V2: LH-Cavalry Mix for Mounted Archer Armies

[shadowdragon]

With v1, it seems that if people had the choice of fielding their mounted archers as LH or Cavalry they went with LH. The relevant v2 changes are:

1) Both LH and single rank Cavalry can move back facing the enemy, but with reduced maximum of 2 MU instead of 3 MU.
2) Shooting range for LH and single rank cavalry reduced to 3 MU.
3) Shooting at unprotected cavalry not in a single rank has the POA reduced to +1. (Crossbows gain this POA.)
4) Shooting at protected cavalry not in a single rank only gets the +1 POA when shot at by longbow and crossbows. POA doesn't apply when shot at by bows, javelins or slings.
5) The reduced armoured advantage helps make the cavalry mounted archers more survivable in close combat.

ISo, some incremental changes that make cavalry mounted archers more viable, but is it enough to see some cavalry in the mix of mounted archers? If so, what ratio of LH to Cavalry? Thoughts?

[IanB3406]

I'm thinking no more than 2 or 3 light horse needed at an 800 point army now....just my opinion.

[shadowdragon]

I'm also wondering about the mix of the actual figures / BG's when building an army.

I'm considering building 2 LH BG of 4 bases (2 figures per base) per cavalry BG of 4 bases (3 figures per base). If I want to go with a larger number of cavalry BG in an army then I'll mix the 2-figure and 3-figure bases (50:50) to represent cavalry while the LH BG's would only have 2-figure bases. So original 2 LH BG of 8 figures and 1 cavalry BG of 12 figures would end up as 1 LH BG of 8 figures and 2 cavalry BG of 10 figures. That gives me a ratio of fielding any mix between 1:2 to 2:1 LH-to-Cavalry.

[ShrubMiK]

Good idea.

[IanB3406]

I did this basing once when I used my DBM army as an Early Byzantine....got some complaints but frankly I think it's fine to represent Cav BGs to have both 3 and 2 to a stand figures.

Ian

[ShrubMiK]

I can see why it could be an issue in DBx - I have armoured horse archers 3 to a base for Foederate Roman in FoG, but in DBMM they are classed as LH and I would not want to plonk them on the table and say "I know they look exactly like ordinary cav but don't forget they are really superior light horse.........oh you forgot, game-losing mistake, never mind!". So recently I ended up duplicating them. Even mixing bases wouldn't really work, because every base is interpreted individually.

But in FoG this sort of mixed BG I think is defensible. Just make sure that when you remove casualties you remove the 2-to-a-base ones first to avoid what remains causing confusion!

There is a sort of precedent in fact - those Byzantine klibanophoroi wedges with 4 figures on one base and 2 on the other.

[philqw78]

There is a sort of precedent in fact - those Byzantine klibanophoroi wedges with 4 figures on one base and 2 on the other.

Oh no, I've done it wrong. I have three on the front base and four at the rear.

[quackstheking]

The good news is though Phil, that if you rebase, for every six you do you'll get a 7th free!!!

Don

[ShrubMiK]

No wonder you win so many games Phil, cheating like that.

I hope you at least managed to get the mix of weapons correct, and maces only in the front rank? If our role models don't play by the rules as pictured, what hope is there for the rest of us?!?!?

Hmmm...good idea though, it does mean all of the bases are viable as non-wedgie cats in both FoG and DBx, and presumably other systems following similar basing conventions.

[ShrubMiK]

The good news is though Phil, that if you rebase, for every six you do you'll get a 7th free!!!

Don

True cats are 4 to a base though, so he'll be one short, for my money. If you can fit them on without offsetting along the front/rear axis, you're just not doing it right!

[philqw78]

The good news is though Phil, that if you rebase, for every six you do you'll get a 7th free!!!

Don

Made me smile.

[philqw78]

No wonder you win so many games Phil, cheating like that.

I wish

I hope you at least managed to get the mix of weapons correct, and maces only in the front rank?

Like this (ish)
base1
..__
.._
base 2


Commander, Mace, lance, bow
with the cammander between macemen and as far forward as possible, macemen as far back as possible on same base