Armies: Better and worse under V2

[grahambriggs]

Have just received my book but not read it. What changes have been made to Longbow to improve them? I realise there is the no -1 for support shooting any more but is there something else?

So far as I'm aware there is no other differences (could be wrong) but naturally the extra armour penetration would make them more effective than normal bow.

I do believe that Jannissaries and immortals/saparabara would be damned good

Having now read it, Longbow are now at evens POA shooting at single rank armoured knights, whereas they were previously +. So they are actually worse against those.

[grahambriggs]

Another V2 game with 2 BG's of elephants last night (my 4th), another dismal failure. Both units in combat (one with a BG of already disrupted knights, the other with a 6 base unit of AVE MF OFFSP) still no win for the elephants. They have been in combat every game and have not won a fight yet.

Even factoring in some bad dice I strongly feel they are still not "Better" enough.

Martin

Are you letting them be overlapped? If not you seem consistently unlucky. The single base loss thing means you really can't let the elephants be overlapped so they'll need something that can fight properly next to them.

Vs knights impact POA and twice as many dice. Kn should lose and drop to fragged.

vs Off Sp MF. equal POA but more dice. Should win and MF will then have 2, perhaps 3 minuses. Disruption likely. Equal in melee but mor dice if the MF are dirsrupted

[philqw78]

Longbow are now at evens POA shooting at single rank armoured knights, whereas they were previously +. So they are actually worse against those.

Armoured knights move faster now as well so are much better than they were against longbow. LBow are also better than they were against other stuff though.

[marty]

Are you letting them be overlapped? If not you seem consistently unlucky.

They are usually been overlapped on one side. They are part of an army that doesn't really have anything to go in with them (as is the case with most elephant armies). Most of the time though I'm not even winning the impact. I accept this is "Unlucky" but would suggest it is still going to happen a fair bit with a unit it is so difficult to give re-rolls to. As long as your opponent can stay in the fight (and this isn't really that hard as the elephants wont often win consistently) eventually the elephants disappear. I would also suggest that elephants should be able to plow through mounted with ease, overlaps or not.

Still not worth 25 points by a long way.

Martin

[Robert241167]

One thing I noticed in a game last Wednesday was that undrilled cavalry can have a hard time of it against knights.

They need to be in a single line to ensure they can evade.

This means the knights move up to just outside 3". The cavalry then move forward slightly to get a round of shooting. At worse the knights will disrupt but then charge the cavalry off.

The knights will have one or even two chances to rally and continue the process again.

Rob

[Jilu]

combine the knights with LB....French ordonance can....you kill the bowCav...

[navigator]

but support the cav with a unit of elephants... problem solved

[marty]

My experience would suggest that the knights will simply charge and defeat the elephants.

Martin

[grahambriggs]

Are you letting them be overlapped? If not you seem consistently unlucky.

They are usually been overlapped on one side. They are part of an army that doesn't really have anything to go in with them (as is the case with most elephant armies). Most of the time though I'm not even winning the impact. I accept this is "Unlucky" but would suggest it is still going to happen a fair bit with a unit it is so difficult to give re-rolls to. As long as your opponent can stay in the fight (and this isn't really that hard as the elephants wont often win consistently) eventually the elephants disappear. I would also suggest that elephants should be able to plow through mounted with ease, overlaps or not.

Still not worth 25 points by a long way.

Martin

Yes it might be that the army structure isn't helping there. It will be interesting to see if there is a flavour of elephant armies that works. Perhaps it'll be one of those things where you need a mass of them all together, or a bunch of lancers to support. e.g. three units side by side led by generals with lancers on either flank perhaps.

[stenic]

Another V2 game with 2 BG's of elephants last night (my 4th), another dismal failure. Both units in combat (one with a BG of already disrupted knights, the other with a 6 base unit of AVE MF OFFSP) still no win for the elephants. They have been in combat every game and have not won a fight yet.

Even factoring in some bad dice I strongly feel they are still not "Better" enough.

Martin

Had my first v2 game on Friday, Carthaginians vs my Seleucids. I had two BGs of nellies, both failed to win impact and never won any melee despite 4 rounds of melee, 1 after impact and 3 subsequent turns. The only reason they lasted so long was because I had a TC with one of them and they both had companions to their rear adding support so I was +1 or +2 on CTs. The BG without the officer eventually broke (double down on two 1s) whilst the other went went to disrupted.

Both BGs hit seperate enemy BGS, 1 was 2by2 (no overlaps) Impact foot, ssw, the other was 2by3 average Scutati who then went to 3by to to give an overlap in their turn (so the 2nd melee !!)

My dice were not great (my pike line also lost all bar 1 combat) but it occurs to me if nellies fail to win impact they'll die very quick without support and commanders around.

[Martin0112]

Well, you look on some fights, but in general, having played some armies with aleohants also on 1.0 and now also on 2.0 I have to say they really improved.
Yes, they are at risk, but for the impacts, it's very likely that they win, and with the new cohesion test modifiers this it automatically a -2 for everybody testing (and a -3 if they for 1HP2B), which is hard to survive without general or rear support (you need a 10 then!!!)

I have played pagan burmese on 2 tournaments last year, and they worked even on V1.0, and I will see what will happen with my classical indians on 2.0.
I plan to play them im May first time, and I'm sure they work even better.

But yes, they are still at risk, but what do we want? Unbeatable elephants?

[stenic]

... but what do we want? Unbeatable elephants?

Well now you mention it...

[hoodlum]

Just had a game ottoman turks against Serbs with armoured knights last night.

The armoured knights have improved greatly with their increased movement. They really give the bow shooty cav armies a problem. Protect the armoured knights with light foot and then straight in. if the targets evade their is an increased chance of catching both light foot and cav. Sure the cav have the ability to turn 180 move and turn 180 but only if they pass their test.

Additionally - armoured knight are on even odds against the heavily armoured knights and you should be able to afford more of them.

Early crusaders vs saracens could be a great game under v2.

[ShrubMiK]

>Additionally - armoured knight are on even odds against the heavily armoured knights

You sure you got that right? One level of armour advantage can't result in ++ POA anymore, but will still give +.

[Robert241167]

Who won hoodlum?

Armoured knights are even in impact and then a POA down in melee against heavily armoured knights.

Your post wasn't clear on that point.

Rob

[hoodlum]

Serbians won - I made a mess of the skirmishers combined with cav and the armoured knights were able to charge and catch evading troops and then pursue into the next round of troops.

It got very messy with evading and interpenetration. he charged one unit of disrupted light foot and caught them - and then stepped forward into cav. the cav evaded and carreered into and disordered another unit of cav that had also evaded.

with the new interpenetration rules another unit of lf could not pass through supporting cav because the was no space behind so they got caught and butchered.

four units gone - due to clever play by opponent and the increased movement of the armoured knights.

in terms of my serbian ally - they got caught fighting one unit of heavily armoured and one unit of disrupted knights so there was only one way that was going to end.

The point with the armoured knights is the number you can put on the table. easily get to 6 units. you are even at impact - and down at melee but if you win the combat the likelihood is the other unit will disrupt. and it is still very much an even fight. 8 one down to 6 one up.

plus you have more.

[marty]

Martin0112 wrote:... but what do we want? Unbeatable elephants?

Well now you mention it...

Not unbeatable but if an element is going to be unmanouverable, vulnerable to shooting and have a special built in tendecy to self destruct It needs to be either overwhelmingly devastating in combat or fairly cheap. Elephants are neither.

Martin

[gozerius]

Oh, like battlewagons.

[Three]

Kushan can mix elephants and cataphracts in decent numbers; the only time I've tried it they treated 5 BGs of superior legions as speed bumps

[grahambriggs]

Martin0112 wrote:... but what do we want? Unbeatable elephants?

Well now you mention it...

Not unbeatable but if an element is going to be unmanouverable, vulnerable to shooting and have a special built in tendecy to self destruct It needs to be either overwhelmingly devastating in combat or fairly cheap. Elephants are neither.

Martin

But elephant battlegroups are quite cheap at 50 points. Compared to, say, a BG of 4 undrilled superior heavily armoured knights at 92 points. The elephants are roughly the same cost as a BG of 4 undrilled protected superior lancers - troops which can do well in the right circumstances or fail miserably.