Are mixed formations ever worth it?

[Trench_Raider]

I'm in the finishing stages of painting up the 6th army for FoG that I've painted since the game hit the shelves. (yes, I have both too much free time and am gifted with being a very fast painter) This army will end up being about 800 points of Burgundian Ordinance.

Anyway, I painted up the extra stand of pikes so as to have the option to run the three units of mixed pike/bows. But upon looking at that option it does not seem to have much to offer. A single rank of defensive spear is not going to stand up to anything and the units have their shooting power reduced compared to dedicated longbow units. So is there ever a reason to take that particular option?

But then again that single eight stand unit of pikes is not the most useful option either.

TR

[SirGarnet]

- HF make it slower and not terrain friendly, but also don't take the MF negative POA or CT modifiers.
- The rear rank of shooters puts out 3 rather than 4.5 dice of shooting for a 6-base BG. On the other hand, it still gets the same 3 dice of defensive shooting in impact.
- Having Def Spear in the front rank is handier in some Impacts and Melees since it neutralizes Lance and Swordsmen POAs if you can stay steady. No Spearmen POA but the impact shooting helps.

I would field at least one of those mixed BGs just because it's unique, interesting and a nuisance to the enemy, then a second one to brigade them for more shooting power and stick them in the open facing Knights or other mounted and avoiding armoured or better foot (though the longbows might well disrupt them on the way in).

Thoughts?

[hammy]

Essentially the mixed defensive spear and missile formations are much better than all missile troops against mounted but nowhere near as good as all close combat troops against foot.

Where the front rank is light spear swordsmen or heavy weapon they are a better general purpose formation but the defensive spear and longbow BGs do have their uses.

[Rudy_Nelson]

Being worth it for game purposes is a different issue than their being allowed in the army lists due to tactical doctrine by that nation.
I tend to feild formations that best represent historical forces. Just my preference. I play an army due to historical preference and interest rather than being a 'tournament killer'.

[Scrumpy]

I used the Medieval Danes at Cold Wars and found the HF HW/MF XB SW combination a real boon, they held their own and could stand up to most foot.

I had a very enjoyable Italian Condotta civil war fight yesterday, and my opponent opted for the poor pavisier/crossbow combination. We both felt they were a waste of points, the front rank spear getting no poa for combat, and the crossbows needing a 6 to hit in impact, being poor meaning they had to reroll another 6 to score a hit. 36/1 odds did not seem very tempting.

Actually the Condotta made a nice battle, my Papists v Florentines; both sides had a fair number of poor troops that saw action, and lasted the battle.

On my side it was the 4 bg of knight that died to a man, the game ended after 4+ hours in an honourable draw, both sides being close to breaking.

That taught the evil Florentines for saying the Pope's momma could not make a decent pasta sauce !

[rbodleyscott]

Being worth it for game purposes is a different issue than their being allowed in the army lists due to tactical doctrine by that nation.
I tend to feild formations that best represent historical forces. Just my preference. I play an army due to historical preference and interest rather than being a 'tournament killer'.

Fair enough. I wouldn't say that the mixed formation was necessarily typical of Charles's forces although it was mentioned in one of the Ordonnances (? 1473 IIRC)

[jre]

I have done some tests with them and I would consider using them in a themed tournament, but not in an open tournament where you will find lots of close combat foot.

They stand up quite well against mounted, and they are cheaper for filling the line than giving all the longbowmen stakes.

However you have to keep in mind that in that way you are turning a decisive BG into a support one, so you better keep enough punch in the army.

My standard "kill group" with the Burgundians is a longbow BG teamed with a Knight BG, either 2 or 3 of them. A TC always attached to the knights, as you will rely on stopping their charge and protecting the longbows with interception charges, till the enemy is softened.

José

[jlopez]

I have done some tests with them and I would consider using them in a themed tournament, but not in an open tournament where you will find lots of close combat foot.

They stand up quite well against mounted, and they are cheaper for filling the line than giving all the longbowmen stakes.

However you have to keep in mind that in that way you are turning a decisive BG into a support one, so you better keep enough punch in the army.

My standard "kill group" with the Burgundians is a longbow BG teamed with a Knight BG, either 2 or 3 of them. A TC always attached to the knights, as you will rely on stopping their charge and protecting the longbows with interception charges, till the enemy is softened.

José

I seem to recall your mixed troops hiding near the baseline and defending a hill just in case something nasty came near them...

Where the Burgundians are concerned if you aren't too bothered about fielding the pikemen, why not try two BGs of 8 longbowmen and 1 BG of mixed troops?

They are useful in combat against lancers but against other mounted they are a bit of a waste at impact. In a shooting match, the fact you can only field them in BGs of 6 makes them very vulnerable as it only takes 2 hits to make them test and that's not very hard to achieve against protected troops. I might consider them if they were armoured but otherwise I'd rather have dedicated shooting BGs with HF supports to intercept anything nasty.

Julian

[jre]

Your army did not have enough melee mounted, and plenty of scary HF, so they kept to their deployment area, and one of them ended up defending the camp, with mixed success as you will remember (letting the light horse sack the camp and them charging them in the flank with enough luck to catch them).

Against a Medieval German one forced a knights BG to break off twice, till they brought some pikemen that rolled over them. The other kept their own against shooty cavalry the whole game.

In other games they did little but fill the line, but that is their role while others roll up the enemy. But I agree another group of 8 longbowmen would have been more flexible, therefore more useful.

I probably will not use them in the next games I play with the army, as I will be testing the advantages of an English ally for some extra HF. But that will have to wait some further tests with all mounted armies.

So many possibilities, so little time.

José

[expendablecinc]

I am really enjoying running my Late Assyrians where pretty much all of the army is mixed formations of bow and light spear/swordsmen. They are decent in terrain and much less vulnerable to mounted in the open. With a few well placed field fortifications gives them a good place to sit back and defend or to deploy at 15 inches and sally forth.

The same principles may apply to other mixed formations but you are still going to be more vulnerable to enemy heavy foot. the + at impact vs other foot softens the blow of impact foot and other heavies. often if they can come through the impact phase ok thier armour and swordsmen factor can see them thrugh to a nice outcome.

I'm in the finishing stages of painting up the 6th army for FoG that I've painted since the game hit the shelves. (yes, I have both too much free time and am gifted with being a very fast painter) This army will end up being about 800 points of Burgundian Ordinance.

Anyway, I painted up the extra stand of pikes so as to have the option to run the three units of mixed pike/bows. But upon looking at that option it does not seem to have much to offer. A single rank of defensive spear is not going to stand up to anything and the units have their shooting power reduced compared to dedicated longbow units. So is there ever a reason to take that particular option?

But then again that single eight stand unit of pikes is not the most useful option either.

TR