CV with bow on second rank

rtaylor · Post by **rtaylor** » Wed Dec 12, 2007 9:56 pm

Are the front-rank spearmen HF instead? A number of Warrior lists have "HF" (close-order) bowmen backing HF spearmen. However, in FoG formed bowmen appear to be MF by definition.

Either way, a single rank of spearmen appears to be suboptimal.

stevoid · Post by **stevoid** » Wed Dec 12, 2007 9:56 pm

In summary, if you have mixed spear (HI) / bow (MF) BGS against Lancer cav then there are no POAs at impact with the mixed foot getting an extra support shooting dice. In melee it comes down to armour for any possible POA. If the Lancers don't disorder at least half their opponents, then they will have to break off giving the bow a chance of some free shots next turn.

Given their respective costs and sizes I reckon the mixed foot are good value. It also, IMO, helps to have some things that your opponent might want to have a crack against!

Steve

nikgaukroger · Post by **nikgaukroger** » Thu Dec 13, 2007 8:47 am

HF spearmen and MF bowmen.

Should be good enough against their historical opponents - note that the Taktika of Ouranos (the slightly updated version of Phokas' Prsecepta) suggests that against Katafraktoi the infantry will need to double their depth from 7 to 14 ranks so I'll let you work out whether FoG gets this right.

hcaille · Post by **hcaille** » Thu Dec 13, 2007 12:55 pm

Hi

You must also take in account that the bowmen on second rank give additionnal dice on the impact.
For example if you have 6 Cv lancers on 2 ranks charging 3 HF with spear backup by 3 HF with bow :

Cv : 6 Dice on POA 0
HF : 6 Dice on POA 0 and 3 Dice on POA - (supporting fire)

So the advantage if for the foot, not the cavalry

Hervé

nikgaukroger · Post by **nikgaukroger** » Thu Dec 13, 2007 1:22 pm

However, also remember that the Cv are more likely to be Superior and so get their rerolls if they roll a 1 - hard to quantify on small frontages, however, I believe that the authors think the reroll is worth about half a PoA. Possibly quite a close combat.

hammy · Post by **hammy** » Thu Dec 13, 2007 1:44 pm

While the impact may be roughly even the melee will favour the cavalry as they have better armour and the foot in this case have no positive POAs' being only in a single rank. If the foot become disrupted the combat will be a ++ to the cavalry .....

With the spear in a double rank then the impact will be one POA in favour of the foot and the melee would be the same too. A good reason to double the depth of spears.

hazelbark · Post by **hazelbark** » Thu Dec 13, 2007 5:30 pm

babyshark wrote:I'm going to shred you when we play over the holidays.

Ahab hasn't caught the whale since i was a gumpy. Heck even my trainees are taking commands off of you.

hazelbark · Post by **hazelbark** » Thu Dec 13, 2007 5:36 pm

hammy wrote:While the impact may be roughly even the melee will favour the cavalry as they have better armour and the foot in this case have no positive POAs' being only in a single rank. If the foot become disrupted the combat will be a ++ to the cavalry .....

With the spear in a double rank then the impact will be one POA in favour of the foot and the melee would be the same too. A good reason to double the depth of spears.

How do the spear double rank in a formation that is 50/50. I mean I can see the bow going into 3rd and 4th ranks. Is that what you mean? Cutting your frontage by half?

Nik does that conform with your reading of Taktika of Ouranos ?

nikgaukroger · Post by **nikgaukroger** » Thu Dec 13, 2007 6:22 pm

Yes you'd have to go 4 deep to get 2 ranks of spears.

Matches Ouranos IMO as he talks about a 7 deep formation going to 14 deep if needed rather than being deployed 14 deep to begin with so it is an in battle adjustment if necessary.

You may note that unlike other 50:50 Spear + Bow formations the Nikeforians get 8 base BGs as opposed to 6 base which makes this manoeuvre possible on table - I think Richard is a bit smug about that