Slitherine

Hi all,

Just received my 200 hoplite figs(Xyston) plus some Thracians and light foots woohoo!!
http://www.flickr.com/photos/25819143@N ... 3/sizes/l/

While painting them, i was wondering what kind of gameplay would induce one option Armoured average
over the other Protected sup, knowing that they would cost the same( 10 points for the drilled version?

I've not played a game yet, just watched several, and my personal choice would be armoured average
over protected sup, just because i feel safer with armor than with higher moral.

What would you chose if you had to chose only one type and why?

Cheers.

I have found myself needing the quality reroll more than the extra armour. My dice can be very suspect, (card carrying member of S.A.D., Suck at Dice ), and rerolling a few ones has turned the tide in a few instances. Throw in a general and it gets even better.

<BRIAN>

Given a choice, I think Prot Sup is the better option in most situations. On Impact, the re-roll gives a better chance of doing more hits - and thus winning and avoiding Cohesion Tests. In melee, the Armor gives a + POA if and only if you are better armored than your opponent - this is where the proposed enemy may influence the choice. Once the CT's start, having the better morale tends to keep you in the fight longer, and also helps in bolstering if you lose same. Overall, I would prefer better morale than better armor. YMMV.

hum interesting, both of you wouldn't chose my armoured option, i need to consider that
I'll have to play some games to make up my mind and see what my buddies use as potential
opponents to my Greeks.
More opinions welcome
p.s : while it's true that you only get a bonus for better armour if your opponent has a lower armour,
you still prevent him benefitting(sp?)from his better armour if you're yourself armoured which is
obviously not the case when you're prot/sup and the opponent armoured.
Does it bring something in favor of armoured/average, or this aspect is not important enough
when comparing to prot/sup other advantages?

spring wrote:hum interesting, both of you wouldn't chose my armoured option, i need to consider that
I'll have to play some games to make up my mind and see what my buddies use as potential
opponents to my Greeks.
More opinions welcome
p.s : while it's true that you only get a bonus for better armour if your opponent has a lower armour,
you still prevent him benefitting(sp?)from his better armour if you're yourself armoured which is
obviously not the case when you're prot/sup and the opponent armoured.
Does it bring something in favor of armoured/average, or this aspect is not important enough
when comparing to prot/sup other advantages?

It all depends on your expected opponents, if you are facing historical opponents you will be amongst the better Armoured/Average as you are likley to gain a POA, against later medieval armies you will be better off with Protected/Superior vs those Knights and you need to pass CT's.

The Superior Vs Average debate is a personal issue- the numbers say (per die) of success in combat.
Superior-
"++" 77.77%, "+ or Even" 58.33%," - or -- " 38.88%
Average
"++" 66.66%, "+ or Even" 50.0%," - or --" 33.33%

And as far as CT's
The average roll for "average" is of course 7, where as "Superior" is an 8

I prefer Armoured/Average on the whole as I prefer to win the combats and not have to make CT's.

Spike

As the man said - the numbers give a (slight) edge to the man who can re-roll 1's - and thus have a better chance of winning the combat. Also notice that in the initial Impact phase the armor class has no bearing - so you have a better chance of getting on top from the git-go. Also the more hits you do, the better the odds of the opponent losing a base due to death rolls and thus dice in following rounds.

It is a crap shoot - you pays yer money and takes yer chances. Me - I like the house odds!

Ah thanks for the numbers Spike, my buddies and i usually tend to play in period, so no hoplites
against medieval french, but still plenty of possible armoured romans now that this is a strong
army^^...

Am i wrong to consider that the weapon used could also be a part of the decision of fielding either armoured
or protected?

With hoplites and their Off spear, the impact phase is maybe not the strongest phase for them
compared to the melee phase.
I could expect to have an easier time to win the impact, and benefit from
the sup in this phase, with an impact foot unit rather with an Off spear which doesn't benefit so much
from this phase?

One other major benefit of armour is it reduces the effectiveness of bows. I would not be keen on fighting Persian Immortals with protected spearmen no matter how superior they are.

spring wrote:Ah thanks for the numbers Spike, my buddies and i usually tend to play in period, so no hoplites
against medieval french, but still plenty of possible armoured romans now that this is a strong
army^^...

Am i wrong to consider that the weapon used could also be a part of the decision of fielding either armoured
or protected?

With hoplites and their Off spear, the impact phase is maybe not the strongest phase for them
compared to the melee phase.
I could expect to have an easier time to win the impact, and benefit from
the sup in this phase, with an impact foot unit rather with an Off spear which doesn't benefit so much
from this phase?

At Hoplites are at minus in melee vs Romans, but if you get past that the armoured ones are at even if disrupted or plus if steady- As I said scary for Romans!

Spike

Draka wrote:As the man said - the numbers give a (slight) edge to the man who can re-roll 1's - and thus have a better chance of winning the combat. Also notice that in the initial Impact phase the armor class has no bearing - so you have a better chance of getting on top from the git-go. Also the more hits you do, the better the odds of the opponent losing a base due to death rolls and thus dice in following rounds.

It is a crap shoot - you pays yer money and takes yer chances. Me - I like the house odds!

Ill have the average armoured Vs your protected superior any day

Spike

hammy wrote:One other major benefit of armour is it reduces the effectiveness of bows. I would not be keen on fighting Persian Immortals with protected spearmen no matter how superior they are.

Good point.

hammy wrote:One other major benefit of armour is it reduces the effectiveness of bows. I would not be keen on fighting Persian Immortals with protected spearmen no matter how superior they are.

as demonstrated by my early successors (macedonians) getting butchered by christian nubians last weekend.

*butchered*.

Another factor in the equation is Support.

Prot/Sup need superiors (or elites!) to support them, Armd/Ave can be supported by Ave - sometimes by very cheap Ave troops!

It is reckoned that one re-roll is worth half of a POA.

Armoured Average are evens against Pikemen and Plus at Roman Legionaries. Protected Superior are dogmeat to both of these opponents. They can also get shotup by LH, LF, Bowmen, etc, etc.

Longbowmen (which seem popular) are protected, swordsmen, hence Armoured are ++, whereas protected are only at +. If you get disrupted at impact (which given the amount of dice the bowmen get is not that unlikely) then at protected you are at evens.

Armoured Average every time.