Ambushing Cavalry

WayUnderTheMountain · **Posted:** Tue Dec 20, 2011 6:11 pm

Okay so I'm building a Fallen Realms army for tomorrow and I'm thinking of using the Host of Karna battlehost and the Mumak War Herd. I noticed in the Watchers of Karna Battlehost that it is possible to take up to 2 formations of Haradrim Raiders and that all formations (not just infantry) have the Ambushers special rule. Yet Cavalry can only enter walled fields and forests, this means I could only Ambush the Raider formations out of forests then?

Telchar · **Posted:** Tue Dec 20, 2011 7:20 pm

I suppose so, yes. For an official answer you'll have to try GW though.

Xelee · **Posted:** Tue Dec 20, 2011 7:59 pm

Hi WayUnderTheMountain, it does mean you can - forests and walled fields. I don't see anything about it that would require official clarification.

I think the cav in that list are very cool: Patherfinders (Master), Enchanted Cloaks, and ambushing; along with the reserves can terror changes.

WayUnderTheMountain · **Posted:** Tue Dec 20, 2011 8:39 pm

@Xelee, it didn't really once I took a really good look through the rule book and found the defensive terrain summary. Originally I thought Cavalry could never enter defensive terrain and thus the Ambushers rule useless but even without the Ambushers rule; Pathfinders (Master) and Enchanted Cloaks alone make cavalry and interesting investment in the Host of Karna. Sorry for wasting people's time.

Xelee · **Posted:** Tue Dec 20, 2011 8:58 pm

Hi Wayunderthemountain - wasn't a dig! If it was a waste of our time, we wouldn't have posted

Beowulf03809 · **Posted:** Wed Dec 21, 2011 5:07 pm

WayUnderTheMountain wrote:

@Xelee, it didn't really once I took a really good look through the rule book and found the defensive terrain summary. Originally I thought Cavalry could never enter defensive terrain and thus the Ambushers rule useless but even without the Ambushers rule; Pathfinders (Master) and Enchanted Cloaks alone make cavalry and interesting investment in the Host of Karna. Sorry for wasting people's time.

Let us know how it goes. I am building my Fallen Realms up army in a similar direction. Three Mumuks (one ready to play, the other two still in the box) and lots of Haradrim infantry and Cav. The Battlehosts you mention have been on my mind as giving that extra little boost and tactical variation that can toughen up the list nicely.

Xelee wrote:

Hi Wayunderthemountain - wasn't a dig! If it was a waste of our time, we wouldn't have posted

If it was, you wouldn't have been treated so nicely. :sauron:

WayUnderTheMountain · **Posted:** Wed Dec 21, 2011 10:10 pm

Had to cancel the game today due to player illness (ironically it was the Elf player who got sick) but I'll make sure to let you know how the army list works out.

Beowulf03809 · **Posted:** Thu Dec 22, 2011 7:57 am

You call him up and tell him Elves can't get sick, they're naturally immortal and immune, and to get his butt down there NOW! There are people across the globe that are waiting to hear about the game.

If that doesn't work tell him we hope he feels better soon.

Rangefinder · **Posted:** Thu Dec 22, 2011 2:51 pm

I ran the Mumak War Herd, Mahud War Tribe, Host of Karna in my last battle. Host of Karna is a very flexible force! I was disappointed that my opponent mowed one Mumak down straight away with 2 formations of 3 coy's Dwarf Ballistas. So beware the ballista. Big fan of Half Trolls. The Half Trolls I put in the battlehost had normal weapons. The coy's of Half Trolls outside had the Two Hand Weapons. And..., I put Amdur in their formation! This is a great idea! Just sayin. Did not mean to hijack the thread, but Beowulf & WayUnderTheMountain, your armies reminded me of my own and thought I would over-share. (Attached photo of Fallen Realms vs. Dwarves) (Host of Karna not on board yet)

Telchar · **Posted:** Thu Dec 22, 2011 3:23 pm

Wait... You used no terrain? seriously?

Rangefinder · **Posted:** Thu Dec 22, 2011 4:22 pm

The blue is a small water feature, and the yellow is a sandy area. Both are difficult terrain features slowing movement by half. Even though our forces are large, we are both still fairly novice players. Both armies are just over 5,000 points. We have played with too much terrain and too little in earlier matches. We agreed that this was getting closer to the mark for a larger "Battlefield" senario.

Beowulf03809 · **Posted:** Thu Dec 22, 2011 4:24 pm

Nice to see I'm not the only one that fields a large force of unpainted models sometimes while getting a new army up and running. :-)

In my case I do try to get them base coated black at least but have been known to field formations of riderless horses in the past. I do like the looks of that fourth Mumuk in there. Very Nigel Tufnel (our War Heard goes up to Four!).

I know what you mean about the Ballistas. My only WotR experience with multiple Mumaks was against Dwarves in fact. Their Ballistas, combined with the most frustrating streak of short Mumuk charge rolls you could immagine, made our life difficult. But it was very fun.

BR: http://tac-me.net/index.php/battlereportslotr/lotrbattlereportswotr/80-br-wotr-18jun11

Your table is WAY more clear of terrain and obstacles than anything we typically play on, and I'm sure that also challenges the Mumuks more for us. The Dwarves were spread out and dug into every possible defensible terrain they could find. Even if those colored templates were terrain features that's still got to be the most open table I've seen.

Rangefinder · **Posted:** Thu Dec 22, 2011 5:08 pm

If it is okay to continue the hijacking of this thread...
What would you suggest for large force size and terrain balance?

I have actually seen your website before Beowulf. Nice!
Yes, the 4th Mumak was great to have in there. He's part of the War Tribe, so he can roam apart from the Herd.
I have also been stymied by bad rolls moving the Mumakil. Very frustrating.

Beowulf03809 · **Posted:** Thu Dec 22, 2011 6:29 pm

The random terrain rolls typically work out pretty well. Our group personally likes to use a fair amount of terrain for WotR and SBG since it really makes the games more interesting (and I think it actually helps balance some WotR issues a little...but that's just a feeling). So if the random roll comes out with the minimum number we often just say "to heck with the dice" and go with the average instead.

The actual terrain itself makes a big difference. Water features are realistic ways of limiting most movement but do nothing for line of sight, ranged weapons, spells, etc. Woods and structures cripple most movement and visibility and can serve as defensible terrain. Hills are visibility barriers that MAY impact movement (if you determine they are steep enough or otherwise difficult) but not serve as a defensible terrain. So I like to see a mix of at least two of the three basic types.

WayUnderTheMountain · **Posted:** Thu Dec 22, 2011 6:55 pm

I don't mind people hijacking the thread, so no need to apologize.

Beowulf03809 wrote:

You call him up and tell him Elves can't get sick, they're naturally immortal and immune, and to get his butt down there NOW! There are people across the globe that are waiting to hear about the game. If that doesn't work tell him we hope he feels better soon.

I tried that but when I called him, his fiance (also my Goblin ally for the match) answered the phone so my argument kinda stalled before I could say much. I did make sure to let him know that the One-Ring wished him to get better soon. Silly elf. Should be able to play next week after Boxing Day.

@ Rangefinder, our group plays with a lot more terrain (usually akin to Osgiliath) so my plan is to ambush the entire Host of Karna battlehost behind the Gondor-Elf line and point-blank a volley of arrows into them before closing for melee. The Mumaks (all 4 of them) will be charging from the front (hopefully a major distraction) while being followed by the entire Goblin army. In the words of Sun Tsu "if double the enemy's strength, be able to divide them."

Here's a question for everyone, who would be the best ringwraith for a 6 company formation of Haradrim Warriors (with bows) that are part of the Host of Karna?

I can only take the Undying, The Betrayer, The Knight of Umbar or The Dark Marshal because I refuse to use Khamul and the Shadow Lord's special rule is near useless with the Battlehost. I don't have have access to the Tainted, Dwimmerlaik or Witch King because this Nazgul is to be my general.

Rangefinder · **Posted:** Thu Dec 22, 2011 7:16 pm

I cannot get a solid UP or DOWN on Epic Heros joining Battlehosts. The rules "seem" to disallow it. At first anyway. But, we have decided that a Battlehost is limited to what is in the list for each. I acutally prefer the idea of not allowing Epic Heros outside the list to join. Or, if they did, that formation would cease to be part of the Battlehost.

I had a plan for Arbalasters with Betrayer. But only pulled together a single company before the battle. And...they were able to move in the first turn, and get mowed down by ballistas in the second. (yay)

Xelee · **Posted:** Thu Dec 22, 2011 7:20 pm

Wayunderthemountain, the obvious choice is the Betrayer because well - pretty much the same reason you don't want to take Khamul!

I think there is a lot to be said for the Dark Marshall as a general.

Re: the Elven player, I can't imagine why they'd struggle to get out of bed to play vanilla WOTR

Rangefinder, I definitely think the game is a lot better the way you play Battlehosts. It makes the player using them be very careful what other ones they may have, since if the force only had a token common formation to be legal (not mentioning anyone's Dunland list with Saruman here

), that Epic hero is at a big risk.

Cheers

Beowulf03809 · **Posted:** Thu Dec 22, 2011 7:26 pm

If nothing else, Mumuks are GREAT distractions.

You know your opponent is going to be expecting the ambushers, but they may not realize just how much is going to ambush them or the variety of troops. You do need to be careful about where you assign the ambushers due to limits of terrain size, size of your Formations, etc. But with a battlehost of Mumuks and a large force of Goblins bearing down they may well think that is the majority of your army and discount any expected ambushers are minor harassment forces.

I'm pretty sure you can have multiple individual formations ambush from the same terrain feature, but only one can occupy it at a time. So you can be a little creative there and maybe catch your opponent by surprise. You spring one ambusher, your opponent may feel the terrain is "clear" now and perhaps even send a small force at it to take care of that initial ambushing formation, then the next turn spring another.

All warfare is based on deception
- Sun Tzu

So your partner is the fiance of your opponent...yeah...I don't see any problems with THAT. Just be sure where her loyalties lie.

These military devices, leading to victory, must not be divulged before hand.
- Sun Tzu

Any chance your opponents are members here and reading this as well? :oops:

Regarding the Epics in BHs...our group interprets it to mean you cannot DEPLOY your Battlehost with the Epic, but once the game is started an Epic may jump into any Formation he can normally join legally. So you need some non-BH formations to deploy with at least. I'm still not super keen on this and would happily play either this way or that no outside Epics can join a BH Formation at any point in the game. I don't think there's a solid rule on this yet so talk it over with your opponents in advance.

I need to give a little thought to the Nazgul. I have a personal mental block regarding GW's named wraiths and can't remember which special rule goes to which abomination and is best for each situation. I don't consider this a flaw. I consider it a defensive reaction of my brain refusing to accept what GW gave us. :-D

Telchar · **Posted:** Thu Dec 22, 2011 8:21 pm

Beowulf03809 wrote:

If nothing else, Mumuks are GREAT distractions.

You know your opponent is going to be expecting the ambushers, but they may not realize just how much is going to ambush them or the variety of troops. You do need to be careful about where you assign the ambushers due to limits of terrain size, size of your Formations, etc. But with a battlehost of Mumuks and a large force of Goblins bearing down they may well think that is the majority of your army and discount any expected ambushers are minor harassment forces.

I'm pretty sure you can have multiple individual formations ambush from the same terrain feature, but only one can occupy it at a time. So you can be a little creative there and maybe catch your opponent by surprise. You spring one ambusher, your opponent may feel the terrain is "clear" now and perhaps even send a small force at it to take care of that initial ambushing formation, then the next turn spring another.

All warfare is based on deception
- Sun Tzu

So your partner is the fiance of your opponent...yeah...I don't see any problems with THAT. Just be sure where her loyalties lie.

These military devices, leading to victory, must not be divulged before hand.
- Sun Tzu

Any chance your opponents are members here and reading this as well? :oops:

Regarding the Epics in BHs...our group interprets it to mean you cannot DEPLOY your Battlehost with the Epic, but once the game is started an Epic may jump into any Formation he can normally join legally. So you need some non-BH formations to deploy with at least. I'm still not super keen on this and would happily play either this way or that no outside Epics can join a BH Formation at any point in the game. I don't think there's a solid rule on this yet so talk it over with your opponents in advance.

I need to give a little thought to the Nazgul. I have a personal mental block regarding GW's named wraiths and can't remember which special rule goes to which abomination and is best for each situation. I don't consider this a flaw. I consider it a defensive reaction of my brain refusing to accept what GW gave us. :-D

Wow, you know your Chinese sayings! May I ask how you got to know them all, as I love Sun Tzu as well (suppose you think he's epic, to quote him 3x in one thread)

@Wayunderthemountain. I personally don't see why Epics can't join battlehosts, though a lot of people with more rules experience do. I also don't know why GW would disallow it. Just to stop the Khamul, Betrayer, Gorgoroth Horde combo? Then they would just have nerfed Khamul and the Betrayer.

Beowulf03809 · **Posted:** Thu Dec 22, 2011 8:51 pm

Telchar wrote:

Wow, you know your Chinese sayings! May I ask how you got to know them all, as I love Sun Tzu as well (suppose you think he's epic, to quote him 3x in one thread)

I have an e-book and a couple paper versions of Art of War and have read it multiple times over the last 25+ years so I'm pretty comfortable with where to find things fast. His principles are amazingly enlightening and many can be applied to so many aspects of life...not just wargaming (though it's a good one

). Art of War, Hobbit/LotR, Illiad and Beowulf are almost always in constant rotation on my reading and why I rarely get to anything else. As soon as I finish one I realize how long it's been since I've read one of the others...it's a never ending cycle.

Telchar wrote:

@Wayunderthemountain. I personally don't see why Epics can't join battlehosts, though a lot of people with more rules experience do. I also don't know why GW would disallow it. Just to stop the Khamul, Betrayer, Gorgoroth Horde combo? Then they would just have nerfed Khamul and the Betrayer.

Mordor already has enough extreme combos that I don't think it alone justifies disallowing Epics to join. Even if you don't go with the GHorde, you can get a large enough formation of basic Orcs, pop in the Big Three and be just about as dangerous. I can only see disallowing Epics to join for a pure thematic reason in most cases. As long as you don't try to deploy your Epic with the BH. That's a no-no. :no:

Ambushing Cavalry

Who is online