A question was posed some time ago as to whether a big barbarian army could be competitive in field of glory. Well Terry and I took up the challenge and figured if anyone should prove they can then the authors should - so we took Gallic to Godendag this last weekend.
16 teams in our rise of Rome period. Several Romans and Seleucid. A slave revolt army. A Bosrporan. A Parthian. An Armenian.....but only ourselves with our barbarian army.
Our army was essentially built around having a number of very solid BGs of 10 HF Impact Foot Swordsmen. We managed 2 of these as Gaesati Superiors and 3 average ones with a rear support BG. A lowland ally gave us 2 MF BGs with a supporting cavalry. Then 3 mounted and 2 LF battlegroups for a total of 14.
Playing with Gauls you are really only going to win games big by gritting it out with the Impact Foot troops and so it proved. And of course however well you do anything it is always going to be a bit nervewracking. Our games in outline went as follows:
Game 1 vs Parthian
Had some rough terrain in the centre which caused a split of the enemy cataphracts leading to a vulnerable side that the Gaesati took apart gradually. We sarmed the central rough going with our MF. Nearly managed to bust enough cataphracts on the other side to take down the army but couldn't quite manage it due to the heroic exploits of the enemy inspired commander. LH proved very hard to catch but then again little use against our solid blocks of HF. END RESULT - MODERATE VICTORY TO US.
Game 2 vs Late Seleucid
Did well on right where MF IF dominated and area of rough ground. Centre held against pike block for a long time thanks to rear support and generals but eventually crumbled. Left flank superiors got the better of Seleucid mounted troops over time - passing CTs happily they whittled the smaller BGs of cataphracts and the like down so the numbers of dice started to dominate, eventually overwheming them. END RESULT - ARMY ROUT WIN TO US
,
Game 3 vs Late Seleucid
Got engaged in a battle of support troops which alas we lost leading to us having little left with which to mount a big charge of the HF. Seleucid frontline was very tough and well played which led us to use some mounted troops to try to deal with some Roman Agryaspids - which worked in the sense that it kept them occupied but also got a little in our way. Our counter attack ground to a halt when our Gaesati general unfortunately put his head under the foot of an elephant! END RESULT - BAD LOSS BUT HELD ONTO OUR ARMY
Game 4 vs Late Seleucid
In the words of the monty python sketch "course we were getting used to it by then".... There was enough rough terrain on our left for us to mount a serious attack with our MF supported by mounted troops and this went very well demolishing this flank in due course. On our right we were under pressure and everything went against us as out mounted forces crumbled to cataphracts. In the centre we planned a two stage charge ecpecting the first wave to be sacrificial but our gaesati had other ideas and stormed through two pike BGs creating a big hole in the process of sacrtificing themselves. Thereafter the gallic numbers came into their own as two other pike phalanxes gradually got swamped by numbers of gallic warriors. END RESULTS - ARMY ROUT WIN TO US
So 2 ARMY ROUT wins, 1 MDOERATE win and 1 BAD loss. 2nd place out of 16 overall.
Conclusion. If you set up the HF Gauls in the right way with rear support and generals with large BGs for maximum charge you can scare anything and have chances ... but it scares you as well while you are doing it. Feels about right for a mass barbarian army...
Si
Gauls in the open
Moderators: philqw78, terrys, hammy, Slitherine Core, Field of Glory Moderators, Field of Glory Design
-
miffedofreading
- Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
- Posts: 317
- Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 4:00 pm
- Location: Reading, England
Probably drop a cavalry and have another chariot BG as the chariots cover frontage a bit better than the cavalry when under pressure.
Minimise the skirmishers and max out the gaesati - which might mean dropping another BG of ave down to 8 from 10.
Not much else. To win big you have to force the issues with the "warband" of various types.
Si
Minimise the skirmishers and max out the gaesati - which might mean dropping another BG of ave down to 8 from 10.
Not much else. To win big you have to force the issues with the "warband" of various types.
Si
Yes they can certainly do the business, and cause complete mayhem with some good dice at impact against anything average - including pikemen ...
But they might give you a vervous breakdown in the process too
I doubt they can get through a game without losing 3-4 BGs however well it goes. But if they trample the entire opposing army then who cares!
Si
But they might give you a vervous breakdown in the process too
I doubt they can get through a game without losing 3-4 BGs however well it goes. But if they trample the entire opposing army then who cares! Si
-
davidandlynda
- 1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
- Posts: 830
- Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2007 9:17 am
You need to look at the rules closly befoere commiting to a flank march,An all mounted force with FC will need 10 to arrive,we did one with the Bosporans,it arrived 1st time then we spotted the ammendment,test each group for straggling 
They were scary throws.
A question from this what does the general do if all groups straggle ?also (to late now )but how about a plus to thye straggle throw for general with flank march
David
They were scary throws.A question from this what does the general do if all groups straggle ?also (to late now )but how about a plus to thye straggle throw for general with flank march
David
-
robertthebruce
- Field of Glory Moderator
- Posts: 505
- Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2007 8:24 pm
- Location: Granada, Spain.
Hi Simon.
I have not played any Barabarian Army in FOG, but I think that these kind of armies can run very well versus historical Oponents, but maybe they would have more problems versus non Historical Armies like the mass Knights armies.
How Do you Think abou this??, I have the feeling that FOG runs better between historical armies.
David
I have not played any Barabarian Army in FOG, but I think that these kind of armies can run very well versus historical Oponents, but maybe they would have more problems versus non Historical Armies like the mass Knights armies.
How Do you Think abou this??, I have the feeling that FOG runs better between historical armies.
David
-
davidandlynda
- 1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
- Posts: 830
- Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2007 9:17 am
-
stevoid
- Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
- Posts: 285
- Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 9:03 pm
- Location: Wellington, New Zealand
If you send superior, drilled troops or skirmishers there is next to no chance that they will fail - need to get a 4 with re-rolls on 1s!davidandlynda wrote:True but its the straggling part that was the worry
David
The trick is rolling the 9 before too much game has past. Of course there is always the two flank march option...
Steve
H
True and army with 16 bases of medieval knights will not be much fun.
But at the same time all sorts of feudal/arabic spear based armies look quite tasty compared to most in period opponents. Or a nice chienses army with crossbows and spears. Or a biblical army with spears backewd by bows. All of these are decnt tqargets for a big block of Impact Foot.
I would be happy taking Gallic in an open comp but I would expect to suffer the odd bought of fear and joy when reading the draw.
Si
In an open comp I think the volatility just goes up.i Simon.
I have not played any Barabarian Army in FOG, but I think that these kind of armies can run very well versus historical Oponents, but maybe they would have more problems versus non Historical Armies like the mass Knights armies.
How Do you Think abou this??, I have the feeling that FOG runs better between historical armies.
David
True and army with 16 bases of medieval knights will not be much fun.
But at the same time all sorts of feudal/arabic spear based armies look quite tasty compared to most in period opponents. Or a nice chienses army with crossbows and spears. Or a biblical army with spears backewd by bows. All of these are decnt tqargets for a big block of Impact Foot.
I would be happy taking Gallic in an open comp but I would expect to suffer the odd bought of fear and joy when reading the draw.
Si
H
True and army with 16 bases of medieval knights will not be much fun.
But at the same time all sorts of feudal/arabic spear based armies look quite tasty compared to most in period opponents. Or a nice chinese army with crossbows and spears. Or a biblical army with spears backed by bows. All of these are decnt targets for a big block of Impact Foot.
I would be happy taking Gallic in an open comp but I would expect to suffer the odd bought of fear and joy when reading the draw.
Si
In an open comp I think the volatility just goes up.i Simon.
I have not played any Barabarian Army in FOG, but I think that these kind of armies can run very well versus historical Oponents, but maybe they would have more problems versus non Historical Armies like the mass Knights armies.
How Do you Think abou this??, I have the feeling that FOG runs better between historical armies.
David
True and army with 16 bases of medieval knights will not be much fun.
But at the same time all sorts of feudal/arabic spear based armies look quite tasty compared to most in period opponents. Or a nice chinese army with crossbows and spears. Or a biblical army with spears backed by bows. All of these are decnt targets for a big block of Impact Foot.
I would be happy taking Gallic in an open comp but I would expect to suffer the odd bought of fear and joy when reading the draw.
Si
