Deployment

[RogerCooper]

I have observed that the initial deployment of forces is often the key to victory. I would like to hear from players more experienced than myself about what is the best deployment for mixed armies facing other mixed armies.

Some things are clear. Fast units (normally cavalry) belong on the flanks, were they can use their mobility to flank the enemy. (The way armies were usually deployed historically). Open order troops should be deployed to take advantage of difficult terrain. If your units get rear support bonuses, double them up.

Other things are not so clear. If you have a mixture of close combat troops and ranged fire troops, should they be intermixed or deployed separately? The same question applies if your close combat troops are of mixed quality. Historically, the HYW English intermixed their forces, but I am not sure how common a practice it was. The French generally put their ranged fire troops in front, which usually worked out poorly.

If you have a small force of cavalry, should you split them between the flanks or concentrate them on a single flank (while using infantry that peform relatively well against cavalry on the other flank)?

Is it ever worthwhile to have a full or partial second line? (Other than the case of rear support bonuses).

[skc]

I'm still trying to work out deployment including the fiendish, terrain deployment setup. (Tricky but suspect there is method in their madness!)

One thing I've recently discovered with my Ancient British regarding the ability of Battle Taxis to interpenetrate the Open Order Warband and that they not die against Close Order troops even on a double.

Battletaxis are deployed in front of or back of, the Warband. When nearing the Roman Close Order Line they go in first. Romans may get a double on the Battle Taxi but it does not die, just evades or panics back through the Warband. The Roman stand has to follow up, leaving its flanks exposed to the Warband line, which when it moves in getting two overlaps on the Roman stand. Haven't quite worked it out and it takes much planning, positioning and desperation to beat these damn Romans with Ancient British!

[David Kuijt]

It's a complex question, because so many of these issues interact with each other.

Terrain by itself is complex. A village on one flank, close enough to impede you. Do you use it (with open order troops) as a pivot for a mounted sweep around it? Do you attack through it with strength? Do you screen it? (Screen, in this case, means to put troops in front of it that you do not intend to use to fight in it -- often cheaper close-order troops, like heavy foot or horde. This is intended to interdict the enemy's use of the village, but with troops that cannot fight in the village.) Your choice will be driven by what types and numbers of troops you have, and what types and numbers of troops your enemy has.

Triumph is not a game of winning everywhere -- generals who try it, fail. Triumph is a game of effective use of limited resources. Mostly command points, but also troops. If I put three horde to screen a village, and the enemy puts three raiders to attack through it with strength, the raiders will eventually win on that flank -- but if I am smart, I will win the battle as a whole. Because the enemy general has committed a major part of his army, and an even larger part of his command points over the next dozen turns, to that attack. So I'll have a similar advantage elsewhere. Can I win on the far flank or center, before he fights through that village? Very likely.

Your initial (deployment) plan needs to be flexible -- you need to be able to change your mind, based upon enemy action. If the enemy deploys heavily on that flank, or screens the village, or sets up to use it as a pivot, that's going to modify your initial thought. If I have three Heavy Foot screening a village, and the enemy puts a couple of skirmishers in it (to delay and deny access), then I might try to push the heavy foot through. If even one stand makes it through the village, the skirmishers are suddenly in serious trouble. My heavy foot screen has now become a group that I'm willing to push through the village, to try and turn the enemy's flank. Maybe! If one +2 vs +2 attack goes really bad, or if my command points go bad, that attack will stall.

A major part of the battle is fought in the mind. The impact of your plan on the enemy general doesn't depend upon your plan, it depends upon what he THINKS your plan is. Deception is a great weapon. That's true of deployment as much as anything else. Deployment that looks like one thing, but is actually something else, can create uncertainty and lead the enemy into mistakes. The "glistening plum" (some troops that look vulnerable) is very useful.

Changing your deployment into something different is a major way to mess up enemy plans (and deployments). Having reserves is part of this, but so is wheeling -- wheeling is more important than "sliding sideways" or swapping matchups. Swapping matchups is usually not an effective tactic -- anything you can do, he can do, and command point advantages are temporary. Wheeling changes what parts of the line are facing what other part across the whole line, and changes where you are being aggressive and where you are refusing (forcing him to use more command points to engage).

Do you have any way you can express your will (fight, in other words) at a distance? Especially a long long distance? Artillery are a stand type that can have a major impact on the game -- and it all happens in (or soon after) deployment. On the flip side, if your enemy is better than you at deployment, your artillery may end up sad and weeping, or popped like a balloon, leaving a big whole in your line. Artillery deserve an article all by themselves, but they tie in to the fundamental idea of deployment -- foresight. If you can foresee where the battle is going to be fought, you will overperform. If you have no idea, or if your idea of where the battle is going to be fought is incorrect, you will underperform.

Crowding the enemy so they cannot redeploy (modify their own initial deployment) is also a fundamental tool. March moving to get close enough that the enemy cannot march move can give you a significant advantage; hesitation or indecision on the enemy's part in the first few turns can be devastating if you press them hard. Fast troops (including sweeps of multi-stand groups of skirmishers and rabble through difficult terrain) can really put on the pressure.

Okay, too much info here already, so I'll stop for now.

[RogerCooper]

If you have a mixture of close combat infantry and archers, is it better to intersperse the archers or to keep the archers together?

[Rod]

In most instances, intersperse. More targets for your archers and it also makes it more difficult for your opponent to attack using a particular troop (knights vs. heavy foot for example) without the risk of a more threatening unit getting involved.

[David Kuijt]

If you have a mixture of close combat infantry and archers, is it better to intersperse the archers or to keep the archers together?

You get as many answers to that as you have generals, I expect.

Rod's answer is good, but that's not what I do. My answer is "it depends". Intersperse locks you in to that plan -- which is good, but not very flexible. For me, it depends upon what the rest of the battle looks like. And are you facing Knights, or JavCav, or Horsebow, or Elephants? Or enemy infantry? And what kind of close combat infantry do you have? What is your battle plan? (where on the battlefield, in time and space, are you intending to win? Where are you intending to lose -- but slowly? If you are intending to win everywhere, you probably won't win at all)

• If you're facing Knights, and trying to hide your close combat infantry (because they're Heavy Foot or Elite Foot, who really don't like Knights) -- Intersperse.
• If you're facing Knights, but you don't need to hide your close combat infantry (CCI, from here on) -- put your CCI in the useful place where they can do something without hiding. Knights are largely terrified of a line of Archers.
• If you're facing JavCav, intersperse sometimes. Archers don't like JavCav so much; support with Elite Foot is good. Support with Heavy Foot isn't as good, because they can't kill the JavCav on a double.
• If you're facing Horsebow, intersperse always -- to make your line wider, not to make it stronger. Horsebow beat you with speed, not by assaulting your line. Your CCI and Archers won't match the speed; be wary of them zooming around one flank in an on-map flank march. Maybe even have two Archers on both ends of your line (where the Horsebow will be trying to wrap around) and none (or few) in the center.
• If you're facing Cataphracts, concentrate. Cataphracts are fine with hitting dispersed Archers; to ensure that you break up their line sufficiently to get lots of shots and maybe prevent a concerted smash into your line, concentrate the Archers.
• If you're facing Elephants, do a Cannae. It's your only hope. CCI in the center, with some reserve; Archers on the flanks; create a cup by wheeling the archer formations inward. Ideally have at least one terrain piece supporting the formation you will be adopting. If you can't do a Cannae, concentrate and pray.

If you're facing infantry, a lot depends upon what type of infantry, and what type of CCI you have.

• If your CCI are Elite Foot, you can do whatever you want.
• If the enemy infantry are Warband/Warriors, concentrate -- the interspersed formation is too vulnerable if the enemy hits on their turn and rolls the attacks on the Archers first.
• If the enemy infantry are Light Foot, you can do whatever you want -- they'll be weeping at the end of the day. Unless you let the wrap your line.
• If the enemy infantry are Archers, concentrate. You can't let them win the shooting battle by getting multiple shots on your Archers; just one or two lost Archers and your formation is toast if you intersperse.
• If the enemy infantry are Elite Foot, a Cannae formation is a good solution (as above with Elephants).
• If the enemy infantry are Horde, close your eyes when making up your formation -- it doesn't matter. Victory will be yours.

[RogerCooper]

How about deploying artillery?

If you deploy it in the main line it has a good line of fire but it is vulnerable in close combat, leading to holes in your line.

If you deploy it in front of the main line, it will die but will have opportunity to do damage and will not create a hole in your line.

If you deploy it behind your line you can use it to attack units breaking through, but it may not have a chance to fire.

If you deploy just behind a gap in your line, it can usually fire, but the gap makes maneuvering hard and creates a weakness.

[David Kuijt]

How about deploying artillery?

If you deploy it in the main line it has a good line of fire but it is vulnerable in close combat, leading to holes in your line.

If you deploy it in front of the main line, it will die but will have opportunity to do damage and will not create a hole in your line.

If you deploy it behind your line you can use it to attack units breaking through, but it may not have a chance to fire.

If you deploy just behind a gap in your line, it can usually fire, but the gap makes maneuvering hard and creates a weakness.

I guess my answer is that it isn't where you deploy it, it's where you end up with it at. There's a whole chain of cause and effect involved -- your opponent is going to move (and redeploy) based upon where your artillery is (and other things too, of course). And you are going to do likewise. Can you forecast the future better than they do? That makes it sound a little mystical, but it isn't really that bad.

For example, suppose you have HYW English in a situation with a stream running up your left side. Your enemy doesn't have as many, or as good, difficult terrain troops as you do. You can deploy your artillery in the center of your line, say with three or four stands in the line left of the artillery before the stream, and a couple of stands ready to run up the stream and/or ensure that the enemy doesn't come down it. That ensures your arty will fight, but causes all the problems you mention. You've got to stay pretty static, and you don't have much flexibility in a line with an artillery in it.

But suppose instead you put the artillery on the left of your line, near the stream. With the same couple of stands to help defend the stream/run up it. The artillery helps ensure that the enemy does not assault down the stream -- taking missile fire while advancing in difficult terrain is a nightmare. So the enemy's plan will be basically the same -- advance with the main line and fight there, more than two or so base widths from the stream. But your plan is NOT to leave the artillery there -- you advance it several times, and wheel it to fire diagonally into the side of the enemy advancing group. This is a much more effective position, firing from enfilade into enemy that are advancing past you, not at you. And the artillery is usually LESS exposed by this advance than it would be in the main line in the paragraph above.

There are responses to this tactic, of course -- I'm describing a simplified version of it, to illustrate a point. I've used this tactic to beat HYW English (with HYW English) against a very good player, and to beat Hussites with my HYW English (Hussites being a very very bad matchup for HYW English).

[RogerCooper]

I have learned that in Triumph, it is hard to make major deployment changes in the face of the enemy.

It is an interesting point about difficult terrain. Artillery isn't much affected by it difficult terrain, as it doesn't need to close with the enemy to fight and most difficult terrain does not block line of sight. So deploy in the difficult terrain or where it can target difficult terrain.

[David Kuijt]

It is an interesting point about difficult terrain. Artillery isn't much affected by it difficult terrain, as it doesn't need to close with the enemy to fight and most difficult terrain does not block line of sight. So deploy in the difficult terrain or where it can target difficult terrain.

Can't deploy Arty in difficult terrain -- you can deploy behind it, but then it is locked into place, essentially, since you cannot move through it. So your enemy has much more ease avoiding it.

But yes, putting an Arty behind a marsh or ploughed field (rough) makes it really hard for any non-skirmisher enemy to get through there without bad casualties.