Defending against Horse Bow

[David Crenshaw]

Hey Paul,

You forgot the age old adage - don't roll "1"s for movement on a consistent basis!

Your points are excellent and just the kind of thing I was looking for.

I did try and deploy in smaller groups on a couple of games but was never able to deploy them in an advantageous way, though I think that may be the way to go and just need to refine the technique. With the advantaged player having control of terrain and the first move, I found it rare that I could organize much in the way of a defense, and certainly not mount an offensive attack, as by the end of the first turn I was already forced to play defensively or you would have easily rolled up my flanks. This situation may be mitigated to some extend if on that first move you are forced to stay at least 8 MU away, which we mis-played.

I missed you avoiding friends in a panic move, but as that seemed natural and I wouldn't have caught it. Will be interesting to see if that helps, though I imagine that was rare. It was fun to force you off the edge of the world though.

With your line consisting of elite horse, knights and some reasonable infantry, putting pressure on your line would almost always have actually favored you, as your knights could smash any bow or Infantry I had, which indeed did happen.

Your point of garrisoning the camp was a hard learned lesson, but as I mentioned in my earlier point, it has the effect of nullifying any numerical advantage. Still worth doing, but is another disadvantage when facing a highly maneuver rated strong horse army.

Beer - more beer - I will remember that tactical advice next time we meet.

David

[David Crenshaw]

I forgot the best option - if you can't beat them join them. High time I painted some Sarmatians!

[paulgpotter]

David, yes I forgot about not rolling 1's. I thought you already had Sarmatians. If not It would be cool if you got some or added more horse bow to your Samurai.
I thought of a couple more things. First is mounted infantry, In the Khazar army I got two of these, a horde and a spear, This makes infantry more usable with a fast moving army. the second is a mention in the troop type descriptions that war wagons are useful for securing flanks. I guess this make since as they have the any side can be front thing. I have never tried this.

[David Crenshaw]

I have had the Sarmatians on the painting desk for ages, just never have gotten to them. Well that is not exactly true, I painted one army to sell long ago.

As for war wagons, I just don't have any armies that use them.

[paulgpotter]

David, of the two Sarmatian lists one can have 12 knights , the other can have 12 jav cav, both can have fortified camps. If interested you could also use your sarmatians for migration era Alans which can have up to 6 knights and up to 12 horse bow with a fortified camp. I am considering having a fortified camp a real bonus for having or facing an all horse army.

[greedo]

This thread is fascinating, especially since I'm gradually building up Skythians...

To Paul and David, a question: Were you able to trade armies? So that you rule out army advantage as a cause of defeat
I've always found that helpful to understand what the other player is going through, especially if it seems one sided, and could give you valuable insight into how to best defend when there is little terrain to hide in.

[David Crenshaw]

We really should have Greedo, but Paul was trying out a couple of new armies and I was trying to figure out effective strategies to combat them, so it worked out just fine. I knew ahead of time I would be facing Paul at the head of a light horse army which is always a daunting prospect. Definitely should have plied him with beer earlier though!

[greedo]

Plie his Bow Cav with Beer too. They'll roll nothing buy 1s, and go in the wrong direction!

By the way Rod, I watched the Hattin Battle Report on YouTube, and it was fascinating. I'll repeat my comment here:

"Very interesting battle report. Most ancient rules I've played don't do cool "surrounded" scenarios like this very well. They tend to be much more of a "line up and crash together" type affairs, which is a real testament to the Triumph rules.."

It definitely showed the strength and weaknesses of Knights, Jav Cav, and Horse bow.
Although I didn't appreciate that Knights are in fact Open Order. Doesn't seem intuitive to me, but I'm sure there's a reason for it. Noticed with the Crusader List, that Knights can also have a "charge through" battle card that allows them to pass through friendly heavy foot as if they were also open order. Very interesting!

[Rod]

"Very interesting battle report. Most ancient rules I've played don't do cool "surrounded" scenarios like this very well. They tend to be much more of a "line up and crash together" type affairs, which is a real testament to the Triumph rules.."

Thank you for you kind comments, I am very pleased with how well the Triumph! rules system handles famous historical battles. The triple size battles work very well for creating a fun convention game which can reasonably recreate some truly great battles. I have now done GT recreations of Hastings, the First Crusade Battle of Nicaea, Hatttin, and Marathon and it has given a great battle every time.

Also Triumph really checks the box for enough details to be interesting while still fitting well into a reasonable time frame even with new players. The 48 point games take about an hour so they work well for tournament games and the GT battles where I think the game really shines take about 3-4 hours which works perfectly for a fun 2-6 player event at a convention.

So this game really checks all my boxes for Ancient and Medieval Battles.

[David Kuijt]

Although I didn't appreciate that Knights are in fact Open Order. Doesn't seem intuitive to me, but I'm sure there's a reason for it.

It's easy -- if a group of knights maintain a tight formation, they can't (and don't) charge. If they charge hard, they cannot maintain a tight formation. If you've got a mounted formation that uses the Charge as its main attack mechanism, open order is the way they are fighting. Because any charge over anything but very short distances (which isn't really a charge at all -- no chance to build momentum or get the receiving foot to quail in terror) will always spread out and break up a formation.

Heavily armored knights that maintain a tight formation are rated as Cataphracts. Close order.

Psycho-charging Normans, French Kniggits, Sarmatians, etc. -- those are open order, fierce charging Knights.