Post by stevie on Jun 18, 2018 8:33:45 GMT
That the invader could simply deploy opposite the Fort is quite true Arnopov.
But tell me, if you had an invading good going army of mounted, or Pikes, or Spears, and the defender has placed a small Fort/City in one corner and a large piece of bad going in the diagonally opposite quarter, would you still choose the bad going table edge as your deployment area just to avoid the Fort?
If the aim is to reduce frontage, then the Fort has done it’s job...the invader has chosen a deployment area that forces him to either reduce his frontage or start with some elements in most unfavourable terrain.
As for LH and Ps being easy targets for Bow and Cv respectively, that is also true.
And Elephants and WWg are easy targets for Artillery, and Wb and Ax are easy targets for Kn, and so on.
That is one of the beauties of DBA; there are no ‘super elements’. Everyone is vulnerable to someone or some terrain.
Ps merely flee when doubled by Pk, Sp, Bd, Wb, WWg, Hd, Art or civilians.
In fact, in rough going they even flee if doubled by Kn, Cm, Cv and LH as well.
So really, Ps are only vulnerable to mounted (other than El or SCh) in good going, are inferior to Ax, but equal to other Ps and Bow in close combat...in any other situation they just flee when doubled.
I’d say that makes them ‘hard to kill’...if used correctly.
As for Bows, how many armies in western Europe before say 1000 AD have them? Very few.
Actually, I treat such vulnerability not as a disadvantage, but sometimes as an asset.
If when defending I have a battleplan that requires drawing the enemy mounted away from a particular flank, then dangling vulnerable troops on the opposite flank can entice my opponent to deploy as I want them too. When threatened they simply nip behind my main battleline where they are safe.
A player than can manipulate their opponent into dancing to their tune will have an advantage.
It’s all about using your troops and terrain to its best advantage, even if they are not quite suitable for the role.
Of course, a defender does not have to take a City or Fort if they don’t want to.
In the artificial environment of a tournament, defenders have free choice to pick any terrain they like for their region.
But I dislike this ‘supermarket’ approach to terrain selection, and much prefer random terrain generation.
(See fanaticus.boards.net/post/11499/ )
After all, in reality few defenders had the luxury of always getting the exact terrain suitable for their cunning plans.
Random terrain selection is not only more realistic, it also creates more challenges.
And finding ways to make Cities and Forts useful, even if you only have CF 3 troops to garrison them against an assault by enemy Bd or Sp, is one of those challenges.
Some potentially useful player aids can be found here, such as the “Quick Reference Sheets” from the Society of Ancients,
and the new “Army List Corrections” file: fanaticus-dba.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Reference_sheets_and_epitomes
And this is the latest January 2018 FAQ: fanaticus-dba.wikia.com/wiki/FAQ_2018
But tell me, if you had an invading good going army of mounted, or Pikes, or Spears, and the defender has placed a small Fort/City in one corner and a large piece of bad going in the diagonally opposite quarter, would you still choose the bad going table edge as your deployment area just to avoid the Fort?
If the aim is to reduce frontage, then the Fort has done it’s job...the invader has chosen a deployment area that forces him to either reduce his frontage or start with some elements in most unfavourable terrain.
As for LH and Ps being easy targets for Bow and Cv respectively, that is also true.
And Elephants and WWg are easy targets for Artillery, and Wb and Ax are easy targets for Kn, and so on.
That is one of the beauties of DBA; there are no ‘super elements’. Everyone is vulnerable to someone or some terrain.
Ps merely flee when doubled by Pk, Sp, Bd, Wb, WWg, Hd, Art or civilians.
In fact, in rough going they even flee if doubled by Kn, Cm, Cv and LH as well.
So really, Ps are only vulnerable to mounted (other than El or SCh) in good going, are inferior to Ax, but equal to other Ps and Bow in close combat...in any other situation they just flee when doubled.
I’d say that makes them ‘hard to kill’...if used correctly.
As for Bows, how many armies in western Europe before say 1000 AD have them? Very few.
Actually, I treat such vulnerability not as a disadvantage, but sometimes as an asset.
If when defending I have a battleplan that requires drawing the enemy mounted away from a particular flank, then dangling vulnerable troops on the opposite flank can entice my opponent to deploy as I want them too. When threatened they simply nip behind my main battleline where they are safe.
A player than can manipulate their opponent into dancing to their tune will have an advantage.
It’s all about using your troops and terrain to its best advantage, even if they are not quite suitable for the role.
Of course, a defender does not have to take a City or Fort if they don’t want to.
In the artificial environment of a tournament, defenders have free choice to pick any terrain they like for their region.
But I dislike this ‘supermarket’ approach to terrain selection, and much prefer random terrain generation.
(See fanaticus.boards.net/post/11499/ )
After all, in reality few defenders had the luxury of always getting the exact terrain suitable for their cunning plans.
Random terrain selection is not only more realistic, it also creates more challenges.
And finding ways to make Cities and Forts useful, even if you only have CF 3 troops to garrison them against an assault by enemy Bd or Sp, is one of those challenges.
Some potentially useful player aids can be found here, such as the “Quick Reference Sheets” from the Society of Ancients,
and the new “Army List Corrections” file: fanaticus-dba.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Reference_sheets_and_epitomes
And this is the latest January 2018 FAQ: fanaticus-dba.wikia.com/wiki/FAQ_2018
