Warhammer armies: Bretonnia - The Round Table of Bretonnia
Home arrow Tactics arrow A.T.T.A.C.K. Tactics arrow A.T.T.A.C.K. using support units
16. August 2014, 09:05 GMT

 

 
 

The Round Table
Home Home
Forums Forums
Gallery Gallery
Knights Knights
Chat Chat
Links Links
About / Help About / Help
Articles
News News
Events Events
Literature Literature
Tactics Tactics
Hobby Hobby
Background Background
User Login
Support us

Vote at the The Warvault: Warvault Webring
Vote for us at the Warvault.net Webring!

Support the maintenance and costs of running this site:

 
 
 
 
A.T.T.A.C.K. using support units PDF Print E-mail
User Rating: / 13
PoorBest 
Written by Skavenslayer   
Friday, 25 September 2009
Article Index
A.T.T.A.C.K. using support units
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5

A.T.T.A.C.K.!    

Assaulting Thoughtfully: Tactical Advice for Charging with Knights.  

These articles are an attempt to give beginners and intermediate players some tools with which they can improve their playing skills, in the form of basic principles and maneuvers you can use with your cavalry. 

There is a ton of advice on the net about how to write army lists, and on which units to use against which opponents, but very little of it shows you how to do that, so I decided to make some diagrams. Some of it is more for competitive games, some of it is more general. If there are longer bits of theory, I will put the conclusions in big text so you can just skim over the text and still get the basic point.  

Page 1: About support units.

Page 2: Baiting.

Page 3: Diverting.

Page 4: other maneuvers.

Page 5: Warhammer Basics: Possible results of a charge.

 

 

Step 2a: Maneuvers against cavalry. 

Enough of this subtle one-on-one stuff of stealing inches, I want to nail them good!  

My my, I think someone failed his Ld 7 test...

Okay, let’s get to the good stuff:

 

 

 

Part 2: Using support units. 

Support units? You mean peasants?! 

Not necessarily. A support unit can be any unit which is not used to defeat enemy units on its own, but which is there to help another unit achieve that. So 5 KE are usually a support unit, but 25 M@A are usually not.  

What do you mean “usually”? 

A good general will try to conserve his troops as much as possible. However, if it is necessary to win the battle ANY unit can be used as a support unit or even sacrificed to help defeat the enemy. Units can also switch roles. Imagine that a big lance which just broke a unit and pursued too far is in danger of being countercharged. 1overrun.jpg             

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You can then decide that it will flee if charged and move other units in to counter the charging enemy. You are now using the big lance as support unit, even though it is not in the army for that purpose.  

Fleeing with the General? How dishonourable! 

So what would be more dishonourable? A calculated retreat that helps you win the battle, or holding the charge and then fleeing from a lost combat with the enemy at your heels? 

Hmmm. I admit you have a point... 

Being prepared to sacrifice ANY unit makes you a better general!

But don’t worry, for the first exercises no knights will be fleeing. We’ll be using our most suitable support unit, the Yeomen. 

 

 

 

 



Last Updated ( Saturday, 26 September 2009 )
 
Discuss (10 posts)
A.T.T.A.C.K. using support units Sep 26 2009 17:29
This thread discusses the Content article: A.T.T.A.C.K. using support units

as promised, here's part 4 of the A.T.T.A.C.K. series!



I made some pretty bold statements here and there, but I am willing to defend them...bring it on!

Anyway, hope you enjoy it!



Martin
Re:A.T.T.A.C.K. using support units Sep 27 2009 06:56
I'm just impressed... Complete lack of words... Keep it that way!

As for the article. I've been practicing those few tricks presented in the previous article... Now I'm practicing those and I must admit that there are good... I've looked at some things posted here that way.
I have a conclusion about something. The situations presented in here are good examples for present the battle theory as I call it. But for the purposes of a battle, those situations will be extremely rare. I'm curious about the next page (multiple combat) but I think after that you should present a small battle (around 500-1000 pts) and then explain certain situations that occurred there. As the second army use a one suitable for those tactics (i.e. no DoC, VC, TK, WE, and so on). I think it would be best o play a battle that will show certain situations... It will give the beginners a good insight in the art of war. This is the spirit of this community, isn't it? Newbies to be taught by more skilled players.
Re:A.T.T.A.C.K. using support units Sep 28 2009 08:08
sounds like a great idea!
Battlereports can really make the ideas come to life (or flop on their ***, depending on the execution ) Will work on that.


What you said about it being theory. You're absolutely right.

My intention is to show people how they can get better performance out of their army, and for that you have to know it inside out. That also mean gritty details like arcs of vision and turn sequences.
Every 16 year old that goes to a driving school wants to race a sports car 200 mph down the highway. But to be able to do that, he has to spend time to learn the car and the driving process inside out.
So while most internet discussion focuses on "installing turbochargers" on WH units, I'll just take a step back and talk about using the gears properly.
Re:A.T.T.A.C.K. using support units Sep 28 2009 20:04
Is there hope for the same article in pdf form?
Re:A.T.T.A.C.K. using support units Sep 29 2009 10:37
I really love to read these articles.
Keep up the good work!
Re:A.T.T.A.C.K. using support units Sep 29 2009 19:24
Good work again!
I liked the article but I think that KEs are better for Forcing Pursuit and Diverting, MY don't hold the ground....Zythaar idea is great anyway! You should give it a try if you have time!
A question: How many MY would you put in an army list?
Go on whith it!
Re:A.T.T.A.C.K. using support units Sep 30 2009 17:01
Skavenslayer wrote:

So while most Internet discussion focuses on "installing turbochargers" on WH units, I'll just take a step back and talk about using the gears properly.


You have the point

But consider posting a battle report explained as previous article..
Re:A.T.T.A.C.K. using support units Oct 01 2009 07:14
What, nobody want to argue with me about how a Bretonnian would never flee with big units, or avoid Death Stars?
We're supposed to be point-and-click army players, will nobody keep up our reputation!?!





The Avenger of Quenelles wrote:
Good work again!
I liked the article but I think that KEs are better for Forcing Pursuit and Diverting, MY don't hold the ground....
Glad you like it!
KE have their advantages and their drawbacks. On the one hand, they take less casualties and can often hold when the MY would flee.
On the other hand, Impetuous is a bit of a pain for support units, they cannot rally and move immediately, they cannot slip though gaps. Also, sometimes you WANT a unit to break, and peasants are masters at that!

A question: How many MY would you put in an army list?

Unfortunately, the models are expensive and I only have 5 . So I haven't been able to experiment with more, but 2 should do well, especially if you also have other high-value targets like GK and Pegs. Don't go overboard, they're no Dark Riders so using 4 units is probably ineffective.



@ Zythaar: will do, wanted to use yesterday's game but the combination of a gunline and horrible dice rolls meant that only one unit made it to the enemy (Not much supporting going on then...)



@ RBG: will work on that, been busy so was happy enough to just get the article up in time.
Re:A.T.T.A.C.K. using support units Oct 01 2009 08:12
Skavenslayer,

Another very nice article on Fantasy. Its a 'Charge and Flee tricks for Dummies' article, or just simply beginners.
I really like the way how you formulated it as a conversation between two people. I learned a few things from this.

I always had the impression that the enemy didn't have to allign to the fleeing unit (if the charge would be normal he wouldn't have to wheel in the movement, just moving forwards until he touches the enemy), but seeing the description that the enemy has to move directly towards the fleeer, makes me think otherwise.

Although keep in mind that if your fleeers are caught (especially against cavalry), that the enemy moves his full charge move forwards. So its good to keep that in mind when your positioning your counter chargers so they have line of sight.
Re:A.T.T.A.C.K. using support units Oct 02 2009 06:55
Artinam wrote:
I really like the way how you formulated it as a conversation between two people.
It's the first time I've tried writing in this form. I hoped it would make the long text a bit more lively, so I'm glad people like it.
It turns out it also gives me the opportunity to put more emphasis on certain points, making it easier to communicate ideas clearly.



I always had the impression that the enemy didn't have to allign to the fleeing unit (if the charge would be normal he wouldn't have to wheel in the movement, just moving forwards until he touches the enemy), but seeing the description that the enemy has to move directly towards the fleeer, makes me think otherwise.
There has actually been a lot of debate on the net about this issue, but I'm clearly in the camp of centre-to-centre charge moves. It just makes the game more straightforward, and I HATED the flee rules in 6th ed. so I really don't want to bring back confusing and unpredictable pursuit moves.
Furtunately most people see it this way.
There are too many comments to list them all here. See the forum for the full discussion.

Discuss this item on the forums. (10 posts)
Next >
 

Warhammer, Warmaster, Games Workshop (and more) are registered trademarks of Games Workshop Ltd. This site is not affiliated with Games Workshop Ltd. and no claim of ownership is made to any of these trademarks.
Design by Earl Cadfael and Guillaume le Courageux, responsible for the content (Admins) are: Etien de Rochefort, Guillaume le Courageux, Robert de Giselles (see "Staff").