a "super" army ?

Ask a question about rules
Répondre
KeefM
Sergent Major
Messages : 77
Enregistré le : jeu. 26 déc. 2019 07:59

a "super" army ?

Message par KeefM » ven. 9 sept. 2022 23:09

One of the reasons I really really like BE is that mini-maxing army lists is incredibly difficult due to the inherent complexity of trying to juggle all the competing elements of how troop types and their various qualities/abilities interact. The more that the breadth of choices and complexities exist, the less able to design a "super" army ... but it doesn't stop us wargamers giving that a go !!

Overall BE lists and points costs are pretty good ... with only a minor few anomalies. The complexity is such that this is a hard system to mini-max and therefore it makes for a much better game whereby no single type of army or troop type overly dominates !! BE is VERY balanced notwithstanding some minor wrinkles.

Anyhows, in my dim dark past I was a system architect and programmer, so I used to get paid for finding/eliminating system loopholes. It's been a dreadful bad habit that has dogged my whole life ever since :D ! I just can't seem to leave alone testing the boundaries of systems; it's a character defect. One of the start points is that ALL systems tend to fail/fray at their 'edges'.

So ... I've been messing around with the 'edges' of BE points system as that plays out in army and troop types choices when compared to on-table effectiveness.

In a wargame list building sense, usually that means having a look at what one extreme or another might generate in game impact terms. For example, you might try and have an army consisting entirely of the lowest priced troops which will test whether the tradeoff between quantity and quality is 'worth' the difference in points costs vs the game-impact. Or vice versa.

This particular post is focused at an army list level, but I might put up a few ramblings about some of the individual troop types in due course.

Here is a 200 point list that is incredibly difficult to beat on-table. It may be that Guards status or higher Morale level (5 or 6) points costs need to be increased.

Anyways, feel free to give list a try out. Sure, it is small; but it is a nasty combo especially when taking morale tests and reacting ! Don't take my word for it, give it a try 8-) ... enjoy !



Imperial Guard - Summer 1813

Commander in Chief - Brilliant

Old Guard Division - Ordinary
4 x Old Guard infantry
1 x Old Guard 6pdr Battery

3rd Guard Cavalry Division - Ordinary
1 x Chasseurs a Cheval
1 x 1st Polish Lancers
1 x Empress Dragoons

RogerGreenwood
Chef de bataillon
Messages : 384
Enregistré le : ven. 29 nov. 2019 20:55

Re: a "super" army ?

Message par RogerGreenwood » sam. 10 sept. 2022 09:12

I tried something similar a couple of weeks ago. I used the 4 battalions of the Vistula Legion and a Guard Cavalry division. It took on Russians and used the proposed rule changes for the Poitiers tournament.
The army lost very badly. The cavalry was obliged to charge, it had attack orders. It was that or stand under a lot of artillery fire.
The first charge was decisive. It didn't do sufficient damage to get a pursuit and on rallying back was swamped by the Russians. The proposed change that rallying gets an action marker prevents opportunity charging. A good idea I believe.
My infantry just couldn't take the weight of fire of the artillery and the support count of the number of enemy units when it finally made contact.

I had a win this week with an 1813 Russian army. It included a large Prussian corps with reserve infantry and Landwehr.

I have yet to find a 'super army'. The points are well balanced.

Adrian Steer
Capitaine
Messages : 206
Enregistré le : ven. 4 sept. 2020 20:17

Re: a "super" army ?

Message par Adrian Steer » sam. 17 sept. 2022 20:12

Yes I agree I haven't come across a super army yet. I've managed to loose with most armies I've tried as well as win.

Répondre