Slitherine

How would Cavalry with Bows fight in FoGR? Let's say like good quality Ottoman sipahis. Two ranks usually, or one?

A purely academic question, to be sure!

Thanks!

Well, I could repeat Nik's standard phrase...

The short answer is either. If they don't have a lance capability (if they did they would be shock) they might choose to fight 1 rank deep so that they can evade. However for the mass of shooting required (they get 1 per 2 bases in the second rank) they will be 2 ranks.

timmy1 wrote:Well, I could repeat Nik's standard phrase...

The short answer is either. If they don't have a lance capability (if they did they would be shock) they might choose to fight 1 rank deep so that they can evade. However for the mass of shooting required (they get 1 per 2 bases in the second rank) they will be 2 ranks.

Perzactly.

We've seen a lot of "skirmishing" with the cavalry in one rank. Combined with the more maneuverable LH, it is often possible to concentrate archery on a single BG. In playtesting, the Turks did well against the TYW Imperialists and in a recent game we used the Turkish Playtest list against Swedes and the Turks took them apart. In both of these cases, we used an early Turkish list but allowed arbuebus to be upgraded to musket for appropriate points.

GHGAustin wrote:We've seen a lot of "skirmishing" with the cavalry in one rank. Combined with the more maneuverable LH, it is often possible to concentrate archery on a single BG. In playtesting, the Turks did well against the TYW Imperialists and in a recent game we used the Turkish Playtest list against Swedes and the Turks took them apart. In both of these cases, we used an early Turkish list but allowed arbuebus to be upgraded to musket for appropriate points.

TBH the great equalizer is the +2 on shooting from bow, I'd quite happly stand and let you shoot me with bow while I shoot my muskets at you and hit you without a saving throw.

Did'nt the swedish only shoot half bases for being salvo as they are better at combat than shooting. I fought a Turkish army at Britcon were'nt to bothered with the bow as they had to keep evading or fight at a - against pistol and better armoured cavalry

david53 wrote:

GHGAustin wrote:We've seen a lot of "skirmishing" with the cavalry in one rank. Combined with the more maneuverable LH, it is often possible to concentrate archery on a single BG. In playtesting, the Turks did well against the TYW Imperialists and in a recent game we used the Turkish Playtest list against Swedes and the Turks took them apart. In both of these cases, we used an early Turkish list but allowed arbuebus to be upgraded to musket for appropriate points.

TBH the great equalizer is the +2 on shooting from bow, I'd quite happly stand and let you shoot me with bow while I shoot my muskets at you and hit you without a saving throw.

Did'nt the swedish only shoot half bases for being salvo as they are better at combat than shooting. I fought a Turkish army at Britcon were'nt to bothered with the bow as they had to keep evading or fight at a - against pistol and better armoured cavalry

No, I would not use cavalry bow versus musket, rather cavalry bow versus other cavalry. For infantry, Turks would use superior musket armed janissaries who are also swordsmen.

A few bow BGs can be useful in a firepower army.

Only a majority of shooting dice need be from firearms to get the death roll advantage, so combining bows with firearms to converge fire can be efficient. Bows have longer short range and better odds to hit mounted than do shot, plus they are cheaper in points cost.

GHGAustin wrote:

david53 wrote:

GHGAustin wrote:We've seen a lot of "skirmishing" with the cavalry in one rank. Combined with the more maneuverable LH, it is often possible to concentrate archery on a single BG. In playtesting, the Turks did well against the TYW Imperialists and in a recent game we used the Turkish Playtest list against Swedes and the Turks took them apart. In both of these cases, we used an early Turkish list but allowed arbuebus to be upgraded to musket for appropriate points.

TBH the great equalizer is the +2 on shooting from bow, I'd quite happly stand and let you shoot me with bow while I shoot my muskets at you and hit you without a saving throw.

Did'nt the swedish only shoot half bases for being salvo as they are better at combat than shooting. I fought a Turkish army at Britcon were'nt to bothered with the bow as they had to keep evading or fight at a - against pistol and better armoured cavalry

No, I would not use cavalry bow versus musket, rather cavalry bow versus other cavalry. For infantry, Turks would use superior musket armed janissaries who are also swordsmen.

Feel free you still give up the +2 against mostly superior horse better than you in impact

MikeK wrote:A few bow BGs can be useful in a firepower army.

Only a majority of shooting dice need be from firearms to get the death roll advantage, so combining bows with firearms to converge fire can be efficient. Bows have longer short range and better odds to hit mounted than do shot, plus they are cheaper in points cost.

True but against superior horse that brave it out and come up real close in their move what do you do if you can't disrupt them....its evade and be caught or stand and fight at a -