Slitherine

I have been using my Arabs a bit lately and have to say that I am now maxing out the unprotected, undrilled, superior lancers/swords. In units of 4 they are giving excellent value for money.

Used in single rank they chase off armoured horse archers, just too risky normally for the horse archers to stand and fight and they cost nearly twice the price. Being superior and a general hanging around they usually pass their co hension tests. Against other lancers they fight at evens at impact and at worse -POA during melee. For the money saved vs armoured you can almost have a second lancer BG.

Against most foot they are also heaps of fun. With most foot not getting a + POA when charging the lancers the lancers can pin much more expensive BGs. If the lancers to get into a fight its only one round and they break off. Being superior they have to be dropped to one base, surprisingly time consuming.

Has anyone else been using them much?

madmike111 wrote:If the lancers to get into a fight its only one round and they break off.

See you've spotted whats wrong with FOG and mounted troops then.

madmike111 wrote:Has anyone else been using them much?

I've thought of the same consideration for unarmoured archers in the Middle Plantangenant list.

You take the Protected guys for 'vs foot' and the 'unprotected guys' for 'vs mounted'. > half the time the mounted are going to be armoured or better, so why bother wearing ANY armour?

Ahh but the unprotected foot are less effective run only one deep and thus get shot up by skirmishers.
Lesson learned running NKE
Gino
SMAC

I've seen a few people starting to use massed bedouin lancers, which are similar I believe. You do get lots of them. I imagine there are two issues:

- can you bring your numbers to bear?
- They won't like being shot at.

I think my Immortals would like to fight them...

I've seen a few people starting to use massed bedouin lancers, which are similar I believe. You do get lots of them. I imagine there are two issues:

- can you bring your numbers to bear?
- They won't like being shot at.

I think my Immortals would like to fight them...

I am not finding them hard to field, single rank on either flank. Been toying with the idea of fielding them 2 BGs, single rank in a long line, rear support a 3rd BG in 2 ranks. If the front BGs break there is room to go around the rear BG. Also if either of the front BGs loss a base then the rear support BG can charge next impact round dropping back one column.

I would be happy to take on Immortals with these guys, at impact the lancers are +1, good chance to kill an immortal base and with the lancers mod added in also drop a cohesion level on the immortals and during melee they fight as equals.

madmike111 wrote:

I've seen a few people starting to use massed bedouin lancers, which are similar I believe. You do get lots of them. I imagine there are two issues:

- can you bring your numbers to bear?
- They won't like being shot at.

I think my Immortals would like to fight them...

I am not finding them hard to field, single rank on either flank. Been toying with the idea of fielding them 2 BGs, single rank in a long line, rear support a 3rd BG in 2 ranks. If the front BGs break there is room to go around the rear BG. Also if either of the front BGs loss a base then the rear support BG can charge next impact round dropping back one column.

I would be happy to take on Immortals with these guys, at impact the lancers are +1, good chance to kill an immortal base and with the lancers mod added in also drop a cohesion level on the immortals and during melee they fight as equals.

Yes I think they will work well in single rank on an open-ish flank - might work well with the other elements of the army.

Against the immortals they'll die, as the 50% extra dice at impact hurts and the Immortals shoot but at least they are cheap.

I would be happy to take on Immortals with these guys, at impact the lancers are +1, good chance to kill an immortal base and with the lancers mod added in also drop a cohesion level on the immortals and during melee they fight as equals.

All the immortals I've fought have light spear, putting them at evens in impact and armour puts them at evens in melee, you need 2 group of lancers to take 8 immortals.

kal5056 wrote:Ahh but the unprotected foot are less effective run only one deep and thus get shot up by skirmishers.
Lesson learned running NKE
Gino
SMAC

It's a risk, but not a huge one. A whole army of unprotected foot is in trouble I'll admit, but where you can put down unprotected guys and protected guys it's less of an issue.

All the immortals I've fought have light spear, putting them at evens in impact and armour puts them at evens in melee, you need 2 group of lancers to take 8 immortals.

I don't have my rule's in front of me but don't the lancers get an additional POA against MF, giving them a +POA?

So Impact (assuming 4 wide)-> the immortals get 12 dice needing 5 or 6, while the lancers get 8 dice needing 4s. With rerolls the average hits work out the same, comes down to a 50/50 chance for the lancers.

The Immortals are tougher than they look. Walking it through:

If you have two groups of lancers in two ranks:

The immortals shoot at long range. 2 dice at 2s rerolling 1s. Then at close: 3 dice hitting on 2s. That should be 3 or 4 tests for the lancers - damaged goods.

Then the lancers charge. 8 dice on 4s (if still steady) vs 12 on 5s. The Immortals will have a general so reroll1s and 2s. The lancers will need 2 generals to do the same. About even, but shading to the Immortals on generals on average.

Melee is even factors and dice, so generals can tip the balance.

Unless the Immortals have disrupted, the lancers break off and will be shot twice again.

Single rank cuts down on the initial shooting but means the lancers have a decision to make in the movement phase: do you fight with less dice or do you feed in and so risk some ghastly shooting?

So the whole cycle is 2 close combat and four shots, unless the lancers manage to disrupt the Immortals

Hi Graham

You mention that the lancers will be shot twice again after breaking off.

They will be shot at only once in the immortals phase.

Are you including the impact shooting to get your second shot?

Rob

Robert241167 wrote:Hi Graham

You mention that the lancers will be shot twice again after breaking off.

They will be shot at only once in the immortals phase.

Are you including the impact shooting to get your second shot?

Rob

Oh yes, good point, I've miscounted. However, lancers, even armoured ones, who haven't broken in to the Immortals are often quite damaged after five rounds of dice against them. Hence there are a few situations where the lancers are down a base and disrupted so desperately try not to charge. They might get shot again.

To be honest, the only mounted troops I've fought that survive to a second impact phase were heavily armoured knights. Others tend to either break through in the first charge or die horribly.

The unprotected lancers are meant to go in single rank to avoid the nasty arrows.

The point of my example is a cheap and nasty unit at 40pts can do 50/50 on the immortals, if they win impact then the immortals are in a bad place. If a lancer base dies then the rear support lancers charges in with a good chance of fraging the immortals.

madmike111 wrote:The unprotected lancers are meant to go in single rank to avoid the nasty arrows.

The point of my example is a cheap and nasty unit at 40pts can do 50/50 on the immortals, if they win impact then the immortals are in a bad place. If a lancer base dies then the rear support lancers charges in with a good chance of fraging the immortals.

If a cheap and nasty Lancer unit takes no shooting casulaties, wins a 50/50 combat (and 50/50 means they will win around 1/3 of the time) at impact, the Immortals are then a Superior unit taking a cohesion test with probably a 2 minuses (1 per 3, lost to Lancers/MF vs Mounted) and at least 1 plus (General) maybe none (the Persians might well give rear support to their best unit..?)- which they fail on a 7.

So the Immortals go DISR maybe one time in 7 or 8. Every other time the lancers lose.

Even if the Immortals lose and go DISR, melee is then 6 dice for the Immortals vs 4 for the Lancers, and the Immortals are also a POA up and effectively elite.

All in all, I still really don't think this is a bad place for the Immortals to be !

To be honest, the only mounted troops I've fought that survive to a second impact phase were heavily armoured knights. Others tend to either break through in the first charge or die horribly.

Seleucid cats and elite companion cavalry work for me, but that often isn't quick or pleasant.

madmike111 wrote:The unprotected lancers are meant to go in single rank to avoid the nasty arrows.

The point of my example is a cheap and nasty unit at 40pts can do 50/50 on the immortals, if they win impact then the immortals are in a bad place. If a lancer base dies then the rear support lancers charges in with a good chance of fraging the immortals.

It's a good point that a 40 point unit can hold up 96point plus general Immortals for a while. In fact, that seems to me more benefit than the chances of taking down the bowmen. Of course, a rear support BG adds to the lancer cost.

Of course arab armies - arab conquest particularly have lots of spearmen who can also take on the Immortals.

Even if the Immortals lose and go DISR, melee is then 6 dice for the Immortals vs 4 for the Lancers, and the Immortals are also a POA up and effectively elite.

actually from memory the Immortals don't get a melee weapon so they are evens at melee. Also your example assumes a general on the immortals side, no reason couldn't be one on the lancers side. Being med foot all co henion testing is at -1 vs mounted.

My 2 points are firstly that for 40pts you get a unit that can't be ignored and has to be treated with respect. While the stats for the scenario are based on the best Persian unit fighting the more likely scenario is for one of the average units, in that case the odds move decidely towards the lancers. Secondly, instead of entering into an armour 'armour race' go no armour.

madmike111 wrote:

Even if the Immortals lose and go DISR, melee is then 6 dice for the Immortals vs 4 for the Lancers, and the Immortals are also a POA up and effectively elite.

actually from memory the Immortals don't get a melee weapon so they are evens at melee. Also your example assumes a general on the immortals side, no reason couldn't be one on the lancers side. Being med foot all co henion testing is at -1 vs mounted.

My 2 points are firstly that for 40pts you get a unit that can't be ignored and has to be treated with respect. While the stats for the scenario are based on the best Persian unit fighting the more likely scenario is for one of the average units, in that case the odds move decidely towards the lancers. Secondly, instead of entering into an armour 'armour race' go no armour.

Indeed, the Immortals are equal in melee with unprot lance, Sword - though would presumably have more dice. I'm assuming a general as I almost always have one with the Immortals. The lancers may indeed have one too.

I agree that you get a cheap BG that can't be ignored - better than allowing the Immortals to wander about at will certainly.

You mention fighting "one of the average units". I tend to only use average for skirmishers - the non-skirmisher units tend to be 2 Immortal and 5 superior cavalry units.

Having seen off armoured lancers regularly, I think the benefit of the unprotected guys is the low cost/got to respect the lance combo.

Well done for trying something different.

I've previously used Protected Superior Lancers and found them to be excellent value too at just 48 points per BG.