Slitherine

i saw that Simon Hall played a magyar army at last tournament (DERBY). Impressions? composition?

i have the figurines but don't know how to play it!

fogly

domblas wrote:i saw that Simon Hall played a magyar army at last tournament (DERBY). Impressions? composition?

i have the figurines but don't know how to play it!

fogly

Going by the result, neither did Simon

May be better to ask Graham Willmott ...

Going by the result, neither did Simon

Ouch!!

The number of times you can say that about Si are very few indeed - I'm taking the rare opportunity whilst it exists

I would give my impression, but I can't do the Burnley accent

The last time I saw him he was headed to the bring and buy....

Magyar is as pure a shooty horse army as there is. You can expect the same results as they did when playing it. You skirmish like crazy trying to pull the enemy formation apart, inflict some cohesion losses via shooting. Then when you have succeeded you charge his disrupted/fragged isolated units and crush him. if that fails, you keep skirmishing until time expires or evade off the table at the last minute to deny your opponent a victory. You will be very popular.
Don't bother with any foot. I doubt if anyone has ever gone %100 LH. A mix of armored cav, protected cav, and light horse is pretty standard. The cav is deployed in skirmish lines in the center with the LH on the flanks.

gozerius wrote:Magyar is as pure a shooty horse army as there is. You can expect the same results as they did when playing it. You skirmish like crazy trying to pull the enemy formation apart, inflict some cohesion losses via shooting. Then when you have succeeded you charge his disrupted/fragged isolated units and crush him. if that fails, you keep skirmishing until time expires or evade off the table at the last minute to deny your opponent a victory. You will be very popular.
Don't bother with any foot. I doubt if anyone has ever gone %100 LH. A mix of armored cav, protected cav, and light horse is pretty standard. The cav is deployed in skirmish lines in the center with the LH on the flanks.

What Gozerius said, going by my experience with Scythians.

I think the option to upgrade/change the LH to protected cavalry will make it more capable against some armies, but more demanding to use around enemy missile troops. Don't stint on generals.

Run this army soon, before they are forced to take CTs for shooting, skirmishing, evading, moving quickly, or any of the other things at which horse archers excelled.

Skullzgrinda wrote:Run this army soon, before they are forced to take CTs for shooting, skirmishing, evading, moving quickly, or any of the other things at which horse archers excelled.

what about 4 BG armored cav bow sw sup
7 BG LH ave bow sw
1 BG armored lancer
1 MOB

and the commanders ? IC? would be good for choosing steppe and manoeuvring

I'd prefer having a 3 TC and a sub General FC for a flank march. It would cost too much to have IC, FC, 2 TC.

domblas wrote:what about 4 BG armored cav bow sw sup
7 BG LH ave bow sw
1 BG armored lancer
1 MOB

and the commanders ? IC? would be good for choosing steppe and manoeuvring

I'd prefer having a 3 TC and a sub General FC for a flank march. It would cost too much to have IC, FC, 2 TC.

I found IC, FC, TC was fine for a very similar Khazar army. IMO these types of armies do not need 4 commanders.

Here I was thinking FC TC TC and 17 BGs of average unprotected LH Bow swordsmen.

Someone was complaining that using Armored, superior, Cav, bow/swordsmen vs LH was cost ineffective. But that's what the protected cav is for.

I'm playing around with the builds for a Great Moravian army, the natural enemy of the Magyar, with an eye to defeating shooty horse armies. The idea is to figure out how to force the LH off the table as quickly as possible. I think the key is to charge with the cav and then follow up with the infantry in the manuever phase, using generals to double move if possible.
I for one have no complaints with the LH - HF dynamic. It is the way things worked in real life. Unless the horsemen could be pinned against terrain, they could fight or break off at will.

gozerius wrote:...
I for one have no complaints with the LH - HF dynamic. It is the way things worked in real life. Unless the horsemen could be pinned against terrain, they could fight or break off at will.

I agree. I just think that if over half the army has fled (evaded off table) then the army should be considered defeated. ie 2 ap for an evaded BG off table.

gozerius wrote:Here I was thinking FC TC TC and 17 BGs of average unprotected LH Bow swordsmen.

Someone was complaining that using Armored, superior, Cav, bow/swordsmen vs LH was cost ineffective. But that's what the protected cav is for.

I'm playing around with the builds for a Great Moravian army, the natural enemy of the Magyar, with an eye to defeating shooty horse armies. The idea is to figure out how to force the LH off the table as quickly as possible. I think the key is to charge with the cav and then follow up with the infantry in the manuever phase, using generals to double move if possible.
I for one have no complaints with the LH - HF dynamic. It is the way things worked in real life. Unless the horsemen could be pinned against terrain, they could fight or break off at will.

come here in Montpellier and play FOG with me!!!!! How nice it would be to play magyar vs moravians!!!! My Fog friends here have mainly greeks and romans!!!!!

nikgaukroger wrote:

domblas wrote:what about 4 BG armored cav bow sw sup
7 BG LH ave bow sw
1 BG armored lancer
1 MOB

and the commanders ? IC? would be good for choosing steppe and manoeuvring

I'd prefer having a 3 TC and a sub General FC for a flank march. It would cost too much to have IC, FC, 2 TC.

I found IC, FC, TC was fine for a very similar Khazar army. IMO these types of armies do not need 4 commanders.

sounds good

domblas wrote:

gozerius wrote:Here I was thinking FC TC TC and 17 BGs of average unprotected LH Bow swordsmen.

Someone was complaining that using Armored, superior, Cav, bow/swordsmen vs LH was cost ineffective. But that's what the protected cav is for.

I'm playing around with the builds for a Great Moravian army, the natural enemy of the Magyar, with an eye to defeating shooty horse armies. The idea is to figure out how to force the LH off the table as quickly as possible. I think the key is to charge with the cav and then follow up with the infantry in the manuever phase, using generals to double move if possible.
I for one have no complaints with the LH - HF dynamic. It is the way things worked in real life. Unless the horsemen could be pinned against terrain, they could fight or break off at will.

come here in Montpellier and play FOG with me!!!!! How nice it would be to play magyar vs moravians!!!! My Fog friends here have mainly greeks and romans!!!!!

Mine too. And Carthaginians. One guy is a total Byzantophile though and has many of their enemies as well. I'm still acquiring all the troops for the Moravians. On a budget and all that.

gozerius wrote:I for one have no complaints with the LH - HF dynamic. It is the way things worked in real life. Unless the horsemen could be pinned against terrain, they could fight or break off at will.

I agree. Basically the demand for nerfing the LF and LH seems to come from those who are unable to accomplish very much with their HF, or simply want a blunt game of bumper cars between heavy infantry. There are no historical justifications for breaking the LH as they presently operate in the game, so "play balance" is invoked instead.

Should the present volume of complaint succeed in eliminating horse archer army as a viable contender, it will be interesting to see what is the next troop type that will need to be broken to help the once and future complainants overcome their next level of frustration.

Skullzgrinda wrote: I agree. Basically the demand for nerfing the LF and LH seems to come from those who are unable to accomplish very much with their HF, or simply want a blunt game of bumper cars between heavy infantry. There are no historical justifications for breaking the LH as they presently operate in the game, so "play balance" is invoked instead.

Should the present volume of complaint succeed in eliminating horse archer army as a viable contender, it will be interesting to see what is the next troop type that will need to be broken to help the once and future complainants overcome their next level of frustration.

Great someone hits it on the head?

After LF and LH what next cavalry cause HF can't catch them.

I for one think FOG will be less a game if all we do is line up HF either side and roll lots of dice. The tactices and skill will have gone and it'll all become like another rule set.

So please be aware of what you wish for and the effect it will have on the whole game if you nobble the LH LF troop type.

Thank you Chicken Licken for your timely contribution

We're off again..........fly on the water