Go for broke Impact

[DaiSho]

Hi All,

There's been a couple of times where I've decided for an 'all in' impact combat.

By that, I mean something along the lines of 'Lancer Cavalry' in one rank or similar.

The thought being that in some instances the factors are so high that there is an ability to do a crushing assault where it may be worthwhile getting more dice involved:

Lancer cavalry vs MF Unproteced Heavy Weapon for example.

Has anyone tried this successfully? I must admit to trying it unsuccessfully, but I really didn't check the factors closely enough - it wasn't as good as I thought.

Ian

[gozerius]

I've considered the same thing against MF missile types, but am always worried about the ensuing melee with only 1 dice per two. Then my wrecked BG might get to break off only to be shot to broken.

[hazelbark]

Well it is high stakes. You still need to have an ability to whether the melee phase.

I have found that anything that you can beat 4 wide you can beat 2 wide and have less risk.

Basically the thin charge approach is relying on you disordering the foot in impact and having a POA in melee.

Even 4 wide lancers versus MF bow.

Lancers are ++ in impact and probably the same in melee.

So giving them more dice is really the only way the bow can win. And they need to be lucky.

in impact the bow get 12 dice needing 5s. If you come in two wide the bow only have 6 dice.
In melee unless you frag the bow at impact then they have 8 dice or 6 if disordered. Although depending on the overlaps they may these evenif you were two wide.

I think the wide charge is because the formation needed to be wide for some other reason protected cav or skirmisher or manuvering or such.

[madaxeman]

Why would more dice at impact lead to a "crushing" assault? The two possible up-sides of going in wide and shallow are that you have a better chance of beating an enemy by 2, to give them a -1 in the cohesion test, and also perhaps you have a better chance of causing "real" casulaties through a failed death roll. I'm not sure either of these would be a "crushing" attack in my book?

As long as you have enough dice to beat the enemy by 2 you really have all the advantages you need.

Having only 1 dice to their 2 in melee however is going to hurt you much harder - you then need to instantly fragment the enemy at impact to even things up !

[philqw78]

If it is an isolated combat where you have a smaller BG, but that BG is better in impact go shallow. The opposition will get the overlap in the melee, so take the advantage early. e.g. 4 Armoured lancer against 6 Armd lt Sp MF. The lancers a + at impact so may as well go in three wide as the other 2 dice from the MF will count in the melee anyway.

[DaiSho]

Why would more dice at impact lead to a "crushing" assault? The two possible up-sides of going in wide and shallow are that you have a better chance of beating an enemy by 2, to give them a -1 in the cohesion test, and also perhaps you have a better chance of causing "real" casulaties through a failed death roll. I'm not sure either of these would be a "crushing" attack in my book?

As long as you have enough dice to beat the enemy by 2 you really have all the advantages you need.

Having only 1 dice to their 2 in melee however is going to hurt you much harder - you then need to instantly fragment the enemy at impact to even things up !

It has to do with statistics.

Put it this way:

You have a 1base wide column of lance armed Cav going against a 4base wide line of MF Heavy Weapon (example 1)
==versus==
You have a 4base wide column of lance armed Cav going against a 4base wide line of MF Heavy Weapon (example 2).

The dice are as follows:

example 1:
Cav get 2 dice at ++
MF get 2 dice at --

Statistically, the MF will lose, and as you say, you've got all the advantages you need.

example 2:
Cav get 8 dice at ++
MF get 8 dice at --

Statiscially, the MF will lose, and as you say, there is a > chance of casualties, but other than that I have all the advantages I need.

BUT - it is far far harder to get more 5's and 6's than someone getting 3's, 4's, 5's and 6's with 8 dice than someone than it is with 2 dice.

I've (on multiple occasions) beaten my opponent when they have an overwhealming advantage (once after being charged in the rear - I won), but it is a lot harder to win when you're disadvantaged with more dice being rolled.

Ian

[petedalby]

I'm not very good at statistics but it's worth going for it sometimes.

I have fond memories of a single ranked 4 BG of Timariots charging 2 enemy BGs of 8 Prot Bow and routing both with no loss to me.

But it can also go horribly wrong.

A 4 BG of Superior Armoured Billmen charged an 8 BG of Superior Christian Nubian Bow. So I was on a + at impact and ++ in melee. But I still auto-broke through attition.

I guess the learning point for me was don't underestimate the resilience of Superiors.

Pete

[nickblackheart]

my elite troops are surprisingly fragile and in groups which are so small as to make them vulnerable to enemy action, your elite troops are too powerful and badly pointed and able to take advantage of their small unit size to amnouvre in a non-historical manner. Remember that and its all easy.