Slitherine

I am rather new to FOG , but was wondering about the utility of some units . Some byzantine CV are organised 1/2 lance and 1/2 bow, so it would be logical ( as in previous WRG rules ) to have a first rank of lance and a second rank of bow . But , even mesaering from the front rank, the bow will only shoot once . The turn after ennemy CV or KN
( BRRR ) will charge and especially if KN, will have a bonus against the CV . Contrary to INF, the CV receives no benefit from a second rank of bow . I seem to me that the second rank would fire during the charge to help the first ranks , weren't they rained to shoot while charging ( difficult Ok i know I tried but feasable... ) The effect being more trying to disrupt the enemy charge .

As part of he unit is shock , difficult to escape a charge

So the role of CV Bow seems rather limited in the byzantine organisation and similar

Any comments ?

Jacques

The Strategikon is quite clear that the effect of the archers in the rear ranks was not great - no idea how it pans out in actual game play, mind you

Thank's Nick , you are responding quickly
I have many books on Byzance, but lack copies of the strategikon and similar ( and still have some books to read )

Actually faced a thematic army with Abbassids just last weekeend and will face thematic again tonight.

I think the 2nd rank CV w/bow work well. Not killer but well. I think the combination gives the byzantines some capablities that are pretty good.

Now can they hold off a KN charge? Well they do about the same as most CV a little better or worse depending onif you get a lucky shot or luckyimpact phase.

The deeper CV formation comes into play in the melee phase versus the KN. WhenI first saw the thematic list i kindof dismissed it thinking it was neither fish nor fowl. After seeing it in action it actually is effective.

could tou keep me informed of the results please

Well they were spectacularly unlucky in our 2nd match.

One of the observations is while Ghulams can run in BGs of 4 (superior cav), I suspect that Average Cav (thematic line cav) is too vulnerable/brittle to freakish dice so they may have to be 6 bases instead of 4. If they stay in 4s and maybe in 6s they really need to use their manuver and avoid a slugfest.

Ok and thank you .
Tomorrow I try the rules for the first time carthaginians angainst romans and I'll have to face the cohorts .

For byzantines , I'll have to wait a bit for lack of opponents . Really wonder what to d with the byzantine army . I amnot looking for a "killer" but an army which is pleasing to play ( Byzantine being my old favorite armies, WRG and DBM ) and which as also some chance of winning .

bahdahbum wrote: Really wonder what to d with the byzantine army . I am not looking for a "killer" but an army which is pleasing to play ( Byzantine being my old favorite armies, WRG and DBM ) and which as also some chance of winning .

Which flavor of Byzantines? I took the Komenan in a recent game and really enjoyed them. They have a little bit of everything. I can imagine the Nikephorian and Early (Belisarius) Byzantines could be quite good.

I think the the thematic challenge is how to manuver your CV without getting caught in a sloggin match. I suspect the Cliinarbi are not worth it. I don't think it is a dog at all. Also I suspect clever use of the Defensive Spearman (skoutai) is important.

I would prefer the Nikephorian byzantines ( an ld favourite ) . Against Knights, I would have to manoeuver but it might be worth the challenge

One of the observations is while Ghulams can run in BGs of 4 (superior cav), I suspect that Average Cav (thematic line cav) is too vulnerable/brittle to freakish dice so they may have to be 6 bases instead of 4. If they stay in 4s and maybe in 6s they really need to use their manuver and avoid a slugfest.

I'd certainly try to use the thematic cavalry in 6's
reasons:
1) As shock cavalry they can't evade so don't get the normal single-rank evade of other bow-armed cavalry
2) As armoured cavalry they don't need the reduced POA from shooting for being in single rank
NB - Both the above mean that they don't need to be able to switch from 1 rank to 2 in a single move
3) They need to be in the larger group to reduce the likelyhood of taking the 1HP2 casualties from shooting
4) As average troops, you'd likely try to put a general into combat with them - He gives more value when fighting with a bigger BG.
5) You don't lose the half back rank shooting as you would with a fully bow-armed BG.

I do agree with you . Small groups are brittle . In a test game, I had 2 BG of 4 superior CV charging a BG of 4 superior roman infantry, the roman infantry exploded ...but I needed the superior mass to do it and found out that 4 might sometimes but a bit understrenght even if superior . But I need to play more often to have any real idea .

Both the Nikephorian and Komnenan make excellent armies. The small BGs of Klibaophoroi are fun as are the Varangians.

The rear rank of bow had little effect in a charging cavalry fighty hence no rear support. They were good for peppering the enemy in the warm up to a fight. They get a chance or two to do this int he game. They do however still add dice fighting as per the front rank in the melee. I find they work very nicely - versatile but not overwhelmingly powerful against anything.

Si

Well , to respond I need the Nikephorian list which I will wait for

Speaking of Nikephorian list. How will the Bow-x (DBM term) be set up?

I am not looking for the final answer but it would seem exceedingly vulnerable if it was half defensive spear half bow. Maybe all defensive spear with Bow*

wondering as I probably have a rebasing project coming before the list comes out.

I wouldn't write off the defensive spear/bow combo so quickly.

Had a few units of such in my Yuan and they performed better than expected. In one game they repeatedly repelled charges from lancer cavalry and in another they got lucky in shooting at some Roman auxilia, disordering them, and then dealt to them in combat.

They certainly aren't wonder troops but they aren't expensive either and can be a useful block against mounted.

Cheers,

Steve

Hello, i think that the question here is ¿ Where the spearmen trained to use the bow (def or of spear with bow*) or spearmen protecting a group of specialized archers (a row of spearmen and another of bowmen)?
Example of the first case could be the T'ang bubing or puping infantry and of the second the suposed mixed formations of pikes and persian archers of the late Alexander.
Mikel

hazelbark wrote:
Speaking of Nikephorian list. How will the Bow-x (DBM term) be set up?

I am not looking for the final answer but it would seem exceedingly vulnerable if it was half defensive spear half bow. Maybe all defensive spear with Bow*

wondering as I probably have a rebasing project coming before the list comes out.

Half Protected Defensive Spearmen, half Protected Bow.

DBM DBEs can be used if you have elements to make change (as you would need for DBM v3.1).

I would expect them to be effective against mounted but not so effective against proper close combat infantry.

nikgaukroger wrote: Half Protected Defensive Spearmen, half Protected Bow.

DBM DBEs can be used if you have elements to make change (as you would need for DBM v3.1).

I would expect them to be effective against mounted but not so effective against proper close combat infantry.

MF ?

The problem is even though someone posted they had good luck with a Yuan variation of the same. If the lancer CV gets to them, which isn't that hard. Then the lancers get their impact POA as there are not two ranks of spear. Plus the CV gets the + for being versus MF. Which basically means this group will always get struck as ++ POA in the impact phase. Then in the melee phase, the CV may or may not get the armor advantage, but the Swordsman CV get a + and you don't get a + for the Spear. So this formation gets roughed up if its reduced dice of Bow don't get a successful cohesion test on the incoming CV.

Now, versus foot it is much the same way.

If I understand the historical reason for the troop type was to have spear to protect the bow from close combat. I think historically versus mounted. But in this case it really does little benefit to have MF Defensive spear in one rank.

I wonder if they should be classed as both ranks defensive spear with the 2nd rank also getting Bow. Also is the MF the right categorization for historical impact?

hazelbark wrote:

nikgaukroger wrote: Half Protected Defensive Spearmen, half Protected Bow.

DBM DBEs can be used if you have elements to make change (as you would need for DBM v3.1).

I would expect them to be effective against mounted but not so effective against proper close combat infantry.

MF ?

The problem is even though someone posted they had good luck with a Yuan variation of the same. If the lancer CV gets to them, which isn't that hard. Then the lancers get their impact POA as there are not two ranks of spear. Plus the CV gets the + for being versus MF. Which basically means this group will always get struck as ++ POA in the impact phase. Then in the melee phase, the CV may or may not get the armor advantage, but the Swordsman CV get a + and you don't get a + for the Spear. So this formation gets roughed up if its reduced dice of Bow don't get a successful cohesion test on the incoming CV.

Now, versus foot it is much the same way.

If I understand the historical reason for the troop type was to have spear to protect the bow from close combat. I think historically versus mounted. But in this case it really does little benefit to have MF Defensive spear in one rank.

I wonder if they should be classed as both ranks defensive spear with the 2nd rank also getting Bow. Also is the MF the right categorization for historical impact?

Hi, the Lancers don't get POA as they are up against steady spear - no rank requirment. The spear need >=2 to get their own POA. And as the spear are HI there isn't a POA for Mtd v MF (with the Yuan spear/bow units anyway).

Having a Yuan v Ottoman game soon so will test them out some more.

Cheers,

Steve

edit: PS - the Cav won't get Sw either in melee unless they win and disorder the Spear as again no rank requirement to negate Sw.

hazelbark wrote:The problem is even though someone posted they had good luck with a Yuan variation of the same. If the lancer CV gets to them, which isn't that hard. Then the lancers get their impact POA as there are not two ranks of spear. Plus the CV gets the + for being versus MF. Which basically means this group will always get struck as ++ POA in the impact phase. Then in the melee phase, the CV may or may not get the armor advantage, but the Swordsman CV get a + and you don't get a + for the Spear. So this formation gets roughed up if its reduced dice of Bow don't get a successful cohesion test on the incoming CV.

If the front rank Sp are HF they will wind up on even POAs against lancers in the impact phase: they lose a + because they are spears only one rank deep, but the lancers lose their + as well (assuming the spears are steady); if the Sp are MF then they will only be at a net - POA. In either case they will get extra dice for the second rank of Bw, which will mitigate the - POA. In the melee phase the Sp will also cancel out any swordsmen POA (assuming they stay steady) and pretty much only have to worry about heavier armor.

And you told me you have been practicing. I'm going to shred you when we play over the holidays.

Marc