Slitherine

ravenflight wrote:As I understand it the spear who finally do get into combat without being disrupted by at least 3 rounds of solid fire. So let's assume they do get into combat without losing anything... doubtful, but possible. They then are at evens at impact with less dice!

They then have the fun of passing the cohesion test. IF, by some miracle they pass that (so that's 3 rounds of shooting, 1 impact phase that they'll likely lose) THEN they are as you say at an advantage.

I agree, average, protected, HF spear are rubbish against sparabara.

Defensive spear are dead men walking against any Bow MF now

dave_r wrote: The Lydians lost because of filthy underhand Persian tactics (I.e. campaigning during the winter break).

The Greeks abandoned Athens without _much_ of a fight. A bunch of hoplites at Thermopylae held up a massive Persian army for days.

Marathon and platae were solid hoplite victories.

I doubt the Lydian and Egyptian campaigns tell us much about hoplites vs sparabara. The key concern of the persians in the Lydian army seems to have been the Lydian cavalry, for example.

Thermopylae shows well that the Persians struggled to defeat the Greeks when unable to use their cavalry. But it was a persian victory against 7,000 mostly hoplites. The Greeks abandoned Athens without _any_ fight, as they knew the persian avalry would slaughter them on the plain surrounding the city.

But if the hoplites were able to advance into the Persian foot (Marathon, Plataea) without the cavalry interfering they did well.

Where the Greeks did take on the Persians in cavalry country (Ephesus, Malene) they seem to have been at a disadvantage. And the tactics of the Greeks in the "retreat of the 10,000", albeit in a later time, suggests sensible hoplites stuck to difficult going when faced with Persian cavalry.

philqw78 wrote:

ravenflight wrote:As I understand it the spear who finally do get into combat without being disrupted by at least 3 rounds of solid fire. So let's assume they do get into combat without losing anything... doubtful, but possible. They then are at evens at impact with less dice!

They then have the fun of passing the cohesion test. IF, by some miracle they pass that (so that's 3 rounds of shooting, 1 impact phase that they'll likely lose) THEN they are as you say at an advantage.

I agree, average, protected, HF spear are rubbish against sparabara.

Defensive spear are dead men walking against any Bow MF now

But the hoplites of the persian wars period are really armoured, not protected. They have a big shield, helmet, greaves and body armour faced in bronze. So we're really talking about armoured offensive spear.

A BG of 8 armoured hoplites, three wide, in a battle line approaching the sparabara. The persians get three rounds of shooting with four dice needing to hit three times with 5s or 6s. They might get lucky and cause one test. Assuming the Greek general is sensible, the hoplites need to roll a 5 on two dice (+1 general, +1 rear support) to pass.

It seems likely to me that steady hoplites will be charging the sparabara. They then get 6 dice at impact needing 4s vs 6 needing 4s and 3 needing 5s. So the Greeks are likely to lose 4-3. They'll need a 7 on 2 dice to pass the test (minusses for 1HP2B, lost impact) so need a 7 to pass - about a 60% pass chance. If they fail they'll disrupt but even disrupted hoplites are tough enough to hold on.

Hvaving played this through several times with sparabara against armoured foot, the sparabara usually lose.

On that frontage with armoured hoplites you are spending twice as many points as the sparabara

The rules would be really broken if that failed

philqw78 wrote:On that frontage with armoured hoplites you are spending twice as many points as the sparabara

The rules would be really broken if that failed

The discussion was about whether the rules get this historical interaction correct; for which points are not relevant.
If you are refighting Plataea then you'll use whatever troops were at the battle.
I don't know whether the points are even, and it doesn't really matter if they are or not.

As to whether armoured Hoplites are good value in open competition, that's a completely different question.

pyruse wrote:As to whether armoured Hoplites are good value in open competition, that's a completely different question.

No, I disagree. The rules are a total encompassing, and the original question posed was:

Eques wrote:How is this particular match-up playing out under V2?

I'm guessing the Spara Bara now have quite a bit of extra heft with the armour changes and support shooting bonus?

So, the answer is:

If you have 50% frontage of Hoplites vs Saparabara it's about an even fight, with a slight edge possibly going to the Armoured hoplites (I've done the calculation - it's something like Saparabara winning the impact on average, but only just). Just hope your Saparabara equipped opponent is willing to wait around and not hit you on the flanks... because your Hoplite army will only be half the size of the Persian army.

There is an alternative: Take Protected Hoplites, then you're only slightly outnumbered and you'll almost guarantee losing.

Think on the bright side, you'll have plenty of time to browse the stalls and possibly even see how much fun is being played in games OTHER than FoG:AM.

ravenflight wrote:

pyruse wrote:As to whether armoured Hoplites are good value in open competition, that's a completely different question.

No, I disagree. The rules are a total encompassing, and the original question posed was:

Eques wrote:How is this particular match-up playing out under V2?

I'm guessing the Spara Bara now have quite a bit of extra heft with the armour changes and support shooting bonus?

So, the answer is:

If you have 50% frontage of Hoplites vs Saparabara it's about an even fight, with a slight edge possibly going to the Armoured hoplites (I've done the calculation - it's something like Saparabara winning the impact on average, but only just). Just hope your Saparabara equipped opponent is willing to wait around and not hit you on the flanks... because your Hoplite army will only be half the size of the Persian army.

There is an alternative: Take Protected Hoplites, then you're only slightly outnumbered and you'll almost guarantee losing.

Think on the bright side, you'll have plenty of time to browse the stalls and possibly even see how much fun is being played in games OTHER than FoG:AM.

There is another alternative - don't play equal points competition style battles. FoG works really well for historical refights and scenarios.

pyruse wrote: There is another alternative - don't play equal points competition style battles. FoG works really well for historical refights and scenarios.

Ummm, if hoplites are outmatched by Persian foot in equal numbers in FOG, I'd really hate to see what would happen to them in a historical refight, even accounting for the number inflation in the sources.

They are not outmatched at equal numbers - they are outmatched at equal points.
Numbers on the two sides were pretty much equal at Plataea.

pyruse wrote:They are not outmatched at equal numbers - they are outmatched at equal points.

Well, that depends on how much armor you want to give the Greeks, I guess.

Numbers on the two sides were pretty much equal at Plataea.

That's not history, that's modern reinterpretation. (Modern reinterpretation I happen to agree with, but the actual historical sources give the Persians anywhere from a 1.5 to a 5 to one advantage, IIRC). Anyway, aren't a significant proportion (majority) of Greeks at that battle supposed to be light troops and helots?

I do agree that whether the troop interactions are correct or the points are balanced are 2 different questions.

philqw78 wrote:On that frontage with armoured hoplites you are spending twice as many points as the sparabara

The rules would be really broken if that failed

Yes, the hoplites succeed by concentrating force. So they need to do this is one or two areas and accept that they will lose elsewhere. Like at Marathon where they put the weight on the wings and thinned out the centre. The persian wings broke while the Greek centre caved in. Or at Plateae whre the rash persian advance meant that they fought on the wings against the best of the Greeks while the centre was refused.

In equal point battles between armoured hoplites (indeed armoured foot of any type) and Persians the Persians tend to lose.

ravenflight wrote:

pyruse wrote:As to whether armoured Hoplites are good value in open competition, that's a completely different question.

No, I disagree. The rules are a total encompassing, and the original question posed was:

Eques wrote:How is this particular match-up playing out under V2?

I'm guessing the Spara Bara now have quite a bit of extra heft with the armour changes and support shooting bonus?

So, the answer is:

If you have 50% frontage of Hoplites vs Saparabara it's about an even fight, with a slight edge possibly going to the Armoured hoplites (I've done the calculation - it's something like Saparabara winning the impact on average, but only just). Just hope your Saparabara equipped opponent is willing to wait around and not hit you on the flanks... because your Hoplite army will only be half the size of the Persian army.

There is an alternative: Take Protected Hoplites, then you're only slightly outnumbered and you'll almost guarantee losing.

Think on the bright side, you'll have plenty of time to browse the stalls and possibly even see how much fun is being played in games OTHER than FoG:AM.

The key to the match up is that the hoplites need a bit of terrain and some delaying troops to slow the flanks down a bit and drive hard into the Sparabara with a concentrated force. Armoured foot in quantity are the worst opponents for Persians to face in FOGAM. It's almost always a bad idea not to concentrate against a shooting army.

Just because you couldn't make it work doesn't mean it can't be made to work at all, nor that it's not enjoyable.

Jhykronos wrote:

pyruse wrote:They are not outmatched at equal numbers - they are outmatched at equal points.

Well, that depends on how much armor you want to give the Greeks, I guess.

The Greeks should have better armour than the Persians. For example, here's a snippet from Herodotus on Plataea:

"The fight went most against the Greeks, where Mardonius, mounted upon a white horse, and surrounded by the bravest of all the Persians, the thousand picked men, fought in person. So long as Mardonius was alive, this body resisted all attacks, and, while they defended their own lives, struck down no small number of Spartans; but after Mardonius fell, and the troops with him, which were the main strength of the army, perished, the remainder yielded to the Lacedaemonians, and took to flight. Their light clothing, and want of bucklers, were of the greatest hurt to them: for they had to contend against men heavily armed, while they themselves were without any such defence."

So even a Greek commentator says the Persians were doing well and causing casualties on the Spartans (so perhaps they won the impact). But in a prolonged melee their lack of equivalent armour (and in other passages the lack of equivalent weapons) led to them losing the melee and the general.

As I said last August, from the games we played Armoured Hoplites can shrug off the shooting and can beat the Sparabara in the melee as they have an edge.
Now, when we refought Plataea two years ago the Greeks got thumped not helped by a complete Spartan collapse due to my usual die rolls. We are refighting it again soon(March 1st) under V2 so that will be interesting.

When we refought Plataea using FoG v1 a few years back it was a narrow Greek victory; it was touch and go, though.
The Athenians lost to the Thebans, and the Persians looked like they might break through, but the Spartans beat the Immortals just in time.
We'll have to try it again using v2.

Vespasian28 wrote:As I said last August, from the games we played Armoured Hoplites can shrug off the shooting and can beat the Sparabara in the melee as they have an edge.
Now, when we refought Plataea two years ago the Greeks got thumped not helped by a complete Spartan collapse due to my usual die rolls. We are refighting it again soon(March 1st) under V2 so that will be interesting.

crikey that is some bad rolling! I take it armoured Spartans vs protected Immortals? - not that armoured immortals would fare much different in v2.

In a refight I'd be thinking of special rules to reflect the Persian mantlet wall. Something that gives the Persians an even chance to start with but a poor chance once the wall is down. I think the generic rules aren't too bad but you could improve on them.

It makes no difference in V2 if the Immortals are Protected or Armoured vs Armoured Spears unless the Spears are fragmented as in melee the spears are at + for the spear and cannot have a 2nd + for a single point of armour.

crikey that is some bad rolling! I take it armoured Spartans vs protected Immortals?

Armoured Spartans vs Protected Immortals indeed plus an opponent who couldn't stop rolling 5+ whilst I rolled my usual awful dice. Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory is a speciality of mine.

Well we re-did Plataea yesterday using FOG2 and, unsurprisingly to me at least, the Greeks were walloped yet again.

Most of the action took place on both wings as both centres were pretty reluctant to get stuck in. The Spartans actually did the business and managed to break through the first Persian line and were making inroads on the second but then got hit in the flanks by either infantry or Elite Persian cavalry. The Peroikoi were easily seen off by the Sparabara as they were disrupted at Impact and it went downhill from there. (The Spartans managed to avoid disruption despite losing the impacts due to superiority rerolls and generals.)
The Athenians meanwhile were losing to the Medizing Greeks and yet more Persian cavalry despite managing to seal off their flank to stop the cavalry getting behind them.

As expected the Greeks were not troubled by the shooting going in but lost vitually every Impact phase. Because of the width of the table there was no rear support which didn't help and on the Spartan side there was nothing to stop the cavalry getting on our flanks. As last time my opponent was rolling stellar dice passing CT's even for fragmented troops to hold up Spartans just a little longer as well as killing Pausanias in a losing melee to name but two frustrating events. My die were about average for me i.e failing simple CT's and death rolls of 1 with remarkable ease.
At least the Athenian commander was doing the same this time which was a relief after all the grief he gave me last time for my die rolls. Welcome to my world

So on this basis did the Greeks do well at Thermopylae and win at Marathon and Plataea through sheer luck? Or is there something wrong with our scenario?
A couple of us think possibly the latter and we are going to look into that in a bit more detail to see if the very linear deployment we have been using up to now is accurate. We will try again next year to see if third time is lucky.

I have done Plataea too with V 1 - Greeks lost but mainly due to errors by the inexperienced Greek player and the Immortals beating the Greek Centre ( the least effective Greek troops in our scenario - and probably too many immortals but we like to use all the figures we have if we can! ) . It was a 28mm on a 12x6 table 1300+ points I think .

We used modern photos of the area to set up the terrain. One wrinkle is we gave the bog standard Persian bow/lt spear armed medium foot large shields (mounted like stakes ) which could be put down as a temporary defence - we gave the Greeks a -1 POA in the impact phase only versus these - then they were destroyed. This was from reading accounts where the Greeks had to knock down the big shields to get at the Persians . We've done a few Greek v Greek with the Spartans getting mixed results largely due to player decisions and the "rub of the table" But big games 1200 points on 8x6 or bigger . Works pretty well we feel if you stick within era and region.