|
Post by derrickthewhite on Nov 5, 2020 17:25:41 GMT
I recently played a test game of HotT against myself and I was very disapointed in the beast's performance. They spent the entire game hiding in bad going from enemy riders. I was hoping to use them as cavalry, but they literally die 40% of the time when they run into even weak cavalry (forget heroes or behemoths).
does anyone use beasts? what tricks work well? Did I just use them poorly?
|
|
|
Post by Baldie on Nov 5, 2020 18:13:30 GMT
I have used beasts and like you tended to keep em hidden in bad going. They have helped to protect flanks. TBH my HoTT experience is limited and I really haven't got to grips with it.
I am sure there is a useful way to play em.
|
|
|
Post by snowcat on Nov 5, 2020 19:44:26 GMT
If you're the defender, have a LOT of bad going. Then they can be quite scary. Otherwise, I wouldn't take (many of) them.
|
|
|
Post by janewilliams20 on Nov 6, 2020 13:30:40 GMT
I recently played a test game of HotT against myself and I was very disapointed in the beast's performance. They spent the entire game hiding in bad going from enemy riders. I was hoping to use them as cavalry, but they literally die 40% of the time when they run into even weak cavalry (forget heroes or behemoths). does anyone use beasts? what tricks work well? Did I just use them poorly? It's careful use of bad going that's the trick. yes, especially against other mounted. I wouldn't class myself as an expert by any means, but if your beasts have a toe in Bad Going and they're against cavalry of some sort, those cavalry get the minus for bad going, and the Beasts don't. Put them up against Knights: start at +4 each. Beasts move faster, so you can control where and when they meet. If they're in bad going, you're at +4 to +2. Yes, Beasts get quick-killed IF defeated, but that's a big "if". And if the combat is in bad going, they also quick-kill knights. The other way would be to use them against infantry; no quick kill, just fast-moving troops in any terrain. The problem may be that if they push the enemy back, they pursue, leaving their friendly bad going to do so. Knights and riders would just be destroyed, so no problem there.
|
|
|
Post by sheffmark on Nov 6, 2020 16:20:13 GMT
Yes, as people have said above, I'd tend to see Beasts as troops to contest Bad Going.
You're going to have at least a couple of pieces of Bad Going on the board, so the decision is, are you going to contest these and if so with what?
The obvious answer is either shooters, warband, lurkers or beasts as none of these are penalised. If the enemy decides shooters are the answer then your beasts are looking a good bet as in any terrain which limits line of sight they should be able to charge from outside shooting range and even though they're 3-4 down they quick kill the opposition. Against warband they are even, but have a longer movement range. Against Lurkers they are 3-2 up and force a 'flee off field' if they win. So overall they look pretty good troop types to contest the Bad Going.
In the open: you can quick kill artillery and shooters and the 400p movement may mean you get to jump on the later. You are 4-3 up on riders (though if you lose you're dead) You can take on Blades and Warband on evens You are 3-2 up on Hordes.
As you say there are certain things they don't perform well against in the open, but that's the fun of HOTT and DBA, everything has some weakness against something else.
Overall therefore I'd say they had some good points but some limitations as well and I wouldn't completely discount them.
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Nov 6, 2020 17:10:49 GMT
As others have said, use of bad going is the key. I have used a Beasty type army in a HoTT tournament. It was a force of giant radioactive ants, based on the 1954 film “ Them!” (see www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4URRp39XOo ), which consisted of:- 2 x Giant Controller Ants, with powerful telepathic mind control abilities (Magicians), 7 x Giant Soldier Ants (Beasts), 1 x Giant Flying Ant (Flyer), with a nuclear crater/hole-in-the-ground as a Stronghold, with a few smaller Worker Ants. I have found that the best way to use Beasts is not to hide in bad going, but to draw your opponent either into or near such terrain. If defending, place large pieces of hindering terrain in the centre of the battlefield. If your opponent is the defender, they will obviously place few small terrain pieces, usually out of the way near the table edges...but at least they’ll have a nice juicy Stronghold for your fast moving Beasts to assault (giving you victory even if you lose more elements). Players may also find the following useful:- vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/fanaticus-dba/images/3/33/DETAILED_CRIB_SHEETS_for_HOTT_2.1.pdf/revision/latest?cb=20190123092614
Some Helpful Downloads can be found here: fanaticus-dba.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Reference_sheets_and_epitomes And here is the latest Jan 2020 FAQ: ancientwargaming.files.wordpress.com/2020/01/dba_faq_q1_2020_final.pdf A "404 Error Message" means you are using a mobile device. The Fanaticus Wiki can only be accessed via computer.
|
|
|
Post by derrickthewhite on Nov 6, 2020 20:14:56 GMT
Ohh! They have +4 vs. non-foot. I completely missed that. That changes things a bit, I thought they had +3. that drops their chance to be destroyed by riders by a third, and gives them a good chance to push the riders around if they just need to push the riders into the wood (that tactic would have been a nice move in the game that beasts disappointed me in). They can outrun knights, and running away from behemoths and heroes doesn't bother me. The comment about anyone being in bad going making everyone in bad going is a great one. It puts a little danger zone around the bad going, making its influence bigger without violating "the majority of the playing surface must be flat good going". having a critical mass of beasts sounds like it really changes gameplay (stronghold rush), but that's probably true of any element type, and one of the fun things about the game. maneuvering around the bad going, tempting the enemy in, sounds like an interesting tactic. The "toehold" rule really helps with that. Looking at the one battle I've played (against myself), I can see that the bad going situation was not nearly as favorable as I first thought it was. There were three big pieces, which I thought was a lot, and a small fourth one that would have been fun to use with the "toehold" rules. - A stream with a road nearby cut the field in two. All combat happened on the larger half with the road. There was some bad going in the center of the unplayed half, but the stream prevented anyone but fliers from really making use of that cover. The bad going wasn't contested, mostly because of lurkers. It was on the opposite corner from the beasts. Attempting to move them across the battlefield to use it to launch attacks might have been interesting... or might have been a waste of time.
- The closest terrain to the beasts was easily taken.. but a great big impassable rock blocked forward access. Had that not been there, the beasts would have been much more threatening, holding a flank and threatening the flanks of the main battle. Also, had I bothered to put a stronghold on the battlefield (rookie mistake), that would have been a great place to put it, and the beasts could have happily and competently defended the stronghold from ground troops while the behemoths and flyers went around flanking the enemy.
- The last terrain might actually have been useful, if I knew what I know now. It was just on the enemy side of the field, near some riders and warband. The pips let the enemy move a lot more at the beginning, and they got warband in the woods, and swept their riders in front of it.
As for terrain placement, I used the advice "We favor a permanent Terrain board with asymmetrical terrain features permanently fixed to it." so I built the map, and then chose the sides, and then they deployed. Though I suppose similar principles apply. So I suppose the takeaways are: - beasts get +4 vs. nonfoot
- bad going applies even if only one element is partially in it.
Thanks for helping me understand beasts. I love my dinosaur army, and beasts just have to be part of it!
|
|
|
Post by snowcat on Nov 7, 2020 2:54:34 GMT
Concept is King, always. Some really useful advice here. Great stuff.
|
|
|
Post by Baldie on Nov 7, 2020 9:27:07 GMT
As others have said, use of bad going is the key. I have used a Beasty type army in a HoTT tournament. It was a force of giant radioactive ants, based on the 1954 film “ Them!” (see www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4URRp39XOo ), which consisted of:- 2 x Giant Controller Ants, with powerful telepathic mind control abilities (Magicians), 7 x Giant Soldier Ants (Beasts), 1 x Giant Flying Ant (Flyer), with a nuclear crater/hole-in-the-ground as a Stronghold, with a few smaller Worker Ants. I have found that the best way to use Beasts is not to hide in bad going, but to draw your opponent either into or near such terrain. If defending, place large pieces of hindering terrain in the centre of the battlefield. If your opponent is the defender, they will obviously place few small terrain pieces, usually out of the way near the table edges...but at least they’ll have a nice juicy Stronghold for your fast moving Beasts to assault (giving you victory even if you lose more elements). Players may also find the following useful:- vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/fanaticus-dba/images/3/33/DETAILED_CRIB_SHEETS_for_HOTT_2.1.pdf/revision/latest?cb=20190123092614
Some Helpful Downloads can be found here: fanaticus-dba.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Reference_sheets_and_epitomes And here is the latest Jan 2020 FAQ: ancientwargaming.files.wordpress.com/2020/01/dba_faq_q1_2020_final.pdf A "404 Error Message" means you are using a mobile device. The Fanaticus Wiki can only be accessed via computer.Mighty fine looking army they were
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Nov 7, 2020 10:24:37 GMT
Mighty fine looking army they were. Yes...what a pity that out of five games they only won two, were winning a third until they ran out of time, and lost twice (not counting the very first sixth game, which I missed because I arrived late!) Having an all dinosaur army is a good one Derrickthewhite, with lots of possibilities. Here are some suggestions for you. Apart from the obvious, such as aerial Pterosaurs and Pterodactyls (Flyers), large two-legged carnivores such as Allosaurus and Tyranosaurs (Knights), and smaller fast moving Velociraptors (Beasts), how about the following?:- Slow moving but heavily armoured Anklyosaurs, built like tanks (Blades). Diplodocus, Apatosaurus, Brachiosaurs, and other long necked Titanosaurs (Behemoths). Herds of Triceratops (Warbands, with pursuit and rear-support representing a stampede). Small highly camouflaged colour changing dinosaurs (Sneakers). Swimming Mosasaurs (Water Lurkers) and Crocodilians (Lurkers). Plus vast herds of two-legged herbivore Hadrosaurs (Hordes). Shooters are more problematic, but you could have groups of small lizards spitting poison. As for Magicians, you could always do as I do and have telepathic mind control dinosaurs (who’s fossils we just haven’t found yet)...
|
|
|
Post by Baldie on Nov 7, 2020 12:42:58 GMT
What was the terrible film yo the centre of the earth or something, they had flying dinosaurs who put people into a trance by staring at them.
Guy with a brolly if I recall correctly
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Nov 7, 2020 15:53:39 GMT
|
|
|
Post by martin on Nov 7, 2020 17:10:36 GMT
Ohh! They have +4 vs. non-foot. I completely missed that. That changes things a bit, I thought they had +3. that drops their chance to be destroyed by riders by a third, and gives them a good chance to push the riders around if they just need to push the riders into the wood (that tactic would have been a nice move in the game that beasts disappointed me in). They can outrun knights, and running away from behemoths and heroes doesn't bother me. The comment about anyone being in bad going making everyone in bad going is a great one. It puts a little danger zone around the bad going, making its influence bigger without violating "the majority of the playing surface must be flat good going". having a critical mass of beasts sounds like it really changes gameplay (stronghold rush), but that's probably true of any element type, and one of the fun things about the game. maneuvering around the bad going, tempting the enemy in, sounds like an interesting tactic. The "toehold" rule really helps with that. Looking at the one battle I've played (against myself), I can see that the bad going situation was not nearly as favorable as I first thought it was. There were three big pieces, which I thought was a lot, and a small fourth one that would have been fun to use with the "toehold" rules. - A stream with a road nearby cut the field in two. All combat happened on the larger half with the road. There was some bad going in the center of the unplayed half, but the stream prevented anyone but fliers from really making use of that cover. The bad going wasn't contested, mostly because of lurkers. It was on the opposite corner from the beasts. Attempting to move them across the battlefield to use it to launch attacks might have been interesting... or might have been a waste of time.
- The closest terrain to the beasts was easily taken.. but a great big impassable rock blocked forward access. Had that not been there, the beasts would have been much more threatening, holding a flank and threatening the flanks of the main battle. Also, had I bothered to put a stronghold on the battlefield (rookie mistake), that would have been a great place to put it, and the beasts could have happily and competently defended the stronghold from ground troops while the behemoths and flyers went around flanking the enemy.
- The last terrain might actually have been useful, if I knew what I know now. It was just on the enemy side of the field, near some riders and warband. The pips let the enemy move a lot more at the beginning, and they got warband in the woods, and swept their riders in front of it.
As for terrain placement, I used the advice "We favor a permanent Terrain board with asymmetrical terrain features permanently fixed to it." so I built the map, and then chose the sides, and then they deployed. Though I suppose similar principles apply. So I suppose the takeaways are: - beasts get +4 vs. nonfoot
- bad going applies even if only one element is partially in it.
Thanks for helping me understand beasts. I love my dinosaur army, and beasts just have to be part of it! Another point to remember/point of difference from DBA is that a mounted element can get a -2 while in the open, fighting an element that is in the open BUT where a flank attacker (such as the beasts in question) is in bad going. Not just the ‘head to head’ elements that are considered for the minus 2.
|
|
|
Post by Baldie on Nov 7, 2020 18:20:42 GMT
You are correct, I still must have watched it 20 odd times
|
|
|
Post by derrickthewhite on Nov 9, 2020 16:34:31 GMT
Having an all dinosaur army is a good one Derrickthewhite, with lots of possibilities. Here are some suggestions for you. Apart from the obvious, such as aerial Pterosaurs and Pterodactyls (Flyers), large two-legged carnivores such as Allosaurus and Tyranosaurs (Knights), and smaller fast moving Velociraptors (Beasts), how about the following?:- Slow moving but heavily armoured Anklyosaurs, built like tanks (Blades). Diplodocus, Apatosaurus, Brachiosaurs, and other long necked Titanosaurs (Behemoths). Herds of Triceratops (Warbands, with pursuit and rear-support representing a stampede). Small highly camouflaged colour changing dinosaurs (Sneakers). Swimming Mosasaurs (Water Lurkers) and Crocodilians (Lurkers). Plus vast herds of two-legged herbivore Hadrosaurs (Hordes). Shooters are more problematic, but you could have groups of small lizards spitting poison. As for Magicians, you could always do as I do and have telepathic mind control dinosaurs (who’s fossils we just haven’t found yet)... Well, The army is planned to have riders. I'm using T-rex as a behemoth right now, but using warriors on mid-sized theropods as knights is a nice idea. I've been thinking about triceratops as spears. Ankylosaurids is another good idea. I'm really wanting to replay that battle now. I was thinking of using different armies and a different map for my next fight, but it might be good to just replay that battle to learn more. EDIT: while I'm here, is the tactic of placing the stronghold in bad going and then defending with lurkers and beasts a solid one?
|
|