Gonna try Later Polish...

SirGarnet · Post by **SirGarnet** » Wed Apr 29, 2009 7:15 am

philqw78 wrote:So if I had a BG of Unprotected and Protected cav with the only one type in the front and only one type in the rear rank no POA's could apply. Thanks for clearing that up.

Not seeing how you can draw that conclusion. Best wait and thank Richard for clearing this up.

ADD: I think your "unless battle group is entirely 1 base deep" interpretation is clean and simple and would be best for the rule but needs a FAQ that "entirely 1 base deep" means the whole BG rather than the subject troop type.

philqw78 · Post by **philqw78** » Wed Apr 29, 2009 7:04 pm

Not seeing how you can draw that conclusion.

I assumed it from your interpretation of the rule

I think all shooting should apply to the target base and if the BG is more than 1 deep any POA applies.

The depth/cavalry formation being the rationale of the POA. If they are more than 1 deep they are formed close and not able to skirmish.

If protected cav are 2 deep anywhere they are not in skirmish formation.

Therefore IMO if the above BG of 1/2 HA, 1/2 protected where shot at from the rear the firer should get a +POA for firng at protected cav not 1 deep, AKA not in a skirmish fromation.

In the case of front rank 1 HA, 1 Prot and rear rank 1 prot the POA should apply to any shots on the Prot base.

Andy1972 · Post by **Andy1972** » Wed Apr 29, 2009 8:41 pm

Played the game last night.. I do love the mixed battle groups.. But i find Lithuanian cav sucks.. The bow* i do not like at all... So i am gonna to do Later Hungarian with a Later Polish ally... Maybe someday in the future if they redo some rules.. I would make bow* -1 POA or something.

Andy1972 · Post by **Andy1972** » Thu Apr 30, 2009 2:49 am

Oh, another quick question.. Do the Cav in the mixed battle group count towards stands of Cav,Lh ect.. For initiative?

nikgaukroger · Post by **nikgaukroger** » Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:21 am

They are stands and I don't recall the rules say anything about stands only in BGs of a certain composition, therefore ...

petedalby · Post by **petedalby** » Thu Apr 30, 2009 11:21 am

Do the Cav in the mixed battle group count towards stands of Cav,Lh ect.. For initiative?

If you use Olivier's excellent army list spreadsheet it will count them as Cav - which as Nik notes above is as it should be.

Pete

GHGAustin · Post by **GHGAustin** » Fri May 01, 2009 7:01 pm

Andy1972 wrote:Played the game last night.. I do love the mixed battle groups.. But i find Lithuanian cav sucks.. The bow* i do not like at all... So i am gonna to do Later Hungarian with a Later Polish ally... Maybe someday in the future if they redo some rules.. I would make bow* -1 POA or something.

I run the later Polish and never use the Lithuanian Cavalry, but I always take the maximum 24 stands of Lithuanian LH. I can see no reason for ever wanting the Lithuanians as cavalry. I do tend to take a few units of Mtd Xbow, since they are so good against knights. And never forget the lowly handgunners, who have twice contributed significantly to victories for me.

I am continuing to discover nice things about the mixed knight/strzelcy units. For example, if you are in close action, and you lose a knight stand, you can take the replacement from any of the rear stands and feed it in, meaning that the cavalry stand that is fighting now is two ranks. And, should you lose additional stands, you can remove the cavalry stand that is now in the front rank instead of a knight. Pretty cool, huh?

I found that the mixed units as 6 stands (3 knights and 3 cav) are really tough and have more staying power than the 4 stand knight units. I can lose a stand and not be at 25%; two hits on shooting does not cause a -1 on the morale test; in melee, I can expand to overlap with the cavalry to offset and enemy overlap or extend my own overlap. All very nice.

Rob

ethan · Post by **ethan** » Fri May 01, 2009 7:06 pm

GHGAustin wrote:All very nice.

Rob

And very expensive. If you have bought three knights already you could choose to simply buy a fourth knights, save a few AP, deploy the knights three wide with another knight stand in reserve and pick up a BG or two or three of pure Cv/Xbs...

Sure, they are very good BGs, but are they a good value?

gozerius · Post by **gozerius** » Fri May 01, 2009 9:00 pm

That's the point. You have options. Having a BG that is HA KN 3 wide, with 3 dice of superior shooting, shrugs off shooting CTs and is able to stand longer in melee could be more valuable than having a BG of 4 Kn and a BG of 4 average Cav.

GHGAustin · Post by **GHGAustin** » Sat May 02, 2009 5:47 pm

ethan wrote:Sure, they are very good BGs, but are they a good value?

In my experience, in combination with many small BGs of Lithuanian LH, yes, they are a very good value. But I do use a mix of pure knight, pure mtd Xbow, and mixed knight/xbow units.

It is also fun to have a unique troop type that plays differently than all the other knight armies.

Best,

Andy1972 · Post by **Andy1972** » Mon May 04, 2009 1:07 am

I played Later Hungarian with a Later Polish ally on Saturday... I love the mixed battle group.. They shot the of knights and disrupted them.. Then my knights went in and beat them 2 out of the 3 games i played.. The 3rd one my polish general died and it went to hell in a hand basket.