Slitherine

azrael86 wrote: It also has to be relevant that of the few armies allowed a lot of superior foot bow, two are very common, Christian Nubian and Ottomann Turk. This suggests to me that the cost of a superior shooter is too low, particularly for foot (most superior mounted are already expensive, although charging extra for being superior but less for being armoured might be a balance here).

Ottomans is good because it has a lot of superior shooting, the useful troops are fast (4MUs and above), and a lot of it can escape by skirmishing or using drilled "strictly come dancing" when things get awkward. That's a powerful combination.

Christian Nubian had the combination of massed superior bow and having a lot of BGs. In a competition (ie the rankings), if you are lucky you can have brought the right match-up to hit the bow (no chance catching the skirmishers ), but breaking the army is another proposition.

I agree superior bow are probably 1AP too cheap (Dominate MF superior bow are viciously powerful), but only for superior bow, not other superiors. And making armour cheaper is absolutely the wrong way to go. It's bad enough at the moment.

Like it'll make a difference. They could be elite and armoured skilled swordsmen will still beat the crap out of them.

This is sadly true. I have had eight elite ancient british warbamd take on four double overlapped roman legionares and still got minced.

MatthewP wrote:

Like it'll make a difference. They could be elite and armoured skilled swordsmen will still beat the crap out of them.

This is sadly true. I have had eight elite ancient british warbamd take on four double overlapped roman legionares and still got minced.

That is a bit unlucky actually. Double dice is worth about the same as a double PoA and elite is better than superior. The Brits also have the advantage in impact (even factors, elite vs. superior)...

88pts v's 70pts. But your brits would be better in the woods against cataphracts though

A few comments on above:

a) Superior Longbows would create a super troop and unbalance the game. It also has no historical basis as Nik and Richard have mentioned. Ave Longbows are very good, but most players who use them a lot go for the non-English armies with lots of Longbows and some other bits. Personally I would be happy to take my WOR English vs anything, has advantages againts many armies and no army is really horrible to fight (MF Imp/Sw probably the worst).
b) Your Elite Brits on average will beat 4 Romans more often than not (from memory IIRC the sumulation, this is about 70/30 in favour of the Britons)... so unlucky. Actually double dice is worth more than a ++. The reason is you can't score 8 with 4 dice, so if you study the profile of outcomes, instead of the average, you will see the odds are not 50/50.

From simlulator rough results:

Round 1
Britons win by 2 or more 25%, Britons win 25%, draw 25%, Romans win 15% Romans win by 2 10%
- roughly 50% chance of loser losing a base.

Round 2 assuming a draw in round 1.
Britons win by 2 or more 25%, Britons win 20%, draw 25%, Romans win 15%, Romans win by 2 or more 15%

Si

hammy wrote:If you want to see how effective armies with longbow can be then check out Ordonance French.

Most of the better players who used 100YW armies have moved to Ordonance French and it has a somewhat better rating.

I've never gotten this list to work for me? Do you have a full OOB?

hazelbark wrote:

hammy wrote:If you want to see how effective armies with longbow can be then check out Ordonance French.

Most of the better players who used 100YW armies have moved to Ordonance French and it has a somewhat better rating.

I've never gotten this list to work for me? Do you have a full OOB?

I have not used it myself but the norm seems to be three BGs of knights and three BGs of longbow. There is quite likely to be the odd OOB or three on Tim's site.

Here is a 900 pt version I won a comp with.

4 x TC
4 x 4 Knights, Drilled, Superior, Heavily Armoured, Lancer, Swordsmen
3 x 6 Longbowmen, MF, Protected, Drilled, Average, Longbow, Swordsmen
1 x 4 Firearm, LF, Protected, Average, Drilled, Firearm
1 x 4 Crossbowmen, LF, Unprotected, Average, Undrilled, Crossbow
1 x 6 Bidets, LF, Average, Unprotected, Undrilled, Javelin, Light Spear
1 x 6 Franc Archers, MF, Poor, Unprotected, Undrilled, Longbow
1 x 6 Crossbowmen, MF, Average, Protected, Undrilled, Crossbow
1 x 6 Polearms, HF, Average, Armoured, Heavy Weapon

Crossbowmen were rear support - lot's of quality LF to deal with other skirmishers and 7 BG's of drilled hard hitting troops to deal with, well, anything.

For an 800 pt version I would probably drop one of the BG's of Knights - still leaves 12 BG's and a very powerful army.

peterrjohnston wrote:
I agree superior bow are probably 1AP too cheap (Dominate MF superior bow are viciously powerful), but only for superior bow, not other superiors.

Off hand are there any superior foot shooters that aren't Bow? Although I would make it apply on principle to LB and CB as well, if they exist.

As a point of interest, will renaissance shot cost more to be superior than pike?

azrael86 wrote:

peterrjohnston wrote: I agree superior bow are probably 1AP too cheap (Dominate MF superior bow are viciously powerful), but only for superior bow, not other superiors.

Off hand are there any superior foot shooters that aren't Bow? Although I would make it apply on principle to LB and CB as well, if they exist.

As a point of interest, will renaissance shot cost more to be superior than pike?

I presume you mean MF Bow?

If so, Cretan Archers can be superior as can Nubian Archers in the Egyptian list. Both are LF.

Can't think off-hand of any superior Crossbowmen or LF Javelins - might be some lurking about in EotD or BaG.

I believe one of the Carthaginian lists has superior slings, Baleric Slingers.

Can we count superior handgunners in the Ottoman list?

Rob

dave_r wrote: Can't think off-hand of any superior Crossbowmen or LF Javelins - might be some lurking about in EotD or BaG.

Ottomans have some MF superior crossbow. Arab Conquest some superior LF jav. And some superior slingers.

The only mounted superior crossbow I can think of is Later Polish rear ranks, and one of the more obscure Chinese lists.

There are some supewrior Korean and Chinese crossbows. The Nanzhao get large numbers os super mounted crossbows.

Alexander's Agrianians are Superior LF, javelins, light spear. They always seem to be the one unit I can depend on to perform well for my Macedonians.

Chris

azrael86 wrote:

peterrjohnston wrote:
I agree superior bow are probably 1AP too cheap (Dominate MF superior bow are viciously powerful), but only for superior bow, not other superiors.

Off hand are there any superior foot shooters that aren't Bow? Although I would make it apply on principle to LB and CB as well, if they exist.

As a point of interest, will renaissance shot cost more to be superior than pike?

From Legions Triumphant

Dominate Romans can have up to 4 stands of superior LF sling or javelin as well as bow.
Foederate Romans can have up tp 4 stands of superior LF javelins (protected or unprotected).
Jewish Revolt can have up to 8 stands of superior slingers (Zealots) as well as 6-20 stands of MF or LF zealot archers.

Superior javenlins in Blood and Gold. Elite javelins too...

Superior javenlins in Blood and Gold. Elite javelins too...

And at no additional cost - how good is that?!!

petedalby wrote:

Superior javenlins in Blood and Gold. Elite javelins too...

And at no additional cost - how good is that?!!

The cost is to your self-respect.

petedalby wrote:

Superior javenlins in Blood and Gold. Elite javelins too...

And at no additional cost - how good is that?!!

We felt sorry for the armies with no mounted, armour or heavy foot