how many BGs of LH should a cavalry shooty army have?

[BlackPrince]

I am interested in players experience with LH in cavalry shooty armies;

1. how many LH BGs should a shooty army have in?
2. Is in worth reducing the total number of LH BGs to make some of the average LH up to superior LH?

[grahambriggs]

I've found with Ilkhanids, for example that a couple of BGs of average give a handy 'falling back' wing and three BGs of superior are good for the aggressive wing. I guess in a pure shooty cav army you could have 6 BGs of superior LH to allow double envelopments.

[sergiomonteleone]

I am interested in players experience with LH in cavalry shooty armies;

1. how many LH BGs should a shooty army have in?
2. Is in worth reducing the total number of LH BGs to make some of the average LH up to superior LH?

Hi,
generally speaking I don't like armies with footmen but with mounted troops.
I like a lot LH because you can skirmis but also shoot (I prefer LH with bow and not with javelin).
And also with sword because you can use it, if you need, in combat (a lot of times you can win using in combat BG's of skirmishers).
Normally I use not less than 4/5 BG's of LH (4 bases for each of one because they are easy to manouvre compared to BG with 6 bases).
It's better to use togheter 2 BG's of LF to concentrate shooting and to skirmishing.
Superior are better (in particularly if with sword you have much possibilities in combat against other LH) but they cost much.
Depends on the army and on your strategy: if you intend to use LH for skirmishing or also to shoot and try to push/ charge enemy LH.
Sergio

[david53]

I am interested in players experience with LH in cavalry shooty armies;

1. how many LH BGs should a shooty army have in?
2. Is in worth reducing the total number of LH BGs to make some of the average LH up to superior LH?

In a true shooty army its numbers that count so go with average as much as you can for your LH BG's, anything higher and it seems a waste of points. Go with proper LH archers no swords, that way you'll have to skirmish its the shooting that counts not their ability to fight also being 8 points each you can get loads.
Like many things I'm sure many people will disagree but thats whats good about wargames, so its just my idea sure you'll get others.
Dave

[rbodleyscott]

In a true shooty army its numbers that count so go with average as much as you can for your LH BG's, anything higher and it seems a waste of points. Go with proper LH archers no swords, that way you'll have to skirmish its the shooting that counts not their ability to fight also being 8 points each you can get loads.
Like many things I'm sure many people will disagree but thats whats good about wargames, so its just my idea sure you'll get others.
Dave

I agree with Dave.

[BlackPrince]

Unfortunately the author of the mongol list made all the LH bow and swordsmen

[ottomanmjm]

If you are running a shooty LH army then take an inspired commander, as your LH will be spread across the board and most of your cohesion tests will be from shooting so a good command radius is important (as well as the +1 for inspired). Of course a IC costs alot of points so cheap shooty LH are good for ensuring you have sufficient numbers to shoot the enemy. I also like to run some good LH, Superior and/or with Sword so that I can force the enemy to retreat in some part of the battlefield.

[rbodleyscott]

If you are running a shooty LH army then take an inspired commander, as your LH will be spread across the board and most of your cohesion tests will be from shooting so a good command radius is important (as well as the +1 for inspired).

I know I am in the minority, but I have a contrary view. Precisely because a LH army is spread out, an IC cannot be in range of all of it, so, paradoxically, he is less useful than in a more compact army (eg a longbow army).

Moreover, getting steppe terrain is not a high priority. (Sorry Tim). Getting to move first is a higher priority, and hence I would go with a TC C-in-C. (But at least one FC SG for flank marching).

And having the extra points to spend on more shooty LH/LF/Cv helps too.

[BlackPrince]

RBS good point thanks.

[ethan]

A lot depends on what you are fighting. Against another shooty army an IC is worth a huge amount. Against a less shooty army, more troops are more valuable.

[david53]

Moreover, getting steppe terrain is not a high priority. (Sorry Tim). Getting to move first is a higher priority, and hence I would go with a TC C-in-C. (But at least one FC SG for flank marching).

And having the extra points to spend on more shooty LH/LF/Cv helps too.

Not to sure about this I tried this twice with a shooty Cav/LH army by taking a field commander and dropping to only +3.
I ended up playing once in Hilly and once Mountains, maybe it was me but yes i got to move first but later these Steep Hill were a bit of a nuisance.
Mind you it may have been down to bad terrain placing or good for the opponent, still will give it another try just to make sure it was'nt just me not having a lot of experience.

[Ghaznavid]

Of course it always depends on the opposition to an extent (not many armies can even choose Mountains). That said I've come to see it the same way as Richard, re-jigging my lists to use a TC C-in-C and a FC Sub. Not only does that give a much better chance to move 1st, it also opens up the possibility to flank march with much more confidence.

If playing against an army that can cover say at least 2/3rd of the table moving second often deprives you of what horse archers need most ... space. As some of my opponents discovered to their dismay, few armies can handle difficult terrain well enough to make it actually worthwhile to them. If you end up with lots of terrain it might become a nuisance, but in most cases it slows the enemy just as much as it slows down your horse boys.