Slitherine

Looking to start my LC army soon. Been reading through the various threads and conclude that it would be a good idea to get some LH into the army via an ally. So, for those playing, or playing against, an LC army what tends to be the more effective, bow or lancer LH?

Clearly Bedouin gives the capability to take as little as you want really but the horse are not bow armed. Syrian is the other option with bow armed Turcomen LH but a requirement to take bow armed Cav too. I'd like to keep the army as much crusader based as possible with as little farmed out to an allied commander as possible. Much as I'd like bow armed LH really I am leaning towards the Bedouin.

Any thoughts?

I have tried out 3 different styles of the Later Crusaders: Crusaders with Syrian allies. Crusaders with Bedouin allies. Syrian States with a large Crusader ally.

I found that the Bedouins could not protect the flanks long enough for my knights to smash through the enemy line.

I found that the Syrians could hold off the enemy line, but the knights could not punch through many heavy infantry units. There was a couple of times where the cavalry would flank the enemy while my knights would punch through; Wonderful results! I have also gotten a bit lucky with one or two knight BGs and, well, Deus Lo Volt! IMO, knights, in general, just needed a little more help to win games.

I finally tried Syrian States with a very large, Later Crusader ally. The additional bow cavalry and bow light horse protected my knights beautifully and also disrupted the occasional BG for my knights to take advantage of the opportunity. Unfortunately, I only had a few knights now and a bad couple of death rolls would cost you the game. I still believe that this is the best configuration of the 3.

Good luck!

I would have thought lancer LH the better choice. Bow LH tend to fall back and shoot, which is fine but the knights will be going in the other direction. Lance LH give you a more offensive capability IMHO

Good point!! I'm not that keen on being tied to a BG of Ghilmans also as any Kn I have I'd like adorned with a cross or suitable Jerusalem heraldry (maybe even Ridley Scott powder blue!!).

Thanks eldiablito. I'd seen the threads on the Syrian army / Crusader ally and while I'm sure it may be the best option it just doesn't appeal Looks like I might be doing some losing. No, think positive

What about using a Byzantine Ally? I have tried it several times and it worked quite well and historically the Crusaders did ok with Byzantines even beating Zengi(sp?). I use; 1x Byzantine TC, 1x4 KN Harm sup drilled ln and sw, 2x 4 LH ave unprot undrilled bw and sw, 1x LF unprot poor undrilled bw. You can have up to 4 BGs of LH it is just a matter of what prefer. The advantages of the Byzantines is you are not diluting your shock power by effectively replace a KN BG with a Cavalry BG if you use a Syrian or Bedouin ally

Good idea. Thanks. Will take a look at those.

Empgamer wrote:Looking to start my LC army soon. Been reading through the various threads and conclude that it would be a good idea to get some LH into the army via an ally. So, for those playing, or playing against, an LC army what tends to be the more effective, bow or lancer LH?

Clearly Bedouin gives the capability to take as little as you want really but the horse are not bow armed. Syrian is the other option with bow armed Turcomen LH but a requirement to take bow armed Cav too. I'd like to keep the army as much crusader based as possible with as little farmed out to an allied commander as possible. Much as I'd like bow armed LH really I am leaning towards the Bedouin.

Any thoughts?

When you take anything (especially an ally) you need to be clear about their purpose, because troops you don't use are wasted army points.
I you know what your ally is there to do the choice will be clear, for example if you only want the LH deal with other skirmishers the lancers are useful, but if you are looking to add an entire skirmishing wing, bow and the Cav are both a good idea.