Slitherine

I wanted to start a disscusion about this subject .
How many commanders do you suggest for 650pts ?
how many for 800pts?
Is their anypoint in taking an IC ? seems like people get the most out of 4 TC than any other combo.
is this true?
Thanks for your comments

I tend to work on getting the ratio of commanders to BGs reasonable.

If you have an army with only 8 BGs then you can get away with 2 commanders. If you have 20 you really need 4.

IC's are at their best steadying troops against missile fire or allowing undrilled troops to maneuver rather better than they should.

I am pretty firm to get the most commanders I can get.

That said I was all about 4 TCs until recently, I've started to use the IC and found them very helpful. Surprisingly well balanced on points.

Note the IC has a big impact on initiative roll too. This can matter if terrain or lack there of is important to you.

But I start at 4 TCs and then tweak based on army and what more or less I can get with the extra points.

I really think the IC never fights. He's jsut so valuable. I've killed two in the past month.

I'm another one who likes to take the maximum number of commanders, but my reasoning is changing. I used to put two or even three of my TCs in the front rank, but now I'm doubting whether the combat bonus is worth the risk of losing one and forcing a CT on everyone around him. Even out of harm's way, a TC is as good as rear support in a CT, more flexible, and is often no more costly than a supporting BG.

In general, the more "other undrilled" your army has, the more commanders you need just to maneuver close to the enemy.

hazelbark wrote:I really think the IC never fights. He's jsut so valuable. I've killed two in the past month.

I think that almost goes without saying. When the IC fights, he stops radiating all that IC goodness to other battlegroups. That's what historical ICs like Hannibal, Scipio, and Caesar are known for, not for fighting in the front rank like Alexander.

You can pretty much always find something useful for an extra general to do. On the other hand, you could probably always find something useful for an extra BG to do as well. Ya pays ya money, ya takes ya chances.

I think the short version is that at full points (800 for 15mm) you should always have either 3 or 4 generals.

Marc

I have only ever played 800pt armies but I recommend 4 commanders. I think one IC and 3 TC is better than 4 FC.

Seems that 80% of passed cohesion tests get over the line by the extra +1 the IC adds, I believe they are way under priced in the rules compared to a FC.

With 3 TC in addition to the IC I am able to use a TC in most of the important battles, that +1 on hit rerolls is critical in most cases.

Also if you only have a total of 3 commanders and one is killed you have a serious problem as one of your flanks will most likely be out of command range.

madmike111 wrote:Seems that 80% of passed cohesion tests get over the line by the extra +1 the IC adds, I believe they are way under priced in the rules compared to a FC.

On the other hand, an IC cannot influence a BG in close combat unless he is with it. So, the IC's influence declines as BGs engage.

On the other hand, an IC cannot influence a BG in close combat unless he is with it. So, the IC's influence declines as BGs engage.

That is why I now play with one IC and 3 TC. Its too dangerous for my IC commander to get involved with actual combat, fighting is for the unknown commanders.

Hmm wargaming seems to be full of calculating types. Pah! A general belongs on a charger at the head of his troops!

IC can’t get involved in combat, you have to think of the IC support staff, namely hair stylist, agent, personal trainer and other critical hanger-oners.

madmike111 wrote:I have only ever played 800pt armies but I recommend 4 commanders. I think one IC and 3 TC is better than 4 FC.

4 FCs is never the right choice.

I could see an argument for 2 FC and 2 TCs. But never more than 2 FCs.