|
|
Post by lkmjbc on May 24, 2018 16:09:48 GMT
Some play test results...
Firstly... Ax recoil of 1 BW
The test for this game is the classic Punic war matchup...
Rome vs Carthage...
Carthage is currently 1 for 4 games with the play test rule most definitely influencing the win and at least one of the losses... (it prolonged the pain... last night's game started with me jumping on the the
Roman allied 4Ax with my Gauls and an overlap... 3 vs 2... and my opponent promptly "six to oned" me... argh... not a good way to start). Still I fought well until the final collapse caused by another fit of
rolling 1s. The game however was closer than it sounds.
The rule change certainly prolongs the life of Ax fighting against heavy infantry.
The next test... which may need to wait awhile will be Clontarf... Norse Irish vs Norse Irish will allies. The ally will be an early Viking raiding army...
I am most interested to see how this matchup changes with the new rule. The Irish should still lose... but less so. To make this matchup more even... one would need to rate the Irish 4Ax as Superior... and
the Viking bondi as Poor.
Secondly... Pikes win ties...
The test for this was Alex vs Greeks...
In this game, I was able to setup and almost perfect Chaeronea. Despite the fields going muddy I as able to launch an echeloned attack against a Greek flank with 4Pk supported by a 3 Ax. The ties definitely
helped as my opponent was shocked by his Hoplites getting pushed around. His Cav reserve got "Threat-Zoned" by my rapid advance... Though I was unable to get any immediate kills, the dislocation in the Greek
line allowed me to charge Alex... prehaps prematurely... Alex ran over a Greek Spear... only to be countered by the Greek reserve infantry. He was forced to survive a 5 vs two attack before he could be
recovered. With only two down and Alex is some peril, the Greeks kept up a good face. The pike however working in conjuction with light troops got another kill... then I isolated a Greek Ps and won the
game.
I am quite happy with this fight... one that was difficult though not immpossible for Alex to win. It now seems more balanced. If my opponent was better prepared or slightly more luckly against Alex, it
could have gone the other way.
I am going to fight this a few more times... and then move to Swiss vs Burgundian fights.
Joe Collins
|
|
|
|
Post by greedo on May 24, 2018 19:52:50 GMT
Nice tests Joe! The Roman vs Carth battle with slowing the bleed. Did the slower Carth Infantry death allow more time for the Carth Cav to wear down the Roman wings? This sounds like a good result. Interesting to hear Alex vs Greeks result. Would also love to hear more tests for +1PIP to contact Bw from the other thread too. Can't wait to hear more tests! Data driven is so much better than conjecture  |
|
|
|
Post by lkmjbc on Jun 10, 2018 0:26:02 GMT
Two more play tests...
First battle was hoplites vs NK Egypt.
Greeks won in a very tight contest 4-3.
Here the new rules really were felt. Shooting disorganized the Greek line. It would take six pips to hit the bows.
The game turned into a tense match of trying to close with the center while the Egyptian Chariots outflanked the Greeks.
Next game was a classic HYW English vs French.
This one was a bust as the new test rules were never tested. A roll of one turned the fields muddy. A narrow front advance resulted in a French blade being shot to death. The French player then promptly rolled four 1s in a row for pips. The English king rashly charged a French blade to put the French out of their misery....and we don't need no stiking kill on tie rules...I...yes O was the French... 6 to 1ed him. Afterwards the French king charged and broke a spear...
No bows were harmed in the game.
So, first game, the new bow rules worked as advertised. The second game was such a fluke as to not be a good test.
Joe Collins
|
|
|
|
Post by goragrad on Jun 11, 2018 7:51:18 GMT
Looks like the 2nd playtest was starting, at least, as Agincourt.
Medieval Thomas and a number of those writing on the battle find that the longbows caused serious casualties on the French as they advanced, Keegan and others don't.
Given the muddy field in a DBA battle, an archery disrupted French attack on the English men-at-arms with the longbow coming out to close the doors is entirely replicable with the rules as currently written - no need for modification.
I still think bows are underrated against foot though.
|
|
|
|
Post by primuspilus on Jun 11, 2018 12:59:44 GMT
Goragrad, I recall seeing a DBA v0.0 from way back, in which ALL combat was close combat, volley shooting having been deemed ineffective at the presented scale in ancient and medieval combat.
I think shooting was introduced later, maybe for the "holy s#!@" factor?
Certainly Joe's idea is tantalising, and certainly fits the idea of shooting as not, in and of itself, wiping out wholesale chunks of the enemy line?
Joe, the +1 PIP idea can easily be extended to HI trying to close with Cv, LH, 3Ax and Ps as well! Maybe it is time to just retire shooting except for WWg and Art?
|
|
|
|
Post by lkmjbc on Jun 11, 2018 14:25:46 GMT
Goragrad, I recall seeing a DBA v0.0 from way back, in which ALL combat was close combat, volley shooting having been deemed ineffective at the presented scale in ancient and medieval combat. I think shooting was introduced later, maybe for the "holy s#!@" factor? Certainly Joe's idea is tantalising, and certainly fits the idea of shooting as not, in and of itself, wiping out wholesale chunks of the enemy line? Joe, the +1 PIP idea can easily be extended to HI trying to close with Cv, LH, 3Ax and Ps as well! Maybe it is time to just retire shooting except for WWg and Art? I don't think the original game featured bow at all...if I recall...it was a Roman vs Gaul matchup only! To reinforce your thinking...I have considered the +1 as well for foot contacting mounted...but only lightly considered it. Hopefully I will get in a good test game this evening. Joe Collins |
|
|
|
Post by greedo on Jun 11, 2018 15:14:49 GMT
Posted this on the other 8Bw thread but attempted to test 4x4Sp vs 4x8Bw last night.
Only rule change was Bw ignored the Threatzone rule.
The greeks rolled 1's like it was going out of style and were murdered losing 1 element before closing, some shoving, and then they got killed.
Ahem. Will try again tonight to see what a "normal" game would look like.
Reminds me of when I was teaching my dad, and I couldn't stop rolling 6s. Didn't want to steamroller him in his first game!
|
|
|
|
Post by primuspilus on Jun 11, 2018 15:19:00 GMT
Ah yes, you are right! It was for Gauls vs Romans. No rear support either. Just Roman Bd +5's vs Gallic QK +3 Wb. No Artillery either, iirc.
While I don't mind the shooting model as is, I wonder if it is the best representation even of volley fire of bows? Is there a PIP solution? One advantage is that all missile fire is then treated more or less the same, and the DBA game isn't fielding flack for having horse archers and psiloi not shooting, while bows do.
Heck, both can be used - with Bows representing far more missile fire down range, hence their ability to project their CF at range...
|
|
|
|
Post by lkmjbc on Jun 12, 2018 17:02:35 GMT
Play Test of the new Bow rules...
Last night I ran the first of hopefully several play tests of the new Bow rules. This rule is simply adding one to the pip cost of an element or group to contact the front edge or front corner of an ememy bow element.
The armies fighting were 1415 English HYW vs 1415 M. French.
Terrain placement conspired to give the English attackers a nice hill and woods on their side.
The French rolled a 2 for pips so the fields/plough were good going.
I as the French pushed my men at arms out front along with my Spear... presenting solid wall of +4 elements to bow shots.
My opponent moved into a typical English Herce formation... with bow interspersed with Blade... the bow being one base depth forward of the blade... allowing a simple retreat or recoil to bring them into support. My opponent also kept two blades in reserve for the Bow to retreat thru if need be.
Shooting produced a breaking of the line in several places (+2 to +2)... and the French had great difficulty closing with the English... any move to close contact was by small groups as I didn't have the pips. This allowed the English to manuever their blades to seize the initiative and attack to prevent the archers from getting charged.
A good bow shot produced a kill for the English. I struggled between patching this hole and closing.
Finally I was able to get some blade into combat. Most of the elements I contacted were English Bd... but I did contact two bow.
The pip drain allowed the English bow get on my flanks. In a hard fought contest, the English won 4 to 2.
Thoughts...
I am worried that this rule makes Bow too powerful. I really struggled as the French to close with the English. Since DBA has no grading... the English should underperform historically, though this may be offset by the French Dismounted Men at Arms not being classed as Superior as well. The game however looked like my vision of a HYW battle. The French closed mainly with the English blade. The archers were flanking elements in many fights... matching historical accounts. Much more testing is necessary.
Final thoughts... this change will make the Scotts vs English matchup hopeless for Scottland. They already struggle in the rules as written. I am not sure however if this isn't historical.
Please...folks with these armies. I would love to see some play testing.
Joe Collins
|
|
|
|
Post by greedo on Jun 13, 2018 5:44:40 GMT
Interesting test Joe! I don't have those armies, but need to set up some cardboard markers...
On a slightly different tack regarding the 8Bw...
What about the 7Hd that are also in the EAP army? what about putting them in the middle or even in the front with the 8Bw on the flanks?
Would this allow the 8Bw to blast away at the Sp (I'm still in favor of removing the Threatzone rule) without fear of being mauled?
The 7Hd are 3 vs foot, don't retreat as often, and aren't worth ANY elements if killed...
Just thinking about combined arms here since EAP isn't just a load of 8Bw...
|
|
|
|
Post by lkmjbc on Jun 14, 2018 18:58:59 GMT
Two more play test reports...
Both HYW fights...
1st battle... English got hung out to dry by terrain. They were forced to fight with no rough fields or bad going in a place that it mattered. The fight was still tight however with the French finally winning 4-3. The French Cinc was pushed back against his camp. One more turn would have probably won it for the English.
2nd battle... This one was against a new opponent- though he is experienced. Here the English had a small amount of terrain (a hill). I as the French was able (by being much more careful in my advance) to better coordinate my attack. Closing with the bows still proved difficult... however... better management of my reserves won me the game with 5 to 3... though my 3rd loss was because of my stupidity.
Thoughts... both these battles fit the narrative of HYW fights. The extra pip cost helps to create Blade vs Blade fights with English archers launching flank attacks. The English now even have a chance in the open...
I am moving my assessment of this rules change to 75% confidence. In Greek vs Persian fights... and HYW fights it provides both the outcomes and narrative I seek.
Please try it.
Joe Collins
|
|
|
|
Post by primuspilus on Jun 14, 2018 19:14:32 GMT
Not sure that it generates a Marathon or Plataea though, Joe. I suppose we have to test it.
I support removal of the ridiculous, non-DBA TZ shooting rule.
In those rare cases where a hoplite army gets badly shot up,.... Well NOW you know why the Athenians took Persian archery so seriously!
|
|
|
|
Post by lkmjbc on Jun 14, 2018 19:48:48 GMT
Not sure that it generates a Marathon or Plataea though, Joe. I suppose we have to test it. I support removal of the ridiculous, non-DBA TZ shooting rule. In those rare cases where a hoplite army gets badly shot up,.... Well NOW you know why the Athenians took Persian archery so seriously! Serious testing of EAP vs (some) Greeks is coming up! Joe Collins |
|
|
|
Post by lkmjbc on Jun 19, 2018 20:09:53 GMT
Two (three really) more play test reports...
This time we decided to test the new shooting rules with an army that has a smaller number of bows. We decided on Arbedo as the battle.
Here we had to modify Phil's list somewhat. The Communal Italians are not allowed to dismount. At Arbedo... the Italian men-at-arms
certainly dismounted... at least a good portion of them.
The Swiss had 4x 4Pk and the rest 6Bd, Ps and LH.
The first battle featured a tough fight between the Italian Men-at_Arms and the Swiss Bd. A string of ones.. both combat and movement
handed the Italian a 2-4 loss.
The second battle saw a 6 to 1 shot against the Swiss Pk Gen. We played it as a recoil as it was very early in the game. This time I was
able to bring my men-at-arms against the Swiss blade. They won the battle against the swiss 5-2.
In both games the new bow rules were instrumental in shaping the battlefield. I was better able to take advantage of it in the second
battle.
So, the (modified) Italians are 2 to 1 against the might of the Swiss 6Bd.
My confidence with this rule change is growing.
Joe Collins
|
|
|
|
Post by greedo on Jun 20, 2018 0:59:00 GMT
Quick question Joe:
The updated Bw rule being tested is:
"+1 PIP for an element or group to contact an element or group containing 3/4/8Bw"
Is that right? As opposed to +1PIP for EVERY bow in the group right?
Chris
|
|
