Amazons - Reborn!

[Zelc]

Let's take a step back. You have the fluff for this faction: lots of cavalry. Now let's think about the crunch for this faction, or how you want it to play out.

I'm not as familiar with how to win with cavalry swarms.  Hannibal might have more suggestions on this.  You're giving up a lot of points on movement.  There's a few ways I can see it playing out:

1) Use the faster movement to get the first attack and as many 2's companies as possible.  This maximizes the front-loaded and damage-imbalanced nature of cavalry and minimizes their weakness of poor health bars.

2) Use the faster movement of cavalry behind a line with gaps to dictate favorable matchups along the line.

3) Match up as normal with lots of cavalry, try to get a fast breakthrough or pinch somewhere.


I don't see 3) working out very well, simply because you're giving up too many points and getting a pinch is unreliable against wide lines.  2) requires a solid line to pull off.  1) is interesting (and suggests some sort of extra CA for order changes faction ability), but is also easy to counter with a staggered line.

What do you see as this faction's win condition?


Let me end with something else.  I think there's a rock paper scissors relationship in this game, under the 3.1 final rush rules: slow wide lines > fast wide lines > short lines.  Slow wide lines beat fast wide lines because the wide line gives less opportunities for pinches and the slow wide line gives up fewer points to movement.  Fast wide lines beat short wide lines by getting fast pinches.  Short lines beat slow wide lines because they can set up 2's companies on the flanks and win with superior units.

I'm guessing this faction favors fast wide lines, so you should think about how it can beat slow wide lines.

[Dave-SWA]

Interesting observation...  I will mull on this.  Will come back after Council pre-reg stuff is out the door.

Thanks,
-DC

[BubblePig]

OK, so I will wade in  here now that I have reread some reports and actually played a game against Dave at Council. Obviously one is not a large statistical sample and I can't get 100% of the feel for what is going on from reports, nor can I discount the possibility that some of the things I have noticed might be based too much on a Dave-centric way of playing the faction. Also for what it is worth I agree with Corey and Kevin to the extent that it seems to me that depending on causing a large fraction of breakthroughs due to an awesome faction specific command card is something that should be avoided even if it resulted in equally skilled players winning fifty percent of the time. So my two or three big ideas are as follows:
1a - Keep the current Battle Cry faction ability for now and in addition give Amazons the ability to change 2 standing orders for 1 command action. You could maybe achieve the same thing by having them draw 1 command card during army build for every 2 cavalry units in their army or something like that. But whatever it is, it should be simple and directly address the CC deficit on the front end without giving too much extraneous advantage on the back end. Much of the problem I see them having is that they need to capitalize on the points spent on movement and that means changing a lot of SO's which means in turn that they are at such a serious CC mismatch that any attempted breakthrough stalls too often.
2 - An alternative possibility to help create breakthroughs would be to allow Amazon cavalry units an extra attack die on the charge turn, although I see this as comparatively weak tea if those extra dice are intrinsically less good from a command card disadvantage.
3- Get rid of Animal Stampede. I can't remember how much the dice helped, but I held them off with Initiates backed up by unanswerable card love. Maybe include a male unit of dragoons instead.

[Dave-SWA]

OK, I have been percolating on the ideas Bohan and Ron posted here months ago.

I played three more playtest games at the informal Friday BFW at TotalCon.

The new twist:

Option 1:
Direct Controls & Order Changes are half a command action each.  Rally is still 1 CA (debatable, but that's what we went with).
Keep the current Amazon War Cry ability of 1 CA to mark the box - erase the box if you do at least one damage and you are one away from a color threshold.

Option 2:
Eliminate Amazon War Cry.  Direct Controls, Order Changes and drawing a command card are all half a command action each.

The group decided we should try Option 1.


Game 1 vs Carl Herzog

High Elves

• Chariot x2
  HE Archer
  HE Spearmen
  HE Battle Squad
  HE Battle Mages

Amazons

• Unicorn Lancer x1
  Lancer x3
  Light Lancer x1
  Maiden Bow x1

===========
1498 pts

Carl is still learning.  He did not get good value from his missile troops.  He did not remember that all Cavalry get an inherent defense bonus defense vs Ranged attacks, and I was on top of him pretty quick with my fast movement.  Decisive win for Amazons.


Game #2 vs Marcus

Rome

• Italian Spear x4
  Veteran Principes x2
  Triarii x2
  Veteran Equites x1
  Equites x1

Amazons

• Lancer x2
  Harrier x1
  Maiden Spear x3
  Porcupine x2
  Maiden Bow x2

==========
1999 pts

This is the 2nd time I've tried to fake out Marcus by not bringing lots of cavalry.  At Dexcon he was playing Persia (I think), and that didn't work so well.  With Rome's lower defense values, it worked out a little better this time.  The 2 Porcupines backed up by 2 bow units gives me 14 dice of missiles on my turns.

I spent lots of CAs on direct controls and order changes.

Photos in this thread:
http://ymgforum.com/index.php/topic,10352.15.html
 
I eventually conceded, but it was not a blowout.  I think I had a little advantage in army build, which helped make this game competitive.


Game 3 vs Brook

Amazons

• Lancers x4
  Light Lancer x2
  Horse Archers x2
  Porcupine x1
  Pegasus Lancer x2

============
2245 points

Hawkshold

• Scout x3
  Knights x1
  Spearmen x2
  Swordsmen x1
  Peasant Mob
  Red Dragon

I eventually conceded to Brook, but...
* He failed 3 early morale checks, even with the benefit of Bravery
* He didn't get good value from the Red Dragon.  Did I kill it?  I don't remember now - memory too hazy.

Yeah, I think I did kill the Dragon, but I didn't have the strength to take what was left over after that.

Again, I spent lots of points on direct controls and order changes, but this did not tip the game in my favor.  Without those early Hawkshold routs, this would have been decisive Hawkshold win.


I think the 2-for-1 CA thing is a big help to make this faction viable.

Eric suggests other players take it and play some games.  I will get the proxy cards posted soon.

-DC

[BubblePig]

Just thought I would advocate here for new names for both the Suitors unit and Rowdy Gang unit. I don't know if anyone else feels this way, but I actually like Rowdy Gang (as a name not as a unit) better than Suitors. Given that Dave was trying to find a new name for Rowdy Gang as well, I think maybe a new pair of names that play off each other (such as Stags and Hounds or Nobles and Villeins) might be good.

My previous suggestions for the Rowdy Gang unit:
Factotums
Unwedded
Mongrels
Jiltrati
Riffraff
Alluvia
Stooges
Lackeys
Chumps
Pawns
Fawners (a good counterpoint to suitors IMO)
Hounds
Yahoos (a reference to Gulliver's Travels which is sort of horse-related as well)

[Dave-SWA]

Yeah, I like "Fawners".  I agree that it is an excellent counterpoint to "Suitors".

And, I like "Suitors" a lot - I don't see that changing.

But "Fawners" - make it so!