Slitherine

After playing Hammy on Monday we discussed the size of My Carthy Vet BG's ( Superior / Armoured / Off Spear )

He suggested I drop them from 8's to 6 per BG, which makes sense.............

My Average / Protected / Off Spear will stay at 8's

What I'd like some feedback on is how big would you make BG's of Average Armoured Foot ( both spear and Impact types )

Can I get away with 6's ???

gerryb wrote:What I'd like some feedback on is how big would you make BG's of Average Armoured Foot ( both spear and Impact types )
Can I get away with 6's ???

I played with BGs of 6 infantry at Leeds. It was fine provided I kept them together and mutually supporting each other.

The Romans I used a Leeds had 8 BG of 4 bases of Legionaries - HF superior or Elite Armoured Drilled Impact Skilled Swordsmen. This works very well. These are very tough, some of which comes from there being only 4 in the BG thus they fight on a 2 base frontage - in 4 dice vs 4 dice it is hard to loose by 2 and hard to take 3 hits in a fight you didn't loose - so they don't take casualties unless they loose and its very unlikely they will loose 2 levels even if they do lose.

With spear I would probably go for 8 but fight 3 wide - spear really suffer if 1 deep.
With other "good" foot 4s is best but not allways available. I don't think there is much difference between 6 and 8.

Its a bit horses for courses I think....more manouverabuilty and mor BG vs more resilience locally....

Also the new rules fo shooting 1p2b for a -1 on cohesion mean there is an even smoother effect between them so

at 6 - lose 2 for a CT - from combat or to force a test from shooting and 3 - for a CT from shooting
at 8 - lose 3 for a CT - from combat or to force a test from shooting and 4 - for a CT from shooting

at 4 - lose 2 for a CT for any of the above

So more worth having 6 or more making a bit more of a price for having the ultra mobile 4 BG design

Si

Si

its an interesting dilemma..............but both 6's and 8's only need 2 losses for 25%

Question is can armoured BG's of 6 survive where protected need top be in 8's

Think in terms of some spartans.

6 armoured cost 78 pts whereas 8 protected cost 80 pts

Assuming you will still be fighting on a frontage of 6:
In most combats the enemy will have 6 dice against you.

Assuming no net POA vs the protected troops, and the armoured on a net +

Expected hits on the 8 protected = 3, expected hits on the 6 armoured = 2.

Both of these qualify for the 1HP3B.

However, the extra hit on the protected might make the difference between winning, drawing or losing the combat.

For actual losses from death rolls, the protected expect to be down 25% after 4 losing combats, the armoured after 6 losing combats. Against shooting or not losing a close combat, only the protected expect to need a death roll.

On this basis, the 6 armoured are more survivable than 8 protected.

This makes assumptions about the POA. It would change against opponents that ignore armour POA, or if the opponent in close combat was unprotected, for example.

Other factors come into play if you have 24 bases of a fixed troop type and the choice is between 3 x 8 bases or 4 x 6 bases.

It is these intricacies that make it impractical to work out mathematically optimal strategies in this game. This is a good thing as it means you have to rely on tactically optimal strategies.

It is these intricacies that make it impractical to work out mathematically optimal strategies in this game. This is a good thing as it means you have to rely on tactically optimal strategies.

Indeed...so there's an objective met

Si

I am playing Hammy tomorrow. It is Navarrese v Scots Common.

For those of you who don't know the conmen are classed as offensive spearmen. I have taken enough to fill the table (width wise) and intend to operate in BG's of 10. Hammy is taking the Navarrese to check Medium Infantry. I am attempting the "Wall o Spear" tactic, unfortunately I am only protected rather than armoured

We will report back on how it went on Tuesday I guess. The advantage with 10's is he needs to get 4 hits to force a test. Of course the IC is almost compulsory with an army like this...

Unfortunately, I probably want to lose my initiative roll - my deployment is not going to be either a) a surprise or b) clever. Therefore should I be able to choose not to add my +2 for an IC?