the sharpest knife in the FoG drawer and have the stats to prove it. So - I am asking the opinions of others on why there is such a disparate track record between these two armies, Mongol and Later Ottoman.

Ottomans often appear at the top of tournament results, Mongols appear only infrequently and then usually at the bottom. Why? They seem broadly comparable, with Mongols having an edge in quality and drilled, Ottomans having an ability to field more variety with some quality infantry, handgunners, and cost effective LH.

Are Mongols run more often by newcomers as a more (in)famous army? Or is the variety and cheap LH the winner for the Ottomans?
The Mongols need more skill to play as they have less margin for error.
If you know what you're doing you can take down most armies with Mongols, then again the same goes for most armies you play.
david53
Major-General - Jagdtiger
Major-General - Jagdtiger
Posts: 2859
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 9:01 pm
Location: Manchester

Re: Later Ottomans compared to Mongols - what am I missing?

Post by david53 »

Fluffy wrote: The Mongols need more skill to play as they have less margin for error.
True but I find them a fun army for me to use, hard at times to get right it also helps as i like the whole history of them.(not the mass murder bit by the way)
Post Reply

Return to “Field of Glory : Ancient & Medieval Era 3000 BC-1500 AD : General Discussion”