Points values for mixed BGs

[gozerius]

It seeems that the mixed BGs of front rank defensive spear, rear rank bow or crossbow, which are supposed to be depicting a mostly bow armed force with a veneer of pavisiers to protect against charges, should count the first rank as HF bow, defensive spear. This would give them the same shooting capacity as a normal bow armed BG but with the added benefit of the POA cancelling spearman capability. Yes this would break the norm of missile troops always being rated MF.
Scandinavian mixed BGs of HF HW and MF Xbow, Sw are representing a different formation entirely where the mix is 50/50 with the shooters in front, retiring when close combat is imminent. They should be left as is.

[PaulByzan]

An interesting concept and probably something the Byzantines would have been capable of. Not up on FoGR enough to know how it would work exactly. An alternative would be to make all currently mixed BG Byzantine cavalry bow* since the manuals seem to indicate the ratio of bow to lancers was never quite 1:1. I'm not one of those who dislikes bow*. I think it's one of the better concepts in the rules for simulating Byzantine cavalry.

Paul G.

It seems to me that one of the main problems of mixed BGs point costs has not been mentioned yet. This is for the Byzantine mixed cavalry of lance front rank/bow rear rank. The bow armed cav cost as much as bow armed cav of their class not mixed with lancers. However since they are mixed with lance armed they have lost one of the abilities that make bow armed more expensive (generally) than similar lance armed. That is they cannot evade as they cannot go in a one deep line. So, for example, a rear bow armed bukellari stand costs as much as a comparable Sassanid bow armed (if drilled), yet the Byzantine cav is missing the ability to evade which the Sassanid enjoys.

A valid point indeed. A points discount would seem to be in order if the representation remains as it currently is.

However, an alternative proposal is to do something like detached shot in FOGR, and allow the Bow to be detached at deployment. (Koursores/Defensores).

[Polkovnik]

It seeems that the mixed BGs of front rank defensive spear, rear rank bow or crossbow, which are supposed to be depicting a mostly bow armed force with a veneer of pavisiers to protect against charges, should count the first rank as HF bow, defensive spear. This would give them the same shooting capacity as a normal bow armed BG but with the added benefit of the POA cancelling spearman capability. Yes this would break the norm of missile troops always being rated MF.

I agree with what you are trying to achieve (and maybe it should be applied to persian foot also) but the problem is with a BG of 8 such troops, what's to stop the player putting them in a two wide formation with two ranks of spear (which would not be possible in real life due to the amount of spearmen in the unit) ?
Should they be HF at all if most of them are missile troops ?
Maybe they should be MF Bow / Crossbow, with something new in the front rank that gives the required outcome, ie works like Def Spear in cancelling lancers & swords when steady but gets no + POAs.

[lawrenceg]

It seeems that the mixed BGs of front rank defensive spear, rear rank bow or crossbow, which are supposed to be depicting a mostly bow armed force with a veneer of pavisiers to protect against charges, should count the first rank as HF bow, defensive spear. This would give them the same shooting capacity as a normal bow armed BG but with the added benefit of the POA cancelling spearman capability. Yes this would break the norm of missile troops always being rated MF.

I agree with what you are trying to achieve (and maybe it should be applied to persian foot also) but the problem is with a BG of 8 such troops, what's to stop the player putting them in a two wide formation with two ranks of spear (which would not be possible in real life due to the amount of spearmen in the unit) ?
Should they be HF at all if most of them are missile troops ?
Maybe they should be MF Bow / Crossbow, with something new in the front rank that gives the required outcome, ie works like Def Spear in cancelling lancers & swords when steady but gets no + POAs.

In my Later Sicilian army the crossbow/pavisier BG has a max size of 6, so no need to worry about 8s in odd formations.

MF front rank does not work because the lancers, even with the lance not counting, get + for mounted vs MF.

[hazelbark]

This is exactly what one would expect from a mixture of spearmen and crossbowmen.

Now it may be that they do not do either well enough to be effective in either role and therefore are not worth the points.

A simple analysis does not quite capture it as you have to factor in the chances of the shooting disrupting the opponent before they charge.

Agreed it was a simple analysis, but I think when you at players and what they choose if is going to be a single rank of HF Def Sp, the unit is crap. It need to be fixed for two reasons:
1) Its crap
2) Historically it wasn't that crappy.

[ethan]

This is exactly what one would expect from a mixture of spearmen and crossbowmen.

Now it may be that they do not do either well enough to be effective in either role and therefore are not worth the points.

A simple analysis does not quite capture it as you have to factor in the chances of the shooting disrupting the opponent before they charge.

Agreed it was a simple analysis, but I think when you at players and what they choose if is going to be a single rank of HF Def Sp, the unit is crap. It need to be fixed for two reasons:
1) Its crap
2) Historically it wasn't that crappy.

It seems like there are two easy changes that could be made:

Either make the front rank LS/Sw or make the whole formation Xbow with the front rank with LS. Both of these are reasonably effective and not super troops.

[hazelbark]

Either make the front rank LS/Sw or make the whole formation Xbow with the front rank with LS. Both of these are reasonably effective and not super troops.

That would work meaning taking the old nikephorian 1 rank Def SP 1 rank bow and making it

front rankHF light spear sword

Rear rank MF Bow

That is better than what we have now and not all powerful

old way lances don't count and spear doesn't count net POA 0
new way both get a POA so net 0 POA

[gozerius]

But then you have changed the dynamic of the BG. From a shooter, static, but resistant to chargers, to a shooter that has a decent impact/melee capability. I don't think that, at least for medieval types, the number of spearmen justifies the LSp/Sw capability. Its just too powerful.

[lawrenceg]

It might be worth looking at

1 rank HF D spear Bow*, 1 rank MF D spear Bow* for the formations with a lot of spearmen,
1 rank HF Dspear Bow/Xbow, 1 rank MF bow/Xbow for the formations with a lot of shooters and few spearmen.

But maybe a simple points reduction for the existing scheme would be a better way to go, if there is a consensus that they are too expensive.

With the current scheme you get a shooty BG that against better armoured lance/sword is evens at impact and, if steady, - in melee. This is a marked improvement over a pure shooty BG being -- at impact, -- in melee, and -1 in CT vs mounted and HF, for which you give up 1 shooting dice per 4 bases.

Even at current points, they are not expensive troops and you would expect them to lose against quality troops like knights and superior armoured cavalry and, as they are shooty, against specialist close combat infantry. However, they do have a fair chance of losing more sowly, and some chance of actually beating mounted opponents by forcing them to break off and shooting them up.

The thing I would change is the D spear POA to:

D spear charging : no POA
D spear not charging : + except against D Spear

As currently, when Dspear charge you, one rank of DSpear makes you worse than no spear at all.

[hazelbark]

But then you have changed the dynamic of the BG. From a shooter, static, but resistant to chargers, to a shooter that has a decent impact/melee capability. I don't think that, at least for medieval types, the number of spearmen justifies the LSp/Sw capability. Its just too powerful.

Too powerful? Hardly imo. My point is right now the Nikephorian are underpowered for their historical foes.