Vikings a la Ian version II

DaiSho · Post by **DaiSho** » Wed Apr 29, 2009 8:32 pm

Hi All,

Here is the latest version of my Viking army.

I like it even though it didn't perform too well in my last game, but I think that was mostly my fault.

Inspirational C-in-C
Troop Sub-General
Troop Sub-General
Field French Ally General

1. 8 Viking Freemen - HF/Prot/Av/Undrilled/-/Offensive Spearmen
2. 8 Viking Freemen - HF/Prot/Av/Undrilled/-/Offensive Spearmen
3. 8 Viking Freemen - HF/Prot/Av/Undrilled/-/Offensive Spearmen
4. 6 Huscarls - HF/Armoured/Sup/Undrilled/-/HeavyWeapon
4. 3 Huscarls - LF/Unprotected/Sup/Undrilled/Bow/-
5. 6 Huscarls - HF Armoured/Sup/Undrilled/-/HeavyWeapon
5. 3 Huscarls - LF/Unprotected/Sup/Undrilled/Bow/-
6. 6 Huscarls - HF/Armoured/Sup/Undrilled/-/HeavyWeapon
6. 3 Huscarls - LF/Unprotected/Sup/Undrilled/Bow/-
7. 6 Viking Archers - LF/Unprot/Av/Undrilled/Bow/-
8. 4 French Cavarly - Cav/Armoured/Sup/Undrilled/-/Lance/Swordsmen
9. 4 French Cavalry - Cav/Protected/Sup/Undrilled/-/Lance/Swordsmen
10. 4 French Cavalry - Cav/Protected/Sup/Undrilled/-/Lance/Swordsmen

Thoughts?

After my last game I'm thinking that I have too much cavalry. I partly went with 3 bg's to get the >10 Cv + for the intiative. I think this army benefits greatly from being able to select a waterway which will give a secure flank 2/3 of the time. I also split my cavalry into two wings - I should have kept them together. Partly that was due to terrain, but I still should have kept them together.

Ian

BlackPrince · Post by **BlackPrince** » Wed Apr 29, 2009 10:33 pm

personally with only three BG you are right you can place cavalry on both flanks. You should deploy your on mass which may be one flank or even the centre it will depend on the terrain etc.

marioslaz · Post by **marioslaz** » Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:17 am

It's not easy to give advice without to know what kind of troops you will face. I have not Wolves from the sea and I don't think to buy it, because is a period I don't play. But anyway there are some general hints I think can always apply.
First, you have no troops for rough terrain, in particular for brush or similar. You LF archers can go into this kind of terrain, but are no match for any kind of MF or even for an LF with light spear.
Second, you have no troops to oppose to skirmishers, in particular against LH. I found Cav has problems even to catch LF with javelin, and indeed you Superior Cav with lance would be wasted as LF hunters.
Third, if you divide your Cav, the BG without general will be a little hampered, even if Cav Undrilled can perform many manoeuvre without CMT. But what happen if they become even only DISR due to shooting? You cannot bolster them. You pay a lot for them and they could be put out of game by a BG much less expensive.
Forth, your army is slow and you haven't enough troops to keep some reserve. I calculate your troops should be deployed on a front of less than 160cm; we use table 180cm wide, so you cannot cover all front with just a line and if you put some units in reserve your front shorten and you risk outflanking. Without reserve and with a such slow army, it becomes hard to put a patch if one sector goes in crisis.

rbodleyscott · Post by **rbodleyscott** » Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:29 am

marioslaz wrote:Fourth, your army is slow and you haven't enough troops to keep some reserve. I calculate your troops should be deployed on a front of less than 160cm; we use table 180cm wide, so you cannot cover all front with just a line and if you put some units in reserve your front shorten and you risk outflanking. Without reserve and with a such slow army, it becomes hard to put a patch if one sector goes in crisis.

Which tends to suggest that the French ally, if used, may be best used as a mobile reserve. (But only 1 or 2 BGs).

DaiSho · Post by **DaiSho** » Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:38 pm

rbodleyscott wrote:
marioslaz wrote:Fourth, your army is slow and you haven't enough troops to keep some reserve. I calculate your troops should be deployed on a front of less than 160cm; we use table 180cm wide, so you cannot cover all front with just a line and if you put some units in reserve your front shorten and you risk outflanking. Without reserve and with a such slow army, it becomes hard to put a patch if one sector goes in crisis.
Which tends to suggest that the French ally, if used, may be best used as a mobile reserve. (But only 1 or 2 BGs).

Thanks for your input Mario & Richard.

My thoughts for going the Cav option (French Medieval) vs the Medium Infantry option (Scots &/or Irish) is that in my last convention I felt that the only game that I could do nothing to the enemy (yet he could do something to me - which he didn't, ending in a 10:10) was my Vikings with Irish allies vs the Hun.

With the army as listed in this thread, I felt that I would be more capable of going on the offensive. I'd be able to protect my flanks with the cavalry and attack the enemy.

The concept of the three BG's is twofold (maybe threefold?):
Firstly, it gives me > 10 bases of Cavalry, thus +1 to the Initiative. I think this is important as if I get initiative I get a waterway or river 2/3 of the time.
Secondly, it gives me an additional BG.
(maybe) Thirdly, it gives me a slightly more offensive capability.

I could get the 10 bases of Cavalry by having a BG of 6 and a BG of 4 - possibly I'd be able to take them all as Armoured (currenly they're not all Armoured) but at the expense of an extra break point. Additionally, I can't really use the points for anything else as the cost of Viking BG's are so high.

Does this make sense? Can anyone see holes in my theory?

Ian

nikgaukroger · Post by **nikgaukroger** » Fri May 01, 2009 6:13 am

Well against an army like the Huns, which you say it is designed for, IMO the Huns would view the cavalry as targets to aim for rather than a problem.

DaiSho · Post by **DaiSho** » Fri May 01, 2009 7:06 pm

nikgaukroger wrote:Well against an army like the Huns, which you say it is designed for, IMO the Huns would view the cavalry as targets to aim for rather than a problem.

Ok, that's interesting. I would have thought that they would be tough enough to not worry about the shooting too much, and fast enough moving that they may catch the Huns as they evade.

But I'll try it out (I have a regular opponent who runs Ottomans) so I'm sure I'll find out the error of my ways. The trouble with the Ottomans is that he regularly uses an Albanian ally, so it will be the heavily armoured knights that are a problem here I'd say (against my cavalry).

Ian

SirGarnet · Post by **SirGarnet** » Fri May 01, 2009 7:16 pm

DaiSho wrote:he regularly uses an Albanian ally, so it will be the heavily armoured knights that are a problem here I'd say (against my cavalry).

Ian

I think you mean that comforting one BG of Serbs (4 or 6? agonizing choice, that!). Why not the cheap solution of facing them with a BG of Freemen?

DaiSho · Post by **DaiSho** » Fri May 01, 2009 7:34 pm

MikeK wrote:
DaiSho wrote:he regularly uses an Albanian ally, so it will be the heavily armoured knights that are a problem here I'd say (against my cavalry).

Ian
I think you mean that comforting one BG of Serbs (4 or 6? agonizing choice, that!). Why not the cheap solution of facing them with a BG of Freemen?

Yeah, you're right. Serbs, Albanians -what's the difference right? (ducks out of the way of a Serbian/Albanian dice) Hell, they're all the same to me, I'm a bloody norseman!

Well, of course I'd TRY to face the Serbs with the Freemen, but you can't always devise a plan that will work

. Please remember, planning is NOT something that the Vikings rely on

.

Ian

nikgaukroger · Post by **nikgaukroger** » Fri May 01, 2009 7:48 pm

DaiSho wrote:
nikgaukroger wrote:Well against an army like the Huns, which you say it is designed for, IMO the Huns would view the cavalry as targets to aim for rather than a problem.
Ok, that's interesting. I would have thought that they would be tough enough to not worry about the shooting too much, and fast enough moving that they may catch the Huns as they evade.

Well the shooting hits the Armoured BG on a 4+ and the Protected Bgs on a 3+ unless they are in one rank, but that means you can get more shooting at them

You may catch Hun Cv if they evade but you'd be lucky to get LH types.

DaiSho · Post by **DaiSho** » Fri May 01, 2009 8:04 pm

nikgaukroger wrote:Well the shooting hits the Armoured BG on a 4+ and the Protected Bgs on a 3+ unless they are in one rank, but that means you can get more shooting at them You may catch Hun Cv if they evade but you'd be lucky to get LH types.

Yeah, I accept what you say here. My thought in running them was to be in one rank in a gap slightly behind the main line of Vikings in such a way that the ++/+/-/-- movement doesn't have me hanging right out there to reduce the risk of being ganged up on. So it would be something like this:

= Shieldwall

Lancers

= nothing - just used to keep formation:

===FEBA=== (nasty huns/Ottomans/shooty cavalry of any sort)

===g=a=p==o=f==2-3"===

So, in this sort of formation I can hopefully advance with the shieldwall and charge away his skirmishers.

Dunno, might not work. Have to put it on the table to have a look.

An alternative would be the 'quickly moving reserve'

In the game against Anton (the Hun) I effectively went into a defensive box formation at the start and moved out. He pinned me in, and it was annoying as hell trying to attack him. At one stage I had 3 BG's of LH that were in a position where if I could move some cavalry over would have caused great trouble to him. He could no longer evade quite as effectively (his back was to the side edge) but my Huscarls couldn't catch him. A unit of cavalry coming along the edge would have pinned him further and I possibly would have caught him.

Ian