Art De La Guerre
Bienvenue sur le forum de discussion de la règle de jeu l'Art De La Guerre
 
FAQFAQ RechercherRechercher Liste des MembresListe des Membres Groupes d'utilisateursGroupes d'utilisateurs S'enregistrerS'enregistrer
ProfilProfil Se connecter pour vérifier ses messages privésSe connecter pour vérifier ses messages privés ConnexionConnexion
80. Warring States Qin 480-206BC
Page 2 sur 2 Aller à la page Précédente  1, 2
Poster un nouveau sujet   Répondre au sujet
 Art De La Guerre Index du Forum > Army lists
Auteur Message
Black Prince
Prétorien


Inscrit le: 17 Oct 2016
Messages: 290
MessagePosté le: Ven Fév 02, 2018 4:01 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
ADLG is one of the few ancient rules systems where it quite common in a battle where player can concentrate a their forces to achieve locally superiority for example two of your commands against one of your opponent's commands. Though is based on a small sample if this happens the player who achieves local superiority always wins. So with a small army you can not be spread out across the board if you do not concentrate it will come down to a base on base fight in which case you need melee factor mismatches to win which can be hard to get. The benefit of elite it adds one if you roll less than 3 so it means most of the time elite means you do not lose rather than helping win a combat. Unless you both roll a 1 like my last game then I add +1 for elite and won the melee. If you are up against a large force your opponent detach a couple of bases to pin one of your commands while the rest of his army focuses on just one or two of your commands. You could be surprised to see how easily some LF and LH work together can destroy a isolated group of MF.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Snowcat
Vétéran


Inscrit le: 07 Jan 2017
Messages: 162
MessagePosté le: Ven Fév 02, 2018 11:07 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Sounds like I need a cunning deployment strategy or two, followed up by the old Napoleonic maneuvering and maximising of my strength at the opposition's weak point.

Not sure how refused flanks or echelon formations would work on a standard table - very badly I suspect.

Lots to learn.
_________________
"When one goes, one must go with style."
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Hazelbark
Magister Militum


Inscrit le: 12 Nov 2014
Messages: 1525
MessagePosté le: Sam Fév 03, 2018 7:02 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Black Prince a écrit:
ADLG is one of the few ancient rules systems where it quite common in a battle where player can concentrate a their forces to achieve locally superiority for example two of your commands against one of your opponent's commands.


The other few systems being virtually every single one. Concentration of force is a maxim of most game systems. Seems I even read that in Sun Tzu.


Citation:
So with a small army you can not be spread out across the board if you do not concentrate it will come down to a base on base fight in which case you need melee factor mismatches to win which can be hard to get.... If you are up against a large force your opponent detach a couple of bases to pin one of your commands while the rest of his army focuses on just one or two of your commands.


This has validity. Do not spread your army over too wide a frontage. a good axiom is no Corps should start more than 2 UD from the main force of another Corps. And movement should bring them closer. Deploying a force to get overwhelmed before help arrives is indeed unwise. Ethan's list is something akin to 12 serious fighting frontages. There are very few armies with that width and power. If you keep your corps in supporting distance you will be well served. Now if a foe completely moves onto your flank that is where you need to counter march and deny the onset of fighting before you are pinned into the engagement.


Citation:
You could be surprised to see how easily some LF and LH work together can destroy a isolated group of MF.


isolated single units are indeed vulnerable. But equal numbers of LI and LC versus equable numbers of MI is not a bad place to be MI. The lights will need to be very careful and will either evade a lot and/or also consume a lot of CP. The danger being the MI will snuff the lights if the lights are not careful. If it is a lot of lights versus a lone unit, than yes the lone unit becomes prey. Just as a single lion is vulnerable to a pack of jackals.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Black Prince
Prétorien


Inscrit le: 17 Oct 2016
Messages: 290
MessagePosté le: Dim Fév 04, 2018 2:36 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
I did not like DBM because it largely involved two sides square off against each other and the side with blade S (Roman Legionnaires) won.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Snowcat
Vétéran


Inscrit le: 07 Jan 2017
Messages: 162
MessagePosté le: Dim Fév 04, 2018 3:07 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Hazelbark a écrit:
Ethan's list is something akin to 12 serious fighting frontages. There are very few armies with that width and power.


Really? That surprises me somewhat. I wouldn't have thought 12 'serious fighting frontages' would be that hard to achieve with 200 points. Or that 'very few armies' could have 'that width and power'.

Now if you'd said 15-16+ I'd have thought 'yup, that could be difficult'. But 12 units at an average of approx 11 points (for serious fighting troops) = 132 points. Yes you can pay more for even better serious fighting troops but 10-11 seems around the mark to qualify.

Am I misunderstanding something?
_________________
"When one goes, one must go with style."
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Hazelbark
Magister Militum


Inscrit le: 12 Nov 2014
Messages: 1525
MessagePosté le: Lun Fév 05, 2018 2:37 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
You're not misunderstanding and one can certainly get more.
There is also the subjective what counts. I am not counting Bowmen, but depending on situation they would get in the line.

For example would you count MC Bow? Sometimes yes, sometimes no. They have a powerful role, but I am not sure I would say serious fighting frontage.

So you average army is probably 22-23. Most buy 2 LC and 2-4 LI. Then people often have 0-2 bow and 0-2 MI of sorts. Let's just call that 34 points (6 units) which is less than max of what I outlined. add that to you 132. We are at 166. 4 Command Points is another 12 for 178.

So 32 points left and you are at 18 units. 3 more power units gets you to 21 units. So people will say 15 power units out of 21.

So what you outline is a real scenario, but then how many of those 15 are Cav? Because Cav needs to be skillfully used against that warring states. I'm not arguing the list is the bees knees. I am just saying it is serious. Particularly the specific unit blend.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Snowcat
Vétéran


Inscrit le: 07 Jan 2017
Messages: 162
MessagePosté le: Mar Fév 06, 2018 3:38 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
OK. Gotcha.

Out of interest, I just worked up a quick Frankish army to see how many elite hard hitting nutters I could get for 200 points.

Managed to get 16 elite hard hitting nutters (for 16 serious fighting frontages). Not an army that will win too often, especially against a canny opponent - but oh the glory when it does!

Have posted the 200 pts list in a separate thread.

Cheers
_________________
"When one goes, one must go with style."
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Snowcat
Vétéran


Inscrit le: 07 Jan 2017
Messages: 162
MessagePosté le: Mar Fév 06, 2018 11:27 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
The plan is to use the cute Curteys figures for this army in 28mm. Only 'issue' I see is the heavy infantry figures appear to have a width (with shields) of about 17mm, so getting 4 across on a 60mm base won't work without staggering them and will appear very cramped. With 80mm bases, no problem and should look a lot better. Similar with mounted figures. (And I don't really want to use less figures than normal; see related topic in Miniatures board.)

I don't play in tournaments, so adopting 80mm basing isn't an issue for me. Similar situation with chunky 28mm figures from other modern manufacturers - squeezing them onto 60mm bases is less than ideal, whereas 80mm bases would appear to work a treat.
_________________
"When one goes, one must go with style."
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Maverick2909
Légionaire


Inscrit le: 01 Juil 2017
Messages: 103
Localisation: Oklahoma City, OK
MessagePosté le: Jeu Fév 08, 2018 3:27 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Facing off against a Warring States this Saturday, I am playing Neo-Assyrian and we are doing 300 points. I will be sure to take down what his army list is and give a battle report. If I remember I will even take pictures, but I have told myself that the last 3 times I have played and the heat of the moment has me forgetting every time!

I will say, I dread facing Heavy Sword 2HW. Such a powerful troop type.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Snowcat
Vétéran


Inscrit le: 07 Jan 2017
Messages: 162
MessagePosté le: Jeu Fév 08, 2018 3:37 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Maverick2909 a écrit:
Facing off against a Warring States this Saturday, I am playing Neo-Assyrian and we are doing 300 points. I will be sure to take down what his army list is and give a battle report. If I remember I will even take pictures, but I have told myself that the last 3 times I have played and the heat of the moment has me forgetting every time!

I will say, I dread facing Heavy Sword 2HW. Such a powerful troop type.


Excellent, looking forward to it, thanks. Smile

Re the HI 2HW - you may end up facing HI Impact Elite instead. Better/worse?

Cheers
_________________
"When one goes, one must go with style."
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Maverick2909
Légionaire


Inscrit le: 01 Juil 2017
Messages: 103
Localisation: Oklahoma City, OK
MessagePosté le: Jeu Fév 08, 2018 2:39 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Completely opinion based, but better for me. There is a sweet spot with units when it comes to point cost vs combat ability. HI impact elite is 11 points which is pretty expensive for foot. I generally try to avoid paying more than 10 points per stand of foot if I can. Also I’m of the current mindset that 2HW is probably one of the most powerful upgrades in the game right now when comparing functionality to points cost. Armor is pretty dang good too, but again it comes down to not overloading your foot to the point you’re flanked on both ends. 

Maybe that’s me being too scarred from DBM days of where a flank overlap meant everything, but I would say on average I’ve found this game favors quantity over quality.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Maverick2909
Légionaire


Inscrit le: 01 Juil 2017
Messages: 103
Localisation: Oklahoma City, OK
MessagePosté le: Lun Fév 12, 2018 12:49 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
So we ended up playing two games of ADLG yesterday, I played my Neo-Assyrians both times while my friend played his Han Chinese the first game and Warring States the second game. Both lists were quite similar. He had two commands of 6-7 Heavy Sword 2HW in both armies. For the Han, he had a command of 8 heavy cav crossbow and a smaller command of medium troops (cant remember exact troop type). I decisively took the first game when my 6 chariots cracked open his 2HW and my cav outshot his cav.

Second game he played his Warring States. This time he had three commands of Heavy Sword 2HW with 2 units of bow with each. His fourth command was 4 heavy chariot impact elite with 2 bow and 3 impetuous troops of some type. I was more than impressed with how my cav handled this game. They faced off against a solid line of 12 Heavy Sword and got some great shots in. Finally he pushed me back to my table edge and I went into close combat. The previous 4 turns of shooting were enough to do the trick and it was fairly straight up fights all along the line, I tended to outroll him and gaps formed. On the left side of the battlefield his third line of Heavy Sword and Heavy Chariots stared down my 1/2 sword 1/2 bow troops in the rough going flanked by my chariots. The terrain played to my favor and eventually the impetuous troops weren't able to be held and it went downhill from there. I then charged my chariots, and while he had one flank on me, heavy chariots once again proved highly superior to Heavy Sword. I felt kinda bad as I was winning by 3-4 every time so I was doing 3 hits with the furious charge.

The real takeaway from this for me was how powerful heavy cav/medium cav with bow are. They did a lot of damage and were able to avoid combat until the opportune time. I am having trouble seeing how one would deal with them over than heavy cav or heavy knights.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Snowcat
Vétéran


Inscrit le: 07 Jan 2017
Messages: 162
MessagePosté le: Lun Fév 12, 2018 3:03 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
I wonder if your opponent's Warring States might have fared better had he taken the Elite HI option against your shooting.

Cheers
_________________
"When one goes, one must go with style."
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
  
 Art De La Guerre Index du Forum > Army lists
Page 2 sur 2 Aller à la page Précédente  1, 2
Poster un nouveau sujet   Répondre au sujet Toutes les heures sont au format GMT

 
Sauter vers:  
Vous ne pouvez pas poster de nouveaux sujets dans ce forum
Vous ne pouvez pas répondre aux sujets dans ce forum
Vous ne pouvez pas éditer vos messages dans ce forum
Vous ne pouvez pas supprimer vos messages dans ce forum
Vous ne pouvez pas voter dans les sondages de ce forum