Use of Fortifications When Playing the Gaul Army

[BrianC]

Hey Guys,

I fought a game on the weekend where I was the Gaul commander and my friend Mike was the Roman. We will be playing an 800 point game in the next month and I was wondering about the use of fortifications when playing the Gauls. Anyone who has played the Gauls, is this a valuable tool? I would like to try a strategy other than run away .

Thanks

Brian

[vercingetorix]

field fortifications sound like a bad idea with gauls. What I usually do is disrupt the romans and work their flanks with my superior cav and then bring the infantry, which I take as MF, in only for the final blow after the Romans are badly disorganized.

[daleivan]

field fortifications sound like a bad idea with gauls. What I usually do is disrupt the romans and work their flanks with my superior cav and then bring the infantry, which I take as MF, in only for the final blow after the Romans are badly disorganized.

Wouldn't FF help the gauls channel the roman attack? You make an excellent point about the Gallic cav advantage--I agree absolutely, but FF seem to be a great way to fill in open ground between terrain (or on it as the case may be), and give the Gauls a place to station impact foot that don't have to charge?

Mind you I'm generally in favor of the barbarian 'rush' at the Romans but wonder if this isn't an option.

Thanks

Dale

[vercingetorix]

I'm all for the Barbarian rush, the trick is to make good use of your numerical superiority. Many times I have seen the gauls fail because not everyone gets to fight. I take time to develop the flank attack, use skirmishers to slow down the legions, and then swarm frontally and from at least one flank.

[BrianC]

What I was thinking was using fortifications for the front Gaul warrior BGs facing the Romans. These BGs would stay in place until the flanks or flank can be hit. Then they can rush forward and all charge at once. Due to even ratings in the impact phase the only advantage Gaul troops have is numbers. Once in melee they are at a serious disadvantage.

Brian

[vercingetorix]

It sounds like it might work. maybe worth a try. what I think would happen is that the Roman commander might just avoid your foot, crush the rest of your army, and then come in with a flank himself.

but I don't know

[BrianC]

It sounds like it might work. maybe worth a try. what I think would happen is that the Roman commander might just avoid your foot, crush the rest of your army, and then come in with a flank himself.

but I don't know

My idea was to only use the fortifications only long enough to set up a charge, at that point the entire Gaul army would hopefully charge.

Brian

[BrianC]

It sounds like it might work. maybe worth a try. what I think would happen is that the Roman commander might just avoid your foot, crush the rest of your army, and then come in with a flank himself.

but I don't know

[daleivan]

It sounds like it might work. maybe worth a try. what I think would happen is that the Roman commander might just avoid your foot, crush the rest of your army, and then come in with a flank himself.

but I don't know

My idea was to only use the fortifications only long enough to set up a charge, at that point the entire Gaul army would hopefully charge.

Brian

Granted that the terrain rules result in pretty random terrain (so you can't necessarily count on the Gauls have much terrain) but it seems to me that you could use the FF to fill in a gap between terrain (say a hill and a wood etc) which could make problems for the Roman, especially if the Gallic host includes some MF.

Dale

[BrianC]

It sounds like it might work. maybe worth a try. what I think would happen is that the Roman commander might just avoid your foot, crush the rest of your army, and then come in with a flank himself.

but I don't know

My idea was to only use the fortifications only long enough to set up a charge, at that point the entire Gaul army would hopefully charge.

Brian

Granted that the terrain rules result in pretty random terrain (so you can't necessarily count on the Gauls have much terrain) but it seems to me that you could use the FF to fill in a gap between terrain (say a hill and a wood etc) which could make problems for the Roman, especially if the Gallic host includes some MF.

Dale

Hey Dale,

The terrain is always a concern I think. So far most of it has been either removed entirely or pushed to the edge of the table. I would not want to fight the Romans with MF if you are trying to simulate the hill tribes. I'd rather give the win to my opponent then dice again till we got terrian the Gauls would want to fight in. But I guess you have to find a balance of MF and HF that will give you the edge in what ever bad terrain there may be.

Brian

[shall]

At 800pts I have generall found a hill tribe ally with 2 BGs of 8 and then the rest of Gauls as HF.

Stick an IC in, rear support and put your HF gauls with some bases on the 3rd rank to soak up casualties. Have at least 10s so you can get good value from upgrading with TCs in the charge. Ideally 2 x 10s of Gaesati with another ally as the strike force.

Works pretty well. Especially if you can break the Romans up a bit with some skirmishing. You are 50/50 at impact with the Gaesati and if you win the Romans struggle to take the base loses whereas the Gauls can.

Si

[BrianC]

At 800pts I have generall found a hill tribe ally with 2 BGs of 8 and then the rest of Gauls as HF.

Stick an IC in, rear support and put your HF gauls with some bases on the 3rd rank to soak up casualties. Have at least 10s so you can get good value from upgrading with TCs in the charge. Ideally 2 x 10s of Gaesati with another ally as the strike force.

Works pretty well. Especially if you can break the Romans up a bit with some skirmishing. You are 50/50 at impact with the Gaesati and if you win the Romans struggle to take the base loses whereas the Gauls can.

Si

Hey Si,

I thought I read somewhere that BGs of 8 is too small and BGs of 12 are too large. with 10 and in 3 ranks its does give you more staying power and if you are in 3 files you are not taking up much room and can expand if needed to overlap.

When you say stick an IC in, do you mean in close combat? I ask that because I tried that once with a Roman IC and he died the very first impact, lets just say it went down hill from there . I like the mixture of your force but wonder why not take more cavalry? Wouldn't the extra movement give you an advantage on gaining a flank position?

Brian

[shall]

No I was more meaning in the army. I only put ICs in combat in a crisis.

Si

[vercingetorix]

I usually take all MF with Gaisati. MF seems to be more usefull than HF because it can use terrain and move faster. Skirmishers can usually keep my MF safe for long enough.

[IanB3406]

I've just repointed my gauls to incldue some TF's.

I have also taken a different approach with Gauls -- Big BG's and not many of them.
+3 Initiative
IC
2XTC
Ally TC (gasetai)

12 Gasetai
12 MF warrior
10 MF Warriors
8 MF Warriors
8 MF warriors
6 Armoured Sup Cav
4 Protected Sup Cav
8 Slingers
8 Javelinmen.
6 TFs.

Gasetai go down first witht the skirmishers. One Gaul BG will deploy in the Fortifications if needed. the rest mass somewhere (hopefully with terrain), and the Cav take a flank. So far a similar list without the Fortifications has done OK for me. Romans need to commit 2-3 BG's to fight the Gasetai who will be tough with a general in the front. GO BARBARIANS!

[BrianC]

No I was more meaning in the army. I only put ICs in combat in a crisis.

Si

LOL no problem, just wanted to confirm. When someone says stuck in I think of a short end of the stick situation. Or "you mean we have to go up that hill again and retake it?"

Brian

[BrianC]

I usually take all MF with Gaisati. MF seems to be more usefull than HF because it can use terrain and move faster. Skirmishers can usually keep my MF safe for long enough.

But when you finally mix it up with the Romans, doesn't it hurt using MF when you take cohesion checks when you lose against HF? Is the speed an offset?

[BrianC]

I've just repointed my gauls to incldue some TF's.

I have also taken a different approach with Gauls -- Big BG's and not many of them.
+3 Initiative
IC
2XTC
Ally TC (gasetai)

12 Gasetai
12 MF warrior
10 MF Warriors
8 MF Warriors
8 MF warriors
6 Armoured Sup Cav
4 Protected Sup Cav
8 Slingers
8 Javelinmen.
6 TFs.

Gasetai go down first witht the skirmishers. One Gaul BG will deploy in the Fortifications if needed. the rest mass somewhere (hopefully with terrain), and the Cav take a flank. So far a similar list without the Fortifications has done OK for me. Romans need to commit 2-3 BG's to fight the Gasetai who will be tough with a general in the front. GO BARBARIANS!

How do the Gasetai do Ian? Do they hold their own? Again, I would have thought HF would have been better for a frontal pinning role.