Early Northern Barbarians

[Andrew Richardson]

I've been experimenting with Early Northern Barbarians (I/14(d)). I though this should be a reasonable list, with a core of heavy foot and cavalry support (6sp, 2 bd, 1ps, 3cv), but I've lost every game so far against a variety of opponents.

My plan has been to advance with the heavy foot and sweep away anything in my path, with one flank supported by Cv and the other by terrain.

Instead it all goes pear-shaped, particularly when the enemy puts down terrain (at Agg 3 that happens most of the time).

Any advice welcome!

[imported_adsarf]

I think your first judgement was right - this is a tough and fairly well-balanced army that shouldn't be a push-over for most opponents.

Can you give us more insight into what is going wrong? What kind of armies are you fighting against?

Remember Sp are tough, but they won't wipe out any opposition quickly. With only a couple of Bd available, you are going to have to take time to grind out a win against most opposition if you use these tactics. More aggressive use of the Cav might help to speed things up by turning flanks, etc. it depends on the opposition you are facing. Equally, if you are using bad going to protect one flank, this may not delay your opponent enough if they have plenty of bad-going troops.

Andrew

[Andrew Richardson]

I've had three battles; all of them easy victories for the enemy; in all of them I tried the 'push forward with the shieldwall and protect the flanks with mounted or terrain' approach.

1. v LPIA (Ax version) - I lost the terrain roll and didn't really stand a chance against massed Ax and max sixed terrain. I guess it's one of those mismatches you can't do anything about.

2. v One of the Early Roman/Italin blade-heavy armies, we mere more or less identical, except that his heavy foot were blade against my majority of spear; the game became a slog of shieldwalls and the slight advantage Bd have over Sp cost me.

3. v NKE the enemy massed his more numerical mounted, supported by Bw, against my mounted, I was outnumbered and rolled up from the flank.

So am I doing something wrong, or is my army a lemon?

[whefam]

you need to play to your natural advantages..sounds like your opponents are!

[Pthomas]

Originally posted by Andrew Richardson:
I've had three battles; all of them easy victories for the enemy; in all of them I tried the 'push forward with the shieldwall and protect the flanks with mounted or terrain' approach.

1. v LPIA (Ax version) - I lost the terrain roll and didn't really stand a chance against massed Ax and max sixed terrain. I guess it's one of those mismatches you can't do anything about.Max terrain doesn't mean you have to send your spear or blade in to take him on where he has an advantage. His Ax are faster then your heavy foot, but you are more powerful and your Cav are faster then his Ax. Defend your flanks and stay in good going. You can't use bad going to guard one flank, if your opponent can completely control the bad going.

2. v One of the Early Roman/Italin blade-heavy armies, we mere more or less identical, except that his heavy foot were blade against my majority of spear; the game became a slog of shieldwalls and the slight advantage Bd have over Sp cost me.The early Roman or Italian (except for Etruscan League) have, at most, one more blade then you. Cav are an exact even match for blade, if you are outnumbered throw in a Cv to match your blade against his. Even better, get your Cv on his blade, your blade on his spear and your spear on his Cv. Game over, you win.

3. v NKE the enemy massed his more numerical mounted, supported by Bw, against my mounted, I was outnumbered and rolled up from the flank.You need to get your heavy foot on his bow. They are the same speed so there is no reason it shouldn't happen. Use heavy foot to support your Cav in this instance.

So am I doing something wrong, or is my army a lemon? You seem to be allowing your opponent to get the match ups that he wants. You have a plan and it sounds like you may be sticking to it no matter what the enemy is doing. You may need to be a more active general, don't throw all caution to the wind, but look at your army and the opponent's army and decide which of your elements the opponent is likely to try to destroy and which of his you want to destroy and then determine your battle plan.

These are all new player growing pains. Keep at it and have fun and learn from every loss, because you will have a lot of them for awhile.

[imported_adsarf]

I agree with Pthomas. You need to focus more precisely on where you are going to win and where you are going to'not lose'. An Arab army of mostly Aux and LH shouldn't have had anything that could really frighten you in it unless the you go after them in the bad going. You can force them to fight in the open if you threaten their camp, or you can tempt them to fight in the open by exposing your camp or a couple of weak-seeming elements (or often, just by delaying your advance a couple of moves. DBA players bore quickly. That's why we play DBA)

Against the Italians/Romans (whoever exactly they were) you should have had an advantage in mounted of at least one element, I'd have thought. That is usually enough to get aggressive on one flank or the other - as you found against the Egyptians. The Egyptian bow, as Pthomas pointed out, wo'n't last long once you get either heavy foot (particularly blade) or Cav into contact with them - that's 11 of your elements!

I'd say the army you've chosen has a fair chance against all of those opponents. Because it is based on core troops - Cav and Sp - you will rarely get a win just by lining up and blasting through as you might with Kn against Bd or Wb against Sp. You need to focus more clearly on how and where you are going to win each battle, and the victories will come soon enough.

Besides, lots of us have lost 3 games in a row when forst starting to use a new army. Its only probably about 2 hours playing time, so you'd only be half way through losing the first time by this stage playing some wargames we could name.

Good luck

Andrew

[imported_Bryanmd]

Stay with it and enjoy. Sometimes you lose no matter what happens. Losing in glorious fashion with "quick kill" kind of units is second only to winning with them. ;^)

Like these guys say, watch your matchups as best as you can. When you can't, roll well.

Always consider smashing the camps of those who hide in rough terrain, keeping enough loose reserve to keep him from going after yours in a flash.

Or simply put, contain the cowards in the woods and sack their supplies with impunity.

Be Feared!
Be the Northern Barbarian!

Bryan
Motivational Speaker?

[whefam]

One thing I eventually realised was that I was like a frightened rabbit in headlights...some players I regularly played intimidated me by thier competency, attitude and glee at always beating me! I would only react to them and would not come up with a plan. What I mean was when looking at match ups I would just to avoid bad ones and not look for killer match ups in my favour.

Always do the unexpected and try to put your opponent on the back foot. Look for your +ves and try not to think too much about your -ves.

When I started to do this I started to win!

Andy

[Chris Brantley]

"Look to your +'s"

I like that...almost better than "Roll Sixes", since it emphasizes generalship over luck.