Just wanted to put my feelers out there for the usefuleness and appropriate tactics of MF bowmen. I play with a list that can have plenty of them (undrilled and 56 bases) or I can have them as LF. Now on several occassions I have used the MF and every single time they have been totally wholloped. Basically anything with a sword or better running into them routs them before I can say OMG. The draw back with them is that you cant skirmish like the LF can, so when you move forward your pretty much stuck there.
Now I know that putting them in appropriate terrain makes them slightly better but I am looking for other opinions and advice. They are usefull as you roll one die per base in front rank so you can get more dices than LF but, as discussed above, they have failings that I just cant work out yet.
Opinions/discussion most welcome.
MF Bow (tactics and opinions)
Moderators: philqw78, terrys, hammy, Slitherine Core, Field of Glory Moderators, Field of Glory Design
Good question - missile foot in quantity is not the simplest thing to handle. I'm pasting below the relevant portion from my tactical tips post in the hope of getting some feedback from people with more experience and expertise who are willing to reveal their secrets. (My most immediate puzzle is using Classical Indians.)
What does your actual army list look like, and what have you tried?
Mike
937. USING MISSILE FOOT:
Longbows are the best missile foot weapon. Crossbows have comparable penetrating power but their rate of fire is reflected in negative POAs against lightly armoured targets, making them most useful against Medieval opponents – Bows are preferable against the generally Protected/Unprotected troops of earlier eras. Because second shooting ranks shoot 1 dice per 2 bases, MF archers are most efficient in 4s (3 dice) or 8s (6 dice) rather than 6s (4 dice). Having a range of 4 MU or more is important – short-range non-LF missile foot have to get dangerously close to the enemy to shoot – for weapons like handguns or javelins, fielding the troops as LF are preferable unless the missile foot have close combat capabilities.
Missile troops are generally more effective against mounted than foot, but can be swept away in close combat by good troops in clear terrain. They do have the advantage of shooting the enemy first - using Bowmen as an example, the Bowmen can theoretically shoot two times at long range and two times at effective range at well-handled advancing HF in the two turns they must advance before being in range to charge – note that troops with 4 MU range can get in 3 turns of shooting if they step to just inside range when the HF stop just outside, and against Cavalry shooters may need to step forward to enjoy even a single round of shooting. Fragment the attackers and you win, disrupt them and you might even things up for close combat. The problem is that if they have a Skirmisher screen that withdraws to allow them to charge this reduces you to 2 rounds of shooting, and you get no shots at all at enemy shock troops who burst through the skirmishers in an uncontrolled charge.
In Impact, missile foot get the benefit of second rank shooting (1 roll per base) when charged, rolling 50% more dice than their opponents, but typically this is at a negative POA needing 5-6 for hits against the 4-6 or 3-6 rolls of the attackers. For most missile foot, winning the Impact is critical because once it gets to Melee they get pounded to pieces by opponents which may have both combat and armour POAs. Most Missile foot are cheaper because they have no close combat POAs, but some with good armour and Swordsmen POA can match their opponents.
In addition to looking for opportunities to converge shooting, missile foot seek ways to enable them to shoot repeatedly without being contacted by close combat troops. A few armies have mixed BGs with shooters able to shoot at full effect from the second rank, and longbowmen may have stakes to fend off mounted, but otherwise trying to achieve this goal in wide open ground is highly situational – e.g. recessing them between advanced “bastions” of heavier troops should allow them to shoot longer (going to try this with Classical Indians), or flank threats can pin down enemy BGs as targets for a time – but I am still looking for proven tactics from experienced commanders of missile troops.
These clear terrain issues are why missile foot are strongest behind defenses or taking advantage of favorable terrain. Shooting from hills over friendly troops is good when you can manage it, and a rough hill in the midst of the battle is an excellent perch for shooters, especially if they are Swordsmen. Any uneven or rough terrain that allows them to shoot freely helps missile foot by slowing and disordering the enemy. Shooters with close combat POAs are versatile bad terrain troops, although they should beware of tough MF shock troops like Almughavars or Dailami.
What does your actual army list look like, and what have you tried?
Mike
937. USING MISSILE FOOT:
Longbows are the best missile foot weapon. Crossbows have comparable penetrating power but their rate of fire is reflected in negative POAs against lightly armoured targets, making them most useful against Medieval opponents – Bows are preferable against the generally Protected/Unprotected troops of earlier eras. Because second shooting ranks shoot 1 dice per 2 bases, MF archers are most efficient in 4s (3 dice) or 8s (6 dice) rather than 6s (4 dice). Having a range of 4 MU or more is important – short-range non-LF missile foot have to get dangerously close to the enemy to shoot – for weapons like handguns or javelins, fielding the troops as LF are preferable unless the missile foot have close combat capabilities.
Missile troops are generally more effective against mounted than foot, but can be swept away in close combat by good troops in clear terrain. They do have the advantage of shooting the enemy first - using Bowmen as an example, the Bowmen can theoretically shoot two times at long range and two times at effective range at well-handled advancing HF in the two turns they must advance before being in range to charge – note that troops with 4 MU range can get in 3 turns of shooting if they step to just inside range when the HF stop just outside, and against Cavalry shooters may need to step forward to enjoy even a single round of shooting. Fragment the attackers and you win, disrupt them and you might even things up for close combat. The problem is that if they have a Skirmisher screen that withdraws to allow them to charge this reduces you to 2 rounds of shooting, and you get no shots at all at enemy shock troops who burst through the skirmishers in an uncontrolled charge.
In Impact, missile foot get the benefit of second rank shooting (1 roll per base) when charged, rolling 50% more dice than their opponents, but typically this is at a negative POA needing 5-6 for hits against the 4-6 or 3-6 rolls of the attackers. For most missile foot, winning the Impact is critical because once it gets to Melee they get pounded to pieces by opponents which may have both combat and armour POAs. Most Missile foot are cheaper because they have no close combat POAs, but some with good armour and Swordsmen POA can match their opponents.
In addition to looking for opportunities to converge shooting, missile foot seek ways to enable them to shoot repeatedly without being contacted by close combat troops. A few armies have mixed BGs with shooters able to shoot at full effect from the second rank, and longbowmen may have stakes to fend off mounted, but otherwise trying to achieve this goal in wide open ground is highly situational – e.g. recessing them between advanced “bastions” of heavier troops should allow them to shoot longer (going to try this with Classical Indians), or flank threats can pin down enemy BGs as targets for a time – but I am still looking for proven tactics from experienced commanders of missile troops.
These clear terrain issues are why missile foot are strongest behind defenses or taking advantage of favorable terrain. Shooting from hills over friendly troops is good when you can manage it, and a rough hill in the midst of the battle is an excellent perch for shooters, especially if they are Swordsmen. Any uneven or rough terrain that allows them to shoot freely helps missile foot by slowing and disordering the enemy. Shooters with close combat POAs are versatile bad terrain troops, although they should beware of tough MF shock troops like Almughavars or Dailami.
-
stenic
- Sergeant First Class - Elite Panzer IIIL
- Posts: 437
- Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2008 7:24 pm
- Location: Cheltenham, Glos, UK
"shooting dice are per target "hammy wrote:Remember that shooting dice are per target not per shooting BG so two BG's of 6 MF shooters next to each other will get the same shooting dice as a BG of 4 and a BG of 6.
It is still best IMO to have shooters in 4s or 8s but if you are going to have a lot of shooters 6s work well enough.
?? Erm... I've missed something critical here. How does that work in simple terms then ?
If I understand what you are saying, a BG of 8 MF archers shooting a BG of 4 knights has the same number of dice as a BG of 4 MF archers shooting an identical target ? That doesn't make sense. Surely the 8BG gets 6 dice and the 4BG only gets 3 ?
Steve
-
nikgaukroger
- Field of Glory Moderator
- Posts: 10287
- Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 9:30 am
- Location: LarryWorld
It means you work out the dice for shooting based on the total number shooting at the target and not by each BG shooting at the target.
For example if you have 2 BGs of 6 MF archers shooting at the same target you calculate their dice on the basis there are 12 shooting and not as 6 + 6 shooting - so if they are in 2 ranks you get 9 dice shooting rather than 8.
For example if you have 2 BGs of 6 MF archers shooting at the same target you calculate their dice on the basis there are 12 shooting and not as 6 + 6 shooting - so if they are in 2 ranks you get 9 dice shooting rather than 8.
Nik Gaukroger
"Never ask a man if he comes from Yorkshire. If he does, he will tell you.
If he does not, why humiliate him?" - Canon Sydney Smith
nikgaukroger@blueyonder.co.uk
"Never ask a man if he comes from Yorkshire. If he does, he will tell you.
If he does not, why humiliate him?" - Canon Sydney Smith
nikgaukroger@blueyonder.co.uk
-
lawrenceg
- Colonel - Ju 88A
- Posts: 1536
- Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 6:24 pm
- Location: Former British Empire
He made a typo . It should be 2 BG of 6 get the same dice as one of 4 and one of 8.stenic wrote:"shooting dice are per target "hammy wrote:Remember that shooting dice are per target not per shooting BG so two BG's of 6 MF shooters next to each other will get the same shooting dice as a BG of 4 and a BG of 6.
It is still best IMO to have shooters in 4s or 8s but if you are going to have a lot of shooters 6s work well enough.
?? Erm... I've missed something critical here. How does that work in simple terms then ?
If I understand what you are saying, a BG of 8 MF archers shooting a BG of 4 knights has the same number of dice as a BG of 4 MF archers shooting an identical target ? That doesn't make sense. Surely the 8BG gets 6 dice and the 4BG only gets 3 ?
Steve
"shooting dice are per target " means you add up all the bases shooting at a given target and then allocate dice. So if you need 2 bases shooting to get a dice and you have one base from one BG and one base from another BG shooting at the same target, then you will get a dice for them.
Lawrence Greaves
The area of shooting dice is one of those things I've been doing wrong as well. Probably a hang up from the beta. Hammy is trying to illustrate the lose of dice to shooting with multiple battle groups.stenic wrote:"shooting dice are per target "hammy wrote:Remember that shooting dice are per target not per shooting BG so two BG's of 6 MF shooters next to each other will get the same shooting dice as a BG of 4 and a BG of 6.
It is still best IMO to have shooters in 4s or 8s but if you are going to have a lot of shooters 6s work well enough.
?? Erm... I've missed something critical here. How does that work in simple terms then ?
If I understand what you are saying, a BG of 8 MF archers shooting a BG of 4 knights has the same number of dice as a BG of 4 MF archers shooting an identical target ? That doesn't make sense. Surely the 8BG gets 6 dice and the 4BG only gets 3 ?
Steve
I think Hammy's got it slightly wrong. The relevant bit in the rules is "Allocating Combat Dice" p.93. "If more than one battle group is shooting at the same target, add the total number of bases to which a '1 dice per x bases' rule applies before calculating the number of dice to roll.
So, the 2x6 BGs get 6 front rank dice and 3 rear rank dice. Most people are playing that each rear rank of the BGs only gets 1 dice, which is wrong.
The 1x4 and 1x6 BGs get 5 front rank dice and 2 rear rank dice.
With the number of dice calculation when shooting with two or more BGs at one target we have been working this out the wrong way all this time. We have done it as per BG when working out the dice and then adding them up rather than adding the bases first all together and then working out the number of dice. Thanks for that, clears it up and is much appreciated.
A real critical factor when considering use of MF bow is having them work in tandem can be of increased benefit. Really doesnt matter that much when considering LF bow as their calculations dont change, from what I understand.
Last night I watched my two friends go toe to toe. Imperial Roman v Pontus. Romans went with 3 BGs of MF bowmen and he stuck them in the battle line with the legions between each one and on the ends. The MF were in BGs of 4. The tactic worked really well and caused problems for the opposition however he was undone when they broke the line and charged the LF bow which ran away and left the MF to far in front of the battle line and then they started to get picked off and charged.
I learned that MF bow on their own anywehere on the table is just asking for disaster. Have them in battle line with impact or any other troops capable of fighting and only move them up with the line no matter how much faster the MF may be. Pick on the opposition screen but do not charge and if running in BGs of 4, have the MF bow work in BGs of 2 so you can maximise and pick on areas where you want to cause problems.
I did give up on MF early on and may draw up lists now with them in and see how they go with a change in tactics. I think the most important factor to think about is not to use them as screens like LF, which can run away but to have them drawn up in he battle lines and move with your core forces.
A real critical factor when considering use of MF bow is having them work in tandem can be of increased benefit. Really doesnt matter that much when considering LF bow as their calculations dont change, from what I understand.
Last night I watched my two friends go toe to toe. Imperial Roman v Pontus. Romans went with 3 BGs of MF bowmen and he stuck them in the battle line with the legions between each one and on the ends. The MF were in BGs of 4. The tactic worked really well and caused problems for the opposition however he was undone when they broke the line and charged the LF bow which ran away and left the MF to far in front of the battle line and then they started to get picked off and charged.
I learned that MF bow on their own anywehere on the table is just asking for disaster. Have them in battle line with impact or any other troops capable of fighting and only move them up with the line no matter how much faster the MF may be. Pick on the opposition screen but do not charge and if running in BGs of 4, have the MF bow work in BGs of 2 so you can maximise and pick on areas where you want to cause problems.
I did give up on MF early on and may draw up lists now with them in and see how they go with a change in tactics. I think the most important factor to think about is not to use them as screens like LF, which can run away but to have them drawn up in he battle lines and move with your core forces.
If you intersperse MF Bow with close combat troops in a battle line, how will you get enough concentrated shooting on enemy BGs to reliably force cohesion tests? Pointing BGs to converge shooting works for a defensive line, but it's going to be hard on offense.DVeight wrote:I learned that MF bow on their own anywehere on the table is just asking for disaster. Have them in battle line with impact or any other troops capable of fighting and only move them up with the line no matter how much faster the MF may be. Pick on the opposition screen but do not charge and if running in BGs of 4, have the MF bow work in BGs of 2 so you can maximise and pick on areas where you want to cause problems.
I did give up on MF early on and may draw up lists now with them in and see how they go with a change in tactics. I think the most important factor to think about is not to use them as screens like LF, which can run away but to have them drawn up in he battle lines and move with your core forces.
One problem is that the archers are a weak spot in battle line close combat. Would you maneuver so adjoining heavy troops can expand out from deep formations to cover their frontage?
Thanks,
Mike
I am assuming here but a MF bow one either end of a pike block for example that is two wide would still be able to shoot at one target that is poised to take on the pike block at long and, to some extent at short range. I havent tried this tactic, in terms of bringing two MF bow to bear upon opposition when they are in a battle line with HF between them.MikeK wrote:If you intersperse MF Bow with close combat troops in a battle line, how will you get enough concentrated shooting on enemy BGs to reliably force cohesion tests? Pointing BGs to converge shooting works for a defensive line, but it's going to be hard on offense.DVeight wrote:I learned that MF bow on their own anywehere on the table is just asking for disaster. Have them in battle line with impact or any other troops capable of fighting and only move them up with the line no matter how much faster the MF may be. Pick on the opposition screen but do not charge and if running in BGs of 4, have the MF bow work in BGs of 2 so you can maximise and pick on areas where you want to cause problems.
I did give up on MF early on and may draw up lists now with them in and see how they go with a change in tactics. I think the most important factor to think about is not to use them as screens like LF, which can run away but to have them drawn up in he battle lines and move with your core forces.
One problem is that the archers are a weak spot in battle line close combat. Would you maneuver so adjoining heavy troops can expand out from deep formations to cover their frontage?
Thanks,
Mike
I did see them work OK when they were in a battle line with legions on either ends and shooting at the opposition screen moving up. The legions werent bothered much as they had this heavy cover.
Yes, the archers would be a weak spot in the battle line, however if the opposition is going to concentrate their core troops at them rather than the legions/pike for instance in your line, then they are making a serious mistake as the impact foot can manouver to hit the opposition flank. Its serious bad luck if the MF bow rout in the first impact/melee phase which gives you the initiative for your impact troops to give an even deadlier blow.
One thing I would like to see and test is whether the ends of the battle line should be anchored by impact troops or MF bow. I believe it should be impact to ward of and hold any possible flank hist to the battle line in case yoru own screens or wings crumble.
Sorry for causing confusion yesterday. I did indeed mean 2 lots of 6 next to each other shoot exactly the same as an 8 and a 4. I was rather distracted yesterday so not concentrating.
One thing I have found is very handy is a small BG of drilled MF shooters, if you manage your troops correctly then you can get them into possitions where their shooting can be very significant and if you get things 100% right then you can even get flank charges which can be devastating.
In a game the other month I managed to break two BGs of knights and fragment a BG of light horse all in the same impact phase with the charge of a single BG of 4 MF crossbowmen
One thing I have found is very handy is a small BG of drilled MF shooters, if you manage your troops correctly then you can get them into possitions where their shooting can be very significant and if you get things 100% right then you can even get flank charges which can be devastating.
In a game the other month I managed to break two BGs of knights and fragment a BG of light horse all in the same impact phase with the charge of a single BG of 4 MF crossbowmen
Nice tactic. I've underestimated crossbowmen!hammy wrote:One thing I have found is very handy is a small BG of drilled MF shooters, if you manage your troops correctly then you can get them into possitions where their shooting can be very significant and if you get things 100% right then you can even get flank charges which can be devastating.
In a game the other month I managed to break two BGs of knights and fragment a BG of light horse all in the same impact phase with the charge of a single BG of 4 MF crossbowmen
Dveight, I find it's hard to avoid having split fire when facing BGs that are not very wide and deliberately trying to disperse your hits. Two missile BGs next to each other in line can be angled to point at the same target, as they could be if separated by close combat foot, but you get kinks in the line of battle and that have knock-on effects on the positioning of other BGs next in line. How to make it work is a matter for practice.
Mike
Exactly like you said, matter of practice. They do say 'practice makes perfect'.MikeK wrote:Nice tactic. I've underestimated crossbowmen!hammy wrote:One thing I have found is very handy is a small BG of drilled MF shooters, if you manage your troops correctly then you can get them into possitions where their shooting can be very significant and if you get things 100% right then you can even get flank charges which can be devastating.
In a game the other month I managed to break two BGs of knights and fragment a BG of light horse all in the same impact phase with the charge of a single BG of 4 MF crossbowmen
Dveight, I find it's hard to avoid having split fire when facing BGs that are not very wide and deliberately trying to disperse your hits. Two missile BGs next to each other in line can be angled to point at the same target, as they could be if separated by close combat foot, but you get kinks in the line of battle and that have knock-on effects on the positioning of other BGs next in line. How to make it work is a matter for practice.
Mike
Drilled MF bowmen would be great. I dont have them in my list so have to play them very cautiously and, as I said before I stopped playing them as I found myself frustrated over them getting routed in melee as they have no weapon and they cant skirmish as they are not LF. I am still coming to grips with this concept that MF bow can not run away from a charge and have to take the hit. Havent used my new list yet but I will throw in MF bow and have them lined up with my spearmen and have some LF bow providing screen as well and see how that tactic goes. Practice, practice, practice.
I have a couple of questions.
I run two BG's of 8 xbowmen in my medieval French army.
1) In the impact phase I get to shoot with the back rank , assume I am 4 wide and 2 deep so I get 4 shooting dice?
2) In addition to these shooting dice I get the 2 dice per base for the front rank bases that are fighting int he impact phase as well ?
3) It's a - POA with any other modifiers I have to my POA being xbows.
4) My xbows have to pass a CMT to charge?
thanks
I run two BG's of 8 xbowmen in my medieval French army.
1) In the impact phase I get to shoot with the back rank , assume I am 4 wide and 2 deep so I get 4 shooting dice?
2) In addition to these shooting dice I get the 2 dice per base for the front rank bases that are fighting int he impact phase as well ?
3) It's a - POA with any other modifiers I have to my POA being xbows.
4) My xbows have to pass a CMT to charge?
thanks
Yes, you get 4 shots from the back rank at a negative POA for shooting in Impact and in most case another for Crossbow vs. particular targets. These are rolled separately from the Impact dice for the front rank and then hits are added together for the Impact total hits used to decide who loses and for death throws.
Yes, Xbows need a CMT to charge or intercept unless in the flank or rear or vs. skirmishers.
Mike
Yes, Xbows need a CMT to charge or intercept unless in the flank or rear or vs. skirmishers.
Mike
This CMT is just for the crossbow, right? MF bow dont need to do it when declaring charges or does it apply to them as well? If so then we have been playing MF bow all wrong.MikeK wrote:Yes, you get 4 shots from the back rank at a negative POA for shooting in Impact and in most case another for Crossbow vs. particular targets. These are rolled separately from the Impact dice for the front rank and then hits are added together for the Impact total hits used to decide who loses and for death throws.
Yes, Xbows need a CMT to charge or intercept unless in the flank or rear or vs. skirmishers.
Mike
Fairly certain that we played the MF bow shooting in impact phase wrong as well. Do they get 1 die per base to shoot with at roll of 5 as well when charged at??
Any non-shock Medium Foot whose front rank has bow, longbow, crossbow or firearm [corrected] have to take the CMT (p60) and all MF missile foot have the rear rank shooting when charged from the front, different weapon POAs may apply. If Unprot Cav 2 deep charge into the bows - ouch! Net + POA and you rear rank shoot at 3-6.DVeight wrote: This CMT is just for the crossbow, right? MF bow dont need to do it when declaring charges or does it apply to them as well? If so then we have been playing MF bow all wrong.
Fairly certain that we played the MF bow shooting in impact phase wrong as well. Do they get 1 die per base to shoot with at roll of 5 as well when charged at??
Last edited by SirGarnet on Thu Jun 05, 2008 4:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
sagji
- Sergeant Major - Armoured Train
- Posts: 567
- Joined: Sun Nov 06, 2005 12:13 pm
- Location: Manchester, UK
No only primarily missile MF have to test (IIRC this is just Bow and X-Bow) MF with DefSp or HWpn don't have to test (unless disrupted)MikeK wrote:Any non-shock Medium Foot have to take the CMT (p60) and all MF missile foot have the rear rank shooting when charged from the front, different weapon POAs may apply. If Unprot Cav 2 deep charge into the bows - ouch! Net + POA and you rear rank shoot at 3-6.DVeight wrote: This CMT is just for the crossbow, right? MF bow dont need to do it when declaring charges or does it apply to them as well? If so then we have been playing MF bow all wrong.
Fairly certain that we played the MF bow shooting in impact phase wrong as well. Do they get 1 die per base to shoot with at roll of 5 as well when charged at??