Slitherine

Hi,

As HW cancel better armour, is it worth to take them armoured instead than protected ?

What's your choice between
- 6 armoured (3 HW, 3 XB) = 57 pt
- 8 protected (4 HW, 4 XB) = 60 pt

Thanks for your comment

frederic wrote:Hi,

As HW cancel better armour, is it worth to take them armoured instead than protected ?

As always, it depends what you think you will be fighting.

I was pretty convinced to take protected. But in a Xi Xia vs Han battle, the Hand were all armoured and that should have given them the advantage. When my poor protected unit broke one of his through kills you can guess luck played a roll.

But after that battle I figured I would probably do lists about 1/3 armoured, 2/3 protected. Just enough armoured that if I see enemy protected or mounted archers I can have an edge.

Depends on if you think they are going to be facing a lot of shooty bows. If not then protected are far better. If you use enough LF to cover protected are better. If you string them out and don't support use armoured, but you'll have less support after paying for armoured.
Personally I would always take the protected. But then my list would be made to support that choice.

I have been thinking about this one today and have concluded that the heavy weapons chaps are probably better as protected.

The real question now is am I brave enough to take an army with no troops better than average to a tournament??

hammy wrote:The real question now is am I brave enough to take an army with no troops better than average to a tournament??

Next Sunday? At least the HW will be useful.

One thing to keep in mind is that your opponent does not get their amour POA due to your heavy weapon, but you won't get the POA if you are protected and they are amoured since they still have better armour. As was said before it depends on what you will be fighting, if getting shot at a lot armoured is probably worth the extra points. You could try an army either way and see which works better for you.

Thanks for your help.

I knew when facing bow armoured is better but I forget that I could get an extra POA when I face protected with my armoured

So I will play them armoured as it fits with my Terracota miniatures...

armoured

impact foot are the most dangerous foot in the impact phase for your troop
(+ for the hw, ++ for the impact foot)

but in the melee ?

if you are armoured : impact foot are mainly protected
so in the melee :
++hw/better armoured against + swordmen

if you have resisted the impact, you will kill them druring the following melee

see you in ballainvillier

marco wrote:armoured

impact foot are the most dangerous foot in the impact phase for your troop
(+ for the hw, ++ for the impact foot)

but in the melee ?

if you are armoured : impact foot are mainly protected
so in the melee :
++hw/better armoured against + swordmen

if you have resisted the impact, you will kill them druring the following melee

see you in ballainvillier

It rather depends on the impact foot. Barbarian impact foot might be mainly protected but Romans tend to be armoured.

If you think you will be facing a lot of protected troops then armoured is worth it. If not then protected is just fine.

but the roman impact foot armoured are hf
slower than your troop and handicap in rough and difficult



protected: always equal in the melee exept against pike
armoured : better againts protected equal against armoured and pike (protected)

i think the most important thing is : what do you want to do with them ?
i like a smaller force but better than opponent in most of the case :
i choose armoured

how do you use the army
which troop must lead the attack in your army
ect...

frederic wrote:I knew when facing bow armoured is better but I forget that I could get an extra POA when I face protected with my armoured

Out of theme. But within theme, most opposing infantry will have HW & crossbows - against these the Armour will do you no good at all.

Just a thought regarding the use of heavy weapons prompted by deadtorius. Using heavy weapons in the melee phase "cancels enemy better armour POA" that is if they have better armour than your battlegroup. If you were both armoured it would not negate their better armour as you are both the same, hence you would not then get a + POA for your armour, the HW POA is not taken into account. Is this correct.

Having just seen my Warring States lose to an Indian army (well done the elephant core - shame caltrops are no good in FOG) I can say that converting most of the battleline to medium infantry is changing the way this army fights. Also after looking at Blood and Gold I am a bit purplexed at the number of South American Superior troops compared to the army lists in Empires of the Dragon.

HW has two functions if you will under the melee POAs.

1) it give you a POA in certain circumstances.
2) it cancels an opponent having better armour.

These are NOT mutually dependent.

For instance if your Protected HW faced Armoured SKilled swordsmen.

You don't get you POA for HW because its is cancelled by SkSw
The enemy gets a POA for SkSw
The enemy does not get a POA for Armour because your HW cancels it.

armoured : better againts protected equal against armoured and pike (protected)

Actually the pikes are up a + for the rear rank so yes heavy weapon armoured would equal out a pike block, armoured sword the pikes are up a + on POA.

Sorry for confusing the heavy weapon versus armour issue. My main opponent thought originally that his heavy weapons would cancel my armour bonus and then give him a + POA for his armour, doesn't work that way your opponent doesn't get the + POA but would still be counted as better armour so you would not get the + POA for being protected versus armour. Hope that is all cleared up for you now.

Well, if fighting protected heavy weapons guys with backrank bow/x-bow, youd get a double + on any unit that gets a casualty.. whereas they'd only get a single plus if they killed one of you.. small but good to take into account .

Also, with drilled medium foot sixes are better for manouverability sake, so you might aswell have them as good against shooting (compared to protected), since they only need 2 hits from shooting compared to 3 for a group of eight.

Cerberias wrote:Well, if fighting protected heavy weapons guys with backrank bow/x-bow, youd get a double + on any unit that gets a casualty.. whereas they'd only get a single plus if they killed one of you.. small but good to take into account .

I don't understand this????

If you're fighting a group of six protected heavy weapons backed by crossbow, as six armored heavy weapons backed by crossbow.. it might be even at first, but once the protected group loses a front-rank base and steps a protected crossbowmen forward, you'll have both heavy weapon bonus and armor bonus against the crossbowmen. If you lose a base and your armored crossbowman steps forward they only get the heavy weapons bonus so only end up with a single plus against your second rank trooper.

thanks
In my defence it was Sunday morning

, its all good mate, in your defence i did word it quite badly the first time. All i'm saying here is that i'd much prefer sixes of armored compared to eights of protected. I may stretch to sixes of protected if i worked out a way to screen them from shooting and get an extra boost against pikes with the leftover points, but i doubt it.