I have been playing with--and enjoying--the Early Byzantines recently. As a result of my experiences I have come to wonder whether they are best run as a shooty cav army that has lancers or a lancer army that has some shooty cav. Do any of you out there in crowd-sourcing land have input on this issue?
Marc
Early Byzantine list design
Moderators: philqw78, terrys, hammy, Slitherine Core, Field of Glory Moderators, Field of Glory Design
-
lawrenceg
- Colonel - Ju 88A
- Posts: 1536
- Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 6:24 pm
- Location: Former British Empire
Re: Early Byzantine list design
If after your experience you still wonder, then it seems likely that neither is significantly better.babyshark wrote:I have been playing with--and enjoying--the Early Byzantines recently. As a result of my experiences I have come to wonder whether they are best run as a shooty cav army that has lancers or a lancer army that has some shooty cav. Do any of you out there in crowd-sourcing land have input on this issue?
Marc
Lawrence Greaves
-
Lycanthropic
- Sergeant - Panzer IIC
- Posts: 186
- Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 10:48 pm
My immediate thinking after playing this army is about 3-4 Lancer battlegroups out of about 12 total.
It's sort of a combined arms mounted army.
I'm also thinking the Huns as Superior..After playing Ilkhanids I have re-evaluated the Superior light horse and like them more...esp for killing other light horse...and the ability to still function aggresively once they take one casaulty.
Ian
It's sort of a combined arms mounted army.
I'm also thinking the Huns as Superior..After playing Ilkhanids I have re-evaluated the Superior light horse and like them more...esp for killing other light horse...and the ability to still function aggresively once they take one casaulty.
Ian
