Slitherine

I'm trying to get my head around my cav. right now im trying to decide between Pi/Pi cav or Impact/sword. Any thoughts?

SwartzeHeinrich wrote:I'm trying to get my head around my cav. right now im trying to decide between Pi/Pi cav or Impact/sword. Any thoughts?

Hi SwartzeHeinrich,

Please remember, it's generally 'horse' or 'determined horse' etc, not Cav, which is a particular kind of mounted.

The ultimate (I'm not sure if they exist) would be Impact Mounted/Pistol. Do the Poles do that?

Anyway - I think it's a bit of a risk to go "Impact/Sword" as opposed to "Pistol/Pistol".

There are more melee rounds than impact rounds, and usually mounted are Superior, so they aren't that easy to disrupt.

That said, I run "Impact Sword" on my Louis XIV army, but that is because my "Pistol/Pistol" troops are Unarmoured, which to my way of thinking is a huge disadvantage. If I DO go disrupted I'm usually going to be double disadvantaged... whereas my earlier period guys would be less affected.

It's not a simple equation and it often is affected by other things in your army or other options (like my armoured/unarmoured options).

Impact sword often tells more than people suspect.

You "should" win impact.
Therefore your opponent "should" drop to disrupted.
Then you will be in good shape.

Plus its a better variety. Superior with a general and POA at impact are quite promising.

hazelbark wrote:Therefore your opponent "should" drop to disrupted.

I don't really agree with this.

Superiors going for 5's vs Superiors going for 4's... You're more likely to cause a casualty (I'd agree) but with a general and rear support vs Losing to Impact Mounted and possibly 1:2... I don't think it's a great chance for a fail & disrupt... especially seeing there is a reasonable chance that the Impact Mounted will lose the impact.

(I've had vastly more Impacts with my Impact Foot than my Impact mounted, and lost a fair number of the fights. Not QUITE the same, but generally the same factors.)

It's a TOTAL gamble, with expensive troops.

Now, I haven't used my Impact mounted French very much and part of that is because people steer clear of them, so there is a point to the fear factor, but I'm not sure there is a huge thing to be fearful of.

Generally I would regard Pistols as the safer option and IM/Sword as something of a gamble. But it does depend on what you think you may be fighting.

Most IM troops are in the later period, so have less armour, often none. If you have Pistols and your opponent has pistols and better armour, you're even at impact and down in melee so you're likely to lose in the long run. If you take the IM/Sw you'll be up in Impact and even in melee if you disrupt the enemy. However, you can't count on doing that as they are likely to be Superior and probably have support and a general which negates the modifiers you're likely to inflict and means they will probably have a better than even chance of not becoming disrupted. So, Pistols are likely to lose but quite slowly, IM/Sw could win but they could also lose very quickly. One advantage you do have with IM/Sw is that if you can lure the Pistol enemy into broken or rough terrain they will be disordered so your sword will always count.

If you think there's a good chance of fighting Heavy Lancers, Pistols are better as the Lancers are + at Impact v IM.

ravenflight wrote: Superiors going for 5's vs Superiors going for 4's... You're more likely to cause a casualty (I'd agree) but with a general and rear support vs Losing to Impact Mounted and possibly 1:2... I don't think it's a great chance for a fail & disrupt... especially seeing there is a reasonable chance that the Impact Mounted will lose the impact.

It's a TOTAL gamble, with expensive troops.

I agree it is a gamble, so pick you poison.

You've added in the best case for defender, which...ok is not unreasonable but now we are talking more units being put in play to stop these guys.

Impact mounted. 4 dice. Hit on 4. superior with general. Should average 3 hits with 4 not uncommon.
Pistol mounted. 4 dice. Hit of 5. superior with general. Should avearge about ~1.7 hits.

So "on average" says lose by 1, but lose by 2 not shocking.

Results: 50+% chance lose a base. 8% lose officer. 42% chance to drop a level assuming you need a seven.
So about a 1 in 5 chance of catatrophy for the pistol. 2% of all three going bad.

Not doing advanced math. But I would say a pretty good chance that something goes wrong for the pistol.
granted down a die and up a POA are not the end of the world if its just a little wrong.

Now I agree there are times you want to ride it out as the pistol. But the impact mounted isn't "total" gamble.

hazelbark wrote:

ravenflight wrote: Superiors going for 5's vs Superiors going for 4's... You're more likely to cause a casualty (I'd agree) but with a general and rear support vs Losing to Impact Mounted and possibly 1:2... I don't think it's a great chance for a fail & disrupt... especially seeing there is a reasonable chance that the Impact Mounted will lose the impact.

It's a TOTAL gamble, with expensive troops.

I agree it is a gamble, so pick you poison.

You've added in the best case for defender, which...ok is not unreasonable but now we are talking more units being put in play to stop these guys.

Impact mounted. 4 dice. Hit on 4. superior with general. Should average 3 hits with 4 not uncommon.
Pistol mounted. 4 dice. Hit of 5. superior with general. Should avearge about ~1.7 hits.

So "on average" says lose by 1, but lose by 2 not shocking.

Results: 50+% chance lose a base. 8% lose officer. 42% chance to drop a level assuming you need a seven.
So about a 1 in 5 chance of catatrophy for the pistol. 2% of all three going bad.

Not doing advanced math. But I would say a pretty good chance that something goes wrong for the pistol.
granted down a die and up a POA are not the end of the world if its just a little wrong.

Now I agree there are times you want to ride it out as the pistol. But the impact mounted isn't "total" gamble.

Hazelbark, don't take me wrong - I RUN Cavelier Impact mounted in my Louis XIV. The biggest reason is that they are armoured where Pistols are unarmoured, but I'm not particularly upset that I 'have' to take the Impact mounted

For me always Pistol / Pistol as a mainstay

but I like a unit of Impact Mounted as well

ie Later Imperial Spanish with French Allies in 1658

A problem with non historical opponents? I dont bother with more than one unit of Hussars in my Polish Army and if opposed by them usually manage to gang up at least 2 average P/P units which generally saves the day. It does mean that my Poles usually look similar to a standard TYW army, but I do get to play them as Poles with By Fire and Sword. It is also interesting to field them against Ottomans, Early Swedes, Cossacks and early Muscovites.

nickdives wrote:A problem with non historical opponents?

I'm not sure what you mean by this?

My Louis XIV can have impact sword at the same time and agains opponents who are P/P (League of Augsberg).

They are historical opponents.

*shrug*

alasdair2204 wrote: ie Later Imperial Spanish with French Allies in 1658

That's tasty. Have to run it out.

Sorry Raven blinkered by my Poles performance against Western Cav, but had similar with my Louis XIV gang against their Historical opponents!

nickdives wrote:Sorry Raven blinkered by my Poles performance against Western Cav, but had similar with my Louis XIV gang against their Historical opponents!

I think it's a pricing issue. They cost too much for what you get.