|
Post by Simon Robinson on Jan 29, 2012 15:24:06 GMT
The Levy rules hamper any unit they apply to - and the Persians don't have to take levy.
All in all I think the rules aren't too bad. The 1/2 move if you wheel applies to several other types of units (Phalanx, Warbands to name two) and the Fears units they don't outnumber 2:1 or better is easily avoided by having large units of them. I would hardly call leadership 8 / 7 units as "gutless" I think calling rolling 12 as "bad luck" nearer the mark.
Cavalry charged by infantry are almost always in for a bad time. Since they have no rank bonuses, and no benefits for charging they start the combat losing by 3 before a single dice roll - if fighting ranked up close order infantry.
WS3 is average so I'm not sure where their stats are "rubbish"
The biggest problem with your levy was a combination of bad luck, small unit sizes and not understanding the levy rules before playing the game. Maybe a few more games with Levies are needed before you slate the concept entirely. After all a significant number of people spent a lot of time testing these lists before publishing them.
That does not mean they didn't get things wrong but it suggests that based on one game with bad luck we shouldn't be too quick to leap to the conclusion the list is wrong.
You might as well say that the rules for Balista are broken based on the fact that yours only killed 1 skirmisher.
Virtually all skirmishers have low leadership - and so are just there to screen you main force during initial moves and run away when they get charged by something that can kill them
If you wish for a rematch to test the Levies my Spartans will be more than happy to meet you.
|
|
|
Post by wstevens on Jan 29, 2012 18:31:05 GMT
The point was not put across that well granted - I was talking in reference to the Bactrian and even noble cav being levy at all and the fact they have to make the fear test. As you say higher leadership of 8 sort of says it and if needed yes they would have to get less than this for a fear test, which is usually done 3 quarters of the time. Yes bad luck on my side. Not arguing about the Levy rules at all - just that those particular units shouldn't really be classed as levy. At Gaugemela this would mean that the whole of the Persian Cav left was made up of levy - which is just not true. As that was the first time that I have actually played the Persians I think its a bit unfair slating me for not knowing all the rules. As you say with a bit more practise they may just become a good force when I get to know their ways. As you brought up the ballista - (God knows why?), your unit of 20 odd Spartan elites with the Spartan King charging it seems a lot more fear causing than being charged by poxy peltasts in reality. How come the 2 guys on the ballista - remember that just two guys, DO NOT take a fear test? Normally 2 guys would never stay to get slaughtered if highly outnumbered firstly and especially against the cream of the Ancient WAB world ranked up for combat. However with the rules they are not required to take a fear test as they are a unit, but they can flee given the choice. The Ballistas are never going to hit much on 6 anyway so I expect that against skirmishers so I fail to see your point on this matter. Ok perhaps "rubbish stats" was just a ramble... although WS2 and low leadership is reflected in some of the points values. I hadn't realised that you didn't need to take levy troops at all. I thought it was a requirement as I'm used to this kind of stuff in WFB which frequently suggests such things. It is quite obvious that you know all the rules for Levy and how bad they can be - I noted that you didn't have a single levy unit in your army. Perhaps the list doen't have them - although levy phalanx is a possibility. As for your Spartans - not really a match up for levy is it now? Your just gloating!
|
|
|
Post by garth on Jan 29, 2012 19:05:44 GMT
My roman imperial army is now 2,800 points which was originally 2000 points. Granted i did add a praetorian unit but without at least 2,400 points I would have had to remove a scorpio or tormenta from my list.
Personally I think the book is a big plus, and some of the silly rules like shaman has gone, as well as super power characters and armies like Spartans aren't invincible.
Although slightly annoyed that i have to rebase my celtic fanatics and purchase a few more.
Oh well, no such thing as a perfect rule book. the only thing i'm concerned with is the points values that people are going for 2000, or 2,800 or something else.
I want to build my armies, put them in a box ready for me to pick up on gaming day. NOT spend the night before with a calculator and a piece of paper sorting out my army.
|
|
|
Post by tiger1 (Paul) on Jan 29, 2012 19:28:48 GMT
The noble levy cavalry in a big unit is great value (WS4 Int4 Ld 8 and 30% off nortmal costs), its just important to ensure the charge is straight forward. Having read the army list I really like it and the cheap levy skirmishers great value, especially if you have the mind set that when they run they are gone.
Interestingly my ld 5 skirmishers often rally (weird but true) - but I think levy on ld3 are rarely if ever going to. But then the points differential is massive between them actually twice the cost. I reckon I would prefer levy skirmish foot.
I blelieve the reason why non "persian" persian troops are levy is becuase they did not want to fight for the persian ruling line. Indeed reflects the poor perofrmance and infighting that made Alexanders conquest of Persia" easier. It also explains the reliance on mercenary hoplites.
Its an interesting period of history - I'll play chariot wars boardgame with anyone, needs four players but reflects the history of "persia" very well. Think of Iraq and Iran, that war was horrible, but thet were both part of Persia, add the Kurds and other tribal units and its easy to picture the internal emnity between rival factions.
I do believe Alexander was lucky both in his battles and the timing of his invasion. Anyone out there know the history well???
I have collected quite a bit of unpainted lead for persians, and some plastic, I look forward to organising an army for the table top, and that list offers some good value levy cavalry, both skirmish and battle cavalry.
There is an interesting article on levy skirmishers on the WAB Forum, if what is written is accurate then skirmish levy mounted are great value.
I can see games of 3,000 points being more frequent - but will need a bigger table possibly [6 by 6] or [6 by 8].
It would also be interesting to play using Hail Ceasar.
|
|
|
Post by Simon Robinson on Jan 29, 2012 20:56:02 GMT
Noble and Satrapal Cavalry have always been levy - as far as WAB is concerned. In the Alexander the Great source book they cost 17 and 14 respectively - which means they should cost 24 and 19 in the new book, so at 21 and 15 they are effectively cheaper.
I wasn't slating you for not knowing the rules - and it was the fist time I have ever faced levy and I have never taken an army with them in - I was just pointing out that your unfamiliarity with the rule was probably a contributing factor to you taking too small a unit, and then getting into a situation where you were fighting a fear causing enemy.
Because I had taken Spartans I did not have the option to take Levy troops and had to take at least one unit of elites. The only reason I took Spartans is that I only have 3 units of Hoplites (24 each) and that was the only army I could take that wouldn't require more figures than I actually had - as it was some of my skirmishers looked like Vikings or Saxon. When I have more Hoplites I'm more than happy to fight with a non-Spartan Army - and to be honest would prefer to do so. If you remember my Greek army under the old list not a Spartan or sacred band to be seen.
And while my 1 unit of Spartans did turn up – their only contribution was to get shot at by a Ballista, crush a unit of fleeing skirmishers and over-run into the aforementioned Ballista – not a very decisive role. My most effective units were probably my Peltasts – one of which held up the cavalry on my right flank, whilst the other chased off the Cavalry on my right and was in a position to turn in on you left flank. And they were cheap light infantry
I've not done much reading on the battles of the period (Ask me about the Viking sagas and that is a different matter) but I will note that in the ATG supplement the Persian order of battle for Gaugamela lists Cavalry units of 20, 40 or even 64 models. Macedonian phalanx range from 32-40 models
The two guys on the Ballista are trained, motivated professionals, levies are not. They may be trained, they may be professional, they may even be motivated but at they end of the day they are not all three – or maybe their just not as enthusiastic about dying. Who knows.
To be honest anybody who given the choice says “no my Ballista crew will stand when you charge them” knowing that almost certainly the crew will get defeated in combat and therefore trigger Panic in all units with 12” as they count as formed and not skirmish is either not paying attention, has some brilliant reason why this is better than just letting the poor crew run away or is desperate (if I can just kill one more model in the unit that has charged me I’ll get ½ its VP type of thing). Because of the consequences of a war machine being defeated in close combat they almost always behave as if they did fear formed units without the rule being explicit.
I mentioned the Ballista originally to illustrate the point - you cannot judge anything from one battle.
I played the Caravan scenario several times against different people in order to understand it and get better data on it. I know some people think it is broken and some people hate it almost as a matter of faith but to me it is a fun and balanced scenario - although with some armies it can be a bit rock-paper-scissors-lizard-Spock. If that battle had been the first time somebody had used a Ballista then based on its poor performance they could conclude Ballista’s were rubbish in much the same way you appeared to do so regarding levies.
The offer for a rematch was not gloating – I think the battle could have gone either way initially it was only once the situation had developed it started going against you.
The offer was to see how the match up would play once you had had a chance to rework your army after you were more familiar with some of the rules (e.g. how levy work and the fact that the army list says you can take up to 50% levy not that you must take some). For example Persian Heavy cavalry has the same stat line as the Satrapal Cavalry – ok they cost 21 against 15 but that is because they are not levy – maybe they are a better choice.
If you remember the first 4 or so WAB games I played down the club I lost (often quite badly) because my unit sizes where too small, I didn’t take standards etc. It was only after I had played a few games with my Vikings that they became the feared killing machine they were, as I better understood the rules.
|
|
|
Post by Simon Robinson on Jan 29, 2012 21:06:13 GMT
The WAB rule book suggests 2000 pts be played on an 8x4 table and 1500 on a 6x4.
Under the new points system that's 2800 on 8x4 and 2100 on 6x4.
Any points based system always has people reaching for a calculator - unless you're looking at the B5:A Call to Arms game and even then you can end up number crunching just to work out how much that destroyer costs in the "Armageddon" scale game as against the "Border Patrol"
|
|
|
Post by wstevens on Jan 29, 2012 23:12:30 GMT
"Noble and Satrapal cavalry have always been levy as far as WAB is concerned" - Yes I know this - my argument is should they be which seems to be constantly lost or ignored in this thread. I just feel that they were better units than the Persian Cavalry (historically and not in WAB world). The fact that Alexander's companions did a swivel turn to avoid them and punch through the hole made by the stretching of troops, leaving other Greek cav and light infantry to deal with them. Although more tactical than avoidance it has to be said - but still avoided.
As for the ballista - as I said before I didn't expect much from them to be honest - at 35pts who would? If they did run as response to a charge this should not trigger any panic in any other units nearby - unless they had only 3 models in them each.
Yep I'll play you again now that I have my head around the rules - and I will take a better list. However it won't be a few weeks, as this week I'm trying out the Jason scenarios and next week I have parents evening. So perhaps the week after that.
|
|
|
Post by Simon Robinson on Jan 30, 2012 9:23:48 GMT
It's not so much "ignored" as .... well actually it is ignored.
Jeff Jonas who wrote the original lists in ATG classed them as levy, this list was tested and peer reviewed as part of the publication process. Jeff is widely seen as something of an expert on this era by many people in the WAB community and I see no reason to challenge this. His supplement is well researched and interesting with details and OOB for several battles of the time so if he believes that levy classification is appropriate I am inclined to accept his opinion as an expert.
We all have things we disagree with in some lists, or that puzzle us - where, for example, is the viking cavalry that there is historical evidence for? Why can't you take Heavy armour in the later Greek Hoplite lists, but you can in earlier ones - did they forget how to make it or forget where the left it?
If you don't think Satrapal Cavalry should be levy - use the non-levy version provided and pay the appropriate cost, it is that simple and the choice is yours.
Realistically all the Levy status of these units means is that you need to field them in larger units than you might normally chose to. The movement restriction when wheeling they would have any way since they are "massed cavalry" - so no impact there.
I'm booked for the next few weeks anyway so no problems on a rematch.
|
|
|
Post by wstevens on Jan 30, 2012 21:06:18 GMT
Ok settled rematch on the 14th! Oh dear Valentines night... no worries ha ha!
|
|
|
Post by Simon Robinson on Jan 31, 2012 9:19:54 GMT
Busy on the 14th and the 21st - how are you looking for the 28th February?
|
|
|
Post by zedeyejoe on Mar 3, 2012 15:13:19 GMT
|
|