|
|
Post by Haardrada on Mar 4, 2017 11:24:05 GMT
I am interested to see if other players experiences or approach to fighting with Cavalry armies?Lacking the punch of Kn,El,Sch and not having any QK capability,Cavalry have no teeth against Steady foot,fight on a par with Aux.and are at a disadvantage to Bw and Art.shooting...just how do Cav succeed?
|
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on Mar 4, 2017 20:14:42 GMT
I am interested to see if other players experiences or approach to fighting with Cavalry armies?Lacking the punch of Kn,El,Sch and not having any QK capability,Cavalry have no teeth against Steady foot,fight on a par with Aux.and are at a disadvantage to Bw and Art.shooting...just how do Cav succeed? Of the cavalry armies in my collection I enjoy using the Sassanid sub-list for Ardashir I (II/69a) containing a good mix of 3Kn, Cv and LH.
The recent series of match ups between the Early Byzantine versus an array of enemies is moving them up the ladder despite their difference in composition.
The Early Byzantine field 6 x Cv, and one each 3Kn and LH, the remaining number are foot troops.
As you mentioned, they do have their downside facing Ax with equal factors, but that also includes Bd.
They do have an advantage in combat over warband and horde.
A combat result of twice as many, cavalry will flee from pike, spear, horde and artillery in good going.
That last point is useful to keep in mind when attempting to separate an infantry main body from its mobile wing.
I have found impulsive moves generally lead to disaster but a controlled approach works best and keeping your opponent off balance.
Light Horse are very useful when held inactive for two or three turns and then launched deep behind the enemy’s lines, not to sack the camp, but to harass the enemy general.
Either the enemy commander will attack or seek cover which most likely will bring friendly units on the flanks outside command radius "Let them eat PIPS'.
|
|
|
|
Post by Haardrada on Mar 4, 2017 22:10:59 GMT
In the few games I have used Cav in 3.0 I have either had to run them on a flank either in numbers to rush a flank or with Lh support or use them to support an assult with other more potent elements.
I have found they are excellent for supporting Elephants as most troops that are good vs Elephants are not so good vs Cav (screening shooting could prove risky though).
|
|
|
|
Post by phippsy on Mar 6, 2017 13:47:55 GMT
Interesting thread. Was thinking about most Cv heavy army I had used. And the Early Poles were top of the list with only 3 elements. Even that experience demonstrated that minimising terrain was important. When using LH for example one can actually get them through gaps between terrain and out in the open using say a 2 deep column and a double or treble move (also get the +1 combat for support). This burstbthrough factor is not there for Cv.
Open plains please, and target those Ps and Wb and LH where at all possible. Indeed if at all possible an overlap on one end v Ax or Bd is valuable for a 3v2 which really shifts the odds of a kill, but no need to worry at the other end if overlapped at 2v3 as the worst that can happen to the Cv is a flee. A flank contact as well even better.
If you can get a hole in a line somewhere then CV can really exploit this with the movement and go significant distance to pin or contact for rear supprt. Concentrate on the location to open up.
Always fun using Cv but a good brain challenge. Normally CV figures look good too.
|
|
|
|
Post by Haardrada on Mar 6, 2017 22:19:57 GMT
Thats a good take on the subject Phippsy,raising a few good ideas.
Timurilank is right with Sassanid and Early Byzantine armies that can field possibly 6+ Cav armies.I count my Ghaznavids along with these armies that have several Cav elements with different combinations of support troops.
But what about the options for Cavalry heavy armies such as Early Avars,Islamic Persians,Post Mongol Russian and Timurids?
|
|
|
|
Post by phippsy on Mar 8, 2017 18:56:37 GMT
Haardrada, I wonder if those 4 armies that you mention are maybe not used as a focus, 'because' they are heavy in Cv and therefore unpopular, or are generally less fashionable than other armies, or figure ranges and availability affects them.
What I have found with my interest in LH armies, is if you understand the strengths a weaknesses of what you command, then you can operate better, if you have that intellectual drive to do so. I am sure that if an interested Cv General invests time in thinking it through, he or she could probably evolve winning strategies against most opponents.
Of course roling 6's helps, and Cv armies do look good.
|
|
|
|
Post by Haardrada on Mar 8, 2017 23:47:35 GMT
Haardrada, I wonder if those 4 armies that you mention are maybe not used as a focus, 'because' they are heavy in Cv and therefore unpopular, or are generally less fashionable than other armies, or figure ranges and availability affects them. What I have found with my interest in LH armies, is if you understand the strengths a weaknesses of what you command, then you can operate better, if you have that intellectual drive to do so. I am sure that if an interested Cv General invests time in thinking it through, he or she could probably evolve winning strategies against most opponents. Of course roling 6's helps, and Cv armies do look good. I see your point as all 4 armies are suitable versus Lh armies.😊 (I have Timurids myself 😉). Its against other maybe none-historic armies that a General with a Cavalry heavy army will need to put on their thinking cap.😊 |
|
|
|
Post by lkmjbc on Mar 9, 2017 1:32:45 GMT
Haardrada, I wonder if those 4 armies that you mention are maybe not used as a focus, 'because' they are heavy in Cv and therefore unpopular, or are generally less fashionable than other armies, or figure ranges and availability affects them. What I have found with my interest in LH armies, is if you understand the strengths a weaknesses of what you command, then you can operate better, if you have that intellectual drive to do so. I am sure that if an interested Cv General invests time in thinking it through, he or she could probably evolve winning strategies against most opponents. Of course roling 6's helps, and Cv armies do look good. I see your point as all 4 armies are suitable versus Lh armies.😊 (I have Timurids myself 😉). Its against other maybe none-historic armies that a General with a Cavalry heavy army will need to put on their thinking cap.😊 It is heartening to see DBA's standing. I am also very pleased that Armati is being played. I have a very soft spot in my heart for that game. Joe Collins |
|
|
|
Post by lkmjbc on Mar 9, 2017 1:34:18 GMT
Ack...Response to wrong thread!
Joe Collins
|
|
