Use of armoured cav archers

[caliban66]

Due to my experience (not as much as I would like, anyway) with EAP Bow/Sw and LAP LightSpear/Sw armoured cavalry, I have found the later easier to handle, more affordable for elite classification and, in general, better for my taste. The question is, now that I´m planning a daylami army, I would like to know how do you use your armoured shooty cav.

[rbodleyscott]

Due to my experience (not as much as I would like, anyway) with EAP Bow/Sw and LAP LightSpear/Sw armoured cavalry, I have found the later easier to handle, more affordable for elite classification and, in general, better for my taste. The question is, now that I´m planning a daylami army, I would like to know how do you use your armoured shooty cav.

In a different army.

The big thing about shooty cavalry is that they get better the more you have of them. This is because shooting only becomes very effective when you concentrate shooting on one enemy BG.

The problem with the Dailami is that both ghilman and Dailami MF are expensive in points so you don't get enough ghilman to be truly effective, and you don't get any bow-armed LH.

If you are using Dailami army within theme, it may be better to take lancers - Kurds + Kurdish ally instead of ghilman. Against anachronistic opponents (which might include knights) you would, however, probably be better off with ghilman, who can at least evade enemy knights, yet are too powerful for the knights to completely ignore.

[philqw78]

It all depends upon what you are fighting against. Against non-shock troops stay 2 ranks deep and get as much fire on to a single target BG as possible. Against shock targets go one deep and skirmish. You are not going to get a lot of shooting as the evades from their charges will stop a lot of it. However their charges will cause their BG to separate, giving you chance to get your non-shock shooty types on their flanks or through gaps. Against lights don't go wide as you will end up with more enemy shooting hitting your BG, more chance of a death roll and more CTs.

IMHO

[babyshark]

So here is the follow up question: how many BGs of shooty cav (or cav + lh) does one need to have to use them effectively?

Marc

[rbodleyscott]

So here is the follow up question: how many BGs of shooty cav (or cav + lh) does one need to have to use them effectively?

Marc

Hard to answer.

As something of an experiment, we took 15 BGs of shooty LH/cavalry (9 LH and 6 Cv) and 3 BGs of shooty LF to the 900 AP Oxford Doubles last weekend and came 3rd, which is a better position for us than usual.

The more the better, as far as I can see. They are synergistic. Any other troops in the army whatsoever dilute the effect by using points that could be spent on more horse archers (apart from LF, especially those with boomsticks).

Of course the other troops may have other synergistic effects, but they will reduce the effect of shooting.

[madaxeman]

So here is the follow up question: how many BGs of shooty cav (or cav + lh) does one need to have to use them effectively?

Marc

Its more about what you have that ISNT skirmish-capable & shooting capable in the same army, as it will end up being a target (eventually) for an opponent. All skirmish-capable and nothing is really a target for the enemy so their capital troops have nowhere to go.

ALL skirmish/shooters means you can muck about to your hearts content on the get-it-nearly-every-time default billiard table that is Steppe terrain, driving your opponents to despair at the tedium of trying to nail jelly to a wall in the knowledge that your army is impossible for them to beat whilst they also are waiting for the inevitable couple of rounds when they will fail 3 consecutive shooting-caused tests or charge into a position where you can flank charge them, and then you will capitalize on it to eke out your soulless, spiritless unedifying victory.

tim
(guess how much I enjoyed some of the games this weekend at Oxford).

[rbodleyscott]

ALL skirmish/shooters means you can muck about to your hearts content on the get-it-nearly-every-time default billiard table that is Steppe terrain, driving your opponents to despair at the tedium of trying to nail jelly to a wall in the knowledge that your army is impossible for them to beat whilst they also are waiting for the inevitable couple of rounds when they will fail 3 consecutive shooting-caused tests or charge into a position where you can flank charge them, and then you will capitalize on it to eke out your soulless, spiritless unedifying victory.

tim
(guess how much I enjoyed some of the games this weekend at Oxford).

Including the one against us, although it wasn't on Steppe terrain, as neither the Poles nor the Ottomans get Steppe terrain. I am willing to guess that the game against the Mamluks wasn't on Steppe terrain either, as they don't get Steppe terrain either. (As I have said before, the Steppe terrain issue is a red herring).

Tim's army probably contained more Superior Heavily Armoured Knights than any of the other armies in the tournament. How unsporting of his opponents not to consent to being rolled over by them!

[nikgaukroger]

Please tell me Tim didn't go into an "Ottomans and their Enemies" comp without an army that could deal in some way with skirmishing horse-boys?

Personally I was gutted not to make it, especially as Peter Reilly (playing solso in my absence) said he had 4 cracking games. Just my luck

[grahambriggs]

Please tell me Tim didn't go into an "Ottomans and their Enemies" comp without an army that could deal in some way with skirmishing horse-boys?

Personally I was gutted not to make it, especially as Peter Reilly (playing solso in my absence) said he had 4 cracking games. Just my luck

You didn't go. Pete had 4 good game for once. Join the dots

[DaiSho]

So here is the follow up question: how many BGs of shooty cav (or cav + lh) does one need to have to use them effectively?

Marc

I think it depends on the type of army you run.

I took only 3 BG's of 4 LH Javelin/Light Spear to Can-Con and found them very effective, but my main arm of course was the Hoplites. I couldn't stick around against real shooty cavalry, but I could harrass a lot and drop a cohesion level here and there.

So, I think the answer to that question would be dependant on the proportion of the army. I think Richards original answer was more to do with the fact that the Dailami infantry is so expensive that it isn't like they are 'filler troops' and so you will be outshot by another shooty cavarly army and won't be solid enough to be able to mix it with a solid foot army.

My answer. You're either a shooty cav army (go for all shooting types and any foot is filler), a solid infantry army (any shooty types are fillers) or somewhere in between. The somewhere in between is going to be a difficult army list to create I believe.

Ian

[nikgaukroger]

Please tell me Tim didn't go into an "Ottomans and their Enemies" comp without an army that could deal in some way with skirmishing horse-boys?

Personally I was gutted not to make it, especially as Peter Reilly (playing solso in my absence) said he had 4 cracking games. Just my luck

You didn't go. Pete had 4 good game for once. Join the dots

I thought he didn't sound too upset when I didn't turn up ...

[rbodleyscott]

So, I think the answer to that question would be dependant on the proportion of the army. I think Richards original answer was more to do with the fact that the Dailami infantry is so expensive that it isn't like they are 'filler troops' and so you will be outshot by another shooty cavarly army and won't be solid enough to be able to mix it with a solid foot army.

My answer. You're either a shooty cav army (go for all shooting types and any foot is filler), a solid infantry army (any shooty types are fillers) or somewhere in between. The somewhere in between is going to be a difficult army list to create I believe.

Exactly.

Shooty cavalry with a few knights works well. Shooty cavalry with a few Dailami (but not too few) works well.

The Dailami army has too many Dailami for this and lacks the shooty LH needed to complement the ghilman. Effective shooting with shooty cavalry requires you to concentrate more than one BG on a target and this is easier to achieve with a combination of shooty LH and shooty Cv. Bedouin LH lancers can scare enemy LH but cannot help with the shooting.

A Khurasanian army with Dailami allies actually gives a better shooty LH/Cv + Dailami combination than a Dailami army.

In a Dailami army I would go with the Dailami + Kurdish Cv lancers (and Kurdish ally) + Bedouin lancers option and forget about trying to shoot the enemy to death.

[carlos]

ALL skirmish/shooters means you can muck about to your hearts content on the get-it-nearly-every-time default billiard table that is Steppe terrain, driving your opponents to despair at the tedium of trying to nail jelly to a wall in the knowledge that your army is impossible for them to beat whilst they also are waiting for the inevitable couple of rounds when they will fail 3 consecutive shooting-caused tests or charge into a position where you can flank charge them, and then you will capitalize on it to eke out your soulless, spiritless unedifying victory.

You're sounding more and more like Charlie Brooker. That's it, the Charlie Brooker of wargaming!

[madaxeman]

Bloody Guardian readers!

[SirGarnet]

ALL skirmish/shooters means you can muck about to your hearts content on the get-it-nearly-every-time default billiard table that is Steppe terrain, driving your opponents to despair at the tedium of trying to nail jelly to a wall in the knowledge that your army is impossible for them to beat whilst they also are waiting for the inevitable couple of rounds when they will fail 3 consecutive shooting-caused tests or charge into a position where you can flank charge them, and then you will capitalize on it to eke out your soulless, spiritless unedifying victory.

What an eminently quotable marketing message for shooty horse armies! Earthy and evocative - makes them sound full of life and energy and ghoulish at the same time!

[madaxeman]

Please tell me Tim didn't go into an "Ottomans and their Enemies" comp without an army that could deal in some way with skirmishing horse-boys?

Our army could - and twice did - manage to deal with such armies, but only when either the terrain fell favourably (forests on both sides narrowing the table by over a foot - sorry Phil!) or where they had wasted, sorry spent points on troops we could actually hit and beat.

Against Mr RBS and his billiard table full of floating monstrosities we struggled. But we did still cause him some problems, hence his 20 minutes spent trying to work out where to move a single unit of 4 LF handgunners.

Seriously though, I still maintain having a shed load of skirmishers is better than having merely a small tool store full and enough non skirmishers to get you in trouble when/if you lose them. And if either of the opponents we had faced had chosen the "evade off table" option we would have had no chance of a victory at all.

[nikgaukroger]

And if either of the opponents we had faced had chosen the "evade off table" option we would have had no chance of a victory at all.

Well we've discussed that particular problem before and agree on that

[rbodleyscott]

Against Mr RBS and his billiard table full of floating monstrosities we struggled. But we did still cause him some problems, hence his 20 minutes spent trying to work out where to move a single unit of 4 LF

For which I apologise, but moving them wrongly could have had critical consequences to other BGs as you are aware. It was certainly not in our interest to stall the game as (I believe) we had the upper hand. (But it could all have gone tits up if we had moved the LF wrongly).

[nikgaukroger]

20 minutes

[rbodleyscott]

20 minutes

Tim is exaggerating, I would say it was between 5 and 10 minutes, but that is still an unconscionably long time to move one BG.