Help and Opinions

[Mike Porter]

Thinking of a BBDBA build. Here's where I am now. Haven't thought about commands yet, just composition. Any and all ideas are welcome.

IV/7. Early Crusader. 1096AD-1128AD with IV/1a. Komnenen Byzantine Ally

IV/7. Early Crusader: 1x3Kn (CinC), 7x3Kn, 10x4Sp, 2x3Bw, 1x3Cb, 3x2Ps
IV/1. Byzantines: 1x3Cv (Gen), 1x4Bd, 3x3Cv, 4x2Lh, 3x4Bw

Here are my thoughts at this point. The Davids favor the later list, which gives a Littoral landing and more Cb. at the expense of any bad going troops. It seems to me that I really need the Ps in there to support the spear wall against mounted (+5 vs Mntd. Sp + Ps, instead of +4 Cb by itself). In the absence of enemy mounted, the Ps can make for the bad going and hold it until the enemy aux gets there.

I was thinking the crusader bow could screen my Kn when the enemy Lh comes sniffing around. Byz bow can hold the flank while the Byz Lh causes mischief. Byz Cv forms a mobile reserve. Byz Bd gets popped into the camp or BUA.

I'm new at this, so like I said, any thoughts are appreciated. :)

[John Loy]

I'll make sure I'm in the other brackett:confused:

John

[John Meunier]

Others with more wisdom and experience will chime in. All I have is a question.

How do you fight an elephant or pike/elephant army?

[Mike Porter]

Others with more wisdom and experience will chime in. All I have is a question.

How do you fight an elephant or pike/elephant army?

Very, very, carefully!

I have a +5 to the El's +4/Qk. Not very good odds, and the way I roll, probably a death sentence for my Sp. If they are running lots of jumbos and pike, chances are that they won't have much other mounted elements to stop mine. He'll also probably have a shorter line than me. I could move the Bw into the front lines and try to roll his flanks with my mounted.

Thanks for raising the question-there were lots of jumbos at Historicon.

[David Kuijt]

IV/7. Early Crusader. 1096AD-1128AD with IV/1a. Komnenen Byzantine Ally

IV/7. Early Crusader: 1x3Kn (CinC), 7x3Kn, 10x4Sp, 2x3Bw, 1x3Cb, 3x2Ps
IV/1. Byzantines: 1x3Cv (Gen), 1x4Bd, 3x3Cv, 4x2Lh, 3x4Bw




Aggression 4 is harsh on this list, as they have no speed at all, and few BGo troops. Further, your definition of "combined arms" is to have Knights and Spear BOTH in a command. If you go pre-1100 (Agg4) you almost MUST have the Warband -- I'd go with the maximum Warband, myself.

The Komnemenemenemen ally is a good one here because it adds some nice speed that the army really lacks; sadly it does not fix the problem of the lack of BGo troops much.

What I'd suggest when attacking is to deploy your two Crusader commands as seems best, and (if using the NASAMW deployment mod) deploy your Byzantine mounted in a reserve position capable of moving to assist either command. Then when the enemy (usually defending) deploys their last command to abuse you, you can move the Byzantines to assist.


And I'd also recommend you go with the Warband.

[Mike Porter]

Aggression 4 is harsh on this list, as they have no speed at all, and few BGo troops. Further, your definition of "combined arms" is to have Knights and Spear BOTH in a command. If you go pre-1100 (Agg4) you almost MUST have the Warband -- I'd go with the maximum Warband, myself.

The Komnemenemenemen ally is a good one here because it adds some nice speed that the army really lacks; sadly it does not fix the problem of the lack of BGo troops much.

What I'd suggest when attacking is to deploy your two Crusader commands as seems best, and (if using the NASAMW deployment mod) deploy your Byzantine mounted in a reserve position capable of moving to assist either command. Then when the enemy (usually defending) deploys their last command to abuse you, you can move the Byzantines to assist.


And I'd also recommend you go with the Warband.

David, thanks for the input! I was thinking of going post-1100 to use the agg. 1 (Essex gave me a lot of late looking spear and knights) and have the chance to put down terrain, which is why I didn't give the warband much thought. Do you think the 2 elements are worth taking over the psiloi, regardless of aggression?

[John Meunier]

... and (if using the NASAMW deployment mod) deploy your Byzantine mounted in a reserve position capable of moving to assist either command. Then when the enemy (usually defending) deploys their last command to abuse you, you can move the Byzantines to assist.


So, high aggression nets you bad terrain and a reactive or defensive deployment posture.

[David Kuijt]

David, thanks for the input! I was thinking of going post-1100 to use the agg. 1 (Essex gave me a lot of late looking spear and knights) and have the chance to put down terrain, which is why I didn't give the warband much thought. Do you think the 2 elements are worth taking over the psiloi, regardless of aggression?

Abso-freaking-lutely.

Warband in small numbers may be the most underrated troops in the game. Not only are they sneaky bastards with nasty flanking rushes always a threat, but their presence suddenly alters the complexion of bad going -- one or two Warband means that blade or spear armies without Aux suddenly become no-longer-viable in bad going. Free Company (agg4 Dismounting Knights) is paralyzed against Yuan Chinese Looters, for example.

Back to your army, take 2x Ps, 2x Bw, 2x Wb. 2 Psiloi is enough to support two triples of spear, and that's enough to win the game for you if your enemy assaults them with knights, and enough to lose the game for you if he assaults him and you roll stinky. 2 Bow is enough to hold your camp and/or flank against light horse, or to support an assault on bad going without using too many pips. The warband means that the enemy will never be able to use heavy foot as faux bad-going troops. And that you, most likely, WILL be able to do so. Spear work great against Bow in BGo, if your enemy doesn't have Wb.

Warband are sneaky and destructive with their second charge, if you have the pips; put them in your highpip command and treat them as Light Horse Heavy Foot.

[David Kuijt]

So, high aggression nets you bad terrain and a reactive or defensive deployment posture.

Totally not.

High aggression nets you the opponent's terrain choice. That isn't "bad" terrain unless you 1) chose an army that can be crippled by the enemy terrain choice, and 2) the enemy has an army that can take advantage of your vulnerability.

Further, I've seen many (many, many) mistakes in terrain made by opponents (and a few by myself). DS and I have won tournaments with aggression 3 and 4 armies doing almost nothing except capitalizing on opponent terrain and deployment errors. High aggression means the opponent gets a chance to screw up first.

As for reactive/defensive deployment, that has nothing to do with aggression -- it has to do with using a molasses army. If your army is bitchin' slow, unless you find a way to force the enemy to deploy to your liking (and such ways do exist -- we found one in the finals of the Big Battle Doubles at H'Con three days ago), you will be forced to start with a reactive/defensive deployment. (And the Early Crusaders are bitchin' slow). This deployment issue has to do with army speed and responsiveness, not whether you are the attacker or defender. Using the NASAMW deployment mod, both sides have to worry about being outdeployed, and both of them have to take steps to give them some options if so.

[John Meunier]

Totally not.

I'm so glad you answer with more than one sentence answers when I ask a silly question. :)

High aggression nets you the opponent's terrain choice. That isn't "bad" terrain unless you 1) chose an army that can be crippled by the enemy terrain choice, and 2) the enemy has an army that can take advantage of your vulnerability.

Further, I've seen many (many, many) mistakes in terrain made by opponents (and a few by myself). DS and I have won tournaments with aggression 3 and 4 armies doing almost nothing except capitalizing on opponent terrain and deployment errors. High aggression means the opponent gets a chance to screw up first.

I think you just explained why I like High Aggression armies. I suck at terrain deployment. I much rather cope with terrain I didn't choose than try to deploy it well in the first place. I've never figured out how to do it.

As for reactive/defensive deployment, that has nothing to do with aggression -- it has to do with using a molasses army. If your army is bitchin' slow, unless you find a way to force the enemy to deploy to your liking (and such ways do exist -- we found one in the finals of the Big Battle Doubles at H'Con three days ago),

My mouth is watering at the thought of the battle report ... or did I miss it already?

you will be forced to start with a reactive/defensive deployment. (And the Early Crusaders are bitchin' slow). This deployment issue has to do with army speed and responsiveness, not whether you are the attacker or defender. Using the NASAMW deployment mod, both sides have to worry about being outdeployed, and both of them have to take steps to give them some options if so.

The slow E. Crusaders are because the fastest troop type is Kn? If that is molasses, what are Spartans?

[David Kuijt]

I think you just explained why I like High Aggression armies. I suck at terrain deployment. I much rather cope with terrain I didn't choose than try to deploy it well in the first place. I've never figured out how to do it.


It is a very complex art. Dave and my Tactical Manuals for our Big Battle Doubles armies are much, much longer and more involved when we are working up a low aggression army, for this very reason.


My mouth is watering at the thought of the battle report ... or did I miss it already?


A summary is in one of the other threads I've responded to since Sunday, I forget which one. It doesn't discuss the issue of enducing your enemy to deploy in a particular way, which is (if anything) even more complicated than choosing good terrain. I think DS posted a pic from the Big Battle Finals -- if I can find that and link to it, I'll make a thread focused on that question.


The slow E. Crusaders are because the fastest troop type is Kn? If that is molasses, what are Spartans?

Dead meat, mostly.:D

Surprise is something you create in the mind of the enemy. But eventually, no matter how dull, your opponent will figure out what your plan is. If you have nothing faster than Kn, your opponent will see your plan weeks before those guys get into position to do anything. In fact, you will often have to telegraph your intentions at deployment time. Even a totally misdeployed army can usually summon enough pips and enough time to put together an ugly reception for a wad of Kn, especially given their vulnerability to ZOCs extended from BGo. A gap between patches of BGo that is six element base widths across (almost 10") can be blocked by three elements of Bow and two elements of Psiloi angled inwards with their toes in BGo. Unless you're French or roll really, really well, that's going to stop your whole formation. So the speed of Knights is largely illusion -- unlike Auxilia, who can go straight through bad going, Knights have to go around it. Elephants have a similar illusory speed -- their 3" move isn't the speed they can keep up throughout the battle, as they start to get ZOCified and their general starts getting more demands on his pips.

[JamesLDIII]

The slow E. Crusaders are because the fastest troop type is Kn? If that is molasses, what are Spartans?

Pondwater...

[Mike Porter]

(And the Early Crusaders are bitchin' slow). This deployment issue has to do with army speed and responsiveness, not whether you are the attacker or defender.

Exactly why I want the post 1100AD aggression.:D

Lets try this build:


IV/7. Early Crusader: 1x3Kn (CinC), 7x3Kn, 10x4Sp, 2x3Bw, 2x5Wb, 2x2Ps
IV/1. Byzantines: 1x3Cv (Gen), 1x4Bd, 3x3Cv, 4x2Lh, 3x4Bw

Definitely makes more sense, and is more tactically viable. David is right about the Wb's use on the flanks, since the double move can sometimes deceive an opponent into thinking he is safe. I'll think about command structure and post for input later. :)

[Pavane]

I don't want to hijack the thread, but I assume that you should spread the threat of Wb by distributing a small number accross commands, in pairs if possible. Therefore with three Wb, two should go to one command and the remaining one to another. This is better than three Wb in one command.

[Mike Porter]

You're not hijacking; I asked for opinions!

Unfortunately, with a Byzantine ally I am only allowed 2 Wb elements.

Before I get too interested in this project, does anyone think this is just a bad idea to even attempt to run this army?:( :confused:

[Pavane]

You're not hijacking; I asked for opinions!

Unfortunately, with a Byzantine ally I am only allowed 2 Wb elements.

Before I get too interested in this project, does anyone think this is just a bad idea to even attempt to run this army?:( :confused:

By hijack, I meant a reference to a different army with 3 Wb taking the discussion to a more general theme.

As far this being a bad idea to run this army, I can't see why. Who would have thought that Later Hoplite Greek Athenians could go so far! It gives hope to my poor Picts.

[David Kuijt]

Before I get too interested in this project, does anyone think this is just a bad idea to even attempt to run this army?:( :confused:

No, no, it's a great idea.

To Will, though -- sorry, I disagree. Keep the Wb together. Why? Pips. The most critical aspect of any command design is always whether it is the highpip command, lowpip command, midpip command of a triple, or allypip.

Thou Shalt Not:

put Elephants in a lowpip command if you have any thought of moving them more than once
put pike in a lowpip command if you are going to ask more of them than to stand or move forward in a bigass block.
put LH or Wb in a lowpip command if you are thinking of trying anything clever.
put Aux or Ps in a lowpip command if you are assigning them the mission of clearing some bad goingWhat does that mean? It means you want the Wb, both of them, in your highpip command.

Or at least, that's my recommendation.

[Pavane]

DK,

OK, out and out hijack. I agree that a small number of Wb can present problems to the opponent (which is why the II/68a list is more attractive than the II/68b list). With my Picts, I'm having trouble deciding whether to use 3 Wb in my high-pip command or 2 in my high-pip and 1 in my mid-pip command. It seems to me that dividing the Wb into two commands spreads the threats, making it more difficult for my opponent. Three Wb isn't that much better than two.

[David Kuijt]

DK,

OK, out and out hijack. I agree that a small number of Wb can present problems to the opponent. With my Picts, I'm having trouble deciding whether to use 3 Wb in my high-pip command or 2 in my high-pip and 1 in my mid-pip command. It seems to me that dividing the Wb into two commands spreads the threats, making it more difficult for my opponent. Three Wb isn't that much better than two.

What else is in your army? Looks like it has to be the (a) list. Any ally? Scots-Irish would be useful; Early Saxon only a little bit.

Assuming no ally, you get:
3x LCh, 6x 2LH, 15x 3Sp, 3x Wb, 9x Ps.

Take 5 of the Psiloi and throw them in with the Spear to create 5 quads, each 3x 3Sp and 1x 2Ps. Remaining you have:
3x LCh, 6x 2LH, 3x Wb, 4x 2Ps.

How about this functional division:

Bad Going Command: 3x Wb, 4x Ps, 1x Spear Quad
Mobile Command (C-in-C): 3x LCh, 6x 2LH, 2x Spear Quad
Static Command: 2x Spear Quad (one of which has the General)

Use the above if you are fighting on a mapboard where there is one or more pieces of bad going that are crucial to your plan. Most of the time you can have the BGo command be the Midpip. Sometimes you may want to have the BGo command be the Highpip; that might require swapping over one more Spear Quad and two LH as well, to give the BGo command more bulk. (You only want the BGo command to be the highpip if you can guarantee bloody action for it; in that case you might want it to be able to take more casualties before it folds).

If you're fighting on a pool table your options will want to be different.

If you're fighting where your enemy will have a MAJOR matchup advantage against one of your commands, you will want to homogenize them some more. I don't see that much with your troop mix above, though, except facing a wall of blade -- and there you are pretty-much hosed if you don't get clever.

[David Kuijt]

Here's another division for Will:

C-in-C Command: 3x LCh, 3x Wb, 3x Ps, 2x Spear Quad
Flying Command: 6x 2LH, 1x 2Ps, 1x Spear Quad
Static Command: 2x Spear Quad (one of which has the General)

This is a really fun mix if you want battles of maneuver. The Flying command should take a LH general and be the Midpip command. Leave your Spear Quad in a useful place and never see it again -- go zooming out to the farthest flank and create chaos. At 15" or 20" every turn, you should be able to really get out there. And your Flying Command can take 4 casualties, which is nearly all the LH you have if you don't lose your General.

[Mike Demana]

THOU SHALL NOT:
put pike in a lowpip command if you are going to ask more of them than to stand or move forward in a bigass block.

Now, THIS is a rarity...I disagree with Dave on this one. There are few things more designed for BBDBA, IMO, than a bigass block of pike getting the low pip die roll. Tom Graves and I have both won BBDBA Tournies with Successor armies utilizing the "low pip" pike block strategy.

It is for that reason that I will NOT be playing a Successor army at the upcoming 6th Annual HMGS Great Lakes BBBDBA Tourney (Aug. 18, here in oh, hi, oh). I'd feel cheesey riding that horse again. So, I'm playing Ancient Brits...because no one can accuse you of being cheesey if about half of your elements are warband!

[David Kuijt]

Now, THIS is a rarity...I disagree with Dave on this one. There are few things more designed for BBDBA, IMO, than a bigass block of pike getting the low pip die roll. Tom Graves and I have both won BBDBA Tournies with Successor armies utilizing the "low pip" pike block strategy.


And what did you require of your pike block, Mike? Did you dance them sideways, split them in multiple columns, anything like that? Not likely.

I didn't say that pike can't be in the lowpip -- pike SHOULD be in the lowpip (although they may also be in other locations). But if you've got pike in your lowpip, you can't ask them to do much more than move forward in an unstoppable mass. That, they do very well.

[Mike Porter]

Getting back on topic...:)

Crusader commands:

High Pip:
1x3Kn (CinC), 7x3Kn, 4x4Sp, 2x5Wb
Mobile command, The Hammer. Kn and Sp have a good chance against any other Kn, Lh may be a hassle, but I can counter with my Byz Lh & Cv. This command fears elephants.

Low Pip:
6x4Sp, 2x3Bw, 2x2Ps
Static command, The Anvil. Two triplets of Ps supported Sp to form the center. Bw is there to screen flanks and deter Lh probes.


Still learning how to do this, so please comment!:o

[Pavane]

Thanks DK. Here is what I've been toying with:
Command 1 (High roll, fast, BGo, 13 el.)
• 1 x 2LH (Sub-Gen)
• 2 x LCh
• 3 x 2LH
• 3 x 3Wb
• 4 x 2Ps

Command 2 (Middle roll, slow, GGo, 10 el.)
• 1 x LCh (C-in-C)
• 1 x 2LH
• 6 x 3Sp
• 2 x 2Ps

Command 3 (Low roll, slow, GGo, 13 el.)
• 1 x 3Sp (Sub-Gen)
• 1 x 2LH
• 8 x 3Sp
• 3 x 2Ps

I was just curious after your earlier remark about the Wb threat whether it made sense to split them 2 and 1, but let's get back to the Early Crusaders.

[Pavane]

Mike,

The BBDBA Probabilities page on the 2Davids web site is missing, so I wrote a program to calculate the average PIP for a no-ally and a one-ally BBDBA army and thought that you might be interested:

No Allies: High 5, Medium 3.5, Low 2
One Ally: High 4.5, Low 2.5

Having never played BBDBA I was suprised that the average Low Command was 2 for the No Allies option, but I guess every once in a while you will roll three sixes, a six and two fives, etc.

[Mike Porter]

Thanks Will, that's helpful for composing the commands.

[David Kuijt]

The BBDBA Probabilities page on the 2Davids web site is missing, so I wrote a program to calculate the average PIP for a no-ally and a one-ally BBDBA army and thought that you might be interested:

No Allies: High 5, Medium 3.5, Low 2
One Ally: High 4.5, Low 2.5

Having never played BBDBA I was suprised that the average Low Command was 2 for the No Allies option, but I guess every once in a while you will roll three sixes, a six and two fives, etc.

Did we have a Probabilities page? Hm.

The pure averages hide as much as they show. For example, in a triple army the Highpip command gets 5 or 6 pips 75% of the time. And the lowpip command gets 1 or 2 pips 75% of the time, of course. I've seen opponents who sat bewailing their low dice for the lowpip across from me, just because they seemed always to get 1 or 2 pips. Not understanding that their results were perfectly reasonable and expected!

Further, just looking at the averages leads you to think that the midpip in a triple army will function the same as an ally pip will. Not so! The variance is much higher on an ally pip -- a midpip command will only rarely get 1 or 6 pips.

[David Kuijt]

Crusader commands:

High Pip:
1x3Kn (CinC), 7x3Kn, 4x4Sp, 2x5Wb
Mobile command, The Hammer. Kn and Sp have a good chance against any other Kn, Lh may be a hassle, but I can counter with my Byz Lh & Cv. This command fears elephants.


Dude, your whole ARMY fears elephants.


Low Pip:
6x4Sp, 2x3Bw, 2x2Ps
Static command, The Anvil. Two triplets of Ps supported Sp to form the center. Bw is there to screen flanks and deter Lh probes.


Good split based on functional criteria. One suggestion -- take one Kn from the big command (the difference between 7Kn and 8Kn is nil) and add it to the small command as the General. That way you'll have a powerful reserve unit to throw into the fray if things start going badly for that command, especially against heavy foot.

[Mike Porter]

Dude, your whole ARMY fears elephants.



Good point. :o

In the spirit of the BBDBA chess puzzles currently going on on the boards. Say you sit down with this army and across the table is Team Torres with their II/42b Tamil Indian & III/10c Hindu Other.

So what does the Bobby Fisher of DBA do in this situation? Make them come to you while the Byzzies use superior speed to try to take a flank? Go after the blades with my knights?

All I can think of is to hit the flanks and get the elephants into bad recoil situations. Gawd, I suck at BBDBA tactics...

The new army composition:

Early Crusader High Pip: 1x3Kn (CinC), 6x3Kn, 4x4Sp, 2x5Wb

Early Crusader Low Pip: 1x3Kn (Gen), 6x4Sp, 2x3Bw, 2x2Ps

Byzantines: 1x3Cv (Gen), 1x4Bd, 3x3Cv, 4x2Lh, 3x4Bw

[Pavane]

Dk is right about the averages, of course. Here is the distribution as well:

Three commands: High, Mid, Low
HIGH: Average - 5.0
1 - 0.5%
2 - 3.2%
3 - 8.8%
4 - 17.1%
5 - 28.2%
6 - 42.1%

MIDDLE: Average - 3.5
1 - 7.4%
2 - 18.5%
3 - 24.1%
4 - 24.1%
5 - 18.5%
6 - 7.4%

LOW: Average - 2.0
1 - 42.1%
2 - 28.2%
3 - 17.1%
4 - 8.8%
5 - 3.2%
6 - 0.5%

Three commands: High, Low, Ally
HIGH: Average - 4.5
1 - 2.8%
2 - 8.3%
3 - 13.9%
4 - 19.4%
5 - 25.0%
6 - 30.6%

LOW: Average - 2.5
1 - 30.6%
2 - 25.0%
3 - 19.4%
4 - 13.9%
5 - 8.3%
6 - 2.8%

ALLY: Average - 3.5
1 - 16.7%
2 - 16.7%
3 - 16.7%
4 - 16.7%
5 - 16.7%
6 - 16.7%

[David Kuijt]

In the spirit of the BBDBA chess puzzles currently going on on the boards. Say you sit down with this army and across the table is Team Torres with their II/42b Tamil Indian & III/10c Hindu Other.


What terrain? What two commands have they already put down? Where are the camps? Make something up, and I'll make up an answer. Generalities are easy.

[Mike Demana]

Will, don't get "locked into" what you think is the most efficient breakdown of your army into commands. Since you don't do this step till after seeing the terrain and the opponent's composition, have some idea on what you'll do against, say, a Successor Army, an Elephant/Auxilia army, a Roman style Blade army.

Your army, if I remember right, will be the Picts. Whether you can use the psiloi to back the spears is a HUGE consideration on how you divide them. If you're facing, say, a Marian Roman army, those back rank psiloi won't be much use for your spears. If you're facing an elephant army, or an army with lots of knights or cavalry, they will be VERY useful. So, how you divide the Psioli among the commands should take into consideration your opponent's troops...

Looking forward to seeing you this August...

[Pavane]

Thanks Mike. I've been working on a 2Davids-style tactical manual for the Picts.

[Yozhik]

I usually play IV/1b Kn(gen), Kn, 3Cv, 3LH, 1Bd, 3Bw

I have found it to be a very useful army but somewhat difficult in some terrain.

What you listed will give you even greater mobility and LH can not be underestimated. You are right about the Bw. Deploy the Varangians just behind a center Bw and you're ready for anything.

Bw Bw Bw Cv Cv Cv Cv LH LH LH LH
--- Bd

That's my suggestion.

[Mike Porter]

Thanks Yozhik, I appreciate the input! :)

[Yozhik]

Oops. I said IV/1b...that's not right. It would be IV/1a, just with Knights instead of a Cv general and LH. Sorry 'bout that.

[Mike Porter]

That's what I figured. ;)