Slitherine

so i've an army i pushed up to 14 BG.

trouble is, it's mostly average troops, so it will need decent command and control.

my question is whether to lose one small BG of 6xXB undrilled and pick up a TC, or to keep the XB and use it for the purpose god intended. flank support.

It is almost impossible to give a well thought out answer to your question using the data provided. What army is it? More importantly, how do you intend to win games with it? How many generals have you already bought (and is one of them an IC or FC)?

And so on.

Marc

Marc's right, different things work for different people and different armies.
Its best to play with your list, then review what worked, what didn't, who didn't and change things you are not happy with. Then fight again, then review again and again until you get an army composition that you are happy with.

cheers
Jim

what worked, what didn't, who didn't and change things you are not happy with. Then fight again, then review again and again until you get an army composition that you are happy with

Just like the Seleucids

The problem being you may just end up chasing your own tail. IMO get something you like the look of and make it work by practice.

But this comment by the man who's never used the same army in different competitions twice, or more than twice the same army at the club. I may catch my tail soon.

Not sure if this will be too helpful. In my last game I played the Later Carthaginians and bought 1 IC and 3 TCs. From my view point having 4 commanders made a difference. Even if I had bought a FC instead of a IC I think I will try a few games with 4 commanders in total and see how it works. I liked being able to do a little more. I could leave my overal commander in the line while a TC was running around bolstering, helping with CMTs or trying to rally routing BGs.

Brian

FWIW I am considering an army with just two TCs as my list for the 650 point tournament in Manchester.

hammy wrote:FWIW I am considering an army with just two TCs as my list for the 650 point tournament in Manchester.

Hammy could you let us know how that worked out?

Brian

If I go with it I will certainly do so.

I tend not to fight much with my generals so that means that I can manage with fewer. As a general rule I try to have at least 1 commander for every 4-5 BGs

My gut feel is that as armies get bigger you can get away with few generals actually. Basically armies with lots of BGs tend not to have any worth putting a general in, they will win on numbers. Armies with juicy expensive hard hitting, especially hard hitting melee troops, need generals you can fight with IMO.

I tend to not fight with my generals any more. I played a game where I lost an IC in the first melee and learned my lesson the hard way. But I must admit I do see times to use a TC with en elephant or cavalry to gain an advantage.

Unless I am in a dire situation, I would not put an IC into combat...EVER. I would be less averse to an FC. A TC goes in fairly frequently. I would keep an IC towards the main part of the Battle line, as with their 12" command range, and they add +2 to all CMT's within that range,+3 to any BG they are attached, and the +2 to Cohesion tests, and at 80 points, an IC is too valuable to be thrown into combat.

I would dare say that as your BG's break, your IC needs to get over there to bolster. Save your TC's for fighting.

PyrrhicVictory wrote:Unless I am in a dire situation, I would not put an IC into combat...EVER. I would be less averse to an FC. A TC goes in fairly frequently. I would keep an IC towards the main part of the Battle line, as with their 12" command range, and they add +2 to all CMT's within that range,+3 to any BG they are attached, and the +2 to Cohesion tests, and at 80 points, an IC is too valuable to be thrown into combat.

I would dare say that as your BG's break, your IC needs to get over there to bolster. Save your TC's for fighting.

That was the lesson I learned the hard way. I feel kind of stupid doing it but was playing the odds I guess. The way you describe commanders is how I play now. Besides a TC is just as good fighting and even then it has to be a need before I'll put another commander in combat. But I guess its all part of the learning curve and its good to try different things to see what works and what doesn't. On my defence when I first started playing I played the Romans against Carthaginians and my opponent kept putting his commanders in combat so I had to as well otherwise it would have been uglier. This raised his cavalry to Elite status while mine were average unless I added my commanders too.

Brian

PyrrhicVictory wrote:Unless I am in a dire situation, I would not put an IC into combat...EVER. I would be less averse to an FC. A TC goes in fairly frequently. I would keep an IC towards the main part of the Battle line, as with their 12" command range, and they add +2 to all CMT's within that range,+3 to any BG they are attached, and the +2 to Cohesion tests, and at 80 points, an IC is too valuable to be thrown into combat.

I would dare say that as your BG's break, your IC needs to get over there to bolster. Save your TC's for fighting.

how do they get +3 to any BG?

it's +1 for being with group, +1 for being IC.

babyshark wrote:It is almost impossible to give a well thought out answer to your question using the data provided. What army is it? More importantly, how do you intend to win games with it? How many generals have you already bought (and is one of them an IC or FC)?

And so on.

Marc

it's the one true army, with the yorkist allies. this means i only have a TC and a FC to control 11 BG, mostly of shooty things.

i'm wondering whether to trade out one BG of shooters for more command in the form of an additional TC.

+3 to attached BG for CMTs: +1 Line of Command and in range, +1 for attached, +1 for IC.

PyrrhicVictory wrote:+3 to attached BG for CMTs: +1 Line of Command and in range, +1 for attached, +1 for IC.

hmmm... isn't it "CO in LOC in range is BG is not in close combat, or with BG if it is in close combat"

down here we've been playing a max +2.

OldenTired wrote:

PyrrhicVictory wrote:+3 to attached BG for CMTs: +1 Line of Command and in range, +1 for attached, +1 for IC.

hmmm... isn't it "CO in LOC in range is BG is not in close combat, or with BG if it is in close combat"

down here we've been playing a max +2.

CMTs Complex Move Tests, not CTs Cohesion Tests.

But if you happen to have rear support for a BG in close combat with an attached IC, you will have a +3 to CTs.

PyrrhicVictory wrote:

OldenTired wrote:

PyrrhicVictory wrote:+3 to attached BG for CMTs: +1 Line of Command and in range, +1 for attached, +1 for IC.

hmmm... isn't it "CO in LOC in range is BG is not in close combat, or with BG if it is in close combat"

down here we've been playing a max +2.

CMTs Complex Move Tests, not CTs Cohesion Tests.

But if you happen to have rear support for a BG in close combat with an attached IC, you will have a +3 to CTs.

ah. my bad.

ICs should certainly be protected, but IMO better to put them in at a decisive spot than have them stand back and watch the army rout...

OldenTired wrote:so i've an army i pushed up to 14 BG.

trouble is, it's mostly average troops, so it will need decent command and control.

my question is whether to lose one small BG of 6xXB undrilled and pick up a TC, or to keep the XB and use it for the purpose god intended. flank support.

I've just decided to take away my FC and reduce a BG from 6 LH to 4 LH to buy an extra TC. I think the command and control the extra TC will give me will be better than the loss of the FC. But this is after a lot of games with the army, and I've not tried it out yet.

Ian