Anyone found a use for ...

[nikgaukroger]

Lancer LH?

Such as those in some of the medieval estern Europe lists or Arabs.

Come in at 8 points each as they are also swordsmen, so the same as Bow only LH but are they as useful?

This one had been cropping up in my mind from time to time (Hamdanids and all that ) but last night when Paul Robinson charged a BG of them into the flank of my pursuing Cv who were in contact with broken Janissaries their effect was nil, they don't even force a cohesion level drop. We were both surprised and both felt that this was wrong historically - put a downer on the game a bit as it was the first time either of us had come accross something in the rules we felt was pretty wrong on historical grounds.

Peoples thoughts would be appreciated so I can pass them onto Paul (who'd had a rough time in the game as typified by my 4 base Light Spear, Superior, Armoured Cv BG breaking a 6 base BG of Janissaries in 1 bound ).

[rogerg]

I had a BG of four in my Dailami army. They were hopeless. If you have no other LH in the army then it is nice to have something in the later stages to keep the enemy running. They might also get away with driving off javelin armed LF. (But then again, if LF get close enough to throw javelins, anyone can drive them off.)

The only BG's the lancer LH can fight effectively are other skirmishers. Usually these evade out of range then turn round in their next move and shoot the lancers to pieces.

Are there historical examples of successful actions by lance armed LH? Presumably this would be the place to start.

[hammy]

I really like the protected lancer light horse in some of the medieval lists. They are really good against enemy skirmishers and seriously make them think. They are however poo aganist formed troops. The lists that allow lots of lancer LH also allow the option for them to be cavalry, admittely as cavalry they are less maneuverable but they hit harder.

The trick I suspect is to advance to less than 1 MU from the enemy which then forces them to pass a CT to drop back to a safer distance. If they fil the CT they will be shooting at a - POA for facing the wrong way. In your next move charge them, repeat untill either you get shot to bits, they run away exposing things or they have to stand and fight. I am not sure if they are worth 8 point a base but in the right circumstances they are good.

Lancer LH are pretty good against fragmented enemy BTW, they count full dice and get the lancer CT modifier.

As to the janissaries being riffen down by decent cavalry in the open, that is actually what I would expect. Perhaps not in on turn but by the second turn things should be looking pretty ropey for the jannisary. One area where FoG is very different to DBM is mounted against bow, DBM players expect a bunch of what would be Bw(O) in DBM to be able to stand in the open against mounted. In FoG this isn't the case unless the bow have obstacles or suchlike. It is my understanding that archers were very vulnerable to mounted once the mounted got to grips with them and this is definitly the case in FoG.

[nikgaukroger]

Well historically we know from the Praecepta of Nikeforos that the Byzantines were concerned about the fast moving Arabitai riding round their lines and harrasing them - one reason they recommended their infantry adopted a massive square formation. I'm not sure that Lancer LH would be terribly effective at this in FoG and that a Byzantine player would feel the need to adopt such formations.

No real idea on the eastern European types, Matt Haywood would be the one there.

As I mentioned it was the lack of effect of their flank charge that concerned Paul and I. We certainly don't expect them to ride over good cavalry (which was the target) just by hitting them in the flank, however, it was the complete lack of effect that threw us. When we asked Terry if we'd done it righ he said we had and agreed he could see little use for such LH in the game - and at 8pts a base that becomes painful if you have to have them

[petedalby]

I've found them useful to support LH Bow, particularly if they are slightly stepped back.

If the enemy LH charge, the lancer LH will be on a plus at impact. Also good pursuit troops.

But I agree they are very vulnerable to being shot up.

Pete

[rbodleyscott]

As I mentioned it was the lack of effect of their flank charge that concerned Paul and I. We certainly don't expect them to ride over good cavalry (which was the target) just by hitting them in the flank, however, it was the complete lack of effect that threw us.

If you charge enemy in the flank with them when they are fighting to the front, then in the melee phase they will be on -1 for fighting in 2 directions against both of your battle groups.

So hardly "no effect" but certainly not as deadly as in DBM. However, most LH lance,sword can alternatively be fielded as cavalry if you want them to have a more dramatic flank attack effect.

Once you get used to what to expect from LH under the rules, you will have a better feel for their utility.

Historically, most employers would prefer LH Bw,Swd to LH Lancers,Sword. They cost 2 points less than the horse archers. I would submit that their effect is historical.

[rbodleyscott]

The trick I suspect is to advance to less than 1 MU from the enemy which then forces them to pass a CT to drop back to a safer distance. If they fil the CT they will be shooting at a - POA for facing the wrong way.

It is also possible to sweep them off the table or force them to fight by keeping them in your restricted area every move - then they can retreat but must stay partly in front of you.

[nikgaukroger]

Hammy - with the Superior rerolls and extra dice on Impact I think the Janisseries have about an even chance against all but knights, which I think is correct. Paul was unlucky as it was a 4 base BG of mine that beat a 6 base BG of his.

Pete - thanks, could be a useful tip

Richard - I think a couple of the issues Paul and I had (and I suspect Terry as well) was that for the same points cost you get Bow armed LH (sans sword) which for the points cost seem to be a much better buy when looking at the likely range of table top situations. Also we thought that Javelins, Light Spear types at a point less would be more useful than the Lancers type - and having used both (usual caveat about numbers of games of course) I think that is a correct assessment. Possibly as much a points issue as much as anything but as said we didn't feel the flank attack was right (although we both agree that for maximum effect you need to hit something already fighting to its front). I expect that if they had had full dice in the Impact phase rather than the LH reduced ones we would have felt it was correct - interestingly may be a good representation of Arab karr wa farr as well now I think about it.

[nikgaukroger]

The trick I suspect is to advance to less than 1 MU from the enemy which then forces them to pass a CT to drop back to a safer distance. If they fil the CT they will be shooting at a - POA for facing the wrong way.

It is also possible to sweep them off the table or force them to fight by keeping them in your restricted area every move - then they can retreat but must stay partly in front of you.

Javelin, Light Spear LH can do this just as well and, if you do get 1 MU from enemy, get to shoot as well.

[rbodleyscott]

The trick I suspect is to advance to less than 1 MU from the enemy which then forces them to pass a CT to drop back to a safer distance. If they fil the CT they will be shooting at a - POA for facing the wrong way.

It is also possible to sweep them off the table or force them to fight by keeping them in your restricted area every move - then they can retreat but must stay partly in front of you.

Javelin, Light Spear LH can do this just as well and, if you do get 1 MU from enemy, get to shoot as well.

But they are less likely to win the combat, having only a slight advantage over LH, bow and an overall disadvantage vs LH bow,sword.

I do suggest getting in some more games before you come to any irrevocable view on this issue.

There is no doubt that LH lancers,sword need to be used more skilfully than light horse archers. This does not, however, necessarily mean they are overpriced.

[nikgaukroger]

But they are less likely to win the combat, having only a slight advantage over LH, bow and an overall disadvantage vs LH bow,sword.

Agreed, the Impact is relatively more important for JLS LH than for L, Sw against Bw only but at least they do have an advantage, and against Bw, Sw types you can live with a disadvantage being 3 pts cheaper

I do suggest getting in some more games before you come to any irrevocable view on this issue.

Hence posting here - but when you talk to somebody who has played a lot of games (Terry) and he tends to agree with you, it does suggest your impressions could have merit

There is no doubt that LH lancers,sword need to be used more skilfully than light horse archers. This does not, however, necessarily mean they are overpriced.

So far I've actually been quite successful with them, however, we did run into a situation where we felt the rules just didn't do history justice.

However, we shall see in the future as, no doubt, I will feel the need to run the Sons of the Desert from time to time

[rbodleyscott]

Part of the problem is that once you go down the shooty cavalry route, more is always going to be better, so that you can concentrate shooting.

Therefore, in a Hamdanid army, LH lancers, sword are likely to be more cost-effective if you go down a purely lancers route rather than the ghilman route.

Within theme, a lancer based Hamdanid army could be very effective IMO, but it is not one for the faint-hearted to take to an open tournament as it has no answer to Knights.

[nikgaukroger]

Within theme, a lancer based Hamdanid army could be very effective IMO, but it is not one for the faint-hearted to take to an open tournament as it has no answer to Knights.

Well, no direct answer to knights anyway - something a bit more devious needed I suspect

[hammy]

Hammy - with the Superior rerolls and extra dice on Impact I think the Janisseries have about an even chance against all but knights, which I think is correct. Paul was unlucky as it was a 4 base BG of mine that beat a 6 base BG of his.

If the cavalry are steady then the impact is 4 dice on 4's with a reroll vs 6 dice on 5's with a reroll. That actually gives a slight advantage to the cavalry. If the janissaries lose and become disrupted then the melee is 4 dice on 4 at + again favouring the cavalry. If the janissaries stand then the melee slightly favours the janissaries and if they remain steady the cavalry break off. I still think that this fight definitly favours the cavalry.

Pete - thanks, could be a useful tip

You can do the same with BG's of lancer cavalry and horse archers

Richard - I think a couple of the issues Paul and I had (and I suspect Terry as well) was that for the same points cost you get Bow armed LH (sans sword) which for the points cost seem to be a much better buy when looking at the likely range of table top situations. Also we thought that Javelins, Light Spear types at a point less would be more useful than the Lancers type - and having used both (usual caveat about numbers of games of course) I think that is a correct assessment. Possibly as much a points issue as much as anything but as said we didn't feel the flank attack was right (although we both agree that for maximum effect you need to hit something already fighting to its front). I expect that if they had had full dice in the Impact phase rather than the LH reduced ones we would have felt it was correct - interestingly may be a good representation of Arab karr wa farr as well now I think about it.

The key really is the swordsmen capability, lancer sword light horse are specialists at close combat, they are better in close combat against all other similar priced light horse by a full POA (and more at impact because of the CT modifier).

I think if you run them in BG's of 6 they will give enemy horse archer LH a scare. Of course BG's of four unprotected lancer cavalry could be a good laugh too and I am intending rebasing some of my arab lancers for just that purpose.

[nikgaukroger]

If the cavalry are steady then the impact is 4 dice on 4's with a reroll vs 6 dice on 5's with a reroll. That actually gives a slight advantage to the cavalry. If the janissaries lose and become disrupted then the melee is 4 dice on 4 at + again favouring the cavalry. If the janissaries stand then the melee slightly favours the janissaries and if they remain steady the cavalry break off. I still think that this fight definitly favours the cavalry.

Thats just for the close combat, the Janissery shooting - with rerolls for being Superior - make it quite interesting. You have, IMO, to look at it as a whole package

[rbodleyscott]

If the cavalry are steady then the impact is 4 dice on 4's with a reroll vs 6 dice on 5's with a reroll. That actually gives a slight advantage to the cavalry. If the janissaries lose and become disrupted then the melee is 4 dice on 4 at + again favouring the cavalry. If the janissaries stand then the melee slightly favours the janissaries and if they remain steady the cavalry break off. I still think that this fight definitly favours the cavalry.

Thats just for the close combat, the Janissery shooting - with rerolls for being Superior - make it quite interesting. You have, IMO, to look at it as a whole package

Indeed. Of course historically, the Janissaries always formed up behind field fortifications.

[hammy]

If the cavalry are steady then the impact is 4 dice on 4's with a reroll vs 6 dice on 5's with a reroll. That actually gives a slight advantage to the cavalry. If the janissaries lose and become disrupted then the melee is 4 dice on 4 at + again favouring the cavalry. If the janissaries stand then the melee slightly favours the janissaries and if they remain steady the cavalry break off. I still think that this fight definitly favours the cavalry.

Thats just for the close combat, the Janissery shooting - with rerolls for being Superior - make it quite interesting. You have, IMO, to look at it as a whole package

Indeed. Of course historically, the Janissaries always formed up behind field fortifications.

If the cavalry move to 5 mu, they take one shot of three dice at long range which is about 60% likely to force a test so say 25% likely to disrupt the cavalry. Then the jannissary can advance to effective range if they feel brave and have another slightly better chance of disrupting the cavaly. Over the two volleys there is a tiny chance a base will be lost.

If the cavalry are still steady they charge, if not then they can look to get away or stand and take it in the hope they will be bolstered and get back to steady and kick the janissary.

Granted janissary are tough bowmen but in the open they are definitly vulnerable.

Normal bowmen without the swordsman capability are VERY vulnerable to mounted. Janissary are perhaps even, perhaps slight down.

[terrys]

I felt that Paul was using his janissaries much as you would in DBM - i.e. out in front of his army.
This is not a successful tactic to use in FoG.
The chances of winning in either the impact or melee rounds are 36:40 in favour of the cavalry.
In theory though, the Janissaris should get a shot at max range and one at normal range before the cavalry charge. They should have a 50% chance at long range and 75% at normal range of making the cavalry test. If the cavalry end up hitting while DISR the odds are 50:23 in favour of the Janissaries.

As far as the LH lancers go - My comment was that I couldn't see a use for them in this battle, and that I'd rather have Bow or javelin LH in most situations.
Their only real value is in chasing off enemy skirmishers, and, If there is the option, I'd prefer to take them as cavalry.
They have some of the same uses as any other LH have: pursuing routed troops - looting the camp - charging flanks of a BGs already in combat - possibly!!

[neilhammond]

...Granted janissary are tough bowmen but in the open they are definitly vulnerable.

Normal bowmen without the swordsman capability are VERY vulnerable to mounted. Janissary are perhaps even, perhaps slight down.

In my game in Warfare against Alan Cutler I charged in 4 Russian Cv against his 8 english LB (no Sw, armour or protection). I survived the shooting but the combat was a close call. I had an edge at impact but Alan got extra dice from 2nd rank shooting. In the melee phase it was 4 Cv at ++ vs 8 LB at --. In the end Alan's number's prevailed, but it was a fairly tight combat.

Unfortunately I couldn't bring in a second unit to negate Alan's numbers. If I had managed that then the longbows would have been easily ridden down. The interaction felt reasonable - large numbers but crap factor vs a small quality unit.

What I felt was wrong was the number of 5's Alan rolled with the unit.

Neil

[olivier]

Lancer LH are the perfect response to Light foot.
Last week at Aniche, I made crazy my opponents with 5 BG of LF, Bow. On the return I searched a counter measure and I found the Lancer LH. They outrun any LF and easily slaughter anyone they catch ! .

I seriously consider to take at least 1 BG in any Arab army.