Resolutive armies

[jre]

This year I have been very busy, both at work and doing some translation work in my free time, so I have played much less than last year. So besides a very disappointing experience with a Gallic army, almost all of my games in a year (15 out of twenty or so) have been with the same army, though using different combinations, a Burgundian Ordonnance. Those 15 games include 12 tournament games, so I really have not had much time to polish the list, rather using a hit and miss technique.

Taking those tournament games as they were the only ones with strict time limit, I broke once (almost taking the enemy with me), broke an enemy once, and then drew or got a marginal victory the rest. Good for my self-esteem, bad for ranking.

At first I feared I was just that bane of tournament players, a slow mover, but I suppose my opponents would have told me so, at least once, and as one of the few people in Spain who are expected to have read the rules more than once, people actually believed me when I settled a ruling, so there was not much rule checking or umpiring involved, so that was not it.

Now I blame the army. The last incarnation of the army, that made me score 4th out of 12th last week-end at Estella, with results of 6-1, 4-2, 2-0 and 6-2 was:

3x4 Drilled Average Knights
1x2 Drilled Superior Knights
2x8 Longbowmen
1x4 Handgunners LF, Prot
1x4 Crossbowmen MF, Prot
1x4 Crossbow LH
1x8 English Longbowmen with stakes
1x4 English "Heavy Metal" Superior Drilled (HF, HArm, HW)
3 TCs and an AllyTC

Without time constraints it has proved able to beat almost anything, as the Longbow-Drilled Knight combo is very strong. The problem is how long it takes, as shooting takes time, and many opponents, not being suicidal, just move out of the way. That helps in that they are not killing my exposed bits, but that leaves me few exposed bits to exploit on my own.

Former incarnations with pikes, artillery or mixed formations just took longer getting into blows, so they were even worse.

So, I have an army I like to play, with plenty of tricks in the bag, but that lacks resolutive ability at the tournament scale. Maybe it is because people are still insecure, in the first year, but I doubt it.

I partly blame inexperience with the combat system, as many novices still take a long time to get the POA, number of dice and results down, and when Julian crushed me we seldom checked rules or even the QRS. But I also blame the shooting effects, which models very well the results, but is too slow to be decisive against a superior enemy within range of an IC.

I am going to a tournament the 15th of November in Barcelone, and my aim for this tournament is to get a break in the 4 games. Win or lose is not too important, but I would prefer winning. Otherwise I would just take my Ancient Spanish to the open tournament.

So, any suggestions of an easy to morph, competitive, resolutive army? Considering all those knight armies, I briefly fancied a Swiss, but skirmishers will be a bother. Right now I am thinking of an early crusader, and a personal favorite, a classical Greek with hordes of hoplites and javelinmen, and nothing else.

Something I can use in autopilot the Sunday morning, as well.

Any ideas, suggestions, criticisms?

[rbodleyscott]

So, I have an army I like to play, with plenty of tricks in the bag, but that lacks resolutive ability at the tournament scale.

I had the same problem with Ordonnance French. [And Skythians]

[robertthebruce]

I could play against you in Alcoy(Close Victory to me 12-8 ), I think you are changed you army list, but I can give you some advices after this game.


I think your army is very flexible, and very strong fontally, but you have very problems against Skirmishers and fast armies that can take your flanks easily.

I can see that you are taking Bg of 8 longbowmen, yes, you were taking Bg of 6 before, and I could shoot with masses of skirmish to them, it´s very easy to hurt them, only 2 hits to test .

I could see that your deployment was no good too, you can´t deploy this army in the middle of the table, thus you have 2 wonderfull flanks, LH and Cv can ride an get fun here , you must support your army in terrain or in the end of the table, your enemy may have only one flank to attack you.

See you Jose


Cheers

David

[madaxeman]

I have thought for some time that 800 points at 15mm is too few to force/allow game resolutions where one side wishes to avoid combat - the table is just too big and units can get away if they dont want to fight.

In 3 of my 4 games this weekend (against Parthians, Palmyrans and Sassanids) my nearly-all-mounted army still lacked enough fast-moving light horse to catch the enemies masses of 4-strong units of LH with Bw. This meant I had to beat all of the capital troops (mostly cataphracts) - and then some more units - to break any of my opponents armies. I have found this even worse when using mostly foot armies, as then infantry skirmishers can also melt away and not be caught.

From now on part of my basic army design philosophy is going to be to include something that can succesfully chase down and outmatch 4-8 (or more) units of enemy skirmishers - foot or mounted.

Playing with more points makes it harder to escape !

Tim
www.madaxeman.com

[jlopez]

I have thought for some time that 800 points at 15mm is too few to force/allow game resolutions where one side wishes to avoid combat - the table is just too big and units can get away if they dont want to fight.

In 3 of my 4 games this weekend (against Parthians, Palmyrans and Sassanids) my nearly-all-mounted army still lacked enough fast-moving light horse to catch the enemies masses of 4-strong units of LH with Bw. This meant I had to beat all of the capital troops (mostly cataphracts) - and then some more units - to break any of my opponents armies. I have found this even worse when using mostly foot armies, as then infantry skirmishers can also melt away and not be caught.

From now on part of my basic army design philosophy is going to be to include something that can succesfully chase down and outmatch 4-8 (or more) units of enemy skirmishers - foot or mounted.

Playing with more points makes it harder to escape !

Tim
www.madaxeman.com

I fully agree with Tim. I have found well played skirmisher heavy armies almost impossible to beat unless I had a list specifically designed for the job. Facing such an army often means a draw or even worse with a bit of bad luck which leaves you out of the running for the top places.

Jose,

Send me an email and I'll send you a couple of lists I've been working on. I won't be able to go to Barcelona due to the distance so I won't be able to use them.

Julian

[robertthebruce]

I fully agree with Tim. I have found well played skirmisher heavy armies almost impossible to beat unless I had a list specifically designed for the job. Facing such an army often means a draw or even worse with a bit of bad luck which leaves you out of the running for the top places.

I promise never to use a skirmishers army again . No more Gays armies .


Cheers

David

[pyrrhus]

why not use a smaller size board?

[themightycid]

It does not seem to matter which rule system people use with Burgundian Ordonnance. The army seems to lack something. My thought is that it lacks enough good melee infantry. Historically of course it was smashed in most of its battles, though that might be blamed on Charles' poor generalship. Perhaps the ghost of this rash (or cruel as he is called in Germany) is haunting his miniature followers.

[OldenTired]

It does not seem to matter which rule system people use with Burgundian Ordonnance. The army seems to lack something. My thought is that it lacks enough good melee infantry. Historically of course it was smashed in most of its battles, though that might be blamed on Charles' poor generalship. Perhaps the ghost of this rash (or cruel as he is called in Germany) is haunting his miniature followers.

i've fielded a similar version of the Burg.Ord, but use a 4 less average knights, and use all the mixed BG to bolster the line a little.

it was also... rather ineffective.

[jlopez]

I fully agree with Tim. I have found well played skirmisher heavy armies almost impossible to beat unless I had a list specifically designed for the job. Facing such an army often means a draw or even worse with a bit of bad luck which leaves you out of the running for the top places.

I promise never to use a skirmishers army again . No more Gays armies .


Cheers

David

It's not just your Granadines. I've used Huns, Parthians and Latin Greece (the latter two with lots of skirmishers apart from 18-16 Cat/Kn) so I know how they work and a good player using them will rarely lose his army. Unfortunately it doesn't make for an interesting game for the guy on the receiving end.

Julian

[grahambriggs]

I have thought for some time that 800 points at 15mm is too few to force/allow game resolutions where one side wishes to avoid combat - the table is just too big and units can get away if they dont want to fight.

In 3 of my 4 games this weekend (against Parthians, Palmyrans and Sassanids) my nearly-all-mounted army still lacked enough fast-moving light horse to catch the enemies masses of 4-strong units of LH with Bw. This meant I had to beat all of the capital troops (mostly cataphracts) - and then some more units - to break any of my opponents armies. I have found this even worse when using mostly foot armies, as then infantry skirmishers can also melt away and not be caught.

From now on part of my basic army design philosophy is going to be to include something that can succesfully chase down and outmatch 4-8 (or more) units of enemy skirmishers - foot or mounted.

Playing with more points makes it harder to escape !

Tim
www.madaxeman.com

One thing I like about the early Persians is that the Immortals put real pressure on enemy skirmishers.

[jre]

David really makes my point for me. I deployed badly, just moved forward without any concern for my flanks, I let him shoot me up as he wished, and we ended up 12-8 in his favor. Resolution? I don't think so.

Julian, I will write when I get home but I do not have too many miniatures available and our gaming styles are not too similar. However I will love to see your suggestions for a faster army. Your track record is impressive.

I do not think it is a weakness of the army, as I seldom lose when fighting without a time limit. It may be a fault of how long it takes to weaken the enemy through massed fire when the enemy does not have any incentive to get close (charging the bows only to be intercepted/flanked by the knights).

José

[vakarr]

Hi, I tend to think your problem may be caused by open competitions - do you still have the same problem fighting historical opponents? You are not alone in finding it difficult to get a result, though. Perhaps it just takes time to learn the correct tactics and the rules but I played (Getic Thracians vs Romans)f or five hours without a result (we were getting close though) - it takes forever to find anything in the rule book for a new player. The rules require different tactics from previous sets - lancers charging Roman infantry just bounced off them. Heavy cavalry in combat to the front and charged from the flank by LH just shrug them off. LF armed with javelins face an enemy (heavy cavalry) flank (or rear) and do nothing - can't even shoot because the cavalry are in combat. Can't charge becuse they are LF. If you have a combat involving multiple units of varying types and grades it can take a long time to work out what happens. Then it might take three or more turns to resolve a combat. Oftne there isn't a great deal of difference in factors between troop types where there used to be one (eg javelin-armed light horse have no great advantage over bow-armed cavalry).

I'm just an average, middle-ranking player and all the games I have played have lasted more than three hours without a definite result. I've always been a slow player so I know the rules aren't entirely to blame - I wish I could learn how to play faster. Now that I have learnt how to win I'm usually about to flank my opponent when the game ends.

[nikgaukroger]

I'm just an average, middle-ranking player and all the games I have played have lasted more than three hours without a definite result. I've always been a slow player so I know the rules aren't entirely to blame - I wish I could learn how to play faster. Now that I have learnt how to win I'm usually about to flank my opponent when the game ends.

Time your moves in a game and then play some games and give yourself 4 minutes to make all your moves - and enforce it on yourself, so no stretching it if you haven't done all you want.

Once played a desperately slow player in a comp and we went to a 4 minutes blitz - very interestingly after the first of these 4 minute moves, where he ran out of time, he thereafter got all his moves done well within the 4 minutes, and they were usually better moves than when he was taking time to think long and hard.

[robertthebruce]

Once played a desperately slow player in a comp and we went to a 4 minutes blitz - very interestingly after the first of these 4 minute moves, where he ran out of time, he thereafter got all his moves done well within the 4 minutes, and they were usually better moves than when he was taking time to think long and hard

Nick

Are you using, a blitz system in the British competition?, I think it´s very necesary here in Spain, a lot of players complains of the low speed of the rules, I think it´s no problem of the rules, it´s a player problem. FOG is fast rules set if you know how to play.

Cheers


David

[nikgaukroger]

Blitz is not being used for FoG in GB - at present we do not seem to have a problem. We're keeping an eye on things though but we don't want to rush in on such things whilst the rules are still new or until the players think there is a problem. I'd emphasise that last BTW - unless the punters think there is an issue there is no point in annoying them with things like blitz.

However, I do note that both the Usk and Burton doubles for 2009 have dropped from 1000 points to 900 as there was some concern that 1000 point games were not finishing.

[GuglielmoMarlia]

Blitz is not being used for FoG in GB - at present we do not seem to have a problem....

Hi,
Before going to Helsinki I used to think that the rules made for a slow game. Then I played a couple of very competitive matches and changed my mind.
It's all about getting used to the rules and playing at a 'competitive speed'.
I don't think this should be done during the current stage of learning the rules. But later on certainly competition games will be played faster and most of them will come to a conclusion within the time limit.
Rgds/Guglielmo

[robertthebruce]

I agree with Nick and Guglielmo, FOG is not a slow rules, you only need to get a "competitive speed" . But ever been and ever will be slow players, and I think that the blitz rules will be necesary in the future. I have talking about this with Marco Quinta in Sevilla some weeks ago, and he agreed with me.



I hope that the next year with the rules translated into Spanish, the competition games should be faster.


Regards

David

[Redpossum]

I agree with Nick and Guglielmo, FOG is not a slow rules, you only need to get a "competitive speed" . But ever been and ever will be slow players, and I think that the blitz rules will be necesary in the future.

David

But what will that do to new players? You will just raise the bar and make it that much less friendly to newcomers.

And you're talking about a hobby/rules set that's already pretty damned intimidating to newbies.

[robertthebruce]

But what will that do to new players? You will just raise the bar and make it that much less friendly to newcomers.

And you're talking about a hobby/rules set that's already pretty damned intimidating to newbies.

I think newbies can learn the rules quickly, and they can get good speed after some competitions. I´m not talking about increase the speed in the games, I´m talking about teach the players to get a correct speed in his games. Now beginers need some time to know the POA system, and they have some problems to allocate the dices in combats and shooting.


The main complain of the new players in Spain is that FOG is a Slow rules set, and the most of games never finish with an army rout. I think this is not true, here the players have problems with a rules set writen in a foreing language, and all the new rules need a learning time of course.


Maybe we must wait to observe more competitions and decide if a Blitz system it´s necessary.


Cheers

David