7th Ed. 5 CoC vs. 6 CoC Units

[Arsenal]

I just wanted to see the boards feeling on running units of 6 cavalry instead of the minimum 5. I have found the 6 CoC unit, although mildly less maneuverable, to consistently get into combat with a minimum of 4 remaining, and at most losing 1-2 to shooting on the advance. This typically allows for a better flank roll up especially with the benefit of outnumbering/fear after combat resolution is done, and breaking the enemy really well.

When I used to run units of 5, I would end up with a unit of 2-3 by the time they hit the enemy and they were far less effective, if not pretty much neutralized, especially without the outnumber/fear coming into play.

Just wondering what all the other Lizzy generals are thinking...

 

[msinosic]

If you expect to lose 1-2 then why not field them as 5 wide with the additional 6th in the second rank? (worried about bolt throwers?

That way your maneuverability is not compromised at all.

Sure if you do get across untouched then that 6th model in the back is a little ... lame. I am sure you wouldn't want to spend a turn reforming to make it 6 wide (but you could if you had time and really thought that extra model attacking was going to make the difference)

 

[kroxigor01]

In my army I have many targets for missile fire (2 units of 13 saurus and 2 lone salamanders). With skink skirmishers blocking my 5 cold one cav are rarely targetted. If they ARE targetted, I don't really mind as long as I still have enough to threaten a flank (3).

 

[erians]

In my army I have many targets for missile fire (2 units of 13 saurus and 2 lone salamanders). With skink skirmishers blocking my 5 cold one cav are rarely targetted. If they ARE targetted, I don't really mind as long as I still have enough to threaten a flank (3).

Im exactly the same, my army often presents better targets and most of the time i screen them with one of my cohort units, and as I use them as hammers to flank charge the enemy I only need 3 to be alive. With 2+ save and T4 they are free to shoot at them as much as they want to if they leave my sallies, cohorts and saurus blocks alone.

I usually play cav in units of 5 nowadays. I used to think 6 was better as I thought that those extra attacks were really needed but sacrificing mobility just isnt worth it, and imo the difference isnt really "slight" (its not a huge difference either, but imo big enought to play with 5). One of the biggest reasons I like playing cav in units of 5 is also the pt cost. A unit of 6 costs over 200 pts which makes them a decent target, while running a cheaper unit makes them more expendable. It also takes 3 models to get half pts for both unit sizes, so its just as easy to get pts of the unit of 6.

I does sort of depend on what I use the cav for aswell, if they are flankers 5 is fine, if they are heavy hitting killing machines that are supposed to take out units in the front, then 6 with command and war banner is required, or 5 + scar vet with WB.

 

[Bibamus]

my general is usually in the COC unit so i need a champion in the unit (i usually run the FC). if the unit has 5 models 1 of wich the campion i don't get any "Lo,S!" rolls wich is not good. i run them 5+champ+scar vet and demploy them 6 wide and 1 in the back rank to absorb shooting and magic directed at them. i usually don't have manouverability issues wih a 6 wide unit and its good to know that even if i lose 1 i can still get all my attacks if i hit something in the face.
when lacking points i run them as 5 with no champ and my general still in the unit, but in that case i'm more carefull when a challenge can arise

 

[msinosic]

I was bored...

A unit 3 wide has a front width of 75
For each degree of wheeling it must use 1.30899693899575 mm
Compared to a unit 5 wide this is 40% more efficient movement per degree

A unit 4 wide has a front width of 100
For each degree of wheeling it must use 1.74532925199433 mm
Compared to a unit 5 wide this is 20% more efficient movement per degree

A unit 5 wide has a front width of 125
For each degree of wheeling it must use 2.18166156499291 mm
Compared to a unit 5 wide this is 0% more efficient movement per degree

A unit 6 wide has a front width of 150
For each degree of wheeling it must use 2.61799387799149 mm
Compared to a unit 5 wide this is 20% less efficient movement per degree

A unit 7 wide has a front width of 175
For each degree of wheeling it must use 3.05432619099008 mm
Compared to a unit 5 wide this is 40% less efficient movement per degree

A unit 8 wide has a front width of 200
For each degree of wheeling it must use 3.49065850398866 mm
Compared to a unit 5 wide this is 60% less efficient movement per degree

 

[Okopipi]

msinosic: Can you compare the combat efficiency of 5 vs. 6 Cavalry vs. the loss in movement?

Please use Poisson distribution if possible (<- j/k)

 

[erians]

msinosic: Can you compare the combat efficiency of 5 vs. 6 Cavalry vs. the loss in movement?

Please use Poisson distribution if possible (<- j/k)

I'll give it a go, feel free to check if the calculations are correct. This is all assuming no champs as the champ does the same for the unit of 5 & 6.

VS WS4+ T3 4+ save (common ranked inf stats)
5: 10 attacks, 5 hits, 4.16 wounds, 3.47 after saves. Cold Ones kills 1.11 for a total of 4.58.
6: 12 attacks, 6 hits, 5 wounds, 4.16 kills. 1.33 kills from mountes for a total of 5.49.

VS WS4+ T4 3+ save (common elite infantry stats)
5: 10 atks, 5 hits, 3.33 wounds, 2.22 kills. Mounts does 0.625 kills, total: 2.85 kills
5: 12 atks, 6 hits, 4 wounds, 2.66 kills. Mounts kills 0.75 guys, for a total of 3.41 kills.

Against regular ranked infantry with T3 you need a unit of 6 to take them on in the front. With command you should win with 1-2 on the charge, and continue to win the next round by 1 if you kill enought to take away 1 rank. A unit of 5 can't take infantry by themselves, winning by 0.58 on the charge with FC, then starts drawing if 1 rank is gone from the first round of combat.

 

[Arsenal]

msinosic: Can you compare the combat efficiency of 5 vs. 6 Cavalry vs. the loss in movement?

Please use Poisson distribution if possible (<- j/k)

I'll give it a go, feel free to check if the calculations are correct. This is all assuming no champs as the champ does the same for the unit of 5 & 6.

VS WS4+ T3 4+ save (common ranked inf stats)
5: 10 attacks, 5 hits, 4.16 wounds, 3.47 after saves. Cold Ones kills 1.11 for a total of 4.58.
6: 12 attacks, 6 hits, 5 wounds, 4.16 kills. 1.33 kills from mountes for a total of 5.49.

VS WS4+ T4 3+ save (common elite infantry stats)
5: 10 atks, 5 hits, 3.33 wounds, 2.22 kills. Mounts does 0.625 kills, total: 2.85 kills
5: 12 atks, 6 hits, 4 wounds, 2.66 kills. Mounts kills 0.75 guys, for a total of 3.41 kills.

Against regular ranked infantry with T3 you need a unit of 6 to take them on in the front. With command you should win with 1-2 on the charge, and continue to win the next round by 1 if you kill enought to take away 1 rank. A unit of 5 can't take infantry by themselves, winning by 0.58 on the charge with FC, then starts drawing if 1 rank is gone from the first round of combat.

I must say, I do love to see the Math-hammer. You are very impressive indeed!

 

[Bibamus]

uhhm.... don't forget that you are unlikely to strike 1st in the next round of comba unless fighting undead, nurgle demons or things with great weapons
if the yget to strike before you can take out that front rank you might start to lose models

 

[msinosic]

I'll give it a go, feel free to check if the calculations are correct. This is all assuming no champs as the champ does the same for the unit of 5 & 6.

VS WS4+ T3 4+ save (common ranked inf stats)
5: 10 attacks, 5 hits, 4.16 wounds, 3.47 after saves. Cold Ones kills 1.11 for a total of 4.58.
6: 12 attacks, 6 hits, 5 wounds, 4.16 kills. 1.33 kills from mountes for a total of 5.49.

VS WS4+ T4 3+ save (common elite infantry stats)
5: 10 atks, 5 hits, 3.33 wounds, 2.22 kills. Mounts does 0.625 kills, total: 2.85 kills
5: 12 atks, 6 hits, 4 wounds, 2.66 kills. Mounts kills 0.75 guys, for a total of 3.41 kills.

Against regular ranked infantry with T3 you need a unit of 6 to take them on in the front. With command you should win with 1-2 on the charge, and continue to win the next round by 1 if you kill enought to take away 1 rank. A unit of 5 can't take infantry by themselves, winning by 0.58 on the charge with FC, then starts drawing if 1 rank is gone from the first round of combat.

Nice. You beat me too it!

There are so many things to consider. What is the width of the enemy? Who is still left standing and can attack back? What if they have spears!? What if they have a champion that you probably wont direct attacks on?

 

[kroxigor01]

What a poser...

6 are 20% better in combat
6 have 20% more wounds (20% better survivability)

BUT

6 have 20% worse manoeuvrability
6 cost 20% points more

 

[erians]

Nice. You beat me too it!

There are so many things to consider. What is the width of the enemy? Who is still left standing and can attack back? What if they have spears!? What if they have a champion that you probably wont direct attacks on?

Of course there can be a lot of factors that changes things up, but this was simply to look at the difference in combat efficency. If you face a Bret lance which is 3 wide you only get to strike with 5 no matter what, but most if the time all 6 will base up against someting if you fight them in the front.

Kroxigor01s numbers is a great summary, but can be a little misleading. Overall I think KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid) is great, and it gives a much better general idea about the differemce, but you might want to keep the following things in mind:

6 are 20% better in combat

An easy way of saying it but doesnt really help when you are trying to decide if its a good idea to charge a unit of 20 Empire Swordsmen in the front. Also assumes that you face something that is wide enought to let 6 CoC's strike.

6 have 20% more wounds (20% better survivability)

True if you think surviving = 1 model left. 3 dead CoCs give away half pts for both units, so when it comes to not giving away half pts their survivability is the same.

6 cost 20% points more

Assuming the units are naked. With command the unit of 6 are 15-16% more costly.

 

[JohnMavrick]

While the Mathammer is good my personal experiance is that while six wide does seem to be restrictive at first the more you use it the more you start enjoying that extra fig there for attacks and what not. I draw this experiance from running a cav heavy Empire army where I would typically run three or four units of six wide cav.

And in case no one else says it, generally I never run cav on the front of an infantry unit unless the situation at the time demands it. Never attack from the front, always strike at the softest spot.

 

[Stegadeth]

I have decided to start adding a Scar-Veteran on Cold One to my Cavalry units for extra punch. I'll update on the results as I get more experience with this unit. I just figure Burning Blade of Chotec with a Scar-Vet's attacks and Maiming Shield thrown in with Cold One Cavalry is a decent flanking hammer.