Slitherine

All

Following the advice of the esteemed Mr. Powell, who suggested that a mono-type mounted army that is plus against most things may improve upon my career record of 'played lots, won zero', and that Tibetan might be the way, here I present two options. The intent is not to win the PBI but to get first move while deployed well back.

Option 1 (which seems best to me)

FC
TC x 3
8 BG each of 4 Cataphracts, Heavily Armoured, Superior Drilled, Lancers/Swordsmen

795 points.

Option 2

FC
TC x 2
1 BG of 4 Cataphracts, Heavily Armoured, Superior Drilled, Lancers/Swordsmen
5 BG each of 6 Cataphracts, Heavily Armoured, Superior Drilled, Lancers/Swordsmen

People's thoughts are most welcome.

(Now I don't have Tibetans but I have more than enough Parthian Cataphracts to give it a run.)

Option 1 looks best to me.

timmy1 wrote:All

Following the advice of the esteemed Mr. Powell, who suggested that a mono-type mounted army that is plus against most things may improve upon my career record of 'played lots, won zero', and that Tibetan might be the way, here I present two options. The intent is not to win the PBI but to get first move while deployed well back.

Option 1 (which seems best to me)

FC
TC x 3
8 BG each of 4 Cataphracts, Heavily Armoured, Superior Drilled, Lancers/Swordsmen

795 points.

Option 2

FC
TC x 2
1 BG of 4 Cataphracts, Heavily Armoured, Superior Drilled, Lancers/Swordsmen
5 BG each of 6 Cataphracts, Heavily Armoured, Superior Drilled, Lancers/Swordsmen

People's thoughts are most welcome.

(Now I don't have Tibetans but I have more than enough Parthian Cataphracts to give it a run.)

You missed the compulsery fortified camp at 24 points.

Dave

You are 100% correct. I made the assumption that as it was listed in the optional section it was optional. How stupid of me. Explains why you are a list checker (of some repute) and I am not...

Revised list to follow.

Regards
Tim

OK, same ideas, just different numbers.

Option 1 (which seems best to me)

FC
TC x 2
8 BG each of 4 Cataphracts, Heavily Armoured, Superior Drilled, Lancers/Swordsmen
Fortified Camp

784 points.

Option 2

IC
TC x 2
5 BG each of 6 Cataphracts, Heavily Armoured, Superior Drilled, Lancers/Swordsmen
Fortified Camp

774 points.

Again, opinions most welcome

Ha ha ha !!

Are you getting David53 mixed up with dave_r Tim?

Rob

I must be, not my best day.

My apologies to both Dave's.

Revised list 2, but change IC to 2 TCs, and add a BG of filler of some sort (never use it, just hide it near your camp)
and go to 3 bgs of 4 3 bgs of 6 with the cats.

still not sure i really rate it, but could be interesting.

Ben

Very interesting idea that Ben. V3.

OK, same ideas, just different numbers. Just spotted that this would be 601 - 794 and / or 802 - 850 AD only

Option 1

FC
TC x 2
8 BG each of 4 Cataphracts, Heavily Armoured, Superior Drilled, Lancers/Swordsmen
Fortified Camp

784 points.

Option 2

TC x 4
3 BG each of 4 Cataphracts, Heavily Armoured, Superior Drilled, Lancers/Swordsmen
3 BG each of 6 Cataphracts, Heavily Armoured, Superior Drilled, Lancers/Swordsmen
BG of 6 Light Foot, Unprotected, Average, Undrilled, Bow (my how they will be preying for some shrubbery to hide in - if the girly Nomand Mercs were just a bit more girly and had now sword I would have chosen them as they are much harder to catch - oh well I have them so I might as well get to use the ambush markers)
Fortified Camp

794 points.

Once again, opinions most welcome

benos wrote:Revised list 2, but change IC to 2 TCs, and add a BG of filler of some sort (never use it, just hide it near your camp)
and go to 3 bgs of 4 3 bgs of 6 with the cats.

still not sure i really rate it, but could be interesting.

Ben

All TCs, some filler, and having at least two 6-base BGs for their weight all sound wise. Carefully study your terrain strategies.

Mike

Mike et al, thanks for the advice.

Copy all of it bar the very last bit - 'strategies', must find out what that word means. Does it come after 'having a plan'?

Any and all advice on terrain woud be good.

Regards
Tim

timmy1 wrote:Very interesting idea that Ben. V3.

OK, same ideas, just different numbers. Just spotted that this would be 601 - 794 and / or 802 - 850 AD only

Option 1

FC
TC x 2
8 BG each of 4 Cataphracts, Heavily Armoured, Superior Drilled, Lancers/Swordsmen
Fortified Camp

784 points.

Option 2

TC x 4
3 BG each of 4 Cataphracts, Heavily Armoured, Superior Drilled, Lancers/Swordsmen
3 BG each of 6 Cataphracts, Heavily Armoured, Superior Drilled, Lancers/Swordsmen
BG of 6 Light Foot, Unprotected, Average, Undrilled, Bow (my how they will be preying for some shrubbery to hide in - if the girly Nomand Mercs were just a bit more girly and had now sword I would have chosen them as they are much harder to catch - oh well I have them so I might as well get to use the ambush markers)
Fortified Camp

794 points.

Once again, opinions most welcome

Since they are superior and drilled, I'd go with option 1 with the cat's all in 4's. Is there any good reason for an FC CinC. Can you downgrade him to a TC and use the points to get a cheap BG of LF instead? I think the extra BG would be worth more than the FC as CinC. NO reason to get an FC as a sub since this isn't an army that's going to flank march unless run by Mr. Powell .

Chris

IM(not so)HO
3xTC
Camp
5x4 Cats
2x4 undrilled superior abbasids
1x6 LF bow
1x4 LH Bw Sw
1x8 Armd Def Sp

The army is small, so it doesn't need a lot of generals or a huge command radius because of that. The LF are filler and have little use, except to stand in front of the cats to stop them having to charge skirmishers. The LH stay close to the cats so something may be caught when they charge alongside the cats. The armd spear can look after themselves and fill a lot of empty table one rank deep. They should go down first, then can quickly move out of the way. The Abbasids can protect the flanks.

Put lots of difficult terrain down against mounted armies. Against lots of LH on steppes the cats can go 1 deep and quickly change formation, being drilled.

And the cats dismount as Off Sp if you are facing knights. Ooooh, heavily armoured offensive spear. Pikes are the only thing that the cats are minus against if they choose their best mounted/dismounted option. And that only at impact.

Put all the generals in combat. Nothing moves fast enough after routing to get far enough from the enemy to be rallied, so don't bother.

Oh, and the fortified compulsory camp really screws this army over.

timmy1 wrote:Mike et al, thanks for the advice.

Copy all of it bar the very last bit - 'strategies', must find out what that word means. Does it come after 'having a plan'?

Any and all advice on terrain woud be good.

Regards
Tim

The tactical tips in the 600s includes some very specific terrain tips. Since you are drilled, one way to get clever is to put that central blocking terrain (don't ignore Impassable as an option) in the middle or on the opposing side and lure him to deploy a less mobile army on both sides of it, then swing to attack with full force on just one side with his other wing temporarily out of the action. Having even one LF to slow down second moves towards your exposed flank will be valuable.

The nice thing with 4 TCs is that you can assign one to each of two spearhead BGs (should be the bigger ones) and still have two to spare for battle management or replacements. As you will likely be outwinged and experience gnawing flank pains, getting commanders in the front rank to break through quickly is more easily justifiable.

A fortified camp costs about as much as one Cat base and if it holds out that can give you enough extra time to win elsewhere.

It doesn't matter if you win, so long as it's not dull.

MikeK wrote:It doesn't matter if you win, so long as it's not dull.

It won't be dull with Tibetans. Panic followed by elation or "well it was fun anyway" is what I would expect

benos wrote:Revised list 2, but change IC to 2 TCs, and add a BG of filler of some sort (never use it, just hide it near your camp)
and go to 3 bgs of 4 3 bgs of 6 with the cats.

still not sure i really rate it, but could be interesting.

Ben

Since the Cats are drilled it would be a waste in 6's keep them in 4's as mentiioned already no IC take TC's work out enough points to take the 1 BG of LH allowed.

the idea of the 6's was as a hammer blow bg led by a general. While the 4's are to manouver on the flanks.
You could go down to 1 bg of 6 but i think the 3 to 3 ratio has something too it.
Bear in mind i was thinking simple to use rather than best overall.
There is always something for a simple plan and simple to use troops in a well defined role.
The point is the 6's wade into melee while the rest support.
Of course i could be over simplifying?
Ben

Not to sure about this army if you look at the Usk event in the empires book out of 21 teams no Tibetans?

That's 'coz all the players at Usk are better than me so don't need such a simple and one dimensional army.