Nikephorian Byzantine Starter Army

[Omar]

Got the book today, and I also noticed a lack of LH in the list I am looking at playing (Nikephorian). However, Early Byzantine is another period of interest for me.. and they do have a few LH options.

I am confused with why the timing is the way it is with that as well, I will have to review my history a bit better. I had wanted an army of the time of Basil II, but I think taking one after 1042 will give me more options overall. At least it is still pre-Manzikert.

I think it has potential. Of course, I have not yet played a full game.. for what that opinion is worth.

[ethan]

Especially against historical opponents six stands of Normans might be quite poweful. That is the same frontage as a dozen stands of cavalry lancers.

I toyed around with the list a bit more last night and think one approach (especially in period) is to take 24 stands of Bw*/lancers, 8 outflankers, IC+2xTC. Then take the rest of the army as 2 BGs of Poor Spear/Bow and a few BGs of LI that are a mix of Poor and Average.

This gets ou a +4 initiative so you can pick terrain and try out outdeploy (deploy the heavy cav last of course), you are moving second so the lack of LH isn't such a big deal and you can really mass the good Byzantine cavalry. If you can outdeploy and rush an Arab type army with 24 stands of Lancer/Bw* Ghilmans could really find themselves with a tough problem.

Agreed. Curiousity: would you run the Bw*/Lancers as 6x4 bases BG or 4x6 base BGs?

Marc

I think you have to go 6x4 to get the BG count up.

[ethan]

I get something like this (IC+2xTC, +4 Initiative)

1 Skirmishing Archers LF Unprotected Average Drilled Bow - - - 6
2 Javelinmen LF Unprotected Average Drilled Javelins Light spear - - 6
3 Spearmen and Archers HF Protected Poor Drilled - defensive spearmen Spearmen - 4
3 Spearmen and Archers MF Protected Poor Drilled Bow - - - 4
4 Spearmen and Archers HF Protected Poor Drilled - defensive spearmen Spearmen - 4
4 Spearmen and Archers MF Protected Poor Drilled Bow - - - 4
5 Flankers Cv Protected Average Drilled Bow - Swordsmen - 4
6 Cavalry Cv Armoured Superior Drilled Bw* Lancers Swordsmen - 4
7 Cavalry Cv Armoured Superior Drilled Bw* Lancers Swordsmen - 4
8 Cavalry Cv Armoured Superior Drilled Bw* Lancers Swordsmen - 4
9 Flankers Cv Protected Average Drilled Bow - Swordsmen - 4
10 Cavalry Cv Armoured Superior Drilled Bw* Lancers Swordsmen - 4
11 Cavalry Cv Armoured Superior Drilled Bw* Lancers Swordsmen - 6

[Trench_Raider]

Well, if you are of the mind that you need to take some Light Horse in the army (and I for one prefer to have at least a unit or three were possible) there is always the option of taking the Beduin ally. Those lancer/swordsmen LH lack missle fire but are certainly skirmisher killers.

TR

[ethan]

Well, if you are of the mind that you need to take some Light Horse in the army (and I for one prefer to have at least a unit or three were possible) there is always the option of taking the Beduin ally. Those lancer/swordsmen LH lack missle fire but are certainly skirmisher killers.

TR

Bedouin are the only option and I find lancer/sword LH to be pretty awful. Better to use the outflankers in that role IMO.

[jre]

It was a long time ago in a playtest far, far away, but I really liked the combat feeling of a pure cavalry Nikephorian byzantine. Using the Cursores as flank guards, screeners and LH hunters while the main mailed fist shoots up on approach and then charges the enemy.

The main problem is the shock troop rating, as that means, with the high movement of cavalry, that they will want to charge anything you want to shoot. The advantage is that it is quite easy to push LH out when you charge 5 MU

But the basics were in pairing bow cavalry against anything you do not want to charge and to sweep away and charge the rest. It is however a demanding army, requiring lots of maneuver to exploit its strengths. And the willingness to give half or even two thirds of the table to your opponent, unlike standard shooty LH armies who can hinder and shoot everywhere.

With the exception of the Varangians, the infantry are more filler/targets than anything else.

I would never pick this army in an open tournament, however. It is a nomad/arab killer. Bulgar bashing indeed.

José

[Omar]

I would never pick this army in an open tournament, however. It is a nomad/arab killer. Bulgar bashing indeed.

José

Why not? What is it lacking to be an effective army?

[jre]

Unable to tackle on equal terms either solid armoured HF/pikemen or heavily armoured knights, as the lancers cannot evade and will eventually charge the foot (who for once will have numbers on their side).

So, good against what they faced historically, but forced to evolve into the Komnenan Byzantine, which I would use in an open tournament without hesitation.

José

[Omar]

Really? Thats interesting.. I have reviewed them both and it didnt seem to me like the Komnenan Byz were that much better. But, I am still new to the game, so am not sure what I am looking for.

What makes them a better army? Seemed like alot of the same to me.

[jre]

Remember, I was initially talking about a fully mounted Nikephorian Byzantine, which corresponds to the victories period, not the starter army included in the army book.

The advantages of the Komnenan are called Heavily Armoured Superior Knights, with adequate support troops to let them do their job, and even kill what they cannot kill, such as tackling pikes with the Varangian guard.

I think cavalry can handle itself against LH, while knights cannot, so having their own light horse (or lots of missiles) also helps into using the knights properly.

José

[Omar]

My mistake, I was reading the Late Byzantine list. I guess I need to pick up the Crusade sourcebook now. Still interested in how they work better as an army.