Cilician Armenians

I couldn't decide whether this topic was appropriate here or in "building armies" section, but anyway. I'd appreciate your thoughts and experiences on IV/2 Cilician Armenians. Have you played with them? Against them? What style of play are they best suited to? What are their strengths and weaknesses? I'm interested in them because of their history but not sure whether they suit my style of (weak) play. Is it a good army to sharpen your skills with or would it be frustrating for a below average player? Do they do well in competition? Have you ever faced them? What happened? I'd appreciate hearing anything you can offer about them. Have you heard of others who have been frustrated playing with them? I'll never have enough cash to build a bevy of armies so this kind of decision is critical; and your help would be greatly appreciated? I'm kind of teetering between Cilicians Armenians, Later Crusaders, Ayyubid, Seljuk or Georgians. One of those five, no others really. I guess it is a toss up between the first three, with Armenians in the lead. Which would be best suited for a mediocre player desiring to improve his skill. At some point I'd like to try BBDA, but that would be a long way off. Right now I can only afford a mere DBA army. What do you think?

[ November 17, 2004, 04:50: Message edited by: Delirium's Brother ]

I haven't played with the Armenians, but I've used the Hittites who are virtually identical (how many places do you get to say that with a straight face? but I digress...)

I think the army will be an excellent one for a relative newcomer. Spear, with Ps support available if necessary, are tough troops, easy to use and won't die quickly against any opponent - not even Wb in 2.2. A line of 5-6 Spear gives you an excellent base for outflanking moves with the Kn in good going or the Ps in bad.

Three Kn are a powerful strike force if you commit them in the right time and place, so they will probably be more challenging (hence interesting) to use than a 7-Kn avalanche like some of the medieval lists. With I find Kn I usually need to get kills quickly, or the follow-up moves will leave them spread half way across the kingdom, with double overlaps against them, and their power will be dissipated.

Later Crusaders are obviously very similar. I would rather have Ps than Bow myself, but on the other hand the trops are more colourful. Ayyubid and Seljuk I haven't used, but would regard as more challenging armies because they have too much mounted, with little striking power (they would be better on the bigger board). Against historical opponents you may find yourself relying on the LH quick-kills against Kn and Sp which (especially in the case of the Sp) always seem a rather odd way to win a game because no-one understands the historical basis for the rule.

Georgians are probably the best army of the lot, and (IIRC, but I'm not an expert) tremendously colourful. You get an extra Kn for striking power, some LH to play with and still get the Ps-supported Spear. I've tried to use the similar Medieval Portuguese and had to give up because there were too may troop types and I couldn't manage my pips effectively. The Georgian Kn don't dismount, but on the other hand you only have 4 troop types instead of 6, so it should be reasonably manageable.

Hope that helps

Andrew

I have been very slowly building up an Armenian Army, as part of a long cherished 1st Crusade project. I've never yet fought with them, but as far as my thinking has gone, I can only agree with Asdarf.- Especially fighting historical opponents it looks to be solid and dependable army with enough of strike force to be interesting.

Whether you would/should take all 6 spears is another question. With their low aggression (1) the Armenians can more often choose the terrain, and I have been deliberating over the utility of taking 1 or 2 auxilia instead. Good not just for bad going, but able to keep up with the knights.

Perhaps some of the more experiened Fanatici would care to comment on this choice.?

If I were facing an army of Kn, Sp, Ps and had Wb the logical choice would be to take and hold the bad-going with the Wb and try to turn a flank or draw off the Ps support for the Sp and destroy it. Even one or two Ax would make this strategy much more difficult.

Hullo
There was a good article in Slingshot a few years ago on building a Cilician Armenian army for DBM, namely: Adventures in Cilician Armenia by Martin Stephenson, Slingshot (2001). This stimulated my interest in the army. It is an army I also aspire to in the future. I actually commissioned the 2 Cilician Armenian figures produced by Museum Miniatures (a knight and a spearman). Since then Essex has released a range of Cilician Armenian figures in their Crusades range [img]smile.gif[/img]
To return to the main point. If I remember correctly there was some tactical advice for using the army in DBM. Unfortunately I cannot access the Slingshot index on-line at the moment :confused:
Nevertheless I guess these are relevant to DBA as well? Essentially it is an army with knights & spears. At the same time it has a flexible army list allowing for more choice of different troop types, albeit in smaller quantities, than many army lists. I would use the knights to attempt to attack my opponents weakest troop types. I would also try not to let the knights get too far ahead of the spears! Difficult given the different movement speeds! [img]smile.gif[/img]
Kind Regards
Derek

[ November 17, 2004, 14:38: Message edited by: derek ]

The Cilician Armenians are an excellent choice. They can take a large number of auxilia and that coupled with their low aggression means they can take advantage of terrain. The open areas in between your bad going are perfect for the knights and spear. The auxilia and psiloi can use their ZOC's and advantages in the bad going to break up enemy lines by peeling off the units on the flanks or by outflanking those that try to face off with your knights and spear. I find that mixing knights with heavy foot (spear in this case) or bow works well. It limits the knights to the slow speed of the shield wall, but really makes life miserable for your enemies. They can't just send bow at your knights, because the spear can kill the bow easily and the knights still get a QK against the bow. They can't send a spear wall (or blades) against your knights and hope to kill them with overlaps easily, because the spear intermixed with your knights are not always going to yield in the straight up (near straight up) battle. Your knights might themselves get overlaps that way and easily kill the enemy spear. If he tries to send psiloi to delay your knight/spear combo, the knights will eat the psiloi for lunch. Similarly, skirmishing light horse are not likely to succeed against this combo (but beware your flanks....see below).

The only thing I don't like about the Armenian list is the lack of missile power. I like having artillery to tackle war wagon, elephants and bow. Bow is also great to mix with spear or knights to ward off flanking light horse and such....just adding one bow to that Armenian list would radically change the tactics I would use! We recently had a DBA Pike and Shot Tourney (using the extension linked on this site in the period variants section of DBA resources) and I took a Samurai army. The key element in my army was the single bow I took. It helped to ward enemy mounted off my flank and the quick kill from firing at the rear edge of my recoiling opponents was devastating!

IV/2 Cilician Armenian 1071-1375AD
Hilly. Ag: 1
1x3Kn(Gen), 2x3Kn, 6x3Ax or 4Sp, 3x2Ps


Delirium,
I think that this army would be a fine choice for a player that would want to be competitive at tournaments and against it's historical opponents as well. This is a great "combined arms" list with little element variation (let's keep it simple). In supporting roles, the Kn kill all harmful infantry (except Bw) and the Sp can remove Bw, Art, WWg and Pk. In my experiences at competitions, Wb armies aren't widely chosen and the Kn can rid you of those menaces in the open. The Sp can help counter dismounting Kn armies as well. El is the only fear you will have, since they QK Kn and Sp. You will have to rely upon your Ps to keep those at bay. Also what needs to be recognized is the low aggression factor. You will most likely be able to set up terrain which includes steep hills. At tourneys though, many players will have low aggression armies too and this may lower your chance to 50% at getting your terrain selection.
There are two approaches with this type of army; conservative and rash. I will start with the conservative one. First of all, I would chose all Sp. Form a shieldwall of 6 Sp with 2 Ps supports (against mounted or Wb). Use the Kn(Gen) in reserve to plug any holes that form in your shieldwall when the enemy makes contact. Use the remaining Ps to cover your flank (preferably on top of a steep hill vs Ax or Wb). The other two Kn for the opposite flank. The Ps can move through the Sp to engage with enemy Wb to break up his line or flee to the rear of your Sp (Wb can't kill Ps).
Rash method; form 3 double ranked Sp with 1-2Ps support (+6 vs mounted and Wb). I do this with my Medieval German b list and it can be nasty. You sacrifice frontage for killing power against a mounted foe. You can also trick a Bw opponent on where the attack will come from. I will explain:

KnSpSpSpKn
__SpSpSp
__PsKnPs__Ps

Change to this against Pk and missile elements (cost 4 PIPs):
SpSpSpSpSp
KnPsSpPsKn__Ps
____Kn
The Kn's can further spread your frontage against a mounted or Wb enemy and throw the reserve Kn to either flank at a decisive moment.

The big downside of course is the slow speed of the army when using Sp. The Ax is useful, but becomes a casualty against Kn armies (only +3 vs mounted with Ps support). The Sp is more versital and durable. This army will be hard pressed against Lh armies, but then terrain becomes more of your focus then.

I would agree that the Georgian a list would be a good second choice. I would select 1 Ps and the rest Bw. The 1 Ps to support the Sp and the Bw to spread your frontage and cover BG. The Lh extend your reach, but add more complexity and variation of element types.

These are just some observations in regard to the Cilician Armenians based upon my tournament play and similarity to some of the armies I field. It sounds as if they are your initial choice and I would stick with your gut on your selection. After all, you know your fighting style (preferences) better than anyone else. Happy hunting.

Hey thanks for the advice (especially those wonderful long posts), it's all been great. Keep it coming I appreciate any ideas.

for Darren (and the other go with your gut guys): I'm not sure what my gut is telling me. If the decision was based on sentimental favourites then I'd really be in trouble. You see I have a lot.

-Cilician Armenian (heroic struggle of independance; and mountain folk to boot--living in their little fortified towns in the Taurus and Anti-Taurus mountains)
-Early Crusaders (reckless norman adventurers, the family of Robert Giscard!)
-Later Crusaders (colourful, military orders, and such tactical stupidity they are just begging to be played)
-Kommenian Byzantine (great comeback from the brink of disaster, maybe one of the best of all time)
-Georgian (as armenians but bold to the point of foolishness, how can you not like that)
-Syrian (noble city-states in a sea of hegemony, but beter in WRG6)
-Ayyubid (Saladin, need I say more)
-Seljuks (love those light horse, the romance of it all)
-Kurdish (another heroic struggle for survival, mountain folk)
and
-Dynastic Bedouin (even more romantic than Seljuks, LH-wise)

You see each one has its historical charms, and when it comes to sentimentality I've got plenty to go around, but that doesn't win battles, which of course is why I was asking for your practical advice as seasoned players.

[ November 18, 2004, 07:31: Message edited by: Delirium's Brother ]

Delirium,
good point. Everytime I am done with one Balkan project, an earlier period from the same region catches my interest. These too are usually based on heros or the character of peoples. I will admit though as you mentioned, many of these favorites I wouldn't field at a tournament, since they don't play well outside of their historical context. I still believe that the Cilician Armenian list is a good one for competitions. You can always add the others to your collection in the future, due to your enthusiasm for the period.

There is of course one further consideration when choosing an army, unless you are damn good and/or damn lucky.

"Find an army you can love when they lose" - this is my motto as a seasoned tournament player, (25 years through WRG5th - 7th, Warrior and DBA). Up until this year I never thought I was in the running to win any tournament. I have a couple of Mayhem prizes (most casualties inflicted in a single bound), a magic dice award (for jammy play), and a Best and Fairest award.

In the Warrior and its predecessors I trot out my Pre Feudal Scots - 'Go Macbeth'. They have their moments but I'm under no illusions that the army itself will carry me over the line. I think that in an open DBA comp I would probably use my Sung Chinese. They are solid, and correctly handled should do well.

I think the Sp optioned Armenians come under the same category. If their real life struggle provides you with inspiration, so much the better.

Cheers