|
|
Post by greedo on Aug 29, 2018 6:20:10 GMT
Now that 3.0 has increased the command range of LH only groups, and movement rates in general have increased, what do people think of LH heavy armies like Mongols, Parthians, Skythians etc. etc.?
I remember it was a common complaint in 2.2 that LH never could take advantage of their maneuvering because the command range limitations (I might be mis-remembering). House rules were always being thought up to make them more powerful.
But with the improvements, are they GREAT? Too powerful? Still need some power? Pair well with Kn (Parthians)?
What are people's thoughts?
Chris
|
|
|
|
Post by Cromwell on Aug 29, 2018 7:08:45 GMT
I find in DBA 3 my Parthians are easier to fight with. This purely down to the changes in how LH are played.
I do not believe that LH are now to powerful, they still require skilled handling to be fully effective. They can now be used in a more historical way.
|
|
|
|
Post by nangwaya on Aug 29, 2018 11:24:17 GMT
I am starting to like using the Albanian army without resorting to Allies anymore.
At first I found that with four light horse and four psiloi as part of the list, I was replacing some of those elements with Allies (most notably three elements of knights), so I could beef up the Albanians.
Now I am enjoying the amazing mobility of light horse, so much so that I have even dropped the Cav. General for the light horse option!
As Cromwell mentioned, having lots of light horse requires skill (not saying I have it), and I would also add patience and perhaps even deception... with those subsequent moves light horse can make, if the pip score allows it, you can make it look like your light horse are going one way and then in a blink of an eye, they are off in another direction and cover a lot of ground quickly.
|
|
|
|
Post by Baldie on Aug 30, 2018 7:38:31 GMT
I cant say if they are better in 3.0 as I did not play much in 2 or 2.1 and never with those types of forces.
I have recently started playing my O&G as mongols and am doing ok.
Dont know if it will continue as my chums start to drop terrain and pick their fights better.
Using LH in DBA and Lart to stack bonuses for you with rear and flank attacks is wonderfully new to me. As is the ability to flee rather than get taken out in some occasions.
Couple of downsides are of course not being good in terrain and getting split up means you need good pips later in the game.
The ability to have LH loosing off thasands of arrers at the enemy and keeping retreating without having to worry about the edge of the board would be good
|
|
|
|
Post by andrea on Aug 30, 2018 8:54:49 GMT
I played once Parthians against Marian Romans. If I remember well I deployed 4x4Kn, 6xLh and 2x fast Bw. The roman artillery blocked Lh manouvre on one side and got rid of two Lh elements. Luckily, on the other side, the 4Kn - well supported by the Lh - managed to quick kill 4 Roman blades before the artillery (and supporting Ax) could continue eliminating my Lh. I am not sure a full Lh army would have much power, but if combined with other troop types, then Lh become pretty annoying and forcing the foe to stretch its line.
|
|
|
|
Post by greedo on Aug 30, 2018 18:00:16 GMT
I played once Parthians against Marian Romans. If I remember well I deployed 4x4Kn, 6xLh and 2x fast Bw. The roman artillery blocked Lh manouvre on one side and got rid of two Lh elements. Luckily, on the other side, the 4Kn - well supported by the Lh - managed to quick kill 4 Roman blades before the artillery (and supporting Ax) could continue eliminating my Lh. I am not sure a full Lh army would have much power, but if combined with other troop types, then Lh become pretty annoying and forcing the foe to stretch its line. Thanks Andrea, Yeah I've been thinking about Skythians, and Parthians. The Kn + LH combo sounds very interesting. |
|
|
|
Post by goragrad on Aug 30, 2018 18:26:30 GMT
I have run a BBDBA Parthian/Skyth combo vs my nephew with a Norman army a couple of times.
Decent wins, but then my nephew has a bit to learn on maintaining formations and not going off piecemeal. He was a bit impetuous.
When I get back into regular gaming at the club I now have a full BBDBA Skyth I want to try out.
|
|
|
|
Post by greedo on Aug 30, 2018 20:35:44 GMT
Like a proper Warband!  |
|
|
|
Post by Haardrada on Aug 30, 2018 21:41:25 GMT
LH armies still suffer in built up terrain as they did in previous editions of the rules, but the greater/extra movement and extended command range are a real plus.
The rear support rule and the subtle changes in the combat outcomes are also good...but take a little time to work out how they can be used efficiently.
As already noted LH are a bit blunt on their own or with Cav alone the armies are still lacking in punch...thats why the Parthians and Skythians which add Knights are more popular.
I have a few LH armies...Early Hu and Hsuing nu with 8+LH.,Southern Hsuing nu which have a few Kn and Ax to support the 6 LH.,Grenadine which can have between 4-6 LH that add Kn/Cav and supported by Sp and multiple Cb elements....I find the Early Hu and Hsuing nu lack bite and the large number of LH can cause pip drain.The Southern Hsuing Nu are my favourite...with 6 LH to nip about and cause trouble in the open while the Ax can dispute Rough/Bad going and the Kn can exploit any opertunities.
I have not used the Grenadines as yet as they are still being painted...but the idea is to shoot in the LH with massed Cb or ambush enemy in bad going...if it works!lol
I notice that only a few LH armies have low aggression and will have a better chance of choosing terrain.A Bosporan army with low agression and littorial terrain could be interesting?
|
|
|
|
Post by Les1964 on Aug 30, 2018 23:37:38 GMT
I notice that only a few LH armies have low aggression and will have a better chance of choosing terrain. Alan is Agg 1 before 400 AD is steppe , after is arable . |
|
|
|
Post by greedo on Aug 31, 2018 2:30:49 GMT
LH armies still suffer in built up terrain as they did in previous editions of the rules, but the greater/extra movement and extended command range are a real plus. The rear support rule and the subtle changes in the combat outcomes are also good...but take a little time to work out how they can be used efficiently. As already noted LH are a bit blunt on their own or with Cav alone the armies are still lacking in punch...thats why the Parthians and Skythians which add Knights are more popular. I have a few LH armies...Early Hu and Hsuing nu with 8+LH.,Southern Hsuing nu which have a few Kn and Ax to support the 6 LH.,Grenadine which can have between 4-6 LH that add Kn/Cav and supported by Sp and multiple Cb elements....I find the Early Hu and Hsuing nu lack bite and the large number of LH can cause pip drain.The Southern Hsuing Nu are my favourite...with 6 LH to nip about and cause trouble in the open while the Ax can dispute Rough/Bad going and the Kn can exploit any opertunities. I have not used the Grenadines as yet as they are still being painted...but the idea is to shoot in the LH with massed Cb or ambush enemy in bad going...if it works!lol I notice that only a few LH armies have low aggression and will have a better chance of choosing terrain.A Bosporan army with low agression and littorial terrain could be interesting? Hmm, that throws a wrench in my Thessalian Hoplite idea. I wanted to do colorful hoplites, as well as have a HL heavy army. Can LH work with 4Sp or do they really need the more mobile and heavy hitting 3Kn to work properly? Perhaps I go with Parthians/Skythians, and just have a Thessalian army on the side... At least Numidians have an El to anchor them |
|
|
|
Post by paddy649 on Aug 31, 2018 7:29:43 GMT
I’ve found the Thessalians very hard to win playing the 4 x LH option but deadly with the 4 x Cav option. The Sp work well to pin an opposition down but you need the hitting power of the LH is just not enough to exploit it.
Where I do think LH armies (and here I mean Skythians with an all mounted option) are good is where they hold up the front of opposing forces while flowing around other armies to exploit weak flanks and broken lines etc. Need the PIPs though.
I want to try Parthians with the 4 x Kn and 8 x LH option - that combines muscle with guile.
|
|
|
|
Post by goragrad on Aug 31, 2018 11:29:00 GMT
Like a proper Warband! Or a Feudal knight... |
|
|
|
Post by greedo on Aug 31, 2018 17:00:31 GMT
Like a proper Warband! Or a Feudal knight... Or a solid horde |
|
|
|
Post by greedo on Aug 31, 2018 17:02:14 GMT
I’ve found the Thessalians very hard to win playing the 4 x LH option but deadly with the 4 x Cav option. The Sp work well to pin an opposition down but you need the hitting power of the LH is just not enough to exploit it. Where I do think LH armies (and here I mean Skythians with an all mounted option) are good is where they hold up the front of opposing forces while flowing around other armies to exploit weak flanks and broken lines etc. Need the PIPs though. I want to try Parthians with the 4 x Kn and 8 x LH option - that combines muscle with guile. The great part about the xyston dba Thessalian is it comes with both! But good to know that LH armies need an anvil for their hammer. Perhaps LH heavy armies perform best when paired with a good ally for BBDBA.. |
|
